hillary can patch up the divison with europe and bring all the middle east to the table so they all can work together as one and the troops can have some one who can bring the morale and leadership back in the armforces
2007-05-19 08:22:07 · 35 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Yes. As you point out, she can repair relations with Europe, bring all the middle east countries to the table and the UN too, she can make it clear that the US seeks no permanent bases in Iraq and has no designs on the Iraqi oil. She would have more credibility with the Iraqi factions (Sunis, Shias and Kurds) than Bush could possibly build.
Why don't the democrats propose this approach for Bush to do it?
Bush could try some of this, but it is not in his grain, the republican base does not believe in this way of doing things and the Iraqi parties do not trust him.
2007-05-20 09:21:05 · answer #1 · answered by johnfarber2000 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are making the assumption that she can get the Middle
East to the table and work together, the Middle East
may show up specifically to get the troops out of Iraq.
After that happens Iran will invade Iraq and attack Israel
because their leader has already stated publicly that
he want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and they
want Iraq's Oil.
I also do not see how Hillary can restore the morale of our
soldiers especially when they know that the Democrats
have been trying to cut funding of the war. There will be
a few soldiers that will agree but most will feel that it is
taking the cowards way out.
Hillary can not restore leadership to the armed forces
both Hillary and Bill Clinton joined in demonstrations
against the Vietnam War, Bill refused to enter after
being drafted and was found guilty of a Felony for his
refusal and later pardoned by Jimmy 'the commie' Carter
I don't think that any soldier of any political party enjoys
watching an American burn our flag in protest. I know that
Hillary didn't burn the flag but her husband did.
While I don't believe that Hillary can LEAD us out of Iraq
I do believe that she can be duped into thinking that she did
by the terroristic Middle East leaders that support terrorisim
2007-05-19 09:08:18 · answer #2 · answered by justgetitright 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
What America is looking for is a leader, we will find that in Hillary. Some do not like her but she is capable of bringing us together. America and the world will be involved in the decisions made in Iraq. We will never solve problems if the only options come from the White House.
2007-05-20 17:08:53 · answer #3 · answered by GO HILLARY 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
at the same time as Websters dictionary defines socialist again, Hillary's photograph could be suitable beside it. I also consider Curtis. i trust that the present progression contained in the conflict is carefully from the efforts of the adult men and women of the militia, because of the surge, and thanks to the movements of the folk and politicians, both republican and the few democrats, that supported them. i imagine the better safe practices alongside Iran's border helped fairly abit also. I also imagine that some credit has to flow to the Iraqi human beings, as they have also began to assist in putting down the insurgents. i'm no longer authentic knowledgeable, yet i rather do not see the position Hillary, Pelosi, or Harry Reid had a ingredient to do with it.
2016-11-04 11:29:40 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think she would be a great president and she would have a very good adviser that was one of the most popular presidents in history. George Bush has been detrimental to the USA from the get go. I don't think very many could have done worse. The troops need someone with a BRAIN and that can think thru the consequence of his actions and take accountability for those actions. They do not need a little coward pretending to be Rambo in the oval office. Bush is bubonic plague on the USA and the damage he has done will be felt for many years to come.
2007-05-19 08:30:03 · answer #5 · answered by kolacat17 5 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Could King George?
2007-05-25 17:17:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hillary Clinton couldn't lead a thirsty horse to a water trough. She despises our military and they know it there is no way that having Hillary as president is going to have anything but a detrimental effect on the morale and wellbeing of our troops
2007-05-19 08:50:11 · answer #7 · answered by cowboyjim376 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
i would love for hillary to be our president. However, she did vote to invade iraq. And as long as there are a significant amount of Boneheads that dont even take into consideration how divided this country is and has always been, the chances are she will not be elected, and neither will Obama. The only way the democrats will secure a victory is if we get Al Gore to run for office. Supremacy groups will vote for anyone as long as they are not black, and not women, and dont be a black women cause u are now double screwed. if Hillary can fix all of the world conflict she will have done what no man has been able to do in over 20 years. The question is...will she be elected? and who will be her vp. the 2 strongest politicians are currently opp. i really feel that hillary needs a strong vp and if she selects obama, we will have another 5 year war over nothing that has to do with the us.
2007-05-19 08:39:44 · answer #8 · answered by steelababi 2 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Oh yeah...and right into Iran. Hillary would be more detrimental to this country than Bush is now...and I absolutely hate Bush!
2007-05-26 05:49:43 · answer #9 · answered by Gipper 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably. Would she have the guts to lead the US back into Iraq, if Taliban sets up operations there and wreaks mischief against the US?
2007-05-19 08:27:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋