Hillary asks when and how are we pulling out.. Pentagon say's she's aiding the ememy.. what's wrong here?

Question

I don't like Hillary..but I think it was a legitimate question (from anybody). What do you think?

Answer 1

It seems that there exists a ultra-conservative attitude that anyone who disagrees with the United States Government, in this case, the Bush Administration, is un-American. Disagreement and protest are the highest expressions of patriotism. If it were not for those who mustered the courage to protest, we might still be under British rule, or in Viet Nam, or Blacks and Women still wouldn't have the vote.

I am not a Hillary fan, but she is not aiding the enemy. She is waging legitimate political discourse. Claiming otherwise is not the brand of conservatism I grew up with, and it shouldn't be the kind we accept now. Jefferson and others would have been proud of Hillary. Madison might have recited a few verses of the Constitution, and reminded those who condemned Hillary why exactly they hold their positions. It isn't for their own sake and comfort.

Answer 2

It is a good question.

The problem is no one knows. She already knows the answer as does the publidc. the DEMS are acting as if they were in office they would pull out tomorrow. We all tknow that this is not the case. The only reason why they are asking is so that they can take back power in the WH and the senate and they are using the war to their advantage. This is a power move and hopedully the voters will see through it.

I won;t pretend to know what would happen if we pulled out. I think a civil war would be the least of our problems.

Aiding the enemy is also an issue. If the media shows a divided interest those who are fighting against us are less likely to give up. The entire country needs to show a united front and stand strong in the decisions (however lousy they may have been) of our leaders. If we show dividence and we don;t pull out, likely we are killing our own soldiers. They are hoping we will give up. Extremists will not stop at conquering Iraq, from there they will attack Isreal and (again weather or not you agree with it) the US wiill have to send assistance to Isreal and get into that war. We would then have to launch another offensive and we will be right back where we started. We never should have attacked. Everyone knows that now except the whitehouse. Now that we are in, noone knows what will happen. We can only try to sit it out and hope to weed them out or leave the middle east altogether, including Isreal, which we all know will never happen

Answer 3

Those who contend that the public is not capable of deciding their foreign policy are arguing against the basic principles of democracy. An informed populus is a basic pre-requisite to democratic politics, the consequence of which is the capacity of all individuals over 18 to influence all public policy. Obviously, the very many people who defend secrecy in government do not believe in democracy and only pay it lip service as an excuse for foreign adventures.
The great irony is that those who oppose democracy and support government secrecy are the most fervent supporters of democracy promotion in the Middle East. Democracy is better measured by the dynamic between public opinion and public policy than by the frequency of universal suffrage. In this respect, the US does not rank high in a roster of democracies... I would contend that Cuba fares much better in that respect, Venezuela is certainly close to the top.
Public policy ought to be public domain. If it isn't you have no democracy, your freedom is illusory and your livelihood dependent on the wishes of th powerful. I am no fan of the Clinton Crime Family, they are no better than the Bush Gang. Yet the question asked by Sen. Clinton is pertinent to the fate of this ailing democracy: What is the US doing in Iraq? and how does it reflect the wishes of the American people?

Peace.

Answer 4

It's a legitimate question at any time.... but especially since the Pentagon had already been running those simulations for months, and because the Senate was voting on the issue.

So, a Senator asking for information before voting is what you want to happen.

It's pure politics to attack any senator for asking a question, but especially when the senator is a presidential candidate for the opposition party.

Then again, the person who sent the memo to her had been up for a confirmation vote before the Senate a couple years back, and she had voted against confirmation of that individual -- so there's also likely personal animosity against her.

Answer 5

She asked to know the contingency plan for disengagement (and we know that they have one, for if they don't, then they are not doing their jobs.)

Aside from the fact that I like Hillary, I agree with your statement that it is a legitimate question from anybody, but especially a United States Senator, and especially one that sits on the authorizing committee. She is owed a public apology, and Bush or Gates should order it.

Answer 6

Telling the enemy our strategy is stupid in the best of scenearios. Hillary is grandstanding. She knew she would not get the answer before she asked it. Just trying to make herself look good at the expense of the ameican soldier. Some president she would be.

Answer 7

we should leave Iraq when the job is done
when the Iraqi's can take care of themselves, we will leave
plain and simple

and yes, asking for plans of a "pull out" IS aiding the enemy

Liberty Over Liberalism!
No More Bushes!
No More Clintons!

Answer 8

The Undersecretary of Defense who responded to her question is clearly engaging in partisan politics. There are many problems with this, but at least it was not a general engaging in partisan politics.

Answer 9

Hillary wants the military plans to be public. Yes, HilLAREE. Let's tell the enemy all our plans so we look stupid. While we are at it, let's stop tryin to sneak up on them, and let's use rubber bullets on them.

Answer 10

its free speech and thats something republicans hate
its a legitimate question that needs 2 be answered
because one day will we have to leave
better to have a plan than no plan like bushs no plan
for iraq and look where thats going