At least Hillary understands the danger of giving credibility to leaders around the world who have no desires to better the world but to destroy it. For Obama to say he would meet with leaders of North Korea, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba in his first year shows why he is not ready for prime time. Hillary realizes the ground work that is needed to be done by envoys or State officials before any country outside of major allies, G8, or superpowers are met with. For that she deserves credit. Obama would only fuel more problems with his brand of diplomacy.
2007-07-24 08:28:17 · 13 answers · asked by ALASPADA 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
he is showing the fact that he has not been in politics long enough to understand. He has no foreign policy experience in his limited time in federal government.
2007-07-24 08:50:07 · answer #1 · answered by thunder2sys 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that someone needs to find a middle ground between thier two views. Obama is certainly pretty starry-eyed to think that he and Kim Jong Il are going to sit down for some tea and sympathy and work out all our issues, but I agree with him that we need to start talking with these countries. I thought Hilary was a bit evasive as to whether she would ever do any talking. As for Obama's claim that he will do all these things in first year of presidency, he also said in a town hall meeting I attended that he will have universal healthcare within his first year. Um, yeah, right.
2007-07-24 15:46:58 · answer #2 · answered by Ella S 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You could not possibly be more wrong. It is that ivory tower bureaucracy mentality championed by Hillary that creates greater enmity and tension between the U.S. and countries like North Korea, Venezuela, Syria, and Cuba. We have exacerbated problems with these countries precisely because our Presidents refuse to meet with them. Their leaders and their people believe that the U.S. doesn't take them seriously enough -- their rationale is our President WOULD go and meet with them if we did. As a result, they make waves and they posture and they cause more trouble -- why? -- to get our attention. Obama wants to build bridges while Hillary wants to build walls. At least Obama is willing to take the point position in diplomatic relations, unlike his oh-so-much-more-superior opponent.
2007-07-24 15:38:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
If you take diplomacy off the table, then all you are left with is war and terrorism, and believe me we're all sick of it. As much as I dislike Obama from lack of experience, and as much as I realize little would be accomplished by opening up diplomatic channels with these entities, I fail to see how taking that option right off the table is beneficial to anyone.
2007-07-24 15:41:17 · answer #4 · answered by Pfo 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't trust anything Hillary says about foreign relations.
Only two candidates are against nuclear war. That fact alone scares the **** out of me.
Hint: They were the ones that got the least camera time.
2007-07-24 15:48:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Has not talking to them been productive?
He's looking for different avenues of dealing with long standing problems. Not saying I'm going to vote for the guy, but I'm not going to knock him for want to find diplomatic solutions.
I don't think Hillary understands anything that's not fed to her by her puppet masters. I think the woman is a pawn is someone else's game, but she will be the one on the hook.
Politics aren't pretty.
2007-07-24 15:40:08 · answer #6 · answered by American Girl 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Meeting with the heads or diplomats of other states, even if they are "enemies" of the U.S. is never a bad thing. I'm sure that right now, most Americans would have preferred diplomacy to having their fellow citizens coming home in body bags.
2007-07-24 15:32:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I agree with you. It is so dangerous to be dealing with those specific rulers, you need to know exactly what's going on before you do anything. I was recently debating the benefit of diplomacy for US interests... it's a risky business.
2007-07-24 15:35:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
He's way off base...to bad Hillary wouldn't be well received by a lot of men in other nations either....kind of a conundrum.
2007-07-24 15:32:22 · answer #9 · answered by baby1 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You either ignore countries you don't like, or you deal with them diplomatically.
History has shown that ignoring them only causes more problems, going back centuries.
Obama may be out of his league on some issues, but on that particular point I have to agree that talking with the leaders of foreign countries (not just random private organizations -- countries) can only help the political process.
2007-07-24 15:32:04 · answer #10 · answered by coragryph 7 · 4⤊ 4⤋