She may have made her first major mistake.


Washington - Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton has built a reputation for strictly adhering to the pro-Israel line, but she now appears, for the first time, to be supporting legislation that is opposed by pro-Israel lobbyists.

Clinton announced last week that she would co-sponsor an amendment, proposed by Virginia Democrat Jim Webb, that would require the president to seek congressional approval before taking military action against Iran.

“Congressional oversight and debate can help avoid the mistakes and blunders that have afflicted U.S. policy in Iraq,” Senator Clinton said in a statement explaining her decision to co-sponsor the amendment. “We cannot allow recent history to repeat itself.


LINK

To hell with AIPAC. I could care less about them anyway. As for the bill I doubt they have the super majority to make it law anyway. This sounds more like a political statement.

I would say it depends on the amount of cash she will get and hjas gotten from them.

Sounds like she is ecoeing Israel's concerns, IMO.


Hillary Clinton today moved to secure her position as the most hawkish Democrat in the 2008 presidential race, saying she would consider the use of force to compel Iran to abandon its nuclear programme.

In an article for Foreign Affairs magazine intended as a blueprint for the foreign policy of a future Clinton White House, the Democratic frontrunner argues that Iran poses a long term strategic challenge to American and its allies, and that it must not be permitted to build or acquire nuclear weapons.


LINK

AIPAC is getting their money's worth out of Clinton. Thoughts on this?



WASHINGTON – The fundamental elements of a final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians have been clear since 2000, Senator Hillary Clinton said in an essay published Monday in Foreign Affairs.

The elements, according to the Democratic presidential candidate, include a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank in return for a declaration that the conflict is over, recognition of Israel's right to exist, guarantees of Israeli security, diplomatic recognition of Israel, and normalization of its relations with Arab states.

"US diplomacy is critical in helping to resolve this conflict. In addition to facilitating negotiations, we must engage in regional diplomacy to gain Arab support for a Palestinian leadership that is committed to peace and willing to engage in a dialogue with the Israelis," she said.


LINK

She seems to be doing Israel's dirty work even before she becomes pres. I have got to get the whole article and read it.



WASHINGTON, Oct 15 (IPS) - In her most comprehensive -- if characteristically cautious -- foreign policy pronouncement to date, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton stressed a clear preference for diplomacy and "soft power" in pursuing U.S. interests abroad, but added she would not hesitate to use military force unilaterally if she deemed it necessary.

In a lengthy article entitled "Security and Opportunity for the Twenty-first Century", published in Foreign Affairs magazine, the clear front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination for 2008 pledged to expand the U.S. armed forces and consider military action against Iran if it did not abandon its nuclear programme.

"Iran must conform to its nonproliferation obligations and must not be permitted to build or acquire nuclear weapons," she wrote. "If Iran does not comply with its own commitments and the will of the international community, all options must remain on the table."


LINK

"Iran must conform to its nonproliferation obligations and must not be permitted to build or acquire nuclear weapons," she wrote. "If Iran does not comply with its own commitments and the will of the international community, all options must remain on the table."

I don't see anything new in her statement that sets off a red flag.

The elements, according to the Democratic presidential candidate, include a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank in return for a declaration that the conflict is over, recognition of Israel's right to exist, guarantees of Israeli security, diplomatic recognition of Israel, and normalization of its relations with Arab states

Same with that statement. That seems to be our current objective. Neither seem to be working so I don't expect her to come out with a solution immediately.

I have heard a lot about the American ppl need a uniter and not a divider. I say correct, but Clinton is not a uniter, IMO, she will be business as usual.

I get the impression the only thing that remotely unites the country is natural disasters, not politicians.

Disasters do bring the people together, but it is mostly emotional. yes, there are those that will go and help and they are life givers. The government cares not whether it is natural or political it is all about what company gets what from whom.

I don't know of any candidates who possess the quality of leadership it will take to unite this country. The "all for one" theory is wishful thinking.

And it has been a pipe dream for generations.