Skip to comments.Clinton Calls for (UN) Sanctions Against Iran (faults Bush admin. for "downplaying" the threat)
Posted on 01/18/2006 8:17:01 PM PST by NormsRevenge
PRINCETON, N.J. - Sen. Hillary Clinton called for United Nations sanctions against Iran as it resumes its nuclear program and faulted the Bush administration for "downplaying" the threat.
In an address Wednesday evening at Princeton University, Clinton, D-N.Y., said it was a mistake for the U.S. to have Britain, France and Germany head up nuclear talks with Iran over the past 2 1/2 years. Last week, Iran resumed nuclear research in a move Tehran claims is for energy, not weapons.
"I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and chose to outsource the negotiations," Clinton said.
Earlier this week, a meeting in London produced no agreement among the U.S., France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China on whether to refer the dispute over Iranian nuclear enrichment to the Security Council, which could impose sanctions.
Russia and China have joined Europe and the U.S. in criticizing Iran's resumption of uranium enrichment. But both would prefer to avoid Security Council involvement and are outright opposed to sanctions, which are backed by the Bush administration.
While Clinton was critical of the administration, she never mentioned the president by name and did not engage in the same sort of sharp rhetorical attack against him or other Republicans as she did earlier this week.
Speaking Monday at a Martin Luther King Jr. memorial event in Harlem, Clinton said that the House of Representatives "has been run like a plantation" and called the Bush administration "one of the worst that has ever governed our country." The senator's remarks spurred heated reaction from Republicans.
Clinton spoke Wednesday to some 800 Princeton students, staff and alumni at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., speaks as she delivers a policy address Wednesday, Jan, 18, 2006, at Princeton University in Princeton, N.J. Clinton called for United Nations sanctions against Iran as it resumes its nuclear program and faulted the Bush administration for 'downplaying' the threat. Iran resumed nuclear research in a move Tehran claims is for energy, not weapons. (AP Photo/ Jose F. Moreno)
Do they really believe America will fall for her?
......... like her husband outsourced technology to China?
EUrope's problem is EUrope. ;-)
Don't you just love how the Democrats take what they know about what is happen now or is in the pipeline and come out a week or two ahead of time to demand that it happens?
She is a bull in a china shop.
Just keep talking Hillbilly....
Don't worry, as soon as Bush DOES do something to Iran, she will say that he is wrong...
After all, remember how the poor Iraqis suffered under the sanctions...before we "unilaterally" invaded them?
Now if she and Kerry get together, Kerry will give Iran the uranium...and then Hillary will sanction them...
Outsourcing the negotiations is "bad", so of course her brilliant "solution" is to outsource the negotiations to the United Nations? Does she even comprehend the words that spew from her own mouth? What a joke...
she has 40-42% of the popular vote just for showing up.
Bomb the hell out of them then say, "Hillary only wanted sanctions, what good would that do?" :D
Wasn't Iran one of Bush's trio of evil?
The woman knowns no shame. Disgusting.
Didn't the Clintons try that once before
Gee .. think she'll call for another oil for food program?
Clinton, D-N.Y., said it was a mistake for the U.S. to have Britain, France and Germany head up nuclear talks with Iran over the past 2 1/2 years.
And if the US had headed up the talks, it'd be pissing & moaning about the US being unilateralist.
Bush has balls THIS BIG!
Say it ain't so. I believe she is an evil, evil person. She was the brains behind all the cover ups in her husband's dealings. She even has a mean looking face.... Please Dr. Rice, run against this evil woman.
I truly believe that if she gets the Dem 2008 nomination everyone and their mommas will stock up on arms.
Candidate Hitlery. Let the sound bites begin.
Hillary will pull a Murtha within the next few months.
"And now I'd like to show you the proper stance for kissing my behind..."
Of course, she would have said that Bush was "saber-rattling" if he had said what she is now suggesting.. or...not working with our allies enough or...whatever..
It's soooo obvious that these politicians (her especially) wake up every morning and wonder.....how can I make the papers today???
"...she has 40-42% of the popular vote just for showing up."
I'm just wondering how many times she said, "you know".
I am confused. I thought the reason the Iraqis suffered so much was because of the sanctions put on Saddam. Do we want to make things bad for the Iranian people? /sarc
Exactly...Bush hasn't been downplaying anything...I know there are some, even conservatives like Michael Ledeen that wish he would have done more before now...
But, I think his thinking has been...that there are enough young people in Iran that want to change that country...and with a democratized Iraq next door, will feel more "safe" and less "threatened"...it will give them more impetus to have their own revolution..
With America's help, of course...but, it hasn't quite gotten to that point...
Then, when that nitwit Alshamejad (sp) got elected...the rhetoric has heated up to the point that faster action seems inevitable...
BUT, I hardly would say that Bush has ignored, or down played anything.....unless, like the dems, you haven't been paying attention.
Sell me to Colonel Sanders, but wasn't she made co-President last time with 43% of the vote?
In 1992 Perot took 19% of the votes. There will be no Perot type people in 2008 so 43% will not cut for her and the democrats.
OH my. Sanactions really worked so well against Iraq. We really should go down that failed excuse for a policy road again! Say Hilly where were YOU when hubby helped give N.K. their nukes?
Nothing worse than an irritating back seat driver wanna-be who doesn't know where to go.
Nope. Not even sure she can win the Democrat Nomination. The rabid Left is really mad at her. Give them a canidate to the Left of Hilly and she is toast. So she has to move to the Left to win the Nomination which she cannot do and win the Presidency. She is in a real jam.
I still remember Albright complaining early on in the Bush administration that they were too tough on Iran. Of course under Clinton they had absolutely no idea what was going on beyond the progress Albright reported.
Hillary's beyond shameless. Her husband left Iraq, North Korea, Afghanistan and Iran all untouched. How she dares rise to criticize would be beyond belief if I thought she had a shred of human decency...since she doesn't it's only par for the course of her entire life.
Well, I guess that settles that...
Since the ex-copresident has come out for sanctions and immediate UNILATERAL action against Iran, we have not choice but to go forward with her program...
Commander in chief, Hillary?
Not a chance, I wouldn't trust her with my dogs.
Oh I pray she runs for the Presidency in 2008 against Condoleezza Rice, the debates against a numbskull like Hitlery would be hillarious!! Condolezza making well thought out points on important issues, against Hitlery's shrill worn out liberal playbook. Just sit back and pop some pop-corn, better than the movies or most of what's on TV.(Almost worth all the pre-empted programs)
(Now I`m confused, Bush was wrong in Iraq because he didn`t get the support of our "allies" and Bush was wrong with Iran because he worked with the EU.
I don`t understand,think I need help or, maybe another adult beverage)
It's actually pretty simple. Democrats will propose the opposite of what the Bush policy is every single time, regardless of logic. It's getting to be laughable.
Unfortunately, Hillary is being consistent here. She hasn't disavowed her vote to go to war, only Bush's "incompetence" at executing it. She's making an effort to run to the right of the Republicans on national defense, since there's no way a female we-loathe-the-military Clinton could get into the White House.
we said the same thing with Dean - that he was going to run away with the nomination. the media can steer the Dem base any way it wants, when the DNC power structure realized Dean would lose in a blowout, Kerry suddenly emerged, and was "closing the gap quickly in our recent polls". and Kerry was not blown out electorally.
"she has 40-42% of the popular vote just for showing up"
Agreed. There are many Dim voters who will "vote the name they know" without asking too many questions.
"In 1992 Perot took 19% of the votes. There will be no Perot type people in 2008 so 43% will not cut for her and the democrats."
You don't think Bill and Hillary can find another billionaire with an axe to grind? Ross Perot was a set-up, and they will do it again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.