Bill Clinton Doesn't Support Attack on Iran

Associated Press ^ | Friday, March 02, 2007 | JOHN HANNA

[Tulsa Ramjet]

MANHATTAN, Kan. — Former President Bill Clinton said Friday sanctions against Iran were working better than people think and questioned whether a military strike would work to end its nuclear program. He argued that two-thirds of Iran's population wants a moderate government and that sanctions could have some influence on the nation's powerful clerics.

"We may not have to go to war, and we may not have a disaster," he told about 9,000 gathered at Kansas State University. "You need to talk to everybody before you bomb them. In other words, if you're going to fight with somebody _ I don't care what you don't have in common _ you should talk first."

The former president's comments answered audience questions following his 45-minute lecture. His remarks touched on a wide range of topics, including the need to improve health care and the economy in the United States and alleviate poverty abroad.

Officials from the United States and other major powers have been discussing imposing new sanctions against Iran over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. The U.N. Security Council imposed sanctions in December, but the Bush administration hasn't ruled out military action.

"We should be talking to the Iranians," Clinton said. "Attacking them is a whole different kettle of fish."

[Doogle]

Bill Clinton Doesn't Support Attack on Iran

....the scum bag didn't have the spine! He was a coward as a teenager as he is now. His forceful attacks on women indicate some serious issues the MSM should really dig deep into and Hillary's early protection of him was only to protect herself politically (their picking on us...vast right wing conspiracy)

[Piquaboy]

Who woulda thunkit?

[Prost1]

Bill Clinton only attacks Serbs and Helpless Women.

He runs away from all other threats. He even keeps
Hillary at a distance, she in Washington D.C. and he
somewhere else, anywhere else.

[driftless2]

To be sure Clinton and the rest of the Donkey Party members favor not doing anything at all. Except waiting for the next 9/11.

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

["Mrs. Bill Clinton is never going to be in the Oval Office..."]


Well, thanks for your assurance. I feel much better now.

[chiefqc]

Iran still owes him money for the klintons suuport.

[mkjessup]

["Mrs. Bill Clinton is never going to be in the Oval Office..."]
Well, thanks for your assurance. I feel much better now.

Happy to help.

There are multiple reasons why Empress Billigula will NOT be our next president, first of all she has a political tin ear, the only reason she is in her FIRST elected office is because she was tightly controlled, scripted and directed in 2000 (plus the fact that she had Rudy Giuliani to thank for an inept GOP counter effort after Giuliani wimped out of the race because of his near-fatal (snicker) prostate cancer).

Second, her presidential campaign is already making enemies and influencing people in all the wrong ways with the recent rabid attack dog response of that clod Howard Wolfson in his over-the-top reaction to David Geffen's comments about the Clintons (Geffen an Obama backer, fyi).

You want some more? You got it:

Third, witness Hillary's blundering with the pompous pronouncement that NOBODY is to bring up the 'I-word' (*gasp* -- IMPEACHMENT) in the course of the campaign, why? Because that would be (heh) 'the politics of personal destruction', and GAWD knows the Clintons never engaged in THAT practice, right? Moreover, by bringing up Billigula's Impeachment as a taboo subject 'not to be discussed' in the course of the campaign, it AUTOMATICALLY makes it an issue, and moves that issue front and center. In other words, "whatever you do, do NOT think of a purple elephant, ok?"

Another significant misstep by the Hiliarly campaign.

Now it's a long time between now and the 'Rat convention in Denver in '08, do you think for one minute that the ABCA-crew ('Anybody But Clinton Again') is going to just roll over and sweep the carpet for her coronation?

Ain't no way, no how!

Senator Fat Ankles has to make it ALL the way through the primaries without a Howard Dean 'yarrrgghhh' moment, without Bubba having a bimbo-eruption, without her thesis paper revealing her carbon copy philosophy of Saul Alinsky becoming fully publicized, and not only that:

How many speeches do you think Hillary is going to make before somebody somewhere is going to stand up and say 'ohhhh shut UP already!!!!' because she is shrill, she is arrogant, she is as phony as a three dollar bill, AND IT SHOWS. All she has to sell the American people is her name, and that name carries so much baggage with it that she's going to have to fight tooth and nail just to get the nomination of her party, and even if she does, it won't be worth a tinker's damn by the time she seals the deal.

And IF she gets the nomination, she will have to CAREFULLY select a VP candidate that is not going to upstage her in style or substance, that VP candidate MUST be able to deliver substantial electoral-vote clout, that VP choice is going to have to totally submerge his own ego in favor of hers (and the choice WILL be a male, she wouldn't dare go with a fellow feminist although I'd love to see her STP by choosing somebody like Feinstein or (har har) even Boxer of California), and I would LOVE to watch her in a prime time presidential debate with ANY Republican nominee because she will then be revealed as an estrogen-based Nixon of the 'Rat party, she will not present well to the American people, she will not be able to 'close the deal', and I will bet the rent on that.

Hillary will not be the 'Rat nominee in '08.

Take that to the bank.

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

["Hillary will not be the 'Rat nominee in '08."]

Let's look at from another perspective. That is, who is going to beat Hillary for the democratic nomination?

She's already has a war chest of over 30 million dollars and made attacks on Obama and he's subsequently suffering (in the polls) because of those attacks...So who's going to be?

Joe Biden, Chris Dodd,...etc. I don't think so.

In short, give me a name.

[donmeaker]

Quelle Suprise! He didn't support attacks on al Queda until he was about to be impeached, and then he launched attacks on aspirin factorys and Serbian Christians.

The 1993 bombing of the WTC was an Iraqi job, launched with Kuwaitti passports stolen in the Iraq occupation. The explosive was laced with cyanide, in an attempt to hit us with poison gas.

And he didn't support a response to Iraq either.

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

["The 1993 bombing of the WTC was an Iraqi job..."]

Really?...Gosh the things I learn when I read these posts.

How silly of me for not knowing this.

[mkjessup]

In short, give me a name.

If I did, then I'd have to kill you. (just kidding! lol)

I have a sneaking suspicion about a potential draft candidate, and I've alluded to it in the past but that person is by no means a sure bet to allow themselves to be drafted for the 'Rat nomination, but I'm willing to bet that if they were, it would pretty much lock up the election for the 'Rats.

But I don't want to sound coy, so you want a name?

Here you go: Colin Powell.

Powell has everything that the 'Rats could want in a candidate, he would very likely obtain near 100 percent levels of black votes, his national security credentials are virtually unassailable, the fact that he has broken with the Bush Administration regarding Iraq might actually play well with the anti-war left (who irrationally hate Bush for any and every reason under the sun), he is just about as socially liberal as Giuliani, but he retains a vast amount of good will from the so-called 'moderate' (read: RINO) Republicans. I think he would be a formidable candidate, damn near unbeatable, but only if he were the 'Rat nominee, there is no way he could ever obtain the GOP nomination.

But I think that rather than worry about who (or what) the 'Rats are going to nominate, we should be focusing on choosing the best GOP candidate, which embodies the values and ideals of Reagan-style Republicanism, and that means NOT going with the cultish instincts of the RudyBots, nor does it mean choosing the over-the-hill antics of the McCainiacs (which are becoming more and more rare here on FR).

[Tulsa Ramjet]

Mitt with Colin as VP. Powell would give him international experience, black vote, broad appeal, and Mitt would seal the conservatives.

There you go. Everyone can rest now.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

Mitt with Colin as VP. Powell would give him international experience, black vote, broad appeal, and Mitt would seal the conservatives.

There you go. Everyone can rest now.

[mkjessup]

Ehhh, I suspect that there would be more than sufficient animus towards Powell from the conservative base of the GOP that Romney (or any presumptive nominee) wouldn't dare try to pull that.

Like Giuliani, I believe that Colin Powell is more at ease with the Democrat Party, he is NOT a conservative in the mold of someone like Michael Steele, or Alan Keyes, J.C. Watts, et al.

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

["Here you go: Colin Powell."]

That's not going happen. In this day and age, he would already would have to have his people in place...MONEY, etc.

Unfortunately, there's no one the democratic party that's going to stop Hillary...Obama will fizzle.

[mkjessup]

Well I guess we can stop wasting our time then, since you seem to know it all, and with the Hillary-monster scaring you out of your wits, I guess we're all doomed.

Been nice knowin' you.

[ExGeeEye]

"Well there's a (fornicatin') surprise."