jump to navigation

Sen. Clinton and National Security March 2, 2008

Posted by mindscout in Decision 2008.
trackback

The latest tactic of Sen. Clinton is tom toming her national security “experience and credentials” and attacking Sen. Obama that he wont be a good Commander-in-Chief. She even put out an ad asking americans who would you want in white house when there is a problem in the world so that your kids are safe. Interesting. Got to applaud who ever comes with these ideas in her campaign. She is also adding all the living ex-generals in her”endorse me now” category.

This is really amusing stuff. She is using same tactic that Karl Rove used for Bush. These are the same tactics she complained against repeatedly. She is using a scare card with americans by lifting a trick from Republican playbook. Is Karl Rove her new Campaign Manager or is he her new political consultant?

She also mentions who would you have in white  house at 3 am in morning, someone who knows world leaders or someone who doesnt? Now Sen Clinton, if you think you know all world leaders how come you could not name the new puppet of Putin in Russia? Did Putin not tell about his plans when he called you over the weekend?

Clinton has no record on successfull national security. She voted yes on Iraq war spending bill. If she knew the war was wrong idea then why did she vote for it? She claims based on the fact it was sincere decision. Well, Hillary, you have to make decisions based on some facts and then some on the analysis on current and future threats. Some others use threat modeling or analysis or strategy to evaluate the decision-making process. And then good leaders exercise a sound judgement because no matter how many facts you have, leadership is about sound judgement. Now Sen. Clinton , you did not demonstrate that judgement , did you? So what is the difference between you and GWB (George W Bush)?

 Atleast Bush stands up and owns up his decision. But Sen. Clinton, you demonstrate your opportunitistic and political savvy by swinging to popular sentiment. If today Iraq was going as planned and everything was well, you would tom-tom your vote of Yes on Iraq as a good judgement, wouldnt you?

During her husband’s tenure, she just travelled to the countries she wanted to go as a VIP tourist. There was never a sound business conducted or such an outcome arrived by her visits to coountries in Africa, Indian sub-continent etc. If she had a good judgement and a foresight then she would have established good relations with India’s Sonia Gandhi and Pakistan’s late Benazir Bhutto. But she did not.

So, Sorry Sen. Clinton, you dont appear to be a good leader but you do appear to be a good politician. America needs a good leader now and not a politician to run the country.  You are too emotional to be a sound leader. You are getting rankled by simple questions by Tim Russert or making an issue that you are getting the first question in debate. I shudder to think how will you react and what decisions you make when you get rankled by someone in Russia or Iran.  You might end up in the same club as GWB and America cant afford another mistake like Iraq.

If Sen Clinton is the Democratic nominee, then how is she going to compete with John McCain on the National Security? Does that not mean we are in for another 4 years of Republican rule?  Is that what we want?

 Somehow, this strategy of Clinton campaign seems short-sighted and very much  against what Democratic party wants.

I think Sen. Obama presents a very good choice for us. Obama can beat McCain on National Security issues as he did not vote for Iraq War. I think Obama is also correct in saying we need to focus on Afganistan and Pakistan. Current administration did adopt what he had been saying and attacked a milinat base in Pakistan for the first time without Pakistan Army’s involvement. Obama’s assertion that he would speak with any leader first is also a good policy. America cant always act arrogant and deal with other world leaders with a gun in hand. It needs to act like a powerful country and discuss issues confidently with countries like China, Iran and Russia. So what is the harm in talking with these countries? I think to me it all makes sense?

But does it to you? If it does then support Sen. Obama.

I would vote for McCain any day if the choice was in 2000. If it is a choice between Clinton and McCain then I am going McCain.

Advertisements

Comments»

No comments yet — be the first.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: