PDA

View Full Version : Pentagon Smacks Clinton


Sierra Mike
07-19-2007, 03:49 PM
WASHINGTON - The Pentagon told Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton that her questions about how the U.S. plans to eventually withdraw from Iraq boosts enemy propaganda.

In a stinging rebuke to a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman responded to questions Clinton raised in May in which she urged the Pentagon to start planning now for the withdrawal of American forces.

A copy of Edelman's response, dated July 16, was obtained Thursday by The Associated Press.

"Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia," Edelman wrote.

He added that "such talk understandably unnerves the very same Iraqi allies we are asking to assume enormous personal risks."

Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines called Edelman's answer "at once outrageous and dangerous," and said the senator would respond to his boss, Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

I predict Gates will pretty much say the same thing. :)

Clinton's antics are awfully transparant. She wants to take credit for the entire redeployment process and claim she's "the one who got it done." The truth of the matter is, no military unit is ever sent into the field without a plan for bringing it back. Redeployment of assets to CONUS or their original OCONUS duty stations is part of the package. What she really wants from the Pentagon is a time and date, so she can start up the Celebration Machine and await the waves of adoration and idolation that she perceives to be waiting in the wings.

However, since this article is from the AP, it wouldn't be complete without a swipe at Goring--I mean, Cheney:

Edelman is the Undersecretary of defense for policy. He is also a former U.S. ambassador and one-time aide to Vice President Dick Cheney. During the 2004 campaign, Cheney told Iowa voters that electing the Democratic ticket of John Kerry and John Edwards would risk another terrorist attack.

That closer really has a lot to do with the rest of the article.

Read all the nonsense here (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070719/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_iraq).

SM

Plunge
07-19-2007, 03:58 PM
The bitch had it coming. Now if she has a set of brass ones as has been reported, she'll 'man up' and apologize.

ethics
07-19-2007, 03:59 PM
Where are the pics from Iraq?

Plunge
07-19-2007, 04:09 PM
In my camera. I'll check them and then post.

ethics
07-19-2007, 04:50 PM
Cool, thanks!

jfcjrus
07-19-2007, 05:25 PM
If she keeps managing to step into this sort of crap, do you guys really STILL think that this person is going to be our President, a year and a half from now?

Good grief, if she keeps this up, don't you think anyone, with any semblance of reason, will see her for the liteweight she is?
That they'll see that she's simply not the Statesman we so desparately need?

But, I admit, she IS collecting tens of millions of dollars from some folks that evidently think so.
So MAYBE I'm just the one that's out of touch, and hoping for better?

"Hillary Clinton, the next President of the United States of America", just stuns me.
That'll be the day I lose ALL faith in my fellow citizens.
There has just GOT to be someone around that's better than her to lead this great nation!

Regards,

ethics
07-19-2007, 05:27 PM
If she keeps managing to step into this sort of crap, do you guys really STILL think that this person is going to be our President, a year and a half from now?

From the Left? Hell ya. Do you honestly think that all Americans feel the same way you do about the Pentagon, the War, and the idea of stabilization of Iraq via US occupancy?

jfcjrus
07-19-2007, 05:45 PM
From the Left? Hell ya. Do you honestly think that all Americans feel the same way you do about the Pentagon, the War, and the idea of stabilization of Iraq via US occupancy?
No, of course not.

I understand that I'm a sore to most, regarding those issues (and many others), in today's political climate.
I just asked a question, and I thank you for your answer.

Hillary for President in 2008, sure, why not!
And I really hope there's a God, because someone's got to be there when everyone's crying "God help us", in 2009.

We'll see.
Regards,

ethics
07-19-2007, 05:59 PM
LOL! Just giving you the bigger picture. There will be plenty who will vote for her. Will it be enough? We will find out.

Sierra Mike
07-20-2007, 10:40 AM
Clinton, of course, doesn't get it. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070720/ap_on_go_co/clinton_iraq;_ylt=AhmE0Mv0uGHsxZGtDMC6nyIGw_IE)

SM

ShinyTop
07-20-2007, 10:52 AM
When reading of the request to verify that the Pentagon is planning for the "eventual" withdrawal of troops from Iraq I have to admit the request is proper coming from a United States Senator. The DOD should have responded in more serious manner providing the information requested. It is not the DOD's job to choose politics or to lecture Senators.

That said I would like to bemedal the gentleman who responded to Clinton since he and all of us know her use of said information would be only political and probably infantile.

Sierra Mike
07-20-2007, 11:25 AM
I do believe that stuff is usually made available to the SASC as a matter of course. Clinton, of course, went public with her request, and the reasons behind it have nothing to do with the goodness of the nation, but with the goodness of her election bid.

I don't believe the Senate has sufficient authority to command the Pentagon to do anything--that rests with the CinC.

SM

ravital
07-22-2007, 01:41 PM
Here is Slate's brilliant perspective (http://www.slate.com/id/2170852) on the matter:

The undersecretary's letter to Clinton embodies the administration's contempt for Congress, Democrats, anyone named Clinton, and—implicitly, in its tone—anyone who falls in these categories and is also a woman.
Slate's spin embodies their contempt for the executive branch, the military, the Pentagon, and - implicit in their "leaking" of the name of the undersecretary in question, Eric Edelman - anyone falling in these categories who is also Jewish.

:biggrin:

ethics
07-22-2007, 01:42 PM
It's not "Slate" it's Fred Kaplan. It's also an OpEd. :)

Arc
07-22-2007, 01:53 PM
It's basically an SOP near form letter. If any of the candidates or others in certain positions had done or said what Clinton did they too would have gotten one. It's routine. Notice the language or tone is simply advisory and infers caution.

It is just the MSM and Clinton making this a story.

Loans | Bad Credit Mortgages | Personal Car Finance | Gas Suppliers | Submit article