If Barack Obama Were to Sell Israel Down the River, Hillary Would Make a Heck of a Salesperson.
By RobWarrior on November 16, 2008 at 12:30 PM in Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Bill Richardson, Current Affairs, Hillary Clinton, Iran, Israel, Jewish Voters, Jews, Nocturnal Warrior, Zbigniew Brzezinski
Let me say this from the start, I have no idea what the Obama administration policy towards Israel and the U.S.-Israeli alliance will be. After all, during the campaign, he literally had one policy towards Jerusalem one day and a completely different one 24 hours later.
While the President-elect eventually won over most of the American Jewish community by throwing a few folks under the speeding bus and speaking in centrist tones, there have always been concerns by some Israel supporters about his close associations to fervent Palestinians like Rashid Khalidi and anti-Israel advisors like Zbigniew Brzezinski and Andrew Malley.
Caroline Glick does an excellent job of listing those concerns in the Jerusalem Post. You can read that here
If Glick is right and the United States is ready to change its stance towards Israel, this policy will need to be sold to an Israeli government that always puts the safety of its nation first (in other words, we’ll blow up Iranian nukes whether the U.S. likes it or not) and the American People. If he tries to sell that, the only person who could sell it is Hillary Clinton.
While we have had numerous posts on the political implications of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, we haven’t had much discussion about what her presence would mean to Obama administration policy around the world.
While the world is excited about Barack Obama’s election, he has no credibility on the world stage and has not yet earned the trust of our allies. Through her own work and the goodwill former President Clinton has abroad, Senator Clinton has that trust and credibility. Whatever President Obama wants to sell, he may just need Hillary to sell it.
The concern is, would he use her to try and sell this:
As for direct talks with Iran itself, the question immediately arises, what could Obama offer Teheran in exchange for an end to its nuclear program that Bush hasn’t already offered?
What it can offer is Israel.
Over the past few years, Obama’s top nuclear nonproliferation adviser, Joe Cirincione, has repeatedly advocated placing Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the negotiating table and offering it up in exchange for an Iranian pledge to end its nuclear program. Defense Secretary Robert Gates - whom Obama is considering retaining - insinuated in his 2006 confirmation hearings that Iran is only building nuclear weapons to defend itself against Israel. Gates, it should be recalled, has been instrumental in convincing Bush not only not to attack Iran’s nuclear installations, but not to support an Israeli attack against Iran’s nuclear installations.
What is profoundly distressing about statements by men like Cirincione and Gates is what they tell us about the strategic reasoning informing the incoming Obama administration.
Again, I have no idea if this is what an Obama administration will do. Would Senator Clinton as Secretary of State even go along with this kind of policy? What I do know is this, if the new President really wants to change our foreign policy approach radically, John Kerry or Bill Richardson won’t be able to do the job. They can’t walk into a room with other world leaders and say trust me. Hillary Clinton can. That may be why she really is being considered for the job.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
The US has been pushing for resolution to the Palestinian issue forever.
Nothing new here.
Israel hears the US clearly. We are so supportive. That won’t change.
We also want to see resolution. That won’t change.
who says it won’t change? i don’t have a shred of a doubt that O’s supporters would have no problem at all if we completely withdrew aid and military support to israel and let the arabs have their way with them.
What’s the point of this article? You don’t say anything. You state several times you have no idea what the Obama administration’s policies towards Israel would be (you could start by reading his policies and looking at past actions), yet you speculate, “what if it’s this…”
No US government will ever ask Israel to put its nuclear arsenal on the table. It’s pretty much the only thing keeping us from another Holocaust. If Israel doesn’t have nuclear weapons to retaliate with, Iran doesn’t need its own nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. Neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton would EVER ask them to do so. This has nothing to do with who is a strong enough presence as SOS and everything to do with what is best for the security of the US and Israel.
You don’t need a strong SOS to try to convince Israel to get rid of its nuclear arsenal - you need a moronic SOS and President. With Obama (and hopefully Hillary as SOS), you have neither.
This is a lazy article based on speculation and with little merit.
You can call it speculation.
But things just do not add up with him. After reading the JPost article, I can understand why many people may have misgivings. The perfect example is Malley. The guy went to have talks with Hamas during the election, and Obama distanced himself during the election and played as a centrist. And immediately after the election, Malley suddenly show up again as an advisor. Something like that is TOO coincidental. The reality is that Malley was on his short list for some time.
No doubt he’s going to try and talk to these people. But the reality, despite what some like to say, is that both the Bush and Clinton presidencies attempted the same thing. It didn’t work and I don’t think it will work under him. That is unless he’s willing to give them alot more. And given their anti American (not just anti Bush) rhetoric, they will not be placated with BS diplomatic assurances. But even I don’t think Obama is willing to sell out the US.
I’m not one to think that Obama will magically fix everything. The world is way too complicated for such a simplistic view. He’ll try and he’ll negotiate, and he’ll order military actions- as has been done for decades. But as with all previous leaders, we have to watch him.
You can call it speculation and dismiss it as cult-like. I call it keeping my EYES OPEN.
So in spite of the fact that his policies change every 5 minutes, you think you know what they are? And his past actions? I actually wasn’t aware that he’s done anything in his life. Why don’t you enlighten us? Surely you must be psychic.
Kinda like, Obama will save the world. Or Obama is gonna change everything. Exactly what proof or evidence do you have to make that “speculation”. Please, the your double standard is very apparent.
TROLL
Barack Obama links Israel peace plan to 1967 borders deal
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5162537.ece
That pretty much sums up what Obama intends to do. He already stated he’d have a hard time dealing with the Likud party but it looks like that’s exactly what he’ll have to deal with within 3 weeks of his inauguration. Fat chance Netanyahu will go along with the 2002 Saudi peace initiative.
That was a plan initially backed by Bush and Blair. It got nowhere because Bush and Blair are hardy bringers of Middle East peace.
All the fear, war-mongering and illegal invasion did was make Israel less safe. Under Clinton, Israel looked as though it may solve the Palestine problem. Bush appointed his Dracula friend to look after the blood bank and no progress was made.
“fear, war-mongering”
Hardly so. The truth is that there are people out there who just do not like America. And not amount of appeasement will stop that. They didn’t like us under Clinton, under Bush, and they won’t like us under Obama. In the end, if Obama wants to keep his country safe, he’s going to have to continue to hit them at every turn. Just like Clinton and Bush.
If you don’t believe me, look up how Clinton feels about Bin Laden. There’s video of him saying he wished he would have killed him. The mythology is slowly dissipating. The hatred of fundamentalists towards America did not start with Bush, nor will it end with Bush. I used to think the same thing, until I got a clue. I just hope many others on the left will understand that as well.
Xax, what you say is so self-evident that it is a truism. How can anyone think otherwise? Presumably it will take something like a nuclear or biological attack on a major city to convince the appeasers that our enemy is implacable.
Even then the appeasers will continue to appease. They will say its our fault for being global bad guys.
True……but that will always be true, too.
How we respond still defines us. Not them.
Is this a typo for “this” because I have no idea which country he considers “his” since since he’s shown more interest in Kenya than the USA. And it certainly is not obvious which one he would “keep safe” because, like Bush on 9/11, when we had an economic crisis that caused Senator McCain to suspend his campaign and return to his job, Senator Obama just said, “They’ll call me if they need me” so we know the USA isn’t high on his list of priorities! Sounds like something GWB would say, like his being “tired of swatting [al Qaida] flies” in March 2001.
And all of this has to do with a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine problem how?
NoBO: the author of that article on the Times has serious credibility problems (per the israelis themselves)He’s not a reporter but a fabulist (really). Let’s stick to Caroline Glick’s piece; she is great and a serious journalist.
If BO listens to Joe Cirincione irresponsible and dangerous stupid ideas then we are in serious trouble…..
a commenter on HotAir which I enjoy, indicates a coauthor of this piece you cite above, which also concerned me!!, is questionable in motivation..
go check it out, I felt much better after I did background on the author :0)
I dont take it on face value that it is true, fer shure I dont think Hill would taker SoS if she didnt have assurances Obama wasnt going there!
The theory of the Clinton name drop which I posted at midnight is now coming to fruition in today’s US media…..
The Past Week: November 9-15, Recaps & Random Thoughts (Suddenly Soiled Sarah Gets Advice from Katie Couric, Joke “Journalist”; Gov Luv; Sunday Telegraph, UK Previews More Clinton Trashing?; Major Stray Dog Update (Update 1X–Clinton Trashing in Progress in U.S. via AP)
http://tinyurl.com/6eaycw
I don’t buy the name drop theory. That hurts Obama a lot more than it hurts the Clintons. They can take anything. He can’t.
My bet? Hillary will be announced as SOS sometime in the next 5 days. And what a SOS she will be.
agree :0)
If Hillary accepted SOS it would be a lose-lose situation, no matter how good she would be at the job. My take is, Obama got this position by cheating, lying, playing the race card, and misogynist card. He can sink or swim on his own as far as I am concerned. The Israeli/Palestinian issue is not going to be solved in four years. It has been going on for over 2000. It is like Roe Vs Wade. It is not going any where. Hillary should not jeopardize her reputation for the nincompoop Obama; especially after the way he treated her and her supporters and all women.
Zbigniew Brzezinski spoke out against Senator Hillary Clinton and favored Obama, because Obama would listen. I think that they are only seeking out Senator Clinton to use her to do Zbigniew Brzezinski bidding, and if you notice no one is asking about his support of the Taliban in years past. That failed police came back to bite us in 2001.
Obama and Zbigniew Brzezinski have no problem supporting governments that oppress women and now they are going to use Senator Clinton to disarm Israel?!? Why not send Colin Powell to do the job since he believes in the Obama philosophy and is well known in the region. Senator Clinton would be needed in the senate if they indeed are trying to make deals with Iran at the expense of Israel. Who is going to speak up for the lone democracy, that doesn’t oppress women in the region?
If we offer up democracies in order to make deals with dictators what have we gained and what was the point of trying to help Iraq in becoming a democracy?
You do realize that this is simply dangerous speculation by the author who admits he has absolutely no idea if this is something Obama would even consider?
I’ll put this one in the file with the Whitey Tape. Just drumming up the fear with absolutely no evidence to back it up. Keeps the cult of followers of NoQuarter in line with the cult’s mission.
ah the whitey tape! thanks for confirming your troll status cali.
I’m not sure that’s fair.
This site was the primary pusher of the “Whitey Tape.”
Accountability.
I personally don’t think it’s a big deal.
But…..I do think backing Berg is another layer of that approach.
So, this poster has a good point.
I think I’m also beginning to see that this blog is horribly right-wing.
That’s OK. They have their place in life.
But I can’t see me posting at one.
So either this blog starts to moderate the anger articles and find a healthier balance, or I’m out of here, too.
this poster is a troll. larry didn’t push the whitey tape. he mentioned. we did the rest. and yeah when someone brings up the whitey tape that says to me they are trollish. and goodby anne. threats don’t work with larry or the posters here. we are supposed to listen to lectures from the likes of that poster and yeah, gee whiz kick us around and then lecture? no thanks!
Ann said she was leaving before but didn’t. Larry never pushed the whitey tape or Berg.
Asking for fairness for Israel is NOW Right Wing? WOW, I thought ‘progressives’ were for protecting the rights of those whose rights were being trampled upon and in protecting our allies to help or sustain democracy in the world.
As a woman I don’t care to support governments that oppress their people and women in particular.
I do think it is a dangerous proposition to think that a government that has stated clearly and publicly that it would like to see Israel erased off the face of this earth should be dealt with GREAT CAUTION and not be pandered to.
I am neither Arab nor Jew and have sympathy for both sides. I am sure there are many deeper issues of which I am sure I have no knowledge but I do know right from wrong. I am an Amerian Indian and see far too many similarities in the aggression of Israel encroaching on lands that do not belong to them. A past I feel most Americans are not proud of but look to our own history as an example of the Palestine-Israeli conflict. Israel has broken every “peace treaty” since the 1960’s in their greed to take more land. Would you call the American Indians terrorists? They had to fight with whatever means available to them to save their families and homes against against overwhelming odds and naked aggression by a stronger well armed opponent. The U.S. called them heathens and savages and so justified the attrocites and near genocide, forced those who survived to live on lands it had not use for and could not sustain the indian way of life…that is until settlers wanted that too and then broke those treaties as well. Sound familiar? An Israeli statesman admitted they cannot hope to completely root out Hamas, but it is a “lesson they soon won’t forget.” Sounds like comments by Andrew Jackson’s among others with reference to punishing the Indians. I do not say Israel does not have the right to defend itself but there are 500 Palestinians dead and one Israeli solder…clearly, who is the threat and agressor here? How many of that 500 were Hamas? This is hateful aggression and punishment done by an overwhelmingly stronger force and not self-defense. I hope President Obama changes the U.S. policy of unconditional support for Israel. What can he do you ask? Israel receives $6 billion a year in U.S. foreign aid out of the $20 billion given worldwide. The U.S. needs to step in and stop being held hostage by domestic political and financial self interest and demand a cease fire and withdrawal of Israeli troops by threatening a halt of foreign aid, and then ensure the return by Israel of the lands granted to Palestine in the original treaties of the 1960’s. Thereafter, if the violence continues and Israel is attacked, she has the right to defend her borders under those treaties with the full support of this nation. This is not just my opinion but world opinion based on accepted behaviors of civilized nations (I see the obvious hypocracy here but the “look what you do” is not a valid justification and simply a cop out.) I think its time Israel stops the childish name calling and playing the anti-semitic card and begins addressing the real issues.
Oh get real. I hardly think you could curb your incessant blathering. You clearly are in desperate need of attention to fuel your false sense of importance.
AnninCA is a sockpuppet for caligirl- you made it too obvious.
smile, actually they make it too obvious. it is hard to ignore a fire truck that won’t stop the siren!
What is the “mission” of the NQ “cult”? It seems to me that keeping the NQ participants “in line” would be like trying to herd cats.
Obama and Odinga Campaign in Kenya
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6eVVVKFHu0
PROOF OBAMA BACKED KENYA DICTATOR RAILA ODINGA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvmmG7dQMLc&feature=related
………………
Obama supported Odinga who signed onto Sharia Law and it is well documented. SO, NO I DON’T BELIEVE IN THE CHANGE HOPEY THING. As to NQ being a cult…FREE SPEECH is FREE SPEECH, and hopefully it won’t disappear in the next four years.
WTF? Obama doesn’t have cult followers?
Is it dangerous speculation that the LA TIMES has a video of Obama with anti semitic hate speech? Nope.
If Hillary takes the SOS spot it will be just like her accepting Bill Clinton’s philandering right in front of her nose. Why she does not divorce the guy I will never know?
Oh wait its for the party. Party First. But that goes against PUMAs. I am confused.
oh winston come on, why an ad hominem attack on HRC here with her husbands actions?
I dont understand that reasoning, at all. Esp when I sometimes hear it frm conservatives of all people who espouse the concept of no divorces. So honoring her vow and staying with him was somehow bad according to both the feminists and the conservative right
sickening
we are beyond this, come along, she is considering SoS now, nothing to do with Big Dawg but the vetting, got it?
obama’s record of hanging around with israel-haters is undeniable. half his family is muslim, and let’s face it, they are no lovers of israel. sure, nobody “knows” what obama will do, but the odds favor him siding with world islam against israel, rather than the other way around.
I read this snippet this morning, an excerpt from the Times of London:
“Obama intends to throw his support behind a 2002 Saudi peace initiative endorsed by the Arab League and backed by Tzipi Livni, the Israeli foreign minister and leader of the ruling Kadima party.
The proposal gives Israel an effective veto on the return of Arab refugees expelled in 1948 while requiring it to restore the Golan Heights to Syria and allow the Palestinians to establish a state capital in east Jerusalem.
On a visit to the Middle East last July, the president-elect said privately it would be “crazy” for Israel to refuse a deal that could “give them peace with the Muslim world”, according to a senior Obama adviser.”
If you remember, this is a 180 from Obama’s June statment before AIPAC, where he ensured the group that Jerusalem must remain undivided.
It has begun. And he’s going to need more than snakeoil to pave the way. Now, the Hillary Clinton rumor is beginning to make sense.
Hillary Clinton ‘outstanding:’ Kissinger
They don’t call Henry Kissinger a seasoned diplomat for nothing.
The former secretary of state and veteran of Republican administrations said today that Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, under consideration for secretary of state in the administration of Democratic President-elect Barack Obama, would make “an outstanding appointment” and display “great courage” on Obama’s part.
…
The Indian media also have been “rife with reports” that Obama could name the former president, Bill Clinton, as a personal envoy in the Kashmir territorial dispute between India and Pakistan. Kissinger, 85, sparked some laughter in New Delhi when asked about this: “There is a limit to the number of Clintons you can appoint” at one time.
swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/11/hillary_clinton_outstanding_ki.html
I’ll eat my hat if Hillary is even offered the job. More likely: 3:00am text message saying Hillary was never considered.
Alright I’m out
I can’t sit here while people post their greatest fears and conspiracy theories in reaction to a speculative post who’s sole purpose is to drum up fear among its minions in order to keep them in line.
Have fun speculating about how horrible Obama will be for Israel and this country and how much he hates Hillary. Soon enough it’ll have to be placed alongside those posts about how Obama was unelectable and about how Hillary didn’t actually mean it when she said she was going to do everything in her power to get OBama elected.
Peace.
do us a favor. when you return and you will as obot trolls can’t help themselves, save your self righteous bull for another blog. it is insulting.
I understand. It’s with the birth certificate thinking.
Bye CaliGirl, they’re missing you at DU.
The bots over there are bored and are trying to entertain themselves by fanning out and polluting other sites.
They are way too easy to spot.
I still don’t get it?
How can they put Isreal’s nuclear program on the table? Isreal is sitting in the middle of a hurricane, I do not think any amount of talking/assurances will be enough for them to give up their right to defend themselves. Even Clinton will not be able to sell that. I would wager, that despite Emmanual’s appointment, Isreal doesn’t trust Obama as far as they can spit. And he’s the one they’re going to be dealing with, not Clinton. If she’s Sect of State any power she has in the Senate, to actually be of any use to Isreal, is gone.
Iran’s elections are coming up soon and I’m not sure of Ahmadinejad is going to last. As the market continues to drop, along with the price of oil Iran’s economy is going to be in the toilet soon. I don’t know any of the candidates in Iran, but given Ahmadinejad’s anti American/Isreal stances, I can’t see the Iranian people electing a US friendly president. The potential person could be worse than Ahmadinejad, I mean so far all he’s done is talk. The next person might walk.
I don’t see us stopping Iran’s progress in nuclear weaponry, at all. Many people understand the danger in nuclear weapons, so HOPEFULLY they will excercise caution. However, fundamentalist Islamists only want to bend the world to their will. They’ll try to dress it up as “we only hate Americans”, but the reality is completely different. Maybe Iran will put aside it’s anti American rhetoric, at least in private, and will not allow any extremists to gain control of nuclear weapons. I don’t trust it though. The only thing we can do is hit and hit hard if it ever comes to that. The precipice is nearing. Can you see it?
put Isreal’s nuclear program on the table
I don’t understand that. From the article above:
Obama’s top nuclear nonproliferation adviser, Joe Cirincione, has repeatedly advocated placing Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the negotiating table and offering it up in exchange for an Iranian pledge to end its nuclear program.
A quote that supported that would have been nice. What exactly did Cirincione say? How does Caroline Glick think the US could put Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the negotiating table?
And this is just insanity:
Gates, it should be recalled, has been instrumental in convincing Bush not only not to attack Iran’s nuclear installations, but not to support an Israeli attack against Iran’s nuclear installations.
I’m guessing Caroline Glick is a kook.
Iran lies. It has always lied. It’s promises — even in writing — aren’t worth the powder to blow them up with.
Israel will never give up its nukes. The nation doesn’t trust the U.S.,U.K. or any other country. Take a pledge from Iran?! OMG. If this is Bobo’s plan it’s the dumbest policy in American history and more absurd than W sending Condi over at the last second to secure a Middle-East accord!
Ya think Rahm and his Israeli terrorist pop who thinks Arabs would only be mopping floors in the WH would approve?
After what Hitler did to the Jews? The thought of Israel willingly giving up their power is too laughable to contemplate.
You are right. Israel is as hated by those middle eastern 15th century theocrats as the jews were hated by Hitler. I wouldn’t give my nukes up either if I were them.
So is Obama going to tell Hillary if she becomes SOS that he wants the troops out of Iraq now even though Bush just signed the agreement to keep them there till 2011.
Hillary should really think about this and I hope Obama does not set her up, but Hillary’s lust for power and staying in the spotlight just might be her undoing.
So is Obama going to tell Hillary if she becomes SOS that he wants the troops out of Iraq now even though Bush just signed the agreement to keep them there till 2011.
There was no agreement between the US and Iraq. The Iraqi Cabinet said US troops must get out December 31, 2011 no matter what:
The date for all troops to leave Iraq will be December 31, 2011, he said.
These dates are “set and fixed” and are “not subject to the circumstances on the ground,” he said.
Twenty-seven of the 40 Cabinet members in attendance voted in favor of the agreement, said Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. One minister abstained.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/11/16/security.pact.vote/index.html
Tip for ya: And “Hillary’s lust for power? ” Maybe if instead of just hating the Clinton’s you paid attention you’d have a clue.
“Hillary’s lust for power and staying in the spotlight just might be her undoing.”
Oh pu-leeze!!!!
Although Livni and her party might be open to Obama’s ideas, I wonder if there could be a backlash among Israelis to Obama’s election and Netanyahu is elected.
This is the website where they are trying to get volunteers to work on e-mailing/writing to electors from the various states concerning BO’s selective service registration. Whatever he has posted appears to be fraudulent, they say.
http://www.democratic-disaster.com
RobWarrior;
The proof you seek is found by contrasting the speeches by BO and Hillary at AIPAC.
BO will have nothing by himself to offer as an originial idea. Nor does he have the depth at this time. But he does have a very disturbing history in lying about his associations with terrorists.
Hillary is on the side of Isreal and takes it very seriously. Her support of our Democratic ally, Isreal, is undying. If Hillary is the Secretary of state, she will represent an administration that CAN”T be trusted for various reasons, one of which is Barfy lies and is an incoherent, ignorant excuse for a leader who follows.
They can trust Hillary, but the administration is supposed to represent we the people…but 70% of eligble voters did not vote for Barky..so he represents 30% of the people. Hillary representing this administation will be the last straw. Hillary is the winner of the Primary. MSM was the counter of the votes tally and we know we can’t trust that. We have proof–Hillary won the primary..why hook up with a liar and mar her reputation. Sure we need her, but not like that..What country will believe her after that. Most countries are upset over Barky stealing this..Barky the president select and Hillary running the show from behind the scenes? Yes, she is smarter than Bill because she ran the show for Bill….NO~! time to get her out front as the leader..NOW!
Remember when she said she would ‘obliterate’ Iran if they didn’t stop their threats to Isreal. She’s a Scorpio with time on her side and a Gemini moon that never forgets and waits patiently without conscience to make you eat crow. This combo is deadly..but increases the charm and intelligence ever more so. I pity anyone who gets on her wrong side and pushes her past her limits..if her patience runs out, her cold and calculating strike will be swift and fatal.
Only 64,356,793 of the estimated 220,603,000 eligible American voters felt compelled to vote for Obama.
Furthermore, these 64,356,793 people represent only 21% of the population of the US (303,824,640).
Over 70% of eligible American voters did not vote for Obama.
I believe we are already seeing the real Obama - the one that Israel and intelligent Jews feared.
There is no doubt that Israel would agree to giving back land but only in exchange for peace and full recognition to exist by all parties including radical Islamic factions such as Hamas and Hezbollah. That is simply not happening. Bill Clinton tried it and it backfired on him.
I believe there is sufficient evidence now that Obama’s policy will be to force Israel to give up land with limited security conditions and therefore make it vulnerable.
Either Obama is showing just how naive he is or just how anti-Israel he will be.
Regarding Hillary as Secretary of State I believe that Obama wants to do that to make sure she is not in a position as a separate power base to counter him in the Senate and for a second term.
Also being Secrtary of State does not mean that she will be conducting critical foreign policy or be the primary advisors. Witness William Rogers vs. Henry Kissinger or Colin Powell vs. Condi Rice.
She would be a pawn. She has already been rooked.
Comment by S. Markom | 2008-11-16 13:46:47
Regarding Hillary as Secretary of State I believe that Obama wants to do that to make sure she is not in a position as a separate power base to counter him in the Senate and for a second term.
************
Her constituents should be on the phone to her office ASAP, because they would lose the lone voice that has dared to speak up in the past.
I agree, she is more effective in the senate.
You’re kidding. You think a junior senator is more influential than the Secretary of State?
Are you nuts?
AnninCa, Why do you resort to calling people “nuts”?
While a SoS has more power, I agree with S Markom, Winston and Women Voter.
Still, it is not to imply what you say is not a fact. Yes Senator Clinton would be a “scary smart” SoS. But in the bigger picture, she would be co-opted.
There is also the alignment of of Biden and Clinton in shaping Foreign Policy. That needs to be balanced by the fact that BO has NO experience and is completely and hopelessly politically tone deaf.
AnniCa..what are you nuts?
You have tunnel vision or what?
We see the big picture.
What are you, nuts?
Obama was the ‘junior’ senator, Senator Hillary Clinton is on her second term and she even worked while campaigning (multitasking).
This has been the great lie, to call her junior while he hardly even got his feet wet in the senate, before announcing his run for POTUS. McCain served longer as a POW (5+ years) than Obama has served in the senate.
Hillary would be as influential as William Rogers was as Secretary of State - he wasn’t - Kissinger was. The same could be said for Condi Rice overshadowing Colin Powell.
And she is a “junior” senator in name only.
Everyone needs to send Hillary email telling her to turn down the Secretary of State position! Do you remember the old adage, ‘Keep your friends close and your enemies closer’? Well, the adage applies here.
Obama is trying to do to Hillary what Bush did to Powell. By entangling her in his own foreign policy bungles, and there are likely to be many, he will 1) destroy her credibility in foreign policy, 2) probably surround her with people who will constantly undermine her vision (ie. Cheney/Rumsfeld/Feith/Wolfowitz and Rice undermined Powell ar every turn), 3) deprive her of contact with local political leaders in various states (which is necessary for another presidential run), and 4) most importantly, deprive her of an independent policy and institutional platform in the Senate.
He wants her to answer to him, not her constituents or political leaders, just like she was forced to do after she conceded in June. He and the Democratic leadership will just keep on raping her.
She has done enough for this rancid political party and its roving pack of cronies and Obama-enablers. She should keep her independence and stay in the Senate. We need brilliant Senators badly to keep Odumbo in check. The only good thing about the election is that we got rid of a bad Senator!
Don’t take the position, Hillary.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/
Indypol, your analogy comparing Bush’s appointment of Powell to Obama’s (supposed) appointment of Clinton is very insightful and worth thinking about long and hard.
Agreed.
I agree, she could do so much more in the senate and the fact that she challenged the Bush administration showed that she will not stand in silence when things go wrong.
Richard Danzig has been mentioned as a possible sec of defense.
Greater problem is, as an early Obama supporter, he would seem to lack a certain intuition.
I can’ t imagine having to take orders from someone considered an intellectual inferior.
At this point, I truly hope they go with someone different.
But it won’t be the first time they’ve brought in a flat wheel to run the Pentagon.
Or the CIA, for that matter.
Israel is the only real democracy in that region. WHen one democracy is nuked by these jihad extremists, the others can’t be far behind for these bastards bent on making the world a theocracy. Are you ready to size up your burkha and stand by to watch yet another holocaust?
This is all irrelevant, and we need to know more about Joe Biden’s views, since Obama will be declared an unconsitutional candidate when he can’t provide proof of natural-born United States birth. Can you see how this will all go down? Obama will say “I apologize for this birth situation which I knew nothing about. But we brought change to Washington and good luck to President Biden.” I wonder which african-american Biden will select as VP. Are we all starting to see the spin coming?
Obama’s church of twenty years was openly anti-Israel and yet no mention was made of it during the primary or general election. Now they are concerned?
As for Obama, he couldn’t have known of such things (not the church or pastor of twenty years he knew). But consider this portion of a Trinity Church bulletin (now scrubbed from the church website).
“I must tell you that Israel was the closest ally to the White Supremacists of South Africa. In fact, South Africa allowed Israel to test its nuclear weapons in the ocean off South Africa. The Israelis were given a blank check: they could test whenever they desired and did not even have to ask permission. Both worked on an ethnic bomb that kills Blacks and Arabs.
Arabs have always supported the dismantling of this racist government. In 1962, African-Arab Sudan granted Mandela a passport to travel with to gain international support in his struggle to free his people. Libya, among other Arab states, provided Mandela and other African liberation movements, political as well as material support. As a result, Libya was designated by the White House as a terrorist rogue state. What a great honor!”
Obama’s church of twenty years was openly anti-Israel and yet no mention was made of it during the primary or general election.
It was an issue during the primary but not until it was too late for Hillary.
McCain decided for some unknown reason that his campaign was not going to use it as an issue. That I will never forgive McCain for.
Also, this is the only way it could happen. If McCain had pushed the birth issue during the general campaign the Democrats could have killed it by saying “See, they can’t beat us on the issues so they have to try technicalities.” Now that the Democrats have won, Obama is boxed in. He reminds me of Nixon and his struggle to survive. He’s going down, but the media will put a nice spin on all of it.
You guys do realize that If Obama pushes this, it will start a war.
Yeah, for whatever reason, it strikes me as the other side of Cheney’s empire coin.
The middle east is a battle ground for Russia, and the US, always has been, the situation is far more complex than this “solution” would seem to acknowledge.
I don’t know, I keep thinking of McPeak, and what I think is his antisemitism, if they go in viewing Israel as one dimensional, or a homogeneous entity, if they’re motivated by bigotry, they’re already screwed.
I see a complete lack of sophisticated diplomacy, here, which we kind of knew, during the primaries.
Clinton would balance “the ticket,” as would Bill, but given the inner dynamics, it might not work out.
They’ll end up like Cheney’s group, functionally isolated, if not the Clintons first, then, Obama’s new “OSP, ” secondly, from everyone else.
Not too smart, here.
But who knows, it’s very early, yet.
I think Obama was born outside the USA…but no one will touch the issue…the fix is in.
BO will have at least 3 different positions on Israel before he is in office,not counting the ones he has already gone through.
This is the problem when we elect an unknown, Hillary will be in a losing position if she takes the job, and I don’t know how good she will be at selling BO’s crap.
Israel will not be giving up their nuclear weapons, dream on.
Israel will be sold by the wayside, as expedient as possible, with the notion that they deserve it for not giving up MORE LAND and their weapons.
I have stated here several times throughout the campaign any Jew who voted for BO did not learn from history. Our colleges do not teach real life diplomacy, they teach campfire diplomacy…where everyone does what they say they are going to and we all hold hands. PLEASE.
I support Hillary and Israel and do not want her put in the bad cop position…and you know BO will sell Hillary down the river, and once again be on top in 2012.
I think the goal here is to get Kerry as SOS so HE can lose HIS seat..Yeah!
Oh goody! I bet many in Massachusetts would love to send him packing off to DC.
I’m trying to figure out what Israel is getting with the news of this and, the article below. My immediate response is, gee how swell of you to ask the Arab world to recognize Israel, in exchange for them giving back all the land…and now to see they will also ask Israel to give up Nukes while giving up the rest. And do you think they will feel so secure to be willing to do all this for what? I’m sure they feel quite confident on ones word.
“Barack Obama is to pursue an ambitious peace plan in the Middle East involving the recognition of Israel by the Arab world in exchange for its withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, according to sources close to America’s president-elect.
Obama intends to throw his support behind a 2002 Saudi peace initiative endorsed by the Arab League and backed by Tzipi Livni, the Israeli foreign minister and leader of the ruling Kadima party.
The proposal gives Israel an effective veto on the return of Arab refugees expelled in 1948 while requiring it to restore the Golan Heights to Syria and allow the Palestinians to establish a state capital in east Jerusalem.
On a visit to the Middle East last July, the president-elect said privately it would be “crazy” for Israel to refuse a deal that could “give them peace with the Muslim world”, according to a senior Obama adviser.
Related Links
Clinton awaits recall to serve on world stage
Palin’s failure set to reap her $7m book deal
The Arab peace plan received a boost last week when President Shimon Peres, a Nobel peace laureate and leading Israeli dove, commended the initiative at a Saudi-sponsored United Nations conference in New York.
Peres was loudly applauded for telling King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who was behind the original initiative: “I wish that your voice will become the prevailing voice of the whole region, of all people.”
A bipartisan group of senior foreign policy advisers urged Obama to give the Arab plan top priority immediately after his election victory. They included Lee Hamilton, the former co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Democrat former national security adviser. Brzezinski will give an address tomorrow at Chatham House, the international relations think tank, in London.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5162537.ece
If this is true, it’s not a promising insight.
Because those in the middle east are not known for playing diplomatic and military atwater tricks against one another, with bombs and guns, though, as opposed to the smear.
All agreed upon peace deals will be honored, and certain people in the Arab world DID NOT think an Obama presidency would indicate the eradication of Israel.
Presidency by PR won’t work here, find out why Cheney and Rove failed, mostly it’s because they’re weren’t competent to lead, having cheated their way into the White House.
if anybody thinks that all the arabs want is to go back to the pre-1967 borders, they are dreaming. without a doubt, their ultimate goal is total elimination of israel.
lee hamilton and brzezinski both carter administration folks! i have mixed feelings about carter. i used to admire him for being a good ex president, but his attitude toward the clintons sickens me. i think we need to have a voice to make the case for the other side and at times carter has done that. but overall where their views might have the best intentions there are a number behind obama whose intentions i don’t trust. and the sad thing is many of us want reapproachment and some change in the climate where folks in the middle east can talk. but i don’t trust the farakhan, rev wrights, or other unsavory types hence failure is coming.
It was my feeling during the primary many in Obama’s camp were anti- Semitic, maybe anti Israel would be a better frame, and by that, I mean the McPeaks (McPike? I always forget)and the Zbigs.
This does not bode well, US aggression via a pro Israel Cheney was a disaster, as will be it’s opposite, in Obama, if that is what they choose to pursue.
Successful diplomacy cannot be borne of bigotry, period, whether it be against Israel, or Iran.
crater is a total arab-lover and palestinian apologist. he’s the kind who, whether he says it outright or not, justifies suicide bombings of civilians, because “israel made them do it.”
He just wants to park Hillary out. SO he can put Caroline in her senate slot, after having done nothing whatsoever for America other than to pimp Barack Obama and use her father’s name in vain. Barack Obama is NO JFK. And Michelle “fist pumper” is no Jackie. Shameful. They must be rolling in their graves.
Since Teddy “I love the poor so long as they don’t live near me” Kennedy is getting closer to his trip to hell, he wants that Kennedy name to stay in the American mind, as IF he were even a shadow of his two brothers. I do hope he meets up with mary jo in his last hullucinatory moments.
One good thing is THANKFULLY the speculation about SOS won’t be for too much longer. I hope Hillary stays way far away from the ensuing cluster fuck “Obama administration,” an oxymoron indeed.
i thought of that also. but i don’t think caroline has a real will for public life. she likes her privacy. also i think she has fairly young children and knows the kennedy name invokes some strange characters.
Oh gawd, Obama’s entire background and many of the people he has been closest to, etc share the same theme: anti-Israel.
Do people need a brick to fall on their heads? Our relationship with Israel will change substantially. Some people have figured that out many many months ago.
Dang.
Anyway, good post, and thanks for a link to Caroline Glick’s article as well.
You are welcome…
The simple point of the post is this, if Obama were planning some radical shift in policy, Hillary’s credibility would be a big help in selling it abroad.
If the Obama administration were to seek more concessions from Israel than previous administrations have asked for, who better to ask than her. She has trust that he does not.
Everything else is speculation. Anyone who thinks they know what Obama will do is lying. By admitting I don’t, at least I’m being honest and actually giving him the benefit of the doubt.
It really doesn’t matter what anyone else does–the UN, the Obama administration, whatever. There’s a power struggle going on in the Israeli government at the moment, and Likud is going to come out on top. The Israelis will do what they feel is necessary because they really believe in their motto–”Never Again!” They’ll keep their nukes, and when they feel like the time is right, they’ll use them on Iran and Syria.
It’s just the next step/escalation in an ongoing world war.
RobWarrior:
If BO is even thinking about pursuing this HRC better NOT get involved. It is the craziest idea I have ever heard. It very much smeels like sell out Israel to Iran and the whole region and IT STINKS.
HRC not even get close to this b/c it will burn her forever.
correction: “smells like a sell out of”
testing….
Israel is our one true friend and ally in the middle east and it amazes me that anyone could ask them to disarm themselves to appease a country like Iran. My question is why do we even consider appeasing iran when they are sending terrorists into Iraq to kill our troops and bring down the new government in Iraq before it can even get it’s feet on the ground. They hate us and want our destruction just as they want the destruction of Israel.
If Hamas spent it’s energy in helping the people in Gaza and developing it’s infrastructure rather than shelling Israel, the people there would have some kind of decent life and Israel would not close the borders as it does.
I am not sure what Iran wants. Their president is waiting for the reincarnation of the Imam. It is the clerics that run the country. The president really has no power. If anything the Shia clerics would have a bone to pick with the Sunni’s and the “Less than” status that sect has within the Muslim community. It is more complicated that just Israel although that is what they banter about. A nuclear Iran threatens the Sunni nations also, not just Israel.
If you all remember, Hillary Clinton talked about a regional protection plan against any nuclear aggression from Iran towards any country in the region.
I do sometimes wonder if BO knows Israel is scared blind of him as POTUS because he makes the US no longer their friend. He may have heard the intel briefing, which is that Israel will attack Iran soon. He puts Clinton in SOS position to make the Israeli’s think America is still a friend because Clinton was. Then he stabs Clinton and Israel in the back. He could make deals behind her back, right, and make it look like she knew all about it?
I should have added that he tricks Israel into taking no action or at least to delay any action of their part.
I can’t imagine Rahm Emmanuel going along with disarming Israel, he was in the IDF and is very pro-Israel. Why would Obama ask Emanuel to be his chief of staff if he wasn’t planning on continuing our pro-Israel policy? We will have to wait and see, what other choice is there?
“If” Obama were to sell Israel down the river?
Hasn’t he as much telegraphed that will occur?
Should be interesting to see how his chief-of-staff deals with that.
Hillary would NEVER do what the title of the piece suggests (i keep typing peace instead hopeful Freudain typo??)
Hillary has always stood by Israel and in the debates was INCREDIBLY CLEAR AND FORCEFUL on her positio inre Iran and nukes and Israel our ally
wipe them off the map
obliterate
ches :0)
What you may want to consider is the current political situation IN ISRAEL, their ongoing/upcoming change in governance and Livni’s position according to that piece, which is one in which Israel gives up the Golan Heights.
THAT is I think to my uninformed eye not doable, it looks ona map like it would make them incredibly vulnerable.
Anywho if the govt of Israel is negotiating with Syria, why would Hillary not help broker a deal that Israel wants?
Why jump to conclude Hillary would ever sell otu her lifelong friends. Saban fully supports Hillary because she is such a staunch defender of Israel.
In re Obamas inclination, I am OVERJOYED at the news of HRC SoS b/c to me ti si an incredibly strong signal that we will not allow Israel to stand alone.
I have ZERO DOUBT that Hillary would resign before she would carry out anything that harmed Israel.
:))