Re: [Marxism] Clinton threatens attack on Iran "the way that we did" Iraq

[Eli Stephens <elishastephens@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

This is a complete over-reaction and misreading on the part of the Antiwar.com 
writer of what Clinton actually said. Read the transcript for yourself:

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=7775502

Here's the relevant section, where she says, in English which is fragmented and 
not completely grammatical but still I think understandable, that the U.S. has 
to understand that Iran might think the U.S. or "some other enemy" (gee, who 
could she be talking about) is going to attack Iran pre-emptively. She fails to 
note, of course, that many key figures in both the Israeli and U.S. governments 
and "establishments" have threatened exactly that, this is hardly something in 
the imagination of the Iranians. Nevertheless, the idea that this can be 
interpreted as Clinton herself threatening a preemptive attack on Iran is 
incorrect.

Note, by the way, her nonsensical implication that somehow if Iran gets nuclear 
weapons, that "other Arab countries" are going to get them. As if the U.S. 
would tolerate Saudi Arabia, or Iraq, or anyone else, getting nuclear weapons 
any more than Iran.

By the way, this, earlier in the conversation (before what appears below), is 
both a rare admission from a U.S. journalist, as well as (by the end of the 
sentence) utter nonsense:

STEPHANOPOULOS:  Well, what do you think they want, deep down?  You 
know, you read some of the public declarations by their supreme leader 
and others saying that they consider nuclear weapons un-Islamic, and yet 
they continue to pursue the nuclear program.

Uh, George, "pursuing the nuclear program" involves pursuing nuclear energy, 
which even the President of the U.S. acknowledges they have a right to do. And 
if you're implying they're pursuing a nuclear *weapons* program, some proof 
will be required.

Anyway, here's the part about "the way that we did" Iraq:

------------

STEPHANOPOULOS:  Your own envoy, Dennis Ross, has said one way to 
strengthen the position of the United States going into these 
negotiations is to make it very clear that, if Iran used nuclear weapons 
against Israel or any U.S. ally, that would be met as an attack on the 
United States, full response.  Now, that was your position during the 
campaign, as well.


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)


CLINTON:  I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on 
Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States.


(END VIDEO CLIP)


STEPHANOPOULOS:  Is it U.S. policy now?


CLINTON:  I think it is U.S. policy to the extent that we have 
alliances and understandings with a number of nations.  They may not be 
formal, as it is with NATO, but I don't think there is any doubt in 
anyone's mind that, were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, 
there would be retaliation.


STEPHANOPOULOS:  By the United States?


CLINTON:  Well, I think there would be retaliation.  And I think 
part of what is clear is, we want to avoid a -- a Middle East arms race 
which leads to nuclear weapons being in the possession of other 
countries in the Middle East, and we want to make clear that there are 
consequences and costs.



Now, let me just put it this way:  If Iran is seeking security, if 
they believe -- and, you know, you have to put yourself into the shoes 
of the other party when you negotiate -- if they believe that the United 
States might attack them the way that we did attack Iraq, for example...


STEPHANOPOULOS:  Before they attack, as a first strike?


CLINTON:  That's right, as a first strike, or they might have some 
other enemy that would do that to them, part of what we have to make 
clear to the Iranians is that their pursuit of nuclear weapons will 
actually trigger greater insecurity, because, right now, many of the 
nations in the neighborhood, as you know very well...


STEPHANOPOULOS:  Because Israel will strike before they can finish?


CLINTON:  Well, but not only that.  I mean, other countries, other 
Arab countries are deeply concerned about Iran having nuclear weapons.  
So does Iran want to face a battery of nuclear weapons countries...


(CROSSTALK)


STEPHANOPOULOS:  Can you get those other Arab nations to say that 
publicly?  That was part of the president's theme today.


CLINTON:  Well, you know, we've been there a little over four 
months.  And clearly a lot of what we are doing is teeing up our 
framework for decision-making.


We are aggressively pursuing diplomacy, not as an end in itself, but 
as a means to try to resolve some of these outstanding and very 
difficult problems.  We are trying to make clear that the United States 
is of course going to pursue our interests in values, but, frankly, we 
believe there are ways that we can make them consonant with the issues 
and values that are important to others, as well.


STEPHANOPOULOS:  You know, when I saw President Ahmadinejad last 
month, he said the U.S. wasn't really walking the walk here, and he 
cited the idea that President Obama never responded to his initial 
letter of congratulations.  Why not?


CLINTON:  Well, I think that President Obama has made very clear 
that he is going to put forth an open hand, but not as part of an 
electoral ploy or propaganda.


STEPHANOPOULOS:  You have to let the elections play out?


CLINTON:  I think, just like in every country, there is a process 
that takes place during an election.  That will be over soon, and then 
we're going to hope to get a positive process going.






Eli Stephens
 Left I on the News
 http://lefti.blogspot.com


_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™ SkyDrive™: Get 25 GB of free online storage.
http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_SD_25GB_062009
________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu