Friday, July 20, 2007

Pentagon Versus Hillary

If you've read this blog before, you know I'm no fan of Hillary Clinton, but some things are simply sensible and reasonable - like knowing how to withdraw troops from a conflict. In May Sen. Clinton wanted to know if the Pentagon had plans for withdrawal from Iraq, Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman responded with this,

"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.." according to AP.

Whatever your political leanings or feelings on the war, it would only make sense to know how to remove the troops and all the equipment. There are always unforeseen events, and this is particularly true in warfare, so it is stupid to not have a plan.

Hillary didn't think a lot of his response,

"Undersecretary Edelman has his priorities backward," Clinton wrote, calling his claim "outrageous and dangerous," reported in AP .

I suppose it pays a politician to use considered language...

2 comments:

KISS said...

Ever have a day when you read something and can't find it again? I read today, that an amendment to an amendment was defeated by 3 votes. It had to do with taking away assets of someone arrested for terrorism, and even if found not guilty all assets would be government property. Hilary and Baucus and the usual suspect dimmos voted yes, as all republican senators. The article said it would come back again through maneuvering. But good old Hilary was all for it, just like Billy, a republican in dimmo clothing. Why repugs hated him was amazing to me..he was such a good repug.

Vigilante said...

Whatever your political leanings or feelings on the war, it would only make sense to know how to remove the troops and all the equipment. There are always unforeseen events, and this is particularly true in warfare, so it is stupid to not have a plan.

CIVICS 101:

In an open society governed democratically (small-d), government ought not to do anything it can't tolerate discussed in congress, in the media, or in the public.

If they have nothing to hide, why do they hide everything?