Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Historic NY

(37,452 posts)
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:16 PM Nov 2015

Jack Reed: Clinton best suited to lead troops

Regardless of gender, Secretary Clinton is the person most capable of both leading our nation’s troops and fulfilling our sacred responsibilities to them when they return home.

I had the privilege of serving with Clinton on the Senate Armed Services Committee, where I witnessed firsthand her dedication to our troops and their families.

In fall 2003, then-Senator Clinton and I traveled together to Afghanistan, where we met with members of the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division and shared Thanksgiving dinner with troops at Bagram Air Base. During that trip, and throughout her time as a lawmaker, Clinton was laser-focused on ensuring our forces had the resources and equipment they needed, and a strategy that matched their sacrifice.

My father, like Clinton’s, served in the military during World War II. We both were taught from a young age the value of serving our country and the debt we owe to our nation’s veterans.

Unfortunately, Congress and the Veterans Administration have too often failed to stand up for our veterans. In recent years, we have seen some veterans wait months for medical appointments and sometimes years for final decisions on disability claims. As president, Secretary Clinton will ensure veterans’ access to timely and high-quality health care and simplify the claims process. She has announced plans to refocus the Veterans Health Administration as a veteran-centric provider of service-connected care and appoint an oversight board to ensure the VHA remains true to the mission of putting veterans first.

At the same time, Secretary Clinton understands that the solution some have recommended — privatizing the VA — would be a major disservice to our veterans.http://www.providencejournal.com/article/20151117/OPINION/151119423

63 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jack Reed: Clinton best suited to lead troops (Original Post) Historic NY Nov 2015 OP
I had NOT thought of this till seeing this, in relation to Paris and the inevitable twisted sick fux randys1 Nov 2015 #1
My comment in regard to the OP Title passiveporcupine Nov 2015 #62
Another good endorsement mcar Nov 2015 #2
Make that "Most likely to lead troops" and likely the most troops. n/t leveymg Nov 2015 #27
Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2015 #3
Polls say Hillary is best in handling foreign policy. riversedge Nov 2015 #6
You forgot to welcome him or her back to DU. DemocratSinceBirth Nov 2015 #17
Yes, I should have been more polite. Just saw this now. Have riversedge Nov 2015 #46
you sound like a republican Florencenj2point0 Nov 2015 #15
Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2015 #18
Thank you. Spot on. riversedge Nov 2015 #4
I respect and like Jack Reed of RI. Always have. Not an easy congressman to get an endorsement from. BlueCaliDem Nov 2015 #5
He's my Senator gaspee Nov 2015 #8
You are SO LUCKY. I'd love to swap my Senator, Feinstein, for your Senator. BlueCaliDem Nov 2015 #9
Maybe gaspee Nov 2015 #11
link please Florencenj2point0 Nov 2015 #14
I assume you wanted a link to substantiate Feinstein's war profiteering? BlueCaliDem Nov 2015 #19
Sorry, but I don't see a lot of difference between the pro war positions of Feinstein and Clinton tularetom Nov 2015 #55
I don't see a whole lot of difference between Hillary Clinton's "warmongering" response to Bernie BlueCaliDem Nov 2015 #57
Lucky you. I have a Tea bagger--Ron Johnson riversedge Nov 2015 #47
Rather ironic TM99 Nov 2015 #7
here you go Florencenj2point0 Nov 2015 #13
I live the consequences of this speech. TM99 Nov 2015 #16
She voted against the Levin amendment Scootaloo Nov 2015 #28
My feelings at the time AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #32
Yep.... Punkingal Nov 2015 #38
And that is exactly why she should not be President madokie Nov 2015 #39
Definitely not a "Profiles in Courage" moment Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #51
All the while the UN inspectors were saying they had gotten 95% of the WMD AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #31
Excellent News! Florencenj2point0 Nov 2015 #10
Another, perhaps the primary, reason I won't be voting for her. Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2015 #12
Short version: She's a Hawk. nt Romulox Nov 2015 #20
Exacatly. Best suited to lead the troops... Hepburn Nov 2015 #22
Hillary is the best all around candidate to lead the Country and the Troops.. thank you, Cha Nov 2015 #21
Best suited to lead them to their premature, unnecessary, deaths n/t whatchamacallit Nov 2015 #23
Thank you, Senator Reed. Beacool Nov 2015 #24
The world is under attack by crazies. Hillary is recognized as oasis Nov 2015 #25
She's a big part of the reason the ME is in chaos and she's likely to make it leveymg Nov 2015 #29
"a big part of the reason the ME is in chaos". You can only oasis Nov 2015 #30
A lot of people grasp that HRC had a major role in the regime change operations in Libya and Syria leveymg Nov 2015 #45
Then put a helmet on her and let her take the field. Scootaloo Nov 2015 #26
LOL Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #56
If she gains the presidency cpwm17 Nov 2015 #33
Pretty sure juror 4 should get a pizza but whatever - for your information - Juicy_Bellows Nov 2015 #36
What a surprise! MrWendel Nov 2015 #43
Can anyone tell me why... MrWendel Nov 2015 #34
I'll take a wild swing. Juicy_Bellows Nov 2015 #37
For starters madokie Nov 2015 #40
I don't see it... MrWendel Nov 2015 #42
Thank you for the chuckle FlatBaroque Nov 2015 #49
No problem... MrWendel Nov 2015 #50
I know right? FlatBaroque Nov 2015 #52
I know right.... MrWendel Nov 2015 #53
Here you go, sport FlatBaroque Nov 2015 #58
Yep... So did Obama. MrWendel Nov 2015 #61
Lead them to their deaths maybe. Fearless Nov 2015 #35
Someone forgot to tell the troops jfern Nov 2015 #41
Rasmussen is a Republican outfit so they usually poll 90% Repukes leftofcool Nov 2015 #44
Hillary's strong Foreign Policy speech today confirmed the OP. riversedge Nov 2015 #48
She didn't LEAD our TROOPS anywhere. pangaia Nov 2015 #54
Into what? frylock Nov 2015 #59
They used to call it a "quagmire" Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #60
I'm not electing a president to lead our troops ANYWHERE! John Poet Nov 2015 #63

randys1

(16,286 posts)
1. I had NOT thought of this till seeing this, in relation to Paris and the inevitable twisted sick fux
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:18 PM
Nov 2015

comments we will see from righty about why we need a war monger now as president.

Surely they will convince many that at a time like this, a Woman simply wont do.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
62. My comment in regard to the OP Title
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 05:52 AM
Nov 2015
"Clinton best suited to lead our troops"...


That's what I'm afraid of. She's ready to lead them to war. I want our troops to come home.

Response to Historic NY (Original post)

Response to Florencenj2point0 (Reply #15)

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
5. I respect and like Jack Reed of RI. Always have. Not an easy congressman to get an endorsement from.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:25 PM
Nov 2015

That makes this endorsement very special to me as a Hillary Clinton supporter and an American.

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
9. You are SO LUCKY. I'd love to swap my Senator, Feinstein, for your Senator.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:29 PM
Nov 2015

But I know Rhode Islanders are too smart for that.

Your State rocks, gaspee!

gaspee

(3,231 posts)
11. Maybe
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:36 PM
Nov 2015

Someone will primary her with better luck next time. Her warmongering is disgraceful. Especially when she directly profits from war.

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
19. I assume you wanted a link to substantiate Feinstein's war profiteering?
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:59 PM
Nov 2015

Here's one from April 27, 2003 from Charles Lewis, executive of the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity watchdog group in Washington, who at the end of his article says, that "regardless of whether there is a direct conflict of interest, it's useful to know that the spouse of a sitting senator is getting richer because of what's going on in the world." .
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/War-brings-business-to-Feinstein-spouse-Blum-s-2652085.php

[center]War brings business to Feinstein spouse / Blum's firms win multimillion-dollar
defense contracts in Iraq, Afghanistan
[/center]

When it comes to scoring mega-military-related contracts, Sen. Dianne Feinstein's multimillionaire husband, Richard Blum, is right in the thick of things.

First up: a contract announced last week between the Army and URS Corp., the San Francisco planning and engineering company that specializes in defense work -- and that happens to be partly owned by Blum's investment firm.

The contract -- which could grow to $600 million -- is to help with troop mobilization, weapons systems training and anti-terrorism methods.

That's on top of a $3.1 billion Army contract that URS snared back in February for weapons systems and homeland defense.

read more: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/War-brings-business-to-Feinstein-spouse-Blum-s-2652085.php

Now she's on teevee promoting "boots on the ground" because of the ISIS attacks in France.
She's definitely a warmonger, and it frustrates me that in a very blue State, California, we can't get a better candidate elected to remove her. I voted for her primary challenger in 2012. I went door-to-door, donated, used all my social media, and educated my group of 41 young voters to support him. In the end, Feinstein's connections with the California Democratic Party and her mega-millions drowned out Mike Strimling completely, and Strimling got fewer votes than that nutty Orly Taitz.

California can do better than DiFi. Much better.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
55. Sorry, but I don't see a lot of difference between the pro war positions of Feinstein and Clinton
Thu Nov 19, 2015, 09:00 PM
Nov 2015

It's odd that you can be so (correctly) critical of Feinstein and yet support Clinton, whose "we can't contain ISIS, we must destroy them" speech today was warmongering to a degree Feinstein would be proud of.

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
57. I don't see a whole lot of difference between Hillary Clinton's "warmongering" response to Bernie
Thu Nov 19, 2015, 09:14 PM
Nov 2015

Sanders' "warmongering" response this afternoon, "To my mind, it is clear that the United States must pursue policies to destroy the brutal and barbaric ISIS regime,".

You?

Florencenj2point0

(435 posts)
13. here you go
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:41 PM
Nov 2015





And finally, on another personal note, I come to this decision from the perspective of a Senator from New York who has seen all too closely the consequences of last year's terrible attacks on our nation. In balancing the risks of action versus inaction, I think New Yorkers who have gone through the fires of hell may be more attuned to the risk of not acting. I know that I am.

So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed.


[link:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/12/435624/-|
 

TM99

(8,352 posts)
16. I live the consequences of this speech.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:45 PM
Nov 2015

She was either supportive of the PNAC agenda, too stupid to realize she was being lied to, or supported it for political expediency to look 'tough' on terror.

All three thoroughly disqualify her.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
28. She voted against the Levin amendment
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 12:28 AM
Nov 2015

And she'd have to be fucking stupid beyond measure, to believe that Bush - George W. Bush - would not jump immediately to military action. And I think we cna all agree, she's not fucking stupid beyond all measure.

She knew she was voting for war. TM99 has the right of it - She's either an imbecile, or she wanted to "look tough," or she has an active interest in needlessly killing over a million people in Iraq. None of these are good options.

 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
32. My feelings at the time
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 01:09 AM
Nov 2015

Were that she voted the way she did out of political cowardliness. Everyone was beating the drums for war, Ari Fleischer was threatening reporters at press briefings, etc. She did not want to take the political heat of opposing it, and hear Republicans shouting "She's Unpatriotic". In short, I believe she went against what she knew was right for political expediency.

Punkingal

(9,522 posts)
38. Yep....
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 04:33 AM
Nov 2015

i believe she does that a lot: "she went against what she knew was right for political expediency."

 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
31. All the while the UN inspectors were saying they had gotten 95% of the WMD
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 12:58 AM
Nov 2015

And the remaining 5% were just weapons parts.

Bush made a speech as the inspectors were withdrawing two days before the invasion, stating we were invading because Saddam wouldn't allow UN inspectors in. I will never forget seeing that one on tv.

March 18, 2003 - Inspectors withdraw from Iraq.

March 20, 2003 - (local time) U.S. and coalition forces begin military action against Iraq (because we wouldn't allow inspectors in lol)

Anyone who was watching the news at the time knew the whole thing was bullshit.

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
12. Another, perhaps the primary, reason I won't be voting for her.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:37 PM
Nov 2015

I'm a vet and I certainly want her leading me anywhere.

Cha

(297,503 posts)
21. Hillary is the best all around candidate to lead the Country and the Troops.. thank you,
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 10:53 PM
Nov 2015

Sen Jack Reed!

Beacool

(30,250 posts)
24. Thank you, Senator Reed.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:45 PM
Nov 2015

I remember reading that the military brass liked Hillary. One general said that most politicians gave them lip service, but that she actually listened to them when they came with their concerns. I think that she would be a good CIC.



oasis

(49,398 posts)
25. The world is under attack by crazies. Hillary is recognized as
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 12:18 AM
Nov 2015

having a firm grip on the workings of international protocol. America needs a pilot at the helm who can form alliances and make critical decisions.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
29. She's a big part of the reason the ME is in chaos and she's likely to make it
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 12:32 AM
Nov 2015

even more deadly.

oasis

(49,398 posts)
30. "a big part of the reason the ME is in chaos". You can only
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 12:46 AM
Nov 2015

sell that bill of goods here in the DU bubble.

Anyway, my IPads low on power.

Have a nice evening.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
45. A lot of people grasp that HRC had a major role in the regime change operations in Libya and Syria
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 01:59 PM
Nov 2015

and that, along with her errant vote on the IRW, led directly to the chaos and killing sweeping the Mideast today.

Speaking of bubbles, the only ones who apparently don't seem to acknowledge that are part of HRC's machine.

 

cpwm17

(3,829 posts)
33. If she gains the presidency
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 01:58 AM
Nov 2015

we all should post pictures of the results of her military leadership, which will predictably be mangled bodies of dead and injured brown people. Since that is the known results of her past and future aggressive wars, then obviously that is what many here must want.

I'll start with a predictable result of the past aggressive war she enthusiastically supported:

Her family was massacred by US troops.

Juicy_Bellows

(2,427 posts)
36. Pretty sure juror 4 should get a pizza but whatever - for your information -
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 04:08 AM
Nov 2015

On Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:17 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

If she gains the presidency
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=823502

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Poster suggests HRC "enthusiastically supported" the war which resulted in this horrid photo. Beyond disgusting, over the top.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:24 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: speaks the truth. argue it out.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: We should refute, not remove, untrue posts.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Voting for the IRW was "enthusiastic," support for it, from my point of view. I myself, without the "intelligence" she may or may not have had access to, knew her vote was wrong. HRC should have known better.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Fuck you
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Whether a person supported the war or not, we are not the ones suffering. If pictures of war bother folks so much, imagine those living it.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

madokie

(51,076 posts)
40. For starters
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 04:45 AM
Nov 2015

War is not his first, second or any of his options. If forced upon him yes but as a first step not at all.

MrWendel

(1,881 posts)
42. I don't see it...
Wed Nov 18, 2015, 05:19 AM
Nov 2015

war or foreign policy is .... we'll foreign to him. He's very jittery when it comes to any of those topics. If there is a "break glass in case of emergency" option, hes not a guy I would want making the tough decisions. And I definately don't see him handling whats happening in Paris if it ever came to the States well at all.

FlatBaroque

(3,160 posts)
58. Here you go, sport
Thu Nov 19, 2015, 09:35 PM
Nov 2015

Bernie's speech predicting the current clusterfuck, you know, the one Hillary voted for.

?t=4m38s

you are welcome.

MrWendel

(1,881 posts)
61. Yep... So did Obama.
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 01:36 AM
Nov 2015

And he supported troops STAYING in Afghanistan, just like Obama.... wait is this the part where you tell me that he is the new Obama right?

One more thing...

Bernie Sanders' Troubling History of Supporting US Military Violence Abroad
Why aren't we talking about Sanders' foreign policy more?

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-sanders-troubling-history-supporting-us-military-violence-abroad

Happy Reading.

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
54. She didn't LEAD our TROOPS anywhere.
Thu Nov 19, 2015, 08:57 PM
Nov 2015

She sent them the fuck off to a stupid fucking mindless, idiotic war based on lies she was either too dumb to see through or..... yes... OR....

Oh, and taking care of them after they come home mangled has nothing to do with the SACRED. It is just fucking human decency !!

 

John Poet

(2,510 posts)
63. I'm not electing a president to lead our troops ANYWHERE!
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 06:14 AM
Nov 2015

If that's to be the "Democratic" plan,
then they can fucking do it without me.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Jack Reed: Clinton best s...