2016 Postmortem

Indepatriot

(1,253 posts)

27. Honestly, I'm not quite sure, but I am sure more genocide is not the appropriate response.

Reply to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #14)

Sun Jul 5, 2015, 12:05 PM

Jul 2015

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

85 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Disturbing Hawkishness from Hillary Clinton. Is this her true belief or is it merely [View all] Indepatriot Jul 2015 OP

Would it have been possible to explain what this is in reference to? brooklynite Jul 2015 #1

Never mind; I see this was something from 8 years ago... brooklynite Jul 2015 #2

So you're saying she's "evolved" on this issue? If she has I'd like to know. Did she apologize for Indepatriot Jul 2015 #7

Back at Hillary 3.0? MannyGoldstein Jul 2015 #45

So nothing she has said in the past still stands? AgingAmerican Jul 2015 #53

Depends on whether there's any evidence to suggest it's still relevant. brooklynite Jul 2015 #55

Previous position statements are relevent AgingAmerican Jul 2015 #57

Maybe this: Hillary Clinton: �If I�m President, We Will Attack Iran� no_hypocrisy Jul 2015 #3

What would Senator Sanders do if Iran dropped a nuclear bomb on one of our allies?/NT DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #5

Why don't you ask him? My belief is that he would take appropriate action. "Total Obliteration" Indepatriot Jul 2015 #12

What do you think the appropriate reaction to genocide would be?/NT DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #14

Honestly, I'm not quite sure, but I am sure more genocide is not the appropriate response. Indepatriot Jul 2015 #27

that's not a great answer qazplm Jul 2015 #54

Bringing those responsible for the genocide to justice. n/t PoliticAverse Jul 2015 #37

Russia has some 8,000 or so nuclear warheads. DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #46

'What difference would it make'? If he used "all of them"...the planet is toast anyway. eom Purveyor Jul 2015 #82

The whole point of my argument is that he nor we would use them because using them ... DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #83

This is an example HassleCat Jul 2015 #44

thanks! you took the words out of my fingertips Voice for Peace Jul 2015 #81

You took it out of context. Are you that afraid of Clinton that you will distort and twist? Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #6

I read the link. I don't care what the context is, advocating Total Obliteration of any nation is Indepatriot Jul 2015 #8

What would Senator Sanders do if Iran dropped a nuclear bomb on one of our allies?/NT DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #10

crickets, of course n/t MoonRiver Jul 2015 #26

I suspect many here are not aware that Bernie is a strong supporter of Israel. He believes in a two still_one Jul 2015 #30

Which is where most Americans are./nt DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #32

of course, as is every single Democratic nominee. The only candidate that I am aware of that might still_one Jul 2015 #36

There you have it ladies and gentleman Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #16

Yup. Agschmid Jul 2015 #17

I did not twist or distort anything. "Total Obliteration" of millions of innocents is unacceptable Indepatriot Jul 2015 #21

By the way, welcome to DU Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #23

I've been "here" since 2007. Indepatriot Jul 2015 #35

Casually advocate....there you go again... Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #41

"Casually Advocate" Agschmid Jul 2015 #49

"Total obliteration is unacceptable" AgingAmerican Jul 2015 #58

"If Iran attacks Israel" you can bet your house that Sanders wouldn't sit back and do nothing. OKNancy Jul 2015 #9

So doing nothing is the only alternative to obliteration? GeorgeGist Jul 2015 #40

It's called "Black and white thinking" AgingAmerican Jul 2015 #60

Ah very interesting link!!! mylye2222 Jul 2015 #47

**IF** Iran attacks Israel Martin Eden Jul 2015 #52

Israel has hundreds of A-bombs, and is the only one (ambiguously) threatening to use them. leveymg Jul 2015 #69

Message auto-removed Name removed Jul 2015 #4

This message was self-deleted by its author moobu2 Jul 2015 #11

Context is completely provided by both the link and the narration. Call me a dove if you Indepatriot Jul 2015 #15

Almost every candidate has voted for war. Agschmid Jul 2015 #19

OP FAIL. Agschmid Jul 2015 #13

Sanders: I'm not "going to let some damn war cost me the election." Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #18

This message was self-deleted by its author moobu2 Jul 2015 #20

Oh noooos! MoonRiver Jul 2015 #28

I don't think so. Bernie is not a pacifist, and he never said he was. still_one Jul 2015 #31

The OP is not about Sanders. It is about HRC's own words about "totally obliterating" Iran. Indepatriot Jul 2015 #50

Actually, it is about words and actions Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #51

Are you saying that actual video of HRC's own words are ''twisted and distorted"? Was the video Indepatriot Jul 2015 #56

Her hawkisnness Nite Owl Jul 2015 #85

One main problem with that interview is the question she was asked. CNN asked her Jefferson23 Jul 2015 #22

I agree with you that the press is nearly useless and that the question itself was hyperbolic. But Indepatriot Jul 2015 #24

Yes, but she is only stating what would happen and she is correct..that's what we'd probably do. Jefferson23 Jul 2015 #25

The idea of Iran nuking Israel, or any other country, MoonRiver Jul 2015 #29

I would assume then, that Hillary blithely advocating "Total Annihilation" of Iran would Indepatriot Jul 2015 #43

I don't know what she actually said or the context. MoonRiver Jul 2015 #61

I think "totally obliterate them" coming from her own lips, on videotape, is pretty clear. Indepatriot Jul 2015 #71

Context is everything, unless you're on a mission to smear someone. MoonRiver Jul 2015 #74

Which nation has actually employed nuclear weapons against a civilian population? Fumesucker Jul 2015 #62

That has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton. MoonRiver Jul 2015 #63

You were speaking of your fear of Iran using nukes Fumesucker Jul 2015 #64

"Logic" we don't need no stinking logic.... Indepatriot Jul 2015 #68

Details,details... Indepatriot Jul 2015 #65

That is why in general politicians avoid "hypothetical" questions. In this case, as you pointed out still_one Jul 2015 #34

Yes, and another reason I can't stand the MSM..they do not serve what is suppose to be their Jefferson23 Jul 2015 #38

I absolutely agree still_one Jul 2015 #39

"Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran�" tularetom Jul 2015 #33

This is the problem with half truths Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #73

Please do not accuse me of posting "half-truths". I provided a link with a complete question/answer Indepatriot Jul 2015 #76

If you are worried about who is hawkish why would you try to demean DNC candidates? Thinkingabout Jul 2015 #42

Please explain to me how sharing a link that provides both context and a full, unedited quote Indepatriot Jul 2015 #48

Yes, the nation must base its voting preference on your mind reading pronouncements Sheepshank Jul 2015 #59

Are you saying that a candidate's statement that they would "totally obliterate" another country Indepatriot Jul 2015 #66

Unfortunately unless you block them, anyone is entitled to respond to this OP. Agschmid Jul 2015 #67

I'm trying to get as many folks involved in the conversation as possible. I merely observed that Indepatriot Jul 2015 #70

You may be trying to get people involved... Agschmid Jul 2015 #72

So you're saying that discussing a candidate's own words and positions is somehow Indepatriot Jul 2015 #75

This message was self-deleted by its author Agschmid Jul 2015 #77

"All I did was post a video of her answering a question." asjr Jul 2015 #79

As did I until I was accused of "distorting" "smearing" "demeaning" ad nauseum.....Seems any Indepatriot Jul 2015 #80

Here since 2007..What words did I put in anyone's mouth. Examples please or it is you who is Indepatriot Jul 2015 #84

A Democrat is a hawk? FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Clinton would be shocked! wyldwolf Jul 2015 #78