...because you will not get a straight answer.
Tim Russert seems to ask an easy enough question at the Democratic Presidential Debate:
RUSSERT: OK, all right—all right, we’ve had that discussion.
Senator Clinton, in 1981, the Israelis took out a nuclear reactor in Iraq. On September 6th, to the best of our information, Israel attacked Syria because there was suspicion that perhaps North Korea had put some nuclear materials in Syria. If Israel concluded that Iran’s nuclear capability threatened Israel’s security, would Israel be justified in launching an attack on Iran?
Clinton starts off...
CLINTON: Tim, I think that’s one of those hypotheticals, that is...RUSSERT: It’s not a hypothetical, Senator.
CLINTON: ... better not addressed at this time.
...and keeps on dodging until finally:
CLINTON: Well, what I have said is that I will do everything I can to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power, including the use of diplomacy, the use of economic sanctions, opening up direct talks. We haven’t even tried. That’s what is so discouraging about this.
Clinton apparently spent so much time and effort dodging the question that she completely forgot what the question was: "would
Israel be justified in launching an attack on Iran?"
Obama also avoids the question and instead does his best John Kerry imitation:
Until we have gathered the international community to put the squeeze on Iran economically, then we shouldn’t be having conversations about attacks on Iran.
John Edwards follows a similar line:
And if we work with our friends in Europe in the European banking system, we can put a clear proposal on the table for the Iranian people; sticks and carrots. Carrots being, we will help you with your economy if, in fact, you give up your nuclear ambitions. The flip side being, there will be severe economic sanctions if you don’t.
And Bill Richardson
A fundamental goal of our foreign policy should be not to permit Iran to develop nuclear weapons.Another cornerstone of our foreign policy should be the strength and the security of Israel. So you cannot deny a nation the right to legitimately defend itself.
... A fundamental tenet of American foreign policy is to support Israel. But Tim, you’ve got to bring diplomacy.
At least he says 'a nation' has a right to defend itself--but we are left to hope that he agrees that Israel is included, and in the current circumstances.
This is how Democratic candidates want to deal with a country that has killed American soldiers and is behind terrorist groups that fire rockets on Israeli citizens.
Neither Clinton, Obama, Edwards had the guts to give a direct answer about Israel's right to defend herself.
[Hat tip:
Contentions]
Technorati Tag: Israel and Democrats and Democratic Debate and Clinton and Obama and John Edwards and Bill Richardson.
