Obama vs. Clinton on Pakistan

Posted: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:02 PM by Mark Murray

From NBC's Lauren Appelbaum and Andrew Merten
Here's their actual exchange over Pakistan... Obama said, I find it amusing that those who helped to authorize and engineer the biggest foreign policy in our generation are now criticizing me for making sure we are on the right battlefield and not the wrong battlefield in the war against terrorism. Chris [Dodd], respectfully, and you and I are close friends, but the fact is, you obviously didn't read my speeech because what I said is that we have to refocus, get out of Iraq, make certain that we care helping Pakistan deal with Al Qaeda, Afghanistan as well, in the hills of Pakistan. But ... Chris, if we have actionable intelligence on Al Qaeda operatives including bin Laden and president Musharraf who cannot act, then we should. I think that's just common sense."

Said Clinton: "Well, I do not believe people running for president should engage in hypotheticals and it may well be that the strategy we have to pursue on the basis of actionable intelligence -- but remember we've had some real difficult experience with actionable intelligence... But I think it is a very big mistake to telegraph that and to destabilize the Mushareff regime, which is fighting for its life against Islamic extremists, who are in bed with al-Qaeda and Taliban. And remember, Pakistan has nuclear weapons. The last thing we want is to have al-Qaeda like followers in charge of Pakistan and having access to nuclear weapons. So, you can think big, but remember, you shouldn't always say everything you think if you're running for president because it can have consequences across the world, and we don't need that right now."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Someone should tell Hill that the biggest hypothetical of all is "If I win the Presidency..." If she won't discuss hypotheticals, she's in a real pickle.

The Witch, Washington, D.C. (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:10 PM)

I thought Obama actually called it the biggest foreign policy "failure" or "disaster." One of those key words was in there, I think.

CP, Columbia, SC (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:15 PM)

Clinton is right again. Obama cannot said things like that because he needs to think that he is representing the USA not just the democracts. He needs to think like a president will think and that is were Clinton kills him, she knows how to think like CIC.

Aidyn, NY NY (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:19 PM)

someone shoudl say... Mrs Clinton... we are all answering hypothetically... she sounds rather dumb saying she won't answer hypotheticals when the moderator asked a hypothetical about al queda after Iraq. Such hypocrisy...

If you don't answer or even think about hypotheticals how do you explore policy options?

Eustace, New York, NY (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:20 PM)

So basically, if youre running for President, don't tell the people where you stand because people who don't like us will fear us?

I'm confused. Does that mean that Hillary wants to nuke Mecca but won't let the American people know that?

Alex, Princeton, NJ (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:23 PM)

One thing to note was the audience reaction: to Obama's response huge applause and to Dodd's and Clinton's attacks on Obama, boos.

MR, Seattle (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:29 PM)

Two points.

First, we should hear what candidates think about foreign policy and national security. Constantly hiding behind this "hypothetical" excuse does nothing but continue our ignorance of such a candidate's real thoughts.

Second, Obama only said, with respect to targets in Pakistan and nuclear weapon use, what is already open and public U.S. policy. Its already been said, and not by a candidate but by a government. To criticize those comments is either disingenous or reflecting of an ignorance of U.S. policy.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:37 PM)

"AlQaeda like followers", who the hell are those AlQaeda like followers. People who wants to practice their own religion, a religion of peace and Justice. Sorry Mr. Clinton you have a muslim phobia, you need some psychatrist's help for that. And for Mr. Obama, i think, he is near to,if not on the verge of, lunacy.

Shah Khalid, N.W,F,P Pakistan (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:37 PM)

In an earlier debate, Obama expressed a willingness to consider nuclear attack on Pakistan to get Al Quaeda. I am still in shock. Words do matter - and we are listening. But, he and all the candidates have every right and indeed the obligation to say truthfully what they think and are willing to do in a public forum and should. Do we want a president who supports nuclear energy (along with renewable energy on US soil) and unilateral nuclear attacks in the middle east?

Jackie Mac, New York, New York (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:59 PM)

All Obama does is repeat over and over he was against the war. So was I but we are there. He has voted just like Hillary ever since becoming senator. He has the same stump remarks over and over. I would never vote for him. He thinks he is the messiah. The media gives him way to much coverage. The democrats have a good selection this time but he is not one of them.

cherylv, arizona (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:12 PM)

Jackie, your criticism of Obama is really off the mark, because he said just the opposite. And, no, cherylv, he says a lot more. Because he's substantive, he gives others a lot of meat to chew and in some cases criticize.

He must be hitting it right if he's getting criticized by Clinton for saying too much, and by others for saying too little, lol.

I wish the others were as substantive. Well, Biden and Sea Biscuit are, but neither is in a position to win the nomination. Biden has an outside shot, and he helped himself tonight. But he'd need an Obama implosion (I think Edwards time has come and gone) and then Biden and Dodd would compete to move up into the number two slot by December.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:23 PM)

Obama kicked. did you catch the boo's directed at Hillary.

diane (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:26 PM)

It is funny, both candidates are in favor of attcking Pakistan a nuclear country, after defeat in Iraq.
Funny

Sohail Rizki (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:34 PM)

Great misdirection Jackie! So well you thought it worthy to repeat this on another topic. I can't really tell if you're a Hillary sheeplike supporter or an actual Republican sheeplike supporter. More of the same people...more of the same!! GO BARACK!!!!

Steven (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:41 PM)

There are people in this country who will not vote for a black man or a woman, and that is the truth. The media has already annointed Hillary, the fact is she is just in her seventh year in office, and really that is all that counts. If we are talking experience, that is not much more than Obama. And she still has high negative ratings. We in upstate NY are still waiting for all the jobs she promised in her first run for Senate. And the upstate NY economy is still one of the worst in the nation.

Mark, Dunkirk, NY (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:44 PM)

MSNBC has gone from subtle pro-Clinton to all out pro-Clinton. I can not believe they are going to allow her to get away with 'I was for it before I was against' Pakistant statement. Am I the only one who is aware that she went on a radio station only hours after Senator Obama's speech and completely echoed his comments but tonight she scolds him for "telegraphing" his intentions? This is absolutely unbelievable that she can get away with this--right under the media's nose!

"If we had actionable intelligence that Osama bin Laden or other high-value targets were in Pakistan, I would ensure that they were targeted and killed or captured."

--Hillary Clinton

Dee of VA (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:44 PM)

Paul, in an earlier debate, not tonight, he refused to take off the table a nuclear attack on the area of Pakistan where Osama and his crew are rebooting. He also in a previous debate suggested he would consider pushing nuclear as a response to global warming in addition to renewable sources. During the earlier debate, Edwards said a flat "no" to nuclear power because of the waste created.) So, I agree with Obama, if we have the intelligence, go get bin Laden et al. But not with nukes. It was noticeable to me that he didn't mention the nuking tonight.

Jackie Mac, New York, New York (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:47 PM)

Why was Hillary winking Dodd? And is she saying that the President should try and fool the American people by saying one thing and planing something else? Sounds Bush-Lite to me.

Pattianne (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:58 PM)

Why not post Obama's second response? What's with that?

As Obama then said, why should the American people be excluded from the debate? That is what is irresponsible, expecting people to elect you when all you offer is vague talking points with could allow you to do a total revert(See Bush, 2000, nation-building) and do the complete opposite of what you were elected to do.

Obama has done the responsible thing by putting his foreign policy out there so the voters can decide.

Abe, Dayton, Ohio (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 9:58 PM)

Obama stutters and can not think fast on his feet.
Biden and Edwards were much better tonight.
Obama does not speak well, not even good in his sermon on the mount impression.
He would not answer the Barry Bonds question!
What the hell kinda prez will he be, sports are the answer man. lol

HP Boston (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:39 PM)

YIKES there you are Paul Miller in the middle of all the TROLLS. TWICE!

H P Boston (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:42 PM)

Obama is open and honest and by providing substance he invites opponents to distort his words. It's up to us to read his full remarks and not be spun. Hillary only reveals what she wants you to see.

Mark Morris, Cupertino CA (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:46 PM)

Anyone who has any integrity at all would question Ms. Clinton's integrity for saying that, wen right after Obama's speech, she also said:

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will"

Why is it ok if Hillary says it, not when Obama says it. And then hillary gets to turn around and accuse him for saying something that she also said. I think the press is giving her a free pass.

Mike (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:57 PM)

Keith Olberman indicated that the audience was booing Clinton's reference to the Bush administration and its secrecy, not at Clinton.

Gayle Niemeyer, Lexington, KY (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:00 PM)

Jackie, as pointed out, Obama said just the opposite on use of nuclear weapons. He said he would never use them. Hillary then criticized him (incredibly!) by saying the president should never take the nuclear option off the table.

Alan, Chicago, IL (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:38 PM)

And Obama did say worst foreign policy "disaster."

Alan (Sent Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:39 PM)

i think that obama won the debate tonight,he is very clear in his views.clinton, dodd, biden brings us the same old postions on issues. we need a change .clinton come off very stiff,artificial.

cliftonmcdonald,pikesville,md (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 1:03 AM)

I think Obama's right about this. It should be an open debate--with all due respect to Hillary. It's a primary. The public has a right to know where these candidates stand.

Amy Parker Deerfield, IL (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 1:17 AM)

In the original speech, Obama said if Musharraf WON'T act implying a refusal on Pakistan's part. Tonight, he said if Musharraf CAN'T act. Not the same thing and interesting that he has absorbed criticism and changing his language.

And yes, especially in foreign policy and diplomacy, language does matter.

Edrie, Arlington, VA (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 3:48 AM)

This is so ridiculous. Most americans think iraq is a failure because you didn't win, but nothing to do with the face that you went into a foreign land. Have you not learned your lessons, you went to vietnam, iraq and he reckons if he doesn't like the way musharage is doing things, he'll go into someone elses country and do it himself.

How the hell is that justified, the reasons why many muslims turn to the exreme fringe, and it is a fringe, is because of actions like that and guantanamo bay.

Aren't there any sane americans out there?

Ahmer, London (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 6:20 AM)

I'm not sure that people really want to hear what presidential candidates have to say. Why not? I have no idea. I'm currently watching MSNBC "Morning Joe", and all they seem to focus on is Sen. Clinton saying "I'm your girl"! So, at least in thier opinion, she "won" the debate.

Are you kidding me? Is this what we as Americans have come to expect as meaningful journalism, oneliners and sound bites? Why did she duck the Washington DC Lobbist question? What is her stance on providing "healthcare" for all American's who may or may not be able to afford it?

Why should we as Americans not expect to hear EXACTLY what our candidates think about topics that effect our lives.

I think that in the era of instant "24" hour news coverage, talking heads that are looking to get a contract deal for their own show, and other so called "political experts" weighting in on topics that could effect us all for generations to come, we deserve more than just prepared statements, oneliners, and rethoric. We should DEMAND that all in this process, the candidates, the news media, and all associated with providing the American citizen with relevent information during this presidential race, be more responsibile.

Larrien, Fairfax, VA (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 7:05 AM)

Hillary is right. Words have consequences. Obama keeps having to come back and clarify what he meant. It's not such a big deal in the primaries and maybe not even in the general election, but when you are president, you better make damn sure that what you say the first time is what you mean because with some of our enemies, you might not get an opportunity for clarification. That is what Hillary means about words having consequences. It's common sense. Why can't you guys see that?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 9:32 AM)

Sun Tzu said it best:
"All warfare is based on deception."

CynicalGeek, Georgia (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 10:36 AM)

After having lost a war practically in Iraq, a much weaker country than pakistan in arms and army, the candidates have lost their sense of rationality by pointing to wage a war against a nuclear country...that has also got the ability to hit the warships of usa in gulf countries, not to mention a guirella war edge over them in Afghanistan. Sorry Mr. Obama, elections can't be won by talking such a non-sense.

Shah Khalid, Pakistan (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 10:48 AM)

Obama proves that he is the true Front-Runner.. lol everyone knows that polls are not accurate.....take Kerry's nomination... he was behind like 12 points and won the nomination and Gore was leading in the polls for election and lost...lol....i dont see how polling 1,000 or a little more can represent the whole country.

Jogn, Wilmington, nc (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 11:43 AM)

Thank God he didnt say Osama is in Venizuela

ali abbas jaffery, Pakistan (Sent Wednesday, August 08, 2007 12:49 PM)

I agree with Clinton. Obama needs to observe his words carefully.

Sikander, Ontario, Canada (Sent Thursday, August 09, 2007 1:31 AM)

No, it was Hill who first criticised and then Obama responded defending his position. Tell MSNBS to post it in correct order and to stop taking out some of Obama's words.

ftroit Washington DC (Sent Friday, August 10, 2007 5:15 PM)

Those polls are stupid. If a poll can tell you that even if Al Gore enters the race, it won't change Hillary's position, then you know that's some bullsh**. and can't believe the mainstream media is relying on such polls and repeating and publishing all over. We all know if Al Gore enters the race, the terrain will be so, I mean way so different for the current front-runners. (See the so-called popular Gallup polls at http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=28345 . This is one of the polls that the media keep citing.

ftroit Washington DC (Sent Friday, August 10, 2007 5:19 PM)

Jackie Mac, oh la la. You got it all wrong.

ftroit Washington DC (Sent Friday, August 10, 2007 5:22 PM)

cherylv, you know we're still waiting for you to make a point right? That right there, is basically to express your dislike for him. but you've provided no rational reason. I mean, you don't have to, your are at liberty to say anything, but a specific point and comparison with another candidate (may be of your choice) will make your point well noted. and hey you may get some followers if you break this thing down

ftroit Washington DC (Sent Friday, August 10, 2007 5:25 PM)

ftroit Washington DC (Sent Friday, August 10, 2007 5:26 PM)

Jackie Mac, oh la la. You got it all wrong.

ftroit Washington DC (Sent Friday, August 10, 2007 5:26 PM)

Very interesting to note that MSNBC has not mentioned Hill-arey's flip-flopping. She made the same statement as Obama in 2006 regarding taking off nuclear weapons and MSNBC and all the other so called liberal media outlets are letting that slide. It had to take the hard work of some less-known journalists to research this BLUNDER and make it nown to the world. By the way, Hillary's not yet president, she is still trying to be president and she already wants to hide information from Americans. I think Obama's talk about going after Al qaeda is helping is campaign. Now Americans know who is a force to reckon with. Besides what he said is already America's policy.

ftroit Washington DC (Sent Friday, August 10, 2007 5:37 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=307881