ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Clinton foreign policy; more get 'real'

Posted: Monday, February 25, 2008 6:23 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under:

From NBC’s Ron Allen
On a stage with American flags behind her, and a phalanx of retired generals backing her, Clinton seemed to assume the role of commander-in-chief, for a "major" foreign policy speech. Slowly and deliberately she laid out her view and concerns about the world.

The world today compares with the time when Harry Truman took office, she began. (She never mentioned this, but four months after taking office Truman approved dropping two atomic bombs on Japan.)

Then, in one of the few references to Obama, while referring to President George Bush, she said we've seen the tragic result of a president without wisdom or experience in foreign affairs, and we can't let that happen again.

Later, while laying out her "New American Strategy," she said people won't need to guess whether she needs an instruction manual to deal with the world. Along with Iraq, she named Afghanistan and Pakistan as two other failures of Bush foreign policy. She talked about the emergence of China and the need to "level the playing field" for trade.

She vowed to end the era of "cowboy diplomacy." On Iraq, she emphasized the need for a carefully planned withdrawal, and the moral obligation to take care of Iraqis who have worked with America, and continue to do so.

Another swipe at Obama came later when she said his desire to sit down with the leaders of rogue nations "doesn't meet the real-world test of foreign policy."

Of McCain, she said he's a friend, but he can't seem to put behind him the Bush approach of using force where diplomacy would be more appropriate.

And in a last reference to Obama, she said he "wavers" on this matter of meeting with our enemies -- referring to the debate where he said no preconditions but preparations before meetings. And she criticized him for advocating carrying out military operations inside Pakistani territory unilaterally.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

If Hillary Clinton doesn't need an instruction manual for foreign affairs, then why did she vote to authorize the biggest strategic blunder in our nation's history, the Iraq War?  Also, was she Secretary of State or National Security Advisor during her husband's tenure as president?  I thought she was a first lady without security clearance -- not exactly first-hand foreign affairs experience.
So over her....she hasn't stated one thing that makes her more accomplished in the area of foreign policy than he is.
Apparently, she needs a handbook on how to run a campaign.  Why should we think she would know how to run foreign policy?  If someone from another country disagreed with her, would she freak out like she has been doing the past couple of days?
Perhaps she doesn't need an instruction manual now, because her husband used to read his to her at night.  Is that where she gets her 35 years of experience....pillow talk?  Ooops, that's probably not possible.  I think they had seperate bedrooms in the White House.  
Hillary Rodham Clinton is so fake, her disengenuineness is as see-through as plastic.  Anyone who falls for her act, is truly duped.  One should ask, "If she were to run the country as she has run her campaign, would we be better off?"  NO WAY!  She has selective amnesia on her record.  Take NAFTA for instance.  Her and Bill supported it and she said it was an achievement.  Do we need this?  NO WAY!
I find the comparison of Barack Obama to George Bush a little over the top. Among other things, Bush always came across as simple-minded and obstinate, which is almost the exact opposite of Obama. What misguided voter will fall for this insulting and absurd mischaracterization is anyone's guess. Clinton is clearly grasping at straws at this point.
Advise comming from someone who voted for the war with Iraq then, while making excuses for that vote, voted to give Bush pretext for another ill-advised war with Iran.
Barack Obama's promise to use military force unilaterally inside Pakistan to go after Osama Bin Laden---if there was actionable intelligence and the Pakistanis were unwilling or unable to act---is the most refreshing thing I have heard any candidate say during this primary season.  After 9/11, President Bush promised that there would be "no safe havens" for the 9/11 terrorists---and yet there has been, in the mountains inside Pakistan.  President Bush has let down the American people in this regard, kow-towing to the sensitivities of the Musharraf regime.  Obama would rectify this mistake, if given the opportunity.  This would be an appropriate use of military power, unlike the war in Iraq, which distracted from the hunt for the 9/11 terrorists.
It's all but over for Hillary. When she is finally out HP in Boston will finally grow depressed and stop posting his laughable Hillary fiction. Go Nader!!!! He would never get the but he would sink the Dem ticket.
"We've seen the tragic result of a president without wisdom or experience in foreign affairs, and we can't let that happen again."

Then why is she running? She supported the war in Iraq, unilaterally declaring hostile intent towards Iran and the failed policy of forced negotiation with our adversaries. What wisdom and experience is she specifically citing that makes her uniquely qualified? I hope it is not her husband's policies of ignoring terrorist strikes and appeasement of China and North Korea.
And her credentials are??? Thats right, the same as Obama's. She still claims experience that she can not document. I spent 12 years watching Bill in the white house, by her standard we all have her qualifications. To quote her campaign "Get Real!!"
Hillary has become delusional, she is, then she isn't for free trade. Not long ago Hillary said she favored free trade with China and said free trade is good for America when she voted in favor of free trade with Peru. Now will the 'REAL' Hillary Clinton please stand up?
Mrs. Clinton says "we've seen the tragic result of a president without wisdom or experience in foreign affairs, and we can't let that happen again." and she condemns the "Bush approach of using force where diplomacy would be more appropriate."

Mrs. Clinton voted with Bush to use force in Iraq where diplomacy would have been more appropriate.  That vote certainly is not an example of wisdom in foreign affairs.  

I agree with Mrs. Clinton on one point: we can't let that happen again.  So I voted for Barack Obama.
I was a HRC supporter and held a fundraiser at my home.  However, given the last 4 days I have become ashamed of her and her return to nasty tactics.  I believe that she is indeed divisive and will try to anything to win at the cost of truth and transparency.  I now do not know the Hilliary that I supported--- very sad and I will now vote for Obama.  I live in Dallas, Texas.
HRC touts her experience to be the better Commander in Chief. But what about her vote FOR the war in Iraq. She was TOO BUSY to read the full report to make an educated and informed decision?? She went with the flow and now is claiming she was duped by President Bush. Seemed the report and it's title were pretty straight forward as to its intent. Now she can't even admit she might have been wrong, or that her vote was a mistake.

I want a Commander in Chief who will weigh all the options, READ all of the information, talk to the leaders of other countries and who will become completely informed BEFORE they take action. I want a Commander in Chief who won't just go with the flow, and be too busy to fully understand what they are approving.

This week it's a "New American Strategy" last week it would have been a "New American Solution"
This was a comprehensive and important speech by Senator Clinton. It is one every voter should hear. It had substance and expresse her vision on many, many issues facing our world. It was not just jabs at Obama and Bush. Please don't let pollsters decide who will be our next president.
Give Senator Clinton, a highly qualified and committed candidate, the forum she deserves. Obama is getting far more coverage--most of which is favorable. Where are the hard questions for him?
I'm shocked that someone in the media, especially MSNBC, would actually take the time to listen to Hillary Clinton's substantive positions, instead of finding outrageously misleading soundbites of her reacting to Obama's hypocritical underground attacks.

I was on the fence before all this media bias started, and now I’m firmly in Hillary's corner.  As Saturday Night Live thankfully pointed out, pretty much every member of the media is "totally in the tank for Barack Obama" even Keith Olbermann, who I used to have a lot of admiration for.

Anyway, I haven't drunk the Obama Kool-Aid, and listen closely to policy positions like this, as well as experience in these areas, and her positions and experience really speak to me.

Give 'em hell, Hillary.
Keep it up Hillary!
*yawwwwwn*
More rhetoric by a failed campaign. To say that Obama has no foreign policy experience, need I only ask what experience she has? No one goes into the office of President with the real foreign policy experience. She's just throwing whatever crap Mark Penn can come up with and hope that something, anything, sticks.

It isn't. It won't. She needs to bid farewell now.
What is real? That HRC is all but washed up,, now that is a real statement of fact. She and that lame excuse B. is never going to see inside the White House again. The disgusting methods only show she has no control over her accounting, hollow experience, living with a common liar The Clinton's are not serving this nation, yet they think their solution is and has the answer to anything and every thing,,,Far from being truth, we have no idea as to their hidden agenda. Well, its time to take out the trash, throw out the dog,, would some one closer tell them to turn out the lights?? The party is over HRC America knows all the tricks of being a professional liar.  
Hillary speaks of a new America as if the old America is bad?
Barrack Obama says, lets fix Washington and lets heal as a nation.
Hillary’s arrogance is the old Washington and the reason we need to heal.
As for Foreign policy experience, Grant it she may be right on that.
But her view of the world askew and her direction for America is wrong.
Obama is deserving of the same trust that we have given all of our passed presidents.
If Hillary runs a Presidency anything like her campain we will be in another war before this one is over and be out of money before the job is complete. Her, her husband and her advisers underestermated who they were up against, overspent. Sounds like the same thinking we have in power now..
Mrs Cliton often suggest that she's been tested. Just wonder tested by who and by what? The last time I checked she wasn't member of any US gov. Being first lady doesn't prepare anyone to be president. It's a fantasy to claim experience cos no president has been president before becoming president. They all learn on the Job. Better judgement is the key and She failed this test by voting to authorise the war in Iraq
Hillary is so desperate it's sad. Here is an intelligent woman who could have won this thing but choose to be negative, had 10 different messages, ran a horrible campaign with no planning and is now saying anything to make herself look good.
Rudy would be proud of your "ready" message Hill. This photo thing and comparing Barack to Bush is so over the line . "Vote for me or Barack will not know what to do"
Are you listening Cheney?
I think after this She should consider "The Dark Side of the Force"
DARTH HILL for Prez.
Clinton's notion of foreign policy is a misleading statement about a "phased" withdrawal. What follows next? She won't say because she's keeping her options open. She could be "phasing" for as long as McCain wants to stay.

At least Obama plainly states he'll withdraw but maintain an ongoing US presence in the region for purposes of counter terrorism. He has his brain wrapped around 4th generation warfare. Clinton and McCain are still mired in 3rd generation conventional warfare.

As far as Clinton's criticism of Obama's intervention statement, that's exactly what the US just did in Pakistan to take out al Qaeda's number 3 man.

Clinton is such a flip flopper.  The only reason she's taking the stance that she won't meet with leaders is because she's afraid of the Repubs attacking her on it and it was more convenient to flip.  If you look on youtube (I can't from work or I'd post the link), you can quickly find a video of her saying one thing then saying the other.

But there is also items in print.

Clinton said:
''I would engage in negotiations with Iran, with no conditions, because we don't really understand how Iran works. We think we do, from the outside, but I think that is misleading.''
http://www.slate.com/id/2175884

"The Bush administration has opposed talks with our adversaries, seeming to believe that we are not strong enough to defend our interests through negotiations. This is a misleading and counterproductive strategy. True statesmanship requires that we engage with our adversaries, not for the sake of talking but because robust diplomacy is a prerequisite to achieving our aims."
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20071101faessay86601-p0/hillary-rodham-clinton/security-and-opportunity-for-the-twenty-first-century.html

As you can see, as usual she has flipped to a position that is politically convenient. Which is agreeing with the Repubs so that they have less to attack her on.  Funny how she called Obama "naive" for having basically the same position she had before she flip flopped.

Enough of this lady.  She'll say whatever she thinks you want to hear.
There is no question that Hillary is the best choice for president at these hard times, both considering security and economy.

HILLARY 08!!!
Go Hillary! She has much more experience than Obama. We desperately need that experience now. I hope voters can see through the hype. Obama needs a reality check!
HRC has no experience in foreign affairs either.  Her husband (who I'm sure she thinks did a great job) was the reason for 9/11 and what Bush had to deal with.  He was the one who outkasted the middle east entirely and tried to force thier hand.   I'm not saying Bush handled the situation perfectly, but I know for a fact either of the Clintons would have handled it worse, and probably would have caused more than just one attack on American Soil.
It seems that it's the very nature of change that is being attacked by Hillary. Anything that is different in relation to America's foreign policy is dismissed or critiqued as naive or inexperienced. It makes it impossible to address the need for fundamental chamge in our global positioning UNLESS it's coming from Sen. Clinton herself.

To distance her policies from Bush while denouncing Obama's attempt to do the same is tight rope to say the least. I would think that Obama's best strategy is to point that out. The only person that can change policy apparently is Sen. Clinton anyone else is being naive. Even if they pretty much agree.
any body that would feel comfortable with the obviously bi-polar hillary clinton in control of the military is nuts, which hillary would be there, she does not have enough common sense to be commander in chief, she has no experience making strategic military decisions, and no her experience picking out the color of the drapes in the whitehouse don't count for much, obama has the demeanor required for the commander of the military without the psychosis hillary suffers from
She's still on the military operations inside Pakistani territory?

Speaking of getting real, does she even realize this happened a few weeks ago? Haven't heard anything about bin Laden, but reportedly the U.S. was confident it had killed an al Qaeda leader with a strike, inside Pakistan.

Couple that with her seeming ignorance of U.S. nuclear policy, and she's looking as competent with regard to these security issues and she is at putting together an effective campaign team.

I think I still prefer Obama. Less drama, more competence.
Looks like a leader to me here. At least everyone could follow her and know when they left just what her plans were.I believe Obama may be in for surprise tonight. I think this floating pic is an example of Obama trying to steer people away from Farrakhans endorsement. He would be the likely one to have that pic.Blame it on Clinton like he minipulated the race issue before S Carolina. Go Hillary Madam President


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):

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=701149

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google