Hillary Clinton on War & Peace
Democratic Jr Senator (NY)
Agrees with Newt Gingrich that Iraq policy is a mess
Newt Gingrich said the administration has failed "to put the Iraqis at the center of this equation. The key to defeating the bad guys is having enough good guys who are Iraqis," he said. The administration did not send enough Iraqi Americans there
after the war, Gingrich said.
Hillary Clinton, who recently returned from Iraq and Afghanistan, said she agreed with Gingrich. She blamed the administration for "miscalculation" and "inept planning" in Iraq. "I do think we need more troops" in Iraq,
Clinton said. She said she believes in giving the chief executive the authority to wage war, as her husband did in Bosnia and Kosovo. "But I regret the way the president has used the authority." Clinton dismissed complaints that she should not have
criticized President Bush while in Iraq and blamed a "right-wing apparatus." Clinton said she was merely responding to questions from U.S. troops. "I'm not going to lie to an American soldier," she said on CBS.
Source: Howard Kurtz, Washington Post, Page A07
Dec 8, 2003
Urged President to veto UN condemnation of Israel
LAZIO: When the US failed to use its veto, in the UN Security Council [which condemned Israelís response to Palestinian protests] - that was one of the great mistakes of the last few years, and I spoke out immediately. Iím sure that Mrs. Clinton had a
chance to speak with the president about this, to urge him not to use that veto. I would love to know what the context of the discussion was.
Q: Did you urge him to use it?
CLINTON: That was what I urged my husband to do. He made a different decision
Source: (X-ref Lazio) NY Senate debate on NBC
Oct 28, 2000
Cut off US aid if Palestine declares a state unilaterally
Q: In recent weeks, scores of people have been killed in the Middle East. In view of whatís happened, do you think there should be a Palestinian state now?
CLINTON: Only as part of a comprehensive peace agreement. Thatís always been my position, that
[it should] guarantee Israelís safety and security and the parties should agree at the negotiating table. A unilateral declaration is absolutely unacceptable and it would mean the end of any US aid.
LAZIO: Thatís a change of heart for Mrs. Clinton,
because back in 1998 you called for a Palestinian state. You undercut the Israeli negotiating position. The people of New York want to have somebody who has a consistent record. For eight years I have been consistent and strong in my support for the
security of the state of Israel. Without equivocation. Without a question mark next to my name.
CLINTON: There is no question mark next to me. Thereís an exclamation point. I am an emphatic, unwavering supporter of Israelís safety and security.
Source: NY Senate debate on NBC
Oct 28, 2000
Returned money from organization associated with terrorists
LAZIO [to Clinton]: When you accept contributions from people that support Hamas, when theyíre your guests at the White House, when you cavort with terrorists, you send a message to the Palestinian Authority that encourages violence to be used as a tool
to achieve political ends.
Q: Wait a minute. Didnít your presidential candidate, George W. Bush, also accept contributions?
LAZIO: Itís absolutely wrong for all. The difference, though, on top of receiving the contributions, is that people who
support the Hamas terrorist group, have been invited and courted at the White House, which I think is wrong.
CLINTON: I learned that an organization claimed credit for sponsoring a fund-raiser I attended; an organization whose members have made
statements that I find offensive and have condemned. And as soon as I found out the facts, I returned all of the money that was raised because I did not want anyone to have a false impression about my strong support for Israelís safety and security.
Source: (X-ref Lazio) NY Senate debate on NBC
Oct 28, 2000
Focuses on increasing relationship between US and Israel
LAZIO [to Hillary]: Itís very hard to accept a claim of consistency [on Israel] when you called for a Palestinian state with full military powers. Itís difficult to accept that you are a consistent supporter when you stand on the sidelines while Suha
Arafat issues a blood libel suggesting that Israelis have been orchestrating an attack on Palestinian women and children with poison. Itís hard for us to imagine youíve been a consistent supporter when you refused to support the law which says that we
should move our embassy to Jerusalem, not next year, but right now. For eight years Iíve wanted the embassy to be placed in Jerusalem. CLINTON: My positions for more than 20 years have been to do everything I could to support Israel and to increase the
relationships between the US and Israel. Iíve worked on everything from the National Council of Jewish Womenís program to bring a preschool instruction program for children of the US, to speaking out, time and time again, about violence and terrorism.
Source: (X-ref Lazio) NY Senate debate on NBC
Oct 28, 2000
US should have vetoed biased anti-Israel UN resolution
Q: Did the U.S. do right to abstain from the UNís anti-Israel resolution?
CLINTON: We should have vetoed it. It was one-sided. It did not address the violence that I believe is fomented by Arafat. It did not address what Israel has tried to do, such
as pulling out of Lebanon. Weíre seeing the capture of Israeli soldiers, the desecration of Josephís tomb. Itís imperative that Arafat end the violence and get back to negotiating. The US remains the guarantor of Israelís security, and in the Senate, I
would certainly be a strong voice for doing whatever was required. Iíve also called for conditioning aid to the Palestinians on their willingness to end violence, on their willingness to rid their textbooks of anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli statements.
LAZIO: I did issue a statement immediately expressing my strong disappointment with America not using its veto power. I do not support call for a Palestinian state. My record is one of 100% consistency for the security of the state of Israel.
Source: Senate debate in Manhattan
Oct 8, 2000
Pollard committed a crime, but use of secret evidence unfair
Q: Jonathan Pollard, the American naval officer who betrayed the country, was sentenced to life for espionage and treason. The secretary of defense, the secretary of state, the director of the FBI and the head of the CIA have all said do not pardon him.
Do you support clemency for Mr. Pollard?
CLINTON: What Pollard did was a terrible crime against the US. It was a great breach of trust and national security and he plead guilty, was convicted and is serving a very long prison term. The question for me
is around the due process issues concerning the way that he was sentenced. It is something that I have questions about and I believe that fair-minded people should ask similar questions. There was secret evidence put in before the court that has never
LAZIO: The only person who is in a position to make that decision and the only person whoís got the authority to actually issue a pardon is the president himself.
Source: Clinton-Lazio debate, Buffalo NY
Sep 13, 2000
Support Israel in finding a safe and secure peace
Hillary Clinton supports a move [of the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem]. She spoke more generally yesterday about what she called her longstanding respect for the country and its people. ďThe United States has been and
will be always there for Israel,Ē she said. ďAnd we will always support the Israeli government and Israeli people as they struggle to find a safe and secure peace.Ē
She stayed away from more controversial topics, such as whether there should be an
independent Palestinian state. Mrs. Clinton angered many Jewish voters last year with when she voiced support for such a state. But the animosity felt by some in the crowd toward Mrs. Clinton was evident on nearly every block, with some holding signs
recalling her embrace last year of Yasir Arafatís wife, Suha.
Source: Associated Press in NY Times
May 26, 2000
Extend peace treaties to Palestinians, Syrians & Lebanese
The message of Oslo [was]: How we can fulfill Rabinís legacy by bidding farewell to generations of war and ushering in a new century of real and lasting peace? The same
must be true on all of Israelís borders so that the peace that now covers some will be a peace that extends to all-Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese.
Source: Remarks at Tel Aviv Performing Arts Center
Nov 11, 1999
Yugoslav involvement good on both moral & strategic grounds
Hillary Clinton called for the US to reject isolationism and aggressively engage itself in world affairs in the tradition of President Truman at the end of WWII. She cited American involvement in Bosnia and Kosovo as examples of foreign
engagements she favored on moral and strategic ground, but also suggested that Americans needed to consider becoming involved in solving crises that are not only military in nature.
Source: Dean Murphy, NY Times
Oct 20, 2000
Urged president to bomb Serbians
On March 21, 1999, Hillary expressed her views by phone to the President: ďI urged him to bomb.Ē The Clintons argued the issue over the next few days. [The President expressed] what-ifs: What if bombing promoted more executions? What if it took apart the
NATO alliance? Hillary responded, ďYou cannot let this go on at the end of a century that has seen the major holocaust of our time. What do we have NATO for if not to defend our way of life?Ē The next day the President declared that force was necessary.
Source: Hillaryís Choice by Gail Sheehy, p.345
Dec 9, 1999
Kosovoís unified message: We will not turn away
Iíve met people who are determined to rebuild Kosovo with a sense of positive energy and not vindictiveness and retribution. This has been possible because our nations-our leaders and our citizens-stood up against evil. Now there are some who I
know who would quibble with my use of that word, but I think it fully describes the conflict we have been waging these last few months. The many democracies that came together to wage this battle against Milosevic may have spoken different languages
and even held different political views. But they have sent a unified message at the end of this century that says we will not turn away when human beings are cruelly expelled, or when they are denied basic rights and dignities because
of how they look or how they worship. When crimes against humanity rear their ugly heads, we have to send such a message as an international community.
Source: Remarks at The Sorbonne, Paris, France
Jun 17, 1999
Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007.
Voting YEA on this amendment would establish a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Voting NAY would keep the current situation without a timetable. The amendment states:
- The President shall redeploy, commencing in 2006, US forces from Iraq by July 1, 2007, leaving only the minimal number of forces that are critical to completing the mission of standing up Iraqi security forces and conducting specialized counterterrorism operations.
- The President should maintain an over-the-horizon troop presence to prosecute the war on terror and protect regional security interests.
- Within 30 days, the administration shall submit to Congress a report that sets forth the strategy for the redeployment of US forces from Iraq by July 1, 2007.
Opponents of the Resolution say:
- This amendment would withdraw American forces from Iraq without regard to the real conditions on the ground.
- The consequences of an American retreat would be terrible for the security of the
American people at home.
- Our commitment is not open-ended. It is conditional on the Iraqis moving toward self-government and self-defense.
Opponents of the Resolution say:
Reference: Kerry Amendment to National Defense Authorization Act;
Bill S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766
; vote number 2006-181
on Jun 22, 2006
- Congress talks almost incessantly about the situation in Iraq as if on 9/11 the situation involved Iraq. Of course, it didn't. We were attacked by al-Qaida operating out of Afghanistan on 9/11.
- One of the theories we hear is that somehow staying in Iraq is necessary because all the terrorists will come into Iraq, and then they wouldn't be able to attack us anywhere else. Some call this the roach-motel theory. The fact is, al-Qaida is operating in 60 to 80 countries. Yet our resources are only heavily focused on this Iraq situation.
- In terms of differences from other Iraq amendments: This is binding, not just a sense of the Senate.
- Secondly, we have a date; other amendments are open-ended.
- Thirdly, this has an over-the-horizon force specifically to protect our security interests.
Voted YES on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan.
To establish a special committee of the Senate to investigate the awarding and carrying out of contracts to conduct activities in Afghanistan and Iraq and to fight the war on terrorism. Voting YES would: create Senate special committee to investigate war contracts, taking into consideration: bidding, methods of contracting, subcontracting, oversight procedures, allegations of wasteful practices, accountability and lessons learned in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Reference: Committee to Investigate War Contracts;
Bill S Amdt 2476 to S 1042
; vote number 2005-316
on Nov 10, 2005
Voted YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding.
Amendment to express the sense of the Senate on future requests for funding for military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. A YES vote would:
Reference: Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act;
Bill S.AMDT.464 to H.R.1268
; vote number 2005-96
on Apr 20, 2005
- Request all future funding for ongoing military operations overseas, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq, be included in the President's annual fiscal year budget proposal
- Call for the President to submit to Congress by Sept. 1, 2005, an amendment to his annual fiscal budget, that details estimated costs for ongoing military operations overseas.
- Ask that all future funding requests for ongoing military operations overseas appear in the appropriation bills in which such expenditures are normally included.
Voted YES on $86 billion for military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan.
Vote to pass a bill that would appropriate $86.5 billion in supplemental spending for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan, in Fiscal 2004. The bill would provide $10.3 billion as a grant to rebuild Iraq. This includes:
Reference: FY04 Emergency Supplemental for Iraq and Afghanistan;
; vote number 2003-400
on Oct 17, 2003
- $5.1 billion for security
- $5.2 billion for reconstruction costs
- $65.6 billion for military operations and maintenance
- $1.3 billion for veterans medical care
- $10 billion as a loan that would be converted to a grant if 90% of all bilateral debt incurred by the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein, would have to be forgiven by other countries.
Voted YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq.
H.J.Res. 114; Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. The administration would be required to report to Congress that diplomatic options have been exhausted before, or within 48 hours after military action has started. Every 60 days the president would also be required to submit a progress report to Congress.
; vote number 2002-237
on Oct 11, 2002
Condemns anti-Muslim bigotry in name of anti-terrorism.
Clinton sponsored the Resolution on bigotry against Sikh Americans:
Title: Condemning bigotry and violence against Sikh Americans in the wake of terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.
Summary: Declares that, in the quest to identify, locate, and bring to justice the perpetrators and sponsors of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, the civil rights and liberties of all Americans, including Sikh-Americans, should be protected.
Source: House Resolution Sponsorship 01-HR255 on Oct 4, 2001
- Condemns bigotry and acts of violence or discrimination against any Americans, including Sikh-Americans.
- Calls upon local and Federal law enforcement authorities to: (1) work to prevent hate crimes against all Americans; and (2) prosecute to the fullest extent of the law all those who commit hate crimes.