« Previous | Main | Next »

Clinton Defends Saying She Would 'Obliterate' Iran

Share

May 04, 2008 1:12 PM

ABC News' Mary Bruce reports: Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., defended this morning her comments that she would "obliterate" Iran if Iran ever attacked Israel with nuclear weapons.

"Why would I have any regrets?" she asked in an exclusive appearance on a special edition of "This Week" from Indianapolis, Ind. "I'm asked a question about what I would do if Iran attacked our ally, a country that many of us have a great deal of, you know, connection with and feeling for, for all kinds of reasons.  And, yes, we would have massive retaliation against Iran.

"I don't think they will do that, but I sure want to make it abundantly clear to them that they would face a tremendous cost if they did such a thing," she added.

Rival candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has said her comments are reflective of George W. Bush and could further harm America's reputation abroad.
    
Clinton also responded to criticism that her comments would undermine Iranians seeking democracy and an alliance with the United States.

"The experts I consult with don't say that," she explained. "We want to create some upward pressure that sends a very clear signal to the supreme leader and to Ahmadinejad and others, that going forward on nuclear weapons is not a free choice for Iran. And the very idea that they would translate into action some of the most outlandish comments that have been made by some of the Iranian leaders, and even contemplate wiping Israel off the face of the world, means that we've got to make it clear to them that will not go without massive retaliation." 

Clinton has spoken out recently on the need to extend America's nuclear deterrent to other countries in the Middle East. When asked who would fall under that "nuclear umbrella," Clinton said, "The theory that I'm putting forth is we have to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.  We have to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons throughout the region, because I'm not so concerned about them falling into the hands of states, which is bad enough, as I am about falling into the hands of terrorists." 

The Democratic nominee also discussed the possibility of a nuclear arms race.

"If Iran continues to try to pursue a nuclear weapon, if you're sitting in one of the other capitals in the Gulf region and in the wider Middle East, you're not going to let Iran get that nuclear weapon. You're going to have your own nuclear weapons race," she said. "We had a Cold War where each of us, the Soviet Union and the United States, had missiles on hair trigger alert aimed at the cities in our respective countries.  And we deterred the nuclear conflagration that could have occurred by having tough diplomacy, by having presidents who really stood their ground."

May 4, 2008 in Bush, George W. | Permalink | User Comments (155)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

We need a leader to act with intelligence and skill, like John Kennedy. We need Barack Obama.

Posted by: John | May 4, 2008 3:14:08 PM

Why do Iranians/Iranian Americans always make comments about how mean it is for Hillary to talk about attacking Iran but completely ignore the "if Iran attacked Israel with a nuclear weapon" part? If you are so concerned about innocent people and humanity, why only care about Iran? If Iran has only "peaceful nuclear technology" they'll never hit Israel with a nuke so you have nothing to worry about. I am concerned that Obama's years as President would be like Jimmy Carter's years as President. Obama is already criticizing the idea of standing up for our friends and allies. Not much gets solved by trying to be the nice guy (remember the Carter years).

Posted by: Jason | May 4, 2008 3:21:28 PM

I think that Obama suggesting Clinton is acting like George Bush is uncalled for and lowball politics.

If Iran was to develop a nuclear weapon and use it against Israel or anyone else, I expect fully that Obama,Mc Cain or Clinton would act to obliterate Irans militay and nuclear infastructure immediately.

I certainly dont think the russians would complain then, unless we hit the oilfields.

Posted by: tomdavie | May 4, 2008 3:21:43 PM

What I think is this:

-If Hillary Clinton suggest she wanted world peace, the Obama freaks would rip her a new one and call it a LIE or PANDERING .

- If Obama was caught clubbing baby seals on the head on tape, they would somehow say it showed his 'inner strength' .

I really wonder if there are ANY Obama supporters who actually know how the world works, or what the presidents job is.

I wish the Obama suppporters would just grow up and stop taking anything Clinton says and twist it into a scathing negative. Quite often it looks immature and quite offensive.

Posted by: tomdavie | May 4, 2008 3:37:08 PM

Iran does not have nukes so Hillary's statement, although hypothetical, is the same rhetoric that Bush and the Neo-Cons have been reitorating.
She wants to catch the republican vote aswell as the democratic in order to justify to the supers that she has broader appeal than Obama.

Posted by: Dann | May 4, 2008 3:41:47 PM

And how would Israel benefit from the distruction of the Iranian population, after its own population has been massacred? Pushing forward such lunatic scenarios are meant to hide the lack of real solutions, which would include a more open support for Israel and at the same time a real dialog with Tehran and a more effective participation of the international community to the consultations.

Posted by: mfr_08 | May 4, 2008 3:45:02 PM

Since we are dealing with hypathaticles, someone should ask Hillary this question:
What would you do if Israel attacks Iran with a nuclear bomb?
Her answer should be intereting!!

Posted by: hamid | May 4, 2008 3:53:06 PM

OH Cmon Now, If Iran attacks Israel that is what any president would do except maybe Obama, who would probably consult Rev. Wright.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 4, 2008 4:01:04 PM

Not many world leaders will swallow Obama's sweet words.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 4, 2008 4:03:26 PM

tj remember that gw bush talk act tougher than hillary clinton but where here is the progress in international relations so far(in eight years)?
irak in civil war...............(finish the rest}

Posted by: sam | May 4, 2008 4:05:10 PM

Hillary's gas tax holiday is a brilliant idea. Many workers drive 100 or more miles per day. For them it will give some relief and she has good ideas for the long term, too. Obama is an eletest that don't understand working class people.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 4, 2008 4:09:21 PM

Hillary knows the issues and can get something done. Obama is still learning to stream his words.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 4, 2008 4:13:44 PM

tomdavie...I couldn't agree with you more. From the childish post some these Obama supporters have written here it really makes me wonder if they are only high school students just shooting off at the mouth! They remind me of my seventeen year old when she trying to make excuses when she forgets to turn in her homework or bombs a test because she was too busy with her freinds and boyfriend to study the material at hand. Not too mention she thinks she has the answer to everything and that I know nothing--typical of a teenager!!

Posted by: kira | May 4, 2008 4:14:21 PM

The Donald Young Story will be appearing soon for Obama to explain away.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 4, 2008 4:16:57 PM

this woman is a dangerous idiot or insideous that she is using this to try and win uneducated voters when she knows these statements are already being used to our detriment... and you can bet in those villages where people are wartorn and starving across the world her video is already appearing for recruitmant.

she I hope is just a moron.

Posted by: dl | May 4, 2008 4:19:26 PM

i beleive that with the so called " white middle class" AND THE OLD PEOPLE is that with all respect they can not make the difference between HILLARY PANDERING AND THE TRUTH COMMING FROM OBAMA. THEY USED TO BE LIE TO BY PEOPLE LIKE HILLARY AND BILL AND THEY ARE NOT FAMILIAR TRUTH TELLING PEOPLE LIKE OBAMA

Posted by: sam | May 4, 2008 4:20:26 PM

nodevilsplease...Obama only won Guam by 7 votes!! That's not a whole lot if you ask me. He's losing his edge because those of us who are moderates and not left wing nutjobs realize that "Hope" and "Change" are going to instantly happen on Jaunary 29, 2009 because Obama said so!! We live in a complicated world and technology is changing it even more! Pretty slogans and speeches just don't cut it for me--I need a little more meat and potatoes from my President not Hot air!

Posted by: kira | May 4, 2008 4:20:36 PM

If Obama would shaft his friend Rev. Wright for political gain...What does that say about his character? He has also spent much more money to buy the superdelegates than Hillary has.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 4, 2008 4:21:56 PM

I think it's pretty clear now. The United States isn't going to put anybody into office with a proven history of assocations with terriorists and racists. There is too much on the table here for anybody to really figure out. But it doesn't look good. What some of you people don't know is that some of the more astute democratic heads are already conceding this race. Obama can't garner the support that he needs to get over the top. What is being said against him now is a play date compared to what the republicans are going to do. With that aside, Obama has lost the confidence of the middle of the road democrats and moderates. He can't win without them. Hillary won't push a far left agenda like Sorros, MoveOn.org and others want. The far left loons like Pelosi, Ried, Dean and Boxer are willing to lose as long as nothing starts to cut into their control of congress. Try as they want the african american vote cannot put him in the White House. Some of the youth vote is rethinking things after all of the exposure about Obama. It's not going to go away. No matter how hard he tries to spin it. Now he is resorting to doing the one thing he said he would not do which is going out with attack adds. Just another politican trying another route. The old one isn't working. I still think it's a really tough uphill climb for Hillary because the loons don't want her in office and will do everything in their power to keep her out. This is one of the dirtiest campaigns I have ever seen behind the scenes. Delegates are being threatened with political death and non-support if they don't fall in line for Obama. I think the democratic party has suffered real damage. I don't think a lot of tried and true democrats like what they see and absolutely have lost all trust for the party heads. It's going to be intersting, who ever wins to look back a year or two from now when more of this mess has played out. If nothing else a lot of people are getting a real sobering look at how politics work.

Posted by: JFrance | May 4, 2008 4:22:42 PM

i am not shocked that Clinton using such strong word does not make Americans people turn against her. Is it that they are all war mongers.I think the world is not safe with these can of people in it.
When you walk in the dark you will never understand the light, you would never even know you are in the darkness.
cyrus

Posted by: cyrus | May 4, 2008 4:30:40 PM

Post a comment