(Untitled)

Nov 28, 2008 00:36

Conflict Zone
Will James Jones and Hillary Clinton butt heads over Middle East policy?


Read more... )

palestine, israel, jim jones, hillary clinton

Leave a comment

Comments 10

worldmage November 28 2008, 07:31:28 UTC
I think this is completely the wrong way to think about Obama's appointments. Trying to infer his policy directions from his appointments is completely backward from the way he has presented his way of doing things ( ... )

Reply

ladypolitik November 28 2008, 08:25:26 UTC
It's like you're making love to my brain.

Reply

schmiss November 28 2008, 09:10:21 UTC
True; but IF Obama is (as people are saying) delegating his foreign policy to the best people he can find for now, while turning his attention to the economy, then it's a worthwhile to examine the potential dynamic between Jones & Clinton. While it's unlikely we'll ever have a Rumsfeld vs Powell situation, the amount of tension in the Mideast and the quagmire Bush is bequeathing to Obama is staggering & there needs to be examination of who he's picking to manage those factors.

Reply

worldmage November 28 2008, 10:19:47 UTC
You're absolutely right. I don't have a problem with people analyzing his picks and what their agendas are and how those agendas might possibly conflict in the Obama Administration-to-be. Quite the contrary, in fact; it's information that needs to be in the public eye IMHO. As such, I don't have a problem with the bulk of the article examining Jones's and Clinton's respective records on the issue ( ... )

Reply


allhatnocattle November 28 2008, 10:22:39 UTC
Given the economic state I imagine the focus of his administration will pay less attention to global problems. Clinton and Jones may not be able to forward their ideas and plans as domestic economic issues are more urgent. This maybe Obama's Achille's heel.

Reply


heather November 28 2008, 14:11:08 UTC
Ultimately it's not Clinton's job to be butting heads with people if she's appointed/confirmed, is it? At least not publicly. As SoS, at least as far as I know, your job is to speak for the president and represent him to the world in every way, on every point. Not to set the policy itself. Other world leaders should be confident that when they are talking to Clinton, they're talking to the president for all intents and purposes. In that job there's not a whole lot of room for arguments. She's got to command respect and people will know if she's not on the same page with Obama.

I don't care if there's debate where people can't see or hear it. As long as they (Jones and Clinton) know their jobs and are willing to implement Obama's agenda, and only his agenda, that's the important thing.

Reply

cire32 November 28 2008, 16:10:39 UTC
SOS have place at the table behind close doors and give advice to the president.

Reply


khudirambose November 28 2008, 15:44:16 UTC
Weell, first of all, both of these two will work under Obama and will implement HIS POLICY. Secondly, this article, and others I have read, dramatically overstate Hillary's hawkishness. She is not Dick Cheney or Joe Lieberman.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up