- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
What about Hillary Clinton saying that she would "obliterate" Iran, presumably with nuclear weapons, if that country's government attacks Israel?
Today, the Boston Globe editorial board says that "[Hillary Clinton] seems not to realize that she undermined Iranian reformists and pragmatists. The Iranian people have been more favorable to America than any other in the Gulf region or the Middle East."
If Hillary Clinton feels that she must "act tough" to prove that a woman can be a strong commander-in-chief while merely running for office, what's to prevent her from feeling the need to "act tough" as the first actual female commander-in-chief and doing something catastrophically violent to prove her toughness?
If President Bush orders an attack on Iran before the 2008 November election, how can Hillary Clinton then turn around and condemn him after she has so "imprudently" as the British called it, and with "doltish ignorance" as the Saudis called it, threatened to obliterate the very same country?
Glenn, this issue is important.
