International Issues in Domestic Politics
This is interesting: Democrats in the USA are frustrated that Hillary, after voting for the Iraq War years ago, has voted for labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organisation recently. Some believe this could be used as a pretext by the current administration for attacking Iran.
Hillary at the moment is seen by many as the front-runner. Without critiquing whether this supposed position is deserved or not, it's interesting to note the meshing together of international/domestic issues. This fear - of a US attack on Iran "in sixth months time" as John Edwards phrases it - may be slightly off the mark.
Hillary vote for the Iraq War has been seen by many as a mistake. If the administration does use this as a pretext for military action in Iran, they might be wise to wait until (, or if,) Hillary secures the Democratic nomination. Then this issue - along with most of the heat the Republican nominee could receive on issues involving the "War on Terror" - could be neutralised. Hillary would look foolish, as Edwards correctly points out, if action did occur and she claims that her vote for this bill was not meant to authorise such action.
So what I'm contending is that if military action does occur and if the current administration does care about helping - or not harming - the Republican nominee, they may wait until after the Democratic primaries have finished.
Hillary at the moment is seen by many as the front-runner. Without critiquing whether this supposed position is deserved or not, it's interesting to note the meshing together of international/domestic issues. This fear - of a US attack on Iran "in sixth months time" as John Edwards phrases it - may be slightly off the mark.
Hillary vote for the Iraq War has been seen by many as a mistake. If the administration does use this as a pretext for military action in Iran, they might be wise to wait until (, or if,) Hillary secures the Democratic nomination. Then this issue - along with most of the heat the Republican nominee could receive on issues involving the "War on Terror" - could be neutralised. Hillary would look foolish, as Edwards correctly points out, if action did occur and she claims that her vote for this bill was not meant to authorise such action.
So what I'm contending is that if military action does occur and if the current administration does care about helping - or not harming - the Republican nominee, they may wait until after the Democratic primaries have finished.
posted by SC TC at 12:47 pm
1 comments
əl, 