Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: unclewest who wrote (18086)	11/29/2003 4:31:46 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793639

Re Hillary...Let's hope this comes back to bite her.. But we do need to know WHY she is there, and how much it is costing taxpayers. How many people did she bring with her (staff, etc)? Why is a Jr Senator doing this? None of the major (so called) media has talked about this... From the appearance of a couple of the articles I've seen, she really is trying to dictate policy now...Here's another one...For months, the Left constantly has been harping on the Administration to get out of Iraq ASAP...and now she says: Sen. Clinton: More Time Needed for Iraq Power Transfer BY Haitham Haddadin, Reuters Updated: 10:37 AM EST MUBARAK AIR BASE, KUWAIT (Reuters) - U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton said on Saturday President Bush's administration was moving too fast in a planned transfer of power to the Iraqis by July. "It's going to take more time than has been allotted for the process to take hold," the New York Democrat told Reuters during a brief stopover to visit U.S. troops in Kuwait. "I don't think we should be setting artificial timelines as this is a very challenging undertaking and we need to work with our Iraqi counterparts and make sure that the steps that are being taken are going to work." Washington's plan for handing power back to Iraqis has been criticized by the top cleric among Iraq's Shi'ite Muslim majority for paying too little heed to Islam and including too little Iraqi involvement. Clinton arrived from Iraq with fellow Democrat Senator Jack Reed, who said the United States had overextended itself in Iraq. He said a failure to get the Shi'ites' backing for the handover plan could cause huge political problems in the future. "We could look back and see the decision to attack Iraq was one that ended up being very, very costly and peripheral to the real enemies that are trying to attack the United States." "And its connection with the terrorist cells that attack the United States are tenuous at best," he added, casting doubt on one of the administration's justifications for the invasion. He said the U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan had critical shortages of specialized troops such as military police, civil affairs and psychological operations troops. "We are beginning to see the cracks now because as these forces rotate out, and many of these troops here are reserve National Guard people who have that expertise, we don't have a second echelon of those types of troops," Reed told Reuters. Clinton has ruled out a presidential bid next year, but Iraq is emerging as perhaps the greatest threat to Bush's re-election as American troops suffer casualties almost every day. She said more troops, preferably an international force, were needed in both Iraq and Afghanistan. "We are fighting an enemy which has a lot of impact by relatively small numbers and we've got to provide security throughout large countries. That's not easy with the force numbers that we have. "In Iraq, I still think the administration should internationalize the military, political, civilian presence," she said. "And that means to go to the United Nations, to go to NATO and to go to other willing allies and be willing to share the authority and power as well as the responsibility." aolsvc.news.aol.com 11/29/03 10:35 ET