The New York Times reporter Nicholas Kristof, who conducted the interview in front of thousands at a Lincoln Center theater, asked if Syria policy had been the biggest mistake of the Obama administration.
Clinton reiterated that in 2012, she and the then CIA director, David Petraeus, had devised a plan to arm rebels, but it was rejected.
“I thought we should have done more at that point,” she said.
She noted that most of the civilian deaths came because of airstrikes and argued that more could still be done to stop Assad’s airforce and protect civilians.
“I really believe we should have and still should take out his airfields and prevent him from being able to bomb innocent people and drop sarin gas on them,” said Clinton.
Here again Americans believe God is on their side and therefore can accomplish the impossible.
"W" was the same way with Iraq. He expected to be cheered by the Iraqi people as a liberator. That is all American arrogance.
What if, instead of arming rebels, the USA brokered an agreement that any leader of the rebellion would be given amnesty from retribution by Assad? What would happen? Why is war always the best answer? It is actually no answer in the Middle East.
If Assad was guaranteed his position as president of Syria there would be no reason for war. His position has always been to place strategic militias throughout the region, including Lebanon. It sincerely is the only method of security for the Shia Crescent. UNLESS. Peace was brokered with enough incentive it would be permanent. The Late Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Abdullah was doing exactly that. He would meet with Assad and they would discuss the day and the stability of the region.
Everyone remembers Beirut and the horrible violence decades ago. For the most part it ended. It took strong Lebanese leadership, but, the Beirut of yesterday is no longer. It is possible. I think Hillary Clinton didn't take the time to realize the strength of peace within the region. Guns are too easy and please the politics of the American people.
Here again Americans believe God is on their side and therefore can accomplish the impossible.
"W" was the same way with Iraq. He expected to be cheered by the Iraqi people as a liberator. That is all American arrogance.
What if, instead of arming rebels, the USA brokered an agreement that any leader of the rebellion would be given amnesty from retribution by Assad? What would happen? Why is war always the best answer? It is actually no answer in the Middle East.
If Assad was guaranteed his position as president of Syria there would be no reason for war. His position has always been to place strategic militias throughout the region, including Lebanon. It sincerely is the only method of security for the Shia Crescent. UNLESS. Peace was brokered with enough incentive it would be permanent. The Late Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Abdullah was doing exactly that. He would meet with Assad and they would discuss the day and the stability of the region.
Everyone remembers Beirut and the horrible violence decades ago. For the most part it ended. It took strong Lebanese leadership, but, the Beirut of yesterday is no longer. It is possible. I think Hillary Clinton didn't take the time to realize the strength of peace within the region. Guns are too easy and please the politics of the American people.
