Hillary Clinton gave a speech in which she criticized Bush’s handling of Iran. She doesn’t think he’s been aggressive enough on the issue and has downplayed the threat of a nuclear Iran. Bush has mainly deferred to the Europeans on Iran and let them do much of the negotiating. Predictably, it’s gotten them nowhere as the Iranians are merely stringing them along and stalling for time while the mad mullahs continue their nuclear project. It just goes to show how well constant diplomacy works with aggressors who only understand force. If Bush was more involved, of course, Hillary would likely be complaining that he isn’t being multilateral by working with the Euros. If he threatened force, you can imagine the uproar. It’s a no-win situation, a political Kobayashi Maru.
Really, she’s just triangulating again by running to Bush’s right on a particular issue. You can still see the Clinton in her, though. Her preferred approach for Iran?
We cannot and should not — must not — permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. In order to prevent that from occurring, we must have more support vigorously and publicly expressed by China and Russia, and we must move as quickly as feasible for sanctions in the United Nations.
Ah, sanctions, those things that have worked so well in the past. Why, they’re one step up from strongly worded UN letters!
Iran is a far more serious issue than is being portrayed here in the U.S. I’m confident there are contingency plans in effect (whether they’re effective is another question) and we still can’t count out the Israelis. I’m not sure what to expect, but I imagine there will be some important and violent developments in the coming year.