Speculation is she made the final cut for VP. Do you have any confidence that she could run for President in her own right in 2024? I have no feeling for her political chops.
Susan Rice
- Thread starter naturalmwa
- Start date
Seems crazy to me. I couldn't tell you one thing she's accomplished, unless she had some hand in reducing our ME exposure.
I don’t think it’s a good choice personally. She is a very qualified individual for a cabinet position but Biden needs a VP with more of a commanding personality like Harris or Warren IMO.
Well, she would have done a poor job of that considering Obama expanded our wars in Syria, Yemen and Libya without Congressional authorization.
Out of all choices I think she is the most would. Probably what's putting her over the top.
yeah that’s going to stir up the Benghazi crazies. Her offense was delivering the cia information on the Sunday talk shows following the attack.
WTF does that mean?
If another country sends in a few thousand troops to our country with armored vehicles backed by thousand of airstrikes, do we just brush it off as not a ‘material’ invasion?
Obama’s decision to embroil our country in the Syrian civil war was a mistake. Funneling weapons to jihadists made life ‘materially’ worse for millions and killed thousands and thousands.
But I’m sure he meant well.
Never has a VP pick been so important. This dude just ain't gonna make it.
It was spin trying to downplay the jihadist involvement in the attack.
She went in five stations and lied to the American public in an effort to downplay the shit show the Obama/Hillary Libyan war had created.
That war is still going on, btw.
Are you ignorant of the Obama era policies and their ramifications in Syria?
2016:
“Syrian militias armed by different parts of the U.S. war machine have begun to fight each other on the plains between the besieged city of Aleppo and the Turkish border, highlighting how little control U.S. intelligence officers and military planners have over the groups they have financed and trained in the bitter five-year-old civil war.
The fighting has intensified over the last two months, as CIA-armed units and Pentagon-armed ones have repeatedly shot at each other while maneuvering through contested territory on the northern outskirts of Aleppo, U.S. officials and rebel leaders have confirmed.
In mid-February, a CIA-armed militia called Fursan al Haq, or Knights of Righteousness, was run out of the town of Marea, about 20 miles north of Aleppo, by Pentagon-backed Syrian Democratic Forces moving in from Kurdish-controlled areas to the east.“
2015:
“The $500mn programme originally aimed to ready around 5,400 vetted fighters a year for three years, but problems finding suitable candidates have seen only a fraction getting trained.
The first graduates, who made up a group of 54 fighters, were attacked by al-Nusra in July and the Pentagon isn't sure what happened to them all. At least one was killed.
The second group, consisting of about 70 rebels, were sent back to Syria last weekend and reports began circulating on Twitter soon after that they had either defected or handed over equipment.
Last week, before the insertion of the new fighters, the US general overseeing efforts against IS drew disbelief from senior lawmakers when he told them only "four or five" US-trained rebels were on the ground fighting in Syria.”
Not really, but that is the narrative. She put the info out that was given to her and I recall she premised it on being the best info at the time.
I'm sure the Trump supporters will go nuts with Benghazimania, but I'm not sure it sticks. Trump has outright lied to the American people many times since then. For personal reasons. For political reasons. For no reason at all other than lying is what ge does. Will an accusation that she lied sway undecideds?
She does have foreign policy experience but I'm not familiar with her domestic side of the equation.
Yes, those efforts were fruitless. Small cost to the US. The later effort to topple ISIS was successful. Regardess, the human and economic cost to the US was minute compared to Iraq.
It was 2012, Mr. History Professor. If you're going to spread crap, at least get the year right.
Anyway, that's weak sauce, and all the GOP has on her. Maybe they should launch an 11th Congressional investigation on the subject. Maybe that one won't come to the conclusion that she did nothing to intentionally mislead the public like the first 10 did.
No...it came at a huge cost. Under Obama and now Trump, the USA is seen as the greatest threat to world peace.
Hillary's Wikicable leaks reveal our Syrian plans before 2011.
Susan Rice has youth, she will be 56 yrs old in Nov.
U.S. Ambassador to United Nations 2009-2013
U.S. National Security Advisor 2013-2017
She has some foreign policy credentials which would
make her able to represent Biden in world travel to
our allies. We know that Biden will not be flying out
of our country.
U.S. Ambassador to United Nations 2009-2013
U.S. National Security Advisor 2013-2017
She has some foreign policy credentials which would
make her able to represent Biden in world travel to
our allies. We know that Biden will not be flying out
of our country.
Last edited:
I'm hoping Joe goes with Susan Rice for 2 main reasons:
1) She is the very most qualified minority woman to be POTUS, and Joe's VP will undoubtedly be #47.
2) The Republicans can't stand her, and think they'll have some sort of edge if she is the pick (just read some of this board). So, it will be that much more fun to own the Cons.
1) She is the very most qualified minority woman to be POTUS, and Joe's VP will undoubtedly be #47.
2) The Republicans can't stand her, and think they'll have some sort of edge if she is the pick (just read some of this board). So, it will be that much more fun to own the Cons.
And this is his problem. If he doesn't pick a radical leftist, his party raises hell. If he does, it gets glowing press for a week or two and then reality sets in during the campaign.
I think she is best. She has name recognition and is a more moderate pick. The name of the game is winning Independents and Trump hating Republicans. She moves that dial in the right direction waaaaay better than a Warren and Harris, both of whom will be easy to weaponize and scare off the Ind/Rep. voters thinking of voting for Joe. The Benghazi nothing burger is tired and will have zero impact on anyone not already a card carrying member of MAGA. She’s also the most photogenic of the bunch, and looks do matter.
I like Gretchen Witmer for her executive experience and appeal to the Midwest swing states. Pretty photogenic and a high approval rating in her state. Rice for Seccy of State. Harris for Attorney General. Kerry for Chief of Staff.
I already told you, but to spell it out:
Credibility. Believability. Integrity. Acceptability. Knowledge....
If you can't get a year right, why should anyone think you know anything you're talking about?
If I told you I was an expert on the Sept 11, 2002 attacks, I'd be a little hard to take seriously, eh?
Do we know where she stands on any of the domestic issues? We’ve seen her foreign policy experience.
Agree, and we know she would not have thrown the Kurds, one of our allies under the bus.
Maybe, but she and her superiors, along with France and the UK turned Libya into a failed state.
But that’s what the US does, so nothing out of the ordinary. I want to know the direction she sees the domestic arena should look like
She was raised in D.C. And is a product of the inside the Beltway political culture. So in the old traditional sense she won't help carry a state, and I do not know if she has any domestic policy experience.
If she is the choice it may or may not be a factor. But then again Warren or Harris aren't hugely experienced in foreign expertise outside Senatorial actions.
Sorry. Thought you’d get the Hilary/Benghazi take-off.
But yes, factual inaccuracy does degrade an argument.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Players file lawsuit against state for privacy rights violations
- Latest: WaterlooChazz
-
