What DID Sarah Mean By her "War on Iran" Remark to Chris Wallace?

@anniepa (27279)
United States
February 10, 2010 3:56pm CST
Sarah Palin's first appearance on ANY Sunday morning talk show last Sunday was met with the usual controversy that seems to surround her. I've gotten sort of caught up in the fray here over her remark about President Obama playing the war card and declaring war on Iran. Some have claimed that she outright called for us to attack Iran which has given Sarah's ardent admirers to claim everyone is lying about her and taking her out of context. Below I'm posting an excerpt from the Fox News transcript of the entire interview and I'll also post the link at the end of this discussion: WALLACE: I know that three years is an eternity in politics. But how hard do you think President Obama will be to defeat in 2012? PALIN: It depends on a few things. Say he played, and I got this from Buchanan, reading one of his columns the other day. Say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran, or decided to really come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do. But that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three years. Because I think if the election were today, I do not think Obama would be re-elected. But three years from now things could change if on the national security threat -- WALLACE: You're not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card. PALIN: I'm not suggesting that. I'm saying, if he did, things would dramatically change if he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies. I think people would perhaps shift their thinking a little bit and decide, well, maybe he's tougher than we think he is today. And there wouldn't be as much passion to make sure that he doesn't serve another four years -- WALLACE: But assuming he continues on the path that he going on and we don't have that rally around the flag (ph) -- PALIN: Then he's not going to win. (End of excerpt) I sincerely hope we can DISCUSS this civilly and respectfully! I'm conceding that she didn't say outright that she would like to go to war with Iran or that President Obama should. However, from where I sit she DID use that as part of her suggestion as to how he could be reelected along with "really come out and do whatever he could to support Israel". She DID say, " if he did, things would dramatically change if he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies." What do you think she meant by that? Let's discuss it and PLEASE let's be "nice"! Annie : http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/07/transcript-fox-news-sunday-interview-sarah-palin/
6 responses
@spalladino (17921)
• United States
11 Feb 10
Well, it looks like she's saying that Obama should toughen up and start a war with Iran...but then again, it's hard to understand exactly what she's saying because AS USUAL she's talking in circles. So, now my question is...why is it that some folks are so fond of someone who you can't really make heads or tails out of what she says?
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27279)
• United States
11 Feb 10
I think they're so fond of her because the way she talks it's so easy to spin it into whatever they want to think she meant. They can actually sometimes dissect it to a point where it really DOES seem that she didn't really say - or mean - what seemed to be obviously what she'd said or meant. Oh, $hit! Trying to explain Sarah's way of talking in circles has ME feeling like I'M going in circles...lol! Annie
• United States
11 Feb 10
congrats annie...you can now talk in circles...you now have the required skills to now run for public office.....go forth and start your campaign. LOL.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27279)
• United States
11 Feb 10
Only if I have you guys to help run my campaign! Annie
• United States
11 Feb 10
Ok...here is my take on what she said....you don't have to agree with me. heck I don't agree with her...but I think this is what she was saying was this. Enless Obama takes a tougher stance on foreign relations, especially Iran, than he won't get re-elected. Palin feels that obama looks weak on his handling of the war on terror and with dealing with Iran and other countries that hate us and pose a threat to us like Pakistan...so unless he does something to change that view of him and make himself look stronger in those areas than she feels he won't get re-elected. I do think she is saying she would like Obama to come out in stronger support of Israel. She thinks he has a better change of getting elected if he "plays the war card". Basically she is saying he needs to take a tough stance against Iran and the war on terrorist and stick to it. He needs to be become a force to reckon with internationally. She does not feel Obama is respected or feared enough by countries like Iran, Pakistan or other countries that don't like us or pose a threat to us. Ok that is what Palin thinks. Here is what I think of what Palin thinks...she is full of you know what. The LAST thing this country needs is another war. Let the UN or another country deal with Iran. We have enough on our plate. If Obama wants to get re-elected he has got to remember one thing Bill Clinton used to say "it's the economy stupid". He HAS got to get our economy on a good road to recovery. He has GOT to find a way to get Congress to work together and get things done in a bipartisan way. He has got to find a way to cut spending and get a plan on how to get our debt under control. I know it will take longer than 3 more years to pay it off....but he needs to have a workable plan. He has got to get us OUT OF IRAQ and find a way to end the war in Afghanistan. Ya...I do think he needs to get tougher there. Think how much money we will save when we don't have two wars going on...or even one war going on. The sooner it is over the better. So yeah....he needs to do what it takes to get them completed as soon as possible.I am not talking about cutting and running....but just being really aggressive about winning this dang thing and getting it over with. We had years of Bush running rough shot over alot of countries. His "I am God", "my way or the highway" foreign policies pretty much alienated a lot of countries. Do we really need to go there again? I don't think so. Now I don't think we should be bending over backward to please other countries or let them dictate our laws, or grovel for their forgiveness....I do think we need to show more respect than Bush did to a lot of the other countries. By the end of Bush's term...heck most of our allies and "friends" did not even like us.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27279)
• United States
11 Feb 10
I'm with you - she sure is full of it! Of course, we don't want any President to be so "soft" we're put in more danger than, let's face it, we are and probably always will be to some extent. However, there's "tough and arrogant" and there's "tough and firm but rational". We've had a cowboy and like you said our image around the world suffered terribly, even after we'd had everyone on our side right after 9/11. Since we're discussing Palin here let's just say we don't want a toy poodle but we don't want a pit bull either! I also agree that Obama needs to get Congress to work together but I don't know if they ever will and I don't think he can do anything about it. They have to be willing to compromise and meet each other halfway on the issues but so far I don't see much hope of that happening. It's all politics and personal destruction these days. I used to think it was bad years ago. I was wrong! Annie
@ZephyrSun (7382)
• United States
11 Feb 10
Well I'm not a Palin expert but, if I was basing this on any other Republican I would say that starting wars are the best strategy for that party to win elections most of the time. And, as for her picking Iran, I assume that's because it's one of the most talked about countries that we have yet to "liberate".
1 person likes this
@iriscot (1290)
• United States
11 Feb 10
Annie, do you actually believe she knew what she meant by that. I doubt it very much. She was just speaking the "hawkish" line that the republicans and religious right support. As far as Obama being re-elected, I think he will be a shoo-in.
1 person likes this
@jerzgirl (8170)
• Gloucester City, New Jersey
10 Feb 10
I think she meant that whoever is president at the moment should be looking to do just that (to quote her "which I would like him to do"). She's saying that he can only get re-elected if he goes to war against Iran (and I'm assuming that if she were president, that's what she would do, although she didn't say that). She didn't suggest that Obama would "cynically play the war card" - she was saying that he SHOULD go to war in order to be re-electable.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6313)
• United States
11 Feb 10
Palin owns you. Bow to your master. Roseitis. What I think she meant? It doesn't even matter. She'll still own after.