Clinton outlines plan to combat Islamic State

“This is no time to be scoring political points. The entire world must be part of this fight, but we must lead it”.

When asked “Is the United States at war with radical Islamic terrorism?”, 60 percent of likely USA voters agreed; 24 percent said the nation is not at war with the faction while 16 percent are undecided. She herself opposed that surge.

Mrs Clinton emphasised the importance of what she has long called “smart power” the co-ordinated deployment of all of America’s levers of influence – “military and diplomacy, development and economic and cultural influence, technology and maybe most importantly our values” in a moral and military fight against IS.

“This is their fight, and they need to act like it”, she said.

“The obsession in a few quarters with a clash of civilisation, or repeating the specific words radical Islamic terrorism isn’t just a distraction, it gives these criminals, these murderers more standing than they deserve”.

Clinton spoke less than a week after a shooting and bombing attack in Paris killed 129 people in Paris and wounded hundreds more. “It would be a cruel irony indeed if ISIS can force families from their homes and then also prevent them from ever finding new ones”.

Instead, Hillary referred repeatedly to “radical jihadism” as the enemy we must defeat.

As for Russian Federation, it has “an important role to play”. But it’s plain she’d have non-US forces do the heavy lifting in many of these areas.

Indicating support for arming Sunni and Kurdish fighters, Clinton said that “Baghdad needs to accept, even embrace, arming Sunni and Kurdish forces in the war against ISIS”.

Hillary Clinton delivered a speech today to the Council on Foreign Relations in NY. Bernie Sanders, an independent seeking the Democratic nomination.

Clinton praised Obama in February, saying that “a lot of the right moves are being made”.

“It cannot be contained; it must be defeated”, she recently said.

“We certainly need more than 50 specials ops and we need the ability to really make a difference on the ground”.

“The United States must work with Europe to dramatically and immediately improve intelligence sharing and counter-terrorism coordination”, she said.

She took a position that clearly set her clearly in a more “hawkish”, than President Barack Obama. Again, Hillary’s stance put her in lockstep with Obama.

“After making clear that the heart of the crisis is the conflict between Sunni and Shia adherents of Islam and the loss of territory in which Sunni can feel they have a voice, Clinton states that…” we need to lay the foundation for a second Sunni awakening.

One senses that, if Clinton had not paid such a high political price for her support of the Iraq War in 2003, she might be sympathetic to such arguments. “I think it’s improper to turn our back on those people now”, he said. “That is just not who we are”.

The older the voter, the more likely he or she is to disagree with the president’s assessment of what ISIS stands for.

Yet in the same speech she announced her “plan” to “defeat ISIS”.

Further complicating Clinton’s task is the original foreign policy wedge between her and Obama: Iraq.

Then-New York senator Clinton in 2002 supported George W. Bush’s push for war. Other Democratic nominees have been hesitant to stray from what President Obama is already doing in Syria.

“I think this is a no-brainer”, said Sen.

When it came to actually fighting IS militants on the ground, Clinton’s prescriptions were familiar, echoing the recommendations of strategists testifying before Congress every week.

“This is a time for American leadership”, Clinton concluded.

The United States and its allies have been conducting airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq and Syria since previous year.