A Quote by Hillary Clinton

A group of national security experts, military intelligence experts, issued a very concerning statement about Senator Bernie Sanders's views on foreign policy and national security, pointing out some of the comments he has made on these issues, such as inviting Iranian troops into Syria to try to resolve the conflict there; putting them right at the doorstep of Israel.
We have a media that goes along with the government by parroting phrases intended to provoke a certain emotional response - for example, "national security." Everyone says "national security" to the point that we now must use the term "national security." But it is not national security that they're concerned with; it is state security. And that's a key distinction.
The National Security Act of 1947 - which established the National Security Council - laid the foundation for a deliberate, multitiered process, managed by the national security adviser, to bring government agencies together to debate and decide policy.
National security is a really big problem for journalists, because no journalist worth his salt wants to endanger the national security, but the law talks about anyone who endangers the security of the United States is going to go to jail. So, here you are, especially in the Pentagon. Some guy tells you something. He says that's a national security matter. Well, you're supposed to tremble and get scared and it never, almost never means the security of the national government. More likely to mean the security or the personal happiness of the guy who is telling you something.
If Israeli intelligence that has been shared with the United States - whether the National Security Agency, the C.I.A., the Defense Department, or the White House - is not safely guarded, Israel faces a major threat to its security. Cooperation with America's agencies is deeply embedded in Israel's intelligence community.
Foreign policy is about US national security, it is definitely not non-intervention. It is definitely not isolationist. That's where people want to hear what they want to hear and not listen to what Donald Trump says. It is about national security for the United States, and that's fine.
White House and State Department foreign-policy experts are overwhelmingly directed towards military and diplomatic issues, not development issues.
I think the US has the right to have its own national security policy. I think most Americans would agree with that. And therefore clarity on this issue is important and especially if we commit ourselves, explicitly and bindingly, to Israel's security.
The fact that some former national security officials challenge the policy wisdom of the order, while other national security officials - most notably those of this [Donald Trump's] administration - support it, merely demonstrates that these are policy disputes that the judiciary is both ill-equipped and constitutionally barred from arbitrating.
The 'Scowcroft Model' recognizes - and embraces - the unique but necessarily modest place the National Security Council and the national security adviser occupy in the American national security architecture.
I am deeply worried about Donald Trump on matters of national security. He doesn't know anything himself about it, and he has appointed a national security adviser, Mike Flynn, who is a pro-Russia conspiracy theorist, and he's just put Steve Bannon, a guy with connections to white supremacy and antisemitism, onto the National Security Council.
I think that Joe Biden is qualified in many respects. But I do point out that he's been wrong on many foreign policy and national security issues, which is supposed to be his strength.
I have made it a top priority for my administration to deepen cooperation with Israel across the whole spectrum of security issues - intelligence, military, technology.
We have been using foreign affairs ministries to address security issues, but this practice is outdated. It's time to assign the handling of regional security to national organizations and expert institutions.
I reserve the right to survey the national political landscape for candidates at all levels who reflect a proper understanding of our national security, economic security, and family security - the ideals of social conservation, the heart and strength of our country.
I find it a lot more concerning to me that Hillary Clinton was extremely careless in the handling of national security information, not just one or two, but thousands and thousands of pieces of national security information.
Another longstanding foreign policy flaw is the degree to which special interests dictate the way in which the "national interest" as a whole is defined and pursued.... America's important historic relationship with Israel has often led foreign policy decision-makers to defer reflexively to Israeli security assessments, and to replicate Israeli tactics, which, as the war in Lebanon last summer demonstrated, can turn out to be counter-productive.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!