Hillary Clinton reiterated her unreserved support for both a “no-fly zone” and “safe zones” in Syria during Sunday’s presidential debate — but in a partial transcript of private remarks she made at a Goldman Sachs event in 2013, she acknowledged some of the complications involved.
Her comments were included in an 80-page report prepared by the Clinton campaign listing the most politically damaging quotes from Clinton’s paid speeches, which she has refused to make public. Among the recipients of that report was Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, whose hacked emails were posted by WikiLeaks on Friday.
In her remarks to Goldman Sachs, Clinton pointed to the Syrian government’s air defense systems, and noted that destroying them would take the lives of many Syrian civilians.
“They’re getting more sophisticated thanks to Russian imports. To have a no-fly zone you have to take out all of the air defense, many of which are located in populated areas. So our missiles, even if they are standoff missiles so we’re not putting our pilots at risk—you’re going to kill a lot of Syrians,” she said. “So all of a sudden this intervention that people talk about so glibly becomes an American and NATO involvement where you take a lot of civilians.”
She also addressed how much harder it would be to intervene in Syria, compared to Libya.
“In Libya we didn’t have that problem. It’s a huge place. The air defenses were not that sophisticated and there wasn’t very—in fact, there were very few civilian casualties. That wouldn’t be the case,” she noted. “And then you add on to it a lot of the air defenses are not only in civilian population centers but near some of their chemical stockpiles. You do not want a missile hitting a chemical stockpile.”
While Clinton admitted these complications in establishing a no-fly zone, she also urged other forms of intervention. “And there is still an argument that goes on inside the administration and inside our friends at NATO and the Europeans. How do intervene—my view was you intervene as covertly as is possible for Americans to intervene. We used to be much better at this than we are now,” she said.
She also explained how in her view the civil war could have been avoided by offering concessions to the Syrian people, saying that Syrian leader “[Bashar Al-] Assad very well could have in my view bought them off with some cosmetic changes that would not have resulted in what we have seen over the now two years and the hundred thousand deaths and the destabilization that is going on” in the region.
At the Jewish United Fund Advance & Major Gifts Dinner in October 2013, she blamed Saudi Arabia for complicating efforts to arm ideologically moderate Syrian rebels — pointing to indiscriminate Saudi arming of a wide variety of groups.
“Some of us thought, perhaps, we could, with a more robust, covert action trying to vet, identify, train and arm cadres of rebels that would at least have the firepower to be able to protect themselves against both Assad and the Al-Qaeda-related jihadist groups that have, unfortunately, been attracted to Syria,” she noted. “That’s been complicated by the fact that the Saudis and others are shipping large amounts of weapons—and pretty indiscriminately—not at all targeted toward the people that we think would be the more moderate, least likely, to cause problems in the future, but this is another one of those very tough analytical problems.”
Top photo: A Syrian rescue worker surveys rubble in Aleppo, which has been under intense Syrian and Russian bombardment, on October 4
Wow, what an eye-opening and damning speech. Absolutely ludicrous for Hillary to be the next POTUS. Please vote Trump and let’s put an end to these corrupt, dishonest bastards.
Is it just me or is this a strange conversation for a candidate for the Presidency of the US to be having with a private investment bank? Does she have discussions like this with the Coca Cola people too?
Killing civilians could easily be the least of it. Starting a war with Russia should be the much bigger concern for obvious reasons.
The last paragraph on supplying arms to rebels by the Saudis…are we doing this today through the arms to the Saudis via Yemen, indirectly for the same results. And if so ….
This is the problem with “American power” We have run amok, I served in the Marines for 20 years, I saw mission creep 1st hand as the $2000 suit crowd insisted that the world needs “American leadership”. In Syria there is a legally recognized government, they have invited the Russian’s into their country to help turn back a revolt. We continue to operate in the country against International law, with no clear mission. We could have joined the Russians and worked to end the violence by all sides and has some sort of “Interim” leadership once the violence ended Bashir would leave and live on the Black Sea, the Russians would guarantee the safety of the new ruling group and they could keep their warm water port and airfield on the Med and everyone would turn on ISIS because then America would put the arm on the rich Gulf states to rebuild.
Since the “rebels” we armed and funded are ideologically identical to al Qaida and collaborate with al Qaida, and since the weapons the Saudis were shipping in were purchased from us knowing who they intended to give them to, and since the CIA set up the logistics for those Saudi weapons deliveries…
… Clinton blaming the Saudis when she shares personal responsibility is twisted.
Hillary climbed into bed with those who gave us 9/11.
Her claims about Assad being able to buy off Syrians using the false “civil war” talking point while touting our covert proxy war made up of FOREIGN militants is just pathetic. She is trying to blame Assad for inaction when her actions are the true cause of the war.
Was Assad supposed to send checks to Saudis, Egyptians, Yemenis, etc. too?
Hillary’s claim that few civilians died in Libya from our bombing ignores the direct culpability for every single death that resulted from the regime change war, the power struggle fighting after the war, the economic chaos, instability, refugees drowning, etc… all of which falls squarely on her shoulders. I think many would also be shocked by her definition of “few”.
She wants credit for her roles in all the illegal and immoral actions she was involved in for the benefit of ideologues and profiteers… and absolves herself of any blame.
There is nothing lesser about her evil.
“..and absolves herself of any blame.”
That divorce from ownership and responsibility is built in to her mental state.
Like when she says,
“So our missiles, even if they are standoff missiles so we’re not putting our pilots at risk—you’re going to kill a lot of Syrians,”
She, like the US spy agencies, both want backdoors, they want a way in, she wants a way out. Clever girl.
Thanks for excellent reporting, and thanks to wikileaks.
“How do intervene—my view was you intervene as covertly as is possible for Americans to intervene. We used to be much better at this than we are now,” she said.”
I have read some of the excellent books that chronicle the failures of covert CIA operations. It takes a conniving, lying, and utterly devious SoS (a la John Foster Dulles) working in concert with his brother, Allen, an all-too-powerful, conniving, lying, and even more devious CIA chief to wreak havoc on other countries.
I don’t get the broad impression we were ever particularly GOOD at covert action.
With our history, I would urge caution before talking, let alone thinking, about handing things off to an agency that has been lying since its inception.
Sounds easy, right? No repercussions…
It’s amazingly dangerous.
Why would Hillary Clinton choose to address Goldman Sachs with a topic that includes her concerns for the Syrian government’s air defense systems? And why would Goldman Sachs agree to underwrite the cost of resettling Syrians in the United States in keeping with Obama’s plan of increasing forced migration from Syria by 500 percent?
Could be because Goldman Sachs is so heavily invested in munitions manufacturing like cluster bombs?
It’s a damn good question, isn’t it? Why the hell would Goldman Sachs be paying for a speech like this, and what DO they hope to gain?
Looks like we found the real basket of deplorables.
So during your little “war on terror” Bashar Al-Assad and Syria were one of your primary “outsource” points for you torture regime, but the minute Al-Assad tries to put down a Western allies’ inspired armed insurrection against his government, he has to go–in the name of “America’s commitment to humanitarianism”. Immoral and laughable (in a dark humor sort of way not actually funny).
As soon as Al-Assad has as much blood on its hands as the US does in Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, I’ll starting believing Assad is in the same ballpark as US “do-gooders” looking to bring “democracy and freedom” to other places (unless the other should be so foolish as to exercise their newfound democratic power by electing people the US government does not approve of).
Doesn’t make what Al-Assad has done defensible, but the hypocrisy, irony and body count of the US notwithstanding its purported “good intentions” is equally indefensible.
Reason #528 I will not be voting for Hillary Clinton.
Keep those #s coming!
One can only assume Assad would have had to offer more than the billions of dollars the U.S. has invested in fomenting regime change in that war-torn country.
While interesting, this article is 100% consistent, from what I can tell, with what Clinton has said before (and, is consistent with reality). The vituperative – and usually factually false – comments here notwithstanding.
Oh, so then you’re confident that you can post here with a link to the direct quote from Hillary Clinton where she said something exactly like the following quote?
“you’re going to kill a lot of Syrians”–Hillary Clinton
If a no fly zone means nothing flying in the air there, why do air defense systems matter? Nothing is flying overhead.
The USA has never had any national interests in Syria. It is on the other side of the earth is Russia’s backyard. Why are we there? That debate question was never asked.
The USA is there as mercenaries for the ME oil states. Building a natural gas pipeline through Syria is apparently worth risking WW3 Russia. Why are these important questions never asked?
Because most journalists and debate moderators are tools of the CIA.
When they say “national interests,” they mean business interests. So of course the U.S. has national interests in Syria, and in fact all over the Middle East.
No,they are all tools of zion.
And the guy wasn’t a rescue worker,the white helmet,but just another Western propagandist.
In a 2014 email, Killary also admitted that (donors) Qatar and Saudi Arabia were providing “logistic support to ISIL”.
There she goes again.”
Half Sentence Hellary can’t stop lying cheating and deceiving.
She wasn’t there for Bill and she wont be there for Mainstreet!
cont…
notice where she says “…you’re going to kill a lot of Syrians,”
Do you see it?
All of a sudden she takes her hands off what she helped start.
All of a sudden she gets another divorce.
If you don’t see it, you might be off track.
Yeah, especially the people whose future fates you are designing: “collateral damage” and “cannon fodder.”
Expect the very worst, ugliest and most despicable and Killary will never disappoint.
Disgusting how dismissive she is of the civilians she ordered butchered in Libya. But then, she is disgusting.
She wants regime change in Syria (like Libya) and is willing to risk war with Russia for it.
BOTH TRUMP AND CLINTON ARE EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE
“Decision 2016: Would you rather your daughter were grabbed by her pussy or blown to bits by a Hellfire missile?”
Isn’t it ridiculous how overblown the pearl-clutching over Trump’s macho-posturing braggadocio has become? I’ve heard worse misogyny from teenagers, and it was about as believable from them as from Trump. Men who talk like that are insecure and seeking male peer approval; they’re not real threats, in my experience. This aspect of his personality is so unimportant compared to his environmental and military cluelessness and his flirtation with national racism, just as Clinton’s ‘Benghazi’ is nothing compared to her mendacity, environmental lunacy, neoconservative militarism and pathological hatred of the lower classes.
Explain your hatred of Trump,if it isn’t rooted in sexism?
You like world terror,open borders,no good jobs,and ww3 ?
Israel uber alles?
How any rational american can’t see that zionism is our mortal enemy and has US by the balls,with only Donald Trump,their golem standing between they and our complete subjugation is one for the books.
Maisie, You’re a lady after my own heart. I could not imagine a better
reply to Mr. Salzmann. Strangely, however, we’re all on the same side.
Were I to have a daughter, as long as it was a feminist missile, properly credentialed by the Saudis, Nuland, or Power, I’d have to go with the latter.
Thank you.
Actually, she really wants war with Russia, and is happy to use Syria as a primer for it.
More specifically, she and the US foreign policy establishment want to contain, constrain, neuter and, eventually, dismantle the Russian Federation. That’s been the (thoroughly-documented) goal since the collapse of the USSR.
And they’re dumb and reckless enough to think they can risk (and win) a war, if it comes to that.
Seriously. Fucking. Insane.
She’d have to be psychopathic to want war with Russia. I think egomania is her problem; she wants to take over the world and probably thinks Russia would back down in Syria. But what if they don’t?
You ruined the article by including some pro al-qaeda propaganda in the visuals.
Thanks for the insights, Zaid.