Perry's Spokesperson Victoria Coates on Foreign Policy, Part 1

[shcart011]

This woman really is weak on Foreign Policy. You can see from her response that she does not have a solid philosphy on when the U.S. should go to war. She quibbles by saying, "Well, it's a case by case basis." Of course there's no hard-fast rule, but one needs to have a clear strategic vision spelled out, especially if you're the chief foreign policy advisor to the (aspiring) U.S. president.

[firestrings272]

So bottom line, any country that doesn't want to be invaded needs to get nukes.

[janhelfeld]

@firestrings272 Exactly.

[qtutoringhelps]

She does a pretty good job of defending her points.

[restoresoundmoney]

No proof that bin Laden had anything to do w/9/11--even the FBI tells us so--so on what basis did we "know" that bin Laden was behind 9/11? And when the Taliban asked for that evidence, the "good people" in the US govt gave them the middle finger & here we are. Pathetic. Questions based on unproven assertions will always get you faulty answers. This woman is a pathetic nitwit who has not questioned a thing w/regard to the basis for the most aggressive assault on life & liberty in history.

[jryan1971]

So basically he'll go to war whenever he damn well pleases . . .

[RonDukeSilverSwanson]

The "principle" behind their foreign policy is looking back at how successful it was. Fantastic recipe for us constantly getting screwed.

[RonDukeSilverSwanson]

From 5:22 to 5:41 is the dumbest chain of statements I have heard in a long time.

[DestroyerX61]

WHEN IS PART 2 ?!

[canisdormit]

Hmm, and here I always thought we went to war when congress voted to go to war.

[janhelfeld]

@canisdormit  good point.

[Mastinox803]

What principle does the American citizen use when being allowed to legally exercise deadly force on another? Does our society justify deadly force when another man threatens your economic interest? How about if he/she harbors another that committed a crime against you? If a neighbor was developing a RPG, would a court of law excuse your killing of him? You would go to jail if you committed use of deadly force for any of these reasons.Amazing how a sovereign nation lacks these basic rights.

[canisdormit]

@Mastinox803 actually, in some states, if someone "threatens your economic interest" you can use deadly force against them. Ie, If they rob you or steal your property or monies.

[sng1977]

thank you Jan

[banemaler]

Jan, thank you for demonstrating effective use of the Socratic method. I have enjoyed your films for years.

[XulChris]

Summary:

Jan: "What is your policy to determine if we go to war?"

Coates: "I wish we knew our policy, but we simply don't know."

[watcher8o]

Hillary Clinton wannabe.

[CurtHowland]

Not PERPETUATED, Perpetrated! Argh!



[gold95]

She is an idiot.  At 3:45 minute she says that Afghanistan did NOT give the US intelligence on terrorists. Well, then how the hell would she explain how we KNEW they were there and how would she explain how we catch anyone there? Obviously the US is getting information in Afghanistan..

[BettyFordGalaxy]

Threats, fear, terror, attacks, invasions, fear, kill, keep shopping.

[egervari]

While she definitely has contradictions, I think she did a pretty good job compared to a lot of others being interviewed. She at least tried to establish distinctions between Afghanistan and Pakistan in a way I think a lot of people would think is somewhat consistent, even though I disagree with her conclusions.

She had a priceless facial expression though once you got her in the first contradiction. That was great ;)

Can't wait to see part 2 Jan ;)

[MrLongshotlouie]

Translation: "We don' need no stinkin' principles...."

[saturnined]

Thanks Jan! Now I see how it works! If I understood her right, after a president "carefully assesses each situation in a larger context, exercises judgement and leadership", who knows what principle they may use to determine policy? You need a crystal ball! [She left out the part about Congressional Declaration of War or did I just miss it?]

And then this: Now if a country has a nuclear weapon, that's different, ya know. Ya have ta think twice then. [smiley face]

[Killedkennyagain]

2:00 "The Talliban harbored the 'perpetuators' of the 9/11 attacks." (emphasis mine) Perhaps she meant perpetrators, 2:42, guess not.

[necrom666]

Jan is ok to watch but a bit too much repeating and doesn't move the discussion along.

[Killedkennyagain]

@necrom666 If the interviewees would actually answer his questions, he would move along in discussion.

[mikrobspen]

@necrom666

Most reporters are quick to "play along" & let the interviewee off the hook. Jan shows their lack of consistency by making them squirm.

[janhelfeld]

@necrom666 wait until you see part 2- the end game

[JartaMan]

@janhelfeld I would like to see that... The lady wasn't getting the questions... "I wasn't commander in chief then"

DUH UH!!!

The principle is what you are being asked....

These people are really... dim wits...

[treisseis]

@necrom666

I think the reason the conversation doesn't move along is because the interviewee never aswers the question asked.

[lastpatriot4America]

Notice how perry and romney have spokespeople ? That is because they are stupid. Govenors can be stupid it is like a puppy. But presidents can not be stupid. This whore is telling you that the president can start wars. That is why they just passed that bill night before last. The terrorists Bush,Chenney, Rumsfeld, Bush Sr. etc.

[FatLibertarianInOkc]

Jan, you should put the full URL to your video download page on your site so people can buy more. Put it in the description area with the full url

[FatLibertarianInOkc]

lol @ it's a case by case basis. Which means anything, anywhere and for any reason.