Rudy Giuliani supports the President on Iraq, wants to think about Iran

Considering his claim to fame is his response to the 9/11 attack on New York City, Rudy Giuliani's official site has remarkably no information on his views on foreign policy, the war on terrorism or the war in Iraq. You can read short remarks about his record fighting crime, cutting taxes, fiscal responsibility, welfare reform, education, quality of life and protecting children, but nothing on his views of the most pressing issue of the day. Hopefully, its just a new site that will expand quickly.

Fortunately (via the independent GiulianiBlog), He gave an interview to Sean Hannity about his presidential candidacy.

HANNITY: Let me ask about Iraq. You've generally been very supportive of the president and the Iraq war. Is there anything you would have done differently? Do you think there's been any mistakes made?

GIULIANI: .... But here's the reality of it: We're at war. And we're at war because they're at war with us. I mean, sometimes, when you listen to these debates in Congress, and you listen to the politicians debating, you sort of get the impression that they think we're in control of whether we're at war or not.

It doesn't matter what we think. They're at war with us. They want to come here and kill us. And they did on September 11, and they did a long time before September 11. Way back in 1993, they came to this city and killed people.

Got that? They're at war with us. Who are they? Obviously he's not talking about the Iraqis here. Either he's refering to the entire Muslim world or some subset of them, but he's deliberately vague.

GIULIANI: So we've got to put Iraq in the context of a much broader picture than just Iraq. And getting Iraq correctly, in other words, getting stability there is real important. And I support what the president asked for support to do and what General Petraeus has asked for support to do, not because there's any guarantee it's going to work. There's never any guarantee at war.

But if we can come out with a correct solution or a better solution in Iraq, it's going to make the whole War on Terror go better. We got to get beyond it. We've got to get beyond Iraq.

HANNITY: In essence, have people forgotten?

Have people forgotten what? Nobody's called for a withdrawal from Afghanistan or an end to the fight against Al Qaeda. Is he asking whether we've forgotten that Iraq attacked the WTC?

GIULIANI: It's natural. I mean, you have a terrible attack like September 11, 2001. Right in the aftermath of it, there's tremendous unity. We understand that we have to be on offense against terrorists, that we have to make it bipartisan, that it isn't about being a Democrat or a Republican. It's about being an American.

Now you get further away, and that lesson isn't as vivid. And all wars have that happen. This is a difficult thing to do, but we've got to start getting beyond Iraq.

We've got to be thinking about Iran. We have to think about Syria. We have to be thinking about Pakistan and Afghanistan and making sure that the transition in Afghanistan goes correctly. We have to be ready for the fact that, whatever happens in Iraq, success or failure -- success will help us in the War on Terror. Failure will hurt us. But the war is still going to go on. They're still going to want to come here and kill us.

Straight out of the Bush/Cheney playbook. If you don't follow me THEY WILL KILL YOU. And now they include Iran and Syria maybe even Pakistan! Considering all the debate over bombing Iran these days, shouldn't he be clearer about what he means when he says we should be "thinking about Iran". Everyone's already thinking about Iran. They're wondering if we're about to open up a third war.

HANNITY: If you're president, and the Baker Commission recommends sitting down with Ahmadinejad and then Syria, would you take that recommendation? Would you sit down with them like that?

GIULIANI: I thought one of the mistakes of that recommendation is you almost can't put it up front. The minute you put it up front, you give them all the leverage and you take all the leverage away from us. That recommendation would have been better delivered quietly, secretly.

And then you -- then, through back channels, you find out. Can I achieve something with Ahmadinejad? Can I achieve something with Syria? Right now, it doesn't look that way.

The better thing to do in Iran is to put pressure on them and to let them know that we will not accept their being a nuclear power. The nightmare of the Cold War was nuclear weapons in the hands of an irrational person. I don't want to live through that nightmare.

Got that? Diplomacy only gives your opponent an unfair advantage. So a Giuliani presidency would look pretty much like the Bush presidency in terms of foreign policy. More competent, we hope, but ideologically identical.