General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsListening to Hillary's speech today, where have we heard this before?
Last edited Sat Jun 13, 2015, 05:02 PM - Edit history (3)
Seem to have heard most of this address before - now, having listened to this, a dreadful feeling building for a long time is only stronger. Back to the endless twilight struggle of the Cold War, the ashes of victory in our mouths in unending wars: the Global War on Terrorism, the invasions of Iraq, the regime changes, the Code Reds, Red Lines, and sectarian holy wars of what remains of North Africa, the Gulf wars, and the Levant. Back to the optional wars that nobody really seems to understand that never end but the burning embers of which always blow back on us.
In President Hillary Clinton's America, we fight all wars at once, none ends on nearly the clean, final terms of the last "good war" America declared that FDR did not quite live to see the end of. Then came Truman, the Loyalty Oaths, and Korea . . . and without so much as a breath or a doubt, the beginning of our next long war in Vietnam.
It's in this part of her address on Roosevelt Island, and it is who Hillary really is, in her own words, and her America will become ours, if we allow it:
No other country on Earth is better positioned to thrive in the 21st century. No other country is better equipped to meet traditional threats from countries like Russia, North Korea, and Iran and to deal with the rise of new powers like China.
No other country is better prepared to meet emerging threats from cyber attacks, transnational terror networks like ISIS, and diseases that spread across oceans and continents.
As your President, Ill do whatever it takes to keep Americans safe.
And if you look over my left shoulder you can see the new World Trade Center soaring skyward.
As a Senator from New York, I dedicated myself to getting our city and state the help we needed to recover. And as a member of the Armed Services Committee, I worked to maintain the best-trained, best-equipped, strongest military, ready for todays threats and tomorrows.
And when our brave men and women come home from war or finish their service, Ill see to it that they get not just the thanks of a grateful nation, but the care and benefits theyve earned.
Ive stood up to adversaries like Putin and reinforced allies like Israel. I was in the Situation Room on the day we got bin Laden.
Who else feels in their bones that their bones are weary of unending wars and the wars to come, and this will all end badly?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)She's learned nothing from her IWR "mistake".
daleanime
(17,796 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)rosesaylavee
(12,126 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)What was that guy's name?
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)whether that war intends to screw or not.
We need to stop seeing violence as the solution of first resort.
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)I don't want a Clinton or a Bush. No more sequels that didn't work the first time.
jimlup
(7,968 posts)this is based on my wife's take on her character.
zentrum
(9,866 posts)Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)In her mind the compass looks like this and she feels it points in the proper direction
But the unfortunate reality is that the compass she is using is irreparably broken and only points one way - right
This broken compass points towards:
Privatization of public services
trickle down economics
"sensible" cuts to social services and entitlements that should be increased rather than lessened due to rising poverty and stagnant wages
War, interventions and more war
Dereegulation of banking and corporations
and so called trade deals that will help expedite all of the above goals.
I am sure she feels her moral compass is pointing in the proper direction and felt the end of welfare as we know it was a good thing, that banking deregulation that led to the end of Glass/Steagall was prudent, trade deals that have more to do with granting corporate sovereignty and special corporate rights rather than actual tariffs and trade will lead to a better world, that a commission to look at cuts to SS rather than raising the cap is all good for the country and I do not doubt that she is sincere in all these beliefs.
Unfortunately, most of these beliefs are demonstrably false, have let to the decline and poverty of the common working people while bringing wage disparity between the upper crust and the rest of us to levels unseen since the gilded age. Now from her perspective and the perspective those she socializes with whom are all benefiting greatly from such policy, such leadership and such a direction must appear wonderful and profitable, but to those of us (the 99.9% of the rest of the country, such a broken compass leading to such a state are breaking us, and we have so little left to give so that people such as her that count their fortunes in the multi-millions or billions of dollars can have even more money to put in a pile they will likely never spend. We need someone with a compass that is not broken, but rather points true to a destiny of shared prosperity in a world where peace is more common than war and those that work for a living can afford to live.
It is time to smash what's left of that broken compass of hers and restore the country to one where every citizen prospers when productivity rises and where taxes paid to maintain the country and the citizens do not come from the middle class and struggling working class people almost exclusively, but rather from those with the most that take the most while providing so little of the labor that makes all of that capital that is going almost exclusively to a lazy vampirific, non working uber-rich class, and corporations that although highly profitable pay very little or none of the taxes when they are not getting handouts instead of paying taxes at all.
At least, that is the view from down here, a place she has forgotten exists by all appearances, a place where homelessness is a possibility and paying a co-pay for needed medical procedures means not paying one's utility bill.
If only she had eyes to see below the clouds of Olympus, she may change direction and work for the majority rather than the richest among us that are all that remain in her sights at this point in her life.
That is just a thought from an impoverished former blue collar worker that worked his way out of deep poverty to join the ranks of the lower middle class only to fall back into the deepest of poverty yet again due to illnesses that no longer allow me to work, are chronic and will get worse but not better coupled with a SS disability insurance system that I pad dutifully into for forty years only to be in a position where they are trying to enable my death via extreme poverty by making me wait it out (in the hopes I die I think) before honoring our agreement now that I can't work. They have been screwing me around for four years now and it appears they will win as I will likely die homeless before their stalling is complete. (a reality that I am sure will put a smile on Pete Peterson's face if he hears about it)
That is all.....
AnAzulTexas
(108 posts)i hope that you are able to claw your way back to a relatively comfortable life
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)That I will have a roof and enough food to make it to the next month.
That sad part is, that each one of these months is a nail biter, where I am never sure that such hopes for next month will come true.
DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)i care deeply about those who are not. i've never been hungry or homeless but i did struggle -- so did my mom when she and my dad split with 3 kids to support. my grandparents never owned a home. i'm thankful every day for what i have.
i hope you see better days.
bernie is my choice.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)A summary of why I am dead set against HRC.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)The excerpt in the OP is enough to convince me I should not support her.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)More truckling to the plutocracy? And you call yourself a Democrat?
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)So no, I don't want that shit
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)I wish you all of the best. I've been a very lucky person in this life. But I too fell victim to illness, so I can empathize. And money has never been an issue, until lately. It's pretty unnerving, and I know I'll pull out of it. Not having any hope is something I can see very clearly, and there should be absolutely no room for that in a decent society.
It has helped me to see even clearer how we need to help those who can't make it. I yearn for a compassionate country like the one Bernie describes.
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)why all progressives should NOT vote for HRC...
I am indeed sorry for your predicament...many of us are just hanging on, hoping for some improvement...I think the Turd Wayers and the Repugs won't mind if all us old folks died...
hay rick
(7,669 posts)I admire Hillary for her professionalism but I think she confuses oligarchy with meritocracy and is disconnected from any real concern for the non-rich.
Rockyj
(538 posts)Hillary is a HAWK!
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Myrina
(12,296 posts)Thank you.
840high
(17,196 posts)secondwind
(16,903 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)And noticed quite a few things that felt very corporatist.
And if she is so against Citizens United, why is she taking so much money from corporations,
onecaliberal
(33,012 posts)Obama said he wanted to repeal NAFTA. Look what he's doing now. These people will never know what it's like to worry about where your next meal will come from or worry about being homeless....
marym625
(17,997 posts)Actions speak louder than words. The action is taking the money for the campaign. So, there you go!
Yeah, he'll get right on that right after he gets the TPP passed
onecaliberal
(33,012 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)onecaliberal
(33,012 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)We'll have all of du doing it soon enough!
Cleita
(75,480 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)is on Syria, Hondura, and Libya. I do not want her anywhere near a decision making capacity.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)She's done everything she can to make sure that nothing can ever get better for the desperately poor vast majority there.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)There were several things she said that were, imo, Republican talking points and language, war footing, bootstraps, and at least one more though I can not recall it. Oh wait, she used the phrase "stand our ground" in her speech. She used 9/11 as the fallback justification too.
zentrum
(9,866 posts).go to a war, any war, just to prove she, as the first woman president is "as tough and hawkish as any man".
clydefrand
(4,325 posts)political speech - what did you expec5t? You think she could give a Bernie Speech and mean it?
840high
(17,196 posts)come from the heart. He means every word.
SaranchaIsWaiting
(247 posts)I wish she didn't say all that. It wasn't necessary, imho. It's creepy.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)SaranchaIsWaiting
(247 posts)I realize every candidate has to make their choices on how to appear strong and leader like, but this says a lot more to me. Strength is too often related to aggression and all this talk about Hillary being a tough mother and all that, it only makes me think of one thing. Wars and interferences around the world.
I do feel sick.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Not a lot of sense of humility or doubt about her own actions, awareness of the possibility of unintended consequences, diplomacy or even respect for the dead. Are these the words of someone we want to trust with the U.S. nuclear arsenal?
SaranchaIsWaiting
(247 posts)DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)kill someone and then go out to dinner". this is from a female.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)It's as much a gut feeling as any factual understanding I have about her. I would almost trust her more as Commander-in-Chief if she had killed someone, or come close to being killed herself, in combat. She seems to have an underdeveloped appreciation of the gravity of that sort of mortal power. Her comment about "We came, we saw, he died", and her little laugh afterwards, is simply hideously callous and shallow. She frightens me.
Many Democrats, myself included, are going to have a very, very hard time voting for Hillary.
DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)is the nominee i will vote for her. in '04 my late husband hated bush and didn't like kerry so he didn't vote. after the election i asked a lot of people about it. many said they didn't like kerry so they voted for bush. she's still better than any republican who's running.
Paka
(2,760 posts)She scares me almost as much as the repukes. I'm glad I'm near the end if I have to see her as President. I fear for what will follow.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)CrispyQ
(36,567 posts)One is sort of a friend. She said, "You should be happy!" I asked, "Why would I be happy that the dems are putting up a candidate who appeals to republicans?" The dems have been taking the left for granted for 30 years, now, as they continue to drift to the right. There's a reason her logo has the big red arrow pointing to the right. I don't know if I can vote for her or not.
Depaysement
(1,835 posts)She needs to look tougher than Obama because foreign policy will be a main area of Republican/MSM attack. No pussy Peace Prize for her.
Let's face it. She's a woman and she has always had to be tougher than men to be accepted by the Beltway Bandits.
The scary thing is that foreign/trade policy is the bulk of the President's job. So we will be getting Hillary Hawk most of the time and "FDR" a lot less.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)Depaysement
(1,835 posts)The very claim that she doesn't have to overcompensate for the notion that women are "soft" is politically naive.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)Segami
(14,923 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)That's how the Pukes, Baggers and Haters do it...
BOO!
Reds Under the Beds!
It's all great mind control for the dillusional and paranoid.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)why bring that up? Kerry is just recovering from his broken femur and trying to broker a deal....and she mentions Iran as an enemy? And what about the Minsk agreements that are also underway and yet she considers Putin an enemy?
That's her Foreign Policy? Or, are we supposed to believe that she is just trying to appeal to the "Older Crowd" who remembers the Cold War...Fondly? I am of Hillary's Generation and I DO NOT remember it fondly. Senator Joe McCarthy (watch what you say) and "Commies Under Our Bed...Duck & Cover" and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover with his Secret Files on Everyone hauling people up to "The Hill" to interrogate them.
Sheesh.....I don't want to go back to that....we've had enough of that. We already have Militarized Police going after People of Color and Women, Riots and Protests, Reporters being Harassed both here and abroad.. and those who aren't under the pay of people like Rupert Murdoch and Wall Street Crowd buying up our Media as the newspapers fold while Indie Media struggles to survive.
We are in a terrible situation which she fails to address... She says she will put out her policy recommendations as she goes along...but, if this is her "outline"...it isn't sounding good. So far.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)They are maxed out with anti-Hillary vitriol. She will never win them over. I'm not saying whether that is bad or good. I'm just saying that is the reality.
DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)air raid shelters -- taught to get under our desk at school in case of an attack.
no more wars -- enough already.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Come unto the bandwagon, ye of little fear.
brooklynite
(95,007 posts)and you wonder why I don't see him as being competitive in a national election.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)I only wish that HRC had not been SoS when she was, and Obama had heeded his own advise better.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)been his SoS too.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Who?
PADemD
(4,482 posts)We want peace and to hear about domestic policy and what can be done for our COUNTRY, not "Homeland."
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Her quotes not enough
Nice try
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Doesn't make the first bit of sense. You "don't see him as being competitive in a national election." because someone recommends that he ignore foreign policy?
You don't see him competitive in a national election because you know the Oligarchs don't favor him. You want to go with someone that Goldman-Sachs favors. Winning is the only thing that matters, it seems.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)You do you though, brooklynite.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)is mainly about the use of force.
Why can't we let the world run itself? Why assume it needs to be led, when "world leadership" is an intrinsically brutal and right-wing concept?
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)collar schmoe...
So how do you consistently say such stupid things?
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Be afraid...pick me and I will keep you safe, and feed the MIC beast and continue the permanent war.
And will drag the Democrats along with me.
donf
(87 posts)jalan48
(13,916 posts)Response to leveymg (Original post)
ladjf This message was self-deleted by its author.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,138 posts)If Sanders and his fans are going to argue that statement, then good luck.
I hate to break it to you, but there are threats. This isn't fantasy land. Not everything is a massive conspiracy to start wars.
starroute
(12,977 posts)Because "do whatever it takes" really IS horrible. It's what led us to Abu Ghraib and Gitmo. It's a promise to throw away the moral compass and turn to the dark side.
And "keep Americans safe" isn't much better. It's the other side of "I will fight for you." It tells people to just go back to sleep and leave everything in the hands of their protectors.
And who the hell needs more of that?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)That's at least two in this thread so far.
The purpose of strawmen is to shut down discussion.
Why do people want to shut down discussion on a discussion forum?
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)To halt argument. Straw man is a non argument, position
leveymg
(36,418 posts)That's another quote from HRC that we shouldn't forget.
She stated it herself, and in so doing Hillary Clinton distanced herself from Obama and the rest of us Democrats who really, truly want to avoid doing the sort of stupid things that have disordered and inflamed the most dangerous parts of the world and brought this country to the precipice of war, again. http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/
Well, his former secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton, isnt buying it. In an interview with me earlier this week, she used her sharpest language yet to describe the "failure" that resulted from the decision to keep the U.S. on the sidelines during the first phase of the Syrian uprising.
In other words, Hillary is promising us she is going to do what Dubya was widely condemned for. In the face of failure, she's doubling-down. Do you really think that's going to keep America safe?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)that the organizing principle of ANY society must be war.
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Orwell that ends well, I guess.
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And that phrase could only ever have led to ONE thing:
That's what every war we get into for the rest of eternity is going to be like. None can ever be any more humane than that. None can ever be any less indecent than that. Nothing can ever be WORTH that.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Funny how awesome war is to these 2 frauds but that is where the money is
Their foundation is taking it from every sleaze out there
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)at any point during his presidential campaigns-never mind that nobody who still thought we were right to be in Vietnam in 19 freaking 92 was ever going to vote for a Democrat of any stripe again.
Unforgiveable. And it gave us eight years of uselessness and irrelevance under a "Democratic president".
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)and right out of next year's Republican campaign speech.
Yippee
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The very words uttered at a press conference in which not a single of the callow, cowed press corpse saw fit to ask a follow-up. And then he laughs.
Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan tried to bring it to our nation's attention. Few others, if anyone, saw fit to comment.
As for where American's entrepreneurial spirit of war came from: Poppy: Bush Sr told the FBI he was in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963. His father, Prescott Bush helped Adolf Hitler rise to power. His father, Sam Bush, was called a Merchant of Death for his work in the armaments industry during World War I.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Patriot Act
Body Scans
NSA spying
You realize none of that makes us safer but was put in place by making people fear some undefined enemy - "Terra terra terra!!!" - in order to keep us in line, not keep us safe.
Not falling for any more of that unconstitutional bs.
Martin Eden
(12,887 posts)Why?
Because her SPEECH and her ACTUAL RECORD indicate more of the military interventionism we have see since 9/11.
The invasion of Iraq which she voted for opened the gates to al Qaeda, gave rise to ISIS, and has drained our treasury.
The world is a more dangerous place and the United States of America is WEAKER because of it. We are more deeply in debt, our nation's infrastructure is falling apart, and engaging in war crimes has cost us a great deal of support as leader of the free world.
Yes, there are real threats out there -- MOSTLY OF OUR OWN MAKING.
Hillary would continue to make more.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,138 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,138 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)That must be why I don't walk around being afraid and scared all the time like I'm told to be!!
...Hmmmmm....
Are you one of those people that views a Muslim walking down the sidewalk with suspicion and fear?
moondust
(20,027 posts)national security could be a more prominent issue this election cycle. The ISIS global threat and Putin the Terrible weren't issues in 2008 or 2012. Fox and to some extent CNN will keep their viewers scared of their own shadows to make sure they rush out and vote for the most bellicose candidate available, typically the Republican.
C Moon
(12,226 posts)trying to portend what she plans on doing if she becomes commander in chiefor even giving a nod and a wink to the military-industrial complex.
But I so wish the Presidential election cycle would climb out of this "we are the great and power Oz" attitude.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)C Moon
(12,226 posts)moondust
(20,027 posts)how a woman in her position might feel the need to sound twice as tough as the boys to compensate for the archaic perception of women as the weaker sex. That may have also played into her vote for the IWR. I would hope that overcompensation is not a permanent condition that could lead to unnecessary bellicosity and militarism later on.
Martin Eden
(12,887 posts)But her actual record says otherwise.
Every indicator points to a more aggressive military policy than the current president.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)You weren't supposed to actually listen to the speech and analyze what she read. You were supposed to let the sound of her voice wash over you, be mezmerized by the flags, and groove to the music.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)War Hawk Language left over from the Cold War. How is Putin an adversary to the US? This isn't the "Communist Soviet Union" we have to deal with, anymore. That sounds like he's on a "Terrorist Watch List" and how is that a good start to a campaign?
I'm disappointed she's started out like this. She seems to be clear that her Foreign Policy will be a continuation of the same Foreign Policy which we've lived through under Bush and now Obama. Foreign Policy is very important. It's been draining resources from our economy and taxpayer dollars for too long now. She can't do all those programs she wants to do (neither could Obama fulfill his promises) when the mighty "MIC" keeps growing and demanding more and more.
And, why nix Obama/Kerry's Efforts with Iran at this crucial moment? Why would she do that? Is this a break from them in FP where she doesn't want to deal with Iran except as an Enemy?
I wait to hear more on FP from Bernie, but his emphasis on rebuilding America is more convincing to me than Hillary's platitudes, at this point in the Campaign Season.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)He is lacking in foreign experience and the manner countries interact. Also he has not shown complete attention to the ISIS situation.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)He stands firmly in the ideal that the middle eastern countries should clean up that mess themselves first and foremost with only minor assistance from us.
He's already got a plan on that. He basically sees that ISIS is a problem within the heart of Islam. It's a religious issue at it's root and that religion needs to repair itself. A Christian nation like ours taking ISIS on would NOT make that problem any easier for them or anyone for that matter.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/02/11/bernie_sanders_this_war_is_a_battle_for_the_soul_of_islam_and_it_should_be_muslim_countries_sending_troops.html
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)The information he has come away with then perhaps he should catch a few news programs. The information you have provided give me much more concern.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)"catch a few news programs"
The very thing that lies to us and fearmongers is corporate media and you're saying he should pay attention to that more?
....I think his sources are a bit better than ours.
DirtyHippyBastard
(217 posts)Citizens of the US are in more danger from christian extremists, the mentally ill, and the police in this country than we are from ISIS. Why don't we declare war on those enemies? People are dying from them daily. Here. Inside the US borders.
I think we don't because certain things are labeled terrorism by the media, and others are not. If we put just a small amount of the $ into those non-terrorism issues as we do to battle big bad scary ISIS, this country would be a much safer place, but the industrial military complex would suffer from a few billion less profit, and that might make them sad.
We are causing anti-american sentiment all over the world with our strategy of being the world's police force, IOW we are making it worse by sticking to current policies. We are creating terrorists, and then we must fight our creation. How convenient.
I agree whole heartedly that ISIS should be left to the people in that part of the world to deal with, with our assistance if asked for. Our good friends the Saudis appear very reluctant to lead in this fight that, by geography alone, effects them much more than the US; and that's a shame, since they spend 10 billion more a year than Russia on military. If they don't care to invest more in defeating ISIS, why should I (we)?
For 50 years we have been told by our leaders to be afraid of boogeymen that never materialize, and that war is the only way to defeat them. Why should I believe it now, since they have been wrong every time. Now they won't even take up a discussion about it in congress, and they don't really have to since they already have what they want: a state of perpetual unauthorized military action, at one time known as WAR.
And, you think Bernie should watch a few news programs? HA! You mean the news programs broadcast by stations that are paid to sell us an agenda of fear and propaganda, and that work daily to keep the powers that be rich and powerful. No thanks.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)The hawkish foreign policy "professionals" around Hillary have proven themselves wrong over and over again, but never seem to learn from their mistakes. A lot of people are beginning to understand that the TINA doctrine doesn't really apply, and there really are alternatives. Bernie presents an alternative, and he's been right while the neocons and hawks have been very, very wrong.
It's really very simple: fire those who have created the problems, such as ISIS. Hire someone who will do things differently.
We have an opportunity to do better, and to save ourselves a lot of grief in the next 4 to 8 years.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Created ISIS. Just name the names who needs to be fired.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)You won't like the answer one bit. But, you have to promise to respond calmly and with a reasoned, informed argument. Can you do that?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Created ISIS is not imaginable to me.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)General David Petraeus. Begin reading here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6326588
Here's a lesser-known set of facts leading to the creation of ISIS:
John Kerry was actively wooing Assad until early 2011 when the Petraeus-Clinton faction took control over MENA policy, and regime change was brought simultaneously to Syria, along with Libya and Tunisia. The project was most aggressively led on the ground by covert operators from France and Qatar, to a lesser extent involving the U.S., U.K., Saudi Arabia, UAE and Turkey in funding, coordination, propaganda, logistics and support. Ongoing programs run by CIA and State Dept. were ballooned, and there were a lot of meetings, but mostly we watched civil war unfold as third-force special forces units (mostly Qatari) led armed uprisings in Libya and Syria. In March 2011, President Obama signed a classified "finding" coordinating efforts with Qatar and several other countries to overthrow Qaddafi. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H220110330 A similar directive was signed ordering similar covert operations in Syria.
In April, 2011, Chris Stevens arrived in Eastern Libya where he took a lead role in organizing opposition militia. At the time of Stevens death on September 12, 2012, Ghadaffi had been killed the previous October after retreating to his tribal homeland in Sirte, and the Libyan army had dissolved. Opposition militia were in charge of the rest of the country and arms stocks. By that stage, there was an active pipeline set up for Islamic fighters and looted Libyan heavy arms -- along with shoulder-fired antiaircraft missiles (MANPADs) -- flowing into Syria by way of Turkey. That movement of MANPADs was first confirmed in a Times of London article published two days after the attack on the US compound in Benghazi. See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/28/1137620/-Times-of-London-Shipload-of-Looted-Missiles-From-Libya-Arrives-in-Turkey#
The death of Stevens and the spread across the region of heavy arms and Jihadist Libyan fighters armed and trained by Qataris using Saudi and Gulf money forced President Obama to reconsider the policy. CIA Director Petraeus, who was confirmed in September 2011 to succeed Leon Panetta, resisted winding down the operation. In a showdown White House meeting the following October, Petraeus was supported by Secretary of State Clinton and Defense Secretary Panetta. Obama's decision to wind down what has been referred to as "Operation Zero Footprint" came after discussions with national security advisor Tom Donilon. The rift within the Administration was first made public during Senate hearings the following February. See, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/08/us/politics/panetta-speaks-to-senate-panel-on-benghazi-attack.html?_r=0 Petraeus' ongoing affair with his biographer was exposed, and Secretary Clinton's resignation graciously accepted after the Inauguration. The rest, as they say, is history.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Or are these sources not credible enough?
ON EDIT: What are you afraid of?
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Seems pretty obvious....TRUTH. Truth has a nasty habit of cutting discussions short around here it seems.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Are you on the right board?
Depaysement
(1,835 posts)That's the real question.
Libya, Syria, Iraq. What did they all have in common?
Because they're not in offuce any more
leveymg
(36,418 posts)The latter career path is open to this guy, of whom we have seen a great deal of in DC and on network TV as a "commentator", of late. In fact, he appears to have been recently re-hired by the intelligence community.
AnAzulTexas
(108 posts)good lord. that's not really what i'm wanting to hear...
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)AnAzulTexas
(108 posts)and to get applause from people for spouting shit like that. come on people...
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Might work, until someone calls her bluff. Then, who knows how fast things can start moving in all directions at the same time. It only takes one operator unable to understand an image on a screen.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)Iran, and OBL?
and that "whatever it takes" is right from her IWR speech
but remember she's never met a war she didn't like, and pushed as hard as Al Haig did (even Reagone had to rein Haig in): a lot of glassy-eyed sobbing votaries have forced themselves to forget, but DU hasn't--and neither has the American people; the real thing is to break primary voters of the idea that she's inevitable and thus has to be voted for "to build a strong base"
stonecutter357
(12,699 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Methinks a LOT of HRC fans are/were recently Republicans. That fits closely with the DU meme these days.
stonecutter357
(12,699 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)and that progressive domestic policies will be unachievable(as the Johnson Administration started proving in the summer of '65, when LBJ started cutting funding for the Great Society to free up funds for the escalation in Vietnam), right?
You're cheering for a pledge that would make a HRC presidency right-wing and irrelevant.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Thank you.
MattSh
(3,714 posts)The bogeyman under your bed?
Job #1 - Create new enemies
Job #2 - Protect America from new enemies
Job #3 - Cut Social Budgets, give funds to MIC.
Repeat as long as there are children, mothers, poor people, middle class, students, pensioners, etc to steal money from.
stonecutter357
(12,699 posts)Martin Eden
(12,887 posts)The Iraq war Hillary voted for opened the floodgates to al Qaeda, gave rise to ISIS, and has cost America far more than the thousands dead and $trillions spent. It has seriously eroded our standing as leader of the free world, made us weaker, and the world a more dangerous place.
Her speech on Saturday included much of the same rhetoric that both she and GW Bush employed in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Based on her words and her actual record, there is every indication that POTUS HRC would continue to lead our country down that costly and ultimately self destructive path.
Yes, there are real threats out there -- MOSTLY OF OUR OWN MAKING.
HRC would continue to make more.
mooseprime
(474 posts)spot on. wish they'd focus on defending the constitution instead. which i believe i recall is in the job description.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Hillary's predecessors have made an increasing mess of it. She's shown no reason to believe she won't press on regardless.
Did she really say, "at any cost?" Well, we all know what that implies.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)Especially Rand Paul. This was made-to-order for him to add his 2 cents (not more than that)... the others will just say they will make more bombs than she will and drop them anywhere there's no trouble to start some. Nobody messes with us (cause they think we're crazy?)
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)It's a primary reason I do not support her as a candidate, and will only with great reluctance support her as a nominee.
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)"The maximum age for Army enlisted recruits is 35"
http://www.stripes.com/news/air-force/air-force-raises-enlistee-age-limit-from-27-to-39-1.290578
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)I didn't get that far in the speech.
I was already over-dosing on cliches and hypocrisy and kinda tired of the ads on YT.
I don't feel the words in this OP to my bones either. Just smells like more cliche spirit.
Some one probably had a template when they wrote this speech.
Part IV - rah rah America and keep America safe part
leveymg
(36,418 posts)mission, and it has little to do with being a Champion for the Middle Class beyond what G.H.W. Bush said about a "kinder, gentler America." I think both she and Bush, Sr. and essentially believe themselves to be muscular humanitarians in world affairs, and are quite satisfied with the rather stark inequalities that support the economic and political status quo (and the growing Military Industrial Complex and internal surveillance state) at home.
They both operate according to the same standard issue post-War Power Elites moral compass. C.W. Mills described it pretty accurately, as did Marcuse following Schumpeter. Creative Destruction of Capitalism and recirculation of elites, and all that. In other words, they think the system is self-correcting, if only the power elites are allowed to run things in their own interest, which means tearing down the bottom to build up at the top. That also means they both accept the inevitability and normalcy of Interventionism in foreign affairs, and that wars (even if the US has to start them) are necessary to maintain and rebuild what's left of the Pax Americana order. They call it peace and security. We heard that today in her speech:
No, HRC is no ordinary tired pol. She still has her mission and knows exactly where she intends to march. She's telling us up front in the hopes that they can claim we bought into the same plans once they are launched sometime after her election.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)rather than having some kind of mission of what she wants to do as President. Probably will think about the historical record too.
As for "champion of the middle class" I don't really doubt that, but, like most Democratic politicians, especially DLCers, the "middle class" means "those in the 80th-99th percentile".
Like that video I posted numerous times. In the 2007 primary she got all mad about the idea of raising the cap on social security taxes. She said it would be a "trillion dollar tax increase on the MIDDLE CLASS". It would be a tax increase on individuals making over $97,000 - to her, that was "middle class".
But Obama was pretty much just as bad. He wanted to keep most of the Bush tax cuts, because he didn't want to increase taxes on the middle class. And by middle class, he meant, just like Romney, "couples making less than $250,000 a year or individuals making less than $200,000".
Every time I hear a politician talk about the "middle class". I just think it is "trickle down lite."
It's more filling and it tastes terrible.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)as to why that rings so hollow to so many who really are. Then, there are the aspirational references to the Patrician Class worthies, the Roosevelts, and her perspective drifts in that direction.
Wish she would keep an identity long enough to deliver a message that doesn't contradict itself.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)basically they seem to think "If you are not on the Forbes 400, then you are not rich". And when you hang around with other people with 6 figure salaries than it just seems normal to you. My brother and sister live in fancy houses, but they are poorer, or at least no richer, than most of the people they know.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)consume unusually large amounts of alcohol and drugs, keep irregular hours and rarely have real jobs, and don't much care what the rest of us think of them.
Otherwise, they are normal among themselves but, as has been observed, are different from you and me. Both groups should be abolished in a healthy society.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Dear World "Resistance is futile" prepare for the invasion.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)We needed to hear ideas, if not specific solutions, that address the current "money trumps peace" worldview.
At least the rhetoric made clear what the next eight years would continue. The problems the nation faces demand a new vision.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Had you not done so, I would have let this speech slide. All in the name of good will. Glad I didn't.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)for all the pinpoint accuracy of this OP on military issues/foreign policy, it doesn't even begin to question what kind of America it will be when corporations and Wall St. get further emboldened to do take risks with our money, increase surveillance, and blah blah whatever else crap they will do when their leash is extended.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Thanks.
Caretha
(2,737 posts)an ally.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Pauldg47
(640 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)Kablooie
(18,648 posts)I think I'm going to pass.
I think I may just have to vote against her no matter who's running.
I am sick and tired of them trying to keep us running scared all the time.
Until there is a specific, concrete threat to our life here in the states, I'll vote against anyone who tries to keep me terrified of everyone else in the world.
marble falls
(57,537 posts)leave me cold. Giuliani politicizing that event has made me sensitive about it.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)dynastic politics. Isn't it self-evident that Ms. Clinton will do nothing to change the direction in which this country is headed? What has she ever done to make any dispassionate observer think otherwise?
Gloria
(17,663 posts)Not that we haven't started some on our own.
But, Obama tried to tweak it a bit, relying on coalitions and training, etc. and we're messing with Iraq again....ISIS is really awful and I heard a report that they are making moves to sort of instigate attacks which Israel then pins on Hamas...the Hamas government is really concerned about this.
I can imagine ISIS taking over from Hamas and what a mess that will create..
But, do we go to war then?
No easy answers to this. It's an endless cycle.
And what would Bernie do if that happens? Seems like all the nice rhetoric has to be tossed once someone enters the White House...ie, Obama. The reality sets in and the path to conflict just opens up...
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)She should KNOW the history.
We started planning for post war peace before the Germans were defeated.
There are NO plans for cutting back on the war machine.
As Kucinich said, "Yet the defense budget grows with more money for weapons systems to fight a cold war which ended, weapon systems in search of new enemies to create new wars. This has nothing to do with fighting terror. This has everything to do with fueling a military industrial machine with the treasure of our nation, risking the future of our nation, risking democracy itself with the militarization of thought which follows the militarization of the budget."
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)a mindset that is not conducive to real peace but rather to eternal war.
juajen
(8,515 posts)I believe that this attempt to destroy the dems by encouraging infighting, is despicable, and that Bernie
nor Hillary would approve. I believe we have increasing numbers of agitators. Watch what you say on here, please. "Divide and Conquor" is as old as the hills because it works. Please don't let them hit our stupid buttons.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And really, she didn't need to mention foreign policy at all-everyone already knows she's an all-out hawk. What she should have done was to make the case that she's also capable of NOT being a militarist, or at least not being one all the time.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)but I'm a scaredy cat.
ISIS wants all out war so that the world will end like in prophecy;
does our government want the end to come too?
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)It sure does sound like she channeling George W. Bush.
delrem
(9,688 posts)DhhD
(4,695 posts)compensation from the same source; Fascist. Clinton's message on June 13, 2015: You may Play Warring if you Pay Foundationing in a Hillary Clinton Administration with the American people as the pieces to be used and manipulated.
Hillary made a speech; did all the talking. When do the questions start? Here is one; how many veterans should we expect to make it back home? How are the wealthy going to pay for a Clinton's War?
DhhD
(4,695 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)...as they destroy another people, take their land, kill their children, destroy their crops and propose to annex what little they have left.
Does Hillary Clinton recognize apartheid Israel, or does she want to recognize human rights everywhere?
That's her choice of course, but how can she honestly stand gor han rights when a a supposed democratic ally acts like a rogue state?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,719 posts)eom
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Her speech makes boots on the ground sound like delicate pastries at a garden tea. Just fun, light fare. She's inviting us to try some off the tray. Bon appetit.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)I am fed up to death with this endless war crap.
We are not the world's police force.
The military is taking up too much of our budget.
Let countries in the region take up arms against forces there.
And don't tell me that war protects our freedoms, because it does not. It only protects corporations.
Thanks for telling us that you are an unadulterated war hawk Mrs. Clinton. At least you are honest.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)Or there about.
CrispyQ
(36,567 posts)Wasn't there a time when war profiteering was against the law? Now it's the norm. I did not hear the speech, but the text you provided was enough.
"...transnational terror networks like ISIS..."
Which we helped create.
The system isn't broken. The system is fixed.
CrispyQ
(36,567 posts)I think I just heard a giant deposit into her campaign fund.
DrBulldog
(841 posts)... "After listening to Bernie, I can't now believe Hillary Clinton is the leading Democratic candidate for President".
Right on. Put them side-by-side, people, and all of a sudden you realize Hillary is a joke and Bernie IS FOR REAL.
mike_c
(36,281 posts)Same as it ever was.
GoneOffShore
(17,346 posts)I'm struck with the same feelings of dread that I experienced when I realized how far to the right Bill had pushed the Democratic Party.
And Steve Earle's song Christmas Time in Washington, with a slightly different lens reflects those feelings.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)such a familiar litany of what they think will sell.....to the 'average' american voter...
Puha Ekapi
(594 posts)...she sounds like George Bush.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)After reading that excerpt of her speech I have to say that she has made a better argument for republican foreign policy than any of their candidates have been able to do so far.
So my suggestion is that she quit pretending to be a Democrat and just get in the car with the rest of the clowns. She'll be happier once she's come to terms with who she really is and the Democratic party will be happier that we can unite behind a true Democrat with this fake out of the way.
Besides, once she says she is a republican, Benghazi - forgotten! Email gate - history! Shady financial dealings at the Clinton foundation - never happened! Fox, CNN, they'll all love her.
And most important to her, her chances of being elected will be at least as good as if she remained a Democrat.