HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Editorials & Other Articles (Forum) » Hillary Is the Candidate ...

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 11:47 AM

 

Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine - by Jeffrey Sachs

Someone posted this in another thread. Just thought I'd share it as it is vitally important people understand this right now. Lives are at stake.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/02/05/hillary-candidate-war-machine

There's no doubt that Hillary is the candidate of Wall Street. Even more dangerous, though, is that she is the candidate of the military-industrial complex. The idea that she is bad on the corporate issues but good on national security has it wrong. Her so-called foreign policy "experience" has been to support every war demanded by the US deep security state run by the military and the CIA.

Hillary and Bill Clinton's close relations with Wall Street helped to stoke two financial bubbles (1999-2000 and 2005-8) and the Great Recession that followed Lehman's collapse. In the 1990s they pushed financial deregulation for their campaign backers that in turn let loose the worst demons of financial manipulation, toxic assets, financial fraud, and eventually collapse. In the process they won elections and got mighty rich.

Yet Hillary's connections with the military-industrial complex are also alarming. It is often believed that the Republicans are the neocons and the Democrats act as restraints on the warmongering. This is not correct. Both parties are divided between neocon hawks and cautious realists who don't want the US in unending war. Hillary is a staunch neocon whose record of favoring American war adventures explains much of our current security danger.

Just as the last Clinton presidency set the stage for financial collapse, it also set the stage for unending war. On October 31, 1998 President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act that made it official US policy to support "regime change" in Iraq.

It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.

Thus were laid the foundations for the Iraq War in 2003.

71 replies, 4706 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 71 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine - by Jeffrey Sachs (Original post)
highoverheadspace Mar 2016 OP
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #1
Viva_La_Revolution Mar 2016 #3
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #17
highoverheadspace Mar 2016 #42
revbones Mar 2016 #56
Baobab Mar 2016 #59
PatrynXX Mar 2016 #63
Cassiopeia Mar 2016 #4
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #24
Cassiopeia Mar 2016 #29
revbones Mar 2016 #57
Hortensis Mar 2016 #64
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #7
zalinda Mar 2016 #9
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #22
zalinda Mar 2016 #36
Duval Mar 2016 #10
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #20
noiretextatique Mar 2016 #32
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #35
noiretextatique Mar 2016 #38
A Simple Game Mar 2016 #62
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #65
Katashi_itto Mar 2016 #11
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #21
Katashi_itto Mar 2016 #50
Baobab Mar 2016 #67
Wibly Mar 2016 #12
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #19
Wibly Mar 2016 #66
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #68
Wibly Apr 2016 #69
lewebley3 Apr 2016 #70
jbeck Mar 2016 #23
lewebley3 Apr 2016 #71
gordyfl Mar 2016 #26
lewebley3 Mar 2016 #27
gordyfl Mar 2016 #47
CoffeeCat Mar 2016 #55
downeastdaniel Mar 2016 #2
davidthegnome Mar 2016 #5
fbc Mar 2016 #6
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #15
I hate liars Mar 2016 #8
MaggieD Mar 2016 #13
peace13 Mar 2016 #16
MaggieD Mar 2016 #30
noiretextatique Mar 2016 #33
MaggieD Mar 2016 #34
noiretextatique Mar 2016 #37
highoverheadspace Mar 2016 #43
sublimecabbie Mar 2016 #28
revbones Mar 2016 #58
Hissyspit Mar 2016 #60
lark Mar 2016 #14
peace13 Mar 2016 #18
sublimecabbie Mar 2016 #31
lark Mar 2016 #39
sublimecabbie Mar 2016 #41
stupidicus Mar 2016 #25
lark Mar 2016 #40
stupidicus Mar 2016 #44
lark Mar 2016 #45
stupidicus Mar 2016 #46
highoverheadspace Mar 2016 #49
stupidicus Mar 2016 #51
highoverheadspace Mar 2016 #52
Doctor_J Mar 2016 #48
Kittycat Mar 2016 #53
RufusTFirefly Mar 2016 #54
Scuba Mar 2016 #61

Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 12:44 PM

1. Hillary is the peace candidate: She is for the Iran peace deal: The Clinton

 


Administrations was peaceful for the most part;

The Clinton's rejected attacking Iraq.

Sanders is for drone strikes he is not a peace candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:11 PM

3. lol!

It doesn't work when she rewrites history so its not going to work for you either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Viva_La_Revolution (Reply #3)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:35 PM

17. Hillary history has been in open for all to see she has served her country

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #17)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 04:37 PM

42. Tell that one to the thousands of people killed in Libya.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #17)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 09:45 PM

56. That seems to be the problem... nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to revbones (Reply #56)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 12:11 AM

59. We're #1 in arms sales. It takes an AR-15 (TM) to raze a village!

It takes an AR-15 to raze a village!


Which country is the largest exporter of arms in the world?

China has become the world's third largest exporter of arms after the US and Russia, according to a new report.

China overtook Germany, France and the UK in exporting weapons between 2010 and 2014, said the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_arms_industry_corporations_by_nation

China becomes the world's third largest arms exporter
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-31901493

BBC

What country produces the most weapons?

The United States produces the vast majority of firearms in this country. It's also the world's leading weapons exporter by far. America exported $336.5 million worth of firearms in 2011, according to customs data compiled by the Norwegian Initiative on Small Arms Transfers, NISAT.

America's gun industry is booming - Salon.com
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/americas_gun_industry_is_booming/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Viva_La_Revolution (Reply #3)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 11:28 AM

63. that seems to happen all the time

except my memory is rather good. gosh wish it worked on Tests ADD killed it. but certain things in my life and politics are boing I still have memories of when Reagan was president and maybe one or two when carter was. not that I Knew much about such things

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:13 PM

4. Well that's some spin.

Hillary not only voted for the IWR, but stood before the Senate and gave an impassioned speech on how she wanted her fellow Senators to join her.

Clinton has lobbied for every intervention under the Obama admin.

Hillary says she likes the Iran deal, but then derides it as not strong enough, ie not enough threat of force is implied. She wants us to stay ready for and likely to invoke war with Iran.

Hillary is anything but a peace candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cassiopeia (Reply #4)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:50 PM

24. Not spin: The Truth: Sanders people are always spreading propaganda

 



Hillary for the use of force: War was Bushes choice: Bush said so:
Under the Clintons: they didn't attack Iraq:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #24)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:06 PM

29. Hillary gave an impassioned speech on the merits

of the IWR.

That is a clear, simple, concise, fact and it is verifiable through video of the her doing it on the Senate floor.

To say otherwise is at best spin, at worst an open lie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #24)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 09:46 PM

57. Right, but she still voted for the Iraq War.

 

She also said it was time to start thinking of Iraq as a business opportunity.




For the inevitable jurors, once the alerting Hillary supporter wakes from their fainting:
The Terms of Service clearly state "But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to revbones (Reply #57)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 11:51 AM

64. I'm really shocked at Sachs and am going to

tell him so. What Sachs had to have meant was between Hillary and Sanders she would be the [reluctant] choice of the war machine.

Sachs should also admit that as president Sanders would be forced to finally involve himself in foreign policy, and with it military actions.

Obama's been "killing terrorists like swatting mosquitoes" as one military expert put it, and Obama himself marveled that since becoming president he's become "really good at killing people." Who do we imagine is going to be in charge of the swatter when he's gone? No one?

Reality is, though, the "war machine" is absolutely opposed to the election of either Democrat. For very good reason. They want and need a GOP president -- as always.

But then we all know that.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:19 PM

7. Holy Spin Batman! You just went full "War = Peace" on us!

 

Do you believe this yourself, or is this just make-belief you hope to sell in an effort to limit tomorrow's losses in the primaries?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:21 PM

9. Still smoking that stuff, I see.

Clinton didn't go into Iraq, but he paved the way for Bush to go in, legally, and Hillary voted for it.

I guess you never saw the video:



And what has happened to Libya? It is now in a civil war and under Sharia Law, with Isis having a strong foothold there. Iraq was only the start of the middle east conflict, Hillary stoked the fires under Isis and the entire region is becoming unbearable for it's people. Bernie said he MAY continue drone strikes, depending on the circumstances. Hillary looked gleeful at the thought of killing a person.

Oh, and for your information:

Washington, DC February 10, 2016 For the first time in nearly 25 years, Peace Action PAC, the political action committee of Peace Action (the largest peace group in the U.S.) has endorsed a candidate for President: Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) for the Democratic primary.

https://peaceblog.wordpress.com/2016/02/10/largest-peace-group-endorses-sanders/


Z

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zalinda (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:46 PM

22. No, but have not turned into a Sanders ideologue; which it more of problem

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #22)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:35 PM

36. Why should you worry, you live in Hillaryland,

where everything is bizarro....up is down, back is forward and right is left.

Z

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:22 PM

10. You may want to reread the OP. Just saying... eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duval (Reply #10)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:40 PM

20. I know Hillary's peace History: She also will keep the American people safe

 


Sanders has no intellect in for keeping peace: and he is for
drone strikes,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #20)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:14 PM

32. either you are woefully misinformed

or purposely lying. i think ratonal clinton supporters would agree that she is hawkish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #32)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:19 PM

35. No not misinformed: I have watched Hillary with others American's 30 years

 

Last edited Mon Mar 21, 2016, 04:53 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #35)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:55 PM

38. thanks for confirming eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #20)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 11:12 AM

62. Please don't tell us you are so uninformed as to believe Hillary is against drone strikes. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Simple Game (Reply #62)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 01:13 PM

65. Sander is for Drone strikes: A Commander in Chief needed protect the country

 



Any American President will be using drone strikes'

No Dem President wants war: no one is for war:




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:27 PM

11. Meth is a terrible drug

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Katashi_itto (Reply #11)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:41 PM

21. You are on the drug of Sanders propaganda

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #21)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 08:42 PM

50. Not even a snappy comeback. Meth is a really terrible drug.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Katashi_itto (Reply #11)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 10:34 AM

67. What about "Math" ?

Gateway to nowhere!

The Arabs invented zero.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:30 PM

12. Clinton voted to invade Iraq

Clinton, as the Senator from New York, supported the Iraq invasion.
How can you claim otherwise?
Sanders voted against the Iraq invasion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wibly (Reply #12)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:38 PM

19. Hillary voted for the use of force: Bush chose war: The Clintons made a diffferent

 



choice with Iraq than Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #19)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 04:10 AM

66. Call it whatever

Clinton supported the War in Iraq.
Sanders opposed it.
Call it any name you want, but your "use of force" is just spin for "whole-hearted support of the war in Iraq.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wibly (Reply #66)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:31 AM

68. Sanders state didnt get attacked : He is a pacifist: He.can not be trusted

 

Sanders had no choice: and his vote Didn't matter: Senator Boxer is supporting
Hillary 100%, even though she voted against use of force. Go HiLeary


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #68)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 04:28 PM

69. Sadly, an all too typical response

From the Clinton brigade.
While they, you, love to lay claim to Hillary having done so much, when all she's really done is ride the coatails of her husband and her party.
Yet you have the gall to diminish the actions of Sanders, who stood up in the face of an overwhelming herd mentality to vote against the invasion of Iraq.
Sadly, you post says a lot about the herd mentality of Clinton supporters, and nothing at all about Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wibly (Reply #69)

Sun Apr 3, 2016, 11:10 AM

70. Hillary's never ridden Bills coat tails they are a team like the Democratic party

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:47 PM

23. Please educate yourself

I really do not know where you get your information. Clinton voted for the invasion of Iraq. Bernie stood against the Iraq invasion. You are correct that Bernie said he would not end Obama's drone program but Hillary has also defended the drone strikes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jbeck (Reply #23)

Sun Apr 3, 2016, 11:19 AM

71. Hillary voted for the use of force: a power Bill and her had with Irag but

 

used differently than Bush. Bush is responsible alone he said so"
he was commander. so you need educate yourself: When Clinton
Chose force not a single American was lost. Kosovo streets are
Name after Clinton

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:55 PM

26. So Why Has Hillary Sided With the Republican War Hawks?

and not the Dems?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gordyfl (Reply #26)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:00 PM

27. Hillary has sided with Obama's peace work: and Iran peace Deal: GOP is against the Deal

 



Hillary is for peace but she will keep American safe:
I don't trust Sanders with Us people lives: He is and
ideologue, and that is dangerous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #27)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 08:16 PM

47. The Video Clearly Shows She Sided With Bush

And AGAINST the Democrats. She can't be trusted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 09:31 PM

55. Robert Kagan, the founder of the neocon movement--does not endorse "peace candidates."

Robert Kagan founded the neocon movement. He hatched the entire Middle East war plan in 1996.

He endorsed Hillary for President a few weeks ago.

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/02/25/neocon-kagan-endorses-hillary-clinton/

He could have picked any candidate. Any Republican. And he endorsed Hillary.

Why do you think that is?

Robert Kagan is the opposite of the peace movement. He is a warmonger.

When I see responses like this about Hillary, I really wonder--is it just simple ignorance of her actions and of world politics? Or is it total denial. Neither is good for our country.

Please, please educate yourself about Kagan--and his endorsement of Hillary and how Hillary selected him as one of her foreign-policy advisers. Pretty serious stuff that will affect our country, our future--your kids and your grandkids. These people are dangerous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kagan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:07 PM

2. Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine, lies don't erase.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:17 PM

5. A disturbing history, to say the least.

I'm wondering though, how they could even try to justify a new war right now? There's so much going on in terms of violence around the world, military actions, bombings and so on... we need to step it back, not speed it up.

I'm not sure where Clinton stands on Iran and North Korea... but I am hoping it isn't in favor of military action. Diplomatic and humanitarian efforts should be exhausted before we even think about going to war. The whole notion that a "preemptive" invasion of Iraq was going to somehow make us safer or prevent future attacks here was so damned ridiculous that I can't believe anyone with half a brain tried to push it. They should have at least come up with more clever lies.

I know what Clinton did then... what will she do though, if she becomes President? We can't afford another war, the world cannot afford another war. It's time for something extreme like diplomatic and humanitarian efforts in all of our so called "enemy" Nations. The notion that we cannot negotiate with them is absurd. Of course we can negotiate - you can always negotiate, until the bullets start flying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:19 PM

6. This is why I can't vote for her. It would be immoral.

 

I won't vote against her. But I will have to be a conscientious objector.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fbc (Reply #6)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:07 PM

15. GOod POint

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:21 PM

8. Here's my post on a related column, published yesterday

The militarism that Hillary has supported is too important to let slide without discussion:

[link:http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511542512|

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:36 PM

13. Please stop smearing Democrats here

 

This is a site dedicated to supporting Democrats. Please be respectful of that and find a more appropriate venue to attack Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #13)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:33 PM

16. Looking at history, decisions that were made and supported..

 

..is not smearing. It's just a fact of life. Come November people will be looking so we better investigate here while we have the chance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peace13 (Reply #16)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:06 PM

30. Yes it is smearing

 

And worse yet it is inaccurate smearing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #30)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:16 PM

33. Post a correction

if it is a smear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #33)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:17 PM

34. I would spend my entire day doing that

 

.... if I had the time. How about you all just go to an anti-Dem site if you want to smear Dems? Have some respect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #34)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:54 PM

37. provide some facts

or stop claiming what you can't prove. appeals to emotion are not facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #34)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 04:40 PM

43. I'm supporting Bernie, a real democrat. He's not a wolf in sheep clothing.

 

And in case you didn't notice, he's an FDR democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #13)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:04 PM

28. Perspective

 

Smear: damage the reputation of (someone) by false accusations; slander.
"someone was trying to smear her by faking letters"

It's not smearing and it's not attacking. PLEASE stop pretending it is so that you can feel better about your undemocratic candidate.

Ironic that you can't see the truth; Sanders is more of a "democrat" than 99% of your fellow do-no-wrongs in the Democratic Party, including Clinton.

The Democratic Party operates like a lighter version of the Republican Party, which is to say not very democratically and hungry for US intervention and war profiting.

PEACE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #13)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 09:49 PM

58. Please stop the repetitive inane posting of that "smear" line.

 

It doesn't hold water, it's juvenile, and what you're using it against is not against the terms of service for this site.

We should hold ourselves to a higher standard and if we cannot criticize our politicians when they do something wrong, we are not only not better than Republicans, but worse because we pretend we're better.



The Terms of Service clearly state "But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 01:38 AM

60. That is not accurate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 01:40 PM

14. One sided

Why is he attacking Hillary for being war like yet ignoring the entire Repug field, every one of who is more prone to getting us in a war than Clinton? Every person running for president on the R side has said they would support war against Iran, Donald said it would happen on day one. Why isn't he attacking them for the war machine tools that they are instead of her?

Yes, Bernie is by far better on this than she is. He's one of the very few people in congress to vote against the Iraq war and against the lying Patriot Act. However, Clinton is a saint on this topic compared to the Repugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lark (Reply #14)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:35 PM

18. Look carefully.

 

I'm sure there is an article about Republican war mongers. This one happens to be about Hill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lark (Reply #14)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 03:13 PM

31. Clinton is no saint

 

in regards to war related ACTIONS Hillary is a beast compared to just the TALK Republican candidates have been giving.

Words do not offend me.

Actions offend me.

Hillary is some of the best political muscle the war machine currently OWNS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sublimecabbie (Reply #31)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 04:12 PM

39. Their actions will totally offend you and millions will die.

If you think Clinton is worse than those awful war mongers, think you are taking the R's and the security of the world way too lightly. Clinton didn't cause 9/11 - a Repug did, Clinton didn't push us into Iraq with self serving lies, Bush did. Of course the D's, including her, didn't stop this rush to madness, but believed the Bushco lies. Clinton's kept us out of war with Iraq. She supported the truce with Iran, something none of the jackasses did. Seems like you are letting a personal agenda obscure the truth of how dangerous the R's are. I don't want us paying the high price in war deaths and war costs that are inevitable if the R's win the presidency and think you'd rue the day as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lark (Reply #39)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 04:27 PM

41. you've missed my point

 

if you're worried about the Republican candidates talking points, then maybe you be worried about Hillarys actual actions and building support for war, intervention, and the likes.....unless you're under the illusion that Hillary actually doesn't support war as a primary option. Her RECORD indicates otherwise. You've gotta see it.

In the end I hate both, war mongering Republicans , and war mongering Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:51 PM

25. yep, she's great at warmongering offense like her supporters are woefully unable

 

to mount a defense to it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupidicus (Reply #25)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 04:15 PM

40. What war did she cause?

Name one? BTW - I'm not one of her supporters, I voted for Bernie. I'm just not so blinded by hate that I think there's no difference between her and the R's, because there's a HUGE difference for anyone to see if they just bother to look. I've listed the ways she's better than them numerous times before, so not doing it today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lark (Reply #40)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 06:26 PM

44. blindness is blindness regardless of the cause

 

and you know where you can stick that "your comments can ONLY be born of blind hate!!!" insulting bs, no? WHo said a damn thing about her being identical to repubs? They just make shit up as they go along too in the course of putting their woefully inadequate "debating" skills on display.

and the notion that one has to be personally responsible for starting wars to be a "warmonger" is hilarious

noun
noun: warmonger; plural noun: warmongers; noun: war-monger; plural noun: war-mongers

a sovereign or political leader or activist who encourages or advocates aggression or warfare toward other nations or groups.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupidicus (Reply #44)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 06:53 PM

45. The person that originally responded said that she was a worse warmonger than the Repugs.

I was responding to that person, obviously not you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lark (Reply #45)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 07:59 PM

46. and warmongering is just ONE thing

 

which she could be as bad as if not worse than some repubs, and possibly the donald included given his povs regarding the Israeli/Palestinian conflict

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/02/02/hillary-clintons-hawkish-record/

http://hillaryisaneocon.com/

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/13/hillary-clinton-has-long-history-of-collaboration-with-gop-on-foreign-policy/

that's not even debatable

and exactly why the hell don't you "show your work", because I don't see that case --"worse warmonger than the Repugs" -- made

Yet Hillary's connections with the military-industrial complex are also alarming. It is often believed that the Republicans are the neocons and the Democrats act as restraints on the warmongering. This is not correct. Both parties are divided between neocon hawks and cautious realists who don't want the US in unending war. Hillary is a staunch neocon whose record of favoring American war adventures explains much of our current security danger.


here, but rather the same one I just did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupidicus (Reply #46)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 08:24 PM

49. How dare you use those links here!

 

Don't you realize Democratic Undergrounds secret police only allows links favorable to the mainstream media and the military industrial complex! You must be a supporter of Hitler, Putin, Trump, Hamas, China, Kim Jong and Oliver Stone! How dare you post the truth!

For that, I'm crushing your head. 1990's Kids in the hall reference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Reply #49)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 08:46 PM

51. they can be a sad lot

 

I had a post hidden and got a few weeks worth of vacation for posting a link to a democrat, pro-life site that Hillary probably frequents.

I was crushed...lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupidicus (Reply #51)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 08:55 PM

52. Indeed, on a bright note, I now know what life was like in East Germany in the 1970's.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 08:17 PM

48. And today's speech reinforced that fact

 

But denial is not a river in Egypt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 08:57 PM

53. Hillary voted for war in Iraq, because she wanted it

Every bit as GWB and Cheney. Every action she's made since then validates it. Her relationship with Kissinger cements it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 09:04 PM

54. PNAC cofounder Robert Kagan has endorsed Hillary Clinton

When it comes to neocon luminaries, Kagan's hard to top. An unrepentant interventionist, he might be what Clinton likes to call the "gold standard."

Thanks for posting, highoverheadspace!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highoverheadspace (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:39 AM

61. I believe lewebly3 and MaggieD have defended Hillary on this as well as she can be defended.

 

Congratulations lewebly3 and MaggieD on a job done as well as it can be done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread