Hillary Clinton

[FightTheFuture]

Don't worry about it! You're a team player. As soon as Hillary's elected she'll be running your grandkids through a meat grinder...for the greater good though...you you can feel good about that. 

I don`t worry. One reason I don`t worry is because Trump will go down in humiliating defeat. Clinton is much more unlikely to get us back in a war than Trump.

However, if war is warranted, my sons are both highly capable special operators and willing to do what your cowardly ass isn`t.

[onan]

I don`t worry. One reason I don`t worry is because Trump will go down in humiliating defeat. Clinton is much more unlikely to get us back in a war than Trump.

However, if war is warranted, my sons are both highly capable special operators and willing to do what your cowardly ass isn`t.

let's hope the don't have to.

[FightTheFuture]

let's hope they don't have to.

A M E N !

[SciFiAuthor]

Clinton is much more unlikely to get us back in a war than Trump.

How do you figure? She has a proven track record of being a warmonger and further seems fully ready for a confrontation with Russia.

[FightTheFuture]

How do you figure? She has a proven track record of being a warmonger and further seems fully ready for a confrontation with Russia.

Donnie loves war. HIS WORDS. You know why donnie loves war? Because all he knows of it is what he sees on the History channel. Some of us know war up close and personal. Let me tell ya; it`s horrifying. Ever see women and children blown to pieces, arms, legs, heads scattered about? I have. It changes you. Trump is a FOOL.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzi7mxUk2FM

[albrecht]

How do you figure? She has a proven track record of being a warmonger and further seems fully ready for a confrontation with Russia.

I don't think Hillary or her neo-con and billionaire friends really want an outright war with Russia because that would/could go nuclear and it is bye-bye but certainly she is "all in" for the destabilization of the regions peripheral to Russia, proxy wars, electronic war, and the continued destabilization of Middle-East, and, for whatever reason, pushing China and Russia closer together in trade and defense and forcing Europe and the USA to take in radical "refugees" (though this is more likely just a nod to Soros since that is one of his projects.)

For what her opinion is worth the more leftist candidate, Jill Stein, who didn't sell out or be Hillary's bitch from the get-go, has said Hillary might bring about WWIII the other day.

[albrecht]

http://americanlookout.com/jpb-green-candidate-jill-stein-how-much-more-evidence-does-govt-need-to-press-charges-against-hillary/

I have no thoughts on her because I've never see her in a debate or read her policy statements but she is correct on this point.

Even the Washington Post is being forced to point out the hypocrisy of the Obama government with regard to Clinton's crimes and actions.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogin/wp/2016/10/18/general-cartwright-is-paying-the-price-for-hillary-clintons-sins/

[onan]

I don't think Hillary or her neo-con and billionaire friends really want an outright war with Russia because that would/could go nuclear and it is bye-bye but certainly she is "all in" for the destabilization of the regions peripheral to Russia, proxy wars, electronic war, and the continued destabilization of Middle-East, and, for whatever reason, pushing China and Russia closer together in trade and defense and forcing Europe and the USA to take in radical "refugees" (though this is more likely just a nod to Soros since that is one of his projects.)

I'm not an expert on this, but it seems to me, Hillary wants to spend her time in country rather than in other countries. War would take away resources from what I believe are plans.

And yeah, it is hard not to claim she is a hawk. But I remember some position she was spouting about using "smart power", I think she meant using other means in conjunction to hopefully resolve issues in other countries.

[SciFiAuthor]

Donnie loves war. HIS WORDS. You know why donnie loves war? Because all he knows of it is what he sees on the History channel. Some of us know war up close and personal. Let me tell ya; it`s horrifying. Ever see women and children blown to pieces, arms, legs, heads scattered about? I have. It changes you. Trump is a FOOL.

Yeah, but Hillary has a record and is a warmonger. She has voted to send people to their deaths in what has to be history's most useless war. It's easier to defend Vietnam, it at least had an ideological purpose. Iraq had only two effects: regional destabilization and a windfall for oil infrastructure corporations. It's the same story with Libya, only it had even less benefits. Grave errors in judgment were made when we started removing middle eastern dictators from power.

Look, we all know that you like your politicians to be polished bullshit artists that watch their words and know how to snow the public. That would normally be okay. But their track record fucking sucks on both sides the last few decades and we just can't afford anymore of this. Trump is not ideal, but the Republican party failed to put anyone up there that wasn't yet another piece of cardboard shilling for god knows what special interest. If the party had been smart, it would have treated Ron Paul better when it had the chance. That was the time for reform, even if he wasn't ideal either. Instead, they just showed their ass and illustrated how much of an establishment they really were.

So came the rise of Trump. And the fact is, if Trump surrounds himself with competent people, which I see every indicator that he will, then his presidency will be fine. I'll go so far as to say that it will probably be a non-event in the face of all the apocalyptic bullshit that's been tossed out there. Case in point, he consults Henry Kissinger, which is precisely who Trump needs to be talking to if global stability is to be reestablished. Contrast that with Hillary, who publically insults Putin. I think I'll go with the guy that consults the right folks and claims to want to lower tensions instead of raising them.

Hillary Clinton, as evidenced by plenty of stuff that's coming out, is exactly who we all knew she was. A sociopathic whackjob that can't control her temper.

[SciFiAuthor]

I don't think Hillary or her neo-con and billionaire friends really want an outright war with Russia because that would/could go nuclear and it is bye-bye but certainly she is "all in" for the destabilization of the regions peripheral to Russia, proxy wars, electronic war, and the continued destabilization of Middle-East, and, for whatever reason, pushing China and Russia closer together in trade and defense and forcing Europe and the USA to take in radical "refugees" (though this is more likely just a nod to Soros since that is one of his projects.)

For what her opinion is worth the more leftist candidate, Jill Stein, who didn't sell out or be Hillary's bitch from the get-go, has said Hillary might bring about WWIII the other day.

It'll be another stupid fucking proxy war in Syria. We're sort of at that stage already thanks to Obama's disastrous foreign policy, Hillary will just continue it until an incident happens and we accidently shoot down a Russian plane or vice versa. How it goes after that just depends on whether cool heads prevail, which to be honest I have little faith in that in regard to Hillary. It will be up to Putin to back down or escalate.

[albrecht]

I'm not an expert on this, but it seems to me, Hillary wants to spend her time in country rather than in other countries. War would take away resources from what I believe are plans.

And yeah, it is hard not to claim she is a hawk. But I remember some position she was spouting about using "smart power", I think she meant using other means in conjunction to hopefully resolve issues in other countries.

I'm no expert, but I'll play one on BellGab, the thing that we have to consider also is that Presidents have, at max, 8 years in office. But there is a vast amount of people who exist at agencies such as the State Dept, CIA, etc for a whole career and there could be a 'plan' or 'consensus' or 'movement' that is larger than the President. Like stopping or steering a large ship- takes a long time to change course, especially if the crew has their own agenda. I'm not saying a total "secret government" or "deep state" like Turkey had/has but there are influential people, black budgets, large corporations, and billionaires that have influence. Especially if a President is more concerned/focused on with domestic issues and "things" can happen without direct large numbers of ground troops and they simply delegate foreign policy or wars to others to manage.

[onan]

Yeah, but Hillary has a record and is a warmonger. She has voted to send people to their deaths in what has to be history's most useless war. It's easier to defend Vietnam, it at least had an ideological purpose. Iraq had only two effects: regional destabilization and a windfall for oil infrastructure corporations. It's the same story with Libya, only it had even less benefits. Grave errors in judgment were made when we started removing middle eastern dictators from power.

Look, we all know that you like your politicians to be polished bullshit artists that watch their words and know how to snow the public. That would normally be okay. But their track record fucking sucks on both sides the last few decades and we just can't afford anymore of this. Trump is not ideal, but the Republican party failed to put anyone up there that wasn't yet another piece of cardboard shilling for god knows what special interest. If the party had been smart, it would have treated Ron Paul better when it had the chance. That was the time for reform, even if he wasn't ideal either. Instead, they just showed their ass and illustrated how much of an establishment they really were.

So came the rise of Trump. And the fact is, if Trump surrounds himself with competent people, which I see every indicator that he will, then his presidency will be fine. I'll go so far as to say that it will probably be a non-event in the face of all the apocalyptic bullshit that's been tossed out there. Case in point, he consults Henry Kissinger, which is precisely who Trump needs to be talking to if global stability is to be reestablished. Contrast that with Hillary, who publically insults Putin. I think I'll go with the guy that consults the right folks and claims to want to lower tensions instead of raising them.

Hillary Clinton, as evidenced by plenty of stuff that's coming out, is exactly who we all knew she was. A sociopathic whackjob that can't control her temper.

Lots of senators and house members voted for going into Iraq. 77 senators and 296 representatives.

I've seen little surrounding of skilled to guide him. Kasich, when offered the position of VP was told he would be in charge while Trump would be making America great.

[MV/Liberace!]

Look, we all know that you like your politicians to be polished bullshit artists that watch their words and know how to snow the public.

that's exactly it.

[onan]

that's exactly it.

I like straight forward discussions as much as the next guy, maybe more. Like it or not politics are just that, politics.

[SciFiAuthor]

Lots of senators and house members voted for going into Iraq. 77 senators and 296 representatives.

Goes to show how bought and paid for they were.

I've seen little surrounding of skilled to guide him. Kasich, when offered the position of VP was told he would be in charge while Trump would be making America great.

Supposedly. But I'd actually have been happy with that state of affairs. Kasich was one of my more preferred candidates, though ideally I was initially a Rand Paul supporter.

[MV/Liberace!]

Like it or not politics are just that, politics.

So things should stay as they are because that's how things are.  Got it.

[Jackstar]

my sons are both highly capable special operators and willing to do what your cowardly ass isn`t.

At last, now we're getting somewhere. Who do they think killed Kennedy?

[onan]

So things should stay as they are because that's how things are.  Got it.

Point taken. A bull in a china shop, no matter how entertaining, is not a good plan.

[NowhereInTime]

It'll be another stupid fucking proxy war in Syria. We're sort of at that stage already thanks to Obama's disastrous foreign policy, Hillary will just continue it until an incident happens and we accidently shoot down a Russian plane or vice versa. How it goes after that just depends on whether cool heads prevail, which to be honest I have little faith in that in regard to Hillary. It will be up to Putin to back down or escalate.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/10/19/iraqi-general-calls-on-isis-fighters-in-mosul-to-surrender.html

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/19/middleeast/mosul-isis-operation-iraq/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-china-agree-on-implementing-paris-climate-change-pact-1472896645

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33521655

So far, not looking good for "Obama's disastrous foreign policy" critique.  Back to the stacks, Dolphin.

But your pal Don's good buddy Shirtless Vlad has taken the odd step of establishing an air defense perimeter in Syria.  To combat ISIS.  Which has NO PLANES.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-air-defense-raises-stakes-of-us-confrontation-in-syria/2016/10/17/85c89220-948c-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html

If a shooting war starts, its because nobody, from Clinton to Bush on down has done enough to starve Russia.

Although there's this:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/white-house-russia-hacking-retaliate-229622

But it's not jingoistic or sexy to crush Russia's infrastructure.  Plus you can't set it to music like Fox News did during Shock & Awe bombing.

[MV/Liberace!]

A bull in a china shop, no matter how entertaining, is not a good plan.

But a fox in the hen house is?

[NowhereInTime]

Goes to show how bought and paid for they were.

Supposedly. But I'd actually have been happy with that state of affairs. Kasich was one of my more preferred candidates, though ideally I was initially a the Rand Paul supporter.

That was you?!?

[onan]

But a fox in the hen house is?

I guess we will have to wait and see.

[NowhereInTime]

But a fox in the hen house is?

Especially if its this Fox:

[Jackstar]

I guess we will have to wait and see.

Wait for what? More evidence?

[NowhereInTime]

I'm no expert,

Done.  Entire thought complete.

[Yorkshire pud]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/10/19/iraqi-general-calls-on-isis-fighters-in-mosul-to-surrender.html

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/19/middleeast/mosul-isis-operation-iraq/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-china-agree-on-implementing-paris-climate-change-pact-1472896645

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33521655

So far, not looking good for "Obama's disastrous foreign policy" critique.  Back to the stacks, Dolphin.

But your pal Don's good buddy Shirtless Vlad has taken the odd step of establishing an air defense perimeter in Syria.  To combat ISIS.  Which has NO PLANES.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-air-defense-raises-stakes-of-us-confrontation-in-syria/2016/10/17/85c89220-948c-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html

If a shooting war starts, its because nobody, from Clinton to Bush on down has done enough to starve Russia.

Although there's this:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/white-house-russia-hacking-retaliate-229622

But it's not jingoistic or sexy to crush Russia's infrastructure.  Plus you can't set it to music like Fox News did during Shock & Awe bombing.

Putin is every month of his 2017 calendar. Very swish. Trump will be inspired I'm sure.

http://mashable.com/2016/10/19/vladimir-putin-calendar/#59R70p.8Paq9

[MV/Liberace!]

Especially if its this Fox:

yeah, well, fuck that guy, too.

[SciFiAuthor]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/10/19/iraqi-general-calls-on-isis-fighters-in-mosul-to-surrender.html

Well look at what the cat hacked up! How you been man? I hope well.

So far, not looking good for "Obama's disastrous foreign policy" critique.  Back to the stacks, Dolphin.

There's creating problems and then addressing them, or there are avoiding problems from the start. Obama's policy has been the former.

But your pal Don's good buddy Shirtless Vlad has taken the odd step of establishing an air defense perimeter in Syria.  To combat ISIS.  Which has NO PLANES.

Sounds like an incident waiting to happen to me.

If a shooting war starts, its because nobody, from Clinton to Bush on down has done enough to starve Russia.

I agree with this. I'm not a Putin apologist, he's a crook. But I want the path of least death and destabilization in the world, and sometimes that means ramping down tensions with a crook. The time for starving him was when he went into Ukraine.

But it's not jingoistic or sexy to crush Russia's infrastructure.  Plus you can't set it to music like Fox News did during Shock & Awe bombing.

Yeah, I heard about that. I'm not sure how much damage it really does, or what will happen in retaliation.

[SciFiAuthor]

That was you?!?

For a little while. I jumped ship when I was comparing the candidate's hand sizes when making my decision during the primary. Rand just didn't measure up.

[NowhereInTime]

Well look at what the cat hacked up! How you been man? I hope well.

Treading water.  Hey did you write any Star Trek books for the 50th Anniversary series?

There's creating problems and then addressing them, or there are avoiding problems from the start. Obama's policy has been the former.

Obama's policy has been about nuance and consensus, not unilateralism.  This world is full of crazy and we need to settle it down.  Some things, like South China Sea, you let play out.  There's been little actual confrontation (some chest beating on the high seas) but there will be a negotiated solution there.  Iran?  Obama didn't cause their nuclear avarice.  Hell, W. named them as part of his "Axis of Evil" and promptly ignored their atomic aspirations.  'Bam pushed a coalition (including a nervous Russia and China) into the mix, squeezed them to the bargaining table, and we now have IAEA (read: CIA) inspectors on the ground gathering valuable intelligence on their actual capabilities.  Seems pretty insightful to me.
As for ISIS?  Believe the shitmongers if you want to, but ISIS' true Pappy was L. Paul Bremer and his ill-advised "de-Baathification".  Most of ISIS came from Sunni Baathists kicked to the curb.  Notice how their terror targets are always Shia Mosques and gatherings?
In any event, we've reconstituted the Iraqi army, have pushed them out of many strongholds, and are now advanc ing on Mosul with a coalition of nearly 100,000 Iraqi, Peshmurga, & US forces.  ISIS will be demoted to Al-Shabaab before the next President swears in.

Sounds like an incident waiting to happen to me.

Exactly.  Putin the Great Showman has to divert starving Russians away from their misery with histrionics.

I agree with this. I'm not a Putin apologist, he's a crook. But I want the path of least death and destabilization in the world, and sometimes that means ramping down tensions with a crook. The time for starving him was when he went into Ukraine.

I disagree.  The time to install missle defense in Poland is now.  The time to agree to supply Turkey and Ukraine with logistical support is now.  The time to backdoor exploit China via Russian servers is now.  The time to push sanctions on them is now. 
Russia will never be a democracy.  It is historically ingrained in its' DNA to be lead by a strongman.  Call him Czar, Commissar, or President there will be no change until the suffering and misery exceeds even Russian tolerances.

Yeah, I heard about that. I'm not sure how much damage it really does, or what will happen in retaliation.

The real point is that Putin needs to know he's not invincible.