The Truth About Hillary Clinton's Foreign Policy Views

May 16, 2016 00:19

NOTE: I know some people reading this will probably brush off this article as worthless and even maybe laugh at it, but I'm posting it anyway. I think it's appropriate for a wide range of views to be represented here, and the views outlined here are not ones that are often, if ever, expressed in this comm. I am therefore posting this for those (and ( Read more... )

foreign policy, iran, iraq, myanmar / burma, hillary clinton, libya, cuba

Leave a comment

Comments 37

sugartitty May 16 2016, 16:38:58 UTC
Lol is this article seriously trying to paint Libya as an example of successful regime change? And Obama avoided involvement in more quagmires? In what world?

Reply


evilnel May 16 2016, 17:14:05 UTC
But you see, it's much easier to paint everything she's done in incredibly broad strokes in order to justify your irrational hatred of her. Because the world is clearly made up of hawks and pacifists, and nothing in between is real. *eyeroll*

Reply

vindictaa May 16 2016, 17:15:21 UTC
irrational? lmao the nerve

Reply

evilnel May 16 2016, 17:16:57 UTC
There's a difference between critiquing a candidate and blithely ascribing malevolent motivations to everything she does. The "I hate that bitch" mentality does not make detractors look super nuanced.

Reply

vindictaa May 16 2016, 17:56:58 UTC
None of the people who regularly post in this community is part of the latter group. And no one's hatred of her is irrational.

Reply


prehnite May 16 2016, 17:40:58 UTC
George W. Bush lied about his intentions.

I was 14 years old when Congress voted on the Iraq war, and even I could see that the administration's arguments and evidence were horseshit. Considering her position and access to classified information, Clinton sure as shit should have been able to do the same. There were months of debate and outcry leading up to that vote; she had plenty of time to examine not only evidence for and against the war.

But instead of doing that with any great diligence, she instead became the only Senate Democrat to make the erroneous claim that Saddam had ties to al-Qaeda in that very same floor speech this article cites as proof of her desire for diplomacy.

If you want diplomacy, don't vote on a bill called the "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002" and act contrite and betrayed when that authorized force is used, and don't vote against a substitute amendment that would have required the Bush administration to return to Congress and ask for another war resolution if UN ( ... )

Reply

vindictaa May 16 2016, 20:03:47 UTC
Ugh, yes, thank you for this comment

Reply

sugartitty May 16 2016, 20:11:59 UTC
Applauding this entire comment

Reply

jeeelim5 May 16 2016, 21:28:16 UTC
Bless this comment (and thanks for all the links!)

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

lightframes May 17 2016, 02:51:30 UTC
I'm sorry that happened to your aunt.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

sugartitty May 16 2016, 21:18:43 UTC
Wasn't she just calling for more sanctions against in Iran in March?

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

sugartitty May 16 2016, 21:40:11 UTC
lol I went to the source too when I read the article this morning for the same reasons, and yeah, it explained a lot.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up