Hilary Clinton's foreign policy is already terrifying

[beetcoin]

this is my biggest knock on her.. and the more she shows that she intends to enforce american influence around the world, the better she makes rand paul look to young people.

The Iraq War sank Hillary Clinton when she ran for president in 2008. The former first lady and then-US Senator's refusal to call her vote authorizing the invasion a mistake made her seem just enough like a George W. Bush clone to alienate liberal Democrats and hand some guy named Barack Obama their party’s nomination. But she doesn't seem to have taken the rejection to heart, and may have actually become even more prone to saber-rattling since.

In a recent interview with the The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, the former Secretary of State talked Syria, Israel, Iraq, and the Obama Doctrine—if that’s really what we’re calling it now. In addition to all but admitting she is ready to run for the most powerful office on planet Earth two years from now, Clinton sounded a nostalgic tone for the bellicose American rhetoric of the Cold War, defended Israel's latest brutal assault on Gaza, and knocked Obama for not meddling in foreign conflicts more often.

“Great nations need organizing principles, and 'Don’t do stupid stuff' is not an organizing principle,” Clinton said, offering her most aggressive criticism yet of Obama’s famously (some would say toxically) "pragmatic" approach to the world. “You know, we did a good job in containing the Soviet Union, but we made a lot of mistakes, we supported really nasty guys, we did some things that we are not particularly proud of, from Latin America to Southeast Asia, but we did have a kind of overarching framework about what we were trying to do that did lead to the defeat of the Soviet Union and the collapse of Communism. That was our objective. We achieved it."
The Iraq War sank Hillary Clinton when she ran for president in 2008. The former first lady and then-US Senator's refusal to call her vote authorizing the invasion a mistake made her seem just enough like a George W. Bush clone to alienate liberal Democrats and hand some guy named Barack Obama their party’s nomination. But she doesn't seem to have taken the rejection to heart, and may have actually become even more prone to saber-rattling since.

In a recent interview with the The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, the former Secretary of State talked Syria, Israel, Iraq, and the Obama Doctrine—if that’s really what we’re calling it now. In addition to all but admitting she is ready to run for the most powerful office on planet Earth two years from now, Clinton sounded a nostalgic tone for the bellicose American rhetoric of the Cold War, defended Israel's latest brutal assault on Gaza, and knocked Obama for not meddling in foreign conflicts more often.

“Great nations need organizing principles, and 'Don’t do stupid stuff' is not an organizing principle,” Clinton said, offering her most aggressive criticism yet of Obama’s famously (some would say toxically) "pragmatic" approach to the world. “You know, we did a good job in containing the Soviet Union, but we made a lot of mistakes, we supported really nasty guys, we did some things that we are not particularly proud of, from Latin America to Southeast Asia, but we did have a kind of overarching framework about what we were trying to do that did lead to the defeat of the Soviet Union and the collapse of Communism. That was our objective. We achieved it."

http://www.vice.com/read/hillary-clintons-foreign-policy-is-already-terrifying-812

[1714729674]

1714729674

[1714729674]

1714729674

[1714729674]

1714729674

[1714729674]

1714729674

[TaunSew]

Didn't Ron Paul essentially win the Caucasus but they ignored the results and threw the election?

Rand Paul would never be allowed to represent the Republican Party in a Presidential election.

[boraf]

We all know politicians are liars. Why is this surprising anyone?

[bryant.coleman]

When Hillary is elected to the office in 2016, she will make Obama look like an angel in comparison. Hillary is the most war crazy politician who is currently active in the American politics. Her role in Kosovo, Bosnia.etc are examples. An ideal candidate to trigger a WW3.

[beetcoin]

When Hillary is elected to the office in 2016, she will make Obama look like an angel in comparison. Hillary is the most war crazy politician who is currently active in the American politics. Her role in Kosovo, Bosnia.etc are examples. An ideal candidate to trigger a WW3.

if john mccain won in 2008, he would have given her a run for her money. that man has been wrong about so many things in terms of warfare/foreign policy, and he still markets himself as some sort of expert.

[Mobius]

I think that Clinton's handling of the Benghazi situation will prevent her from ever getting elected president. She obviously f'ed up and I doubt that the GOP is ever going to let this go.

[freedomno1]

When Hillary is elected to the office in 2016, she will make Obama look like an angel in comparison. Hillary is the most war crazy politician who is currently active in the American politics. Her role in Kosovo, Bosnia.etc are examples. An ideal candidate to trigger a WW3.

As long as we don't see a re-emergence of Sarah Palin, but honestly if Hillary is on the ballot
I hope that the other candidate is someone who can hold their on against her.
Not a big fan of Hillary Clinton for president maybe bring back Al Gore over Hillary since his environment victories might be a good campaign policy.

[bryant.coleman]

I hope that the other candidate is someone who can hold their on against her.

Who that will be? Rand Paul, Huckabee, Bush, Chris Christie, Ryan, Cruz are all probable... And with the exception of Rand Paul, all of them are crooks. But still, I'd prefer them over Hillary.

[Lethn]

I hope that the other candidate is someone who can hold their on against her.

Who that will be? Rand Paul, Huckabee, Bush, Chris Christie, Ryan, Cruz are all probable... And with the exception of Rand Paul, all of them are crooks. But still, I'd prefer them over Hillary.

That's like I saying you'd prefer being shot in the face over being shot in the balls, the kind of logic voters sometimes use to vote for stupid candidates amazes me and is pretty self-defeating and shows just how well the people in power have your lives managed.

[cryptasm]

Think we do need more women in politics though I'm not sure Hilary fits the bill for President.

Imagine she would be a warmonger like her husband

[Dogtanian]

What's the difference? They're all the same and will all just want to create wars. This is their entire business plan.

When Hillary is elected to the office in 2016, she will make Obama look like an angel in comparison. Hillary is the most war crazy politician who is currently active in the American politics. Her role in Kosovo, Bosnia.etc are examples. An ideal candidate to trigger a WW3.

Agreed with this. The sad thing is I think she's going to get elected. Rand Paul doesn't have a chance but I don't think he's be much different either.

[Ron~Popeil]

The democrats did a great job making themselves look like the peace doves while the republicans were the warmongers. If you look at their actual track records they are as much if not more war mongering than the republicans. Of course the media fails to point this out and properly vet one side. The only candidate that I think would end all the interventions would be Paul.

[Chef Ramsay]

Agreed with this. The sad thing is I think she's going to get elected. Rand Paul doesn't have a chance but I don't think he's be much different either.

Well, if you've been checking out the polling her numbers have only come down ~10 points over the last year on the heels of her comments of being broke and the yet to be fully investigated Benghazi. Rand believes himself uniquely positioned to be able to take her down as he has some pretty damning critiques of her on the Senate Foreign Relations Cmte's task force last year. Rand is doing what it takes to win and that is building a machined coalition in all the the key states while lining up big donors to either be on his side or not to be actively against him.

Saying how Rand wouldn't be much different shows you either haven't payed any attention at all to his Senate record or are a doctrinaire anarchist that sees the good as the enemy of the perfect. In every area Rand would be superb to Hillary and every other candidate. The issues are too numerous for me to list on short time.

[bryant.coleman]

Saying how Rand wouldn't be much different shows you either haven't payed any attention at all to his Senate record or are a doctrinaire anarchist that sees the good as the enemy of the perfect. In every area Rand would be superb to Hillary and every other candidate. The issues are too numerous for me to list on short time.

I'd celebrate for weeks if Rand Paul is elected as POTUS in 2016. But seriously, right now it seems almost impossible. He has near-zero support among the minorities (Blacks / Latinos / Asians), and his support among the female voters is very low. Also, the religious nuts are not too much excited about him and they might prefer Huckabee, Cruz or Bush.

[DavidHume]

Hilary doesn't seem to understand the ramification of having US embassy getting attacked and not able to respond in a timely manner.

This will just encourage more attack on American on foreign soil.

[chopstick]

Hillary Clinton is a sociopathic bitch.

[beetcoin]

The democrats did a great job making themselves look like the peace doves while the republicans were the warmongers. If you look at their actual track records they are as much if not more war mongering than the republicans. Of course the media fails to point this out and properly vet one side. The only candidate that I think would end all the interventions would be Paul.

democrats have a history of meddling with foreign policy, but republicans are the ones who say they want to increase the budget by a shitload.. i think it was paul ryan who wanted billions more spent on foreign policy. he basically wants welfare for his buddies in the defense industry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/us/politics/paul-ryan-budget.html?_r=0

[bryant.coleman]

democrats have a history of meddling with foreign policy, but republicans are the ones who say they want to increase the budget by a shitload.. i think it was paul ryan who wanted billions more spent on foreign policy. he basically wants welfare for his buddies in the defense industry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/us/politics/paul-ryan-budget.html?_r=0

The establishment republicans are scum. They are war crazy, such as John McCain. But the Libertarian Republicans are much better. The problem is that we have only a dew of them.

[Fray]

Hilary doesn't seem to understand the ramification of having US embassy getting attacked and not able to respond in a timely manner.

This will just encourage more attack on American on foreign soil.

This is exactly correct. She was more or less "asleep at the wheel" when Benghazi was getting attacked. She had turned down numerous requests for additional security at the embassy for unknown reasons.