Hillary the Hawk

He hasn't had the op....yet

Given his personality or rather lack there of, I would say he is @the least totally inappropriate for the job..

He can't even deal w his own party... Glad they stood up to the asshole bully.. Good job!!!
 
Bill said:
He hasn't had the op....yet

Given his personality or rather lack there of, I would say he is @the least totally inappropriate for the job..

He can't even deal w his own party... Glad they stood up to the asshole bully.. Good job!!!
Click to expand...
so you wanna go with a known warmonger instead of a possible warmonger?

again we've had this discussion, so I'm not gonna re-hash it further unless you wish
 
anatta said:
he's def a wild card. But he leans toward more isolationalism.
Like we talked about POTUS is almost impossible to make a "rash" decision - there is too much institutional support.

Chief of staff, NSC,CIA,DNI, Joint Chiefs - the list goes on.
what gets me is Hilary is well institutionalized and still inevitably leans towards war/interventionism.

She is a known quality, and it's one of bellicosity.
Click to expand...
How is he going to be isolated and take out ISIS at the same time?

I think she will use diplomacy first as she has always advised even in her vote on the Iraq War.
 
Rana said:
How is he going to be isolated and take out ISIS at the same time?

I think she will use diplomacy first as she has always advised even in her vote on the Iraq War.
Click to expand...
Isolationism is more of a diplomatic/treaty stance. He is willing to walk away from NATO for ex. It doesn't mean he would not " take out ISIS
(trump bellicose words)

But she doesn't lean towards diplomacy in Libya or Syria ( arming the rebels)..are you really saying the Iraq vote was not a known vote for war?
 
anatta said:
Isolationism is more of a diplomatic/treaty stance. He is willing to walk away from NATO for ex. It doesn't mean he would not " take out ISIS
(trump bellicose words)

But she doesn't lean towards diplomacy in Libya or Syria ( arming the rebels)..are you really saying the Iraq vote was not a known vote for war?
Click to expand...

No, it was not a known vote for war, Congress did not make a declaration of war.
 
Rana said:
You said war and as has been explained, Bush told Congress he would exhaust all diplomatic actions and he didn't.
Click to expand...
it's the same in practice as Declaration..Congress will never declare war since I've been alive , so that argument is moot.
so you really want to stand on the fact Clinton ( and not just Clinton) had no knowledge this vote was not going to lead to war??
 
anatta said:
it's the same in practice as Declaration..Congress will never declare war since I've been alive , so that argument is moot.
so you really want to stand on the fact Clinton ( and not just Clinton) had no knowledge this vote was not going to lead to war??
Click to expand...

Yeah.
Duh.
 
anatta said:
it's the same in practice as Declaration..Congress will never declare war since I've been alive , so that argument is moot.
so you really want to stand on the fact Clinton ( and not just Clinton) had no knowledge this vote was not going to lead to war??
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure that she wanted diplomacy exhausted first
 
[FONT=&quot]If we were to attack Iraq now, alone or with few allies, it would set a precedent that could come back to haunt us.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]...this course is fraught with danger.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]...a unilateral attack...on the present facts is not a good option.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely, and therefore, war less likely, and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause, I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of preemption, or for unilateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose -- all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law and for the peace and security of people throughout the world. ...[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/...er-Supported-the-Bush-Cheney-Invasion-of-Iraq[/FONT]
 
Rana said:
I am pretty sure that she wanted diplomacy exhausted first
Click to expand...
I know the speech. I'll go with Bernie (and the rest of the world) she voted for the Iraq war.
the speech "puts.... in the hands of the POTUS". it's an authorization for war.
 
anatta said:
I know the speech. I'll go with Bernie (and the rest of the world) she voted for the Iraq war.
the speech "puts.... in the hands of the POTUS". it's an authorization for war.
Click to expand...

Bull fucking shit you lying stain.
Her words had actual meaning unlike yours.
 
anatta said:
I know the speech. I'll go with Bernie (and the rest of the world) she voted for the Iraq war.
the speech "puts.... in the hands of the POTUS". it's an authorization for war.
Click to expand...
Sorry, again, the rest of the world doesn't agree with Bernie and you.
 
Rana said:
Earth, but you head is in Uranus when it comes to Hillary
Click to expand...
only a Clintonista could claim her vote wasn't for a war authorization. It defies logic -but then again Clintonistas aren't concerned with the truth.
Even Clinton has said her vote was..wrong/misguided -some junk speech.
Yet she continues to ride the warhorse
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top