Hillary just ate Trump's lunch on foreign policy

Discussion in 'Elections & Campaigns' started by bwk, Jun 4, 2016.

  1. bwk

    bwk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    23,837
    Likes Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    113
    http://on.msnbc.com/25FBokw And so Donald, where is the counter punch? :roflol: Nothing! Zilch! The guy is at a total loss for words. It truly was embarrassing. The Right needs to consider someone else. For someone you can quote saying Putin gets an A for being tough, to saying just the opposite later, to saying he is for giving some countries nukes, to not giving countries nukes, making enemies with the London mayor, people of Mexican heritage cannot be judges, he doesn't need to learn who his Generals are, and many more. His foreign policy is dangerously incoherent as Hillary puts it. And boy is she spot on. What a disaster this guy would be. You just have to hope that the Right isn't so out of step and irresponsible to consider putting our country in this kind of jeopardy, with someone who is beyond unprepared. You just have to hope.
     
  2. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What we have are two buffoons running for office and there is no way we can win unless we think outside the box and start supporting the Libertarian.
     
  3. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry to have to remind you of this, but Rachel Maddow is a lesbian so your apparent infatuation with her is going nowhere as the only reason I can think you so awestruck by your link to her mouthing away in her typical sneering fashion. Clinton's boring apparent attempted comedy routine won't change a single vote.
     
  4. bwk

    bwk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    23,837
    Likes Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ah yes, how classy. I show you a video where Hillary Clinton is pounding Donald Trump on foreign policy as she should, and you decide there is a need to exercise your homophobic hatred towards someone else, who is doing nothing more than reporting what she accurately sees. It's obvious the facts of the thread and Clinton's on target speech, have gotten you in such a raging pantie faced mess,that you had no idea you were actually pulling it over your head.
     
  5. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mostly it is just Maddow mouthing away and Clinton said nothing original or creative whatsoever. Maybe if Clinton shouted even louder people might listen to her?

    Foreign policy is not a good topic for Clinton. She is an extreme neocon warhawk and has been for decades, said she literally wants to go to war directly against Russia over Syria and was as incompetent a Secretary of State as is possible.
     
  6. bwk

    bwk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    23,837
    Likes Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, of course not. :roflol: Nothing original! Doing away with Nato, making enemies with the Mexican president, telling us Mexicans of Mexican decent cannot be judges, Putin gets an A for toughness, then says he's not so tough, makes enemies with the London mayor, makes enemies with Muslims, and she said nothing original. Wow, I really do feel sorry for you, Trump and the party. Because it really (*)(*)(*)(*)(*).
    She hit the speech out of the park. They heard her just fine.

    Of course! And she like Donald Trump said she wanted to put nukes in the hands of certain countries too right? :roflol: Boss, when are you going to stop making these comments that make you look incredibly foolish?
     
  7. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not to mention the only reason she was Secretary of State was because it was a consolation prize from Obama.

    She had no qualifications for the position in the first place.
     
  8. doombug

    doombug Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    56,871
    Likes Received:
    22,778
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where is the part where Hillary "ate Trump's lunch"? She has zero credibility.
     
  9. Sharpie

    Sharpie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2015
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    2,441
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    She eats everybody's lunch but her own! The thief.
     
  10. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well that is probably open to debate but the one thing that is inarguable is that Trump has no foreign policy experience, no government experience and basically no qualifications to be President.
     
  11. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Suggest you check out her credibility versus Trump's on polifact. Hint, Trumps record shows he lies a whole lot more than Hillary. The most obvious recent lies are his claim he opposed going into Iraq and that He opposed the action in Libya. Both of which are well documented lies. But then of course his supporters don't actually seem to care how much he lies.

    ..
     
  12. Borat

    Borat Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    9,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And the good thing is, Hillary's record of foreign policy disasters on Iraq, Syria, Libya, Iran, Russia and China speaks for itself.

    It will come in due time. There is no sense to waste too much effort on her until the GE is in full swing. Stay tuned, it will come, you will not be disappointed.
     
  13. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let's assume that's true. His assumed inexperience is still preferable to Hillary's warmongering and utilization of her office for personal gain.

    Hillary has no success as the Secretary of State. If you want to call that "experience", that's pretty questionable. Normally experience is measured by success, not failure.

    Hillary's greatest success as Secretary of State: Libya.

    Obama's greatest failure as President: Libya.

    That pretty much says it all.
     
  14. bwk

    bwk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    23,837
    Likes Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is zero evidence of such nonsense, but feel free to wallow in your own fantasies.

    That due time came a long time ago with Trump. He has made a fool of himself, the party, and his followers. And his record will be his demise. There is no doubt about it.
     
  15. Sharpie

    Sharpie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2015
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    2,441
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I'd like to hear opinions on who IS qualified!
    Are you thinking of someone who has hung around the inner circle as a career politician, or been married to a career politician? Someone who becomes extremely rich from the political deals they've cut? How about someone who's responsible for American deaths because they can't respond adequately to an attack on our embassy? Or someone who has for decades put forth bogus programs that have cost the taxpayer billions without delivering a better quality of life and prosperity?

    Are they people with so much government experience that they don't understand how to protect state secrets and uses their unauthorized Blackberry to conduct business?

    Who are those people with foreign policy experience? The people who put nukes into the hands of the Iranians and released billions into their hands while they are launching test missiles?

    There are certainly intricacies in high level politics that require some polish -- but the first thing needed is emotional intelligence and common sense.
    It's also refreshing to consider a candidate who actually knows the right way to make money -- as opposed to bribes and stealing from taxpayers.
     
  16. Borat

    Borat Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    9,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Zero evidence of what? That Hillary's policies on Iraq, Syria, Iran, Russia, China, Libya have been nothing short of disaster and quagmire and that she does not have a single foreign policy success story on her resume is not really in dispute.


    The due time for the GE campaign actions is when the GE campaign starts, which is typically at corresponding conventions.
     
  17. RonnieFan

    RonnieFan Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 23, 2015
    Messages:
    2,502
    Likes Received:
    101
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I just reread Hillary's speech on what was supposed to be her foreign policy plan. Instead, it was nothing more but a professionally written anti-Trump trash attack.

    http://time.com/4355797/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-foreign-policy-speech-transcript/
     
  18. Merwen

    Merwen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2014
    Messages:
    11,574
    Likes Received:
    1,731
    Trophy Points:
    113
    IMO he did it because he had even less.
     
  19. TheGreatSatan

    TheGreatSatan Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Messages:
    21,269
    Likes Received:
    21,243
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Feel the bern....ie
     
  20. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,423
    Likes Received:
    51,236
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah. For example she brags about her role in taking the “lead” in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Syria. But what has been the result of that military action? Mostly it has fueled chaos and enabled the rise of terrorist organizations, including al Qaida affiliates. She is a war monger promising more war mongering. Is that the foreign policy we want more of?

    She brags about the nuclear agreement with Iran. But no one can even produce even an unsigned document of what that "agreement is" though it has released billions to Iran that they now use for their missle and terror campaigns. Hillary is promising more of that?

    War Monger Clinton threatened to ethnically cleanse Iran in 2008. “In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.” Oh well, in 2 years I guess, her commitments ends? She sure likes war.

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/04/dems.election/

    Clinton the war monger said, when Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was killed, “We came, we saw, he died,” while pumping her fists. She was gleeful when her adventurism resulted in his murder, sodomized with a knife. She responds very weirdly to sexualized violence.

    She is a “stalwart friend” of some of the “world’s worst despots.”

    https://theintercept.com/2016/03/10...pots-attacks-sanders-latin-american-activism/

    As Secretary of State she bragged: “I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family.” Then she worked to turn Egypt over to the Muslim Brotherhood despite the fact that Mubarak had worked successfully with every US President since Gerald Ford. She referred to Bashar al Assad in 2011 as a “reformer.”

    She was just fine with the military coup in Honduras and did nothing, even verbal support for the lawful government that was overthrown while she was in charge of the State Department.

    https://shadowproof.com/2016/04/12/...illegal-daily-news-editorial-board-interview/

    Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, and UAE "donated" millions of dollars to the Clinton Global Initiative between 2001 and 2014. What do the leaders of tyrannical governments in the Persian Gulf expect in return for these "donations" to her personal foundation?

    Clinton supported regime change in Libya, and the country has been utterly destroyed this is the evidence that she follows "well thought out" strategies? If she had any shame she wouldn't even bring the subject up.

    Clinton whines that Trump is "racist" for wanting to secure our border but she also bragged last fall: “I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And I do think you have to control your borders.”

    http://www.investors.com/politics/c...a-wall-with-mexico-before-she-was-against-it/

    She whines about fracking but as the head of the State Department, Clinton sold natural gas fracking to the world on behalf of corporations like Chevron and Halliburton.

    http://www.motherjones.com/environm...inton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron

    Clinton is a warmonger who supports a policy of “predatory pragmatism.” Her policies result in bloody, failed aftermaths. After 13 years of this, haven't we had enough? Her ignorance is invincible.

    https://shadowproof.com/2016/04/07/global-consequences-hillary-clintons-predatory-pragmatism/

    She is dumb stupid arrogant twisted and wrong. It's time for change.
     
  21. TheGreatSatan

    TheGreatSatan Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Messages:
    21,269
    Likes Received:
    21,243
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's a troll thread, bought and paid for, like Hillary Clinton.
     
  22. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You Do know of course that Trump was a major advocate of the action in Libya. He also didn't oppose the invasion of Iraq as he has repeated claimed.
     
  23. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well we really can't actually evaluate Trump's money making abilities since he has claimed A ten billion fortune which even Forbes says is a major exaggeration. And he is afraid to releases his tax returns which certainly calls his finances and current economic skills into question.

    And the putting nukes into the hands of Iranians is just pure nonsense. But the Trump quotes on spreading nukes to South Korea and Japan is inarguable. Now if that to you indicates emotional intelligence and commonsense in foreign policy then clearly Trump is your foreign policy ideal.
     
  24. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said that “”I don’t want more nuclear weapons” but that the world would be better off if South Korea, Japan, and Saudi Arabia had nuclear weapons on CNN’s Republican Town Hall on Tuesday.

    Trump was asked if there was a contradiction between his concerns over nuclear proliferation and his openness to supporting Japan and South Korea developing nuclear weapons. He responded, that there is no contradiction and the US doesn’t want to “pull the trigger” against a nuclear North Korea. He added, “We owe $19 trillion, we have another $2 trillion because of the very, very bad omnibus budget that was just signed. … We are supporting nations now, militarily, we are supporting nations like Saudi Arabia, which was making, during the good oil days, which was a year ago, now they’re making less, but still a lot. $1 billion a day. We are supporting them, military, and they pay us a fraction, a fraction of what they should be paying us, and of the cost. We are supporting Japan. … Excuse me, we’re supporting Germany. We’re supporting South Korea.”

    He further stated that it might be time to change U.S. policy keeping Japan and South Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons.

    Trump was then asked, “So, some proliferation is okay?” He answered, “No, not some. I hate proliferation. I hate nuclear more than any.”

    After moderator Anderson Cooper said these positions were contradictory, Trump responded, “How many countries have it? Iran is going to have it, very — with…one of the dumbest deals I’ve ever seen signed ever, ever, ever by anybody. Iran is going to have it within ten years. Iran is going to have it.” And “At some point we have to say, you know what, we’re better off if Japan protects itself against this maniac in North Korea.”

    Trump continued that things would also be better if Saudi Arabia and South Korea also had nuclear weapons. And “It’s going to happen, anyway. It’s only a question of time. They’re going to start having them, or we have to get rid of them entirely.”
     
  25. Silver Surfer

    Silver Surfer Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,871
    Likes Received:
    2,233
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Utterly idiotic attempts to compare Hillary's disastrous foreign policy record with Trump who has never occupied public office and never was involved in carrying out foreign policies of the USA. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence will reach a conclusion than literally anyone could do a better job than Hillary.

    Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/hillary-is-the-candidate_b_9168938.html

    Jeffrey Sachs
    Director, Earth Institute at Columbia University

    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.

    Of course, by 2003, Hillary was a Senator and a staunch supporter of the Iraq War, which has cost the US trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and done more to create ISIS and Middle East instability than any other single decision of modern foreign policy. In defending her vote, Hillary parroted the phony propaganda of the CIA:

    "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members... "

    After the Iraq Liberation Act came the 1999 Kosovo War, in which Bill Clinton called in NATO to bomb Belgrade, in the heart of Europe, and unleashing another decade of unrest in the Balkans. Hillary, traveling in Africa, called Bill: "I urged him to bomb," she told reporter Lucinda Frank.

    Hillary's record as Secretary of State is among the most militaristic, and disastrous, of modern US history. Some experience. Hilary was a staunch defender of the military-industrial-intelligence complex at every turn, helping to spread the Iraq mayhem over a swath of violence that now stretches from Mali to Afghanistan. Two disasters loom largest: Libya and Syria.

    Hillary has been much attacked for the deaths of US diplomats in Benghazi, but her tireless promotion of the overthrow Muammar Qaddafi by NATO bombing is the far graver disaster. Hillary strongly promoted NATO-led regime change in Libya, not only in violation of international law but counter to the most basic good judgment. After the NATO bombing, Libya descended into civil war while the paramilitaries and unsecured arms stashes in Libya quickly spread west across the African Sahel and east to Syria. The Libyan disaster has spawned war in Mali, fed weapons to Boko Haram in Nigeria, and fueled ISIS in Syria and Iraq. In the meantime, Hillary found it hilarious to declare of Qaddafi: "We came, we saw, he died."

    Perhaps the crowning disaster of this long list of disasters has been Hillary's relentless promotion of CIA-led regime change in Syria. Once again Hillary bought into the CIA propaganda that regime change to remove Bashir al-Assad would be quick, costless, and surely successful. In August 2011, Hillary led the US into disaster with her declaration Assad must "get out of the way," backed by secret CIA operations.

    Five years later, no place on the planet is more ravaged by unending war, and no place poses a great threat to US security. More than 10 million Syrians are displaced, and the refugees are drowning in the Mediterranean or undermining the political stability of Greece, Turkey, and the European Union. Into the chaos created by the secret CIA-Saudi operations to overthrow Assad, ISIS has filled the vacuum, and has used Syria as the base for worldwide terrorist attacks.

    The list of her incompetence and warmongering goes on. Hillary's support at every turn for NATO expansion, including even into Ukraine and Georgia against all common sense, was a trip wire that violated the post-Cold War settlement in Europe in 1991 and that led to Russia's violent counter-reactions in both Georgia and Ukraine. As Senator in 2008, Hilary co-sponsored 2008-SR439, to include Ukraine and Georgia in NATO. As Secretary of State, she then presided over the restart of the Cold War with Russia.

    It is hard to know the roots of this record of disaster. Is it chronically bad judgment? Is it her preternatural faith in the lying machine of the CIA? Is it a repeated attempt to show that as a Democrat she would be more hawkish than the Republicans? Is it to satisfy her hardline campaign financiers? Who knows? Maybe it's all of the above. But whatever the reasons, hers is a record of disaster. Perhaps more than any other person, Hillary can lay claim to having stoked the violence that stretches from West Africa to Central Asia and that threatens US security.

    Follow Jeffrey Sachs on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JeffDSachs
     

Share This Page