Would you have trusted Hillary Clinton to handle North Korea?

It's safe to let off the Hillary bashing. The campaign is over.

 

As I recall, during the first two years of Hillary's tenure as Sec of State, Republicans were singing her praises. That stopped when it became clear she would leave the administration and prepare to run for President again. In regards to your accusation that Hillary was somehow responsible for the mess in the Middle East, I suggest you read some history about the region. The Middle East has been a hotbed of conflict and violence throughout history. It didn't start under Obama or Hillary. Remember extremists assassinated Anwar Sadat, the first Egyptian ruler to participate in the peace process, and Yasser Arafat refused to sign the Oslo Treaty for fear of his own assassination. For a more thorough feel for the region read Ben Hur, by Lewis Wallace, published in 1880, which describes the ongoing conflicts in Palestine under Roman rule during the time of Christ. It's easy to blame Hillary for the outcome of the Arab Spring, but at the time it was the most promising outburst of public support for democracy and human rights by the local residents in thousands of years, if ever. To have ignored the possibilities would have been a far worse offense historically than the choices that were made. Hindsight is always 20/20, but it's never that clear what outcomes will be when you're a player immersed in the events themselves. Hillary did well as Sec of State--as good as anyone has or could have done. To be sure, Hillary made mistakes, but like you and me and every other Sec of State in history, she's human. Perfection was never a standard we demanded of her or any other who served in her position. To simply find fault and lay blame is unwarranted, undeserved and unfair. I disagree with you.

 

No more or less than I trust Trump to do it. I think Clinton would have maintained the failed status quo whereas Trump is trying a more agressive approach. The question is what if any positive or negative effect will Trump's policy have on NK? Time will tell so stay tuned. I am OK with Trump's policy so long as it nets a positive result, which is unlikely as there is no way in hell NK is going to give up their nuclear weapons program.

 

Sure. Why not?

 

I am no fan of Clinton, but she would handle this better than Quick Draw McGraw Trump.

Would you have trusted Hillary Clinton to handle North Korea?

 

Come on Seth, if Clinton is a serial liar, then Trump is a super deluxe serial liar...

 

You mean the Alt Right, of course.

 

Ah, all the Alt Right lies, yes.

 

I don't think Trump is a saint or anything like that. But I also think Hillary's lying is pathological.

 

I noticed that the video you posted is from Facebook, where the Russians are now known to have propagated over $100,000.00 worth of advertising accusing Hillary of a multitude of totally contrived malfeasances. Unfortunately, many Americans were willing to believe these fake stories without actually considering the lack of evidence. In a country that prides itself on "innocent until proven guilty," that's smacks of serious UN-Americanism.

 

The only ones that are continually confused with right and wrong are you libs. It wasn't anyone but your king Barry that aided his buddies in Iran, just like slick Willy did with NK. It's undeniable, own it.

 

I am not a lib, and you do not understand political terms, definitions, and positions. The semi-hidden racist commentary about Obama and Iran, etc., is nonsense, of course.

 

Hardly, if she'd get her fat a$$ off the public stage maybe but until then she's fair game.

 

Of course she is, as is Trump, etc.

 

I agree. Tell your friends

 

I don't think that there is a "correct" way to handle North Korea.

With Trump, you have two unstable narcissists trash-talking at one another, and Trump has the incentive of escalating the matter to distract from his deepening Russia scandal.

Clinton - or most of the seasoned GOP politicians that Trump vanquished - would have brought experience, responsibility, and patience to the crisis, and I don't think those assets can be blithely discounted.

Trump's insecurity that accounts for his pathological need to "win" is certainly not being assuaged by his concatenation of legislative failures.

I'm hoping that the five-deferment cadet's cadre of generals will be less bellicose and assign him at least two push ups to work off his rage.

 

I think she would help NK with nukes and ICBMs. Leftist believe it's not fair we have those weapons and they don't. She would be forced to deal with the nuclear Korea that Bill created.

 

She could not manage the security within the State Department for overseas post. She can not even follow the security protocol for electronic devices. She has forgotten how to pump gas into a vehicle.

NO, no confidence at all with Mrs Clinton.

 

^^ It's those type of posts that the average American rates as propagit and not worth thinking about.

 

She is the epitome of what collectivist consider greatness. Have some respect for the hero of the drones.

 

So Bill Clinton didn't give NK nukes? And China ICBMs?

 

The true hive collectivism is in the great nest of the Alt Right, which TheGreatSatan represents on the Board.

 

Some people just have no clue and think...

Right wingers = totalitarians/communist/socialist

Left wingers = Anarchist/capitalist/libertarians

 

Hilary Clinton would have made a deal with N.K. for missile fuel and enriched uranium in exchange for a contribution to the Clinton Foundation.

 

Those questions are la la questions. Are you a Russian agitprop agent?