Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 6 (7 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   2 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

Hillary's War Whoop

By       Message Mike Whitney     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 4   Valuable 4   Well Said 2  
View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H2 11/20/15

Author 33
Become a Fan
  (46 fans)
- Advertisement -

Reprinted from Counterpunch

From Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton
(image by marcn)
  License   DMCA

If you're one of the millions of Americans who think Hillary Clinton would make a lousy president, then pat yourself on the back because she pretty much proved it yesterday. In a presentation to the Council on Foreign Relations, Clinton made it clear that if she's elected in 2016, she's going to drag the country straight to war. Invoking the same imagery as her ideological twin, George W. Bush, Clinton fulminated for more than an hour and a half on Syria, war, terrorism, war, no-fly zones, war, radical jihadism, war, and "metastasizing threats," whatever the heck those are. Oh, and did I mention war?

Seriously, while regretful Democrats can claim that they never thought Obama would turn out to be the disappointment he has been, the same can't be said about Clinton. Madame Secretary has a long pedigree and the bold print on the warning label is easy to read. There's simply no excuse for anyone to vote for a proven commodity like Hillary and then complain at some later date, that they didn't know what a scheming and hard-boiled harridan she really was. Clinton's hawkishness is part of the public record. It's right there for everyone to see. She voted for Iraq, she supported the Libya fiasco, and now she's gearing up for Syria. Her bloodthirsty foreign policy is just slightly to the left of John McCain and his looneybin sidekick, Lindsey Graham. Simply put: A vote for Clinton is a vote more-of-the-same death and destruction spread willy-nilly across the planet in the endless pursuit of imperial domination. It's that simple. Here's an excerpt from her speech:

"...let's be clear about what we're facing. Beyond Paris, in recent days, we've seen deadly terrorist attacks in Nigeria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey, and a Russian civilian airline destroyed over the Sinai. At the heart of today's new landscape of terror is ISIS. They persecute religious and ethnic minorities, kidnap and behead civilians, murder children. They systematically enslave, torture, and rape women and girls. ISIS operates across three mutually reinforcing dimensions--a physical enclave in Iraq and Syria, an international terrorist network that includes affiliates across the region and beyond, and an ideological movement of radical jihadism. We have to target and defeat all three. And time is of the essence. ISIS is demonstrating new ambition, reach, and capabilities. We have to break the group's momentum, and then its back...." ("A Conversation With Hillary Clinton," Council on Foreign Relations)

Get the picture? ISIS is everywhere; Syria, Iraq, Europe, the US, in the closet, under the rug...everywhere. So we need to get busy and kill them all pronto before they rape our women, behead our children and turn us all in to sex slaves.

Ever heard that mantra before? Maybe just once or twice?

- Advertisement -

Of course this is all music to the ears of the weapons manufacturers, the pudgy bankers and the other ne'er-do-wells who assemble at these elitist gatherings. They just love the idea of everlasting war, perpetual war, war stretching in all directions across all continents forever and always. That's the perennial dream of elites, isn't it; making sure that we're all at-each-others-throats so they can lend us the money to buy the weapons to kill each other as efficiently as possible? That's like Braham's Lullaby to these guys, but for everyone else, it's holy hell.

And what, pray tell, does Clinton have in store for us all once she's sworn in and comfortably ensconced in the Oval Office? Well, more war, of course. Check it out:

"The United States and our international coalition has been conducting this fight for more than a year. It's time to begin a new phase and intensify and broaden our efforts to smash the would-be caliphate and deny ISIS control of territory in Iraq and Syria. That starts with a more effective coalition air campaign, with more allies' planes, more strikes, and a broader target set...And we should be honest about the fact that to be successful, air strikes will have to be combined with ground forces actually taking back more territory from ISIS.

"Like President Obama, I do not believe that we should again have 100,000 American troops in combat in the Middle East." ("A Conversation With Hillary Clinton," Council on Foreign Relations)

A "new phase" in the war on terror, says she, and it will only cost you 100,000 troops or so...for starters, that is. And, of course, she's drawing on her vast military experience to make that calculation.

- Advertisement -

Oh, that's right, she doesn't have any "vast military experience," in fact, she doesn't have any military experience at all, she was a flunky diplomat at the State Department who knows nothing about these matters.

But, maybe we're being too harsh, after all, Don Rumsfeld didn't have any experience either, and look how that turned out.

Here's more: "We need to lay the foundation for a second 'Sunni awakening.' We need to put sustained pressure on the government in Baghdad to gets its political house in order, move forward with national reconciliation, and finally, stand up a national guard." (CFR)

Yes, and we also need to ride unicorns over rainbows to a shiny bright future in Candyland. It's about the same thing, isn't it?

Washington has been trying to accomplish what Clinton is recommending for the last 10 years and, guess what, it's never worked. And it won't work, because it's a pipedream. The Iraqis are not "going to stand up, so we can stand down." (Remember that one?) It's not going to happen. She knows it and everyone in the audience knows it too. She's just blowing smoke to convince the big shots that she'll faithfully prosecute their freaking wars until hell freezes over. That's what's really going on, or does someone actually believe these cut-throat plutocrats really want a more stable and secure Middle East?

Next Page  1  |  2


- Advertisement -

Must Read 4   Valuable 4   Well Said 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

Mike is a freelance writer living in Washington state.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Class Warfare Scoreboard -- Guess Who's Winning?

Newt's Victory: Was it a "Surge" of popularity or faulty voting machines?

Is Fukushima's Doomsday Machine About to Blow?

Troublemaking Washington: Pushing Ukraine to the Brink

Dominique Strauss-Kahn was trying to torpedo the dollar

Unraveling the Welfare Safety Net - Europe Moves Closer to Banktatorship