Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Tell A Friend Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites
OpEdNews Op Eds

Sanders the "Realist"; Hillary the "Neocon"

By       Message Robert Parry       (Page 1 of 2 pages)     Permalink    (# of views)   4 comments

Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

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

opednews.com Headlined to H2 2/24/16

Author 1553
Become a Fan
  (85 fans)
- Advertisement -

Reprinted from Consortium News

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders.
(Image by (NBC screen grab))
  Permission   Details   DMCA

Hillary Clinton has scored points against Bernie Sanders by tagging him as a "single-issue candidate" who harps again and again on income inequality. Though the "single-issue" charge is false -- the Vermont Senator actually addresses a wide range of topics from global warming to health care to college costs -- Clinton's attack line has been effective nonetheless

- Advertisement -

It works, in part, because Sanders shies away from thorough discussions about his views on foreign policy while Clinton can tout her resume as a globetrotter both as First Lady and Secretary of State.

Sanders also has left himself open to attacks from neoconservatives and liberal interventionists that he is a "closet realist." For instance, The Washington Post's David Ignatius wrote recently: "Is Bernie Sanders a closet foreign policy 'realist'? Reading his few pronouncements on foreign policy, you sense that he embraces the realists' deep skepticism about U.S. military intervention."

But what if Sanders came out of the closet and "confessed" to being a "realist" while posing the alternative question: Is Hillary Clinton a "closet neocon" who is seen by key neocons as "the vessel" in which they have placed their hopes for extending their power and expanding their policies? Might that question reenergize Sanders's suddenly flagging campaign and force Clinton to venture beyond a few talking points on foreign policy?

- Advertisement -

Rather than largely ceding the field to Clinton -- except in noting her Iraq War vote while he opposed that disastrous war of choice -- Sanders could say, "yes, I'm a realist when it comes to foreign policy. I'm in line with early presidents -- Washington, Adams, Jefferson -- who warned about the dangers of foreign entanglements. While I believe America should lead in the world, it should not go 'abroad in search of monsters to destroy,' as John Quincy Adams wisely noted.

"I'm also in agreement with Dwight Eisenhower who warned about the dangers to the Republic from the Military-Industrial Complex -- and I agree with John Kennedy who recognized the many legitimate concerns of Third World countries emerging from colonialism. I have learned from my own years in Congress that there's no faster way to destroy a Republic than to behave as an Empire."

Hiding Facts

Sanders could note, too, that the other way to destroy a Republic is to use the secrecy stamp too liberally, to hide too many key facts from the American people, not because of legitimate national security concerns but because it's easier to manipulate a public that is fed a steady diet of propaganda. The American people, he might say, are citizens deserving respect, not mushrooms kept in the dark and fertilized.

On that point, Sanders might even note that he and Hillary Clinton may be in agreement, since the former Secretary of State's team has complained that some of her infamous emails are now being classified retroactively in what her aides complain is an exercise in over-classification. Of course, the key reason for Clinton using a private server was to keep her communications hidden from later public scrutiny.

If Sanders is asked about specifics regarding where the line is between legitimate secrets and propagandistic manipulation, he could cite how President George W. Bush played games with intelligence by hyping claims about Iraq's WMD and Saddam Hussein's ties to Al Qaeda.

- Advertisement -

Or Sanders could note the case of the sarin-gas attack outside Damascus on Aug. 21, 2013, which almost drew President Barack Obama into a full-scale war in Syria.

If indeed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was responsible -- as the Obama administration claimed and the mainstream U.S. news media repeats endlessly -- then the U.S. government should present the evidence to the American people. Or, if one of the jihadist rebel groups was behind the attack -- trying to trick the U.S. into joining the war on the jihadist side -- lay that evidence out even if it means admitting to a rush-to-judgment against Assad's forces. [See Consortiumnews.com's "The Collapsing Syria-Sarin Case."]

Similarly, on the issue of Ukraine: if the former government of President Viktor Yanukovych was at fault for the Maidan sniper attacks on Feb. 20, 2014, as was widely alleged at the time, put forward the evidence. If the snipers were extremists among the Maidan protesters trying to create a provocation -- as more recent evidence suggests -- give those facts to the American people.

The same applies to the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014. Yes, the suggestion that Russia was responsible has proved to be an effective propaganda club to beat Vladimir Putin over the head, but if the tragedy was really the fault of some element of the U.S.-backed Ukrainian regime -- and if U.S. intelligence knows that -- fess up. Stop the game-playing.

Who's in Charge?

It should not be the job of the U.S. government to mislead and confuse the American people. That reverses the proper order of a Republic in which "We the People" are the sovereigns and government officials are the servants.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

- Advertisement -

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

opednews.com

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at
(more...)
 

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 Share Author on Social Media   Go To Commenting

The views expressed herein 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

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

The CIA/Likud Sinking of Jimmy Carter

What Did US Spy Satellites See in Ukraine?

Ron Paul's Appalling World View

Ronald Reagan: Worst President Ever?

The Disappearance of Keith Olbermann

A Perjurer on the US Supreme Court