It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do you believe Hillary Clinton as POTUS would assure WW3?

page: 3
8
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
We need to get off of Russias border and leave them alone. Whos going to do that? Hillary? Hell no!
Its likely we only were given two choices for president, Jeb Bush, or Hillary. Both are puppets to people with deep bunkers that really dont give a rats a$$ about anyone besides themselves. Sounds kind of like Hillary huh? Just another self profiteering fake, liar, and cheat, who thinks laws are for everyone else.




posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 03:27 PM
link   
hillary and bill are about getting wall street geeked out and making bank. the wall street bankers loved bill and gave tons to his campaign as well as hillary's

in recent history, starting wars has been a republican thing. trump is such an amateur politically putin would lead him around by his nose and have him at war in months, probably in syria as a proxy war

the right needs to grow up and own the fascism thing and war mongering



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Nikola014




You do understand that human beings start wars, and it's not something that's already been planned by a magical universe creatures?


Wait a second if what you say is true then this was all BS...



Because remember those were planned after 9/11...supposedly.

I guess they are.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: visitedbythem


We need to get off of Russias border and leave them alone.


No, Russia needs to stop bullying its neighbors. Can you see Trump staring Putin down over Ukraine and the Baltic states?



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: visitedbythem




We need to get off of Russias border and leave them alone.


Except the countries that border Russia want us there, and as soon as Russia quits trying to intimidate those neighbors it may happen, but Russia being who they are I don't see that happening anytime soon.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:17 PM
link   
NO WW3, but I think with both Clinton and Trump we'll get at least a minor Middle East war..probably Syria or an Escalation in Iraq or Libya.

There's really no reason for it other then they both work for the Military Industrial Complex, meaning they get paid by big corporations to start wars.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   
She would probably be a hawk of levels not seen since the Third Reich, and personally cause a direct armed confrontation between the US and Russia which would most likely escalate. Pretty bad for everyone involved.

The Hawk lobby and it's needless confrontation and antagonistic stance towards major world powers, not confined to Russia, needs to be purged from the US Government. It leads down a path that is very dark for humanity as a whole.

I imagine it'd be great for the armaments industry though



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

No, Democrats will not get us in a war, at least no the middle east or China or Russia, Hillary is in bed with all of them to make wars, she love too much her foundation foreign money donors to jeopardize the money gravy train

She will go after guns, immigration and will increase the welfare state, by executive orders.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   
This has been said about the US president for the entirety of my lifetime, and before.

Oooh, noes, they'll start WWIII... We is dooooomed!!

Huh. We're as likely, now, to have WWIII as we were, in retrospect, thirty years ago.

Chances are there surely. But if it didn't happen in the bad ol' days of the Cold War, seems unlikely it'll happen when (God forbid) Ms. Clinton becomes President.

As MrSpad pointed out, the US policy's have remained fairly constant over the past half century plus, meaning NATO's has as well. We're predictable. So, too, are the responses. Never fear, we'll still be here in 8 years, regardless of who the President is.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I don't know about ww3 but.....I see a bunch more drinking in my future



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Only if she is Franz Ferdinand'd in a false flag hit that's blamed on Iran and Assad.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 08:28 PM
link   
If I were leader of a nation with something to gain from a war with the US, I would definitely look at a hillary administration as the right time to attack. The first clinton administration brought our military to its knees. I see no reason to believe this one will be any different should she actually get elected. The incompetence, arrogance, and downright stupidity of this woman would almost make a strike on the US a no-brainer. Not to mention the fact that the military do not like her, and a great many will reject the idea of her as CIC. For the most part the military will do what it always does - follow orders. But I can also see dissent within the rank and file when this 'laws apply to you, not to me' kind of person ends up in charge.

Incompetent, arrogant, and stupid: everything I look for in an opponent.



posted on Jul, 10 2016 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Absolutely not and its foolish to believe that any one person is capable of such a thing.

Let me be clear on my reasoning. I believe that the human race has been on a collision course with MAD since we split the atom and even more so, destroying itself period by some means since the moment we came into existence whether it be a biological evolution (or de-evolution depending on how you view it) that we instigated through our actions on this planet or something done on purpose (nuclear weapons). There is no religious belief that perpetuates this belief whatsoever either. We may be intelligent beings that are capable of a lot of good and even greatness, but we're not superior beings. We're animals at the end of the day.

I do not believe that one person is capable of being the catalyst for this to happen. In my opinion we've been going down this road for centuries. It's only recent history that the capability exists to do it with a button press.

The US and Russia are two dogs perpetually about to fight, but neither will bite first. It will be an outside element that brings about MAD should it come to pass either through a situation that creates a reaction in one of the two sides (the Franz Ferdinand effect) or a proxy that was "chosen" by one of the two sides to get the ball rolling.

I find it extremely hard to get up in arms about either major US political candidate. Both are seriously flawed people whose philosophies are largely the same if boiled down to the roots, but I do not think either will be a catalyst for the "button press" one way or another. If "WWIII" comes to pass in our lifetime, it will just be time for it. The ball has already been rolling down the hill and was pushed long ago. Human beings have never stopped warring and quarreling over pettiness and nonsense and won't stop until there's no one left. Think about the reasoning man has gone to war. Its wide ranging, from various magical sky spooks (still happening), to exert power/will over fellow human beings (ditto), to imaginary land borders (see what I mean?), etc. At the end of the day, the leader of any country is just a figurehead and someone to blame when things go wrong.



posted on Jul, 10 2016 @ 02:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Nikola014


So, if you elect a corrupted, arrogant, insane hillary to run your country, you're not exactly helping for things to calm down, but rather, to escalate.


Do you think electing a corrupted, arrogant, insane Donald Trump will be any better? He has expressed his admiration for Saddam and Putin, both of whom are quintessentially anti-democratic. Is that the direction you want the leading superpower to go down?


Enough with the buzzwords. Trump has been right on a lot of issues. He's the most down-to-Earth person running. If anything he's less corrupt than Hillary. We've seen what Hillary's leadership looks like; it involves selling our country out for personal profit.

Trump has too much on the line to under-perform as president. His business, his brand, and his legacy will be irreversibly marred if he doesn't meet expectations. For that reason, if nothing else, he's the better of the two big party candidates.

Trump has also taken an anti-war and anti-globalist stance.



posted on Jul, 10 2016 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: DestroyDestroyDestroy


Trump has too much on the line to under-perform as president. His business, his brand, and his legacy will be irreversibly marred if he doesn't meet expectations. For that reason, if nothing else, he's the better of the two big party candidates.


Yes, that's why he would never declare bankruptcy. Oh, wait....


Trump has also taken an anti-war and anti-globalist stance.


Which is why all of his Trump branded clothes are made in China and Mexico.



posted on Jul, 10 2016 @ 08:13 AM
link   
No I think a Hillary Presidency will simply ensure that the elite bend us over and rape us harder than ever before.
edit on 7/10/2016 by Puppylove because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join