It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: neo96
For over 60 years they have collected the dirt on this country.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
Tell that to the OP? I think it's bulls# too. This whole "if you elect Clinton it's WWIII!" narrative is bogus and intended to get the easier to control candidate elected.
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton champions wars to effectuate regime change. Their immorality, illegality, and stupidity do not diminish Ms. Clinton’s enthusiasm for treating independent nations as serfs of the United States.
As First Lady, she warmly supported the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, which made it the policy of the Unites States to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. As United States Senator, she invoked the 1998 policy in voting for the 2002 Authorization to Use Military Force Against Iraq. Saddam’s successors proved a cure worse than the disease. Shiite dominated governments allied with Iran, oppressed Sunnis, Kurds, and Turkmen, and created a power vacuum that gave birth to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Our national security has been weakened.
As Secretary of State in 2011, Ms. Clinton vocally supported the war against Libya to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi on the heels of his abandonment of weapons of mass destruction. She boasted with the dripping arrogance of Julius Caesar after Gaddafi’s death: “We came, we saw, he died.” She insisted that regime change in Libya was for humanitarian purposes. She agreed with President Barack Obama that to be faithful to “who we are,” we must overthrow governments that are oppressing their citizens by force and violence.
U.S. wars are getting repetitive. Always the same old scenario. The mainstream media alert public opinion to the latest "villain" supposedly threatening to slaughter "his own people". The U.S. does the job instead with its drones and missiles. The new "villain" is soon forgotten, but his country is left in a shambles, with competing fanatics vying to dominate the chaos. Something new is needed. How about a woman War President? Hillary Rodham Clinton has painstakingly groomed herself for the role. Her record as Secretary of State shows that she is fully qualified to be the first woman to be known as the "mother of all drones" or even to launch World War III.
“Veteran journalist Diana Johnstone captures the imperial worldview of Hillary Clinton in memorable detail. Hillary the Hawk, as U.S. Senator and Secretary of State, never saw a weapons systems she did not support nor a U.S. war practice she did not endorse. This included her hyper-aggressive launch of the war on Libya (against the opposition of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) and the resulting sprawling chaos, violence and weapons dispersal spilling beyond Libya’s war-torn society to larger regions of central Africa. Johnstone documents Hillary Clinton as ‘the top salesperson for the ruling oligarchy’ and ‘the favorite candidate of the War Party.’ That is what is at stake in November 2016.”
I agree that Clinton is a neo con, and I abhor that. Don't fool yourself, the Republican Party is bought and sold to American Empire. Ahem.. Reagan? Both Bushes? Trump will be no different. I will not support that idiot either.
originally posted by: neoholographic
For this reason alone there's no way I can support Hillary Clinton. Clinton is a warmonger and I predict she will go after Assad within her first year which would escalate things with Russia.
This is why Globalist support Clinton. Globalist in both the Reublican and Democrat parties want regime change and nation building. I said when Trump gave a Foreign Policy speech in the primaries he would be strongly opposed even by Republicans. This is because Neocons run the Republican party and they gave us the Iraq war which Hillary supported.
Trump said we will work with Russia to go after ISIS which is the smart thing to do. He said no more regime change and nation building throughout the Middle East. This is what Globalist like Clinton want.
Obama and Clinton wanted regime change in Egypt, Libya and Syria. They wanted to replace these regimes with the Muslim Brotherhood. All they did was strengthen ISIS and with the HORRIBLE Iran deal they moved the balance of power in the Middle East to Iran.
Hillary is a Warmonger Globalist. I don't know how anyone can support more war. Like I said with Bush, we will be at war in the Middle East and it could be a bigger conflict with Russia within the first term of Hillary Clinton. Here's some of the headlines.
The Growing Danger of Military Conflict with Russia
Russia, USA at risk of war which will 'likely be nuclear', warn experts ...
Syrian war: All is not well between America and Russia
War Talk Returns to Russian TV as U.S. Ties Hit Deep Freeze
US and Russia 'will go to war' unless proxy Syria conflict resolved, Turkey warns
All of this because Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and the Globalist behind Republicans and Democrats want regime change and nation building throughout the Middle East.
originally posted by: 83Liberty
Why is this thread only 3 pages? Is it because it is the truth, so not many arguments can be made against it?
Here is Hillary admitting their 'brilliant idea' of creating and arming of terrorists in Pakistan to go after Russia in Afghanistan. (20 secs in)
Also her threatening Iran and the world with nukes. (2 mins in)
Meanwhile, here is Trump's response to Nuclear Weapons... (watch the video not the articles spin)