Is anyone else scared Hillary will incite war against Iran?

[betterdemsonly]

The conservadems are clearly pursuing PNAC Objectives. They have gone after Syria, and when Putin stopped them, suddenly we have Victoria Nuland, wife of Robert Kagan(founder of the PNAC) bragging of funding the Ukrainian coup, against their elected President, allied to Putin.

If you recall the big three targets for regime change were Iraq, Syrian and Iran.

I think it is a completely legitimate fear, given Hillary open links to the Neocons, Robert Kagan, and given how she repeats their talking points on American's problems in the world just being bad pr and so forth and so on.

I admit Warren probably wouldn't be an improvement on foreign policy, since her lack of experience would probably drive her into the arms of the neocon dominated DC establishment. That is why I am formally committing to Bernie Sanders. She won't give us the break with Wall Street, and the Neocons, that we need.

[wryter2000]

1. No eom

eom

[Godhumor]

2. Geez....

No. Not even remotely worried.

[betterdemsonly]

5. Why not? n/t

[Godhumor]

12. Because I don't play what if games involving conspiracy theories n/t

[betterdemsonly]

17. What conspiracy theory would that be? n/t

[Control-Z]

47. The one you just concocted. (nt)

[betterdemsonly]

54. How is it a conspiracy theory since I have documented the links

repeatedly in my journals, mostly using sources like the NYTimes, that terrible conspiracy rag.

[LordGlenconner]

3. No.

[randys1]

4. Who knows, what I do know is ANY republican elected WILL start that war, count on it

[betterdemsonly]

6. Rand Paul probably won't n/t

[randys1]

10. Probably not, he will be too busy destroying the Civil Rights Act

[Wait Wut]

15. Are you going to vote for Rand Paul?

I don't think anyone here is going to consider voting for him.

But, an answer to your original question, no.

[betterdemsonly]

18. I support Bernie Sanders

in the primary. Hopefully he or some other antineocon dem wins it. If it is down to Hillary or any of the republicans I will have to get real drunk on general election day. I don't trust her at all.

[Cal33]

35. I sure hope he will run. He said he was considering it.

Last edited Thu Jul 24, 2014, 06:59 PM - Edit history (1)

[Wait Wut]

36. Okay...

...why did you use Rand Paul as a comparison? Why not say "Bernie Sanders" probably won't?

[Spazito]

42. Excellent question!

Someone's slip seems to have shown itself.

[betterdemsonly]

62. Because the post I was responding to

said s/he was sure all the republican candidates would incite war with Iran and because Bernie is not a republican. They didn't ask me who I supported.

[mylye2222]

48. I dont either. You have my strong support!

[Squinch]

19. Ah, and here, I suspect is the point of this thread.

[betterdemsonly]

21. There are primaries

so you would be wrong.

[Squinch]

25. That's nice dear.

[betterdemsonly]

70. Whatever sweetie? n/t

[greatauntoftriplets]

30. FRP.

[Hekate]

50. Now we come to it: defame Hillary to make the Ayn Randian look better. No. nt

[betterdemsonly]

65. Well when you are in a lesser evil frame

the fact that your candidate is closer to neocon than a possible republican opponant is scarey, but that is not my fault. They didn't ask me who I supported. They said all of the all the potential republicans candidates would war with Iran.

You are just trying to frame everyone that doesn't support Hillary as a republican.

[DURHAM D]

7. No. Nice try. nt

[cpwm17]

8. Yes, loose talk of genocide over an imaginary threat should scare anybody

She has a bad history of supporting war. It takes a lot of faith to believe she could not get us into more wars, including with Iran. An Iran war might not be likely under her, but why take a chance?

[BeyondGeography]

9. PNAC

How quaint.

[Cali_Democrat]

40. And no mention of PNAC is complete without throwing in Victoria Nuland!!11!!

The most powerful woman the Earth has ever known!!

Seriously though, I think the post is a parody.

[JI7]

46. i want some of those cookies

[yourout]

11. Not really.....no.

[4now]

13. I think she will do whatever Netanyahu tell her to do.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101698567

[betterdemsonly]

24. She is not properly revolted by him

that's for sure.

[mylye2222]

49. Oh No.

But the current SoS is. Sadly, as AIPAC is so powerfull, he has to lower his tone ninute after showing us his humanity and concern.

[BeeBee]

14. No. n/t

[Agschmid]

16. No.

[Squinch]

20. No.

[geek tragedy]

22. I worry more about Putin. nt

[JustAnotherGen]

27. +1

He's sneaky.

[freshwest]

92. Who? Vlad? But, but... Putin stopped Neo-Con Obama from invading Syria! The OP sez so!

Did we miss a memo?

[mylye2222]

23. Thanks for this tread!

Am afraid of it, yes!

[Skittles]

26. no

[ellie]

28. No.

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. Not in the slightest. n/t

[conservaphobe]

31. No.

The only reason a handful of extremists label Hillary and other Dems like her as hawks is because they refuse to kowtow to those who think we should be weak-willed and inactive on the world stage.

Like President Obama, she will be measured and only take action when absolutely necessary... and the neocon warmongers will continue to scream. The type of nutjobs who complain about how Osama Bin Laden was killed will probably scream about a bunch of meaningless things as well.

Meanwhile, a majority of the country will be happy about not getting into another conflict like Vietnam or Iraq.

[Cal33]

32. Any Democrat who would be driven into the arms of the neocon dominated DC establishment for

any reason whatsoever, must be out of his/her mind. And Elizabeth Warren isn't out of her mind!

<< I admit Warren probably wouldn't be an improvement on foreign policy, since her lack of experience would probably drive her into the arms of the neocon dominated DC establishment. >>

[Bluenorthwest]

88. That statement is contradictory considering Warren was a Republican for most of her adult life

supporting Reaganomics, Reagan/Bush bigoted policy toward LGBT rights and issues, aggressive foreign policy, misogynistic anti choice policies, racist rhetoric and actions. Any reason whatsoever? Warren was a Republican because she felt Reaganomics was sound fiscal policy, she did get rich while serving that ideology.

[Maedhros]

33. No more so than any other possible President.

I don't think Hillary would be any different in this regard.

[Cali_Democrat]

34. This post reads like a parody. nt

[joeybee12]

37. No, I think her modus operendi is that she believs you have to talk and act

really, really tough.

She will act rationally, IMHO.

[NaturalHigh]

38. No.

[KamaAina]

39. Not as scared as I would be if a repuke were president

[KamaAina]

41. By the way, PNAC has gone to ground

the present incarnation of it is called the Foreign Policy Initiative. This has happened before. Before PNAC, it was the Committee on the Present Danger. And so on ad nauseam.

[MohRokTah]

43. Most ridiculous suggestion I've ever heard. eom

[whistler162]

44. I really need to buy more Alcoa stock

[CherokeeDem]

45. No....

n/t

[hrmjustin]

51. No I am not scared.

[earthside]

52. Yes.

If Obama and Kerry don't get a deal with Iran on nuclear power, and Hillary gets elected, well, yes, I think she will incite war against Iran.

[JesterCS]

53. No

Considering Iran has been pretty cooperative since the new President.

[SidDithers]

55. FFS...

Sid

[Algernon Moncrieff]

56. Nope

However I'd love it if she'd loudly demand that those who tool our embassy hostage in '79-80 be brought to be tried in the Hague.

[MFM008]

57. no

[11 Bravo]

58. Nope. Just you.

[stevenleser]

59. No. nt

[kiranon]

60. No. n/t

[DonViejo]

61. No.

[sadoldgirl]

63. NO, please, give her credit for brains n/t

[wyldwolf]

64. this thread didn't turn out quite like you expected it to, huh?

[betterdemsonly]

69. I am not trying to do anything

I am genuinely concerned about her links to neocons, but being a Clintonista you probably share her views. This board used to be more progressive than it is presently, that's for sure.

[wyldwolf]

71. " links to neocons," "Clintonista" - your language reveals your motives

... but you being a far left 'prooooogressssiiiivvveee,' that isn't surprising.

"This board used to be more progressive than it is presently"

Yeah? What was your name previously? I've been here since 2002 and it hasn't changed a bit.

[betterdemsonly]

72. This is democratic underground

presumably for progressive democrats. I have been here for a couple of years. Maybe it is the election. Alot of operatives are here now. Far left is actually the center if you look at public opinion. It is only in DC that it gets pathologized.

[wyldwolf]

75. Actually it's Democratic Underground. The big 'D' matters.

Nothing in the TOS s ays it's only for "progressive" Democrats. There is a prohibition against crackpots, though.

[betterdemsonly]

76. Ok, prove I am a crackpot n/t

n/t

[wyldwolf]

78. why would you ask me to do that?

[betterdemsonly]

80. You implied that I am a crackpot and did something in violation of TOS. n/t

[wyldwolf]

82. no I didn't

But your OP is a bit over the top, now that you mention it.

[mylye2222]

87. My friend dont enter into this game

Here everyone who exposes unconvenient truth fact about The Dem Royal Family ends up namecalled and trashed.

[Capt. Obvious]

66. No

[zappaman]

67. No, but thank you for your concern.

[MineralMan]

68. How would she do that?

She holds no office, nor does she have any official status. Can you explain?

[Thinkingabout]

73. War is something which should not be entered easily. Iran has many different problems to consider

before attacking them, too many threats from Russia and others. We need to back out of the middle east, they have their set of problems for years. Hillary is smarter than getting an unnecessary war.

[betterdemsonly]

79. Given her links to Kagan, Nuland, and other neocons

why do you think so?

[Thinkingabout]

83. She is a very smart person, she has lots of experience in dealing with dealing with other countries.

Why would she want to rush to start wars? She has links with many people.

[betterdemsonly]

84. There are many technically smart people who have supported war

including Hillary herself. Her experience with other countries doesn't inspire confidence, as she hasn't accomplished anything on the peace front.

[Thinkingabout]

85. What does she have to gain from rushing into war?

There have been times where events occur and military action is needed. This CT is overboard.

[etherealtruth]

74. No

Republicans .... yes

Rand Paul and his ilk ... we will need to take to the streets to regain our own personal freedoms

[femmocrat]

77. Not one teeny tiny bit.

[HooptieWagon]

81. She'll def wage war on some country...

I have no idea if Iran or somewhere else.

[Beacool]

86. NO

[Bluenorthwest]

89. This is a paranoid's feast, this OP. No, I don't share your concerns.

I don't even support her candidacy and I find this post to be utterly without merit.

[Pisces]

90. I'm scared you'll keep posting garbage for the next 30 months.

[L0oniX]

91. The Third Way needs to be booted out of the Democratic party.

Let em join the repukes ...oh ...they already have.