First unifying step HRC should take: renounce ANY further Mideast military intervention.

[Ken Burch]

Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and now Syria prove that no Western war against Muslims can ever be winnable or ever do anyone but arms manufacturers any good.

We are a great country, and true greatness comes from admitting that futility is futility.

It is not possible to stop IS by force. We already have the proof of this.

Instead, she should support freezing Saudi and Turkish assets in the U.S. until those countries stop funding ISIS.

[djean111]

1. Seriously - why would anyone believe her, at this point?

It would just be campaign blather. IMO and all that.

[firebrand80]

2. That would be monumentally stupid

There's no way to predict how world events will unfold. You can't guarantee what we may or may not have to do.

[Ken Burch]

6. There are no possible situations in any Middle Eastern country

in which American or Western force could ever prevail, or (as Iraq proves)could ever make anything better if it did somehow prevail.

If all we've done is to make every place we've sent troops in in that region worse(and you'd have to concede the point there, I think), that there can't be any possible future situation in that region where the outcome could ever be different.

No American use of force in the Middle East can ever be progressive or can ever liberate anyone.

We need to just admit that and move on.

If we don't, we won't be able to do anything decent at home, because the resources needed for any future intervention will use up all the funds needed for any form of social change).

We tried. It didn't work.

Let's try something non-lethal instead.

[tonyt53]

12. Yeah, that works with crazy people

[Baobab]

29. But its an EMERGENCY!!!

get the picture?

[firebrand80]

15. ok, let's say, for the sake of argument

that tomorrow Iran said, "fuck the deal, we're building nuclear weapons. In fact, we should have a few ready that could reach Israel in 6 months or so."

Should we take military options off the table in that situation? Of course not.

I'm not saying something that dramatic is likely to happen, my point is we simply cannot say with any accuracy what the future will hold. We can and should certainly stand for the principle that we're not going to engage in regime overthrow and nation building, and that military force should be the last resort, but we can't categorically rule out anything.

[CanadaexPat]

30. We have many that can reach the Middle East,

and important political figures here have made clear their eagerness to bomb Iran. Would Iran have the right to attack us?

[6chars]

7. she could declare a red line

[msongs]

3. bernie should quit voting to pay for all this killing and war. but then he wouldnt get any

boondoggles for his home state

[Ken Burch]

9. The only thing he ever backed was the F-35s. Other than that, he's a dove.

You've got no grounds to call him a hypocrite.

Bernie is the progressive and HRC is the conservative

[leftynyc]

20. Bullshit

He voted yea for this when he was in the House:

A concurrent resolution authorizing the President of the United States to conduct military air operations and missile strikes against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/106-1999/h103



It took me all of 10 seconds to prove you wrong.

[bettyellen]

23. he is for selective military action..... he just downplays it heavily... and plays monday morning

quarteback, always saying inaction would have been better.

[arcane1]

4. We all know that will never happen. Too many "business opportunities" out there. n/t

[Lizzie Poppet]

5. If she had a shred of credibility, that might work.

But it would take a spectacular level of naivete' to believe anything she says at this point...

[ViseGrip]

8. 250 sent to Iraq and day later 200 to Yemen! No one talking about Yemen!

Hear it on Amy Goodman, confirmed. Is that why Obama went to Saudi Arabia? To fudge a deal....as Saudi's have wanted us to go where the hornets nest lies....Yemen. Hillary will stop nothing! The Foundation makes lots of money selling arms for these nefarious activities. They don't want it to stop. But don't believe me.


YEMEN! The shit is gonna fly.

[tonyt53]

13. You opened that door, now where is the proof that the "Foundation" is making money from war?

Come on, let's have that proof.

[tonyt53]

10. Isolationism? Never worked in the past and will never work in the real world.

Currently there is no war against "Muslims". There is a war against terrorism. Some of that terrorism is domestic (Bundy's for example, and not Al). Either we take a stand against terrorism away from our shores or it will end up on our shores. There is also zero proof that ISIS cannot be stopped by force. The targeted actions put forth by Obama and being executed by our military shows otherwise. We cannot bury our heads in the sand.

[Ken Burch]

14. Not isolationism. Just an admission that, in this region, war can't work.

Why not admit that?

Why not try something, anything, else?

If we've failed there everywhere so far, how can we possibly "win" there later? And what does "winning" even mean?

We need to be working to heal the world for a change.

[cali]

11. No President can make such an absolute vow.

[Tarc]

16. If you oppose the Afghanistan intervention, there's really no place for that in this party

[Redwoods Red]

28. Afghanistan "intervention"? You mean the perpetual war?

It's been 15 freaking years! And the Taliban is stronger than ever.

Afghanistan should be example #1 in the law of unintended consequences of our wars.

[onenote]

17. Has Sanders renounced any further mideast military intervention?

Do you really think he would do so if elected?

[JoePhilly]

18. + 1

[JI7]

25. other than bringing up the IWR vote he doesn't really go after Clinton on defense issues

[leftynyc]

19. That would MONUMENTALLY stupid

You have no idea what's going to happen in the next 4-8 years. Bernie wouldn't even do something this colossally stupid.

[brooklynite]

21. Sanders won't do that; why should Clinton?

No President is going to unilaterally announce what it won't do.

Sanders hasn't said he wouldn't engage in military action; just that it would be a last resort.

He also hasn't said he'll immediately pull all US troops out of the Middle East.

[Jitter65]

22. What a crazy notion. Why would she announce this even if she planned on doing it? Get real!! nt

[JI7]

24. why not sanders also ?

[pangaia]

26. No. Her first step should be to quit running for president and support Senator Sanders.

[reddread]

27. you want to stop Isis?

cancel their contracts. doubtless just Dubai's answer to Blackwater.
Wait.
where does Eric Prince live?

[Onlooker]

31. Yes, Bernie supporters oppose Bernie!!!! LOL!!!

http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-isis/

A Global Threat That Must Be Stopped: ISIS is an incredibly dangerous, powerful, and barbaric organization. For the sake of people in the Middle East and all over the world, they must be stopped.

A Coalition is Required: The United States cannot and should not lead the effort to defeat ISIS on its own. There are enough capable military powers in the region, and the coalition should be led by Middle Eastern allies.

“I have supported U.S. airstrikes against ISIS and believe they are authorized under current law, and I support targeted U.S. military efforts to protect U.S. citizens."