Hillary is a Scoop Jackson Democrat. She's an interventionist

[cali]

with a philosophy rooted in American Exceptionalism. Far from finding her record at State a positive, it's replete with warning signs. She's considerably more to the right than president Obama. Her positions on the U.S. role in the world prominently feature the use of military force.

It's hardly just her vote on the IWR. This article is from last year but it sums up her record well.


Hillary Clinton’s Unapologetically Hawkish Record Faces 2016 Test
Burned by Iraq in 2008, but still a strong voice for military action


Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s new memoir hasn’t been a welcome development for Hillary Clinton. In one of the book’s most quoted passages, Gates writes that he witnessed Clinton make a startling confession to Barack Obama: she had opposed George W. Bush‘s last-ditch effort to salvage the Iraq war, the 2007 troop “surge,” because the politics of the 2008 Democratic primaries demanded it.

<snip>

As Secretary of State, Clinton backed a bold escalation of the Afghanistan war. She pressed Obama to arm the Syrian rebels, and later endorsed air strikes against the Assad regime. She backed intervention in Libya, and her State Department helped enable Obama’s expansion of lethal drone strikes. In fact, Clinton may have been the administration’s most reliable advocate for military action. On at least three crucial issues—Afghanistan, Libya, and the bin Laden raid—Clinton took a more aggressive line than Gates, a Bush-appointed Republican.

Former administration officials also tell TIME that Clinton was an advocate for maintaining a residual troop force after the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq—an issue of renewed interest given al Qaeda’s resurgence there. They also describe her as skeptical of diplomacy with Iran, and firmly opposed to talk of a “containment” policy that would be an alternative to military action should negotiations with Tehran fail.

<snip>



http://swampland.time.com/2014/01/14/hillary-clintons-unapologetically-hawkish-record-faces-2016-test/

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. Scoop Jackson ran for president twice and (thankfully) lost. But, his wing of the party

is making a comeback.

[SonderWoman]

2. In hindsight, we probably should have armed Syrian rebels.

The result could only have been better than the current situation in Syria. Not sure how it could be worse.

Bernie seems to like intervention as well: http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/08/30/427026/assassination-drone-program

[beam me up scottie]

3. What does your hindsight tell you about the Iraq war?

And I forget which candidate voted for it, remind me again...

[cali]

5. the poster is clearly wrong about Syria.

[beam me up scottie]

6. She's either not thinking clearly or horribly uninformed.

[SonderWoman]

12. There's clearly no way of knowing that.

And obviously the choice we made in Syria didn't work.

[cali]

17. actually, there really is. there's quite enough solid evidence.to

know that there was not and is not an organized non-radical group in Syria with which to ally ourselves. But it's clear that you are aligned with Hillary's hawkish interventionism.

[SonderWoman]

20. Pretty hard to watch women and children rape and murdered

And not want to intervene. But that's just me.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

26. Part of that rebel faction is ISIS.

So, you're saying ...?

[cali]

34. yes, it's painful but we, as a nation, do so in one situation after anotherr

and.sadly, we have all too often chosen to side with those doing the raping and murdering. And even more frequently we've made things worse by intervening. You are looking at things in a frighteningly simplistic way.

[RufusTFirefly]

36. Selective outrage

In the past we have bankrolled death squads, propped up violent, authoritarian, and decidedly undemocratic regimes, and have been allies of numerous despots, one of whom allegedly boiled his political opponents in oil.

[Chan790]

46. Yes, it is.

And I'm generally relatively hawkish, having argued as early as the mid-1990s that we should be engaging to deny the Taliban a foothold and root them out of power...but they're right, there is nobody in Syria that we should be considering backing for even one hot second. In a vacuum, all of the major players there are people the US government should be actively working to deny power to in an effort to avoid creating an empowered functionally-terrorist-run state. You could populate a solid terrorist watch-list from the leadership on all sides.

In a war between zealots too extreme for Al Qaeda and an Iranian proxy-state that even Iran feels is too violent to support any further...you think we should take sides? Are you mad?! Have you misplaced your good sense?! You do realize that either, if they were to obtain stable control over even a majority of Syria, would turn their attacks towards Western targets, US allies in the region and specifically Israel? That both sides of this conflict are populated by people that feel justified to rape women and murder children? That arming the rebels wouldn't decrease the number of women raped or children murdered...merely the partisan identity of the victims in a fight between evil factions? That we'd be facilitating the rape and murder of a lot more people as once they were done wiping out the government forces and raping their women and murdering their children, they would turn their attentions to Turkey, Lebanon, Israel and the wider Middle-East where they'd find even more women and children?

[artislife]

32. This "cartoon" explains

how Syria is a combination of climate change and insurrection are at play. Both issues that H is on the wrong side of
http://www.unilad.co.uk/articles/this-cartoon-succinctly-explains-the-background-to-the-syrian-conflict/


Very enlightening on why the Syrians came to the city and how the Bashar push back started.

[beam me up scottie]

37. That is brilliant.

There are so many good reasons why we can't support Hillary, it's hard to pick just one.

[artislife]

39. I just started an OP in the GD

with this link.

So we screw up the environment, then we bomb them, and then refuse entry...

It won't get better unless we do a 180 on a few policies!

[cali]

4. your comment displays a woeful lack of knowledge. there was and is, no way

to ensure that arms would be put in the right hands. Syria is a direct result of the Iraq war which your hawkishly zealous candidate voted for and supported.

Bernie did not support arming Syrian rebels.

[SonderWoman]

10. Bernie zealously voted for war in Afghanistan.

He also voted in favor of authorizing funds for the Iraq war and the one in Afghanistan. He voted in favor of a $1 billion aid package for the coup government Ukraine and supported Israel's assault on Gaza. Kosovo as well.

[Enthusiast]

21. Bernie was wrong on Afghanistan. But it was an understandable forgivable mistake. Iraq, not so much.

[cali]

23. give it up. the evidence doesn't support your sad attempt to

paint Bernie as akin to hilly on these issues. He voted against both Iaq wars and he is less rah rah pro Israel than hill. Hilly supports bloody military coups from Honduras to Egypt. The evidence that your heroine is a hawk is overwhelming. The attempt to paint Bernie as one is laughably clumsy.

[retrowire]

30. Some wars are necessary.

this is only proof that Bernie understands when the gloves are necessary.

that's alright in my book. and why not fund a war that's already happening? you want ill equipped troops?

point is, he was against starting anything, she was for it and then after it started, he did what was necessary.

[Warren DeMontague]

61. he was "zelaous" about it?

How do you "zealously" vote for something? Did he push the button really hard, over and over?

Anyway, the fact that some people keep willfully trying to pretend that there was NO DIFFERENCE between going into Afghanistan and going into Iraq, and imagining that folks here aren't going to see that for what it is- borders on goofy and sad.

[jfern]

86. Most Democrats voted for Afghaninst and against Iraq

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Like we armed the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan?

Or UNITA in Angola? Or, the Contras in El Salvador?

[SonderWoman]

13. Nope. Completely different scenario.

[cali]

25. really?..then you'll have no trouble explaining why it's so different. what group or groups

should we have armed?

[Armstead]

19. Oh gosh, now we're citing Iranian media to casigate Sanders

"Press TV takes revolutionary steps as the first Iranian international news network, broadcasting in English on a round-the-clock basis.
Our global Tehran-based headquarters is staffed with outstanding Iranian and foreign media professionals.Press TV is extensively networked with bureaus located in the world's most strategic cities."

And that headline does not exactly put Obama's policies in a good light either. I thought todays mission was to protect the President from Bernie;s scurrilous attacks.

"US presidential candidate: I would continue assassination drone program"

And from that article...

"The aerial attacks were initiated by former US President George W. Bush but have been escalated under President Barack Obama.

Former US drone operator Brandon Bryant, who was involved in the killing of more than 1600 people, revealed earlier this year that aerial strikes are conducted with complete uncertainty.

Bryant, who worked for almost five years in America's secret drone program bombing targets in Afghanistan and other countries, such as Pakistan and Iraq, said operators lacked visibility and were not sure about the identity of the people they were shooting at.

“We see silhouette, shadows of people, and we kill those shadows,” he said.

[jfern]

110. If only we had armed ISIS, Syria would be a perfect utopia

[eridani]

114. Which Syrian rebels? Our record at picking Islamists to back--

--on the grounds that one group is worse than another is hardly stellar.

[oasis]

7. As president, Hill will have advisers, both military and civilian. None

will put American service folk in harm's way unless absolutely necessary.

There is no denying, Hillary has the best foreign policy experience of any candidate, Democrat or GOP.

[Snotcicles]

9. Obama is proof a lack of experience in foreign policy just may be a plus.

I think a great intellect and an ability to reason may be what is more important.

[oasis]

11. Hillary's intellect and "ability to reason" were never in question.

Her foreign policy credentials are a plus. Since you want to throw Obama in the mix, remember it was he who chose Hill to be Secretary of State. Obama's "ability to reason" didn't fail then.

[Fumesucker]

14. Hillary was duped by Dubya

Doesn't really speak that highly of her intelligence to be fooled by the worst President evah.

If anyone should have been skeptical of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy that person would be Hillary considering that she coined the phrase in the first place.

[oasis]

18. IWR vote: I guess you rate Kerry and Biden's intelligence level the same.

[Fumesucker]

28. Pretty much

DU certainly knew the rationale for war was bullshit at the time, odd how random internet posters could discern the truth while oh so intelligent and connected politicians couldn't.

The alternative explanation for their votes in that matter reflects even less well on them, if you wish to go with that scenario then by all means be my guest.

[oasis]

42. Yup, the old reliable "We at DU knew, why didn't congress folk?"

For the record, I was totally against the Iraq war. During the pre-war period I stayed up till the wee hours of the Hawaiian time zone kicking every PNAC thread that was posted on DU so they would get maximum exposure.

Kerry, Edwards, Biden and scores of other Democrats learned and grew from their IWR decision. Mind you, it was NOT a direct vote to go to war.

[cali]

62. mind you, it was a blank check to go to war. period. war is precisely

What it authorized. And nothing in Hillary's tenure at State, provides evidence that she learned to be more prudent about the exercise of military involvement.

[oasis]

65. So all who authorized the "blank check" are "hawkish zealots"

in your book?

[cali]

72. no, as I said, I think most of them did so for political reasons.

But I do think that Hillary's record illustrates her strong inclination to use military force. That is reflected in her positions on Libya and Syria.

Look, your comments in this thread, replete with references to those who want to destroy us, and.how Hillary will make it clear that we won't be pushover, is the same cliche ridden, reflexive attitude that has been disastrous for our foreign policy when employed by our leaders.

We don't seem to learn

[oasis]

75. Sorry if it sounds cliche ridden but there

are only so many words to plainly put it. I want America to be number one and stay number one.

If those who don't feel that way, and think it's a right wing "mindset" I'll just have to live with it.

Have a good night

[frylock]

100. You want America to be number one in what, exactly?

[oasis]

105. Economy, education , military you know the same ol'

patriotic stuff most Americans want.

[frylock]

107. We suck at everything except military spending..

how is waving dick at Iran going to improve our education system?

[oasis]

108. Hillary can multitask you know. <nt>

[frylock]

109. No, I don't know.

Enlighten me.

[oasis]

111. If I had the slightest chance of swaying you I would

"Enlighten you".

I'm sure you could cite more than a few of Hillary's accomplishments if you really wanted to.

Maybe in a few years you'll be a contestant on "Jeopardy" and the President Hillary category will pop up. I'm willing to bet you won't be so shy about your knowledge of her then.

Anyway I'm retiring for the night. Nice talk.

[frylock]

112. I'll take Clusterfucks for $1000, Alex..

Well there's Libya and Syria. Things seem to be going swimmingly there.

[LondonReign2]

82. So if you knew the push for war with Iraq was ginned up bullshit

why do you give politicians, who should have surely had more information than us, be given a pass?

[oasis]

84. Congress folk certainly didn't know Hans Blix

and the weapons inspectors would be given the boot by Bush before they finished their work.

Nor did you or I.

[LondonReign2]

85. Yet you say you knew it was bullshit all along, and yet you

give legislators a pass. Really, if commoners could figure it out there is absolutely no excuse for the folks in Congress.

And of course those with good judgment made the right call, while others with judgment worse than you or I made the wrong call...and that call allowed a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9-11, killed 4,000+ service men and women and between 400,000 and 1,000,000 Iraqis and co.st us on the order of $3 trillion

[oasis]

89. There was far more involved. Bush had made his

Mind up to go to war long before his appeal to congress. The Downing Street Memo to Tony Blair hinted at his intentions. NSA chief Condi Rice and VP Dick CHeney were interviewed on Meet the Press, Face the Nation and other Sunday programs selling the urgency of the need to invade Iraq.


Sec. Of State Colin Powell put on a dog and pony show at the UN with illustrations of supposed WMD which got the public buying into it.

Finally the IWR gave Bush the authority to take military action, only as a last resort. He abused this authority by ordering the weapons inspectors out and giving Saddam Hussien an ultimatum.

A lot more went into the process than you characterize in your post #85.

[LondonReign2]

90. Yes, and throughout all of that going on, you and I both knew going after Iraq was complete bullshit

Yet you want to give the politicians that voted for it a pass. Is that because Hillary voted for it? You are holding politicians to a lower standard than common citizens.

[oasis]

91. 2004 presidential candidate John Kerry, 2008-16 VP Joe Biden

Both voted for the IWR. I gave them a pass also. Sen. Ted Kennedy who voted against the resolution, gave them a pass for reasons he said he could not reveal.

[LondonReign2]

92. Ok, I guess you and I have very different expectations for our politicians

[oasis]

93. Some disappoint repeatedly, others make mistakes

Less often, but no one in the world of politics is a saint.

Have a great evening.

[frylock]

96. What did Clinton learn from her IWR vote?

[oasis]

97. Don't trust Bush. <nt>

[frylock]

99. She needed that vote to learn that, hunh?

Savvy on foreign policy you say?

[oasis]

102. Savvy enough to convince American voters leading up to GE day.

Got anyone in your bullpen who can best her on "the Deal"?

[frylock]

103. Hillary will be a two-time loser..

bank it.

[cali]

35. I think they all voted for it for political reasons.

And I think it was shameful.

[Snotcicles]

15. I just think Bernie Sanders is a far superior choice in all aspects. nt

[jwirr]

16. What makes you so sure that she will select advisers

who are any less militant than she is?

[oasis]

22. I'm not sold that Hill is "militant". She's savvy in foreign

policy. Do you think any of her potential GOP opponents will have "doves" for advisers?

[jwirr]

31. I am not exactly interested in whar the GOP is doing

at this minute. We are in the Primary.

What scares me about Hillary is not what her advisers say or that she is particularly militant. What I really fear is that she is a follower. The IWR vote and others were made because at the time they seemed to be the popular thing to do. She will be surrounded by military leaders who often think war is the answer to all problems. That is what I am afraid of.

[oasis]

38. If Hillary's being "a follower" scares you. That's solved

when she's elected president.

As for being "surrounded by military leaders who think war is the answer". Hill will be their boss. She will have civilian advisers as well.

[jwirr]

47. I once saw a poster that said "I had better go with them

for I am their leader." Not all leaders lead.

[oasis]

54. "Not all leaders lead". Huh?

[cali]

41. actually, she really is a philosophical hawk. It's much more than her being a follower

[cali]

115. the article posted makes its case that she is using specifics

Can you refute them?

[cali]

27. she has an ugly record. Honduras, Libya. Her support for the iraq war

She has a foundational belief in American Exceptionalism exercised through military force and she hasn't hesitated to broadcast that.

[oasis]

33. To be sure, Hill's not going to take any crap from those

who want to destroy us. She'll have the respect and confidence of our military.

[cali]

40. oh fuck. really? And do they hate us for our freedoms?

Libya was not a threat to us. Syria was not and neither was Iraq. Hillary is complicit in creating a destabilized middle east and the current refugee crisis. Her judgment is woefully bad.

[oasis]

45. They hate us because they hate us. With Hill at the helm

The world will know they won't be dealing with a pushover. Most Americans would view that as a good thing.

[Chan790]

51. "The world will know they won't be dealing with a pushover."

You are aware this was a policy objective of the Nixon WH in foreign policy; when did Henry Kissinger join DU?

[oasis]

56. "America must be second to none" JFK. <nt>

[Chan790]

63. There's a canyon of difference between JFK and Nixon there...

it would take a real neophyte of foreign policy to not see the chasm between Kennedy's American Exceptionalism and Nixon's willingness to overreact militarily to any challenge so that nobody thinks America is a pushover.

[oasis]

67. Hill is no "neophyte" of foreign policy, nor

she a disciple of Nixon. But, you knew that.

[cali]

66. what does that even mean? have a clue: it's hollow jingoistic political rhetoric

[oasis]

71. Many of JFK's addresses were like that, "hollow" man that he was.

just for those who might not get it.

The majority of Americans believe as I do, America must be number one in military strength.

I don't belittle those who don't want us to excel, because that's just not going to happen.

[cali]

74. I didn't say or infer that he was hollow.

You view things in a simplistic way. We don't just have the strongest military, we spend far more on it than our nearest competitors combined. What has been/is the cost to civil society? Is it self-perpetuating unnecessary wars such as Iraq?

[oasis]

76. Again. I was not for the Iraq war. Furthermore

I'm not for any wars, anywhere.

Hillary's not going to advocate a reduction in our military. I get that. Bernie's okay with me but he's not likely to be the one running our military. So, it's either Hillary, or a GOP whacko.

We're not going to agree on this tonight but it has been interesting.

Bye for now.

[cali]

64. wrong. in the middle east, they hate us for our deeds.

Your mindset is not only simplistic but mirrors rightb wing talking points.

[oasis]

73. Simplistic or not, my "mindset" mirrors the majority of Americans.

I trust Hillary will do what's best for America. You don't, but that's okay, the will of the people be done. Oops, more jingoism.

BTW, Mistakes were made in the Mideast decades before Hillary became SOS.

[hifiguy]

77. I see a lot of Maggie Thatcher in HRH

as to foreign policy and that is NOT a good thing.

[oasis]

83. Both are women uh huh, I get it.

[frylock]

101. I don't think you do get it..

I really don't.

[frylock]

98. Honduras wants to destroy us?

Fucking Honduras?!

[BlueMTexpat]

24. Sorry, I was around then.

I remember Scoop Jackson well. Hillary is no Scoop Jackson.

There is no comparison - but certainly a LOT of reaching and stretching here to find one.

[cali]

29. sorry but a hollow.declaration without explanation, is meaningless.

[SouthernProgressive]

43. Edit: Not even close to worth it with this one. nt.

[cali]

48. that is a comment that reflects a dearth of a cogent response to the facts in the op.

[uwep]

58. You really do not know what you are talking about.

Sanders is the most ardent socialist I have ever seen in my 60 years. The repugs will have a field day if he is nominated, at least Hillary understands the repug mentality. Good luck with independents, moderate Republicans, and the rich.

[cali]

68. what on earth are you going on about, dear?

This is about Hillary and her philosophy of military involvement. And your comments make it clear that you are the one who has no idea what you are talking about. Bernie's views are no different.than those of many liberal democrats.

[hifiguy]

78. Funny, his policy proposals sound just like Hubert Humphrey

and the Kennedy brothers to me. And I remember HHH very well.

[dflprincess]

104. Hubert wouldn't recognize today's Democratic party

Or the DFL.

[SouthernProgressive]

116. Th is why I edited my reply.

It is becoming very clear in post after post of name calling that they truly aren't educated to that which they speak. I mean not even close. You cannot debate someone who is willfully dishonest.

[Darb]

44. Uh huh, yeah, got it.

You are a partisan.

[cali]

52. um, no. you do not get it. I've been pointing this out about Hillary for years

[hifiguy]

79. She admires War Criminal Henry Kissinger

and called that vicious, amoral butcher a "defender of human rights." That speaks for itself.

[jfern]

88. Wow, just wow. Kissinger helped Pol Pot come to power.

And many people say that Pol Pot was worse than even Hitler. Sorry, Godwin, but Hitler didn't kill half the members of his own country.

[JoePhilly]

49. And one time, at band camp ....

[cali]

57. discuss her campaign or persona and Hillary supporters carp. discuss issues and they carp

Yeah, this is just so inconsequential. And it's mean!

[JoePhilly]

60. Your political pronouncements are starting to sound ...

... just like band camp stories.

They get more and more exciting with each retelling.

[cali]

70. It's an article from Time Magazine

You are confused

[jalan48]

50. I was in college during part of the Vietnam War.

Scoop came to speak on campus at that time but the event was only open to high school kids because he was afraid of the protests from us rowdy college students (we were kinda like the Bernie supporters you know, loud and rude-lol). Scoop loved war and Scoop loved big defense budgets because that meant big money for Scoop's campaigns.

[hifiguy]

80. They didn't call him the senator from Boeing for nothing.

[jalan48]

81. Yep-and an accurate description it is.

[hifiguy]

53. If she becomes POTUS she will have the US

in a boots-on-the-ground shooting war within 12-15 months. I'd bet my life on it.

[SoapBox]

55. Whatever she is...

I'm sticking with Bernie.

No more Bush...No more Clinton.

[Warren DeMontague]

59. I think part of the problem is too many of her people are stuck in the last century.

It's one reason why they're particularly clueless and inept around Millennials.

This is not your grandmother's election.

[Mnpaul]

69. stuck in the last century

and clinging to a bunch of failed policies that never work.

Hillary on the surge

[wyldwolf]

87. How many Democratic presidents since the early 20th century have NOT been interventionists?

you act as if being an interventionist is something new.

[ericson00]

94. Scoop would've been 1000x more effective than Jimmy Carter,

probably would've won too in 1976, and prevented Reagan/Bush. Scoop is and was awesome. The GOP misuses Scoop tho. Hillary just sees the greatness in American exceptionalism.

[Juicy_Bellows]

95. Thanks for the thread!

Unfortunately, those that would stand to learn the most from it just reply with heavy derp.

[dflprincess]

106. Of course Scoop did represent Boeing

Lots of money for them to make off defense contracts.

[cheapdate]

113. She's always been a hawk and probably always will be.

I'd like to expect that she would at least honor our agreement with Iran and continue our rapprochement with Cuba. But who knows? She might not. She's always been a hawk and probably always will be.