HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Hillary threatens first s...

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 09:49 PM

 

Hillary threatens first strike "nuclear option" against Iran, did she misspeak?

Hillary threatens unilateral first strike military action against Iran. Anybody else think that's nuts?

Once you threaten that, once you draw that line in the sand, you pretty much have to follow through, or you cost the USA its credibility as the top world cop.

Apparently Justice Breyer reigned in the insanity a little bit during the Saban forum today. That shouldn't be needed really.


Mrs. Clinton used the forum to continue staking out a harder line on Iran than President Obama has in public. She repeatedly threatened to take what she called “harsh” steps at the first sign that Iran seeks to violate commitments it made in the July nuclear agreement, which sharply limits its ability to possess or produce nuclear fuel for the next 15 years.

She said there should be “no doubt in Tehran” that if the United States saw “any violations in the deal” or an effort to procure or develop nuclear weapons technology, “we will stop them,” including, she added, “taking military action.”

At one point, responding to a question, she referred to using the “nuclear option” against Iran — usually interpreted as using a nuclear weapon — before her attention was caught by a prominent member of the audience, Justice Stephen G. Breyer of the Supreme Court.

“Oh, the military option, thank you, Justice Breyer. He’s a careful listener,” Mrs. Clinton said, reiterating that she meant a military option to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. It was a rare moment: a sitting member of the court rescuing a political candidate from a mistaken comment.


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/07/us/politics/hillary-clinton-islamic-state-saban-forum.html

66 replies, 7490 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 66 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary threatens first strike "nuclear option" against Iran, did she misspeak? (Original post)
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 OP
Agschmid Dec 2015 #1
Android3.14 Dec 2015 #35
UglyGreed Dec 2015 #2
HereSince1628 Dec 2015 #5
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #26
beam me up scottie Dec 2015 #3
rhett o rick Dec 2015 #11
beam me up scottie Dec 2015 #13
Divernan Dec 2015 #20
kath Dec 2015 #23
beam me up scottie Dec 2015 #25
Name removed Dec 2015 #55
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #60
Kelvin Mace Dec 2015 #29
beam me up scottie Dec 2015 #31
morningfog Dec 2015 #4
Divernan Dec 2015 #24
FlatBaroque Dec 2015 #6
DJ13 Dec 2015 #7
Wilms Dec 2015 #8
bahrbearian Dec 2015 #63
jkbRN Dec 2015 #9
rhett o rick Dec 2015 #10
cui bono Dec 2015 #12
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #18
jeff47 Dec 2015 #45
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #65
Turn CO Blue Dec 2015 #14
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #16
Turn CO Blue Dec 2015 #17
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #19
roguevalley Dec 2015 #32
arcane1 Dec 2015 #30
Kablooie Dec 2015 #15
Vattel Dec 2015 #21
Armstead Dec 2015 #22
jalan48 Dec 2015 #27
arcane1 Dec 2015 #28
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #34
Lazy Daisy Dec 2015 #46
GoneOffShore Dec 2015 #33
Android3.14 Dec 2015 #36
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #38
CoffeeCat Dec 2015 #42
Paka Dec 2015 #37
Scootaloo Dec 2015 #39
Major Hogwash Dec 2015 #40
CoffeeCat Dec 2015 #43
cprise Dec 2015 #47
CoffeeCat Dec 2015 #57
UglyGreed Dec 2015 #59
billhicks76 Dec 2015 #41
shadowmayor Dec 2015 #44
Cheese Sandwich Dec 2015 #48
cprise Dec 2015 #49
shadowmayor Dec 2015 #50
BlueStateLib Dec 2015 #51
bowens43 Dec 2015 #52
Scuba Dec 2015 #53
in_cog_ni_to Dec 2015 #54
Autumn Dec 2015 #56
Live and Learn Dec 2015 #58
FiveGoodMen Dec 2015 #64
Name removed Dec 2015 #61
Herman4747 Dec 2015 #62
in_cog_ni_to Dec 2015 #66

Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 09:51 PM

1. Whoops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:31 PM

35. Yes, that was reminiscent of Rick Perry's "oops"

 

WTF?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 09:57 PM

2. freudian slip

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:07 PM

5. Uh-oh, channeling her inner Maggie Thatcher again...

Clinton isn't always capable of modulating when she gets into the bravado.

remember We came, we saw, he died?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:10 PM

26. Could be.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:00 PM

3. I doubt it.

Remember the video where she laughs at the thought of going to war with Iran?

Then there was her speech at the Brookings Institute.

And during the debate she declared Iranians are her enemies.

Once is a mistake, what we see here is a pattern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:23 PM

11. Her fans don't care if she wants to bomb Iran. That's loyalty. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:24 PM

13. Of course not.

What's important is breaking that glass ceiling so a woman president will have a chance to start a war too.

Instead of just voting for and promoting other presidents' wars, she'll finally have one of her own.

Sickening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:54 PM

20. Her next book's title: A War of My Own

Or perhaps, "It Takes a Pre-emptive First Strike to Nuke a Village"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:01 PM

23. Bwah! But too sad to be really funny - she is such a goddam hawk that it's scary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:03 PM

25. Ha!

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe she said "nuclear option" on purpose (more like a Freudian slip) but do we really want a warhawk like that in the White House?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #20)


Response to Divernan (Reply #20)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 11:25 AM

60. ouch.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:16 PM

29. The second coming of Maggie Thatcher

 

Iran will be her Falklands, just with nukes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:18 PM

31. But Killer Mike was raked over the coals when he made that comparison.

Even though more and more it's looking like he nailed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:03 PM

4. She's a war hawk, looking to prove she is tough.

 

It's really disgusting how little regard she has for human life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:02 PM

24. Hillary loves the little children . . . except

for those living in parts of the world where cluster bombs have produced such lovely profits for the MIC, or for those living anywhere outside of the U.S. borders . . . . or inside the borders but not legally - send those precious babies back to Central America post haste . . . . or those whose parents dare to ask for $15.00 an hour minimum wage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:08 PM

6. Warm fuzzies for Likud and its proto-fascist cabinet

This election is a disaster if this person is on the ticket

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:10 PM

7. We really need to keep that hawk out of the WH


She is widely known to be a war hawk.

She voted to authorize the Invasion of Iraq, the biggest foreign policy blunder in U.S. History and an unmitigated disaster that continues to unfold in the Middle East to this day costing hundreds of thousands of innocent lives and trillions of dollars that could have been used to help the American people and alleviate human suffering, not cause more of it.

She has been closely associated with human rights/military disasters in Colombia, Honduras, Iraq, Libya and Syria. Calling it CT or RW slander doesn’t make it so. It’s well documented history.

She is calling for more war, not less.

Google any of those things for all the proof you need.

Those are facts. I know they're tough to swallow. A lot of people want us to turn a blind eye. Why would we? And what price would we pay?

How could any peace-loving person support this?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/12/07/1457682/-Telling-the-truth-does-NOT-a-hit-piece-make

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:13 PM

8. She's not flip-flopping on this one.

 

Hillary Clinton laughs about possible war against Iran

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wilms (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 03:39 PM

63. Laughing it up with James Baker "just bring it on", Wow Chimpy II ,were's Henry Kissinger

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:17 PM

9. I don't know how someone fucks up

"Nuclear option" with "military option" and "nuclear weapon"

This honestly, really bothers me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:21 PM

10. This sounds so much like her stance in 2002.

 

"She said there should be “no doubt in Tehran” that if the United States saw “any violations in the deal” or an effort to procure or develop nuclear weapons technology, “we will stop them,” including, she added, “taking military action.” She somehow saw violations in Iraq and a half million dead later says she made a mistake. The neocons love her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:23 PM

12. Look, they're talking about Iran having nuclear weapons, I don't think it has to be looked at as

more than a mistake when all the terms are being used at the same time.

However, she should be more careful with something this important if she wants to be president. Imagine what could have been started if someone hadn't caught the slip up.

But it does show that she's too much of a hawk for my tastes.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #12)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:47 PM

18. Maybe it was one of those on purpose mistakes

 

Like where somebody says something but acts like it was a mistake, that way you get the benefits of saying it, like you can raise money from very hawkish billionaires, but still maintain the plausible deniability that it was just a slip.

It's a way to have your cake and eat it too. To take 2 positions at the same time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:32 AM

45. Except her "claim to fame" is all her experience, especially on foreign policy

where saying a phrase just a little bit wrong can cause very large problems.

Not to mention this isn't the first time she's talked about attacking Iran.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #45)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 07:12 PM

65. Maybe she's not such a pro after all

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:28 PM

14. Yes, she misspoke. It was a slip. No, she will not nuke anybody.

He didn't reign in "insanity", he helped her correct a misstatement which could happen to anyone in public speaking.

They were using the words over and over - "nuclear weapons" and "military options".

We all use the term "nuclear option" often when referring to crazy Senate Republicans.

Who knows how the brain stores information? Maybe under terms containing "options" and not separately...



___________
I'm a Bernie supporter, Bernie volunteer, but also an admirer of Hillary. Think of me as neutral and scholarly - something rare in primary season.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turn CO Blue (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:33 PM

16. "Who knows how the brain stores information? "

 

Edit to say: That's a great question. I have no idea how the brain stores information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:47 PM

17. Inall seriousness, ten years from now, neuroscience will FINALLY be in its infancy.











___________
I'm a Bernie supporter, Bernie volunteer, but also an admirer of Hillary. Think of me as neutral and scholarly - something rare in primary season.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turn CO Blue (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:54 PM

19. Maybe just a slip of the tongue but she's such a pro though, I guess everyone makes mistakes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #19)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:24 PM

32. she had no problem with Iraq so this can't be a mistake. she just loves war. if she were a dude we

wouldn't even wonder about this. This is her version of machismo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turn CO Blue (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:18 PM

30. Agreed. And this quote of yours is perfect:

 

"In all seriousness, ten years from now, neuroscience will FINALLY be in its infancy."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:31 PM

15. eek. Not a slip you want to be known for.

I hate all the excessive Bernie boosterism around here but I still think he'll get my vote over Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 10:55 PM

21. She clearly misspoke.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:00 PM

22. Yeah great....We just signed a treaty with them. So now lets threaten 'em

 

She pisses me off IT's like she WANTS to go to war with Iran.

Which is massively stupid. You think we've had problems in Iraq and with Isis and Al Quadeh?

Those are the Teddy Bear's Picnic compared to what would happen if we go to war with Iran.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:11 PM

27. She's beginning to remind of George Jr. with all this mis-speaking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:15 PM

28. OT: I hate when they quote 3-word phrases and fill in the blanks themselves. Post the whole quote!

 

Not directed at you, of course, but to the author of the piece

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #28)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:27 PM

34. well...

 

You inspired me to go find the video. This part starts around the 40 minute mark.




But even if she only means the "nuclear option" in the sense of a go it alone US first strike military attack against Iran, isn't that still pretty extreme?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #34)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:33 AM

46. A chill just ran down my spine

 

She didn't bat an eye saying nuclear option

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:24 PM

33. Very quiet in here.

No H's with a rightward pointing arrow jumping in to defend and deflect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #33)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:33 PM

36. It makes one pause

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #33)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:51 PM

38. Talking points have not been published yet

 

What would be the defense? She's not going to nuke Iran, she just misspoke? Like it's really that much better.

I got to credit the Hillary supporters, they are a lot better organized and disciplined than Bernie supporters. They stick to their approved points. Trying to coordinate Bernie supporters would be like trying to herd cats with email.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #33)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:13 AM

42. They clock out for dinner at the same time...

I'm sure they'll return after they've eaten their Hot Pockets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:35 PM

37. War Hawk to the bitter end.

We cannot afford another Clinton in the WH.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Mon Dec 7, 2015, 11:52 PM

39. She's been extremely consistent in threatening Iran with war

 

I have no idea if she "mis-spoke" this time, but the fact is she's expressed perpetual hostility to that other nation, and so we can't just take it for granted that she tripped on her tongue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:10 AM

40. Iran is one of the 7 nations targeted by PNAC.

Kagan, the author of PNAC, is an advisor to Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #40)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:19 AM

43. Isn't that perverse?

...and shouldn't that alone disqualify her from being our Democratic nominee?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CoffeeCat (Reply #43)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 01:02 AM

47. Bush-ites are calling her foreign policy "neocon"

And yes, that is perverse. But neocons sense their Republican ship is sinking and some are moving... they need a new home in the Democratic Party:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/16/us/politics/historians-critique-of-obama-foreign-policy-is-brought-alive-by-events-in-iraq.html?_r=0

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/09/hillary-clinton-goes-militaristic-hawkish-think-tank-gives-militaristic-hawkish-speech/


The odd twist is: Bill Clinton declared in 1998 that Iraq had WMD and that regime change had to occur -- he swallowed the paranoid PNAC manifesto whole. Hillary had many years to reflect and reexamine this falsehood. She chooses to believe whatever a small cadre of paranoid whackos who preached Communism in college says about the Middle East.... US intelligence, European media, UN investigations be damned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cprise (Reply #47)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 10:01 AM

57. I see your PNAC manifesto, and I raise you a PNAC letter to Bill Clinton...

I hear you. I've been mystified and disgusted by all of this. Nice to commiserate with others who "get it."

And yes, some Democrats, including Hillary--have no shame in acting like neocons. These scumbags are some of the worst humans on the planet.

I'm sure you know about the letter the PNACers wrote to Bill Clinton in 1998. Signed by a cadre of sociopaths, including: John Bolton, Bill Kristol, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Robert Kagan (who was an advisor to Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State).

Link to letter:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5527.htm

Here's what gets me. Those bozos were shopping around the Iraq war since 1998. Hillary knew that because her then-President husband received the letter. Fast forward to when Bush was galvanizing support to invade Iraq after 9/11. Hillary knows that the same warmongers (Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Bolton, etc.) who asked her husband for war in 1998, and now in power, in the Bush administration, and asking for it again. This time, they were using 9/11 to go in. Anyone who dared to speak out against war with Iraq was positioned as a terrorist sympathizer.

Of course, the rationale for invading Iraq was ies. All you have to do is read the PNAC manifesto (Rebuilding America's Defenses) to understand that they crafted a plan years ago. They name the countries they want: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya.

Hillary could have singlehandedly stopped the Iraq war by waving around that letter they wrote her husband in 1998. She could have exposed them. But she didn't.

She went further, and banged the drum for war with Iran, when W tried to get that going. She also had a central role in overthrowing the Libyan government--an issue that has yet to be fully examined. It will explode into a scandal if she is our nominee, and there are plenty of emails (her own) to suggest that she was the architect of that failed mess.

She is embroiled in this neocon nonsense. She's their gal. She has betrayed the Democratic party.

More on Libya:
http://inthesetimes.com/article/18592/new-clinton-emails-expose-collaboration-with-media-on-benghazi-coverag1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cprise (Reply #47)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 10:34 AM

59. Funny you mention

PNAC look at the countries they wanted to disrupt or overthrow and what has happened..............

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:12 AM

41. Sold Her Soul Years Ago

 

She can join her close friends the Bushes in judgement later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:24 AM

44. Just an observation

I think she did simply get mixed up given the crowd and her position. And she was glad to correct her statement when called out. In our world and the DU world, to say such things is egregious. However, were she running with the clown posse . . .

If Trump or Cruz or any of the idiots on the Republican side clearly state, without any equivocation or apology, that they would nuke Iran their poll numbers would only go up up up. And the press would note how the American people back a candidate who's strong on defense and doesn't appear weak. Anybody catch Mara Liasson's BS comments on NPR about how the American people don't think our President is effective in dealing with terrorism and that "we" want a candidate who's strong and confident in fighting ISIS and radical Islam and terrorism? There are two separate narratives running through the media; one for repukes and one for the democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shadowmayor (Reply #44)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 01:03 AM

48. Yeah

 

Republicans are worse. Especially one I'm thinking of who seems really really really bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shadowmayor (Reply #44)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 01:05 AM

49. No, its a part of her history

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/09/hillary-clinton-goes-militaristic-hawkish-think-tank-gives-militaristic-hawkish-speech/

And she is consistent enough in it that neocons like Rober Kagan (of PNAC-invade-7-ME-countries fame) have been calling her a fellow neocon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cprise (Reply #49)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 01:59 AM

50. We're not all Neocons now

Despite what Tweedy ranted, we aren't all neocons. I find Hillary even talking to Kagan or his murderous wife Nuland horrifying. I just thought that it sounded more like a slip of the tongue. Perhaps I'm being naive or hopeful??

I think all talk of war is completely mad. I spent OIF3 in Iraq, and people have no idea what war really means. The murder, the senseless destruction, the displacement and the endless propaganda are far beyond the capacity for most to comprehend. We've been killing Iraqi people for nearly 25 years now and I always ask: "What in the hell did the people of Iraq ever do to the people of the United States?

I am a Bernie backer and will vote for Hillary should she win simply because of the Supreme Court nomination process that begins with the President. I'll take Hillary in her choice for Supreme Court Justice over any Republican running. It's kind of a yellow dog thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 02:24 AM

51. JFK's First-Strike Plan

The Berlin crisis of 1961 does not loom large in the American memory, but it was an episode that brought the United States and the Soviet Union close to war—nuclear war. Newly available documents reveal that the Kennedy White House drew up detailed plans for a nuclear first strike against the Soviets, and that President Kennedy explored the first-strike option seriously
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/10/jfks-first-strike-plan/376432/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 05:47 AM

52. she cant wait to get her hands bloody, to play with her soldiers........

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 08:45 AM

53. I find it disheartening, nee unbelievable, that she should be our front-runner.

 

Is this the future of the Democratic Party? Or our downfall?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 09:03 AM

54. O-M-EFFING-G! Freudian Slip -

Keep that woman away from the WH. Her warmongering is DISGUSTING! Has this country not had enough of war? The MIC us going to bankrupt this country with her help.

KEEP HER AWAY FROM THE CODES! Now I have no doubt she'd use them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 09:21 AM

56. I will say she misspoke but given her past rhetoric on Iran

it sure speaks volumes. Hillary isn't one to make a mistake like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 10:03 AM

58. Just another 'mistake'. How many 'mistakes' from her must we endure? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #58)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 05:43 PM

64. An awful lot if she makes it to the WH.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 01:21 PM

62. She is truly one of the WORST serious candidates...

 

for president that the Democrats have considered in quite some time. (Jim Webb was worst, but he wasn't serious).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herman4747 (Reply #62)

Tue Dec 8, 2015, 07:30 PM

66. One of the worst and

Scariest. She has no business near the nuclear codes. She'll use them - just to show how tough she is. Her warmongering is over the top and she needs to be stopped.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread