The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMike Whitney Archive
Hillary’s War Whoop
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

If you’re one of the millions of Americans who think Hillary Clinton would make a lousy president, then pat yourself on the back because she pretty much proved it yesterday. In a presentation to the Council on Foreign Relations, Clinton made it clear that if she’s elected in 2016, she’s going to drag the country straight to war. Invoking the same imagery as her ideological twin, George W. Bush, Clinton fulminated for more than an hour and a half on Syria, war, terrorism, war, no-fly zones, war, radical jihadism, war, and “metastasizing threats”, whatever the heck those are. Oh, and did I mention war?

Seriously, while regretful Democrats can claim that they never thought Obama would turn out to be the disappointment he has been, the same can’t be said about Clinton. Madame Secretary has a long pedigree and the bold print on the warning label is easy to read. There’s simply no excuse for anyone to vote for a proven commodity like Hillary and then complain at some later date, that they didn’t know what a scheming and hard-boiled harridan she really was. Clinton’s hawkishness is part of the public record. It’s right there for everyone to see. She voted for Iraq, she supported the Libya fiasco, and now she’s gearing up for Syria. Her bloodthirsty foreign policy is just slightly to the left of John McCain and his looneybin sidekick, Lindsey Graham. Simply put: A vote for Clinton is a vote more-of-the-same death and destruction spread willy-nilly across the planet in the endless pursuit of imperial domination. It’s that simple. Here’s an excerpt from her speech:

“…let’s be clear about what we’re facing. Beyond Paris, in recent days, we’ve seen deadly terrorist attacks in Nigeria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey, and a Russian civilian airline destroyed over the Sinai. At the heart of today’s new landscape of terror is ISIS. They persecute religious and ethnic minorities, kidnap and behead civilians, murder children. They systematically enslave, torture, and rape women and girls. ISIS operates across three mutually reinforcing dimensions—a physical enclave in Iraq and Syria, an international terrorist network that includes affiliates across the region and beyond, and an ideological movement of radical jihadism. We have to target and defeat all three. And time is of the essence. ISIS is demonstrating new ambition, reach, and capabilities. We have to break the group’s momentum, and then its back.”…..

(“A Conversation With Hillary Clinton“, Council on Foreign Relations)

Get the picture? ISIS is everywhere; Syria, Iraq, Europe, the US, in the closet, under the rug…everywhere. So we need to get busy and kill them all pronto before they rape our women, behead our children and turn us all in to sex slaves.

Ever heard that mantra before? Maybe just once or twice?

Of course this is all music to the ears of the weapons manufacturers, the pudgy bankers and the other ne’er-do-wells who assemble at these elitist gatherings. They just love the idea of everlasting war, perpetual war, war stretching in all directions across all continents forever and always. That’s the perennial dream of elites, isn’t it; making sure that we’re all at-each-others-throats so they can lend us the money to buy the weapons to kill each other as efficiently as possible? That’s like Braham’s Lullaby to these guys, but for everyone else, it’s holy hell.

And what, pray tell, does Clinton have in store for us all once she’s sworn in and comfortably ensconced in the Oval Office? Well, more war, of course. Check it out:

“The United States and our international coalition has been conducting this fight for more than a year. It’s time to begin a new phase and intensify and broaden our efforts to smash the would-be caliphate and deny ISIS control of territory in Iraq and Syria. That starts with a more effective coalition air campaign, with more allies’ planes, more strikes, and a broader target set…..And we should be honest about the fact that to be successful, air strikes will have to be combined with ground forces actually taking back more territory from ISIS.

Like President Obama, I do not believe that we should again have 100,000 American troops in combat in the Middle East.” (“A Conversation With Hillary Clinton“, Council on Foreign Relations)

A “new phase” in the war on terror, says she, and it will only cost you 100,000 troops or so…for starters, that is. And, of course, she’s drawing on her vast military experience to make that calculation.

Oh, that’s right, she doesn’t have any “vast military experience”, in fact, she doesn’t have any military experience at all, she was a flunkey diplomat at the State Department who knows nothing about these matters.

But, maybe we’re being too harsh, after all, Don Rumsfeld didn’t have any experience either, and look how that turned out.

Here’s more: “We need to lay the foundation for a second “Sunni awakening.” We need to put sustained pressure on the government in Baghdad to gets its political house in order, move forward with national reconciliation, and finally, stand up a national guard.” (CFR)

Yes, and we also need to ride unicorns over rainbows to a shiny bright future in Candyland. It’s about the same thing, isn’t it?

Washington has been trying to accomplish what Clinton is recommending for the last 10 years and, guess what, it’s never worked. And it won’t work, because it’s a pipedream. The Iraqis are not “going to stand up, so we can stand down.” (Remember that one?) It’s not going to happen. She knows it and everyone in the audience knows it too. She’s just blowing smoke to convince the bigshots that she’ll faithfully prosecute their freaking wars until hell freezes over. That’s what’s really going on, or does someone actually believe these cutthroat plutocrats really want a more stable and secure Middle East?

Uh huh. That’s right at top of their list right next to higher wages for working people.

Clinton again: “We should immediately deploy the Special Operations force President Obama has already authorized, and be prepared to deploy more as more Syrians get into the fight. And we should retool and ramp up our efforts to support and equip viable Syrian opposition units. Our increased support should go hand in hand with increased support from our Arab and European partners, including special forces who can contribute to the fight on the ground.” (CFR)

Here we go again: More Special Ops, more guns and money for sketchy thugs in black pajamas, and stronger ties with the terror-breeding crackpots in Ankara and Riyadh. Intensify, escalate, ramp up, and deepen our involvement. Why not? What could go wrong?

Clinton again: “We should also work with the coalition and the neighbors to impose no-fly zones that will stop Assad from slaughtering civilians and the opposition from the air. Opposition forces on the ground with materiel support from the coalition could then help create safe areas where Syrians could remain in the country rather than fleeing toward Europe.” (CFR)

This is where career fantasist Clinton really goes off the rails. If you haven’t noticed, Russia, Iran and Hezbollah are currently carrying out military operations in Syria. The objective of these operations is to prevent regime change, to maintain the sovereign integrity of the state (which means securing the borders) and to kill as many jihadi dirtbags as humanly possible. Russian President Vladimir Putin is not going to allow the United States, or anyone else for that matter, to effectively annex part of Syria so it can continue to wage its not-so-clandestine proxy-war on Assad. That’s just not going to happen. So if Clinton is under the misguided impression that the US is calling the shots, well, she’s in for a rude awakening.

It’s one thing to spew this kind of chest-thumping blabber in front of your think tank buddies at the CFR, but it’s something else altogether to try to put this type of lunatic plan into play. The problem is, Clinton doesn’t seem to know the difference because she’s what you call a “true believer”, one of those rare birds who actually believes in the imperial mission to conquer the unwashed masses and bring them under Uncle Sam’s benign rule. She’s a Koolaid drinker, the type of person who would risk a clash with Putin just to prove a point, just to prove that the exceptional nation has an exceptional role to play in making everyone comply with its exception diktats. That’s Hillary in a nutshell, a charter member of the American Taliban, an unrepentant extremist capable of launching a nuclear war if she ever gets close enough to the Big Red Switch. Which is why it is every voting-age American should make sure she never gets that chance, or we’ll all be goners.

One last excerpt: “Now, much of this strategy on both sides of the border hinges on the roles of our Arab and Turkish partners….because ultimately our efforts will only succeed if the Arabs and Turks step up in a much bigger way. This is their fight and they need to act like it….(but) There is no alternative to a political transition that allows Syrians to end Assad’s rule…..” (H. Clinton, CFR)

So, even though the Russian-led coalition now controls more than half of Syria and Assad is in no immediate danger of being removed, Clinton insists that the effort to topple Assad is going to continue.

Doesn’t that concern you, dear reader? Doesn’t that suggest that, if given half-a-chance, Clinton’s going to ramp up the war and use Turkish and US ground troops to launch an invasion of Syria? Read the excerpt again. What else could it mean?

Readers should peruse the CFR transcript for themselves and see if they think I’m exaggerating or not. This is serious stuff. There’s nothing Hillary Clinton would like more than to slip into her Rough-Rider togs and lead the country into World War 3. We need to make sure that never happens.

MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at [email protected].

(Republished from Counterpunch by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Hillary Clinton, ISIS, Syria 
Hide 9 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. “If you’re one of the millions of Americans who think Hillary Clinton would make a lousy president, then pat yourself on the back because she pretty much proved it yesterday. In a presentation to the Council on Foreign Relations, Clinton made it clear that if she’s elected in 2016, she’s going to drag the country straight to war. . . .”

    I’m sure Whitney’s right about that. The Pantsuited One’s a neocon chickenhawk with the best of them. And she’s doubtless owned by the military-industrial complex (among others!).

    If Clinton’s elected, Vlad Putin had better keep his ICBMs at the ready. . . .

    • Replies: @Avery
  2. Avery says:
    @Orville H. Larson

    Lying FemiNazi chickenhawks, including warmongering idiot “I will rebuild the 6th fleet” Fiorina, bravely warmongering behind men, while safely hiding under mahogany desks, eager to send young American men to be killed in foreign lands, while they bloviate about alleged gender inequality in US.

    None of the FemiNazi shills are demanding that young American women be subjected to the Selective Service: the only inequality they are concerned about is in getting free benefits at the expense of US taxpayer.

    Here is the filthy chickenhawk caught blatantly lying:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1582795/Hillary-Clintons-Bosnia-sniper-story-exposed.html

    Slimy FemiNazi scum: sending American men to death, and attempting to get a free ride on their broken bodies.
    Filthy FemiNazi scum.

  3. Bill’s main squeeze does not have the intellectual capacity, psychological integrity, or moral ability to be a chikenhawk. As low as that bar is, she can’t jump it.
    This is cold calculation in her ambition to be the first Vag in charge.
    The Obama scheme to marginalize the warmongers in the Demo coalition, and Hillary’s need to appease his core, drove her to an anti-war position.
    This as expected drove the donors to their fallback with the Alternative Left Repubs, who are enslaved to the neocons. Trump busted up that play. The donors hate the man and all he stands for, because he upsets the demo/repub single party thing they have been driving for generations. As Reagan did, but with even more potential for destroying it, and much less potential for being coopted.
    The establishment repubs obediently tacked left in social and economic policy and screamed for war throughout the ME, east Europe and against Russia. It failed to register with repub voters. The outsider/insider ploy with CarlY and Ben failed. The donors got desperate. But Hillary could not back the agenda with Obama’s base in control of the dems.
    The idiotic EU, hostage to their own demented imps continued the colonization policy using Muslims. The US/EU ploy for ME hegemony blew up with ISIS in Syria, the wave immigration started, and still the EU could not divert. As expected ISIS took the opportunity and struck.
    Hillary’s opening with the donors. So she made the play. Counting on her ability to keep the Obama base convinced she is anti-war, while assuring the donors she will wage at least the one war they must have right now to crush Assad and drive Russia back out.
    She does not believe she can be elected without the donor support, money, media influence, and establishment influence. Especially against Trump who is assembling a whole new coalition that she, the repubs, the dems and the donors fear more than anything.
    It is a calculating play, and she cares not who dies or what damage is done when she wages a feckless conflict to satisfy the donors after election. I doubt she really understands what is involved or at stake, or would care if she was capable of understanding. Moving the feminist hegemony to the next stage, and being the woman who did it, is all that matters to her.

  4. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    What’s more dangerous than a psychopathic stupid bitch with a brain tumor?

  5. tbraton says:

    “She voted for Iraq, she supported the Libya fiasco, and now she’s gearing up for Syria.”

    Mike, you are giving harridan Hillary way too much credit on Libya. She did not merely “support” the Libya fiasco, she, together with Susan Rice and Samantha Power, actively pressured Obama to wage war against Qaddafi and Libya, over the opposition of SOD Robert Gates who openly proclaimed that U.S. had no vital national interests in Libya. And, of course, in normal, dishonest Clinton fashion, she refuses to take any responsibility for the ensuing chaos in Libya and neighboring countries following the overthrow of Qaddafi. What a POS Hillary is!

    • Replies: @Avery
  6. Avery says:
    @tbraton

    Right.

    Community organizer Obama, completely clueless about the world outside of Chicago, thoroughly feminized and neutered, was browbeaten and manipulated by the three warmongering evil shrews into illegally bombing a country that had not attacked US.

    [Obama Takes Hard Line With Libya After Shift by Clinton]
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/19/world/africa/19policy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    {The change became possible, though, only after Mrs. Clinton joined Samantha Power, a senior aide at the National Security Council, and Susan Rice, Mr. Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, who had been pressing the case for military action, according to senior administration officials speaking only on condition of anonymity}

  7. Yes. Hillary is horrible. But she is posing as a populist which is what the voters want and the Republicans don’t have a candidate. Yes. Hillary has baggage. But the voters re-elected her husband, Dubya and Obama after they had ample opportunity to know better.

    HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT
    What Difference Does It Make?

    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
    • Replies: @RobinG
  8. RobinG says:
    @WorkingClass

    HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT
    What Difference Does It Make?

    That’s terrific! LOLOLOL. and weep.

  9. Ugh. I can see it coming: No other Democrats to run and Trump and the rest burn out leaving us with: Clinton vs. Bush II.

    MUST we do this again? We’re nearly 25 years post- Clinton vs Bush I, and now we get a sequel, a remake.

    Really? And must they run on a war platform? Wind em up and they’ll send troops anywhere. We need to disengage from the world at large, allow the Muslims to going back to killing themselves and rather, get to cleaning up the borders and dealing with issues related to the threat within populations.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Mike Whitney Comments via RSS