Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine

[Octafish]

Words of wisdom:

Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine

by Jeffrey D. Sachs
Common Dreams, Feb. 5, 2016

There's no doubt that Hillary is the candidate of Wall Street. Even more dangerous, though, is that she is the candidate of the military-industrial complex. The idea that she is bad on the corporate issues but good on national security has it wrong. Her so-called foreign policy "experience" has been to support every war demanded by the US deep security state run by the military and the CIA.

Hillary and Bill Clinton's close relations with Wall Street helped to stoke two financial bubbles (1999-2000 and 2005-8) and the Great Recession that followed Lehman's collapse. In the 1990s they pushed financial deregulation for their campaign backers that in turn let loose the worst demons of financial manipulation, toxic assets, financial fraud, and eventually collapse. In the process they won elections and got mighty rich.

Yet Hillary's connections with the military-industrial complex are also alarming. It is often believed that the Republicans are the neocons and the Democrats act as restraints on the warmongering. This is not correct. Both parties are divided between neocon hawks and cautious realists who don't want the US in unending war. Hillary is a staunch neocon whose record of favoring American war adventures explains much of our current security danger.

SNIP...

Hillary's record as Secretary of State is among the most militaristic, and disastrous, of modern US history. Some experience. Hilary was a staunch defender of the military-industrial-intelligence complex at every turn, helping to spread the Iraq mayhem over a swath of violence that now stretches from Mali to Afghanistan. Two disasters loom largest: Libya and Syria.

Hillary has been much attacked for the deaths of US diplomats in Benghazi, but her tireless promotion of the overthrow Muammar Qaddafi by NATO bombing is the far graver disaster. Hillary strongly promoted NATO-led regime change in Libya, not only in violation of international law but counter to the most basic good judgment. After the NATO bombing, Libya descended into civil war while the paramilitaries and unsecured arms stashes in Libya quickly spread west across the African Sahel and east to Syria. The Libyan disaster has spawned war in Mali, fed weapons to Boko Haram in Nigeria, and fueled ISIS in Syria and Iraq. In the meantime, Hillary found it hilarious to declare of Qaddafi: "We came, we saw, he died."

CONTINUED w/links...

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/02/05/hillary-candidate-war-machine

Wars without end. Amen.

[cantbeserious]

1. Roger That - No More Queens Of War - That Enable Death - Destroying The Lives Of Millions

eom

[Octafish]

3. War is USA Business Plan.

From the Paper o' Record, ideas for the future:

The Pitfalls of Peace

The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth

Tyler Cowen
The New York Times, JUNE 13, 2014

The continuing slowness of economic growth in high-income economies has prompted soul-searching among economists. They have looked to weak demand, rising inequality, Chinese competition, over-regulation, inadequate infrastructure and an exhaustion of new technological ideas as possible culprits.

An additional explanation of slow growth is now receiving attention, however. It is the persistence and expectation of peace.

The world just hasn’t had that much warfare lately, at least not by historical standards. Some of the recent headlines about Iraq or South Sudan make our world sound like a very bloody place, but today’s casualties pale in light of the tens of millions of people killed in the two world wars in the first half of the 20th century. Even the Vietnam War had many more deaths than any recent war involving an affluent country.

Counterintuitive though it may sound, the greater peacefulness of the world may make the attainment of higher rates of economic growth less urgent and thus less likely. This view does not claim that fighting wars improves economies, as of course the actual conflict brings death and destruction. The claim is also distinct from the Keynesian argument that preparing for war lifts government spending and puts people to work. Rather, the very possibility of war focuses the attention of governments on getting some basic decisions right — whether investing in science or simply liberalizing the economy. Such focus ends up improving a nation’s longer-run prospects.

It may seem repugnant to find a positive side to war in this regard, but a look at American history suggests we cannot dismiss the idea so easily. Fundamental innovations such as nuclear power, the computer and the modern aircraft were all pushed along by an American government eager to defeat the Axis powers or, later, to win the Cold War. The Internet was initially designed to help this country withstand a nuclear exchange, and Silicon Valley had its origins with military contracting, not today’s entrepreneurial social media start-ups. The Soviet launch of the Sputnik satellite spurred American interest in science and technology, to the benefit of later economic growth.

War brings an urgency that governments otherwise fail to summon. For instance, the Manhattan Project took six years to produce a working atomic bomb, starting from virtually nothing, and at its peak consumed 0.4 percent of American economic output. It is hard to imagine a comparably speedy and decisive achievement these days.

SNIP...

Living in a largely peaceful world with 2 percent G.D.P. growth has some big advantages that you don’t get with 4 percent growth and many more war deaths. Economic stasis may not feel very impressive, but it’s something our ancestors never quite managed to pull off. The real questions are whether we can do any better, and whether the recent prevalence of peace is a mere temporary bubble just waiting to be burst.

Tyler Cowen is a professor of economics at George Mason University.

SOURCE: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/14/upshot/the-lack-of-major-wars-may-be-hurting-economic-growth.html?_r=0

NSA! NSA! NSA!

[cantbeserious]

5. Yes - Know Thy Enemy - Oligarchs, Corporations, Banks And Their Media Minions And MIC Henchmen

eom

[Ferd Berfel]

9. but, but War is Peace!

I guess the peons just don't understand....

[cantbeserious]

11. What Orwell Feared ... From Neil Postman

[Maynar]

37. +1000

[hifiguy]

38. Yet somehow they were equally right.

[cantbeserious]

39. Oh So True

eom

[EdwardBernays]

55. Welcome to the 1980s.

This was about Reagan, which makes it hugely depressing as it could be about Hillary and many Dems.

'Any kid can conquer Libya
Just steal a fighter plane

Look who came home in a wheelchair
V.A. Hospital, they don't care
"We're the machine
You're just a tool."'

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/deadkennedys/rambozotheclown.html

[Kip Humphrey]

2. Hillary's diplomatic achievement: "a swath of violence that now stretches from Mali to Afghanistan"

Reason #6 why I'm voting for Bernie Sanders.

WIN, Bernie, WIN!

[Octafish]

10. The Warmongering Record of Hillary Clinton

An analysis rife with inconvenient detail:

The Warmongering Record of Hillary Clinton

by GARY LEUPP
CounterPunch, Feb. 11, 2015

EXCERPT...

While championing the rights of women and children, arguing that “it takes a village” to raise a child, Clinton has endorsed the bombing of villages throughout her public life. Here are some talking points for those appalled by the prospects of a Hillary Clinton presidency.

*She has always been a warmonger. As First Lady from January 1993, she encouraged her husband Bill and his secretary of state Madeleine Albright to attack Serbian forces in the disintegrating Yugoslavia—in Bosnia in 1994 and Serbia in 1999. She’s stated that in 1999 she phoned her husband from Africa. “I urged him to bomb,” she boasts. These Serbs were (as usual) forces that did not threaten the U.S. in any way. The complex conflicts and tussles over territory between ethnic groups in the Balkans, and the collapse of the Russian economy following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, gave Bill Clinton an excuse to posture as the world’s savior and to use NATO to impose order. Only the United States, he asserted, could restore order in Yugoslavia, which had been a proudly neutral country outside NATO and the Warsaw Pact throughout the Cold War. President Clinton and Albright also claimed that only NATO—designed in 1949 to counter a supposed Soviet threat to Western Europe, but never yet deployed in battle—should deal with the Balkan crises.

The Bosnian intervention resulted in the imposition of the “Dayton Accord” on the parties involved and the creation of the dysfunctional state of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Kosovo intervention five years later (justified by the scaremongering, subsequently disproven reports of a Serbian genocidal campaign against Kosovars) involved the NATO bombing of Belgrade and resulted in the dismemberment of Serbia. Kosovo, now recognized by the U.S. and many of its allies as an independent state, is the center of Europe’s heroin trafficking and the host of the U.S.’s largest army base abroad. The Kosovo war, lacking UN support and following Albright’s outrageous demand for Serbian acquiescence—designed, as she gleefully conceded, “to set the bar too high” for Belgrade and Moscow’s acceptance—of NATO occupation of all of Serbia, was an extraordinary provocation to Serbia’s traditional ally Russia. “They need some bombing, and that’s what they are going to get,” Albright said at the time, as NATO prepared to bomb a European capital for the first time since 1945.

*Clinton has been a keen advocate for the expansion of an antiquated Cold War military alliance that persists in provoking Russia. In the same year that NATO bombed Belgrade (1999), the alliance expanded to include Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia. But Clinton’s predecessor George H. W. Bush had promised Russia in 1989 that NATO would not expand eastward. And since the Warsaw Pact had been dissolved in 1991, and since Russia under Boris Yeltsin hardly threatened any western countries, this expansion has understandably been viewed in Russia as a hostile move. George Kennan, a former U.S. ambassador to the USSR and a father of the “containment” doctrine, in 1998 pronounced the expansion a “tragic mistake” with “no reason whatsoever.” But the expansion continued under George W. Bush and has continued under Obama. Russia is now surrounded by an anti-Russian military alliance from its borders with the Baltic states to the north to Romania and Bulgaria. U.S.-backed “color revolutions” have been designed to draw more countries into the NATO camp. Hillary as secretary of state was a big proponent of such expansion, and under her watch, two more countries (Albania and Croatia) joined the U.S.-dominated alliance.

(To understand what this means to Russia, imagine how Washington would respond to a Russia-centered “defensive” military alliance requiring its members to spend 2% of their GDPs on military spending and coordinate military plans with Moscow incorporating Canada and all the Caribbean countries, surrounding the continental U.S., and now moving to include Mexico. Would this not be a big deal for U.S. leaders?)

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/11/the-warmongering-record-of-hillary-clinton/

I bring this up because I am sick of seeing war after war after war that benefits the Plutocracy.

[leveymg]

45. There are two primary beneficiaries, both are Mideast, both have bankrolled her

generously. No coincidence. If you want to understand the wars and the politics of the last 40 years, follow the money.

[polly7]

50. Always such great information, Octafish.

The facts are nauseating, but it really clears up a lot for me a lot of the 'why's.' I honestly think Hillary Clinton sees Bill's Presidency as such an amazing success and they've done so well financially, personally, since ... mostly because of name recognition, that she just can't imagine U.S. foreign policy being run any other way. We saw it with Libya. She doesn't see intervening in sovereign nations, lying and manipulating to do it, and causing all that suffering as a problem at all, so much that she can even laugh when talking about it. Her attitude towards Syria, Iran, and now even Russia ... she's so fucking scary to me. How many kids and innocents have their policies and actions combined already harmed? No regret, nothing.

[SamKnause]

4. But her supporters will tell you she has experience.

Last edited Sat Feb 6, 2016, 03:24 PM - Edit history (1)

It is sound judgment she is poorly lacking.

She should be forced to look at all the dead and mangled

children her poor judgment is partially responsible for.

[Octafish]

14. WikiLeaks showed all of it is for-profit.

And the main beneficiaries are tied to Kissinger's masters.

"Before the Freedom of Information Act, I used to say at meetings, 'The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.' (laughter) But since the Freedom of Information Act, I'm afraid to say things like that."

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/11/wikileaks-kissinger-cables-bradley-manning

[SamKnause]

15. I am sadly aware.

'War Is A Racket'.

I wish the rest of this country would wake up to the lies

we have been taught and told repeatedly.

Kissinger and Albright two disgusting humans.

[leveymg]

46. Wikileaks is what FOIA was meant to be, only without the redactions. nt

[HereSince1628]

6. Sadly, based on effects, New Dem interventionism and Neo-conservatism broadly intersect

[Octafish]

42. Henry 'Scoop' Jackson was first to hire Wolfowitz.

The Power of Nightmares.

Professor HARVEY MANSFIELD, Straussian Philosopher, Harvard University: He didn't give interviews, or write political essays, or appear on the radio—there wasn't TV yet—or things like that. But he did want to get a school of students to see what he had seen: that Western liberalism led to nihilism, and had undergone a development at the end of which it could no longer define itself or defend itself. A development which took everything praiseworthy and admirable out of human beings, and made us into dwarf animals. Made us into herd animals—sick little dwarves, satisfied with a dangerous life in which nothing is true and everything is permitted.

VO: Strauss believed that the liberal idea of individual freedom led people to question everything—all values, all moral truths. Instead, people were led by their own selfish desires. And this threatened to tear apart the shared values which held society together. But there was a way to stop this, Strauss believed. It was for politicians to assert powerful and inspiring myths that everyone could believe in. They might not be true, but they were necessary illusions. One of these was religion; the other was the myth of the nation. And in America, that was the idea that the country had a unique destiny to battle the forces of evil throughout the world. This myth was epitomized, Strauss told his students, in his favorite television program: Gunsmoke.

Professor STANLEY ROSEN, Pupil of Leo Strauss 1949: Strauss was a great fan of American television. Gunsmoke was his great favorite, and he would hurry home from the seminar, which would end at, you know, 5:30 or so, and have a quick dinner so he could be at his seat before the television set when Gunsmoke came on. And he felt that this was good, this show. This had a salutary effect on the American public, because it showed the conflict between good and evil in a way that would be immediately intelligible to everyone.

BAD MAN on Gunsmoke: Let's see what happens!

JAMES ARNESS: No!

ROSEN: The hero has a white hat; he's faster on the draw than the bad man; the good guy wins. And it's not just that the good guy wins, but that values are clear. That's America! We're gonna triumph over the evils of… of… that are trying to destroy us and the virtues of the Western frontier. Good and evil.

VO: Leo Strauss' other favorite program was Perry Mason. And this, he told his students, epitomized the role that they, the elite, had to play. In public, they should promote the myths necessary to rescue America from decay. But in private, they didn't have to believe in them.

ROSEN: Perry Mason was different from Gunsmoke. The extremely cunning man who, as far as we can see, is very virtuous and uses his great intelligence and quickness of mind to rescue his clients from dangers, but who could be fooling us—because he's cleverer than we are. Is he really telling the truth? Maybe his client is guilty!

SOURCE: http://www.wanttoknow.info/war/power_of_nightmares_transcript_1

Wow! Thank you, Heresince1628! You brought it up on DU.

More on the BBC series, including links to the videos: http://www.wanttoknow.info/powerofnightmares

[HereSince1628]

43. It was and remains a terrible thing that series never aired on US broadcast tv

The BBC did a terrific job at a very important time in history and it was kept away from the American people.

[H2O Man]

7. Recommended.

I think that Ms. Clinton is a sincere liberal on domestic policy. But her foreign policy is invested in military force. The truth is that we cannot make needed domestic changes, without having a corresponding change in foreign policy.

[Octafish]

44. That Deep State serves the ideological descendants of Allen Dulles.

David Talbot explains a lot of it...

Whenever Dulles had a chance to publicize the plight of the Jews, he buried the reports. For example,when a German cable reported that 120,000 Hungarian Jews, including children, were to be taken for work in the “labor services” – a euphemism for a trip to Auschwitz – “Dulles’s communiques to OSS headquarters used the same banal language as the Nazis, referring blandly to the ‘conscription’ of Hungary’s Jews.” While noting that academic researchers decades later remain hesitant to condemn Dulles for this, Talbot will have none of it. It is for good reason that he entitles his book The Devil’s Chessboard. He thinks Dulles was satanic.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-devils-chessboard-allen-dulles-the-cia-and-the-rise-of-americas-secret-government/5484565

Dulles (and Prescott Bush and Richard Nixon) helped create this modern world where secret government and secret agents help capital accrue in the pockets of the very, very few at the expense of the nation, Constitution and planet.

It's old news to you, H2O Man. Man in the moon stuff to most Americans.

[AtomicKitten]

8. I don't want her anywhere near the levers of government.

[Dragonfli]

12. She is also the candidate of cluster bomb endorsement, I am curious if any of those quid pro

Arms sales included in their inventory cluster bombs, anybody have the shopping list handy?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1140849

Here is the bill: the “Cluster Munitions Civilian Protection Act.”

This was a single purpose amendment to a larger defense bill so was not part of an omnibus bill where she could have had mixed goals. This was an act to limit the use and transfer of cluster munitions to those munitions that have a 99% or higher reliability rate, would prohibit use of cluster munitions in areas where civilians are known to be present and would require a cleanup plan of cluster munition remnants if the US used cluster munitions.

Historically, cluster munitions are particularly troubling because they are left in place and affect civilians ... including those women and children that Hillary expresses she is a fighter for. It is a world wide issue and is the subject of numerous diplomatic attempts to take these munitions that affect civilians off the table.

Of all her warlike votes, this may be the worst. There was no progressive or liberal reason for anyone to vote against this amendment. Her vote was either because she is a defense hawk or because she wanted to look like one and not look soft. It is one of the worst weapons in the world. Hillary joined 15 other democrats and EVERY REPUBLICAN iN voting this way. Her democratic company included most of the conservative war democrats in the senate: lieberman, nelson, landrieu, pryor, shumer. Surprisingly it was a Feinstein introduced Amendment which shows that such munitions even concern people who generally are defense hawks.

And for you Clinton lovers who want to associate her fully with Obama. Of course he voted for the Ban because he does not have the war baggage she has. Hillary voted against banning these munitions and there really is no excuse for this vote.

Some links below on cluster bombs and the Bill.

http://forums.gardenweb.com/discussions/2012106/hillary-and-cluster-bombs-is-this-what-we-want

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/21/425303/-Hillary-Clinton-Voted-to-Continue-Cluster-Bombing-Civilians

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251413864

[polly7]

13. Great thread. nt.

[bobthedrummer]

16. Copy that Sir. K&R.

Inconvenient truths about the New Democrats, the Third Way, Democratic Leadership Council, etc...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2973191

[tecelote]

17. Thanks!! This needs to be a major issue with this primary!

Americans overwhelmingly want to end our continuous wars and use those taxes for good not for war.

The moral and ethical side alone is astounding. How can we accept so much killing in our name?

Of course, our opinion does not matter to anyone in power... except for one candidate and that's Bernie.

Bernie may not be able to bring us peace but we can be sure he will minimize it to a great extent.

We need to begin working towards peace before we get in to another world war.

[Fuddnik]

18. Hillary Kissinger?

[Octafish]

49. Helping privatize Mexico's national oil company demonstrates that parallel.

Drill, bebe, drill.

Hillary Clinton’s State Department Emails, Mexico’s Energy Privatization and the Revolving Door

By Steve Horn
DeSmogBlog/TruthDig, Aug 13, 2015

Emails released on July 31 by the U.S. State Department reveal more about the origins of energy reform efforts in Mexico. The State Department released them as part of the once-a-month rolling release schedule for emails generated by former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, now a Democratic presidential candidate.

Originally stored on a private server, with Clinton and her closest advisors using the server and private accounts, the emails confirm Clinton’s State Department helped to break state-owned company Pemex‘s (Petroleos Mexicanos) oil and gas industry monopoly in Mexico, opening up the country to international oil and gas companies. And two of the Coordinators helping to make it happen, both of whom worked for Clinton, now work in the private sector and stand to gain financially from the energy reforms they helped create.

The appearance of the emails also offers a chance to tell the deeper story of the role the Clinton-led State Department and other powerful actors played in opening up Mexico for international business in the oil and gas sphere. That story begins with a trio.

The Trio

David Goldwyn, who was the first International Energy Coordinator named by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2009, sits at the center of the story. As revealed by DeSmog, the State Department redacted the entire job description document for the Coordinator role.

Goldwyn now runs an oil and gas industry consulting firm called Goldwyn Global Strategies, works of counsel as an industry attorney at the law firm Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, and works as a fellow at the industry-funded think tanks Atlantic Council and Brookings Institution.

CONTINUED w/links...

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/hillary_clinton_state_department_emails_mexico_energy_reform_20150813

Perhaps it's an alternative to making war for oil. If America can get the elite in Mexico and other nations to share their loot, no need for messy invasion. It's like John Foster Dulles in '54 and Henry Kissinger in '73 with the Shah: No one really notices the thievery, apart from the poor people in the looted nation, and who cares about the little people these days? Remember: "We think the price was worth it."

[Romulox]

19. Make no mistake: her warmongering is a huge part of her appeal to her supporters. nt

[Octafish]

53. Thank you for putting that into words, Romulox.

We live in a time where the politicians appeal to the baser instincts of the mob, rather than to the critical faculties of the enlightened.

Pity, seeing the potential that is American democracy.

[Helen Borg]

20. Lots of people make a lot of money with wars!

Lots of superwealthy made money that way, or their ancestors did.

[Octafish]

54. ''Money trumps peace.'' -- George Walker Bush

Bush spoke those words on Feb. 14, 2007 at a press conference. Then he laughs and not even one member of the nation's callow, cowed press corpse saw fit to ask the giggling mass murderer a follow-up.

I remember Cindy Sheehan tried to bring it to our nation's attention.

The Bush family is a multi-generational example of those who make a living, or "killing" going by the guaranteed profit margins, from the sale of war materiel.

Know your BFEE: Merchants of Death

The nation needs, IMO, leaders who are more interested in peace and prosperity for all.

[AzDar]

21. K & R

[TBF]

24. Is that how you always talk to people?

Or just when you're advocating for Madame Secretary?

[CSStrowbridge]

25. Only when they deserve it.

"Is that how you always talk to people?"

Only when they deserve it. And someone who posts crap that can be disproved with a 30-second Google search deserves to be told to fuck off.

I do the same thing when someone claims Global Warming is a hoax. Or there is not Rape Culture. Or women are not discriminated against in general and in STEM fields in particular.

[Octafish]

29. So what did your GOOGLE search find?

Please show.

[Iggy Knorr]

48. speaking of rude violators of terms of service

Hi there! /o

[kath]

23. Hey, whatsamattayou? War makes the rich richer, so it's all good. YAY!!

[valerief]

27. And making rich people richer is the ONLY thing that drives our world.

We see it over and over and over again.

[valerief]

26. That's my biggest concern about her. Guaranteed continual war. So that's where

all our tax dollars will continue to go.

[amborin]

28. K&R This is what Hillary represents, above all....coupled with Flawed Judgement, as Evidenced by

her Iraq war vote

her urging Obama to depose Qaddafi, based on flawed evidence that others clearly saw as such

her urging Obama to arm Syrian rebels....with disastrous results

[silvershadow]

30. The Iraq invasion she voted for directly birthed ISIS. nt

[NurseJackie]

31. GMAFB!

[SoLeftIAmRight]

32. Another one, out of the park by Octafish - nice swing and

many thanks

[amborin]

33. why Hillary's Iraq war vote still matters hugely:

In fact, Clinton voted against an amendment proposed by Senator Carl Levin that would have authorized war only if Iraq refused to fully cooperate with UN inspectors.

"Instead," notes scholar Stephen Zunes, "she voted for the Republican-sponsored resolution which gave President Bush the authority to invade and occupy Iraq at the time and circumstances of his own choosing."

In fact, Clinton at the time justified her vote by parroting Bush and Cheney's false claims about biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons, and Iraqi ties to al Qaeda -- war propaganda rejected at the time by many experts around the world.

Clinton falsely claimed on Wednesday that top inspector Hans Blix supported the war resolution she voted for. He did not. And actually, just last week he said it's doubtful ISIS would exist if not for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Tell the world that truth about war really matters.

Five months after Senator Clinton's vote, Bush launched the long-threatened campaign of shock and awe, and Clinton did not object. In fact she went on to vote repeatedly to fund the ongoing war that she now claims she never intended. She later became the prime mover behind an overthrow in Libya modeled on the overthrow in Iraq.





-- The RootsAction.org Team

P.S. RootsAction is an independent online force endorsed by Jim Hightower, Barbara Ehrenreich, Cornel West, Daniel Ellsberg, Glenn Greenwald, Naomi Klein, Bill Fletcher Jr., Laura Flanders, former U.S. Senator James Abourezk, Coleen Rowley, Frances Fox Piven, Lila Garrett, Phil Donahue, Sonali Kolhatkar, and many others.

Background:
> Video of Clinton's war speech in 2002
> IPA: Clinton: Still Falsifying on Iraq War Vote
> CNN: Democratic Town Hall: CNN's Reality Check team inspects the claims
> Al Jazeera: Hans Blix on ISIL
> Washington Post: A Tough Call on Libya That Still Haunts


www.RootsAction.org

[moondust]

34. About the author.

Jeffrey Sachs

An awful lot of international and public affairs experience.

[Enthusiast]

35. Kicked and recommended! I knew it. Wars are profitable! But not to regular people.

Regular people are no longer of any consequence however. We should have understood that when they first started shipping our jobs overseas.

[hifiguy]

36. You write the Absolute Truth.

Thatcher redux.

[Uncle Joe]

40. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Octafish.

[bobthedrummer]

41. Bill Clinton: "Hillary didn't study lists of my contributors." CNN June 2015 interview.

Bill Clinton brushes aside foundation criticism (Dan Merica CNN 2015)
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/bill-clinton-foundation-hillary-2016

No 'Artful Smear' Clintons Paid $153 Million in Speaking Fees, analysis Shows (Lauren McCauley 2-6-16 Common Dreams)
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/02/06/no-artful-smear-clintons-paid-153-million-speaking-fees-analysis-shows

"Money trumps peace sometimes..." GWBush SOTU address line

[Ken Burch]

47. Most ironic usage of the "peace sign" I've ever seen.

Well, at least since THIS:

[orpupilofnature57]

51. History shows it .

[tazkcmo]

52. This is Foreign Policy Experience.

Foreign Policy Experience = Bomb Some Brown People

Bonus points if the brown people have oil.

[John Poet]

56. Say No To NeoCon Hillary

Say no to war without end.

K & R

[bobthedrummer]

57. Yep.