|
This is the best place I can think to ask this, today's "No Hillary" meme seems to be "She'll start another war!". Bernie supporters seem to be saying this recently, but what the hell are they talking about? I could understand why they were starting to say they support Jill Stein, but this whole HILLARY'S WAR! thing is really confusing. I'm afraid to google it to end up Infowars or Natural News.
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:53 |
|
|
twistedmentat posted:This is the best place I can think to ask this, today's "No Hillary" meme seems to be "She'll start another war!". Bernie supporters seem to be saying this recently, but what the hell are they talking about? I could understand why they were starting to say they support Jill Stein, but this whole HILLARY'S WAR! thing is really confusing. I'm afraid to google it to end up Infowars or Natural News. Clinton's foreign policy, which is actually Obama's foreign policy, will lead us to invading somewhere for undisclosed reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Look into the Iranian Green Revolution - the State Department and CIA saw social media as useful tool in regime change. There's always unintended consequences and a profitable mess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:This is the best place I can think to ask this, today's "No Hillary" meme seems to be "She'll start another war!". Bernie supporters seem to be saying this recently, but what the hell are they talking about? I could understand why they were starting to say they support Jill Stein, but this whole HILLARY'S WAR! thing is really confusing. I'm afraid to google it to end up Infowars or Natural News. Which, you know. Isn't nearly the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:This is the best place I can think to ask this, today's "No Hillary" meme seems to be "She'll start another war!". Bernie supporters seem to be saying this recently, but what the hell are they talking about? I could understand why they were starting to say they support Jill Stein, but this whole HILLARY'S WAR! thing is really confusing. I'm afraid to google it to end up Infowars or Natural News. There was a big article a little while back outlining how hawkish she's been as a Secretary of State, but I can't find it
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:14
|
|
|
Commonly uttered in the Bernie thread was that she'd go to war against Iran. Being hawkish doesn't equal starting wars but you know how they are with nuance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
Zophar posted:Clinton's foreign policy, which is actually Obama's foreign policy, will lead us to invading somewhere for undisclosed reasons. Based on some second and third hand reporting, she was slightly more hawkish than Obama as SecState, but that's fine by me. Maybe she'd eg commit more resources in Syria, or accidentally misplace a few truckloads of munitions in Ukraine. I basically see her as a slightly worse Obama third term on most counts, and I'm a huge goddamn fan of Obama. Best President since lbj and I like to think he'd have handled Vietnam better besides. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:This is the best place I can think to ask this, today's "No Hillary" meme seems to be "She'll start another war!". Bernie supporters seem to be saying this recently, but what the hell are they talking about? I could understand why they were starting to say they support Jill Stein, but this whole HILLARY'S WAR! thing is really confusing. I'm afraid to google it to end up Infowars or Natural News. The main thing I've seen today is that she personally created and armed an army of child soldiers in South Sudan but of course there was no source there either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton has admitted before that she is vocally more aggressive/'hawkish' on foreign affairs than Obama has been, particularly in regards to the middle east. "She'll start another war" is a disingenuous way of saying that she'll probably want to be more militarily active in the middle east.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Rollofthedice posted:Hillary Clinton has admitted before that she is vocally more aggressive/'hawkish' on foreign affairs than Obama has been, particularly in regards to the middle east. "She'll start another war" is a disingenuous way of saying that she'll probably want to be more militarily active in the middle east. Oh, she outright said it? I must have misremembered, I thought I only heard it from the Obama Doctrine essay and other inside baseball reporting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Seems fair, wizards have been steeling triforces since 1986. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
The main things that I see get thrown at her feet is that she was very gung-ho about Libya and that she wanted a Bosnia-style no-fly zone over Syria (which would have amounted to a war declaration on Assad's SAA)
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
Haystack posted:The main things that I see get thrown at her feet is that she was very gung-ho about Libya and that she wanted a Bosnia-style no-fly zone over Syria (which would have amounted to a war declaration on Assad's SAA) I do wonder how the past 5 years would have gone if we'd managed to remove the SAA/Assad from the picture earlier. I understand the Russia part of that problem and I'm including that with the counterfactual.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Oh, she outright said it? I must have misremembered, I thought I only heard it from the Obama Doctrine essay and other inside baseball reporting. She advocated for Libya and, I think, was vocally pro Syrian intervention. She was also in favor of harsher negotiating positions in the Iran deal. This doesn't in any way mean she's going to invade Iran or start an Iraq 3.0. It should also be contextualized with the admission that Obama's been dropping bombs like a motherfucker via drones. Really, in the future US foreign intervention is likely to use far more drones than troops and bombers. No matter who is president for the foreseeable future, America is gonna be drone striking individuals on the regular. President Sanders almost certainly would have done the same. The reality is that while Hillary is a little more hardline than Obama in negotiations and policy, we are unlikely to be in a situation where Hillary starts a war. Most likely scenario where Hillary commits a bunch of troops is some U.N. Peacekeeping mission with actual, valid, reason for existing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:
I suggest something that looks even more like a badger: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
So who's had a worse week this week? Trump, or Trump surrogates?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:This is the best place I can think to ask this, today's "No Hillary" meme seems to be "She'll start another war!". Bernie supporters seem to be saying this recently, but what the hell are they talking about? I could understand why they were starting to say they support Jill Stein, but this whole HILLARY'S WAR! thing is really confusing. I'm afraid to google it to end up Infowars or Natural News. Assad and his regime are contemptible, but that statement caused a bit of a WTF moment in foreign policy circles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
I had a feeling that it was just more dumbass Sander's supporters (note, those are different from regular Sanders supporters) completely twisting reality again. The same people that have said 'well, she'll be the first presidential candidate under federal investigation!' completely ignoring the investigation is completely made up by the Republicans because they have a 25 year old vendetta against her.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Not that political, but has Anderson Cooper ever actually explicitly state he's gay? Because right now on CNN, discussing their special about AIDs in the 80s, he just openly talked about coming out to his friends in high schoo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Trumps really bad no good week continues Hundreds Claim Donald Trump Doesn't Pay His Bills in Full I see the vetting for the General Election has begun. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Not that political, but has Anderson Cooper ever actually explicitly state he's gay? Because right now on CNN, discussing their special about AIDs in the 80s, he just openly talked about coming out to his friends in high schoo. Yes, lots of times.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Yes, lots of times. Huh, I swear I remember that being treated like the one of open secrets in the journalistic world. My mistake.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
Aerox posted:The main thing I've seen today is that she personally created and armed an army of child soldiers in South Sudan but of course there was no source there either. They're thinking of Metal Gear again. That being said, no, Hideo Kojima and Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty are not acceptable sources.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I had a feeling that it was just more dumbass Sander's supporters (note, those are different from regular Sanders supporters) completely twisting reality again. The same people that have said 'well, she'll be the first presidential candidate under federal investigation!' completely ignoring the investigation is completely made up by the Republicans because they have a 25 year old vendetta against her. You might want to read the report that the state department inspector general published.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
Boon posted:So who's had a worse week this week? Trump, or Trump surrogates? N-no, it's on purpose, he has a plan, he's smart and cooL!!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I had a feeling that it was just more dumbass Sander's supporters (note, those are different from regular Sanders supporters) completely twisting reality again. The same people that have said 'well, she'll be the first presidential candidate under federal investigation!' completely ignoring the investigation is completely made up by the Republicans because they have a 25 year old vendetta against her. It's not like the State Department IG delivered a strong statement that it was entirely outside of procedure and should have never taken place or anything.  People who whine that Clinton's 'being picked on by something so frivolous as email' are either ignorant of or don't give a gently caress about either InfoSec or governmental transparency.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Huh, I swear I remember that being treated like the one of open secrets in the journalistic world. My mistake. It was until a few years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Yeah, the serious concerns over the security of the Secretary of State's communications, plus the various transparency mandates that government servants keep archivable records of such is just right-wing nutjobbery. Funny how no one gave a gently caress about either InfoSec or governmental transparency until Hillary got caught up in maybe possibly being involved in some way that hardly anyone can properly articulate. I bet if you showed the average person, hell even a knowledgeable person, 10 seemingly inane documents and asked them to pick out the one that is classified as 'top secret' they couldn't do it. Hell I bet if you presented someone 100 'top secret' documents and only revealed that they were classified as such after they looked them over they would be completely surprised. Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Jun 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Boon posted:So who's had a worse week this week? Trump, or Trump surrogates? Trump surrogates by far https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2pqX27lc-4
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Yeah, the serious concerns over the security of the Secretary of State's communications, plus the various transparency mandates that government servants keep archivable records of such is just right-wing nutjobbery. The emails are "how do I set up my dvr to record tv shows" Nobody gives a poo poo If it was full of vile, conniving stuff, then sure, I'd care, but it's all poo poo that doesn't matter. It's "bad" but not really worth caring about compared to actually important issues.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Trumps really bad no good week continues god drat is the republican party bad not a single loving bit of oppo work done by any of them and wouldn't you know what happens like just when clinton starts to clinch?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Funny how no one gave a gently caress about either InfoSec or governmental transparency until Hillary got caught up in maybe possibly being involved in some way that hardly anyone can properly articulate. The general public is only aware of things that manage to make it into the headlines. Plenty of people have decried failures of both (on the left and the right) since the dawn of time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Huh, I swear I remember that being treated like the one of open secrets in the journalistic world. My mistake. you're thinking shep smith
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Yeah, the serious concerns over the security of the Secretary of State's communications, plus the various transparency mandates that government servants keep archivable records of such is just right-wing nutjobbery. "Governmental Transparency"? Really? gently caress right off. We have a literal secret court that decides if the NSA can spy on you with no oversight. An FBI that is publicly insinuating that good cybersecurity practices are something that hinders the carriage of justice, and you're worried about the email a former secretary of state had on a private server that was by all accounts light years ahead of the IT norm in the Federal government. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
I want everybody to think back on how the GOP idiots had like 8 months to dig up stuff on Trump and only came up with 1 Trump U one liner, basically, and nothing else "Strongest field of candidates ever" WhiskeyJuvenile posted:god drat is the republican party bad Rubio and Cruz didn't start oppo on Trump until February This on a guy who didn't do any on himself AT ALL
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
quote =/= edit
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:FTFY Oh he's a just a lovely concern troll
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Funny how no one gave a gently caress about either InfoSec or governmental transparency until Hillary got caught up in maybe possibly being involved in some way that hardly anyone can properly articulate. I'm pretty sure the issue is that she broke protocol and kept State Department emails on a private server, which may have been a threat to national security. After 20 years of right-wing attacks the knee-jerk response of assuming anything negative said about Hialry Clinton is a lie seems pretty reasonable. But it seems to me like this email thing is an actual issue. I have no idea how big of an issue, because you've got one side that's hated her guts for decades and on the other side people just lying and saying "nothing happened, the FBI officially pronounced her totally great and faultless"
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
Gyges posted:She advocated for Libya and, I think, was vocally pro Syrian intervention. She was also in favor of harsher negotiating positions in the Iran deal. This doesn't in any way mean she's going to invade Iran or start an Iraq 3.0. I am very nearly 100% behind Operation Flying Death Robot (I have some concerns that we are a little too blase about utilizing our cost effective low risk robot assassins because they are cost effective and low risk) and I concur, I don't see her being all that much more actual-warmongering than Barack Hussein Obama, fairly awesome President. poo poo, her husband's major war (and I expect she will have a similar advisor team) was a pretty solid humanitarian-ish intervention against a notably shitheaded regime. I haven't read any serious arguments against protecting Kosovo, and the only arguments against the wider bombing of Serbia boil down to it not being necessary to the overall objective.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:53 |
|
|
boom boom boom posted:I'm pretty sure the issue is that she broke protocol and kept State Department emails on a private server, which may have been a threat to national security. It's bad but it's not horrific. I am 100% behind Obama amending information security policies to make it no longer technically allowable ish, which mysteriously happened shortly after Clinton retired from State.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 02:22
|
|