Posted on 10/24/2016 9:23:17 AM PDT by Lorianne
Confident in a Hillary Clinton victory, Washington’s foreign policy elite is readying plans for more warfare in Syria and more confrontations with nuclear-armed Russia, an across-the-spectrum “group think” that risks life on the planet ___ What is perhaps most alarming about this new “group think” is that there doesn’t appear to be any significant resistance to the expectation that President Hillary Clinton will unleash these neocon/liberal-hawk forces of intervention that President Barack Obama has somewhat restrained.
Assuming Donald Trump’s defeat – increasingly seen as a foregone conclusion – the Republican leadership would mostly be in sync with Clinton if she adopts a hawkish foreign policy similar to what was pursued by President George W. Bush. Meanwhile, most Democrats would be hesitant to challenge their party’s new president.
The only potential option to constrain the hawkish Clinton would be the emergence of a “peace” wing of the Democratic Party, possibly aligned with Republican anti-interventionists. But that possibility remains problematic especially since those two political elements have major policy disagreements on a wide variety of other topics.
There also isn’t an obvious individual for the peace factions to organize around. Sen. Bernie Sanders, who mildly criticized Clinton’s advocacy of “regime change” operations during the primary campaign, is 75 years old and isn’t particularly known for his stands on foreign policy issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at consortiumnews.com ...
It’s mostly under Dems that we go to war....
I have no doubt that the Democrats will start a cold war with Russia in retribution for the supposed interference in the US election.
President Hillary will use threats of war and/or threats of being nuked to extort huge donations to the Clinton’s “charity”.
The history of the world is filled with this sort of thing happening over and over...
When the ‘leadership’ of a country is faced with economic turmoil and can’t see a way out of it that doesn’t include them losing their heads they will ALWAYS find a foreign power to have a war with.
They would like to have a ‘short and victorious war’ but will settle for a long one as long as the attention of it’s ‘citizens’ is diverted from problems at home.
I've heard that said since I was a kid.
They need a new war to deflect news away from a corruption cycle which would fall out in the next months in the news feed.
FDR and WWII and the Great Depression.???
That’s an example, yes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.