[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: The Trump Threat? The Trump Threat? by Stephen Lendman A new Clinton ad explains much about why America’s war party fears Trump. He calls NATO “obsolete” and may try normalizing ties with Russia for the first time since an alliance of necessity against Nazi Germany during WW II - a disaster for US warmongers like Clinton, needing adversarial relations to further their global hegemonic objectives. Her ad says “(w)e don’t know why Trump praises Putin.” He calls him “a very strong leader for Russia.” Earlier he said he’s “a very outstanding man, unquestionably talented.” He favors a new role for NATO. He’s no peacenik, but unlikely to start WW III. Compared to Clinton, he’s the lesser of two dark forces. Give him credit for wanting rapprochement, not confrontation with Russia, provided he’d follow through if elected president. His potential geopolitical shift from longstanding US policy has opponents like former acting CIA director Michael Morell calling him an “unwitting agent of the Russian Federation,” posing a threat to national security, he claimed. Neocons like Morell, Clinton and numerous others infesting Washington believe peace initiatives gaining traction represent America’s greatest geopolitical threat - especially ending longstanding adversarial relations with Russia. A statement signed by Michael Chertoff (former DHS secretary), Michael Hayden (former CIA director), Robert Zoellick (former World Bank president, NED board member), John Negroponte (former National Intelligence director) and 46 other former Republican national security officials said “(n)one of us will vote for Donald Trump.” “From a foreign policy perspective, (he’s) not qualified to be President and Commander-in-Chief. Indeed, we are convinced that he would be a dangerous President and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.” He’d “weaken US moral authority as the leader of the free world…(H)e has little understanding of America’s national interests, its complex diplomatic challenges, its indispensable alliances, and the democratic values on which US foreign policy must be based. At the same time, he persistently compliments our adversaries and threatens our allies and friends.” “…Donald Trump is not the answer to America’s daunting challenges and to this crucial election. We are convinced that in the Oval Office, he would be the most reckless President in American history.” All this and more because he believes NATO is outdated and favors normalizing relations with Russia. Make no mistake. Trump is a deplorable choice for president - yet favoring two important steps in the right direction shows he’s not all bad. Humanity’s top priority is avoiding another global war, likely with nuclear weapons if one erupts, threatening humanity’s survival. Chances for the unthinkable are far too high to risk under Hillary if she succeeds Obama. Her deplorable record since the 1990s shows she’s a lunatic fringe war goddess, extremely hostile to Russia, China and all other independent sovereign states. Her geopolitical strategy of choice is war. She supports use of nuclear weapons and US-led NATO aggression “to preserve our way of life.” Trump responded to the letter’s signatories, saying they’re “the ones the American people should look to for answers on why the world is a mess, and we thank them for coming forward so everyone in the country knows who deserves the blame for making the world such a dangerous place.” They’re “nothing more than the failed Washington elite looking to hold onto their power.” He’s right. Many are responsible for pre-and-post-9/11 wars of aggression - anti-peace extremists everyone should denounce. Clinton is the establishment choice for president. She’ll likely succeed Obama by fair or foul means. If Trump surprises and wins, he’ll likely not diverge much from longstanding US domestic and foreign policy. Candidates say anything to get elected. In office they continue dirty business as usual. Yet unthinkable global war is much more likely under Clinton than him - why it’s crucial to oppose her candidacy for the nation’s highest office or any other public one. Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Stephen Lendman (#0)
No matter who get the WH, there will be WW 3 to take on Iran, China and Russia will be a part of it.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||