« Back to story "What the Clinton Appointment Means"

Story Comments

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

75%
CRYMTYPHON1 year ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

I am not remotely a libertarian;
but I found the article to be reasonable and insightful,
- though as I write it is not even certain that Ms. Clinton will become Sec of State.

I assumed Hillary was deliberately being pro-war during the last 4 years, to center herself for the presidency

- I think she is flexible enough to create, with Obama, a foreign policy that allows the US to focus its resources inwards.

(ie: getting out of the messopotamian occupation business).

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
3 Replies

loading ...
- 60%
  engineer1 year ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  Hillary was not prowar, but misled by the same lies which the Bush administration put through in aftermath of 9/11
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  2 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - 75%
    CRYMTYPHON1 year ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    If I was not fooled by the lies of the Bush admin (even put into the honest mouth of Colin Powell) I sure as heck don't think someone as smart and experienced as Hillary Clinton would be fooled.
    
    Of course, I could be doing her a discourtesy of assuming she compromised; she may have actualy been expressing her real position.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    1 Reply
    
    loading ...
    - 100%
      ETproductions1 year ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      You weren't told what the Senate and House members were told. They were given top secret briefings filled with lies manufactured by David Addington and Dick Cheney's office. They were told that Saddam had direct ties with Bin Laden, that he not only had developed nuclear weapons but had briefcase nukes and was preparing to arm al Qaeda with same.
      
      I believe engineer is right. I will be disappointed and astonished if Obama continues to pursue the American Caesar policies of Bush. I trust Obama is smarter than that.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...