In a high-profile speech in San Diego today, former Secretary of State and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton lashed Republican nominee Donald Trump as “temperamentally unfit” for the presidency, warning he was so thin-skinned he would start a war over perceived insults.
While it was initially presented as a foreign policy speech for Clinton, she offered little to no clarity on her own policy platform, and instead spent materially the whole speech talking about Trump, ridiculing him for previous comments and suggesting he is too dangerous to have access to America’s massive nuclear weapons arsenal.
Clinton also faulted Trump for comments suggesting his openness to talking to Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, presenting it as “praise” for them, and accusing Trump of having “affection for tyrants.”
Virtually the only comments independent of Trump were at the end, when Clinton accused Russia and China of working against American interests, accusing Russia of “aggressive military action” on NATO’s doorstep and China of “dumping cheap steel” on US markets. She didn’t offer solutions to either, suggesting only that she would “stand our ground.”
Trump’s own response to the speech was fairly dismissive, accusing Clinton of a “bad performance,” saying she was obviously reading from a teleprompter and didn’t “look presidential.”
Clinton is too dangerous to be president. She staged a coup against the government of the Ukraine and wants to turn NATO into an invasion force against Russia.
1) Seeing as how NATO now extends to Russia’s doorstep…
2) China and Russia acting towards their own best interests rather than the USA’s? Blasphemy!
She revealed something we should have known — she has zero foreign policy strategy! None! She has a collection of postures — with no coherence, no strategy, no goals. Wherever her ideology and wind takes her. Amazingly that she chose to challenge Trump on foreign policy strategy. He actually has one, and a good one. He is challenging the globalist view of the world without borders. We have seen what that world looks like in the Middle East where the governments are just too weak to control the borders, and non-state armed forces — for hire by anyone — are destroying societies and their institutions. Diseases, illicit arms trade, human trafficking, drugs — these are some of the outcomes of an overwhelmed systems. Trump at least has a solution, restoring nation-state as a fundamental unit of international relations, not non-state actors, supra-national trade deals that force the hand of democratic institutions what no longer have a say about the things that matter in our lives. I support Trump view that there is no such thing as universal human rights, as there must exist legal systems in place in each country that is the result of their history and culture, and provides the institutional framework for a stable society. As today we cannot all agree across the globe what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what evil — how can we pretend that somebody can impose on other cultures their moral and ethical standards. And this gets us to the reality today — as we struggle with the extreme religious cults. As much as they might be acceptable in Saudi Arabia, that does not mean that Saudi Arabia has any right to build its Wahhabi mosques across Kosovo, and radicalize population. Problems can be solved by stopping to hide behind the morality tale of imposing democracy on people who did not ask to be changed — and talk honestly about our national interests. Whatever they are, we need to pursue them, negotiate, walk away if necessary, but use of force is an extreme last resort.
What is the objective of Trump foreign policy? Return stability to the destabilized regions, and promote world peace. And when it comes to alliances, it will become a necessity to insure that allies pay for heir own protection. If truth be told, many of them will suddenly discover that they are not exactly that much in danger — but if US is offering goodies, and at times pushing them into bellicosity — they feel entitled to make us pay for it. That is what Trump intends to find out. Many other foreign policy principles and strategies are outlined by this candidate — and Clinton has the audacity to say that he is ‘incoherent”. Her own non-existent strategy should be scrutinized, and every time they fish out dead babies from Mediterranean, let us remember her victorious speech — ending the safe and secure life for people of Libya. Those are Hillary’s babies.
Clinton’s posture towards Russia alone is a reason to vote against her. There is no reason on Earth why Russia and the US can’t get along and actually make the world a better place.
As for not talking to North Korea does anyone even remember Bill’s policy? He Traveled there and met with them in person to get two prisoners released. He spent 75 minutes with the leader and sat down with him over dinner. Is she now calling her own Husband an idiot and an appeaser for doing that?
So let’s not mention all the money donated to the Clinton Foundation by the governments of repressive regimes, shall we?
This from the family friend of Mubarak.
What an idiot.A bubblehead full of Ziobubbles.
Nuke her from orbit,the only way to be sure.
Just returned from a trip to northern Europe…almost everyone (local) that I talked to had nothing but ridicule and sadness for the state of our country (they generally love the American people) – and what our government is doing to the rest of the world. Makes me so proud.