Home | About | Donate

Hillary Clinton and the ISIS Mess


Hillary Clinton and the ISIS Mess

Jeffrey D. Sachs

Hillary Clinton's speech on ISIS to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) showed clearly what to expect in a Clinton presidency: more of the same. In her speech, Clinton doubled down on the existing, failed U.S. approach in the Middle East, the one she pursued as Secretary of State.


Having read "Foreign Affairs", published by the CFR, for a few years now, I am rarely surprised by any international developments. "History" is reported as if things happened by accident. In fact, they almost always (depending upon the quality) follow the script. What to do? Do I rail against the injustice or accept the world into which I was born?


Well, I have to say that I like the tone and substance of this piece much more than the somewhat deceptive article Sachs wrote on the TPP A couple of weeks ago-

This last statement was somewhat disappointing though:
"Whether Clinton could ever break free of the military-industrial complex remains to be seen. If she does become president, our very survival will depend on her capacity to learn"

I see no hope what-so-ever of Hillary Clinton ever "breaking free" of the military-industrial complex and our very survival depending on her "capacity to learn" is not even worthy of consideration- This woman will surely drag us all into hell if elected....


She's certifiable. TPTB have so proclaimed!


Great to see this from Jeffrey Sachs. Despite his considerable involvement in developing the Sustainable Development Goals and other noteworthy international projects, I don't recall him wading into US politics before. His Establishment credentials are impeccable, so his going after an Establishment candidate is certainly welcome. Thanks, Jeff! Maybe we'll see you running in 2020?


"Foreign Affairs", published by the CFR is undoubtably the Janes list of the Illuminati One World Order-After all, they (CFR) have always been the bottom line, driving force, that called the shots-
I struggled through enough of Quigley's "Tragedy and Hope" to find this much out-


Yep! I don't endorse it, but do try to understand it...


Much bigger than you or I- About all we can do is hope for the best while dodging the puches :smile:


Sachs is a (insert preferred epithet here)


Well that's a refreshing break in the narrative coming out of establishment types.

Nice to see Sachs noting that both Sanders and O'Malley were far more sane on this question during the Nov 14th debate than Ms Clinton.

Hope Sachs, an economist by training, will start to address the problems of bigger and bigger banks, and why HRC's stance regarding banks remains problematic.


In rare cases, great presidents learn to stand up to the CIA and the rest of the military-industrial-intelligence complex. JFK became one of the greatest presidents in American history when he came to realize the awful truth that his own military and CIA advisors had contributed to the onset of the Cuban Missile Crisis. The CIA-led Bay of Pigs fiasco and other CIA blunders had provoked a terrifying response from the Soviet Union. Recognizing that the U.S. approach had contributed to bringing the world to the brink, Kennedy bravely and successfully stood up to the warmongering pushed by so many of his advisors and pursued peace, both during and after the Cuban Missile Crisis. He thereby saved the world from nuclear annihilation and halted the unchecked proliferation of nuclear arms.

And JFK paid for his bravery with his life, murdered by CIA contractors, E Howard Hunt et al.

Not only did the CIA's murder of JFK eliminate him as a threat to their nefarious operations, his murder has provided an object lesson to every subsequent US president - "Give the CIA a free hand. Spin the truth, tell lies to cover for them, and refuse to prosecute their war crimes. Or else you too may find the back of your head blown off with your wife beside you."

So every subsequent president was either already under their command (clearly Reagan, Bush and Bush) or caved to their evil doing because it was "just part of the job" (Ford, Carter, Clinton, Obama).

Consider the role Eisenhower played in all this. He'd seen the horrors of war, so he misguidedly accepted the Dulles brothers' covert operations as the preferable alternative. Ike was a figure head, he did not run his own administration. The Dulles brothers and Prescott Bush ran it, and the CIA expected all subsequent presidents to be as compliant to their will. Assassinating the one president who stood up to them was all that was needed.


Exactly, reading between the lines is what Sachs was trying to say but did not have courage or stupidity to say it. There is no reason not to believe that those in power would come after any American that stood in their way of domination of the world by whatever means. The might of the MIC is their to own and disperse. Hillary tried to out the right wing conspiracy but was laughed at but eight years in White House she learned how to survive and make buckets of money.


Yes, Hillary and the rest of the rotten political lot coming after JFK'S assassination by the CIA have learned how to survive and make piles of money for themselves. But what about the rest of us? The US empire is on the way out like all the rest before it. Sad thing is that this time it is taking out the rest of the world with it.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Rail! Rail!

There is a certain kind of acceptance that is called for, but not an "acceptance" that forbids speaking - and acting on - the truth.


" Not only did the CIA's murder of JFK eliminate him as a threat to their nefarious operations, his murder has provided an object lesson to every subsequent US president."

And that is why the congress and the POTUS are nothing but figure heads, sycophants and fawning cowards for what America has become: A MILITARY DICTATORSHIP! And the fact that the CIA and the people involved in the assassination have gotten away with the murder of their POTUS tells me that nothing will change militarily in the future.

When it comes to the US foreign policy, congress does not have two parties.. they only have the war parties that support America's military. The only difference between the so-called two parties is a quiddity by the fake opposition party.


There is hope the shadow government known as the "I" is quickly diminishing. The hardliners are still actively working to salvage it. See matthewbooks.com


Thank you, Mr. Sachs for penning a narrative that rightly puts the responsibility on the CIA for so much destruction of nations. What a refreshing departure from the usual frames of we, us, and (all) Americans!


Both of you are offering comments meant to normalize what the CIA does.

These organizations act in covert ways without the consent of the nation's people.

Asking what you, as an individual can do, or otherwise throwing your hands up stating nothing, but accept it.. is a paean TO the darkest acts of the most insidious organization on this planet.

Do they pay you to push this stance?


Instead of juvenile name-calling or attempting to shoot the messenger... exactly what is it in this (Mr. Sach's) excellent commentary that offends you? Are you another one here to protect the MIC and CIA regardless of the ensuing lethal consequences to the planet and its people?