The second thing NPR wants you to know about Hillary Clinton and foreign policy—after “she’s Experienced”—is “she’s more hawkish than President Obama.” White House correspondent Scott Horsley (All Things Considered, 5/17/16) says:
The ever evolving art and science of branding has sanitized US global aggression during the past quarter century from labeling the killing of civilians "collateral damage" during the 1990 Gulf War to the creation and perpetuation of brand Obama that bears little resemblance to the track record of Senator and President Obama.
I DO agree with NPR and others who project that Clinton would be even more of a hawk than Obama has, if she wins in November.
Let us also note that Obama has a set a record in arms sales, post WWII, and that he also has been at war longer than any president in history. He's also used the "military advisers" ploy to the hilt to re-establish a presence in Iraq and is currently considering it for use in other countries. Add to that countries where the government won't even admit to ongoing military activities. Perhaps most dangerous of all, he will hand to the next president the power to wage war anytime, anywhere, with minimal consultation with Congress. The reluctant warrior tag is pure hogwash. Could Hillary be worse? Unfortunately, yes, but she would be building on a huge war machine that she inherited from Obama.
I haven't listened to that mind rot since the breathless imbedding of their war propagandists.
NPR is the National Propaganda Radio.. NPR is a tool of the US Government for propaganda, influence and complacency.
Hollywood operates in the same mode. Any information presented via NPR must be viewed with much suspicion.
NPR Falls right in line with the other MSM players... all tools of the Corporate-Oligarchic (One- World- Government).
No journalist beat war drums louder than NPR's Scott Simon in the aftermath of 9-11.
Chief question of the 2016 election: can white male mythology survive in a mulit-polar world? After Trump, Hillary beats the boards like a white male hawk. Maybe she's a secret trans.
In view of how many "fundraising events" Clinton attends there has been ample opportunity for her bag men to slip testosterone into her coffee ?
This is not really true. The CIA launched its aggressive plans against Cuba without JFK's consent and left him to take the fall:
"John Kennedy began involving US troops in Vietnamese combat, and attacked Cuba in the Bay of Pigs invasion."
However, on this... Mr. Naureckas scored a bulls-eye:
"NPR glosses over all this history, presenting Obama as a relative dove in a way that suggests that its institutional memory doesn’t reach back much before the 21st century. Its presentation of Hillary Clinton as the Goldilocks commander-in-chief—more hawkish than Obama, more dovish than George W. Bush—helps to establish the constant military intervention of the “War on Terror” era as the new normal."
Why not instead argue that they speak to different audiences and both are inordinately dangerous? Is there really a need to rank this type of thing when the entire MSM is rank with propaganda?
It's the disguised Ministry of "Truth" (The allowable version, that is) for the MIC.
After all, it's FOX viewers that were (and remain) most deluded about the cause/trigger for the war against Iraq. Many still think Saddam Hussein was responsible for 911.
Kennedy was smart and brave enough to see involvement in Vietnam as a losing position. He was planning to withdraw
from Vietnam. His murder allowed LBJ to give the MIC and TPTB their covted war.
From a genuine investigative, alternative news source in the 1970s to loathsome stenographer for the Neocons.
They don't call it National Pentagon Radio for nothing...
I believe one also has to add to Obama his aggression toward Russia, since it appears he's on the path to nuclear war. Paul Craig Roberts has been writing about this for some time now (see Why WWIII Is On The Horizon and Can Russia Survive Washington’s Attack?. Eric Zuesse has been warning about this on GlobalResearch.ca (see How Obama Aims to Conquer Crimea and NATO Announces War Policy Against Russia. Chilling Scenario of Encirclement).
In this regard, one has to also add to Obama his complicity in all of the Ukraine deaths, where he funded that coup; and, Victoria Nuland played a significant part of directing who would come to power.
Clinton, a super hawk, likely thinks she could win a nuclear was against Russia; and, she's previously said she would wipe out Iran. So, if Obama doesn't start a nuclear WWIII, there's the likely possibility that Clinton will.
I recommend 'jfk and the unspeakable', after reading you might agree with the book author: jfk would not support the bay of pigs attack by the cia, and wanted troops out of vietnam. The author of this article is not correct on this point, imo, although I agree with the rest.
NPR really is a disgrace to its name.
This slow motion war has the purpose of inflating the bottom lines of war profiteers as well as distracting the public from other more serious and pressing problems. From the comments of various military analysts before congress this boondoggle could be on going for at least the next 8 years--no matter who becomes president--even Bernie--(watch for who is picked for running mates -- assassination insurance).
There's a reason it's called Programing.
I agree. I don't take NPR seriously, especially when they offer up crap like this. I remember their disgraceful cheerleading for the U.S. plans to invade Iraq in 2002-03 and their propaganda that followed. I came to refer to them as National Pentagon Radio and I resent very much during their pledge drives when they have tried to make their listeners guilty for not pledging money. NPR's management buckled under the the threats from our right-wing Congress many years ago to tone down their alleged "liberalism" or they would lose much of their funding. What gets me was that NPR received an enormous donation from the widow of the founder of McDonald's (something like $200 million) and at the time I thought that money would help them become more independent of Congressional pressure and become the network that I always wanted them to be. However, they ended up becoming even more even more of a house organ for the establishment.
I remember many years ago listening to an audio feed on Harry Shearer's "Le Show" that was a recording of an NPR management meeting. I have no idea how he got it but it was very telling. The people on the recording talked exactly like the suits on the commercial networks. This was no group of flannel wearing, granola munching, kindly progressives but a group of bottom line managers who talked of "target demographics" and "proposed advertising revenues". I admit that I was naive and I also know that certain local NPR stations represent more of what I was expecting from the network and that has resulted in me doing volunteer work for them. However, I was never able to see the network as a whole the same again. Fortunately, I have access to a wonderful local FM station that has real progressive "programming". I am currently listing to "Alternative Radio" this morning (highly recommended) which features in-depth interviews with guests discussing various topics. Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges are typical. I am quite confident that this program and others like it will never be featured on NPR.
Agreed. Kennedy inherited the plan to invade Cuba from the Eisenhower administration and possibly felt that he didn't know enough to cancel it as Commander in Chief. He WAS anti-Communist, just like Nixon, but he may have said no if the Bay of Pigs plan had been proposed after he took office. He was deeply embarrassed by the tragedy and the way that the U.S. appeared and, of course, the Bay of Pigs only strengthened Castro's position and provided the Cuban people with more evidence that the U.S. would permit no socialist country to exist in the Americas.