Home | About | Donate

The Bigger Nuclear Risk: Trump or Clinton?


#1

The Bigger Nuclear Risk: Trump or Clinton?

Robert Parry

Hillary Clinton made a strong case for why handing the nuclear codes over to a President Donald Trump would be a scary idea, but there may be equal or even greater reason to fear turning them over to her. In perhaps the most likely area where nuclear war could break out – along Russia’s borders – Clinton comes across as the more belligerent of the two.


#2

How did it come to this? That is a question which is eternally scary because it is always asked after the fact. However the answer is simple enough. We have a conservative hard right mentality in charge of the corridors of oligarchy. Big money has presented us with two candidates who look different but essentially hold to a similar world view yet stand united in opposition to a third candidate ...Bernie with his people's perspective. When viewed against Bernie's unexpectedly and by now unquestionably substantial popular support, suddenly Hillary and Trump seem much closer in outlook, if not actual equals except in style.

Two against one. Yep pretty much that has been the way of this election so far. The world faces an unparalled upheaval in the very near future with the dangers of catastrophic climate change forcing the involuntary cessation of fossil fuels from our technological civilization. For the first time the oligarchy that in large part draws their profits from that fossil fuel use is facing something they actually never expected to have to deal with. The rapid end of fossi fuel use, To paraphrase > Oil is forever! They took that as a given. But now it isn't a given any longer and everything is changing fast. How can such a radical shift in our technology and economy take place without certain historical forces undergoing major disruptions and tensions?

In light of history, this crazy election seems almost like it should be expected at a time of major change at the crossroads. So rather than trusting in democracy - oligarchs might exclaim -'What has democracy ever done for me?' - we see two sides of oligarchy's coin! Trump or Hillary both opposing the people's choice candidate which seems exactly like what such a historically significant moment - a crossroads moment of economics and political change - would present to us.

Which is worse of the two? Trump's racism and climate change denial puts him one or two steps worse than Hillary but is that enough? In any case, here at the end of the age of oil when humanity could use a honest and decent man to hold the reins of power (and perhaps save the goose that laid the golden egg) to help usher us through an age of turmoil as smoothly as possible, we instead are faced with two bellicose personalities who remain stuck in the past and its conflicts and oil based economics exactly as oligarchs wanting to avoid change want. With either expect the future to be more conflicted than it need be. An unique irony is fighting for mid east oil and strategic moves over pipelines when in only a couple of decades the region will be economically unimportant. You see why oligarchs and power brokers and even the military can't get their minds around a future without oil? They just don't know How! So while the world finally rejects oil, these two fossils would perpetuate the oil wars in the Mid East, will fight to build unneeded pipelines for fossil fuels and deregulate and dismantle (EPA) and delay change etc.

The what if moment has arisen. A future generation will look back at us from their misery at this moment and wonder what if we hadn't rigged the game against that Bernie guy and what if he had done the things we all needed to stave off the misery? What if he had helped us and the world get off oil in time to keep so much of the worst from happening? What if Americans had really believed in their own democracy enough to have defended it and to have preserved it for the future? What if oligarchy had been pushed back and it really had been >>> Government of the people, by the people and for the people?

What is the difference between Hillary and Trump? The only real difference is Bernie Sanders!

What if we had had real democracy that one last time before oligarchy cemented their permanent control?


#3

The faux what if moment is a moment that never was.

Soon, very soon, Sanders shall do what he keeps promising to do, and endorse the dangerous Warmonger of Wall Street, with whom he pretends to disagree, on so many issues.

He might even be her Vice Presidential choice, in order to better neuter his supporters, and to minimize the political contortions that he'll have to go through, to convince his supporters to vote for her.

Gird yourself.


#4

Spot on. She showed us once again how aggressive she will be with the military generals, her buddies, at her back. This is a good article and I appreciate the viewpoint. When I say I am more afraid of her than Trump it is because of the above mentioned points. Trump likes to make deals, Hillary likes to be the queen of empire and is poised to piss off China and Russia even more than Obama has. She is truly scary.


#5

Let's see, we are comparing someone who has been First Lady for 8 years, a US Senator for 8 years, and US Secretary of State for 4 years with an impulsive egomaniac real estate developer/reality TV star who did not know what the nuclear triad is and stated it would be a good idea if Japan and South Korea developed nuclear weapons and would not take using nuclear weapons off the table even in Europe. So which is the bigger nuclear risk?. I am going with the impulsive egomaniac real estate developer/reality TV star


#6

Actually, we're comparing an impulsive egomaniacal real estate developer/reality TV star with a bloodthirsty Neocon who is directly responsible for the overthrow of a foreign government, and for all the ensuing death, chaos, pain, oppression of women, and religious extremism in its wake.

But if you're a DNC dead-ender, it's Go, Team!, anyway.


#7

Lrx has my vote for most likely CD poster to be in the employ of "Correct The Record."


#8

From Clinton's speech: "President Obama chose a different path. And I got to work leading the effort to impose crippling global sanctions. We brought Iran to the table. We began talks. And eventually, we reached an agreement that should block every path for Iran to get a nuclear weapon.
Now we must enforce that deal vigorously. And as I’ve said many times before, our approach must be “distrust and verify.” The world must understand that the United States will act decisively if necessary, including with military action, to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. In particular, Israel’s security is non-negotiable. They’re our closest ally in the region, and we have a moral obligation to defend them."

Full text of Clinton's speech

I've no doubt that Clinton's first two wars will be in Syria and Iran, both allies of Russia.

And it wouldn't surprise me if she made Victoria Nuland, engineer of the Ukraine coup, Secretary of State.

Clinton may actually be far more likely to bring about nuclear war than Trump.

Hopefully, time won't tell.

Sanders 2016


#9

Dick Cheney is running?


#10

Dick Cheney is running?

Why, yes, "he" is.

Democratic tribalists just haven't figured that out yet.
After C̶h̶e̶n̶e̶y̶'̶s̶ Clinton's first airstrikes, perhaps they will.


#12

This equivalence of Trump and Clinton is dangerously misleading. However much I may disagree with Clinton, she is a standard-issue, status quo politician - a true conservative who only wants to keep the world more or less the way it now is. That may not be what I want but she certainly will not seize absolute power or order the FBI to break down my door in the middle of the night.

Trump, on the other hand, is clearly a megalomaniac of the classic type and seeks power to indulge his own darkest impulses of revenge and resentment. Anyone who cannot see this has not read enough history.


#13

I was also very critical of Victoria Nuland (and Hillary's) role in the Ukraine coup a couple years ago but have become much more positive about Ukrainian independence after speaking at length with some new Ukrainian friends. Very few Americans are aware that the Ukrainian sense of nationhood was intensified - if not created - by the genocidal program of Stalin which killed at least three million Ukrainians in a man made famine in the 1930s. In this, they resemble the Palestinians who had little sense of nationhood before th Nakba.

Little wonder that some of the survivors turned to fascism and welcomed the Nazis in 1941. In fact, it was the presence of neo Nazis in the Maidan coalition who followed that sorry example that most concerned me but I have gradually come to see that they do not represent the great majority of those now fighting heroically against Putin's neo-Stalinist designs on Ukraine - despite what Putin's trolls and dupes would have you believe.


#14

Bullshit.


#15

Russian scholar Stephen F Cohen, proving that there is no possibility of a revival of Stalinism in Russia, and that Putin is firmly anti-Stalinist:

http://cdn47.castfire.com/audio/550/3618/26026/2767742/2767742_2016-05-31-231342-8210-0-329-0.32k.mp3?


#16

Tuesday June 7th is our primary election in CA. I don't know if many people are experiencing the same problems as I have, I.e. I was registered by mail as an independent, this year I noticed I had become an "American Independent" which I knew nothing about until someone good souls on CD brought it to my attention. I went and changed my party affiliation to democrat so I could vote for Bernie, my sample ballot has arrived with correct party but no voting ballot. I called my county registrars office ti inquire about my voting by mail ballot and was told it had been mailed, I told the lady that it had not arrived yet and it's already Friday, she mentioned my town's precinct to vote. My question to her was that once registered to vote by mail my name will not be on the roster she told me to come to the registrars office she will hand my ballot, I couldn't help wondering how many voters might miss out? This election has been full of surprises, God help Mr. Sanders come Tuesday!


#19

Killery is by far more dangerous than Trump. At least Trump is against threatening Russia and that at present is the issue. The Russians have been very patient with mr. peace prize winner Obomber trying to militarily encircle Russia using the Europeans in the frontlines. Even as the real old fart war criminal Kissinger has warned about agitating the Russian bear too much, he will retaliate. The war with Russia is a lot more likely now than has been since JFK's bay of pigs. The neocon oligarchs have convinced themselves that using their mini nukes (thanks to emperor Obomber) on a fist strike warfare basis they can force the Russians to surrender but to their Neanderthal brains dismay, the Russians will unleash their submarine based nukes on us in retaliation which will only escalate to full scale MAD. I am surprised and very alarmed that the progressive movement is all too quit up to this point about a war with Russia which will push global warming with fossil fuels in the back burner for an immediate global meltdown.


#20

Sir you are full of shit, a war propagandist for that fucking criminal enterprise the USMIC.


#21

And if the Russians choose another Stalin that will be their prerogative won't it?


#23

Thank you very much for helping :slight_smile:


#25

Thanks for your kind words and even if it is praise undeserved ...lol... I appreciated hearing it. I am at my ending and while I can, I try to write what I believe is true with as sincere a voice as I can. They make for themselves a society where insincerity is valued and boast that sincerity is foolish. There are some who comment on this site who prefer a shallower perspective because - "Nothing really matters anyway." Whereas I think everything matters. I think words are like seeds that sprout long after they are planted. If what we say doesn't really matter then what is the point of speaking truth to power? If words don't matter then why does power always seek to suppress words that they don't want to hear or be heard by others? They do that because words are thoughts and not just words. Thoughts are dangerous and change how people see things. Words cut through the dumbing down and can say what is rarely heard but needs to be heard!

Maybe if I am lucky I can say something that someone else will remember and say "Yeah that's right, that is the way it is! I never thought about it quite that way before!" That is my payback. We both know what we get from the MSMedia and why. I am too old to be awed by pundits and the prognosticators. It is what is said that matters to me not who is saying it. The truth is that which we never get to hear said by wordsmiths who know how to use words but who use their words for dumbing down and manipulation. My favorite thing is to fight that dumbing down and treat people with the respect that everyone deserves to hear the truth. The truth will set you free and dumbing down is what imprisons us.

So thanks again for the kind words and I will have to try harder now that I know your wife will hear what I say. So that makes two people listening! Lol (and also certain people who would rather not have anyone say certain things... said well. :innocent:)

There is a power in words well chosen

Saying thoughts not usually spoken

where you hear...

the sound of chains being broken