Trump v Clinton - which is more Pro War?

TommyJeff

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2015
Messages
788
I'm not voting for either person and both support wars. I'm of the belief that, only considering these two, Clinton is more pro war than trump.

What do others here think? Feel free to include data/links
 
They are both for war, just against different countries.
 
Trump would support all the same policies like Clinton like Libya, he supported Libya in 2011 for humanitarian reasons and has even implied going after NK. He is full neocon, in anti establishment clothes. Trump only thinks that the world leaders did a bad job at middle east intervention, he thinks he will make intervention great again. I guess the scarier part of Trump would be his sanity and his anger, I read where his staff wouldn't talk to Trump based on what hat he was wearing. His public persona seems really vindictive, but people in his private life seem to say that he is even worse then he seems.

Trump is an authoritarian, he will say it and he will make it so. I don't think he would be one to think twice about getting us into another war. That's not to say that Clinton would be any better. There is only one possible advantage, and its debatable. One could are that in a Clinton presidency the Republicans would oppose her and they have control of congress. I think that with a Trump presidency we would see a lot of people reluctantly defending Trump just because he is republican like they did Bush all those years. That being said he is just a Trojan horse for Clinton so she can win the general election. He is just a tv personality like hulk hogan or that duck guy with the beard.
 
Last edited:
Trump would support all the same policies like Clinton like Libya, he supported Libya in 2011 for humanitarian reasons and has even implied going after NK. He is full neocon, in anti establishment clothes. Trump only thinks that the world leaders did a bad job at middle east intervention, he thinks he will make intervention great again. I guess the scarier part of Trump would be his sanity and his anger, I read where his staff wouldn't talk to Trump based on what hat he was wearing. His public persona seems really vindictive, but people in his private life seem to say that he is even worse then he seems.
Cite your source for this and provide links.

Trump is an authoritarian, he will say it and he will make it so.
You mean a decision maker. You cannot be successful in business if you are afraid to make a decision.

I don't think he would be one to think twice about getting us into another war. That's not to say that Clinton would be any better. There is only one possible advantage, and its debatable. One could are that in a Clinton presidency the Republicans would oppose her and they have control of congress. I think that with a Trump presidency we would see a lot of people reluctantly defending Trump just because he is republican like they did Bush all those years. That being said he is just a Trojan horse for Clinton so she can win the general election. He is just a tv personality like hulk hogan or that duck guy with the beard.

Trump actually said that he thinks the best way to deal with NKs aggression is to talk to China. Since without China supporting N. Korea, N. Korea wouldn't have much of anything. Made a lot of sense and did not involve the military.
 
Last edited:
Cite your source for this and provide links.
NK is further on after he talks about Libya/ Iraq


https://youtu.be/hZxD_RFvXpA?t=22m26s
O'reilly : Libya- um, the libyan action is being explained as a humanitarian issue

"I support stopping that kind of slaughter, but the problem is where do you stop..."

Iraq:
"To the victor go the spoils"
"as sure as you are sitting there Iran is going to come in and take over the oil (in Iraq), you stay and you take the oil"


"I am the most militaristic person that you will find."


You mean a decision maker. You cannot be successful in business if you are afraid to make a decision.



Trump actually said that he thinks the best way to deal with NKs aggression is to talk to China. Since without China supporting N. Korea, N. Korea wouldn't have much of anything. Made a lot of sense and did not involve the military.


That's peachy and all, but I think China wouldn't make any deals with Trump after he tries to institute his protectionist trade policies. That's the down side of pissing on your trading partners.
 
Last edited:
Trump's whole take the oil campaign and telling opec to fuckoff and lower the price of oil is just the non pc version of neocon foreign policy. No more weak sanctions and fracking to hide inflation, He said he would just tell opec to lower the oil price, and they will do it. Trump made this promise for neocon policy in his CPAC speech.
 
NK is further on after he talks about Libya/ Iraq
I was asking that your cite your source for your claim about the hat he was wearing.

That's peachy and all, but I think China wouldn't make any deals with Trump after he tries to institute his protectionist trade policies. That's the down side of pissing on your trading partners.

Yes, because it is so "free trade" to be forced to hand over technology to your "trading partner" and not have the same rules for trade as they do. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
His butler

And from that you determined...

I guess the scarier part of Trump would be his sanity and his anger, I read where his staff wouldn't talk to Trump based on what hat he was wearing. His public persona seems really vindictive, but people in his private life seem to say that he is even worse then he seems.

What "people"? His butler? The butler that has chosen to work for him for many years? The man who said this?
Mr. Senecal’s admiration for his longtime boss seems to know few limits.
Yeah, I can see how you would get from that how vindictive Trump is. :rolleyes:

Sorry, but that article you cited doesn't substantiate your claims.
 
Trump is probably less likely to lead us into war, but also more likely to lead us into a severe apocalyptic war due to his fragile ego.

I think Hillary/neocons are the slightly "safer" option so I would have to go with her. Even neocons have a logic and something resembling radar for total catastrophe. I don't think Trump has that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top