Hillary say's wha...

[firehawk1]

Hillary say's what... she's most likely running for POTUS? Wonder what caliber hole she has in her foot?

Clinton says America should ?empathize? with its enemies | Fox News

 

[Shiver]

Hillary? Wonder what caliber hole she has

I'd guess Robolo. Maybe Robusto

 

[BiscuitNaBasket]

And what a horrible POTUS she would make. You can't empathize and make peace with someone who wants to kill you just because you exist.

 

[rambone]

Can someone post the full quote? Fox News only offers sentence fragments.

 

[steveh_131]

Can someone post the full quote? Fox News only offers sentence fragments.

"This is what we call smart power," Clinton said to a small audience at Georgetown. "Using every possible tool and partner to advance peace and security. Leaving no one on the sidelines. Showing respect even for one's enemies. Trying to understand, in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view. Helping to define the problems, determine the solutions. That is what we believe in the 21st century will change -- change the prospects for peace."

[video=youtube;2zVHgqj8His]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zVHgqj8His[/video]

 

[OakRiver]

So we as a country have to check our privilege?

 

[rambone]

Is the "respect" going to resemble US foreign policy from 2009-2013? Secretary Hillary oversaw nonstop war, toppling Libya, most drone strikes ever...

 

[spec4]

Well folks, she ain't going away soon. I view her as a criminal (filegate, travelgate, whitewater, etc) and have no reason to think she won't do criminal acts in the future. She personifies a phony social elitist. Competency doesn't even come into consideration.

 

[firehawk1]

Here's her speaking on this, totally delusional.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zVHgqj8His

Whoops, steveh 'ya beat me to it.

 

[OakRiver]

If Hilary runs at this point what difference does it make?

 

[rambone]

Here is a longer clip, in context. I find it unremarkable.

You know, of all the evilness that the Clintons have been involved in, the "opposition" sure plays patty-cake going after them. Yeah, lets rip her for calling for peace in the 21st century -- That should really swing some votes.

(That's directed at the multi-billion dollar media industry, not the OP)

[video=youtube;9YtnPpzbJ2Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YtnPpzbJ2Q[/video]

 

[Trigger Time]

Stupid ****

 

[firehawk1]

Here is a longer clip, in context. I find it unremarkable.

You know, of all the evilness that the Clintons have been involved in, the "opposition" sure plays patty-cake going after them. Yeah, lets rip her for calling for peace in the 21st century -- That should really swing some votes.

(That's directed at the multi-billion dollar media industry, not the OP)

[video=youtube;9YtnPpzbJ2Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YtnPpzbJ2Q[/video]

Peace at what price Neville?

 

[indykid]

Peace at what price Neville?

You beat me to it by 2 minutes.

So empathize with our current enemy, then when we turn our backs we either get blown up or our heads lopped off. Yep, sounds like a good plan Mrs. Clinton.

 

[rambone]

Peace at what price Neville?

WW2 would be a good place to start the conversation. I was just recalling how the USA empathized with Stalin after he murdered millions of his people.

He was America's "Uncle Joe."

 

[ModernGunner]

The Clintons believe, at this point in their life, they 'deserve' whatever they demand from the U.S., and the American people, because they've 'earned it'.

And, for the record, citing previous bad behavior does not 'justify' bad behavior. Never has. This is the same ludicrous 'justification' some bank robber might attempt; John Dillinger did it in the 1930's, so he shouldn't be prosecuted for it, now. Or, the ticket speeder that complains because 'other people were speeding, too!' Citing such 'moral equivalency' is a hollow 'argument' and demonstrates an astoundingly low level of thinking and a complete lack of understanding.

 

[firehawk1]

WW2 would be a good place to start the conversation. I was just recalling how the USA empathized with Stalin after he murdered millions of his people.

He was America's "Uncle Joe."

While I'm not a fan of FDR, The Soviet Union was not a threat to the Untied States at the time. Germany had declared war on the United States right after Pearl Harbor, so was a threat. I'm not military strategist by any stretch of the imagination but siding with the Soviet Union at the time would appear to be strategic thinking. By supporting the Soviet Union Hitler was forced to stay engaged in a two front war.

If the world was a perfect place, and everyone was pure as the driven snow having to possibly bend your ideals would be a non issue. The world is not a perfect place and one might just have to''sleep with the devil' at certain times to insure your survival. I do agree with Patton though, Uncle Joe as you put it should have been driven back to the Soviet Union's borders that existed before the war. Deals made by FDR, Churchill, Truman et al for the post war Europe were disgraceful.

 

[rambone]

While I'm not a fan of FDR, The Soviet Union was not a threat to the Untied States at the time. Germany had declared war on the United States right after Pearl Harbor, so was a threat. I'm not military strategist by any stretch of the imagination but siding with the Soviet Union at the time would appear to be strategic thinking. By supporting the Soviet Union Hitler was forced to stay engaged in a two front war.

If the world was a perfect place, and everyone was pure as the driven snow having to possibly bend your ideals would be a non issue. The world is not a perfect place and one might just have to''sleep with the devil' at certain times to insure your survival. I do agree with Patton though, Uncle Joe as you put it should have been driven back to the Soviet Union's borders that existed before the war. Deals made by FDR, Churchill, Truman et al for the post war Europe were disgraceful.

Stalin was the biggest thug in the world at the time. And as you have shown, a lot of people were OK with that helping him. That is why the comments in the video are unremarkable. This was just one example. Geopolitical history is full of this kind of stuff.

I want Hillary to burn in flames, don't get me wrong. But there are many stronger reasons to hate the Clintons. When her opponents focus on softballs like this, it actually benefits her, IMO.

 

[88GT]

Stalin was the biggest thug in the world at the time. And as you have shown, a lot of people were OK with that helping him. That is why the comments in the video are unremarkable. This was just one example. Geopolitical history is full of this kind of stuff.

I want Hillary to burn in flames, don't get me wrong. But there are many stronger reasons to hate the Clintons. When her opponents focus on softballs like this, it actually benefits her, IMO.

It's an example of many things.

 

[firehawk1]

Stalin was the biggest thug in the world at the time. And as you have shown, a lot of people were OK with that helping him. That is why the comments in the video are unremarkable. This was just one example. Geopolitical history is full of this kind of stuff.

I want Hillary to burn in flames, don't get me wrong. But there are many stronger reasons to hate the Clintons. When her opponents focus on softballs like this, it actually benefits her, IMO.

My main point in posting this was, it is remarkable that someone possibly running for President would voice the opinion that we need to empathize with an enemy. It's just touchy/feel good crap. Wishing things were the way we WANT them to be does not change reality.

The reasons these 'wars' have gone on as long as they have and appear endless is because we have lost our willingness to destroy an enemy. We don't even seem willing to force them to a unconditional surrender so these 'wars' go on and on. All because we want to appear nice and understanding. That is just '60's flower child/hippie talk, you know make love not war drivel...

BTW I have to ask, what is your take on siding with Stalin during WWll?