Your Choice: Deranged Trump or Warmongering Clinton? And, Yes, They're Both Liars

“…A triumphant Hillary, more ‘rational’ and ‘savvy’ than the looney and unpredictable Donald Trump, could well have a freer path to emboldened superpower moves not only in Europe but the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Pacific. While the candidate has not revealed much lately, she is on record as vowing to ‘stand up’ to Russia and China, face off against Russian ‘aggression,’ escalate the war on terror, and militarily annihilate Iran the moment it steps out of line (or is determined by ‘U.S. intelligence’ to have stepped out of line) in its nuclear agreement with global powers.   

“Under Clinton, the Democrats might well be better positioned to recharge their historical legacy as War Party. One of the great political myths (and there are many) is that American liberals are inclined toward a less belligerent foreign policy than Republicans, are less militaristic and more favorable toward ‘diplomacy.’ References to Woodrow Wilson in World War I and Mexico, Harry Truman in Korea, JFK and LBJ in Indochina, Bill Clinton in the Balkans, and of course Barack Obama in Afghanistan (eight years of futile warfare), Libya (also ‘Hillary’s War’), and scattered operations across the Middle East and North Africa should be enough to dispel such nonsense… 

“In something of a political twist, the ‘deranged’ Trump candidacy – with its almost daily flow of bizarre utterances and proposals – actually serves Clinton’s neoliberal/neocon mission nicely, providing a foil to her outwardly more sane persona. Trump, of course, is far too irrational, too narcissistic, too unstable to assume the role of Commander-in-Chief. Who knows what might happen once his shaky hands get near the ‘nuclear trigger?’ 

“Worse yet, here is a bona fide challenger for the White House who has reportedly cozied up to that imperialist dictator, that great enemy of national sovereignty, Putin!   No need for any discussion or debate here. It follows that Hillary will be more reliable (even if more ‘untrustworthy’), more in command – clearly the best option to manage imperial affairs. Why else would all those neocons and Republican super-hawks be so happy to sign on to the Clintonite project…  

“A new Clinton presidency can be expected to further boost the U.S./NATO drive to strangle and isolate Russia, which means aggravated ‘crises’ in Ukraine and worrisome encounters with a rival military power in a region saturated with (tactical, ‘usable’) nuclear weapons.  

“Regime change in Syria? Hillary has indeed strongly pushed for that self-defeating act of war, combined with an illegal and provocative no-fly zone — having learned nothing from the extreme chaos and violence she did so much to unleash in Libya as Secretary of State. There are currently no visible signs she would exit the protracted and criminal war in Afghanistan, a rich source of blowback (alongside Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Israel). Increased aerial bombardments against ISIS in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and elsewhere? More deployments of American troops on the ground?   

“Such ventures, with potentially others on the horizon, amount to elaborate recipes for more blowback, followed by more anti-terror hysteria, followed by more interventions. Uncompromising economic, diplomatic, and military support of Israeli atrocities in Palestine?   Aggressive pursuit of the seriously mistaken ‘Asian Pivot,’ strategy, a revitalized effort to subvert Chinese economic and military power – one of Clinton’s own special crusades? No wonder the Paul Wolfowitzes and Robert Kagans are delighted to join the Hillary camp.

“No wonder, too, that billionaire super-hawk Haim Saban has pledged to spend whatever is needed to get the Clintons back into the White House, convinced her presidency will do anything to maintain Palestinian colonial subjugation. Meeting with Saban in July, Hillary again promised to ‘oppose any effort to de-legitimate Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement.’ She backs legislative efforts begun in several states to silence and blacklist people working on behalf of Palestinian rights. For this her celebrated ‘pragmatism’ could work quite effectively.

“Democratic elites say little publicly about these and other imperial priorities, preferring familiar homilies such as ‘bringing jobs back’ (not going to happen) and ‘healing the country’ (not going to happen).   Silence appears to function exquisitely in a political culture where open and vigorous debate on foreign-policy is largely taboo and elite discourse rarely surpasses the level of banal platitudes.   And Hillary’s worshipful liberal and progressive backers routinely follow the script (or non-script) while fear-mongering about how a Trump presidency will destroy the country (now that the Sanders threat has vanished)…

“Trump is of course no great bargain, a combative warrior looking to slay dragons lurking about in a dark, menacing world – something of a high-level Rambo figure – and this he happily and repeatedly advertises. Like the mythic Rambo, he is also an uncontrollable maverick, eccentric, prone to hare-brained ‘solutions’— much to the dismay of even Republican officialdom. And he is emphatically and unapologetically Islamophobic...   

“Against this corporatist and imperialist backdrop, the ‘deluded’ and ‘unhinged’ Trump becomes far too unreliable for entrance to the Oval Office; he could too easily bungle the job of managing U.S. global supremacy. In March 121 members of the Republican ‘national security community,’ including the warmongers Wolfowitz, Robert Kagan, and Brent Scowcroft, signed a public letter condemning Trump for not being sufficiently dedicated to American (also Israeli?) interests. 

“Trump compounded his predicament by stubbornly refusing to pay homage to the ‘experts’ – the same foreign-policy geniuses who helped orchestrate the Iraq debacle. A more recent (and more urgent) letter with roughly the same message has made its way into the public sphere.   Predictably, Trump’s ‘unreliability’ to oversee American global objectives has been an ongoing motif at CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal…’’

From Hillary and the War Party by Carl Boggs 


Henry A. Giroux on Trump in two sentences: 

“Trump is a real danger to the species, the country and the world in general. His views on war and climate change -- along with the promise of violence against his enemies and his unapologetic racism, bigotry and hatred of constitutional rights -- pose some of the greatest dangers to democracy and freedom the US has ever faced.’’