Hillary Clinton Could Bring On Nuclear War with Russia & World War III

[amborin]

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/02/18/risking-nuclear-war-for-al-qaeda/



Risking Nuclear War for Al Qaeda?

February 18, 2016

Exclusive: The risk that the multi-sided Syrian war could spark World War III continues as Turkey, Saudi Arabia and U.S. neocons seek an invasion that could kill Russian troops — and possibly escalate the Syrian crisis into a nuclear showdown, amazingly to protect Al Qaeda terrorists, reports Robert Parry.

When President Barack Obama took questions from reporters on Tuesday, the one that needed to be asked – but wasn’t – was whether he had forbidden Turkey and Saudi Arabia to invade Syria, because on that question could hinge whether the ugly Syrian civil war could spin off into World War III and possibly a nuclear showdown.

snip

After all, a full-scale invasion by Turkey and Saudi Arabia in support of Al Qaeda and other Sunni rebels would pit the invading force against not only the Syrian army but its Iranian and Hezbollah (Shiite) allies – and most dangerously Russia, which lacks the manpower inside Syria to match up with the Turkish army but could deploy tactical nuclear weapons if necessary to save the lives of Russian soldiers.

So, here is a significant difference between Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

She has publicly called for the U.S. military to establish a “safe zone” inside Syria along with a “no-fly zone.”

While all that sounds very nice and peaceful, it would actually require the same invasion that Turkey is now seeking and it would require the U.S. air force to eliminate much of the Syrian air force and air defenses.

It would be a major act of war.

On Tuesday, Obama was asked about the Syrian conflict at a news conference but it was within the typical mainstream frame of suggesting that Obama is too weak in dealing with Putin. For five years, the mainstream U.S. media can’t get beyond goading Obama to increase U.S. intervention in Syria and thus bring about another “regime change.”

[randys1]

1. Consortium?

[senz]

37. Consortium News has been around for decades. Good leftist investigative reporting.

Robert Parry, the author of the OP, exposed numerous unsavory aspects of the Bush administration.

Surprised you didn't know that.

[SidDithers]

2. Parry. LOL...nt

Sid

[Kelvin Mace]

3. A bit hyperbolic

I don't think she meant anything she said about "no fly" zones, she just needed to disagree with Obama, since that is what her pollsters and consultants said she has to do at the time to look presidential. Don't automatically assume HRC believes anything she says. It's all about the focus group results.

[kristopher]

5. I disagree with the dismissive attitude you're exhibiting

She has demonstrated terrible judgment and an incredible tone-deafness to the consequences of her actions. Why would you think those basic personal characteristics would disappear when it comes to things that could lead us to any war including nuclear?

[Kelvin Mace]

8. I think those tendencies would disappear if she were elected

because World War III doesn't play well with focus groups. When the generals explain that is the outcome of her actions, she will run it past the consultants, pollsters and focus groups who will shoot it down, so she will change to another tactic.

She thinks talking like this gets her votes. Once it is proven it doesn't, she will pretend she never said it and accuse anyone who brings it up of engaging in "an artful smear".

Don't get me wrong, she will get us into a war with someone, but since a nuclear war wouldn't be profitable for her Wall Street stockholders, she will engage in something that maximizes their profit, without destroying civilization.

Please understand, I think she is a warmonger, just not a suicidal warmonger.

[amborin]

10. unfortunately, I and others do not share your confidence

[Kelvin Mace]

12. And it is just my opinion

I make no claim universal truth. I am a cynic, and believe that she will never do anything that would endanger her wealth and comfortable life style.

[kristopher]

14. Focus groups are nothing compared to the pressures on a president

If her judgement is clouded by the pressures of a campaign it is delusional to conclude that the demands of the presidency will be easier to navigate.

[Kelvin Mace]

22. Her judgment is driven by money

and the desire to stay rich. Nuclear wastelands don't have very many customers to sell things to. Also, once you nuke a place, you don't have to bomb it for decades, so that really cuts into war profiteering. A couple of million artillery shells are more profitable than a single nuke.

[kristopher]

24. Whatever dude. Demonstrated bad judgement and the nuclear football don't mix.

[Kelvin Mace]

27. And in every universe where pullin out and using the launch codes

happen, economic implosion occurs as an immediate side effect.

Again, just my opinion, but she is in this for money, not Armageddon. (That would be Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio).

[kristopher]

34. Dude, economics as you know it will cease to exist.

Putting faith in greed when mental instability is the center of concern is sheer idiocy. She didn't vote for Iraq out of Greed - she did it because she couldn't see the obvious consequences. She is not competent to be commander in chief.

[Kelvin Mace]

42. Economics doesn't "cease to exist"

the model simply changes, and it will change to a model that is not very favorable to rich people. In this country, rich people are all that matter. Why else would Wall Street, the corporate Media and the Political Establishment be lining up behind HRC. If poor people actually mattered, Bernie would win in a walk.

BTW, are you claiming that HRC is mentally unstable?

I put my faith in greed because she is surrounded by greedy people and is greedy herself.

Yes, mentally unstable people like Kim Jong Un exist, but if he really starts to get out of hand with his toys, China will put two in the back of his head. Since most of the food aid that keeps NK from starving comes from China, I doubt the generals will be too willing to start something with China.

I beg to differ about HRC's Iraq vote, it was very much driven by greed. The only way she commands the fees she does is because of the jobs she has held (and might hold). She calculated (wrongly) that voting against the AUMF would lose her the next election and kill her chance to be president, so she voted FOR to keep the gravy flowing.

She sure as hell thought about the consequences, but only the consequences to her bottom line, not the consequences to "inconsequential" non-whites in other lands.

Trouble is, her calculation didn't include voters in THIS country 15 years hence.

[kristopher]

45. Most of your post is gigo but I'll address one point

Hillary is not, in my estimation, possessed of the judgment necessary to be trusted as commander in chief of a nuclear power. Poor judgment can box a leader in to a course of action that escalates out of control very, very, quickly.

I don't want her anywhere near the trigger.

[Kelvin Mace]

47. After you have had George W. Bush

handling the trigger for 8 years, HRC is an improvement.

Again, this is America's last chance. Pick wrong and the game is over, it will just be a matter of the time scale.

[kristopher]

49. No she isn't, she is a separate and poor risk.

The more risks you take over time, the greater your chance of losing.

[Kelvin Mace]

53. We have been taking risks with nukes for decades

We are taking fewer now, since we have cut way down on our nuke habit. Of course that is like saying you are cutting down from three packs a day to two packs a day.

That said, we are taking much greater risks with all sorts of things WAY more likely to kill us than nukes. For example. I am far more concerned by the dozen or so firearms within a hundred yards of me at any given moment than I am a nuclear attack. The standards of mental competence imposed for handling a nuclear weapon is far more stringent than that required to handle a firearm.

[kristopher]

54. Her judgement sucks.

[amborin]

7. Hillary pressured Obama to bomb LIbya; now ISIS roams freely there

[Kelvin Mace]

9. Still not WWIII,

just a great opportunity for the MIC to maximize profits.

[kristopher]

16. It's just 3 minutes until midnight

01/26/2016 - 09:22
Doomsday Clock hands remain unchanged, despite Iran deal and Paris talks
Experts at National Press Club Joined by Stanford University Panel of CA Governor Brown, Former Secretary of State George Schultz and Former Defense Secretary William Perry.

WASHINGTON, D.C. & STANFORD, CA. – January 26, 2016 – The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Science and Security Board announced today that the minute hand of its closely watched Doomsday Clock will remain at three minutes to midnight, since recent progress in the Iran nuclear agreement and the Paris climate accord “constitute only small bright spots in a darker world situation full of potential for catastrophe.”

Available in PDF format, the statement accompanying the Doomsday Clock decision opens with the following words: “Three minutes (to midnight) is too close. Far too close. We, the members of the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,want to be clear about our decision not to move the hands of the Doomsday Clock in 2016: That decision is not good news, but an expression of dismay that world leaders continue to fail to focus their efforts and the world's attention on reducing the extreme danger posed by nuclear weapons and climate change. When we call these dangers existential, that is exactly what we mean: They threaten the very existence of civilization and therefore should be the first order of business for leaders who care about their constituents and their countries.”

The decision about the time reflected on the Doomsday Clock is made by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Science and Security Board in conjunction with the Board of Sponsors, which includes 16 Nobel Laureates. The hands of the Doomsday Clock were moved to three minutes before midnight on January 22, 2015, marking the direst setting of the Clock since 1983, at the height of the Cold War.

In addition to a news event at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, the Doomsday Clock also was unveiled by a panel at Stanford University in California featuring: Jerry Brown, Governor of the State of California; George P. Shultz, Thomas W. and Susan B. Ford distinguished fellow, Hoover Institution, and former U.S. Secretary of State; and William J. Perry, senior fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute, and former U.S. Secretary of Defense.

While recognizing the important progress represented by the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate accord, the Bulletin cautions that these positive steps have been offset in large part by foreboding developments....
http://thebulletin.org/press-release/doomsday-clock-hands-remain-unchanged-despite-iran-deal-and-paris-talks9122

http://thebulletin.org/overview

Overview
The Doomsday Clock is an internationally recognized design that conveys how close we are to destroying our civilization with dangerous technologies of our own making. First and foremost among these are nuclear weapons, but the dangers include climate-changing technologies, emerging biotechnologies, and cybertechnology that could inflict irrevocable harm, whether by intention, miscalculation, or by accident, to our way of life and to the planet.

Nuclear Weapons

The nuclear age dawned with the creation of the first atomic bombs dropped by the United States on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 at the end of World War II. During the Cold War years of 1949 to 1990, hostility between the United States and the Soviet Union defined the nuclear threat. Each superpower was poised to destroy the other with nuclear arsenals that together at their peak exceeded 70,000 bombs. The possibility of all-out nuclear war--a war that no one could win and that could lead to the end of modern civilization--was ever present.

The US and Soviet nuclear arsenals were by far the largest, but Britain, China, and France also established nuclear weapon programs during the 1950s. Later came Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. In contrast, other countries, including Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, and Sweden, initiated nuclear weapons programs but later decided to shut them down.

Today, the mind-numbing possibility of nuclear annihilation as a result of a deliberate attack on the other by the United States or Russia seems a thing of the past, yet the potential for an accidental, unauthorized, or inadvertent nuclear exchange between the United States and Russia remains, with both countries anachronistically maintaining more than 800 warheads on high alert, ready to launch within tens of minutes....

[Kelvin Mace]

23. Agreed,

and until a Western power burns its fingers with a nuke, we will keep playing stupid games.

But deliberately starting a nuclear war isn't in the cards. Accidentally is another story. When it happens we will have no one to blame but ourselves, since we elected these people, or tolerated the ones we didn't elect.

[kristopher]

26. Your cavalier attitude will be the root cause.

SMHInDisgust

[Kelvin Mace]

28. Not cavalier at all

I just have great faith in people's greed.

You do realize that I am not supporting her and have ZERO intention of voting for her, right?

[kristopher]

33. I'm talking about your understanding of the threat of nuclear war

You clearly have zero comprehension of what it means to the planet.

[Kelvin Mace]

38. Umm, I think I demonstrated I know exactly what it means to the planet

The first time we have one country nuke another, the economic interdependence of the world economy will punish everyone. That will happen within an hour of detonation. Even if there is but a single weapon used, the economic destruction will last decades.

If we get into an actual serious exchange, then we become the next Mad Max movie.

That said, folks with money wield much, much more power than ideologues. Nuclear weapons going off are bad for business, interrupt the manufacture of rich people toys and render their money worthless. So, a LOT of pressure is put onto world leaders to keep the fighting below nuclear levels since that is the most profitable for all concerned.

If you want to disagree with me, then by all means, do. But please refrain from insulting me as I have afforded you that courtesy.

[kristopher]

44. Your belief in greed and lack of concern about mental competence is demonstrated repeatedly

That means, on this topic, you have no visceral grasp of the topic. Your emotions obviously equate it to a movie storyline. If you consider that insulting I don't know what to tell you. I used to plan for the aftermath of nuclear war so perhaps I recognize foolish thinking on the topic a bit better than most people you've encountered.

[Kelvin Mace]

46. I am quite concerned with mental competence

but if we can survive the reign of His Chimperial Majesty (who didn't nuke anyone), we can survive HRC. Of course given her policies and their consequences to the poor, the truth, and democratic government, some might argue that nuclear annihilation might be merciful by comparison.

I have never worried about "surviving a nuclear war" since, as the saying goes, the living would envy the dead.

At this point, if anyone other than Sanders wins this election, it is pretty much game over for the human race in its current incarnation. Climate change will kill way more people than nukes.

Maybe the dolphins will do better, provided they survive what we did to the biosphere.

[kristopher]

48. IF I can survive drinking and driving on Tuesday night, I can survive it on Saturday night.

Great logic there, champ.

[Kelvin Mace]

50. Well, I don't drink,

never mind drink and drive. I also could drive home tonight safely, and be struck by a piece of Skylab while laying in my bed asleep, because sometimes, shit just happens.

And again are you saying the HRC is mentally unstable?

[Kelvin Mace]

55. I have asked you before to not be insulting

and you have ignored that request again by questioning my intelligence.

Your analogy did not "escape me". I pointed out that it was irrelevant given that I don't engage in the risky behavior you provided as example of two separate events having equal probability, statistically speaking. So, as I do not drink, I do not drink and drive. I then pointed out that it was possible to engage in safe behavior and yet still die in a freak accident.

Also, your example is flawed in reference to my example. I observed that Bush was less competent/menatlly stable than HRC. Thus, if you drank heavily to the point of staggering and drove home, you would be more likely to die, than if you simply had a beer or two and drove home.

Thank you for your time in discussing this, but I have better things to do than be insulted.

[kristopher]

56. Yep there is a lot of work for anyone whitewashing Hillary's run.

[Kelvin Mace]

57. Whitewashing? Seriously?

Disagreeing with you makes me an HRC supporter?

Wow.

Just wow.

[kristopher]

58. 14 posts that use very weak reasoning to defuse the idea that H is a CinC risk?

Yes, that qualifies you IMO.

[Kelvin Mace]

59. If that is the conclusion you are drawing

then I suggest you may want to bone up on your reading comprehension.

I am going to put you on ignore now. Congrats, you are the 2nd person on that list in 13 years.

[kristopher]

60. Thanks.

[Corey_Baker08]

4. Republican Like Scare Tactics & It's Bullshit

[kristopher]

6. No, it's a very real part of the selection of a president.

And Hillary's judgement is abysmal.

[jeff47]

17. Russia is acting as Syria's air force.

How, exactly, do you create a no-fly-zone that does not involve at least the threat of shooting down Russian planes?

[senz]

39. Robert Parry is a respected award winning investigative journalist. On the Left.

Wikipedia:

Robert Parry (born June 24, 1949) is an American investigative journalist best known for his role in covering the Iran-Contra affair for the Associated Press (AP) and Newsweek, including breaking the Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare (CIA manual provided to the Nicaraguan contras) and the CIA and Contras cocaine trafficking in the US scandal in 1985. He was awarded the George Polk Award for National Reporting in 1984 and the I.F. Stone Medal for Journalistic Independence by Harvard's Nieman Foundation in 2015. He has been the editor of Consortium News since 1995.

Learn more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Parry_%28journalist%29

[VulgarPoet]

11. I'll not fight for her.

Any war she could possibly bring us into wouldn't be for the defense of the Constitution, it'd be to line her corrupt pockets. I'd shoot myself before I took up arms for her aims.

[Sunlei]

13. going to be a couple million more refugees amassed on Turkeys borders.Probably a good idea to set-up

refugee camps in situ and prevent Putin from bombing them. Turkey already has about 2 million refugees.

I think what Putin is most worried about is how many thousands have made it past Russia's, porous, unguarded, (corrupt) borders and live in Russia today.

I'm all for "Never American troops on the ground" in the middle east area. Let Turkey and Saudi Arabia provide their own people for ground troops.

[Spazito]

15. Gosh, I hope everyone who believes this is...

planning their nuclear safe bunker! It take some time so it's better to start now!

[zappaman]

18. LOL!!!!!

[NuclearDem]

19. Turkey shot down MH17.

You can tell because of the Nazis.

[Amimnoch]

20. wow.

[MohRokTah]

21. Well that certainly deserves 100 ROFLs

[mcar]

25. Oh good gad

[1StrongBlackMan]

29. Where's that "Hair on Fire" guy when you need him? eom

[mcar]

31. I was thinking the same thing!

[riversedge]

30. Shame on the OP for bringing this crap over to DU.

[vdogg]

32. Wow!

Do you have any hair left? The fire you just set on top of your head must've been glorious to see.

[senz]

35. Well I hope she's got a bomb shelter under one of her mansions!

But don't they whisk the highest government officials to some place in Montana or thereabouts?

[Tarc]

36. This guy is like the Alex Jones of the left

Ugh.

[senz]

40. This guy is a highly respected award winning journalist.

Learn about him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Parry_%28journalist%29

[taught_me_patience]

41. The final straw

in DU's descent into the sewer. Hillary=WWIII... damn... never thought I'd see the day...

[senz]

43. Thanks for an informative, well-researched article, amborin.

Hill supporters are a bit defensive lately, so they're going to overreact to the headline.

Hang in there.

[doc03]

51. OFBS n/t

[treestar]

61. I thought Obama was going to do that?