If you read the attribution, it does not hold Hilary directly responsible for , it only holds her as the supporter of a "very, very hawkish foreign policy", which - obviously as only one of its consequences - has led to the rise of ISIS.
I think it's perfectly legitimate to read that quote as Hilary broadly supporting the sort of foreign policy that leads to consequences like ISIS.
Also : did Hilary propose any substantial emendations to the US Iraq policy after 2005, or 2006, which would have led to any improved outcomes ? Has she modified her foreign policy stands in substance - away from hawkishness - till date ?
Judith, Sanders is no saint, but he is yet to threaten "obliteration of Iran" - naturally, involving the extinction of the civilian population, as a part of a presidential campaign, as Hilary did in 2008, during her earlier presidential campaign.
You have satirically gotten Bernie to hang Messrs Clintons, but Madam Clinton has actually threatened mass annihilation of an entire country.
Add in the fact that Hilary threw a cock-a-hoop cheer when Qaddafi was ~disemboweled~ - like a kid playing a video-game, routinely grandstands tough in front of AIPAC and blindly ignores Israels own threats against Palestine (not to mention actual aggression), has supported an illegal war that killed 100000+, has called for further foreign aggression involving US ground troops, and I think we don't quite have the exact opposite of a saint, but a fairly dangerous, mock-strong warmonger.
And what's more, I don't think the world is amenable to such intervention anymore. That Hilary doesn't get it is only proof of her lack of political perception.
If you read the attribution, it does not hold Hilary directly responsible for , it only holds her as the supporter of a "very, very hawkish foreign policy", which - obviously as only one of its consequences - has led to the rise of ISIS.
I think it's perfectly legitimate to read that quote as Hilary broadly supporting the sort of foreign policy that leads to consequences like ISIS.
Also : did Hilary propose any substantial emendations to the US Iraq policy after 2005, or 2006, which would have led to any improved outcomes ? Has she modified her foreign policy stands in substance - away from hawkishness - till date ?
Judith, Sanders is no saint, but he is yet to threaten "obliteration of Iran" - naturally, involving the extinction of the civilian population, as a part of a presidential campaign, as Hilary did in 2008, during her earlier presidential campaign.
You have satirically gotten Bernie to hang Messrs Clintons, but Madam Clinton has actually threatened mass annihilation of an entire country.
Add in the fact that Hilary threw a cock-a-hoop cheer when Qaddafi was ~disemboweled~ - like a kid playing a video-game, routinely grandstands tough in front of AIPAC and blindly ignores Israels own threats against Palestine (not to mention actual aggression), has supported an illegal war that killed 100000+, has called for further foreign aggression involving US ground troops, and I think we don't quite have the exact opposite of a saint, but a fairly dangerous, mock-strong warmonger.
And what's more, I don't think the world is amenable to such intervention anymore. That Hilary doesn't get it is only proof of her lack of political perception.