Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments


leftous wrote (edited )

I'm not saying Trump isn't pro-nuclear (he clearly is), nor am I saying those people are smart. I'm saying that the Russian war agenda of the Democrats has been wholly apparent since prior to the election. Even Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate called this out:

It is now Hillary Clinton that wants to start an air war with Russia over Syria by calling for a no fly zone. We have 2000 nuclear missiles on hairtrigger alert. They are saying we are closer to a nuclear war than we have ever been. Under Hillary Clinton, we could slide into nuclear war very quickly from her declared policy in Syria. I sure won't sleep well at night if Donald Trump is elected, but I sure won't sleep well at night if Hillary Clinton elected. .... On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary's policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia. He wants to seek modes of working (with Russia), which is the route that we need to follow not to go into confrontation and nuclear war with Russia.

Of course she said this prior to realizing Trump's policy of nuclear war with North Korea/Iran/China, but the point stands that the anti-Russian rhetoric from Clinton and the Democrats was clear.


boringskip wrote

A No-fly zone is a bullshit reason for a war, and neither side really expects to use nukes. If anything, the no-fly zone would protect radical leftists in Syria.


leftous wrote

It isn't a bullshit reason when you consider that a no-fly zone was enforced in Lybia prior to the regime change that occurred there.

Also Clinton already implied that if Russia did not comply with their no-fly zone order, it could get to the point of shooting down their planes. This fp article does a decent job of outlining the Democrats' antagonisms of Russia prior to and during the election campaign. It has only continued until now.