First, Green Party candidate Jill Stein said that a President Hillary Clinton will likely start a war with Russia that will go nuclear.
Now The Independent chimes in: "Could Hillary Clinton start a World War? Sure as [snip] she could – and here’s how."
Basically, the paper says that Hillary Clinton is fundamentally aggressive while Trump is not. This is not an endorsement of Trump at all; in fact the essay points out the real problems with Trump's potential in facing Russia, mainly,
You can condemn that semi-isolationist “America First” mind-set if you want, but the easiest way to prevent the next world war is simply to let the Russians have what they want, provided it makes no difference to you. Trump has almost said as much about American intentions; smaller Nato allies, if they don’t pay their way, can go hang if they want American men and women to lay down their lives for them. The Russians can have Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania if they want. We’re not taking about giving them Rhode Island, or Alaska, are we?Well, I have written for at least eight years now that NATO was finished a long time ago:
What has NATO done for us?
No Action, Talk Only
What has NATO done for us redux
The pointlessness of NATO
NATO: Broke, Leaderless and Pointless
NATO continues to pretend it matters
And finally, George Friedman making the same points.
Posts
