It’s very difficult for those who politically lean left to understand that Donald Trump is actually less of a warmonger than Hillary Clinton. I’m not voting for Trump, but I would rather he win the US presidency than Clinton because I know he’s less of a threat due to what he’s said recently regarding foreign policy versus what Hillary has said and her record. Trump has openly questioned the necessity of NATO, opposes arming terrorists in Syria, has admitted that the wars in Libya, Iraq and Syria are disasters, and wants to work with Russia. Hillary has taken the opposite position on all of these subjects.
Now what Trump says now versus what he does in office are two separate things. And a lot of things Trump has said regarding Muslims, building a wall on the US/Mexico border, his support of genocidal Israel and his opposition to the Iran deal are ridiculous. But Hillary has been involved in the death of thousands of Muslims including innocent women and children, backed building a wall on the US/Mexico border in 2006, is as pro Israel as one can get, threatens to nuke Iran, and is fully backed by the biggest warmongers around, the 9/11 involved neocons.
Below is a really good video over-viewing how big a threat Hillary Clinton is if elected president. Please watch and share.
The world looks on in horror as Hillary Clinton heads to Philadelphia to be nominated as the Democratic Party’s candidate for the presidency.
Yet still the leading lights of the so-called “progressive” movement argue that it is the left’s duty to vote for this neocon warmonger.
But the consequences of this strategy may well lead directly to nuclear war. This is the GRTV Backgrounder on globalresearch.ca
The nuclear option is on the table. Hillary Clinton constitutes an existential threat against all of humanity.
Her candidacy must be opposed.