Emails Show Hillary Clinton Aides Celebrating F-15 Sales to Saudi Arabia

[Voltaire 4,531]

1 minute ago, dannydevito said:

It is very important but let's keep that discussion within our minds. No one should convince you to vote for a candidate but you. So I say we should stay informed and nothing more, that's the key.

"still the best candidate"

I simply pointed out that this is misguided at best. But sure, we can discontinue our discussion.

[dannydevito 10,658]

Just now, Voltaire said:

"still the best candidate"

I simply pointed out that this is misguided at best. But sure, we can discontinue our discussion.

I mean, Hillary will probably win and the gp wont care about this whole thing. It's the same as Trump and even Obama. It's the same with every politician in the world. Some people are so convinced theyre going to vote for one candidate they dont give a **** about these things.

[Voltaire 4,531]

3 minutes ago, dannydevito said:

I mean, Hillary will probably win and the gp wont care about this whole thing. It's the same as Trump and even Obama. It's the same with every politician in the world. Some people are so convinced theyre going to vote for one candidate they dont give a **** about these things.

You're meandering. Now we're talking about voter apathy at large?

Back to the topic:

When people see weapons sales as "just business" that's a problem. What do we all suppose Saudi Arabia intended to use them for? Display models? Peace-Keeping Missions? American Interests abroad?

I don't care what color your political pin is: there are some basic truths that we should begin to care about as people and the shrugging off of war and profiteering from it is certainly one of them.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

35 minutes ago, manicholic said:

Can't with this perpetual never-ending anti-Hillary bias in the media

They need to because she's the actual threat. The GOP has been smearing her for over 25 years and the young voters are particularly susceptible to it.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

44 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

 

Saudi Arabia? Really? Explain to me what Democrat/Liberal/Progressive/Peaceful stance that weapons sales and proliferation to one of the worst state actors on the world stage supports?

ahhhhhh. I see it now:

"As weapons transfers were being approved, both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Boeing made donations to the Clinton Foundation."

Her corruption and money interests truly know no bounds.

 

Why are you assuming that's the only part of the deal?

One can just as easily assume that the deal was part of a United States / Saudi Arabia "underground" diplomatic trade and the donation was an extra "thank you" for her cooperation. Is that not plausible? 

Do you honestly believe that these transactions are not necessary? Do you think "gifts" (often with strings attached) are not commonplace in diplomacy? Politics isn't as simple as you make it out to be. Sometimes you have to cooperate with your enemy and do things that go against your principles to attain a more important end point. Perhaps it could be resolved in a different way, but it's not our place to assume what the priorities are.

You're so easily manipulated into believing it's all Hillary's machinations too, as if she's the only one involved and is the only one who made the decision. You need to think for yourself man. 

[Voltaire 4,531]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

Why are you assuming that's the only part of the deal?

One can just as easily assume that the deal was part of a United States / Saudi Arabia "underground" diplomatic trade and the donation was an extra "thank you" for her cooperation.

You're so easily manipulated into believing it's all Hillary's machinations. You need to think for yourself man.

I am thinking for myself. And here is what I think: I do not support weapons sales to Saudi Arabia. I do not support the acceptance of money in the form of "thank you's" for cooperation with Saudi Arabia.

I think those are two very sane stances to hold but f*ck me for thinking that we can do better than the selling of weapons to a human-rights nightmare. F*ck me for thinking that money-greased politics with such players is part of why the world continues to find itself in incomprehensible situations.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Just now, Voltaire said:

I am thinking for myself. And here is what I think: I do not support weapons sales to Saudi Arabia. I do not support the acceptance of money in the form of "thank you's" for cooperation with Saudi Arabia.

I think those are two very sane stances to hold but f*ck me for thinking that we can do better than the selling of weapons to a human-rights nightmare. F*ck me for thinking that money-greased politics with such players is part of why the world continues to find itself in incomprehensible situations.

I agree with you regarding the position.

It's just that attempting to use this as against Hilary as opposed to politics in general is naive.

[Voltaire 4,531]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

I agree with you regarding the position.

It's just that attempting to use this as against Hilary as opposed to politics in general is naive.

I think its naive to not hold our leaders to a standard of character and integrity. It is not partisan. I do not support Bush's invasion of Iraq. I do not support Obama's continued and increasing use of Drone warfare. I do not support Hillary's interventionist and weapons-sales style of international diplomacy.

I believe candidates need to earn their votes. She, through action and inaction, has not yet earned mine. It's not personal.

[PaperIz 7,354]

Please don't vote for her please. 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

48 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

I think its naive to not hold our leaders to a standard of character and integrity. It is not partisan. I do not support Bush's invasion of Iraq. I do not support Obama's continued and increasing use of Drone warfare. I do not support Hillary's interventionist and weapons-sales style of international diplomacy.

I believe candidates need to earn their votes. She, through action and inaction, has not yet earned mine. It's not personal.

While you keep your integrity, the world burns around you as people with less integrity get their way.

Sorry honey, the world isn't as nice and peaceful as you make it out to be and global affairs doesn't work that way.

Hillary has more than earned anyone's vote. You are just putting different weights on characteristics that someone with her position has had to employ for the sake of the nation.

What have any of the other candidates done that is remotely comparable in scope? 

In any case I'm not here to defend Hilary. I'm here to defend necessary evils in the name of diplomacy. 

[Whispering 18,865]

1 hour ago, LebaneseDude said:

They need to because she's the actual threat. The GOP has been smearing her for over 25 years and the young voters are particularly susceptible to it.

Exactly. People don't realize that it is why Bernie has been getting a free pass from Republicans. It is an all out smear campaign. It doesn't surprise me. First the Democrats presented the US with a black person and now a woman. Republicans are fuming! 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Just now, Whispering said:

Exactly. People don't realize that it is why Bernie has been getting a free pass from Republicans. It is an all out smear campaign. It doesn't surprise me. First the Democrats presented the US with a black person and now a woman. Republicans are fuming! 

He won't for long. As soon as he becomes a plausible contender to the nomination, the floodgates will be released.

[Voltaire 4,531]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

While you keep your integrity, the world burns around you as people with less integrity get their way.

Sorry honey, the world isn't as nice and peaceful as you make it out to be and global affairs doesn't work that way.

 

Wow. Integrity and character is neither of those things when you're willing to toss it so easily. I'll let you just sit in that swamp.

I genuinely feel badly that you have not seen the power in integrity, that you have been so disillusioned that you can not see the value in doing the right thing in the face of adversity. The world does not have to be a place of bribes and underhands, a place of selling off the weakest of us to get the fastest outcomes. It is that way because we accept it.

I don't accept it, and I don't care if you call me naive for it.

[Whispering 18,865]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

He won't for long. As soon as he becomes a plausible contender to the nomination, the floodgates will be released.

I don't know if he is going to get in that position, so he will always be thought of as Saint Bernie. But you are 100 per cent correct, if he starts to look like a viable threat, they will come at him with a smear campaign that looks like a Tidal wave. They will have to, because they will be coming in late. I can gaurantees they already have the information and campaign set in place, they just haven't pushed the button yet. 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

5 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Wow. Integrity and character is neither of those things when you're willing to toss it so easily. I'll let you just sit in that swamp.

I genuinely feel badly that you have not seen the power in integrity, that you have been so disillusioned that you can not see the value in doing the right thing in the face of adversity. The world does not have to be a place of bribes and underhands, a place of selling off the weakest of us to get the fastest outcomes. It is that way because we accept it.

I don't accept it, and I don't care if you call me naive for it.

It's important to employ integrity and character with people. The thing is, (global) politics and nations aren't people. They're constructs, and their representatives are expected to operate in specific ways to benefit these constructs.

It seems you can't differentiate between the two situations. That's where the naivete lies. Diplomacy isn't about people, and sometimes principles have to be left aside in the name of compromise.