Clinton will start WW3, says Trump

[Melech 9,900]

"Washington: Hillary Clinton's policies on Syria and Russia could lead to World War III, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said as he criticised his Democratic rival for being too tough on Russian President Vladimir Putin.

 

"Now Hillary wants to start a shooting war in Syria, conflict with a nuclear power — Russia — which could very well lead to World War III," Trump told his cheering supporters in Springfield, Ohio. "The way she talks about (Russian President, Vladimir) Putin. She's always said she has no idea, but she's always saying — WikiLeak, it's Russia, and Donald Trump — I have nothing to do with Russia. She said may be Donald Trump is involved in projects with the Russians. The answer's no," he said.

"Look, look, she speaks so badly of Putin, nuclear country, she speaks so badly, and she uses it to keep trying to get votes. I said to myself you know, how do you speak so badly of somebody, I mean how are they going to ever get along? Wouldn't it be great if we actually got along with Russia and other countries?" he told his supporters amidst applause.

"We together went after IS and knocked the hell out of them? Wouldn't that be a good thing?" he said indicating that he would collaborate with Russia to defeat IS."

http://www.firstpost.com/world/hillary-clintons-policies-could-lead-to-world-war-3-says-donald-trump-3078140.html

 

[Erotica 34,931]

Oh please. It's just a matter of time to WW3 to happen if Trump wins.

[Squeeshy Keety 9,935]

I hate myself for this, but he's not completely wrong this time 

Spoiler

He still can't be allowed to win 

 

[LePetitGAGABLover 21,234]

I cant believe this. Didn't he say he wanted to use nukes in the middle east?

I'm BEYOND pissed as to how someone like him is a presidential candidate. I hate humans tbh

[Cocaine Heart 4,768]

One of them will either way. 

[TheLucifer992 2,024]

WW3 is inevitable either way... 

[SISTERV 3,887]

Honestly folks, Trump is completely correct here. 

 

He has stated multiple times he would use the atomic bomb if we had to. And he has said he would bomb the **** out of ISIS. 

But ISIS does not have the nuclear capability that Russia has. (The U.S. and Russia are the two most nuclear loaded countries in the world). 

Hillary wanting to ruffle the feathers of Putin is not a good thing, and she has shown she can be war hawkish. 

 

I would rather have a 60 day scuffle with a terrorist organization backed up by the UN entirely, rather than a decade long war where the UN is divided and the big countries are bringing near holocaust levels of weaponry. 

[Luc 4,776]

Whether WW3 with Russia starts, all depends on Russia. US only reacts to things Russia does. Trump's reasoning isn't flawed, but he should criticize Russia the same way he criticizes Hillary if he's going to talk about approaching eachother rather than scolding eachother.

Anyways, it seems pretty hypocritical to me that in the case of Russia, Trump wants to have more dialogue, better communication and more friendliness while in the cases of Mexico, China and the EU he suddenly supports the exact opposite of that. Makes it seem like it's more about just being against whatever the government does rather than supporting the principle of cooperation and the principle of not punishing somebody for crimes committed (in this case war crimes, violation of a country's sovereignty, crimes against humanity and human rights abuses).

[manicholic 3,694]

3 minutes ago, SISTERV said:

Honestly folks, Trump is completely correct here. 

 

5 minutes ago, TheLucifer said:

WW3 is inevitable either way... 

 

7 minutes ago, Cocaine Heart said:

One of them will either way. 

 

You guys are out of your minds. 

[SlaeUrAnus 16,111]

Can see both of them causing it 

 

[FATCAT 60,978]

 I'd rather have a war with Russia than an outright invasion. They're both war hawks, but at least she's strong against our enemies and not our allies.

[SISTERV 3,887]

5 minutes ago, Luc said:

Whether WW3 with Russia starts, all depends on Russia. US only reacts to things Russia does. Trump's reasoning isn't flawed, but he should criticize Russia the same way he criticizes Hillary if he's going to talk about approaching eachother rather than scolding eachother.

Anyways, it seems pretty hypocritical to me that in the case of Russia, Trump wants to have more dialogue, better communication and more friendliness while in the cases of Mexico, China and the EU he suddenly supports the exact opposite of that. Makes it seem like it's more about just being against whatever the government does rather than supporting the principle of cooperation and the principle of not punishing somebody for crimes committed (in this case war crimes, violation of a country's sovereignty, crimes against humanity and human rights abuses).

I don't think he wants to go to war with China. He wants to use sanctions and the UN to get them out of the SCS. (Which is illegal of them).

I don't think he wants a war with Mexico so much as he wants them to own up to their issues and show better interest and cooperation with the U.S. on our borders. 

The EU is a mess, and I think he supported Brexit because it was kind of like what he wants to do: have our own sanctity back. And it was reported yesterday the British economy has already grown .5% since Brexit! 

 

[lego 44,165]

1 minute ago, SISTERV said:

with China

 

GINA*

[Luc 4,776]

4 minutes ago, SISTERV said:

I don't think he wants to go to war with China. He wants to use sanctions and the UN to get them out of the SCS. (Which is illegal of them).

I don't think he wants a war with Mexico so much as he wants them to own up to their issues and show better interest and cooperation with the U.S. on our borders. 

The EU is a mess, and I think he supported Brexit because it was kind of like what he wants to do: have our own sanctity back. And it was reported yesterday the British economy has already grown .5% since Brexit! 

 

I don't think he wants to go to war with China and Mexico either, but what he does want goes further than what Clinton wants with Russia. Clinton does not want to wage war with Russia and would never do that. She just wants to keep Russia under diplomatic, political and economic pressure to stay out of Eastern Ukraine, Georgia (and now, Syria). She knows that an actual war with Russia would basically mean the end of the world and that's not her goal.

I don't think he wants better cooperation with Mexico either. Cooperation is achieved by actually cooperating rather than saying all Mexicans are rapists and criminals.

Whether the EU is a mess or not is irrelevant here. A POTUS can think whatever he wants in private about the EU, but must remember that the EU is the biggest US ally and therefore transatlantic relations are crucial towards maintaining the US' interests. 

The .5% figure is not that relevant by the way, as Brexit has yet to happen. The only thing that has happened is the announcement of the announcement of talks to leave the EU.

You brought up sanctions over the illegal activities China's pursuing in the South-Chinese Sea. That actually makes it all the messier, as it shows his true hypocrisy: Russia annexes a part of Ukraine and Georgia (illegally) and he wants more cooperation and less sanctions, but when China does the same he wants less cooperation and he wants to install sanctions? What's the difference between these two cases?

[Melech 9,900]

24 minutes ago, SISTERV said:

Honestly folks, Trump is completely correct here. 

 

He has stated multiple times he would use the atomic bomb if we had to. And he has said he would bomb the **** out of ISIS. 

But ISIS does not have the nuclear capability that Russia has. (The U.S. and Russia are the two most nuclear loaded countries in the world). 

Hillary wanting to ruffle the feathers of Putin is not a good thing, and she has shown she can be war hawkish. 

 

I would rather have a 60 day scuffle with a terrorist organization backed up by the UN entirely, rather than a decade long war where the UN is divided and the big countries are bringing near holocaust levels of weaponry. 

There are no holocaust weaponry. The Holocaust was the systematic killing of an ethnic group (Jews) like as if they were animals. It's not comparable to atomic bombs. I mean you can do a genocide with atomic bombs, but it's not like the Holocaust.