If she intends to and her opponent doesn't, I'd fully support the Republican candidate.

Who am I kidding, though, they both will continue it.

sadly no matter what the war machine keeps fed.

Those poor, poor terrorists.



This post was edited by IceMage on Jul 18 2015 11:51am

At this point there isn't any electable candidate who could justify shutting down the drone strikes because this is sadly just the natural progression of the path we're on. It's impossible to justify a lot of the foreign policy positions that are held by Clinton and the Republican hopefuls but the drone position is the product of the time. The country grew tired of the symbolic/substance of American troops in the Middle East, especially in countries that we perceived we "shouldn't" be in, but still expects a generic, symbolic "tough on terror" stance from the president.

Because of this and the whole initial lying the country into war in Iraq it's going to be a while before we'll get back to a warfare/diplomacy contrast and choice. Our overarching choice in presidentials is going to be "do you want to get through this transitional period or do you want to go back to 2003-2005?"

vs

Donald Trump is the best thing in politics in the past 25 years.

How our standards have fallen

not fair to the kitty cat creepy by association is a real thing

She is a hawk. Moreso than Obama.



Is this a serious question? Trump has already self destructed twice; he wouldn't stand a chance on the national stage against me, much less Hilary.

People trying to kill the laughter lol, Trumps a big boy - he just uses that as jet fuel in his fleet of Limousines.
I say the chips fall where they may, and let the debates decide on the winners.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jul 18 2015 02:55pm