What’s tragic is that a President Hillary Clinton would’ve been boxed in politically from doing this, with massive resistance from Breivikbart, MAGA hats and probably Trump himself. But with Trump in charge, the GOP swine herd is 110% for it.
No. That’s my speculative read of the weather conditions we did not get
-
-
Considering the power wielded by a black "socialist" president to the same horrifying ends, my read is she'd have done it in half the time and twice the blood.
-
That’s possible. It really is. But opposition to Obama launching punitive strikes on Assad for chem weapons was v strong, and a lot of it came from the tribalism Right (who are now squarely behind Trump)
-
I'm sure we can't know, but considering her history I'm finding it hard to believe she'd be unsuccessful. Also I suppose I'm objecting to your using this very moment to basically say, hey I wish Clinton were here to drag out the contra war instead.
-
Contra war?
-
If anything it’s another condemnation of HRC for pulling off the unthinkable defeat and making this act of war possible, which (no thanks to her own values or judgment) would’ve been much less likely had she won
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So I guess Libya happened because the MAGA crew hadn't congealed.
-
Correct. But by 2012 there was surprisingly strong resistance to air strikes on Syrian govt positions over chemical weapons, much of it from the right. And it worked.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.