Exposing Hillary So She Won't Get Elected

Bloody Hillary Tries to Out Bloody Rivals on Syria

Of course we all love “liberal” candidate Hillary Clinton for her blood-thirsty political record. She has never encountered a war she did not support.

She began her Senate career by enthusiastically voting in favor of George W. Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq (small world: the very thing that lead step-by-step to today’s ISIS!) As secretary of state, Bloody Hillary advocated strongly for the U.S. intervention/attack on Libya, the result of which was the death of Americans in Benghazi and turning that nation into a failed state and haven for terrorists. Throughout her term, she said publically that the U.S. should be blowing up w-a-y more stuff in Syria.

So in a way, Hillary’s latest announcement — she wants more war in Syria — is of little surprise.

In a speech at the Council of Foreign Relations, Bloody Hillary called for escalating the American-led disaster in Syria, going well beyond what Obama has proposed by urging a no-fly zone with coalition forces to protect Syrians, more airstrikes and an expanded deployment of special operations troops to assist local ground forces.

How her plans would square with the Russians, now deployed in force and with their own agenda, was left unsaid. And how her plan of more of the same would work better, also left unsaid.

“Our goal is not to deter or contain ISIS, but to defeat and destroy ISIS,” Clinton said, as if everyone else but her is somehow not in favor of the end of Islamic State group.

Clinton was cautious to say her plan amounted to “an intensification and acceleration,” because American politicians no longer use the correct term, escalation.

Clinton also sought to contrast her plans as somehow different than those of the Republican presidential contenders, even thought their plans are basically the same thing.