As many things as there are that make hating Trump easy, always remember that the *major* party alternative was the one who advocated enforcing a no-fly zone in Syria while the Russians were conducting bombing runs at the behest of their current government, risking WW3.
Hillary’s latest warmongering tweet shows she hasn’t really changed all that much, regardless of what the consequences of her worldview have been, time and time again.
In the words of Luke Skywalker,
If Luke is exaggerating, it’s not by much. To the extent that she accidently says anything true, she’s implying the wrong context entirely.
“Actions have consequences”
Actions have consequences, of course they do. For instance, our actions in Iraq directly lead to the threat ISIS became, and the end of a counter-balance in the Middle East to Iran. Our actions in Libya, which she was the primary supporter of in the Obama administration, lead to religious extremists taking control and a literal open slave market.
“whether we’re in Syria or not, the people who want to harm us are there & at war.”
Whether “we” (the American military) are in Syria or not, the people who want to harm us are there and at war… that’s true as well. You know, the ones we’ve been funding and arming against Assad, who seems content to confine his brutality to his own country. The ones there who want to harm us the most, are currently busy fighting the Syrian government, Iran, Russia, and other actors who are our enemies as well.
“Isolationism is weakness.”
Isolationism may be weakness, sometimes. So is spreading our military thin by placing it everywhere, all the time. Not contributing to the length or severity of foreign conflicts and civil wars or refusing to take the side of those who wish us the greater amount of harm, though… isn’t as much isolationism as it is non-interventionism and rational self-interest.
“Empowering ISIS is dangerous.”
Of course it is, which is why we should stop. When John Kerry outright admitted he was fine with an establishment of a caliphate in Syria because we might be able to control and contain it, he was wrong. Which is why we shouldn’t be fighting on their side, arming groups aligned with them who have given them our weapons, or attacking their enemies.
“Playing into Russia & Iran’s hands is foolish.”
Russia is one of the US’s greatest threats. However, that doesn’t mean our interests are never aligned. If Russia wants to take the role of propping up secular dictators in the middle east from us, along with being the ones to pay for “stability” in blood, in money, in time spent within quagmires, and in risking blowback… for God’s sake let them.
Are Trump’s withdrawals from Syria and Afghanistan based on bad intentions or was the process he used to leave the wrong one? Maybe. But the end result is still something I celebrate… and the *major* party alternative would likely have already gotten us into new wars and risked a policy that could have enlarged the Syrian conflict, rather than leaving conflicts and making it much less relevant that any American be able to correctly find Aleppo on a map.
The Hillary Clintons, Dick Cheneys, Bidens, Bushes, Obamas, Lindsey Grahams, and Eric Holders of the world can fight whatever wars they want themselves. In the meantime, let our soldiers finally come home after seventeen years without pretending that your warmongering is somehow the “responsible”, “reasonable” path rather than state-sanctioned murder that’s often costly while leaving us less safe.