Hillary Clinton supporters often cite the theory that foreign policy under Donald Trump would be a disaster. However, Hillary is the one some foreign and domestic government leaders see as a dangerous war hawk. Many well-informed journalists, political leaders, and activists cite the destabilization of Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and Ukraine as a direct result of actions taken by former Secretary of State Clinton and the Obama administration. In Honduras, the administration failed to act against a coup that ousted a promising democratic president. In Haiti, Hillary allegedly prevented a raise in minimum wage, according to Washington’s Blog’s detailed account of all six alleged debacles.
While Hillary Clinton is still popular around the world by many people, quite a few well-informed political figures are disillusioned with her performance as Secretary of State and have reservations about her potential to become President of the United States. Both nationally and internationally, Hillary has her detractors, and their opinions are based on close observation of her work as Secretary of State.
Hillary Clinton is almost solely to blame for the rise of the Islamic state, alleges Ralph Nader, consumer advocate and former Green Party candidate. He blames Clinton for pushing President Obama to depose Moammar Gadhafi, according to the Washington Times. This, in turn, created a chaotic situation that gave rise to the Islamic State or ISIS.
“She persuaded the White House that it was an easy topple without knowing that, in a tribal society with nothing to replace it, you would have a civil war, sectarian killings spilling into Africa [and] weapons everywhere [in] Mali [and] central Africa. The big thing is the huge amount of geography that has been destabilized because of the Libyan overthrow.”
Hillary Clinton was also heavily criticized in the State Department’s Accountability Review Board Report on the Benghazi Attack.
“In the months leading up to September 11, 2012, security in Benghazi was not recognized and implemented as a ‘shared responsibility’ in Washington, resulting in stove-piped discussions and decisions on policy and security. Key decisions … or non-decisions in Washington, such as the failure to establish standards for Benghazi and to meet them, or the lack of a cohesive staffing plan, essentially set up Benghazi. That’s failure at the very top. It’s not in Libya. It’s not even in Africa. It’s in “Washington.”
Mrs. Clinton has failed to make a favorable impression on French Conservatives who see Clinton as a war hawk and a destabilizing force. Marine Le Pen, leader of the French National Front party and one of the most influential members of European Parliament, sent a warning via RT to American voters.
“There is a candidate who appears a lot more dangerous for France than the others – that’s Hillary Clinton. I’m not American so I don’t need to make a choice. But… in the interests of France, Hillary Clinton is probably the worst choice out there… She worked hand in hand with the full spectrum of American decisions [that] plunged the world objectively into chaos. I think if she was elected she would continue this policy, a destructive policy, a policy of conflict, a policy of imprisonment of Europe in blinded Atlanticism. I think it’s a danger for world peace.”
Hillary Clinton has provoked Russia repeatedly, openly comparing Putin to Hitler. Russian parliament members are requesting President Vladimir Putin impose sanctions on former Secretary of State Clinton. Russians are angry about Clinton’s condemnation of the treatment of Ukrainian pilot Nadiya Savchenko in light of her treatment of a Russian Pilot who was captured by the Americans. Sergey Obukhov, who signed the document against Clinton, accused her of a double standard and of prisoner abuse, according to Newsweek.
“Americans like to stir up a hype around human rights violations across the world, but they themselves spit on these rights. It is clear that weak countries will be silent in the face of the illegal persecution of their own by the U.S. but Russia is a strong country.”
Hillary Clinton is often portrayed in Russian media as a war hawk, going after Russia aggressively and unreasonably. That sentiment is echoed by American commentator Paul Craig Roberts, as quoted in the Washington Times.
“I don’t’ think there is any candidate that we can end up with as president that would be more likely to go to war with Russia than Hillary.”
Harper’s writer, Doug Henwood, expressed his disdain for Hillary and her followers.
“Is Hillary Clinton the answer to these prayers? It’s hard to think so, despite the widespread liberal fantasy of her as a progressive paragon, who will follow through exactly as Barack Obama did not. In fact, a close look at her life and career is perhaps the best antidote to all these great expectations.”
Journalist Rania Khalek is reported by Aljazeera to have criticized Hillary saying she has forgotten the cause of women and children in favor of war tactics.
“Clinton has spent her entire career pushing policies that have destroyed the lives of countless women and children, from her role in rounding up votes for her husband’s disastrous welfare reform bill to her vote as a senator in favor of the US invasion that left Iraq, and its women, in ruins.”
Hillary Clinton is viewed as a war hawk by many of her detractors, some of whom used to be supporters.
[Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images]