Hillary Reviews Kissinger's Book

[PosterChild]

Hillary's review of Kissinger's Book World Order.

[cpwm17]

1. Clinton's trolling again.

No sane and moral person can write this drivel:

During the Cold War, America’s bipartisan commitment to protecting and expanding a community of nations devoted to freedom, market economies and cooperation eventually proved successful for us and the world. Kissinger’s summary of that vision sounds pertinent today: “an inexorably expanding cooperative order of states observing common rules and norms, embracing liberal economic systems, forswearing territorial conquest, respecting national sovereignty, and adopting participatory and democratic systems of governance.”

This system, advanced by U.S. military and diplomatic power and our alliances with like-minded nations, helped us defeat fascism and communism and brought enormous benefits to Americans and billions of others. Nonetheless, many people around the world today — especially millions of young people — don’t know these success stories, so it becomes our responsibility to show as well as tell what American leadership looks like....

This isn’t just idealism. For an international order to take hold and last, Kissinger argues, it must relate “power to legitimacy.” To that end, Kissinger, the famous realist, sounds surprisingly idealistic. Even when there are tensions between our values and other objectives, America, he reminds us, succeeds by standing up for our values, not shirking them, and leads by engaging peoples and societies, the sources of legitimacy, not governments alone. If our might helps secure the balance of power that underpins the international order, our values and principles help make it acceptable and attractive to others.

So our levers of leadership are not just about keeping our military strong and our diplomacy agile; they are about standing up for human rights, about advancing the rights and role of women and girls, about creating the space for a flourishing civil society and the conditions for broad-based development.

[PosterChild]

2. Clinton is not only sane and moral...

... she's also realistic. Freedom, human rights, market economies and and peaceful international cooperation cannot exist without a force to stand behind them and for them in the world.

[cpwm17]

3. Kissinger is the world's worst living criminal.

Last edited Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:58 PM - Edit history (1)

He was instrumental in the genocidal bombings against Cambodian civilians in the most massive bombing campaign in world history. The Khmer Rouge then became powerful due to the chaos Kissinger created.

Kissinger scuttled President Johnson's efforts to get a peace deal with North Vietnam so that President Nixon could get reelected, costing millions of lives.

Kissinger took the lead in overthrowing the only democracy in South America: Chile. He also supported other dictators in South America which disappeared thousands of liberals and destroyed economies for the benefit of the few.

Kissinger backed Indonesia's genocide against East Timor.

Those are only some of his crimes. Hillary doesn't seem to think these matters, which is not surprising, since she enthusiastically supported the world's worst crime this century: the Iraq War. Hillary also supports overthrowing the secular leaders in Israel's neighborhood and she also made some sick comments concerning the kids in the Gaza Strip murdered by Israel. She openly supports Israel's apartheid form of government. She has also made some bellicose statements against Iran, a country that hasn't attacked another since the 1790's.

Hillary's foreign policy positions are what have led to the terrible chaos that is much of the Middle East.

[PosterChild]

4. The world's worst?

I'm not up on the exact numbers, but I seem to remember reading something about the firebombing of Dresden. And Tokyo. Then there is the Nazi Holocaust to consider. And those Armenians who, somehow, simply disappeared.

The world isn't exactly a friendly place. Between nations exists a war of all against all. We have to take care of ourselves, least someone else tries to take care of us.

[cpwm17]

5. That's why I wrote he is the world's worst LIVING war criminal.

Modern civilization requires nations to treat each other with respect. This way civilization advances and the quality of life for the people of this world improves. This should be the goal of any government that is acting in the interests of its citizens.

Nations that operate through greed and blood lust make a few people wealthy, but are only of use to the sociopath. These nations promote poverty and misery. That is Kissinger's world, and apparently it is Hillary Clinton's world also.

[PosterChild]

6. You are right. Modern civiliazation DOES require...

... treating other nations with respect, that is, with justice. Treating others with justice, however, can only be done under conditions where it is reasonable to believe that they will, in turn, treat you with justice. And this, in turn, is only possible when, first, there is good reason to believe that both sides share the same idea of what does and does not constitute justice, and, second, that no one can substantially profit by NOT treating others with justice.

Under a civil government, the government ensures that there is a prevailing and accepted notion of what is and is not just between its citizens, and enforces that notion so all citizens can be assured that behaving according to the dictates of justice is in their own self interest. If we break the law, we are punished for it.

That is why citizens within a sovereign state can live in peace with one another, and respect each other through the observance of justice.

But between sovereign states, neither of these two conditions exist. Each nation has its own idea of what does and does not constitute justice, and there is no overwhelming force to ensure that those who do not observe justice in their relations with others will be punished for it. Indeed, they are all too often rewarded for it.

Under those conditions, a war of all against all exists. And it will exist until one nation or another achieves (at least) a hegemony over the others and can effectively propagate and defend a system of justice between nations. Although we can hope for the best, realistically this not going to happen without an advanced military capability and the willingness to exercise that capability in the world at large.

And since, as you note, it is a requirement of modern civilization... Who wills the end wills the means.

[cpwm17]

8. A 'do unto others before they do unto you' philosophy is a formula for endless war

and a convenient philosophy for the paranoid, greedy, and blood thirsty.

Kissinger is a sociopath. All he is interested in is power and greed. There is no rationalizing his behavior. He abused many nations that were no threat to our own.

All human life in this world is equally sacred. We have no more right to abuse citizens in other nations than we have a right to abuse citizens in our own.

[PosterChild]

9. Agreed...

"All human life in this world is equally sacred. We have no more right to abuse citizens in other nations than we have a right to abuse citizens in our own."

And I wonder what you think would happen between citizens in our own if we did not have the government to define and enforce justice between them? That is what happens between nations in the world at large. And it most likely will continue to happen until one of them develops the means and will to become "the world's police force".

Do you believe that enforcing the law of the land constitutes the abuse of our citizens? Would enforcing a law of nations constitute the abuse of others?

[kentuck]

7. Demoralizing

to many Democrats.