Dear Hillary, Madeleine and Gloria: Feminism Demands We Say No to America’s Deadly Imperial Wars

[Bonobo]

By Sarah Lazare / AlterNet


http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/dear-hillary-madeline-and-gloria-full-feminism-demands-we-say-no-americas-deadly

Clinton’s foreign policy, however, falls in line with policies of war and empire. As a U.S. senator for New York, Clinton cast one of the most influential votes in favor of the 2003 Iraq war, signaling to other Democrats to back the invasion. She has since acknowledged this decision was a mistake, but her actions indicate she has learned nothing.

Under the Obama administration, Clinton consistently represented the pro-war wing, advocating military aggression and escalation from Iraq and Libya to Afghanistan and Ukraine. She was cautious on the global nuclear deal, saying she would “not hesitate” to take military action against Iran, and during her campaign declared her unbreakable bond with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In her memoir Hard Choices, Clinton took credit for the military pivot to the Asia-Pacific, which continues to escalate military buildup and aggression region-wide to hedge against China.

Feminists should unequivocally declare that Clinton’s policies of war and empire that kill, wound and traumatize women around the world are not compatible with feminism. Of course we defend any woman, including Clinton, against sexism. But that defense must not lead to reflexive embrace of an entire platform, nor claims that elite politicians like Clinton somehow have a monopoly on feminism.

Foreign Policy in Focus columnist Conn Hallinan recently took on the grim task ofattempting to tally those killed in foreign policy disasters related to Clinton. According to some calculations, the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq killed over one million people due to war-related causes. Nearly a quarter million Afghans have died since the 2001 U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, and millions more have been forced to flee their homes and become refugees.

[MADem]

1. You forgot the link.

Those who voted for the AUMF should do a little gut check too, wouldn't you say?

[Bonobo]

2. There, I added the link.

As to the AUMF, I did not support the War in Afghanistan.

But if I am honest with myself and I ask who I think is more likely to get us embroiled in more wars in the ME, I am absolutely certain that the answer is Hillary Clinton.

If you are honest, I think you would agree.

[MADem]

3. I think Sanders would allow DOD and CIA to run roughshod over him.

I don't think he understands a doggone thing about the historical relationships in the ME, and he certainly--as he has demonstrated by his comments--doesn't know the first doggone thing about Islam.

That's the same weakness GWB had.

Scary.

Edit--you do realize that the AUMF is an "open ended" thing? It's the gift that keeps on giving. It wasn't just about Afghanistan. It's carte blanche to the POTUS to go where s/he needs to go to fight the "war on terrorism." Like Pakistan. Or where ever those "terra-ists" might be hiding.

And BS voted for it.

[Bonobo]

4. So are you against the AUMF like I am? nt