2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIs supporting wars a feminist position?
It seems like war is about as bad for women as anything on this green earth.
So-- has the US had a military action that Hillary didn't support?
onecaliberal
(32,812 posts)Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)I feel a little like Santorum re. Rubio.
Or Eisenhower re. candidate Nixon: give me a couple of weeks and i'll think of some important decision he's been involved in as veep.
>>So-- has the US had a military action that Hillary didn't support?>>>>>
LWolf
(46,179 posts)LexVegas
(6,043 posts)Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)but IMO it's somewhat more defensible than promoting war.
LexVegas
(6,043 posts)Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)If so, please tell it to the million plus Iraqis who died in the 2003 war
gyroscope
(1,443 posts)who never saw a war she didn't like and sings the praises of Henry Kissinger.
if you want to see more war and escalation of violence in the ME and elsewhere vote for Hillary Clinton.
mythology
(9,527 posts)Some wars are more just than others.
Doing nothing during the Rwandan genocide led to lots of women suffering unspeakable violence.
It's simplistic to say if we don't get involved things that bad things won't happen. While a lot of people don't want to admit it, our own military is really restrained compared to not only previous super powers, but even our own past.
procon
(15,805 posts)Women are not monolithic in their interests or their choices. I believe this also applies to other women who are not "feminists", as well as -- perhaps -- even some men.
"Feminists" are free to engage in whatever they choose, including wars and the military, and they do it quite successfully. If your critique is simply trying to make an assertion that you oppose war, great! But don't omit chastising the vast majority of men (from both parties) who profess their deep and abiding love affair with all things military and warlike, including all those gun loving men who find novel excuses to justify the ever increasing death toll of innocents.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)regardless of her position on women's issues because war is good for Wall St and the MIC
It's a contradiction for sure to be pro-war that basically destroys people's lives
closeupready
(29,503 posts)in light of the self-purported "feminists" on this website.
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)Are we talking Bush-style preemptive adventurism or preventing genocide against a powerless minority?
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Mostly I was thinking about Iraq and Libya, and the Israel bombings of Gaza.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)*sigh*
Is supporting wars a HUMANIST position.
It seems like war is about as bad FOR ANY LIVING CREATURE on this green earth.
Yeah, that's better.
You've could have asked that question about Hillary without making it about gender.
I'm not going to discuss my views on wars with someone that boiled it down to body parts.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)obviously war is bad for everyone.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)It's striking how many people's memories of US military history extend back 15 years but not 20.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)A war of choice that the US was right to fight, prevented large-scale ethnic cleansing and atrocities, and left the Balkans much healthier and more stable.
One might also say 25 to bring in the Rwandan genocide - an occasion when *not* resorting to military force was clearly the wrong decision.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)I know there was some controversy about the Kosovo bombing, but the country seems to have done well since then.
The 2011 Libya bombing was also supposed to prevent ethnic cleansing, but that didn't wok out well at all.
TheBlackAdder
(28,179 posts).
It has nothing to do with war.
"Feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation and oppression."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_hooks
====
Check out her book on this subject, "Feminism Is for Everybody: Passionate Politics"
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/feminism-is-for-everybody-bell-hooks/1111890589
====
Now, onto her completely destroying Sheryl Sandberg's "Lean In"...
http://www.thefeministwire.com/2013/10/17973/
.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)I was listening to a discussion on a podcast and they were arguing that feminism shouldn't just be about reproductive rights but also about economic justice and being anti-war.
I wouldn't say war has nothing to do with feminism at all, but certainly the connection is somewhat tenuous.
DrFunkenstein
(8,745 posts)It is true that 2nd wave feminism had a lot on its hands ending sexism. Sexism still exists, let's not pretend otherwise, but feminism has evolved into something larger and much more positive. It is now as much about embracing the power of women as it is about ending the things that hold them back.
As such, we have moved beyond merely trying to break the glass ceiling on the White House. That is a noble cause, and we all want it, but it is far from the highest aim of a movement for respecting and empowering women all over the country and the world.
TheBlackAdder
(28,179 posts).
When the barriers are removed, there is an equal playing field for all.
Feminism DOES NOT relate to just women, but encompasses complete sexual equality, of all sexes and orientations.
.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)earthside
(6,960 posts)Apparently the 'go to guy' for the Clintons on foreign policy.
Reportedly, Bill Clinton used Kissinger as a reference for Hillary again today.
https://twitter.com/Lawrence/status/696758275044302851
Henry Kissinger, Hillary Clinton's Tutor in War and Peace