Which of the two major party candidates is more “dangerous”?

At “libertarianish” Reason Magazine, they now have a writer that seems to heap praises on Obama in an effort to trash-talk Trump.

So what else is new, after Pearl Harbor (invited by Roosevelt, with Japanese encryption broken), Gulf of Tonkin, Bay of Pigs, missile crisis brinkmanship, FBI “terrorist plots”, Afghanistan, Iraq (twice), Libya, Syria, Ukraine, NATO brinkmanship in East Europe, Navy patrols off Russia’s coast lines, encouraging the Turkey shoot down of a Russian aircraft, we already have “inherently violent” in our ruling class based in the imperial capital of Washington D. C..

Now you bring up war, consider the issue. We have one candidate who demanded intervention in Syria and Libya both, called for yet another U.S-enforced “no fly zone” over Syria to prop up ISIS rebels against one of the best remaining protectors of religious minorities in the Middle East, gives Putin a “Hitler” nickname, and yet tried to tamp down coverage of blow-back in Libya with the stupid insulting “video did it” cover story.

Compare that to the other of the two major candidates who has said WW2 is over, NATO’s purported original mission is dead, advocates quitting the bellicose NATO entanglement, praised the freedom-favoring Brexit vote, talks about bringing the troops home from Japan, Korea, Europe, and the Middle East, calls both the Bush dynasty and the Republican neocons out for LYING about the Iraq war. And when prodded and poked, blusters with opening negotiation gambits and tough guy “Don’t tread on me” talk.

Besides, this candidate, even when he says he would stomp out ISIS in a few days, is this so outlandish, since ISIS is financed and armed from Saudi Arabia and gets training from U. S. regulars in Jordan anyway. The neocon Obama-Clinton-McCain “moderates” act like a mirage. The closer you try to focus on them, the more amorphous they are.

Now do the math. Which one of these candidates sounds more dangerous?

One of them wants to smash conservative and Christian and traditional culture to pieces, the other one promotes traditional American culture. One of them has ALWAYS pushed to disarm the public, the other ohe ne has been inconsistent but has convinced so many millions of armed citizens that he is their friend and believes in personal protection by packing heat that he overwhelmed all the tens of millions unleashed against him in the Republican primaries. The other one calls for unreasonable gun laws every time a gun shooting hits the media.

It makes me wonder who is financing Reason Magazine these days.


%d bloggers like this: