Clinton Supporters Itching for War With Russia

[Ethereal]

It seems like Clinton supporters won't be satisfied until the USA and Russia are in a hot war with one another.

Anyone who wants to take a more diplomatic (sane) approach towards Russia is instantly accused of being some kind of anti-American agent of the Kremlin.

Almost everything bad that happens is attributed to Russia, and almost everything Russia does is vilified regardless of the evidence or logic.

Worst of all, Clinton plans to escalate US involvement in Syria, which is easily the most demented idea to come out of this year's presidential elections, and that's saying something.

What possible good could escalating our involvement in Syria possibly do for the average American? How does replacing Syria's secular government with a motley coalition of Islamic terrorists help America? And is anyone really willing to risk a war with Russia in order to make this happen?

Because make no mistake, that is likely to happen if Syria's secular faction, headed by Assad, is removed from power in Syria by the west.

Apparently, Clinton and her supporters did not learn their lesson from Iraq and Libya?

How many more secular governments do they plan to overthrow and replace with terrorists? Just curious.

[Common Sense]

This wont cause a war with Russia any more than the US involvement in Afghanistan in the 80's did or the US involvement in central America under Reagan.

Russia doesn't want war and wont go to war over Syria. To suggest Clinton wants war is hyperbole and pretty silly.

[The Xl]

Hillary Clinton is liable to start war with Russia and Syria, but I'm supposed to fear Trump because he's a meenie and made fun of some model who may or may not have been mildly overweight or whatever the fuck. Yeah, sure.

[Ethereal]

This wont cause a war with Russia...

When did you obtain the ability to predict the future?

[Common Sense]

Hillary Clinton is liable to start war with Russia and Syria, but I'm supposed to fear Trump because he's a meenie and made fun of some model who may or may not have been mildly overweight or whatever the fuck. Yeah, sure.

How about suggesting starting a war with Iran over hand gestures?

[Common Sense]

When did you obtain the ability to predict the future?

About the same time you discovered the power to read Clinton supporter's minds.

[Ethereal]

This wont cause a war with Russia any more than the US involvement in Afghanistan in the 80's did or the US involvement in central America under Reagan.

Russia doesn't want war and wont go to war over Syria. To suggest Clinton wants war is hyperbole and pretty silly.

By the way, you didn't answer the questions.

What possible good could come from escalating US involvement in Syria? How does replacing Syria's secular government with amorphous, terrorist affiliated rebels help America? Are you willing to risk a war with Russia in order to make this happen?

[Ethereal]

About the same time you discovered the power to read Clinton supporter's minds.

In other words, you have no idea if Clinton's policies will start a war with Russia and are just speculating.

[Common Sense]

In other words, you have no idea if Clinton's policies will start a war with Russia and are just speculating.

...and what are you doing?

[Ethereal]

How about suggesting starting a war with Iran over hand gestures?

If you hadn't noticed, Russia is much more powerful than Iran and has a massive nuclear arsenal.

Apparently, that doesn't concern you.

[Common Sense]

By the way, you didn't answer the questions.

What possible good could come from escalating US involvement in Syria? How does replacing Syria's secular government with amorphous, terrorist affiliated rebels help America? Are you willing to risk a war with Russia in order to make this happen?


I hate to use the overused term, but that's a bit of a strawman, is it not?

[AZ Jim]

Hillary Clinton is liable to start war with Russia and Syria, but I'm supposed to fear Trump because he's a meenie and made fun of some model who may or may not have been mildly overweight or whatever the fuck. Yeah, sure.If you see the dynamics like you appear to, there is a major hole in your reasoning ability.

[The Xl]

How about suggesting starting a war with Iran over hand gestures?

Not to defend Trumps idiocy, but are you really going to assert that their isn't a massive difference in screwing with Iran vs screwing with Russia?

[Ethereal]

...and what are you doing?

You flat out asserted "this won't cause war with Russia", as if it were the immutable truth. I merely said it was likely, which tacitly acknowledges the possibility that I might be wrong.

[The Xl]

If you see the dynamics like you appear to, there is a major hole in your reasoning ability.

You're a low IQ'd geezer who probably has age related cognitive issues. Forgive me for dismissing your irrelevant opinion.

[Common Sense]

Not to defend Trumps idiocy, but are you really going to assert that their isn't a massive difference in screwing with Iran vs screwing with Russia?

Trump advocated opening fire. Clinton has made no similar claims.

Russia and the US have been at odds since the second world war. We are not on the verge of a war with them. The conflict with Russia is a two way street.

[Common Sense]

You flat out asserted "this won't cause war with Russia", as if it were the immutable truth. I merely said it was likely, which tacitly acknowledges the possibility that I might be wrong.

You flat out asserted that Clinton supporters are itching for war with Russia.

[The Xl]

Trump advocated opening fire. Clinton has made no similar claims.

Russia and the US have been at odds since the second world war. We are not on the verge of a war with them. The conflict with Russia is a two way street.

Tensions with Russia have been their highest since the Cold War and they're escalating. It's not wise to elect someone who talks to and about them like they're some 3rd world country to be bullied.

[Ethereal]

I hate to use the overused term, but that's a bit of a strawman, is it not?

No, it's not a strawman.

Clinton's stated policy in regards to Syria is to escalate our involvement there in order to remove Syria's secular faction, headed by Assad, from power. That power vacuum will be filled by a coalition of Islamist rebels, just like it was in Iraq and Libya when their secular governments were overthrown. Russia is allied with Syria's secular faction and is firmly opposed to its removal.

These are all basic facts and logic, really. So what is the purpose or the benefit of escalating in Syria and helping a bunch of terrorists take it over?

[Common Sense]

Tensions with Russia have been their highest since the Cold War and they're escalating. It's not wise to elect someone who talks to and about them like they're some 3rd world country to be bullied.

Yeah, much better to elect someone who will bow to their will.

[Private Pickle]

I hate to use the overused term, but that's a bit of a strawman, is it not?

No.

[Common Sense]

No.

Sorry, that was a rhetorical question.

[Ethereal]

If you see the dynamics like you appear to, there is a major hole in your reasoning ability.

Not really.

Clinton wants to escalate US involvement in Syria in direct opposition to Russia.

Our fighter jets and personnel are already at cross purposes there and walking a razor's edge.

Clinton, for some insane, demented reason, wants to make the situation even more precarious and dangerous.

[The Xl]

Syria is to Russia like Israel is to us. Imagine if they were doing what we are? We'd declare war immediately. Putin has shown great restraint honestly, we need a leader in there who understands the gravity of the situation, not some nutjob with a record of war, death and destabilization.

[The Xl]

Yeah, much better to elect someone who will bow to their will.

Not being unnecessarily openly hostile=bowing to their will. How very Neocon of you.

[Common Sense]

Syria is to Russia like Israel is to us. Imagine if they were doing what we are? We'd declare war immediately. Putin has shown great restraint honestly, we need a leader in there who understands the gravity of the situation, not some nutjob with a record of war, death and destabilization.

Who would that be? It's certainly not Trump.

[decedent]

It seems like Clinton supporters won't be satisfied until the USA and Russia are in a hot war with one another.

Yeah, it really keeps me up at night.

[The Xl]

Who would that be? It's certainly not Trump.

Gary Johnson and Jill Stein would be so very, very, very superior and preferable to Trump, in this situation and generally really. But that isn't realistic sadly, and he's dramatically superior to Clinton sheerly on the basis of not letting warmongering instincts completely overwhelm sane and rational thought.

[nathanbforrest45]

This wont cause a war with Russia any more than the US involvement in Afghanistan in the 80's did or the US involvement in central America under Reagan.

Russia doesn't want war and wont go to war over Syria. To suggest Clinton wants war is hyperbole and pretty silly.

Why of course you are correct Mr Chamberlain.

[Ethereal]

Trump advocated opening fire. Clinton has made no similar claims.

She only compared Putin to Adolf Hitler.


Russia and the US have been at odds since the second world war. We are not on the verge of a war with them. The conflict with Russia is a two way street.

We're already in a proxy war with Russia, so we've past the "verge" a while ago. A NATO ally, Turkey, even shot down one of their fighter jets and machined gunned one of their pilots as he parachuted to the ground. Even Gorbachev said the US and Russia are in a new cold war. The only question that remains, it will it evolve into a hot war?

[Ethereal]

You flat out asserted that Clinton supporters are itching for war with Russia.

Yes, that's my studied opinion. But unlike your opinion, it doesn't require me to predict the future, just to observe things that Clinton supporters have said and done and plan to do.

[AZ Jim]

Gary Johnson and Jill Stein would be so very, very, very superior and preferable to Trump, in this situation and generally really. But that isn't realistic sadly, and he's dramatically superior to Clinton sheerly on the basis of not letting warmongering instincts completely overwhelm sane and rational thought.At one point I had a modicum of respect for your little pop in comments, I no longer feel that way.

[Ethereal]

Yeah, much better to elect someone who will bow to their will.

How is being diplomatic and fair towards Russia the same as bowing to their will?

[Ethereal]

Syria is to Russia like Israel is to us. Imagine if they were doing what we are? We'd declare war immediately. Putin has shown great restraint honestly, we need a leader in there who understands the gravity of the situation, not some nutjob with a record of war, death and destabilization.

That's a good analogy. Syria is very close to Russia and is a longstanding ally. Russia has a rational and vested interest in defending the Syrian government. And it was Putin's quick thinking on Assad's chemical weapons that probably averted yet another full-blown war in the ME. I do have to give some credit to Obama for taking that option and suffering the embarrassment of seemingly backing off his red line rhetoric.

[The Xl]

At one point I had a modicum of respect for your little pop in comments, I no longer feel that way.


You're a low IQ'd geezer who probably has age related cognitive issues. Forgive me for dismissing your irrelevant opinion.

[nathanbforrest45]

We should not have gone to war in Iraq but its ok to go to war in Syria?

If Hillary is elected she will end the unemployment issues in this country the same way FDR did, by going to war with somebody big enough to require the reinstatement of the draft and a massive military build up.

I have yet to see any reason we should help the Syrians in any way, either by giving military aid to the "rebels" or by taking in thousands of refugees. The removal of a strongman in charge of all these factions would be a huge mistake, just as it was in Iraq and Libya.

[Ethereal]

Not being unnecessarily openly hostile=bowing to their will. How very Neocon of you.

I know, right?

One second dissent is the highest form of patriotism and the next it is treasonous.

How quickly leftists change their tune.

[Ethereal]

Yeah, it really keeps me up at night.

http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/uploads/2014/06/America-what-me-worry-alfred_e_neuman.jpg

[Ethereal]

At one point I had a modicum of respect for your little pop in comments, I no longer feel that way.

Trust me when I say that no one in their right mind cares about or wants your respect.

[Peter1469]

Hillary Clinton is liable to start war with Russia and Syria, but I'm supposed to fear Trump because he's a meenie and made fun of some model who may or may not have been mildly overweight or whatever the fuck. Yeah, sure.

60 lbs in 9 months is far from mild....

[Ethereal]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1409sXBleg

What changed?

[The Xl]

I know, right?

One second dissent is the highest form of patriotism and the next it is treasonous.

How quickly leftists change their tune.

Whatever Obama, MSNBC, CNN, Hillary Clinton tells them, they just go with.

[AeonPax]

`
`
All this tells me that aside from Obama and democrats being responsible for the escalations of the civil conflict which has cause the additional death and suffering of tens of thousands in Syria, they are willing to risk war with Russia over an oil pipeline through that country, for the benefit of the 1%.

[Common Sense]

Why of course you are correct Mr Chamberlain.

You sort of have that backwards.

[Common Sense]

Whatever Obama, MSNBC, CNN, Hillary Clinton tells them, they just go with.

Go watch RT some more...

[Ethereal]

`
`
All this tells me that aside from Obama and democrats being responsible for the escalations of the civil conflict which has cause the additional death and suffering of tens of thousands in Syria, they are willing to risk war with Russia over an oil pipeline through that country, for the benefit of the 1%.

I've read some stuff about the oil pipeline angle and I wouldn't be surprised if that were an ancillary goal of some sort, but I think the number one goal is the longterm isolation and destabilization of Russia. That has been the centerpiece in the western imperialist agenda since at least the early 1900's in my opinion.

[Ethereal]

Go watch RT some more...

God forbid someone try to learn about the perspective of other countries and people.

[Ethereal]

You sort of have that backwards.

Is that your way of saying that people like me are the modern equivalent of Chamberlain and that Putin is Adolf Hitler?

[Common Sense]

God forbid someone try to learn about the perspective of other countries and people.


...by watching their propaganda.

[Ethereal]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdVQu18OWko

"Common Sense", why are you mired in a Cold War mindset? Do you miss the eighties?

[Ethereal]

...by watching their propaganda.

The implication being that you've never watched "propaganda" before?

Just curious, though. Can you think of a better way for the average American to learn about Russia as a nation aside from occasionally watching and reading one of their largest media outlets?

[Ethereal]

In the buildup to the Iraq war, many leftists cited Iraqi media and officials as part of their overall dissent to that invasion. I guess they were really Saddam Hussein sympathizers who were brainwashed by propaganda instead of reasonable people who just wanted to hear both sides of the story before they dug in and formed an opinion.

[Ethereal]

"Common Sense" is basically proving my point, as he usually does when the topic comes to Russia.

He begins by objecting to my premise that Clinton supporters want war with Russia and then proceeds to demonstrate just how anxious he is for escalation, i.e., "bow to their will", "conflict with Russia a two-way street", "go watch RT", implying that his opponents are like Neville Chamberlain, etc.

It seems pretty obvious that you are "itching" for a war of some sort, whether it be a cold war or a hot war I can't say for sure, but you clearly see Russia as an enemy to be confronted.

[Common Sense]

"common sense" is basically proving my point, as he usually does when the topic comes to russia.

He begins by objecting to my premise that clinton supporters want war with russia and then proceeds to demonstrate just how anxious he is for escalation, i.e., "bow to their will", "conflict with russia a two-way street", "go watch rt", implying that his opponents are like neville chamberlain, etc.

It seems pretty obvious that you are "itching" for a war of some sort, whether it be a cold war or a hot war i can't say for sure, but you clearly see russia as an enemy to be confronted.

lol...

[Ethereal]

Moreover, Clinton supporters haven't bothered to explain why the US should intervene in Syria.

I've asked this question dozens of times and they never answer. They just deflect or ignore. That must mean they have zero defense of Clinton's stated foreign policy in regards to Syria. Yet they support her anyway. So if anyone is being influenced by propaganda, it's Clinton supporters.

[Ethereal]

lol...

Seriously? And you claim to be an adult?

[Common Sense]

Seriously? And you claim to be an adult?

Sorry, your overly dramatic posts make me laugh...

[Ethereal]

Sorry, your overly dramatic posts make me laugh...

Then refute it using logic and evidence. Because not a single person on this forum comes here to read things like "lol". You are just wasting everyone's time and distracting from the thread topic. Be a grown up and form an argument or don't post at all.

[Ethereal]

As usual, they cannot refute my position. And they cannot even offer a defense of their own. They have absolutely nothing except insults, distractions, and smug declarations.

[Common Sense]

Then refute it using logic and evidence. Because not a single person on this forum comes here to read things like "lol". You are just wasting everyone's time and distracting from the thread topic. Be a grown up and form an argument or don't post at all.

I'll post how I like, but thanks.

[Common Sense]

As usual, they cannot refute my position. And they cannot even offer a defense of their own. They have absolutely nothing except insults, distractions, and smug declarations.

What am I supposed to say to hyperbolic nonsense?

[Truth Detector]

Anyone who wants to take a more diplomatic (sane) approach towards Russia is instantly accused of being some kind of anti-American agent of the Kremlin.

While your thread premise is a strawman in my view; I do find it rather ironic that Trump is getting attacked by same leftists who supported Obama's overtures to Putin and Medvedev....to the point of leaning across the table with an open mike telling them he will be better able to work with them after his re-election, yet it for the ObamaTard it was brilliant strategy but from Trump it's bending over.

Lest we forget what the ObamaTard was doing:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNxEDomUlXw

President Barack Obama was caught on microphone telling Dmitry Medvedev that he would have more flexibility after November's election deal with contentious issues such as missile defense.

[Truth Detector]

How about suggesting starting a war with Iran over hand gestures?

The only ones making that asinine claim were the Liberal left. Good lord; how can anyone be this clueless?

[Common Sense]

The only ones making that asinine claim were the Liberal left. Good lord; how can anyone be this clueless?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoCn8pExF70

“When [the Iranians] circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they make gestures at our people that they shouldn’t be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water.”

[Ethereal]

By the way, you don't need to read or watch a single piece from RT in order to know that Clinton supporters (and neocons generally) are trying to escalate with Russia.

Many, many respected academics, intellectuals, historians, and journalists living in the west have taken notice of this and written and spoken extensively about it.

Professor Emeritus of Russian Studies, History and Politics, NYU and Princeton, Stephen Cohen:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCMyHJJrdDw

Institute Professor Emeritus, MIT, Noam Chomsky:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-lKRsmCx4E

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, Glenn Greenwald:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yy742HAovY

So when people like "Common Sense" try to claim this is nothing more than a Russian-manufactured propaganda narrative, just remember there are no shortage of respected intellectuals in the west who are saying exactly what I'm saying in regards to US-Russian relations.

[Ethereal]

I'll post how I like, but thanks.

Pretty sure you have to post within the rules and spamming "lol" is what any reasonable person would consider bad faith posting.

[Common Sense]

So you honestly think the Clinton end game is war with Russia? She's pushing for war with Russia?

Why?

[Common Sense]

Pretty sure you have to post within the rules and spamming "lol" is what any reasonable person would consider bad faith posting.


That's nice.

[Ethereal]

What am I supposed to say to hyperbolic nonsense?

You can actually demonstrate that it is in fact "hyperbolic nonsense" using logic and evidence instead of just expecting people to take your self-serving assertions as gospel.

[Ethereal]

So you honestly think the Clinton end game is war with Russia? She's pushing for war with Russia?

Perhaps she has deluded herself into believing that Russia will back down instead of escalating into a hot war with the west. Or perhaps she just does not care because she is a power hungry sociopath. It's hard to know what her real motives are, but there is no question that her words and actions presage increased conflict with Russia, and her supporters seem to have no problem with this escalation. In fact, they seem to welcome it.


Why?

Because she, like many other American politicians, is a puppet for the military-industrial complex who profits off of war and conquest.

[Ethereal]

That's nice.

Do you deny what I'm saying? Do you think spamming "lol" every time someone posts something you do not like is good faith posting?

[Ethereal]

Why?

And you'll notice that I actually answered your question.

When are you going to answer my questions? Or don't you have any answers?

Why should the US escalate in Syria? How will removing Syria's secular faction from power make the world a safer, better place? And is it worth increasing tensions with Russia?

[Ethereal]

Pulitzer prize winning journalist, Seymour Hersh, traitorously appearing on RT and questioning US foreign policy:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7IudtaHjBA

He must be an agent of the Kremlin who hates America.

[Truth Detector]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoCn8pExF70

“When [the Iranians] circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they make gestures at our people that they shouldn’t be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water.”

How is Trump wrong here? You think a foreign navy should be able to harass us on the open sea outside of their territorial waters? Why??

I'll guarantee you this much; you blow the little piss ants out of the water for not heeding the Captain's commands and the Iranian leadership will get a clue REAL fast that you don't F with us.

[Truth Detector]

I am always amazed by the dumb and naïve liberal view assuming that despots, tyrants and terrorists can be talk to and reasoned with. It's not merely naïve but outright stupidity.

[Ethereal]

How is Trump wrong here? You think a foreign navy should be able to harass us on the open sea outside of their territorial waters? Why??

I'll guarantee you this much; you blow the little piss ants out of the water for not heeding the Captain's commands and the Iranian leadership will get a clue REAL fast that you don't F with us.

Trump is wrong because taunting and gamesmanship is a traditional component of naval and aeronautical dynamics between adversaries. If we blew someone out of the water or sky every time they did something cheeky or slightly confrontational, we'd be downing ships and planes almost every day.

For some reason, neocons like you think extreme aggression and hostility are the only ways to deal with adversarial nations. Neocons seem to be deeply insecure about the world, which is probably why they are always so quick to resort to violence and aggression.

[Ethereal]

I am always amazed by the dumb and naïve liberal view assuming that despots, tyrants and terrorists can be talk to and reasoned with. It's not merely naïve but outright stupidity.

Bush had no problem talking to and reasoning with the despots and tyrants in Saudi Arabia.

[Ethereal]

Hostility and aggression can be effective at placating an adversary if they're relatively weak. Putting aside the moral and ethical implications for a moment, the practical ability of a superpower to impose its will on weaker countries is not really in question.

But when it comes to a country like Russia, hostility and aggression simply won't work. If anything, it will increase hostilities and tensions in a vicious cycle of reciprocation and recrimination.

The only way to calm tensions with a country like Russia is to engage them diplomatically and fairly and reach reasonable compromises. This doesn't mean we need to fall in love with them or do whatever they want. It just means we have to recognize that Russia has valid interests and concerns and that it's only rational for them to assert them. It also means we have to being willing to at least entertain the possibility that Russia might be right on occasion and that the US government is not infallible.

[Ethereal]

This is amazing.

Not a single Clinton supporter can explain why we should escalate in Syria even though it's arguably the most important and consequential component of her overall foreign policy for America.

Clinton and her supporters are going into this totally blind and with zero regard for the consequences.

[Ethereal]

How the US Armed-up Syrian Jihadists (https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/29/how-the-us-armed-up-syrian-jihadists/)

The West blames Russia for the bloody mess in Syria, but U.S. Special Forces saw close up how the chaotic U.S. policy of aiding Syrian jihadists enabled Al Qaeda and ISIS to rip Syria apart, explains ex-British diplomat Alastair Crooke.

By Alastair Crooke

“No one on the ground believes in this mission or this effort”, a former Green Beret writes of America’s covert and clandestine programs to train and arm Syrian insurgents, “they know we are just training the next generation of jihadis, so they are sabotaging it by saying, ‘Fuck it, who cares?’”. “I don’t want to be responsible for Nusra guys saying they were trained by Americans,” the Green Beret added.

In a detailed report, US Special Forces Sabotage White House Policy gone Disastrously Wrong with Covert Ops in Syria, Jack Murphy, himself a former Green Beret (U.S. Special Forces), recounts a former CIA officer having told him how the “the Syria covert action program is [CIA Director John] Brennan’s baby …Brennan was the one who breathed life into the Syrian Task Force … John Brennan loved that regime-change bullshit.”

...

Clinton supporters want more of this stuff. More arms and money flowing to terrorists in Syria. They have no defense.

[valley ranch]

Re: Syria~It was said that Assad was so bad to the Syrians that he had to go. So, million and millions of dollars, of our tax moneys, was spent arming the killers we said we were fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq and sent them to Syria, under a different name, where they killed, raped and all else the Syrian people while destroying Syria.

And it seems they/we haven't had enough we want to kill more. Syria a sovereign nation, Let's protect Saudi from a law suit while trampling the Syrian nation to death.

We should have an administration that understands this!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Russia is not, should not be, our enemy! The Soviet, our enemy, had the Russian nation and several others captive, the Russian people are free of the monster.

We and the Russians have an enemy who would like to kill us both. Some of Russia's enemy live in Russia, it is the same with us.

A good Russian leader loves Russia~A good American Leader will love America. We don't have to hate and distrust each other. Russia~the former Holy Mother Russia, is moving back to her old self.

Russia could be a important friend.

[Peter1469]

I've read some stuff about the oil pipeline angle and I wouldn't be surprised if that were an ancillary goal of some sort, but I think the number one goal is the longterm isolation and destabilization of Russia. That has been the centerpiece in the western imperialist agenda since at least the early 1900's in my opinion.

Russia refuses to bow to the globalist who control the West.

[Truth Detector]

Trump is wrong because taunting and gamesmanship is a traditional component of naval and aeronautical dynamics between adversaries. If we blew someone out of the water or sky every time they did something cheeky or slightly confrontational, we'd be downing ships and planes almost every day.

For some reason, neocons like you think extreme aggression and hostility are the only ways to deal with adversarial nations. Neocons seem to be deeply insecure about the world, which is probably why they are always so quick to resort to violence and aggression.

We aren't the one's "taunting"; it happens to be the Iranians. You continue to illustrate that you are incapable of grasping reality.

[Tahuyaman]

Clinton Supporters Itching for War With Russia
What? Hillary Clinton's reset button didn't work?