‘Hillary Clinton is the most dangerous presidential hopeful from a war standpoint’
Hillary Clinton is the most dangerous candidate of those running from a war standpoint, says Lew Rockwell, American author, chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. She promoted the destruction of Libya and killing people in Syria, he adds.
Since the start of the NATO intervention in Libya to topple Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, the country has suffered through instability and political chaos.
RT: Why does Hillary Clinton refuse to take at least some responsibility for the Libyan bombing campaign? 2011 was right bang in the middle of her stint as US Secretary of State.
Lew Rockwell: She is a liar. That’s why she won’t. She is attempting to wiggle out of what she did. She promoted the destruction of Libya, the murder of Gaddafi, and murder of many thousands of people in Libya, sending all kinds of horrendous arms with the approval of the US to the Syrian so-called rebels, to kill people in Syria. This was a criminal act and an imperial act. She was cheering it on… You can’t believe her, she is a liar and now she is trying to wiggle out, but she was, if we want to put this in legal terms, she was an accessory before, during and after the fact. Yes, Obama had the final decision. She was egging him on, she was cheering him on, she was pressuring him and she went right along with it and she is co-responsible for all those deaths, for all that blood and destruction, all the families destroyed, all the mountains of corpses in Libya. Just as of course she is co-responsible for what George W. Bush did in Iraq. She is a very nasty lady.
RT: What does Clinton think the Libyan people did to, as she put it, “obstruct” western efforts in Libya? She is blaming the Libyan people.
LR: Because everybody’s job is to salute the US and do what they say. That’s everybody’s job and you better not obstruct US imperial plans: evil, conquering, destructive plans for your country. Or otherwise they are going to kill you. So, she is justifying murder. I was going to compare Hillary Clinton to Lady Macbeth, but Lady Macbeth only killed one person, so she is not in the same category. I am glad to see this attempt at wiggling…it shows us just how her championship of this kind of imperial evil is going over with the American people - they are not liking it. This is one of the great things about this election: all American foreign policy has been questioned for the first time in quite a while and that’s all to the good: the trouble with NATO, the trouble with US bases all over the place, trouble with US troops all over the place, with US intervention all over the world causing constant trouble and death. Maybe we are going to end some of that, fingers crossed anyway. But it is going to have to be over with Hillary, she is the most dangerous candidate from a war standpoint I think of anybody running.
RT: Is blaming Obama part of Clinton's election strategy? After all, in her debates with Bernie Sanders she seems to mention her secretary of state experience a lot. Libya would be a major blot on that, wouldn't it?
LR: When something bad happens: “Hey, it is those other guys, it wasn’t I”. She grabbed on to Obama’s ankle and hugged it tight. But if the polls show that he is trouble for her, then of course he is over the side. That is the way she operates, that is the way Bill Clinton operated, a very nasty bunch. Not that I am exonerating Obama, he has killed infinitely more people than, say, Gaddafi did. These are all bad people, they are all killers and we want less of them, want to hear less of them and certainly doing less to people and it would be great to send her into retirement…
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
