Media sensationalizes Trumps ridiculous statements, while ignoring Hillary’s drive to war

foreign policy plan

Interestingly, the mainstream media has sensationalized the comments of Trump, (which are indeed questionable), while it has not payed attention to Hillary’s extremely troubling actions and positions. It also appears sources such as Yahoo are already claiming that Hillary is determined to win.

Republicans Democrats working to prop up Hillary

“The Republicans and Democrats who make up the foreign policy elite are laying the groundwork for a more assertive American foreign policy via a flurry of reports shaped by officials who are likely to play senior roles in a potential Clinton White House,” the Washington Post’s White House correspondent Greg Jaffe reports.
Studies are also showing that we are now likely to engage in war. Clinton’s foreign policy goals are even to the right of Obama’s, who waged secret wars in 8 countries. One such study, published Wednesday by the Center for American Progress (CAP)—which is run by president Neera Tanden, policy director for Clinton’s presidential campaign—recommends the next administration step up its “military engagement” amid a more “proactive and long-term approach to the Middle East.”

What Does the Plan Look Like?

This means: building “on the Obama administration’s campaign to defeat the Islamic State and Al Qaeda militarily by deepening multilateral cooperation with regional partners and taking steps to help create a regional security framework;” as well as being “prepared to use airpower to protect U.S. partners and civilians in certain parts of Syria.”
What this transpires to is exactly Clinton’s call for a “no-fly zone” in that region, which she said on Wednesdays debate.
The latter recommendation is seemingly a direct regurgitation of Clinton’s repeated call for a “no-fly zone” in that region—one she reiterated during Wednesday’s presidential debate.
Another report shown by Brookings Institution, due out in December, which has been produced by a “team of top former Clinton, Bush, and Obama administration officials,” as well as one authored by a bipartisan group led by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on behalf of the Atlantic Council. The same woman, to be noted that said the death of half a million Iraqi children was justified. One can only image the types of aggressive military policies going to be enacted
“Taken together,” Jaffe reports, “the studies and reports call for more-aggressive American action to constrain Iran, rein in the chaos in the Middle East and check Russia in Europe. The studies, which reflect Clinton’s stated views and the direction she is likely to take if she is elected, break most forcefully with Obama on Syria.”
“Virtually all these efforts,” he continues, “call for stepped up military action to deter President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and Russian forces in Syria.”

What the Future Holds

Jaffe further states “in the rarefied world of the Washington foreign policy establishment, President Obama’s departure from the White House—and the possible return of a more conventional and hawkish Hillary Clinton—is being met with quiet relief.”
Or, as The Intercept journalist Zaid Jilani put it, “D.C. foreign policy elite are giddy that hawkish Barack Obama will be replaced by much more hawkish Hillary Clinton.”

Indeed, Jaffe’s attempt to paint Obama as “doveish” was ridiculed by journalist Glenn Greenwald and others who have worked to highlight the president’s ongoing secret drone war and military operations across the Middle East and Africa.