Sunday, October 23, 2016

Hillary Clinton and her Fractious Relationship with China

While the mainstream media has pretty much ignored the treasure trove of insider information provided by the Wikileaks John Podesta email releases either because they are too lazy to wade through tens of thousands of emails or because they are afraid to piss off their choice for president (the more likely scenario), in fact, there is a lot of information to be gleaned particularly in the 80 page booklet of comments that were made by Hillary Clinton in her paid speeches at various private sector speeches.  One of the subjects addressed is America's relationship with China and how China's relationship with North Korea will be cause for significant concern in a Clinton II Administration, particularly given China's territorial claims in the South China Sea.

Here is an excerpt from a speech given to Ms. Clinton's pals at  Goldman Sachs on June 4, 2013 regarding the continued development of North Korea's missile/nuclear program and North Korea's relationship with China:

You know, we all have told the Chinese if they continue to develop this missile program and they get an ICBM that has the capacity to carry a small nuclear weapon on it, which is what they’re aiming to do, we cannot abide that. Because they could not only do damage to our treaty allies, namely Japan and South Korea, but they could actually reach Hawaii and the west coast theoretically, and we’re going to ring China with missile defense. We’re going to put more of our fleet in the area. So China, come on. You either control them or we’re going to have to defend against them.

Here's what she had to say on October 29, 2013, again, to her best friends at Goldman Sachs, about China's claim to the South China Sea:

I think that—you know, one of the greatest arguments that I had on a continuing basis was with my Chinese counterparts about their claim. And I made the point at one point in the argument that, you know, you can call it whatever you want to call it. You don’t have a claim to all of it. I said, by that argument, you know, the United States should claim all of the Pacific. We liberated it, we defended it. We have as much claim to all of the Pacific. And we could call it the American Sea, and it could go from the West Coast of California all the way to the Philippines. And, you know, my counterpart sat up very straight and goes, well, you can’t do that. And I said, well, we have as much right to claim that as you do. I mean, you claim it based on pottery shards from, you know, some fishing vessel that ran aground in an atoll somewhere. You know, we had conveys of military strength. We discovered Japan for Heaven sakes. I mean, we did all of these things." (my bold)

By Ms. Clinton's flawed logic, this is what Russia/the USSR should look like now with the first map showing the Soviet front on December 31, 1944 and the second map showing the Soviet front on May 11, 1945 when hostilities in Europe ended:

Note that by April 1944, Ukraine, the United States Department of State's latest flawed experiment in democracy, had fallen back into the hands of the Soviet Union.  

So, not only is President Clinton II going to wage war in Syria, she's going to push both Russia and China until they either capitulate to her will or take military action to force her hand.  Either way, it's Main Street Americans who lose.  We need to all keep in mind that it's not her child that she will be sacrificing to fight her wars, it's our children that will make the supreme sacrifice for her aggressive foreign policies.