Since the Iraq and Syrian conflicts are heating up simultaneously, pressuring President Obama to introduce more troops into both theaters of war, we thought it an opportune time to review the proposals of those seeking to replace him next year. And since we know these conflicts will persist for years, if not decades, understanding how Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump would respond to these challenges could go a long way in helping the parents of America's next generation plan their futures.
Examining Hillary Clinton's recent calls for a No Fly Zone over Syria was a bit disturbing considering most military experts and analysts, as well as President Obama, have concluded that option is difficult to manage, let alone enforce. With the Russians given carte blanche over Syrian air space by the Syrian government, how do you challenge or even attempt to restrict their missions? With Syria flying missions of their own, determined to defend against ISIS and anybody else they deem a threat, to force them out of their own sovereign space is an act of war. And by the way, it's really expensive.
With the Saudis convinced the U.S. is no longer as reliable as it once was, they've reserved the right to attack targets they feel pose a threat to their interests whenever they see fit. And considering they've purchased as much as $100 billion in arms over the last five years, how do you keep them on a short leash? With the Turks flying missions of their own as they battle the Kurds and ISIS inside Syria, while playing host to hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees, how do you tell them to chill? And when it comes to the Israelis, they do whatever the hell they want. End of discussion.
Examining Hillary Clinton's past record of supporting military engagements, we found so many hawkish statements and proposals, a mere cursory search took the challenge out of predicting how she'd respond to ISIS in Iraq. If Ralph Nader is correct in his assessment of Hillary Clinton being the poster child for the military industrial complex, then one can safely presume, she'd authorize a surge of additional forces that'll make President Obama's cautious approach look like a cautious approach. And by the way, that too, will be really expensive.
Examining Donald Trump's statements and proposals on dealing with ISIS, Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian rebels, Moscow, Tehran, the Turks and the Israelis, in the chaotic Middle East, was extremely disturbing. Mostly, because much of his hyperbolic rhetoric was far too nonsensical to follow. And having little if any understanding of what's really going on in the most violent, volatile and complicated region in the world, he too would likely plunge U.S. forces into the Middle East's meat grinder without an exit strategy. And again, this too, will be really expensive.
While we have no crystal ball, we do have a strong sense of history. And since history can predict the future, young Americans should be planning for a worse case scenario - the presidency of Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Knowing this, they should also know, any plans, proposals or promises made by Clinton or Trump to make their lives better and America great again, will be downsized significantly to pay for their aggression and ignorance. And if one considers young women are being consider for the draft along with young men for future combat engagements, American parents from all walks of life should be concerned.
Bottom line: Do the math. Endless military conflicts inevitably lead to significantly higher defense and homeland security spending. These costs will inevitably lead to significant reductions in social, educational and infrastructure investments. And so continues the erosion of America's future and quality of life. If either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump find themselves playing a significant role in the lives of America's best and brightest youth, the time is now to plan ways to mitigate the disastrous results their policies will have on them going forward. Podcast below!
Comments
Post a Comment