Jill Stein: a Clinton Presidency could mean nuclear war with Russia

Colonial Viper
8 years ago
Categories: colonialism, defence, Globalisation, International, kremlinology, Syria, us politics, war

Edit – Bill suggested that I change the title of this post to more closely reflect what Stein said in her interview

Jill Stein, the US Green Party presidential candidate, is a left wing woman and politician who can see past cheap political smears, irrelevant diversions, and self righteous stigmatising, in order to keep her eye on what is really important in terms of peace, freedom and democracy.

Her comments about Julian Assange as a democratic hero, fell perfectly into this mould.

And just a few days ago Jill Stein did it again, when Real Clear Politics put up a dramatically titled article:

Jill Stein: Trump Is Less Dangerous Than Clinton; She Will Start Nuclear War With Russia

where Stein makes it clear that while she does not like the idea of Donald Trump as POTUS, there are very good reasons to suspect why Hillary’s declared policy position from the second presidential debate of a US enforced Syrian no-fly zone may be very much worse for us and for the entire world:

It is now Hillary Clinton that wants to start an air war with Russia over Syria by calling for a no fly zone.

We have 2000 nuclear missiles on hairtrigger alert. They are saying we are closer to a nuclear war than we have ever been.

Under Hillary Clinton, we could slide into nuclear war very quickly from her declared policy in Syria.

I sure won’t sleep well at night if Donald Trump is elected, but I sure won’t sleep well at night if Hillary Clinton elected. We have another choice other than these two candidates who are both promoting lethal policies.

On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary’s policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia.

He wants to seek modes of working together, which is the route that we need to follow not to go into confrontation and nuclear war with Russia.

A clip of Steins interview with C Span is here:

In this context, it is an enforced area over all or some of Syria where Syrian Government aircraft and Russian aircraft will be forbidden to fly, but where US/western allied aircraft will have complete air superiority and full freedom to conduct whatever missions they please.

This doesn’t sound so bad until you examine the examples of no-fly zones previously established over Iraq and Libya: in Syria it would require the suppression of most (or ideally all) threatening or potentially threatening Russian and Syrian ground to air defence systems, including radar and missile installations, air bases and air fields, aircraft and hangars which could be used to oppose the activities of US/western aircraft.

In the process, the deaths of hundreds of Syrian and Russian military personnel could be taken for granted. Even the US Chair of the Joint Chiefs General Dunford recently told a House Committee that the actions required to establish a no-fly zone over Syria would be an act of war against Syria and Russia – and that he was not prepared to make such a decision (warning clip is from Alex Jones’ Info Wars):

Earlier in October, Russia also clearly warned about any such actions, saying that with their new S300 and S400 air defence systems installed in Syria, western illusions about the utility of “invisible [i.e. stealth] aircraft” will “face a disappointing reality.”

A reminder to all that Russian armed forces are operating in Syria legally under international law at the invitation of the Damascus government (and approved by the Russian parliament in Moscow), while the US, French, UK, etc. are all operating in Syria uninvited, illegally, as aggressor nations.

My thanks go to politicians like Stein who can ignore the tabloid level noise and tabloid level smears surrounding Donald Trump and instead cut through to the heart of what it means to elect a dangerous warmonger like Hillary Clinton into the Oval Office.