Yes war was on the menu.
Actress and activist Susan Sarandon believes that had Hillary Clinton won the election, “we would be at war.”
If Clinton had won we'd be at war – Susan Sarandon
“I did think she was very dangerous,” Sarandon said in an interview with The Guardian, as she continues to attract criticism from Clinton loyalists over her support for Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and her subsequent vote for Green Party candidate Jill Stein during the 2016 election.
“I got from Hillary people, ‘I hope your crotch is grabbed’, ‘I hope you’re raped.’ Misogynistic attacks," she said.
Asked if Clinton was more dangerous than Trump, Sarandon
explained, “I did think she was very, very dangerous. We would still be fracking, we would be at war [if she was president]. It wouldn’t be much smoother. Look what happened under [Barack] Obama that we didn’t notice.”
Clinton has a long record of supporting US interventions. Her vote for the Iraq war, the zeal with which she pushed to take down Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, down to her giddy celebration at his death, are just some of the reasons pacifists chose not to vote for her.
While Trump has failed to end US interventionism since coming to power, Clinton had advocated for a no-fly-zone over Syria, which would have likely led to war between the US, and Syria and Russia. Clinton admitted a no-fly-zone would“kill a lot of Syrians,” in a 2013 speech leaked by WikiLeaks before the election. She also maintains a hawkish stance on Iran, and promised
in 2008, “If I’m president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.”
Sarandon voted for Stein in New York, which, she explains “was probably the easiest place to vote for Stein,” as Trump was not going to win that state. “Bringing attention to working-class issues is not a luxury,” she said of her decision.“People are really hurting; that’s how this guy got in.”

Post a Comment