22 shares




8 13 0 1




as donald trump gains more bad press, hilary clinton rides the political wave with quick responses, deflections and denials. without question, and largely due to trump's obnoxious candor and grandiose proclamations, she is working her way back into the favor of disgruntled democrats and even right wing firebrands like the notorious glenn beck. she is, without question, a wolf in sheep's clothing. while trump is unbelievably hard to take, constantly, we need to focus on one simple question, which of these candidates will lead to world devastation first?




i suspect it would be hillary clinton who would be most inclined toward involving americans in another military conflict, and she doesn't go small, as she constantly demonizes russia with threats of military action. in clinton's own words, "you've seen reports, russia has hacked into a lot of things, china has hacked into a lot of things, russia even hacked into the democratic national committee, maybe even some state election systems. so we've got to step up our game, make sure we are well defended and can take the fight to those who go after us. as president, i will make it clear that the united states will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack. we will be ready with serious political, economic and military responses."




military responses to a nation the us stood on the verge of war with for more than four decades? military response against russia? over suspected hacking? hillary clinton betrayed her real mindset once and for all during the recent debate with donald trump when she spoke those words of war that would surely lead to only disastrous consequences.




it all stems from the wikileaks release that included 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments from leaders at the democratic national committee. clinton says the russians did it, the national mainstream media parroted those words. it's the american media's political conditioning system at its finest, convincingly reaching tens of millions of americans, and yet nobody knows if the blame is properly attributed to the russians. in a usa today article from july 2016, elizabith weise wrote, "computer security researchers say it<u+2019>s difficult to definitively say the cyber theft of files from the democratic national committee subsequently posted online by wikileaks was the work of russian hackers, as some media outlets have reported."




russia's leader, vladmir putin, says the us long ago tipped the scales in the wrong direction, well before the cold war even ended. peace with russia should be a top priority for any us presidential candidate. the truth is that american politicians, perpetually convinced they are making the right political moves, created a road block on the highway to peace during the vietnam war. putin said during the st. petersburg international economic forum 2016, "it is not in my nature to scold someone -- but when the united states unilaterally withdrew from the abm treaty (in) 1972 they delivered a colossal blow to the entire system of international security. that was the first blow when it comes to assessing the strategic balance of power in the world".




more... 10 things to expect with a hillary clinton presidency hillary clinton must be indicted how hillary clinton ushered in a one party dictatorship of monopoly capital voting for the <u+201c>lesser evil<u+201d> now we have clinton warmongering over unfounded allegations.




world rivals in the air




there is a decades-old history of rivalry between eastern and western jet fighter design and technology. while american designs are more expensive and generally considered to be better, the fastest jet fighter ever made is the russian mig-25; it can break mach iii, more than three times the speed of sound. such demands lessen the life of an aircraft. the mig-25 is typically not flown at anything close to that speed. as an interceptor however, it was supreme, no allied fighter in the sky could outrun it.




the korean war was the first test. soviet mig-15's initially dominated the skies. with russian and chinese pilots often at the controls, the mig's were deadly.




on 1 november 1950, at least sixteen american f-51 fighters (p-51 mustangs) were shot at by six soviet mig-15 interceptors led by soviet wwii ace mayor nikolay v. stroykov. the wwii "prop" planes like the mustang, along with the u.s. f-80 shooting star and f-84 thunderjet jet fighters, had a job on their hands fighting the robust and highly maneuverable mig fighters.




everything changed when the u.s. air force launched the f-86 sabre. wikipedia explains that the f-86 sabre pilots enjoyed advantages they learned to exploit to the fullest. foremost among those was a radar ranging gun sight on their six .50 caliber machine guns, which ensured that even short bursts of fire generally found their target. f-86 pilots were also equipped with g-suits, which prevented pilot blackout in high-speed turning maneuvers.




it is unlikely that anybody will ever fully agree on the casualties and "kill" ratios over "mig alley" during the korean war.




the soviets claimed 1,106 united nations planes of all types shot down, including about 650 sabres. (the usaf only admits to losing less than 200 aircraft in air combat.)




the f-86 pilots claimed 792 mig-15s shot down, while b-29 gunners claimed a further 16. these numbers were later reduced to 379 migs. the chinese air force claimed only 85 kills.




in vietnam, the competitors varied. the mig-17 and mig-21 fighters were widely used by the north vietnamese air force. they fought planes like the f-100 super sabre, f-5 tiger and the f-4 phantom. once again, if you believe western sources which are fairly reliable for the most part, the u.s. planes dominated in most air to air combat, though the other side had plenty of talented pilots and more aces overall than the americans. during the end of the cold war in the 1980's, the soviet mig-29 was the terror of the skies. there was more speculation about it than real knowledge at first. while mig aircraft were only built in odd numbers, the movie top gun references the aircraft by calling them mig-28's - "mig-28's, no one's been this close before!" the planes used in the movie were actually american f-5 tigers painted black with red stars applied to the tails. today the united states spends obscene amounts on planes like the f-22 raptor and these aircraft do not have any clear advantages over modern russian planes like the su-30. both in this case, are capable of "thrust vectoring" which means the pilot can change the direction of the jet blast and create an entirely separate way to control the jet in flight. the ultimate western jet in the world of thrust vectoring is the av8/b harrier which can actually take off and land like a helicopter. hopefully the world will not have to put these machines against each other in a future war, but with clinton at the helm it is entirely possible and the advantages the us used to hold over the russian military have evaporated into thin air.




russia's modern approach to warfare




during the decades-long cold war, the soviet union operated under archaic rules that essentially prevented a commander, or a pilot, from knowing their mission until they were dispatched to carry out the order. kemp freund, a us army sergeant major that i met while i was covering the war in afghanistan, was quote: d in my 2007 video report "camp joyce: remote fire base near afghanistan-pakistan border" saying, "we're trying to break the old soviet methods that they use and the soviet method had that lt. col. completely in the dark until he needed to move.<u+201d> he added, <u+201c>we're still working with the higher echelons to get that to move downhill." the soviet ways were detrimental and offered little freedom to a trained soldier or pilot but all that is over now. today's russian pilots not only fly superior aircraft that cost far less than us taxpayer funded military planes, they also utilize tactics of western pilots. hillary clinton surely knows these facts but she wants to play with fire and be another "war president" which was so important to former president george w. bush, and obama too for that matter.




other looming conflicts




lest we forget, hillary clinton's unwavering support of israel, the apartheid religious nuclear state that has long been protected by us taxpayer money and military hardware. the government of right wing israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu continues to violate the human rights of palestinians constantly, while building settlements which are completely illegal under international law. then there are the attacks in gaza that target schools and hospitals, leaving hundreds and hundreds dead and thousands severely injured. never does clinton speak out against the barbaric treatment israel reserves for non-jews, never does she refer to the fact that the country we now call iran hasn't attacked a nation outside of its borders for more than three hundred years. yet iran has been savagely attacked by the united states both directly and indirectly. maintaining her warmongering spirit, clinton said, "i want the iranians to know that if i'm president we will attack iran." she added that, "we would be able to totally obliterate them."
clinton's policies look like a death sentence for americans
tim king