Kremlin- Clinton Victory Would Have Led to World War 3 Between Russia and the US

Do you really think a man sitting cozy as one of the wealthiest persons in his country, would want to destroy the world, for any reason? What the heck would be in it for him? This was all bluster, come on.

If he started a nuclear war, at the very least, his way of life, and all of his power would evaporate. And he would probably die in the process.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

We all know that wars and more wars would be more likely with Clinton, being part of the social liberal faction of neoconservatism, but reading this, I feel like some of you actually believe we were facing nuclear holocaust if Clinton had won.

This is merely an attempt by Russia to sway opinion and policy toward ending sanctions. They weren't about to end the lives of every single Russian by launching a nuclear strike on the US.

originally posted by: dogstar23
a reply to: TrueAmerican
They weren't about to end the lives of every single Russian by launching a nuclear strike on the US.

Yeah you're right. They weren't about to end the lives of every single Russian. Because they have just prepared their citizenry for it. Chances are millions of them would have survived it. And still might. This isn't over yet. Trump's actions on Syria remain to be seen.

One would hope Putin would at least wait until Trump takes office. The bigger question is though, will Obama wait? He's still the President until then.

I believe that most of the official statements that Russia makes to the U.S., also have a bit of propaganda attached, either in the open, or hidden. Hey, it's business. I certainly am not saying that peace is a bad thing, but we probably do not know the price, just to be fair.

I am positive about Trump's willingness to sit down with Putin and discuss amicable deals, but we, as citizens should know exactly what they entail. I hope he will share the content of those conversations with us all.

What in the hell makes you think any world leader wants to live in a world post global nuclear war. Those have a tendancy to cause a hell of a lot of destruction, you know. All their favorite creature comforts would be destroyed, why would they want that?

By all means, let's listen to Putin's propaganda.

He'll be all cozy with Trump as long as Trump's useful to him.

Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

originally posted by: Annee
By all means, let's listen to Putin's propaganda.

He'll be all cozy with Trump as long as Trump's useful to him.

Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

Yes, and the present administration knows this very well, I am sure.

originally posted by: Annee
By all means, let's listen to Putin's propaganda.

He'll be all cozy with Trump as long as Trump's useful to him.

Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

But you trusted Hillary, who is quoted as saying she holds two separate viewpoints?

I'd like to know when exactly did Putin change his philosophy. Seems like he has always been an aggressive prick.

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: Annee
By all means, let's listen to Putin's propaganda.

He'll be all cozy with Trump as long as Trump's useful to him.

Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

But you trusted Hillary, who is quoted as saying she holds two separate viewpoints?

Anyone who claims they don't have a Public viewpoint and a Private viewpoint is lying.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: Annee
By all means, let's listen to Putin's propaganda.

He'll be all cozy with Trump as long as Trump's useful to him.

Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

But you trusted Hillary, who is quoted as saying she holds two separate viewpoints?

Anyone who claims they don't have a Public viewpoint and a Private viewpoint is lying.

I don't have a public and private viewpoint on anything.

I don't mind-fu#$ myself and others with lies.

And I am not lying now.

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: TrueAmerican

There was a thread before stating Trump might be a sleeper agent for the KGB during the Cold War. I wonder if Putin was only warming his relations with Trump only because he was a Russian operative.

www.rense.com...

They said similar about Obama.

So, what does this conversation from 1992 prove?

Well, it's definitely anecdotal. It doesn't prove that Obama has had Soviet Communist training nor that he was groomed to be the first black American president, but it does show one thing that I think is very important. It shows that Soviet Russian Communists knew of Barack from a very early date. It also shows that they truly believed among themselves that he was raised and groomed Communist to pave the way for their future. This report on Barack came personally to me from one of them long before America knew he existed.

Large nation states with nuclear arms will never declare war on each other again. One side will always back down before the button gets pushed.

Having said that, I'm fine with Trump's approach to Syria and ISIS, as long as he really doesn't think he knows more than the generals before he's even spoken with them at length (in other words, I sure hope that part was hyperbole).

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: Annee
By all means, let's listen to Putin's propaganda.

He'll be all cozy with Trump as long as Trump's useful to him.

Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

But you trusted Hillary, who is quoted as saying she holds two separate viewpoints?

Anyone who claims they don't have a Public viewpoint and a Private viewpoint is lying.

The private/public viewpoint thing was yet another example of certain internet media outlets distorting facts to generate pageviews and ad revenue.

Taken in context, Hillary's public position was more like a press release (high level objectives) whereas her private position was more mindful of the political realities (ie strategy and tactics for obtaining the objectives). At no point does she indicate the two positions are in conflict.

I did not vote for Hillary, nor for Trump. However, this sort of bald-faced lying bothers me.

a reply to: Greggers

No, just no.

She was telling the bankers,

I support you but you know I can't tell the voters that.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: Greggers

No, just no.

She was telling the bankers,

I support you but you know I can't tell the voters that.

No, she wasn't. It is extremely clear if you read the quote in context.


Here is SOME of the context often left out. There's more, if you like.


You just have to sort of figure out how to … balance the public and the private efforts that are necessary to be successful, politically … That, I think, has probably been true for all of our history, and if you saw the Spielberg movie, Lincoln, and how he was maneuvering and working to get the 13th Amendment passed, and he called one of my favorite predecessors, Secretary Seward, who … ran against Lincoln for president, and he told Seward, I need your help to get this done. … I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody’s watching … all of the back room discussions and the deals … then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position…”


In other words, her press release to voters is all about what she wants to accomplish. However, the tactics and strategy, including whatever sacrifices she'll make to accomplish that objective, are game time decisions based upon political necessity.

originally posted by: Annee
Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

You don't have to trust your enemy to know when your enemy is finally ready to attack you. And the fact that he hasn't yet just proves that he and Russia are not, and don't want to be, our enemy. Because they certainly have the capacity to. Putin may be a Jekyll and Hyde most of the time to play politics, and keep his adversaries guessing, but his Jekyll and Hyde merged a long time ago into a stonecold face that means business. Failure to recognize this will mean war.

originally posted by: Profusion
People thought I was "fearmongering" with my recent threads in the WW3 forum. Most of the people claiming that were probably Hillary Clinton supporters in denial.

Profusion, I've been right there in your threads since you've been saying it, and I've been saying it myself. We dodged the nuclear bullet with Trump being elected. I just can't understand why Hillary supporters are so blind to what is happening between U.S. / Russia relations. They can't be that blind, can they? I would rather deal with harsh language, than nuclear winter by far.

We are not out of the woods yet by a long way. Obama is still in the hot seat until January and he can still set things in motion..maybe a false flag..I dunno and hopefully it won't happen.

I am convinced that WW3 has been on the cards since the US started pushing for Ukraine to join the EU. It was a direct provocation to Russia..There was no legitimate reason to push up against the Russian border other than to provoke a war. Putin managed to play it out skilfully and even managed to snag Crimea. Then when the pincer movement started in Syria it was beyond obvious the game plan was to push Putin into a corner and a guy like Putin isn't going to lose face.

Why WW3? It's the only way to reset the financial system of crony capitalism. 2008 finished the economy and we have had nothing but industrial scale fraud since, with endless money printing and market manipulation. Hillary warned of war with Russia and she fully intend to follow through. How the hell America intends to WIN a nuclear war is beyond me but maybe you guys have some better black projects than I have assumed you have..but I doubt there exists technology to reverse a nuclear explosion...though I recall there was a theoretical method to actually achieve this.

originally posted by: Annee
By all means, let's listen to Putin's propaganda.

He'll be all cozy with Trump as long as Trump's useful to him.

Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

Goodness Annee, here we go again. Russia reopened talks with the U.S. right after the election that they said were halted indefinitely. Does that not say anything about his character? Putin has an 80% approval rating by the people, higher than any U.S. president that I can remember off hand, so obviously he's a pretty trustworthy guy to a nation, and a strong leader, and willing to work on peaceful resolution after how many times the U.S. has lied to him? All you really know about him is what your fed in the news, I have a feeling there's a different picture to be painted about this man. Explain your Jekyll and Hyde theory, or your comment is invalid.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: Annee
By all means, let's listen to Putin's propaganda.

He'll be all cozy with Trump as long as Trump's useful to him.

Putin is a Jekyll and Hyde. I wouldn't trust him for anything.

But you trusted Hillary, who is quoted as saying she holds two separate viewpoints?

Anyone who claims they don't have a Public viewpoint and a Private viewpoint is lying.

I refer you to this video if you have not seen it yet. This doesn't sound like a Jekyll or Hyde, this sounds like a sensible person trying to explain what direction the world is headed. www.youtube.com...