Two presidential candidates and the fate of the world
The outcome of the U.S. election will have a critical — and possibly catastrophic — effect on the future of the human race.
Russia, and specifically Syria, will be the flashpoint.
RECENT EVENTS BODE ILL:
Russia has put ground troops in Syria.
Clinton said she supports the use of special ops in Syria, a precursor to sending in ground troops.
Russia has completed several missile shields in Syria.
Putin has threatened war if NATO does not vacate Eastern Europe.
Russia has moved tactical nukes into Estonia and Latvia.
Clinton said she would impose a no-fly zone, which is tantamount to a declaration of war.
The two candidates for U.S. president have completely opposite views on how to deal with Russia. Donald Trump wants to try and get along with Vladimir Putin. Hillary Clinton has taken a belligerent position and will take action that would only provoke the Russian president.
The situation in Syria is said to be comparable to Sarajevo just before World War I — with one catastrophic difference: The next war will be nuclear.
Hillary Clinton brings the real threat of war, not Donald Trump, according to Putin.
Clinton’s image as a war hawk may be lost on many mainstream American voters, but Russia, Europe, and other nations witnessed her warmongering side when she was Secretary of State, and the contents of Clinton’s intercepted emails have not allayed their fears.
On the other hand, Putin said he was encouraged by Donald Trump’s message that he was willing to work with Russian leaders.
Trump said that if he is elected he would weigh an alliance with Russia against Islamic State militants.
Trump has praised the Russian leader, and one of Trump’s top foreign policy advisers, retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, had dinner with Putin last December.
THE BOTTOM LINE:
“When you think about it, wouldn’t it be nice if we got along with Russia?” Trump has said. “Wouldn’t it be nice if we got together with Russia and knocked the hell out of ISIS?”