Illustration by Tamor Khan/The Cougar
Hillary Clinton is too ambitious to be president.
As a career politician, Clinton has become an expert in the art of saying one thing, but doing the other. Just this week, she spoke at the Brookings Institution where she shared her feelings about the Iran deal.
“I will not hesitate to take military action if Iran attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon,” she said.
Clinton voted for the Iraq War as a senator back in 2002 and said that it was a mistake, but is still willing to use military force in an unstable region.
It has become her trademark to appear strong and decisive in order to appeal to a broader spectrum of voters.
“She’s wants to be seen as that ‘no one is gonna walk over me’ kind of thing,” said associate political science professor Jason Casellas. “She’s always had that reputation of being hawkish.”
A hawkish president is not what this country needs.
The last time we had a hawkish president, the U.S. spent nearly $2 trillion and destabilized an entire region. Some say the conflict also resulted in the creation of ISIS, arguably one of the most dangerous terrorist groups in modern history.
This is not to say that Iran is to be trusted entirely with the dismantlement of their own nuclear program. But outright threatening to use military force means she will now have to live up to her promise should she become president.
Using military force means more government spending and putting American soldiers’ lives at risk.
As Bernie Sanders said, “If you can’t afford to take care of your veterans, then don’t go to war.”
This country is ready for a female president, but gender should not be a qualifying factor for being president. Someone who is eager to wage war in another country is not someone looking out for the best interest of everyone.
Clinton can’t continue to speak this way. We live in a period where most Americans are very reluctant to engage in any kind of military conflict if it means putting our troops’ lives in danger.
With the horrible effects of the Iraq War, Clinton should have learned her lesson by now.
Apparently she hasn’t.
Opinion editor Anthony Torres is a political science junior and may be reached at [email protected]
Hillary’s strength should be foreign policy, after four years as Secretary of State. She had plenty of time to adapt her hawkish view to a more realistic stance, especially after what went wrong in Libya. She hasn’t, and we could expect her to govern also as a hawk. I prefer other candidates, like Biden or Sanders.