Really discouraging to hear her talk this way. Obama has done way too much but evidently he's as peacenik as American presidents will ever be.

Has there been a president, since the invention of bombs, who hasn't dropped them on people?

Yet another reason why Warren/Biden is the best choice

The more I hear about Clinton's foreign policy positions, the more worried I become, and the more I hope that someone mounts a serious challenge against her in the primaries and runs on foreign issues. It appalls me that she would throw away all the good that Obama's restraint has done. We saw what unrestrained interventionism did under Bush, why would we want to go back to that?

@ 1

Mass murderer is part of the job description.

Yes, we can plainly see how positively effective US intervention has been in Iraq and Afghanistan, which are now failed states. Hillbot 3000 is truly craven or presumes the public to be total idiots--probably both. Thank you, Neo Con Clinton.

Sounds like a giant step backwards towards a 20th century mentality.

Obama's hands off policy in Gaza is completely breakthrough as was his overall middle east neutrality. What forced him to intervene against ISIS is not clear.

I wish he had continued to retrench and stay away from Ukraine as well. But instead focus on the problems of North and Central America.

China, India, Russia, Europe. These are a all Regional Authorities. When we've pulled back, they seem to carry their weight. Expending American energy by taking sides where there is no advantage to the U.S. is not wise.

She's running for president as a force to be reckoned with globally. She needs to set herself up as, basically, a bad ass that is not afraid to take military action. Obama is always going to defend himself on Syria. Don't forget, he got rid of Assad's chemical weapons. Things could have been worse for the people there. So there's that. But I would be happy to see ISIS pushed back into Syria.

Hillary Clinton is a neocon shill whose primary supporters are aging white liberals and soccer moms. News at 11.

She just lost my vote.

@ 1
Jimmy Carter!
Only U.S. president since WW2 who never dropped a bomb or fired a single shot.

BTW I think it's past time we gave the Kurds their own country, dammit. They have pulled our asses out of the fire and every time we screwed them. They do not deserve the Maliki mess.

Remember, she *has* to distance herself from Obama so she can win back all the racists who also happen to be Democrats.

Appealing to some sort of "humanitarian" goals or "human rights" ideals in ANY conflict where the US might "intervene" is a smokescreen: the US intervenes when and only when there are US geopolitical interests. That Iraq & Afghanistan are "failed states" is not germane because it wasn't our goal to build states: It was among our goals to remove Saddam's meddling with oil prices, and build a pipeline across A'stan. Smaller nations are easier to control, thus Kurdistan. Also, we wanted to establish US bases there from which we can project power around the ME & beyond, essentially circling China a bit tighter, and also reduce/remove supply lines & support for Palastine, & the threat to Israel (eg. Saddam's Iraq). Disrupting AlQaeda was an objective also. Syria isn't pertinent to our interests & it's convenient to have an Iranian ally tied up with drawn-out civil war, thus no US intervention. We're going after ISIS now because ISIS *is* a former branch of AlQaeda (AQinIraq) and represents a direct threat to oil stability.

Same old same old...

@9 He didn't have to when he was shipping weapons and money to mass-murdering right wing dictators all over the globe.

Everyone should vote their conscience, but if you vote for Clinton, you should stop considering yourself to be a liberal.

@13 is correct

For those people who "aren't going to vote", remember this: Republicans are already calling for American ground troops to go back. You're going to do exactly the opposite of what you should.

I have been expecting to vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016 since she lost to Obama last time around, even though my misgivings about her were a large part of why I voted for Obama in the primaries. I can accept that like Obama she's far more conservative than what I prefer, because it's what is possible in the United States today.

Every step she makes toward George W. Bush on foreign policy makes me reconsider. We have no other options, but we are in really big trouble if Obama's sensibilities on foreign policy are thrown out and we adopt a more warmongering posture. I really hope this is a rhetorical turn on her part and not an indication of her actual stance, because we have a depressing decade ahead of us otherwise.

@1: So, if Adolf Hitler and the Emperor of Japan had won WWII, you'd be fine with that. Okay.