News Release

Clinton Caters to the Military-Industrial Complex


ClintionThe Washington Post reports today: “Clinton launching national security case against Trump in California speech.” Hillary Clinton will be giving a major foreign policy speech, the Post reports, on Thursday in San Diego — which houses a major base that is the principal homeport of the Pacific Fleet.

For upcoming events, see

DIANA JOHNSTONE, [in France]  diana.johnstone [at]
Johnstone is author of Queen of Chaos: the Misadventures of Hillary Clinton. See her writings on foreign policy at CounterPunch. Clinton is preparing to boldly run as the candidate of the military industrial complex, Johnstone said today.

According to the Washington Post, Clinton’s campaign “hopes there are many more national-security-minded Republicans and independents who would vote for her, even grudgingly, rather than see Trump win the White House.”

Johnstone said today: “She is counting on such voters to be scared of Trump. Watch out! He might get us into war through what she calls his ‘reckless risky talk.’ Such talk is bad. But reckless risky actions are worse — especially when they lead to war, as [Clinton’s] have already done. The disastrous Libyan regime change war is the centerpiece of the ‘experience’ which she boasts should qualify her to be in a position to start more wars.

“But what are those targeted California voters really scared of? The Washington Post explains that the state of California’s ‘defense industry and military bases lend a backdrop for her speech.’ Indeed! Hillary Clinton is quite simply catering to the military-industrial complex, as she has been doing throughout her career. She is catering to the arms industry, which needs to keep the American people scared of various ‘threats’ in order to continue draining the nation’s wealth into their profitable enterprises. She needs those in the military who believe in those threats invented by intellectuals in think tanks, to keep the machine going.

“This is what is meant by the ‘national-security-minded’ electorate that Hillary is targeting. It is those who are making a living off maintaining the nation in a state of dangerous paranoia. They undermine the real security of a nation, which depends on the well-being of its citizens.

“The opposite is the case. Such ‘national-security-minded’ leaders as Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton have led the United States into wars that create chaos and endanger everybody’s national security. Despite the geographically safe position of the United States, the ‘reckless risky’ actions of the bipartisan War Party in pursuing chaos in the Middle East and provoking nuclear-armed Russia constitute the real and immediate threat to United States national security.

“Coming from Hillary Clinton, the term ‘unqualified’ applied to Trump sounds like a compliment. He lacks her experience in sabotaging peaceful negotiations and encouraging military intervention and regime change. It is nevertheless true that Trump is unqualified. But at least, one can hope that if elected president he would look for foreign policy advisers outside the circle of neocons and liberal interventionists that rule the beltway today. With Trump or with Bernie Sanders, there is at least a chance that the United States might turn away from its perpetual wars. With Hillary Clinton, it’s full speed ahead.

“As reported by the Washington Post, ‘She will make the affirmative case for the exceptional role American has played and must continue to play in order to keep our country safe and our economy growing.'”