Quote:
Originally Posted by Daywolf
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Yay must mean I passed the "I'm not a pleb" quiz hehe. It was due to pain... back pain I think it was (I'm in the process of brewing a bold aromatic mental powe-up *sip*). I mean JFK got so strung out by the Doc, he had an incident one time in a hotel where he threw off all his clothing and ran screaming down the hallways [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] |
No I'm not talking to myself
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] this was my reply to AtG, just good place to expand my comment.
You know, there is a parallel forming between JFK and HRC. Primarily in the matter of the Russians. Why did the whole Cuban missile crisis happen? I mean we know the story, and the Russians were pissed off even before JFK took office (before my time too). But this didn't happen before he took office, but during.
Could it really have been avoided all together? So like we know now he was jacked up on speed. I would say that drug usage directly modified his approach to things, as where like Reagan was cool headed about the Russian matter (though we were less so hehe my time), but in hindsight there was nothing as of the tension raised by the Cuban missile crisis, some, but not to that extreme.
And so we look at Hillary, and see the interaction causing the Russian question again to slide back towards relations parallel to the 1960's. Well not fully with just Hillary at this point, 0bama is driving it as well. In this case we are putting missiles on their borders. The tension is that these missiles are not just capable of defensive operations, but as well capable of offensive operations, which is true. Thus we have a crisis brewing once again just as potentially lethal as the Cuban missile crisis.
tl;dr Clinton, if strung out, much like JFK was, could result in another extreme crisis as happened during the Cuban missile crisis. It's already leading in that direction.