Ice on Fire: the danger of Democrats in the White House

In an earlier post I noted that Donald Trump is the best candidate as he is not a war candidate, and he specifically has an understanding of Vladimir Putin and Russia. He and Putin meet as men and get along, each with a respect for the other. Concern about reckless Democrats starting more wars is necessary; it was Dems who pulled the stupid Bay of Pigs and then then started the Vietnam War on a lie. People let their guard down with this party of losers and think it is about helping poor people. Poor people want jobs not war and a pat on the back from some idiot savant, as Adlai Stevenson turned out to be, seen as not just an idiot but a liar every time he opened his mouth at the UN trying to deny American involvement in the Bay of Pigs. Democrats also tend to feel intellectually superior to military men, whose lives they do not hesitate to spend. So we need to be a lot more intelligent about whom we elect and not look to the false hopes that Clinton offers. I am 100% that woman WILL take the US to war with Russia and the background reasons for it will be the underground economy some of her people are into, including drugs and human sex slaves. Russia bombed a convoy in Syria that had not only terrorists but DRUGS; ever wonder why the US has been so unsuccessful with ISIS? It is not really trying. This whole thing is a scam like Vietnam and the Democrats are playing like they are for peace. Not that I love the GOP...

One issue here is the press; while they are out making scary headlines, yesterday in the Daily News they used the words 'Code Orange' and put on their front page some nonsense from GOP members telling us that Trump could not be trusted, when in FACT, it is Trump who is NOT for war or nuclear action against Russia - people are NOT informed about the reality of what these supposed love doves in the White House are really doing with your tax $.

Stephen Cohen, author of two or more books on Russia, warns us very specifically in the Nation about a secret military build up by the Obama administration, to which Hillary Clinton is certainly party. On pp. 4-5 of the 29 Feb. 2016 issue he writes:

The Obama administration has just recklessly escalated its military confrontation with Russia. The Pentagon's announcement that it will more than quadruple military spending on the US-NATO forces in countries on or near Russia's borders pushes the new Cold War toward actual war - possibly even a nuclear one.
The move is unprecendented in modern times. With the exception of Nazi Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union, Western military power has never been positioned so close to Russia. The Obama administration's decision is Russian roulette Washington-style, making the new Cold War even more dangerous than the preceding one. Russia will certainly react, probably by moving more of its own heavy weapons, including advanced missiles, to its Western borders, possibly along with a number of tactical nuclear weapons. Indeed, a new and more dangerous US-Russian nuclear-arms race has been under way for several years, and the Obama administration's latest decision can only intensify it.
The decision will have other woeful consequences. It will undermine ongoing negotiations between Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on the Ukranian and Syrian crises, and it will further divide Europe itself, which is far from united on Washington's increasingly hawkish approach to Moscow.
Astonishingly, these potentially fateful developments have barely been reported in the US media, and there's been no public discussion, not even by the current presidential candidates during their debates. Never before in modern times has such a dire international situation been so ignored in an American presidential campaign. The reason may be that everything related to the new Cold War in US-Russian relations since the Ukrainian crisis erupted in November 2013 has been attributed solely to the "aggression" of Russian president Vladimir Putin or to "Putin's Russia" - a highly questionable assertion, but long the media's standard policy narrative.
Every presidential candidate and the leaders of both parties, as well as the editors and writers in the mainstream media who profess to be covering the 2016 campaign, the state of our nation, and world affairs are morally obliged to bring these dire developments to the fore. Otherwise, they will be harshly judged by history - if anyone is still around to write it. 

Again, where is the press? Out covering Romney's stupid tirade against Trump; when they ought to be UNcovering important things like the SECRET MILITARY BUILD UP BY DEMOCRATS.