Trump promises huuuge military buildup while calling Clinton ‘trigger happy’
Donald Trump wants more military spending, but somehow bashes Hillary Clinton as “trigger happy.”
Click here for reuse options!The GOP nominee kicked off his speech with a critique of Hillary Clinton. Trump first labeled the former secretary of state an interventionist who oversaw costly military missions in the Middle East before attacking her for helping President Barack Obama decrease defense spending “to the lowest level as a share of the economy since the end of World War II.”
Trump fired many of the insults Clinton has used against him in regards to foreign policy—“unfit,” “unstable,” “unqualified”—back at her.
“She’s trigger happy and very unstable,” he said.
“Hillary Clinton’s legacy in Iraq, Libya, Syria has produced only turmoil and suffering and death,” Trump said, though he has previously expressed support for interventions in all three countries.
The real estate mogul, who has frequently criticized the expense of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars on the campaign trail, then pledged to eliminate the sequester on defense spending. Under his leadership, Trump said, the U.S. military would have an active army of about 540,000 people, a 36-batallion Marine Corps, larger Navy and Air Force fleets, a “state-of-the-art” missile defense system and greater funding for the Defense Department’s “cyber capabilities.”
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
5 responses to Trump promises huuuge military buildup while calling Clinton ‘trigger happy’
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
anothertoothpick September 7th, 2016 at 14:42
I am sick of paying any attention to this ass monkey but if gets elected we will have to.
Which is exactly what he craves.
Forced to pay attention to trump for four f#(#ing years would be torture.
Mike N. September 7th, 2016 at 18:33
I doubt you’d have to pay attention to a president Trump for four years; the nation, and quite possibly the human race, won’t last that long if he’s elected. And sadly I say that without hyperbole.
arc99 September 7th, 2016 at 16:18
Why is it that when it comes to helping people right here at home, the first question that comes up is how much will it cost.
But when the discussion turns to military adventurism thousands of miles away from US soil, cost is never a consideration.
I am not a person who usually invokes the metaphysical. But there is a deep sickness in the soul of a country that spends money without question when the goal is killing people, but pinches every penny when the goal is to spend a fraction of that amount helping people.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jan/13/barack-obama/obama-us-spends-more-military-next-8-nations-combi/
Obama: US spends more on military than next 8 nations combined
….
…
Obama said, “We spend more on our military than the next eight nations combined.”
Obama’s statement is accurate by one measure, while another measure says the United States spends more than the next seven countries combined.
So depending on the data set you use, he’s either right or close. So we rate his statement Mostly True.
whatthe46 September 7th, 2016 at 17:01
Damon shame isn’t it? But they do it because there’s money to be made for them personally. See haliburton.
amersham1046 September 7th, 2016 at 17:21
Has anybody told him , a military build up does not mean a Trump Tower on every base