Who Would Be Better Fighting Terror: Trump or Clinton?

What They BOTH Get Wrong About Fighting Terrorism …

Trump and Clinton both claim they’re the better candidate for stopping terrorism.

Let’s fact-check their statements and their records …


Hillary Clinton is largely responsible for regime change in Libya (for oil and gold?), the war in Syria (to help Israel?), violence in Honduras, and the entire concept of “humanitarian war”.

Clinton is largely responsible for the West’s backing of Al Qaeda and other Islamic terror groups, to act as the tip of the spear in fomenting regime change throughout the Middle East.

And she supports Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and other despotic regimes that support terrorism.

Clinton’s policies have greatly increased terrorism.  Specifically, Clinton has for many years – as the president’s wife, Secretary of State, and now presidential candidate – been championing some of the largest causes of terrorism, including: overthrowing moderates, arming crazies, supporting dictators who support terrorists, bombing and invading when negotiated peace is possible, and imperial conquests for Arab oil.


Trump has said some unusually blunt things about terrorism …

For example, he said that the wars in the Middle East have made us less safe:

We’ve spent $4 trillion trying to topple various people that, frankly, if they were there and if we could have spent that $4 trillion in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges, and all of the other problems — our airports and all the other problems we have — we would have been a lot better off, I can tell you that right now.

We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East — we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away — and for what? It’s not like we had victory. It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the 4 trillion dollars or 5 trillion dollars. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, airports, and everything else that are all falling apart!

He’s right.  Security experts – including both conservatives and liberals – agree that waging war in the Middle East weakens national security and increases terrorism. See this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this.

Trump has also said that the U.S. would be safer if Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi were still in power, and if Syria’s Assad was stronger.  He’s correct: all of the countries we’ve “regime changed” have descended into brutal chaosallowing ISIS and other terrorists to spread.

And Trump has said that we should not back “humanitarian wars”, but only wars to defend our country from imminent threat (pages 141-142).

Trump’s claim that we should temporary close our borders to Muslims obviously rubs many people the wrong way.   And – given that the vast majority of Muslims HATE terrorists – it seems unfair to target an entire religion.

But anyone who thinks we should let in anyone who wants to come here from the Middle East is naive and dangerous.  After all, the Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security says that the outmoded U.S. immigration system – and the authorities’ lack of progress in automating their systems – poses a security risk to the U.S. And ISIS has publicly announced that they’re  infiltrating immigrant groups to enter the West.

At the least, we need much stricter background checks and screening procedures. Do we need to temporarily close the borders to implement them?  Probably not … but until we do tighten screening procedures, we’re leaving ourselves open to a very dangerous situation, with more San Bernadinos (and Parises and Belgiums) a real possibility.

Trump’s call for more waterboarding and torture is extremely misguided.

Specifically, top terrorism and interrogation experts agree that torture creates more terrorists.  Indeed, the leaders of ISIS were motivated by U.S. torture.

Torture will make us less safe, and create more terrorists.

This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • kimyo

    it’s hard to see how screening can be effective. it’s akin to trying to identify the ‘moderate’ rebels. where’s the source data going to come from? how will it be vetted? sounds more like a deal for the next chertoff to bill the taxpayers for a completely ineffective multi-billion dollar neural network.

    and then there’s always the issue of the fbi waving terrorists thru the checkpoints: GORDON DUFF: EVIDENCE MOUNTS FOR U.S. COMPLICITY IN TERRORISM

    Kurt Haskell of Newport, Mich., took to the comments section of this Web site early Saturday to share his story: That he and his wife, Lori, saw a well-dressed man help Abdulmutallab board the flight without a passport under the guise he was a Sudanese refugee. The military police have already said Abdulmutallab did not go through passport control at Schiphol when he arrived from Lagos.

  • diogenes

    A cursory web search suggests over 20,000 people were killed in the war in Syria last year, over 2000 in Yemen. Last October alone Israelis killed over twice as many Palestinians as the death toll in Brussels.

    But none of that is “terrorism.” Apparently. Right?

    So, what’s “terrorism”? Killing white people without wearing a uniform? Killings the New York Times doesn’t approve of? Killing people who carry the wrong passport? Killings on which the “defense (sic) industry (sic)” doesn’t pay dividends of more than $1000 per corpse to investors? Low-tech murder? If you blow somebody up at a wedding in Iraq or a hospital in Afganistan, that’s “counter-terrorism” but in an airport in Brussels it’s terrorism? Is it a question of the inherent moral superiority of Western Civilization or the surpassing virtue of Our Splendid Democracy? Maybe we should ask the Statue of Liberty?

    Clarification please.

  • Rehmat

    Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump support the mother of terrorism in the Middle East and around the world.- Israel.

    Israel’s minister of science, technology and space, Ofir Akunis, commenting on the Tuesday’s Brussels twin terrorist attacks said it’s biblical G-d’s revenge for the Brussels-based European Union’s antisemite decision to boycott Israeli goods made by illegal Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank.

    “Many in Europe have preferred to occupy themselves with the folly of condemning Israel, labeling products, and boycotts. In this time, underneath the nose of the continent’s citizens, thousands of extremist Islamic terror cells have grown,” Akunis wrote on Facebook.

    In other words, Akunis is admitting that Brussels bombing was in retaliation for European Union’s boycott of Israeli goods. One may not agree with my deduction – but Israeli minister’s off-hand comments were very revealing about the current schizophrenic political mindset in Tel Aviv.

  • Birgit

    Nothing will change. This is a big show with Hollywood written all over it. It’s entertainment for the masses to pull the wool over their eyes.