The hashtag, #IVotedForClinton, trended Tuesday night and Wednesday morning as those who proudly voted against President Donald Trump expressed their moral superiority in the wake of Iran’s missile attack on several Iraqi bases hosting American troops.
There was just one big problem: Hillary Clinton also had an aggressive Iran strategy that included the possibility of a major — “obliterating” — attack.
The hashtag began trending Tuesday night, as word broke that Iran had retaliated against the United States for killing Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani in a surgical strike inside Iraq last week by targeting U.S. military stationed at Iraqi military bases. The attack did not result in any casualties and may have effectively ended climbing tensions.
“Many Twitter users who voted for the former secretary of State claimed they foresaw much of President Trump’s foreign policy decisions,” according to The Hill. “Users also implied that if Clinton had won the 2016 general presidential election, the possibility of war with Iran wouldn’t be a topic of discussion.”
“My conscience is clean. I saw the danger of trump. I begged folks especially Berniebros that if they threw away their vote, they were putting this country in mortal danger,” one user tweeted, attacking not just President Donald Trump’s supporters but also supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) who refused to cast a ballot for Clinton in 2016 amid claims the former New York Senator rigged the Democrat’s nomination process.
“We voted for intelligence. We voted for experience,” tweeted another. “We voted for respect. We voted for dignity. We voted for justice. We voted for love. #IvotedforHillaryClinton.”
There’s just one problem: Clinton’s attitude toward Iran has always been one of aggression. While running for president in 2008 against then-Illinois senator Barack Obama, Clinton backed “massive retaliation” against Iran if the Iranian regime attacked American interests abroad or launched a nuclear strike at Israel.
“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m president, we will attack Iran,” Clinton said during an interview with Good Morning America, per Reuters. “In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.”
She even defended using such strong language as a way of heading off Iranian aggression: “That’s a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic.”
Back when she was a Senator, Clinton also took a hard line against Iran, voting, quite controversially even at the time, to “declare Iran’s 125,000-member Revolutionary Guard Corps a foreign terrorist organization,” according to the New York Times. ” That vote, the NYT added was “more hawkish than even most of the Bush administration has been willing to venture.” The outlet even cautioned that Clinton’s assertiveness towards Iran could “intensify America’s continuing confrontation” with the rogue nation.
The bill even declared that “The Revolutionary Guards are deeply involved in Iran’s nuclear program and have substantial links with Hezbollah,” essentially accusing Iran of being a state sponsor of terrorist attacks that had already occurred.
As recently as 2015, Clinton expressed concern over the Iran weapons deal, a hallmark of the Obama Administration’s foreign policy. In a lecture at Dartmouth, Clinton claimed that, “even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran. They are the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism.”
“They use proxies like Hezbollah to sow discord and create insurgencies to destabilize governments,” she added. “They are taking more and more control of a number of nations in the region and they pose an existential threat to Israel.”
She ultimate suggested that the United States move beyond simply negotiating with the mullahs, and work with an international community to effectively neutralize Iran’s influence in the region. The United States, she said, has “to turn our attention to working with our partners to try to reign in and prevent this continuing Iranian aggressiveness.”
Somehow, Clinton’s 2016 voters believe that she would deviate markedly from her 2008 and 2015 positions, but even her record as Secretary of State belies that idea. She, along with the Obama Administration, guided “regime change” in Libya and presided over eight years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.