How this is modded up insightful while lacking so much insight, I have no clue.
Hop in the wayback machine to early 2011, Libyan people are in the streets of just about every major city in that country -- and not because Hillary asked them to -- fighting for the future of their country and Qaddafi is brutally disposing of them. Unlike Egypt, the military by and large is not standing down and continues to slaughter protesters- both the peaceful ones, and the very outgunned insurrectionists. Qaddafi is disliked basically everywhere in the world minus the few dictators he's helped prop up, so it can't be a surprise that the UN Security Council (again - not under Hillary's control) adopted a no-fly zone. Right after that US, France, and UK bomb the bastard - so its almost comical that you could squint and attribute any of this to Clinton. At the same table would be her peers in France & UK, Pentagon, intel depts, not to mention her superiors. While some may have disagreed with the approach (Gates), the State Dept was one voice out of many in the decision, and far from the most powerful. Here's an article arguing why it was the right decision, find a way to disagree with it without shooting the messenger/writing it off http://www.vox.com/2016/4/5/11...
Place yourself in State/CIA/Pentagon at the time in 2011 and you're faced with this situation what do you do? Do nothing and face criticism that you stood by while people were surely slaughtered (see Syria). Do something and slashdot posters will whine that you couldn't wave a magic wand and tidy up the effects of 30 years of bad governance by a depraved dictator with a nice ribbon. Or worse believe/espouse you've conjured the war from thin air for your own profit. The world doesn't work that way, no matter how many action movies portray it as such.
Another absurd statement - that Qaddafi was warming to the west. The only way/reason he did so was to save his own ass - same with a variety of other awful aholes we share intel with (Bashir in Sudan comes to mind). He's first to call after 9/11 - only so that we wouldn't blast him to kingdom come at the thought that the same guy responsible for Lockerbie was at it again. Dropped his nuke program - only after seeing Saddam's regime disposed of in 100 hours. Opened up oil trade because his country was crumbling. To say relations were warming is like saying its not quite as cold in the summer in Antarctica.
Next up - the issue people have with Trump re: nukes - that the man can't contain himself when he's irritated, let alone outright threatened and that is a pretty good reason to be concerned. North Korea issues us threats as part of their weekly newsletters, how would he respond to that? He ain't the pope. He tries to sound like a tough guy on the campaign trail, so you can't be surprised a lot of people don't share your confidence that he's a peaceful guy. Adding to that he's gone on record that he'd allow (encourage?) Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia to arm themselves with nukes. What could possibly go wrong? It'd be like giving a couple of drunks shouting at each other outside a bar a couple of pistols. Tacitly stupid.
