he will finish off the Republican Party, and they will make sure he never gets a second term. If Hillary wins, nobody who is somebody will stand in her way.

warning every time she opens her mouth...

If the U.S. has not been invited into a country to establish a “no-fly zone” such an action is, in fact, an invasion, an act of war.

it is perfectly clear that Hillary will not hesitate to do exactly that, regardless. She doesn't care whether it's an act of war or not. And she'll have plenty of support from within the ranks of the US foreign policy establishment. From an article in WaPo:

The Republicans and Democrats who make up the foreign policy elite are laying the groundwork for a more assertive American foreign policy, via a flurry of reports shaped by officials who are likely to play senior roles in a potential Clinton White House.

And further,

“The American-led international order that has been prevalent since World War II is now under threat,” said Martin Indyk, who oversees a team of top former officials from the administrations of Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton assembled by the Brookings Institution. “The question is how to restore and renovate it.” The Brookings report — a year in the making — is due out in December.
Taken together, the studies and reports call for more-aggressive American action to constrain Iran, rein in the chaos in the Middle East and check Russia in Europe.
The studies, which reflect Clinton’s stated views, break most forcefully with Obama on Syria...

A bit about this Martin Indyk here:

"Martin Indyk, the man who ran John Kerry’s Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, . . . cashed a $14.8 million check from Qatar. . . . In his capacity as vice president and director of the Foreign Policy Program at the prestigious Brookings Institution, Martin Indyk took an enormous sum of money from a foreign government that, in addition to its well-documented role as a funder of Sunni terror outfits throughout the Middle East . . ."

Who is she going to negotiate with to implement the no-fly zone? The Assad regime? The Russians? They're just gonna roll over because she said so? This is a no-go situation right here, unless it's a deliberate plan to start WWIII. I doubt that the MIC would go for that. Whilst war is good for maintaining the profits of the MIC, blowing up the world would ensure that no one gets paid.

... the western propaganda which constantly repeats that "Assad is a brutal dictator" over and over and over and over and over to where even the anti-war activists parrot it. This is especially so because the western media also paints our President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, as a "brutal dictator" over and over and over. Which I know as a citizen is inverted "truth".

Absolutely anything and everything parroted by the main stream media and USA/European corporate police state politicians is not only suspect, but most often an inversion of truth.

1. The Syrian Army holds broad national support or else it would have collapsed years ago.

2. Most Syrians have fled from the USA sponsored jihadists to seek protection in Syrian controlled areas. That is particularly clear in Aleppo where the Syrian half has well over a million people (many of whom are refugees), and the eastern half less than 100,000 civilians, many of who are the families of jihadists. Nobody sees people fleeing Syrian Army controlled areas to the jihadi controlled areas. And no one in the Syrian Army is refusing to let them head there if they want.

3. Most of the atrocities allegedly committed by Assad have turned out to be false, such as the sarin gas attack. It was, according to Seymour Hersch and others most likely committed by Saudi backed FSA group Liwa al-Islam. Human Rights Watch is often full of corporate bullshit...

4. Polls show Assad has a 70% popularity rating within Syria controlled areas. Compare that to the popularity of Hillary Clinton. in June 2014, Assad received almost 88 percent of votes with a high participation rate of 73 percent.

5. The other atrocities committed by the FSA and other jihadists are either ignored by western media or blamed on Assad. Just today, for example, are films showing the jihadists bombing the corridor the Syrian Army opened for 48 hours as a safe route for civilians out of jihadi controlled Aleppo. On the other hand refugees in the jihadi areas are being threatened to death if they try and leave. Today, we have also seen the Turks bombing Kurd villages in Syria (near Aleppo), and the USA making a "mistake" and bombing Kurdish civilians near Mosul in Iraq.

6. There is something to be said about a secular government where hospitals, schools and infrastructure were a priority before the USA armed any number of jihadi groups who are the same ones pusing the story that Assad is a "brutal, ruthless dictator" who "bombs his own people" when one can easily see that the jihadis and corporate police states of the west pushing this repetitively, over and over and are guilty of what they say Assad is doing.

I am not saying Assad is some kind of angel, but given the fact that the same powers claim Evo Morales and Maduro are a "brutal regime" when I know as a citizen of Bolivia is NOT TRUE, and given the other inverted Orwellian "truths" in western media... I for one will no longer spread this sort of demonizing Assad.

Some worrisome things. In a position paper that Hillary sent to her staff, the claim was made that the Russians were essentially paper tigers and would back down if Assad's troops directly attacked by the US. Now this was in about 2012 before the Russian intervention happened and the historical pointer for Russians being paper tigers happened under Yeltsin. To show off how tough she is to her generals, she may do something that immediately confronts Russia and will probably lead to a full fire fight in Syria.

One point of disagreement Gates made to the bombing of Libya was that it was essentially over-extending the US military. His comment was something like "let's finish one war before starting another". Given Clinton's lack of judgement and her hubris, I fully expect her to over-extend the military. She could attack Iran with some flimsy excuse and that way she can have us fight Iran in Iran and in Syria. Maybe a shoot out with Russia inside Ukraine?

But a silver lining of sorts. My impressions is that Hillary will surround herself with total female civilian military and state department leadership. Hillary will show that women can start wars, bomb, invade better than the men.