Many Americans long for a return to cold war foreign policy, since it's now pretty safe with no Soviet Union. We no longer have the domino theory, mutually assured destruction, etc. but we still have the ability to wage client wars. We can fund, train and equip insurrections to destabilize or topple governments we don't like. Those would be governments that refuse to play ball with American corporations. In cases such as Granada, we can invade directly, as long as the target nation is relatively weak and helpless. For bonus points, we can invade countries for no reason at all, other than to project our power around the world, with Iraq being the obvious example.

For people who want a very aggressive foreign policy, the obvious choice is Trump, who has promised to kill plenty of people, with some torture thrown in just for fun. But Clinton offers a less objectionable alternative, holding out the promise of a more "robust" foreign policy without the random recklessness of a President Trump. President Hillary Clinton would surely do much more saber rattling than President Obama, and there is the distinct likelihood of ramping up other activity. We would do more drone strikes, probably across a larger geographic area. We would probably bomb a few nuclear weapons facilities in Iran. Clinton has already promised to sell F-35 fighter planes to Israel. The pressure to "do something" in Syria is unrelenting and Clinton will be exactly the kind of President who will "do something" to avoid looking weak. What about Cuba? Would Clinton dare to unravel what Obama has done regarding Cuba? I don't know, but it's a perfect target, basically helpless and close enough to make an invasion very easy. All this and more is headed our way, so those women in Honduras, as well as people all over the world, better suck it up and be ready to run.