Atleast hes less likely to go to war than clinton
How'd you work that out? Not disputing it, just curious?
1) clinton has already shown a heavy interest in a no fly zone over syria which would mean having to go to war with russia and syria to hold control (the US miltary have even stated this to her that there is no 'no fly zone' without conflict and she didnt seem bothered)
2) she has received money from company's which supply the US with artillery and war vehicles call it a sponsorship to go to war
3) she was one of the big backers of the Iraq war