The Honduras Coup one is complete and total BS that's been debunked over and over again. She couldn't call it a coup because humanitarian aid to the country would have ceased. Non humanitarian aid was cut.
The regime change in Libya was a NATO mission supported by many countries and condoned by the UN Security council, not just the US. It prevented thousands of innocents getting slaughtered, and while the transition went poorly, it is still a million times better than what happened in Syria, which is undoubtedly what Libya would have become.
A regime change in Syria wouldn't have been perfect, but better than the clusterfuck going on now. Unfortunately it was not in the cards, given Russia's resistance to having their puppet removed.
I am also pro no-fly zone, although it may be too little too late. A no fly zone implemented early enough could have made a large difference in the number of innocents killed by conventional and chemical warfare. I have no problem with the US ensuring that not happening. Clinton's stance on Syria is one that I vastly prefer to Obama's.
Hillary has been instrumental in bringing Iran to the negotiation table, which the sanctions she helped impose started.
I'm not a fan of her stance on Palestine, although that is part of the MO for US politicians nowadays, unfortunately. Same with the patriot act; I don't like it, but any serious politician back then (and now) voted for it, for fear of that being used against them.
I'm not a fan of her votes on Iraq or increased troops in Afghanistan either, but no candidate is perfect.