Religions > Atheism > FACT: GOP Cut-and-Ran From Somalia, Not Clinton (GOP, the Party of Treason)
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Yang, AthD h.c, Kicking AWOLs Cocaine Snorting Ass" |
| Date: |
26 Sep 2006 12:34:01 AM |
| Object: |
FACT: GOP Cut-and-Ran From Somalia, Not Clinton (GOP, the Party of Treason) |
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/09/25/clinton/index.html
Who wanted to "cut and run" from Somalia?
One of the central prongs in the right-wing effort to blame Bill
Clinton for the growth of al-Qaida (and one of the central aspects of
the general neoconservative mythology of how to fight terrorism)
revolves around Somalia. Specifically, the right-wingers claim that
President Clinton's withdrawal of troops from Somalia after a Muslim
militia dragged the bodies of U.S. troops through the streets of
Mogadishu conveyed weakness to the Muslim world and showed that we
could be easily defeated. We suffer a few casualties, and we run away.
They claim that that perceived weakness -- "cutting and running" from
Somalia -- is what "emboldened" Osama bin Laden in the 1990s to wage
war against us.
But that is pure historical revisionism; it is just completely false.
And being subjected to that accusation this weekend by Fox News' Chris
Wallace appears -- understandably -- to have been what principally
triggered Clinton's anger in responding to those accusations during
his interview. Wallace asked Clinton about "how the fact that when you
pulled troops out of Somalia in 1993, bin Laden said, 'I have seen the
frailty and the weakness and the cowardice of U.S. troops.'" In
response, Clinton said: "They were all trying to get me to withdraw
from Somalia in 1993 the next day after we were involved in 'Black
Hawk down,' and I refused to do it and stayed six months and had an
orderly transfer to the United Nations."
If anything, Clinton understated his own defense. After the U.S.
troops were dragged through the streets of Mogadishu, numerous
conservative senators and representatives -- mostly Republican along
with some conservative Southern Democrats -- demanded that Clinton
withdraw all American troops immediately, insisting that the U.S. had
no interest in Somalia and that not one more American troop should die
there. They gave speeches stoked with nationalistic anger and angrily
demanded immediate withdrawal, and even threatened to introduce
legislation to cut off all funding for any troop maintenance in
Somalia.
Clinton -- along with Democratic senators such as John Kerry --
vigorously argued against immediate withdrawal, in part because of the
concern that America would look weak by panicking and abandoning its
mission at the first sign of trouble (just like President Reagan did
in 1983 when he immediately withdrew U.S. forces from Lebanon after
the attack on U.S. Marines). Clinton had to virtually beg to be
allowed to keep troops for an additional six months (and he even
increased American troop levels) to stabilize the situation,
demonstrate U.S. resolve and a commitment to the mission and, most of
all, avoid a panicky, fear-driven retreat.
I have compiled -- here -- just some of the numerous Senate speeches
by conservative Republican senators demanding immediate troop
withdrawals, speeches by Clinton and Democratic senators (such as John
Kerry) warning of the dangers of immediately withdrawing in the face
of U.S. casualties, and various news accounts making clear that the
cut-and-run argument was being made most vocally by conservative
Republican senators who wanted to force the commander in chief to
abandon the mission in Somalia the minute it became difficult and
dangerous. Reading these excepts reveals just how completely
misleading -- how outrageously revisionist -- is the accusation that
it was Bill Clinton who emboldened Islamic extremists by beating a
quick retreat from Somalia.
As but one example, President Clinton gave a speech on Oct. 8, 1993,
to argue against the demands from the conservative right that we
withdraw immediately from Somalia and to explain why it was vital that
we stay. This is part of what Clinton said in his speech: "And make no
mistake about it, if we were to leave Somalia tomorrow, other nations
would leave, too. Chaos would resume, the relief effort would stop and
starvation soon would return. That knowledge has led us to continue
our mission ... Recently, Gen. Colin Powell said this about our
choices in Somalia: 'Because things get difficult, you don't cut and
run. You work the problem and try to find a correct solution' ... So
let us finish the work we set out to do. Let us demonstrate to the
world, as generations of Americans have done before us, that when
Americans take on a challenge, they do the job right."
Republican senators attempted to force an immediate withdrawal and
then ultimately compromised on a compelled withdrawal in six months.
As but one example, from a Senate floor speech by Sen. Dirk
Kempthorne, on Oct. 6, 1993: "The United States has no interest in the
civil war in Somalia and as this young soldier told me, if the Somalis
are now healthy enough to be fighting us, then it is absolutely time
that we go home ... It is time for the Senate of the United States to
get on with the debate, to get on with the vote, and to get the
American troops home." Sen. Robert Dole, in a Senate speech, on Oct.
5, 1993: "I think it is clear to say from the meeting we had earlier
with -- I do not know how many Members were there -- 45, 50 Senators
and half the House of Representatives, that the administration is
going to be under great pressure to bring the actions in Somalia to a
close."
Contrary to neoconservative myth, the U.S. did not run away from
Somalia at the first sign of violence. Rather, we stayed six months
and even increased our troop levels, but only because President
Clinton fought and battled to do so in the face of right-wing demands
that he cut and run immediately.
The extent to which blatantly false propaganda can be casually
disseminated in our political dialogue is genuinely jarring. Bush
followers can make these blatantly false accusations and Chris Wallace
can repeat them because they usually go unrebutted by a media that is
too slothful and shallow to do the most basic research to determine if
they were true. That is why Clinton's aggressive responses to Wallace
were so welcome -- it is tragically rare to see anyone forcefully
attacking the false propaganda that is the staple of our political
debates.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
The Bush 'balanced' budget: -2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12.5 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -2696 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
newsgroups Yang promises not to revenge post
in response to Sound-of-Trumpet's *****:
rec.art.scifi.written
sci.archaeology
soc.history.what-if
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
