Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?

Politics > Politics-USA > Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 1

Topic:	Politics > Politics-USA
User:	"Harry Dope"
Date:	23 Jul 2005 05:41:34 PM
Object:	Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?

Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo? (FLASHBACK, Clinton & Bush
statements)
Townhall.com ^ | March 5, 2003 | Larry Elder
Posted on 06/16/2003 8:08:53 PM PDT by FairOpinion
When President Bill Clinton used the military in Kosovo, his primary
justification added up to one thing -- humanitarian reasons. His supporters
cheered him on, despite this illegitimate, though humane, use of our
military.
The case against Iraq, however, turns on the Iraqi dictator's possession of
and willingness to use biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons
against American allies, American interests and America itself. President
Bush does, indeed, underscore the horror inflicted upon the Iraqi people by
Saddam Hussein. But those who applauded Clinton's Kosovo mission seem, in
the case of Iraq, indifferent as to the "humanitarian angle."
Actor/activist Mike Farrell, for example, says about Iraq, "It is
inappropriate for the administration to trump up a case in which we are
ballyhooed into war." But back in 1999, about Kosovo, Farrell said, "I think
it's appropriate for the international community in situations like this to
intervene. I am in favor of an intervention."
Let's go to the videotape:
Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Now (Serbian troops have) started moving from
village to village, shelling civilians and torching their houses. We've seen
innocent people taken from their homes, forced to kneel in the dirt and
sprayed with bullets. Kosovar men dragged from their families, fathers and
sons together, lined up and shot in cold blood. This is not a war in the
traditional sense; it is an attack by tanks and artillery on a largely
defenseless people whose leaders already have agreed to peace. Ending this
tragedy is a moral imperative."
Bush (Jan. 28, 2003): "The dictator who is assembling the world's most
dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands
of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how
forced confessions are obtained by torturing children while their parents
are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other
methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq, electric shock, burning with
hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills,
cutting out tongues and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no
meaning."
Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Our mission is clear: to demonstrate the
seriousness of NATO's purpose, so that the Serbian leaders understand the
imperative of reversing course, to deter an even bloodier offensive against
innocent civilians in Kosovo, and if necessary, to seriously damage the
Serbian military's capacity to harm the people of Kosovo. In short, if
President Milosevic will not make peace, we will limit his ability to make
war."
Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease
persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds,
Turkemens and others -- again, as required by Security Council resolutions.
.. . . The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. They've
suffered too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a
great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it.
The security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate
through cruelty and conquest. And open societies do not threaten the world
with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty
in a unified Iraq."
Clinton (March 24, 1999): "I am convinced that the dangers of acting are far
outweighed by the dangers of not acting, dangers to defenseless people and
to our national interests. If we and our allies were to allow this war to
continue with no response, President Milosevic would read our hesitation as
a license to kill. There would be many more massacres, tens of thousands
more refugees, more victims crying out for revenge. Right now, our firmness
is the only hope the people of Kosovo have, to be able to live in their own
country without having to fear for their own lives."
Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "We can harbor no illusions, and that's important
today to remember. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990.
He's fired ballistic missiles at Iran and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel.
His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15
and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in northern Iraq. He has gassed many
Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages."
Not that his supporters care, but Clinton apparently exaggerated the
suffering in Kosovo. In November 1999, the Christian Science Monitor wrote,
"U.S. and NATO officials at times implied that as many as 100,000 ethnic
Albanians may have been killed, and they used words like 'genocide' to
describe the Serbian policy. They later lowered the estimate to 10,000. But
preliminary findings from war-crimes investigators indicate that the number
of ethnic Albanians killed by Serbian forces during the air strikes was
probably closer to 5,000."
But when and if forces enter Iraq, expect the humanitarian charges lodged
against Saddam Hussein to prove not only accurate, but understated.
What a difference an administration makes.
--
"Bad" Kennedy girls get lobotomized.
"Bad" Kennedy boys get elected
.

User: "Frank Pittel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	24 Jul 2005 12:17:12 PM

Are you talking about the illegal war that slick waged against the
nation of Kosovo??
In alt.politics.usa.republican Harry Dope <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:
:
: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo? (FLASHBACK, Clinton & Bush
: statements)
: Townhall.com ^ | March 5, 2003 | Larry Elder
: Posted on 06/16/2003 8:08:53 PM PDT by FairOpinion
: When President Bill Clinton used the military in Kosovo, his primary
: justification added up to one thing -- humanitarian reasons. His supporters
: cheered him on, despite this illegitimate, though humane, use of our
: military.
: The case against Iraq, however, turns on the Iraqi dictator's possession of
: and willingness to use biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons
: against American allies, American interests and America itself. President
: Bush does, indeed, underscore the horror inflicted upon the Iraqi people by
: Saddam Hussein. But those who applauded Clinton's Kosovo mission seem, in
: the case of Iraq, indifferent as to the "humanitarian angle."
: Actor/activist Mike Farrell, for example, says about Iraq, "It is
: inappropriate for the administration to trump up a case in which we are
: ballyhooed into war." But back in 1999, about Kosovo, Farrell said, "I think
: it's appropriate for the international community in situations like this to
: intervene. I am in favor of an intervention."
: Let's go to the videotape:
: Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Now (Serbian troops have) started moving from
: village to village, shelling civilians and torching their houses. We've seen
: innocent people taken from their homes, forced to kneel in the dirt and
: sprayed with bullets. Kosovar men dragged from their families, fathers and
: sons together, lined up and shot in cold blood. This is not a war in the
: traditional sense; it is an attack by tanks and artillery on a largely
: defenseless people whose leaders already have agreed to peace. Ending this
: tragedy is a moral imperative."
: Bush (Jan. 28, 2003): "The dictator who is assembling the world's most
: dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands
: of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how
: forced confessions are obtained by torturing children while their parents
: are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other
: methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq, electric shock, burning with
: hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills,
: cutting out tongues and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no
: meaning."
: Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Our mission is clear: to demonstrate the
: seriousness of NATO's purpose, so that the Serbian leaders understand the
: imperative of reversing course, to deter an even bloodier offensive against
: innocent civilians in Kosovo, and if necessary, to seriously damage the
: Serbian military's capacity to harm the people of Kosovo. In short, if
: President Milosevic will not make peace, we will limit his ability to make
: war."
: Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease
: persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds,
: Turkemens and others -- again, as required by Security Council resolutions.
: . . . The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. They've
: suffered too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a
: great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it.
: The security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate
: through cruelty and conquest. And open societies do not threaten the world
: with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty
: in a unified Iraq."
: Clinton (March 24, 1999): "I am convinced that the dangers of acting are far
: outweighed by the dangers of not acting, dangers to defenseless people and
: to our national interests. If we and our allies were to allow this war to
: continue with no response, President Milosevic would read our hesitation as
: a license to kill. There would be many more massacres, tens of thousands
: more refugees, more victims crying out for revenge. Right now, our firmness
: is the only hope the people of Kosovo have, to be able to live in their own
: country without having to fear for their own lives."
: Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "We can harbor no illusions, and that's important
: today to remember. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990.
: He's fired ballistic missiles at Iran and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel.
: His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15
: and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in northern Iraq. He has gassed many
: Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages."
: Not that his supporters care, but Clinton apparently exaggerated the
: suffering in Kosovo. In November 1999, the Christian Science Monitor wrote,
: "U.S. and NATO officials at times implied that as many as 100,000 ethnic
: Albanians may have been killed, and they used words like 'genocide' to
: describe the Serbian policy. They later lowered the estimate to 10,000. But
: preliminary findings from war-crimes investigators indicate that the number
: of ethnic Albanians killed by Serbian forces during the air strikes was
: probably closer to 5,000."
: But when and if forces enter Iraq, expect the humanitarian charges lodged
: against Saddam Hussein to prove not only accurate, but understated.
: What a difference an administration makes.
: --
: "Bad" Kennedy girls get lobotomized.
: "Bad" Kennedy boys get elected
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
.

User: "Rich Travsky "
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	24 Jul 2005 10:23:04 PM

Frank Pittel wrote:

Are you talking about the illegal war that slick waged against the
nation of Kosovo??

Explain how it was illegal.

In alt.politics.usa.republican Harry Dope <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:
:
: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo? (FLASHBACK, Clinton & Bush
: statements)
: Townhall.com ^ | March 5, 2003 | Larry Elder

: Posted on 06/16/2003 8:08:53 PM PDT by FairOpinion

: When President Bill Clinton used the military in Kosovo, his primary
: justification added up to one thing -- humanitarian reasons. His supporters
: cheered him on, despite this illegitimate, though humane, use of our
: military.

: The case against Iraq, however, turns on the Iraqi dictator's possession of
: and willingness to use biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons
: against American allies, American interests and America itself. President
: Bush does, indeed, underscore the horror inflicted upon the Iraqi people by
: Saddam Hussein. But those who applauded Clinton's Kosovo mission seem, in
: the case of Iraq, indifferent as to the "humanitarian angle."

: Actor/activist Mike Farrell, for example, says about Iraq, "It is
: inappropriate for the administration to trump up a case in which we are
: ballyhooed into war." But back in 1999, about Kosovo, Farrell said, "I think
: it's appropriate for the international community in situations like this to
: intervene. I am in favor of an intervention."

: Let's go to the videotape:

: Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Now (Serbian troops have) started moving from
: village to village, shelling civilians and torching their houses. We've seen
: innocent people taken from their homes, forced to kneel in the dirt and
: sprayed with bullets. Kosovar men dragged from their families, fathers and
: sons together, lined up and shot in cold blood. This is not a war in the
: traditional sense; it is an attack by tanks and artillery on a largely
: defenseless people whose leaders already have agreed to peace. Ending this
: tragedy is a moral imperative."

: Bush (Jan. 28, 2003): "The dictator who is assembling the world's most
: dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands
: of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how
: forced confessions are obtained by torturing children while their parents
: are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other
: methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq, electric shock, burning with
: hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills,
: cutting out tongues and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no
: meaning."

: Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Our mission is clear: to demonstrate the
: seriousness of NATO's purpose, so that the Serbian leaders understand the
: imperative of reversing course, to deter an even bloodier offensive against
: innocent civilians in Kosovo, and if necessary, to seriously damage the
: Serbian military's capacity to harm the people of Kosovo. In short, if
: President Milosevic will not make peace, we will limit his ability to make
: war."

: Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease
: persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds,
: Turkemens and others -- again, as required by Security Council resolutions.
: . . . The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. They've
: suffered too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a
: great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it.
: The security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate
: through cruelty and conquest. And open societies do not threaten the world
: with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty
: in a unified Iraq."

: Clinton (March 24, 1999): "I am convinced that the dangers of acting are far
: outweighed by the dangers of not acting, dangers to defenseless people and
: to our national interests. If we and our allies were to allow this war to
: continue with no response, President Milosevic would read our hesitation as
: a license to kill. There would be many more massacres, tens of thousands
: more refugees, more victims crying out for revenge. Right now, our firmness
: is the only hope the people of Kosovo have, to be able to live in their own
: country without having to fear for their own lives."

: Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "We can harbor no illusions, and that's important
: today to remember. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990.
: He's fired ballistic missiles at Iran and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel.
: His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15
: and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in northern Iraq. He has gassed many
: Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages."

: Not that his supporters care, but Clinton apparently exaggerated the
: suffering in Kosovo. In November 1999, the Christian Science Monitor wrote,
: "U.S. and NATO officials at times implied that as many as 100,000 ethnic
: Albanians may have been killed, and they used words like 'genocide' to
: describe the Serbian policy. They later lowered the estimate to 10,000. But
: preliminary findings from war-crimes investigators indicate that the number
: of ethnic Albanians killed by Serbian forces during the air strikes was
: probably closer to 5,000."

: But when and if forces enter Iraq, expect the humanitarian charges lodged
: against Saddam Hussein to prove not only accurate, but understated.

: What a difference an administration makes.

: --
: "Bad" Kennedy girls get lobotomized.

: "Bad" Kennedy boys get elected

--

-------------------

Keep working millions on corporate welfare depend on you
.

User: "Frank Pittel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	24 Jul 2005 10:46:11 PM

In alt.politics.usa.republican Rich Travsky <" traRvEsky"@hotmmoveail.com> wrote:
: Frank Pittel wrote:
: >
: > Are you talking about the illegal war that slick waged against the
: > nation of Kosovo??
: Explain how it was illegal.
The same way that the liberation of Iraq is an illegal war.

: > In alt.politics.usa.republican Harry Dope <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:
: > :
: > : Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo? (FLASHBACK, Clinton & Bush
: > : statements)
: > : Townhall.com ^ | March 5, 2003 | Larry Elder
: >
: > : Posted on 06/16/2003 8:08:53 PM PDT by FairOpinion
: >
: > : When President Bill Clinton used the military in Kosovo, his primary
: > : justification added up to one thing -- humanitarian reasons. His supporters
: > : cheered him on, despite this illegitimate, though humane, use of our
: > : military.
: >
: > : The case against Iraq, however, turns on the Iraqi dictator's possession of
: > : and willingness to use biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons
: > : against American allies, American interests and America itself. President
: > : Bush does, indeed, underscore the horror inflicted upon the Iraqi people by
: > : Saddam Hussein. But those who applauded Clinton's Kosovo mission seem, in
: > : the case of Iraq, indifferent as to the "humanitarian angle."
: >
: > : Actor/activist Mike Farrell, for example, says about Iraq, "It is
: > : inappropriate for the administration to trump up a case in which we are
: > : ballyhooed into war." But back in 1999, about Kosovo, Farrell said, "I think
: > : it's appropriate for the international community in situations like this to
: > : intervene. I am in favor of an intervention."
: >
: > : Let's go to the videotape:
: >
: > : Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Now (Serbian troops have) started moving from
: > : village to village, shelling civilians and torching their houses. We've seen
: > : innocent people taken from their homes, forced to kneel in the dirt and
: > : sprayed with bullets. Kosovar men dragged from their families, fathers and
: > : sons together, lined up and shot in cold blood. This is not a war in the
: > : traditional sense; it is an attack by tanks and artillery on a largely
: > : defenseless people whose leaders already have agreed to peace. Ending this
: > : tragedy is a moral imperative."
: >
: > : Bush (Jan. 28, 2003): "The dictator who is assembling the world's most
: > : dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands
: > : of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how
: > : forced confessions are obtained by torturing children while their parents
: > : are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other
: > : methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq, electric shock, burning with
: > : hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills,
: > : cutting out tongues and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no
: > : meaning."
: >
: > : Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Our mission is clear: to demonstrate the
: > : seriousness of NATO's purpose, so that the Serbian leaders understand the
: > : imperative of reversing course, to deter an even bloodier offensive against
: > : innocent civilians in Kosovo, and if necessary, to seriously damage the
: > : Serbian military's capacity to harm the people of Kosovo. In short, if
: > : President Milosevic will not make peace, we will limit his ability to make
: > : war."
: >
: > : Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease
: > : persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds,
: > : Turkemens and others -- again, as required by Security Council resolutions.
: > : . . . The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. They've
: > : suffered too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a
: > : great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it.
: > : The security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate
: > : through cruelty and conquest. And open societies do not threaten the world
: > : with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty
: > : in a unified Iraq."
: >
: > : Clinton (March 24, 1999): "I am convinced that the dangers of acting are far
: > : outweighed by the dangers of not acting, dangers to defenseless people and
: > : to our national interests. If we and our allies were to allow this war to
: > : continue with no response, President Milosevic would read our hesitation as
: > : a license to kill. There would be many more massacres, tens of thousands
: > : more refugees, more victims crying out for revenge. Right now, our firmness
: > : is the only hope the people of Kosovo have, to be able to live in their own
: > : country without having to fear for their own lives."
: >
: > : Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "We can harbor no illusions, and that's important
: > : today to remember. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990.
: > : He's fired ballistic missiles at Iran and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel.
: > : His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15
: > : and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in northern Iraq. He has gassed many
: > : Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages."
: >
: > : Not that his supporters care, but Clinton apparently exaggerated the
: > : suffering in Kosovo. In November 1999, the Christian Science Monitor wrote,
: > : "U.S. and NATO officials at times implied that as many as 100,000 ethnic
: > : Albanians may have been killed, and they used words like 'genocide' to
: > : describe the Serbian policy. They later lowered the estimate to 10,000. But
: > : preliminary findings from war-crimes investigators indicate that the number
: > : of ethnic Albanians killed by Serbian forces during the air strikes was
: > : probably closer to 5,000."
: >
: > : But when and if forces enter Iraq, expect the humanitarian charges lodged
: > : against Saddam Hussein to prove not only accurate, but understated.
: >
: > : What a difference an administration makes.
: >
: > : --
: > : "Bad" Kennedy girls get lobotomized.
: >
: > : "Bad" Kennedy boys get elected
: >
: > --
: >
: > -------------------
:
: Keep working millions on corporate welfare depend on you
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
.

User: "Kel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	25 Jul 2005 05:03:45 AM

"Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
news:k9ydnen9r50e_XnfRVn-pg@giganews.com...

There are a couple of differences. Firstly, Clinton did not begin a war, he
intervened in one to stop ethnic cleansing. Secondly, although it is true
that he did not use United Nations he did use Nato as an umbrella for that
operation.
.

User: "Frank Pittel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	25 Jul 2005 09:28:29 AM

In alt.politics.usa.republican Kel <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
: "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
: news:k9ydnen9r50e_XnfRVn-pg@giganews.com...
: > In alt.politics.usa.republican Rich Travsky <" traRvEsky"@hotmmoveail.com>
: > wrote:
: > : Frank Pittel wrote:
: > : >
: > : > Are you talking about the illegal war that slick waged against the
: > : > nation of Kosovo??
: >
: > : Explain how it was illegal.
: >
: > The same way that the liberation of Iraq is an illegal war.
: There are a couple of differences. Firstly, Clinton did not begin a war, he
: intervened in one to stop ethnic cleansing. Secondly, although it is true
: that he did not use United Nations he did use Nato as an umbrella for that
: operation.
The US was involved militarily in Kosovo prior to slick getting elected? I
know that you're not suggesting that the US should have the right to involve
itself in an internal police action of any country of our choosing.
Is the official looney tune brain dead loser lib dem definition of "legal
war" one were france approves? Sounds like ketchup boy's "global test" was
code for getting permission from the frogs.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
.

User: "Kel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 04:32:02 PM

"Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
news:FIqdnV-v84KQannfRVn-sg@giganews.com...

No, there was a war going on there before the US and allies intervened.
I

know that you're not suggesting that the US should have the right to
involve
itself in an internal police action of any country of our choosing.

No, that was done through Nato.

Is the official looney tune brain dead loser lib dem definition of "legal
war" one were france approves?

No.
Sounds like ketchup boy's "global test" was

code for getting permission from the frogs.

No wars have to be conducted through an international body, in this case
Nato. In Bush's case he had NO international approval.
.

User: "Frank Pittel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	30 Jul 2005 07:10:36 PM

In alt.politics.usa.republican Kel <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
: "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
: news:FIqdnV-v84KQannfRVn-sg@giganews.com...
: > In alt.politics.usa.republican Kel <ostermanuk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
: >
: > : "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
: > : news:k9ydnen9r50e_XnfRVn-pg@giganews.com...
: > : > In alt.politics.usa.republican Rich Travsky <"
: > traRvEsky"@hotmmoveail.com>
: > : > wrote:
: > : > : Frank Pittel wrote:
: > : > : >
: > : > : > Are you talking about the illegal war that slick waged against the
: > : > : > nation of Kosovo??
: > : >
: > : > : Explain how it was illegal.
: > : >
: > : > The same way that the liberation of Iraq is an illegal war.
: >
: > : There are a couple of differences. Firstly, Clinton did not begin a war,
: > he
: > : intervened in one to stop ethnic cleansing. Secondly, although it is
: > true
: > : that he did not use United Nations he did use Nato as an umbrella for
: > that
: > : operation.
: >
: > The US was involved militarily in Kosovo prior to slick getting elected?
: No, there was a war going on there before the US and allies intervened.
Is it now the policy of the US to get involved in the civil war of every
country in the world?
: I
: > know that you're not suggesting that the US should have the right to
: > involve
: > itself in an internal police action of any country of our choosing.
: No, that was done through Nato.
It was the US that overthrew the legal government of Kosovo. The liberation
of Iraq was also done through Nato.
: >
: > Is the official looney tune brain dead loser lib dem definition of "legal
: > war" one were france approves?
: No.
France approved of the overthrow of Kosovo by the US and the looney tune
brain dead loser lib dems claim it's a legal war. France didn't approve of
the liberation of Iraq and the looney tune brain dead loser lib dems claim
it's an illegal war.
: Sounds like ketchup boy's "global test" was
: > code for getting permission from the frogs.
: No wars have to be conducted through an international body, in this case
: Nato. In Bush's case he had NO international approval.
Are you saying that the US can't act militarily<SP?> without the permission
of nato or the un?? You do of course know that nato not only voted in
agreement to the liberation of Iraq but assisted?? By your own definition the
liberation of Iraq was legal.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
.

User: "monkeyhawk"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	30 Jul 2005 07:17:21 PM

"Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote

: > : > : Frank Pittel wrote:
: > : > : >
: > : > : > Are you talking about the illegal war that slick waged against
the
: > : > : > nation of Kosovo??
: > : >
: > : > : Explain how it was illegal.
: > : >
: > : > The same way that the liberation of Iraq is an illegal war.
: >
: > : There are a couple of differences. Firstly, Clinton did not begin a
war,
: > he
: > : intervened in one to stop ethnic cleansing. Secondly, although it is
: > true
: > : that he did not use United Nations he did use Nato as an umbrella
for
: > that
: > : operation.
: >
: > The US was involved militarily in Kosovo prior to slick getting
elected?

: No, there was a war going on there before the US and allies intervened.

Is it now the policy of the US to get involved in the civil war of every
country in the world?

: I
: > know that you're not suggesting that the US should have the right to
: > involve
: > itself in an internal police action of any country of our choosing.

: No, that was done through Nato.

It was the US that overthrew the legal government of Kosovo. The
liberation
of Iraq was also done through Nato.

: >
: > Is the official looney tune brain dead loser lib dem definition of
"legal
: > war" one were france approves?

: No.

France approved of the overthrow of Kosovo by the US and the looney tune
brain dead loser lib dems claim it's a legal war. France didn't approve of
the liberation of Iraq and the looney tune brain dead loser lib dems claim
it's an illegal war.

: Sounds like ketchup boy's "global test" was
: > code for getting permission from the frogs.

: No wars have to be conducted through an international body, in this case
: Nato. In Bush's case he had NO international approval.

Are you saying that the US can't act militarily<SP?> without the
permission
of nato or the un?? You do of course know that nato not only voted in
agreement to the liberation of Iraq but assisted?? By your own definition
the
liberation of Iraq was legal.

When you return to your home planet, Frank, say hello to Bizarro Lois for
us.
.

User: "Kel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	31 Jul 2005 03:26:34 AM

"Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
news:v_adnQK4H6xhi3HfRVn-iw@giganews.com...

No, but in that case the US and others, under the auspices of Nato, did
agree
to intervene to stop ethnic cleansing.

: I
: > know that you're not suggesting that the US should have the right to
: > involve
: > itself in an internal police action of any country of our choosing.

: No, that was done through Nato.

It was the US that overthrew the legal government of Kosovo. The
liberation
of Iraq was also done through Nato.

No, it wasn't. Your facts are simply wrong. From Nato's own web page.
"The campaign against Iraq in 2003 was conducted by a coalition of forces
from different countries, some of which were NATO member countries and some
were not. NATO as an organisation HAD NO ROLE N THE CAMPAIGN but undertook
a number of measures in accordance with Article 4 of the North Atlantic
Treaty, to ensure the security of one of its members, Turkey, in the event
of a threat to it resulting from the war in Iraq. On 21 May 2003, the
Alliance also agreed to support Poland, a member of NATO, in its leadership
of a sector in the stabilization force in Iraq.
In August 2004, in response to a request by the Iraqi Interim Government,
NATO established a Training Implementation Mission in Iraq. NATO is involved
in training, equipping, and technical assistance - NOT COMBAT. The aim of
the Mission is to help Iraq build the capability of its Government to
address the security needs of the Iraqi people."
I should also point out that my original point wasn't that Kosovo was legal
(as it didn't go through the UN Security Council it probably wasn't) my main
point was that it was at least done through an international organisation
(Nato), the war in Iraq was done through neither. Despite your bizarre
claims to the contrary.

: >
: > Is the official looney tune brain dead loser lib dem definition of
"legal
: > war" one were france approves?

: No.

France approved of the overthrow of Kosovo by the US and the looney tune
brain dead loser lib dems claim it's a legal war.

Not all Dems do. This one is willing to admit that it was probably illegal
but that it was done through Nato and it did have a moral purpose of
stopping ethnic cleansing.
France didn't approve of

the liberation of Iraq and the looney tune brain dead loser lib dems claim
it's an illegal war.

The war in Iraq is so illegal it's a no brainer. Fought for reasons that
have subsequently been proved false with no approval from any
international organisation.

: Sounds like ketchup boy's "global test" was
: > code for getting permission from the frogs.

: No wars have to be conducted through an international body, in this case
: Nato. In Bush's case he had NO international approval.

Are you saying that the US can't act militarily<SP?> without the
permission
of nato or the un??

The US agreed to that when they were instrumental in drawing up the UN
Charter.
You do of course know that nato not only voted in

agreement to the liberation of Iraq but assisted??

They have provided humanitarian assistance to aid Turkey and taken steps to
ensure Iraq can form it's own army. However, they did not approve and did
not assist. They themselves say they had "no role in the campaign"
By your own definition the

liberation of Iraq was legal.

Sorry, back to the drawing board.
.

User: "Rich Travsky "
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 10:27:11 PM

Frank Pittel wrote:

Piddle, Piddle, Piddle - whatEVER shall we do with you?
Chimpoleon claimed Iraq was a threat to then US - WMDs, REMEMBER???

: > In alt.politics.usa.republican Harry Dope <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:
: > :
: > : Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo? (FLASHBACK, Clinton & Bush
: > : statements)
: > : Townhall.com ^ | March 5, 2003 | Larry Elder
: >
: > : Posted on 06/16/2003 8:08:53 PM PDT by FairOpinion
: >
: > : When President Bill Clinton used the military in Kosovo, his primary
: > : justification added up to one thing -- humanitarian reasons. His supporters
: > : cheered him on, despite this illegitimate, though humane, use of our
: > : military.
: >
: > : The case against Iraq, however, turns on the Iraqi dictator's possession of
: > : and willingness to use biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons
: > : against American allies, American interests and America itself. President
: > : Bush does, indeed, underscore the horror inflicted upon the Iraqi people by
: > : Saddam Hussein. But those who applauded Clinton's Kosovo mission seem, in
: > : the case of Iraq, indifferent as to the "humanitarian angle."
: >
: > : Actor/activist Mike Farrell, for example, says about Iraq, "It is
: > : inappropriate for the administration to trump up a case in which we are
: > : ballyhooed into war." But back in 1999, about Kosovo, Farrell said, "I think
: > : it's appropriate for the international community in situations like this to
: > : intervene. I am in favor of an intervention."
: >
: > : Let's go to the videotape:
: >
: > : Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Now (Serbian troops have) started moving from
: > : village to village, shelling civilians and torching their houses. We've seen
: > : innocent people taken from their homes, forced to kneel in the dirt and
: > : sprayed with bullets. Kosovar men dragged from their families, fathers and
: > : sons together, lined up and shot in cold blood. This is not a war in the
: > : traditional sense; it is an attack by tanks and artillery on a largely
: > : defenseless people whose leaders already have agreed to peace. Ending this
: > : tragedy is a moral imperative."
: >
: > : Bush (Jan. 28, 2003): "The dictator who is assembling the world's most
: > : dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands
: > : of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how
: > : forced confessions are obtained by torturing children while their parents
: > : are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other
: > : methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq, electric shock, burning with
: > : hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills,
: > : cutting out tongues and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no
: > : meaning."
: >
: > : Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Our mission is clear: to demonstrate the
: > : seriousness of NATO's purpose, so that the Serbian leaders understand the
: > : imperative of reversing course, to deter an even bloodier offensive against
: > : innocent civilians in Kosovo, and if necessary, to seriously damage the
: > : Serbian military's capacity to harm the people of Kosovo. In short, if
: > : President Milosevic will not make peace, we will limit his ability to make
: > : war."
: >
: > : Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease
: > : persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds,
: > : Turkemens and others -- again, as required by Security Council resolutions.
: > : . . . The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. They've
: > : suffered too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a
: > : great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it.
: > : The security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate
: > : through cruelty and conquest. And open societies do not threaten the world
: > : with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty
: > : in a unified Iraq."
: >
: > : Clinton (March 24, 1999): "I am convinced that the dangers of acting are far
: > : outweighed by the dangers of not acting, dangers to defenseless people and
: > : to our national interests. If we and our allies were to allow this war to
: > : continue with no response, President Milosevic would read our hesitation as
: > : a license to kill. There would be many more massacres, tens of thousands
: > : more refugees, more victims crying out for revenge. Right now, our firmness
: > : is the only hope the people of Kosovo have, to be able to live in their own
: > : country without having to fear for their own lives."
: >
: > : Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "We can harbor no illusions, and that's important
: > : today to remember. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990.
: > : He's fired ballistic missiles at Iran and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel.
: > : His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15
: > : and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in northern Iraq. He has gassed many
: > : Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages."
: >
: > : Not that his supporters care, but Clinton apparently exaggerated the
: > : suffering in Kosovo. In November 1999, the Christian Science Monitor wrote,
: > : "U.S. and NATO officials at times implied that as many as 100,000 ethnic
: > : Albanians may have been killed, and they used words like 'genocide' to
: > : describe the Serbian policy. They later lowered the estimate to 10,000. But
: > : preliminary findings from war-crimes investigators indicate that the number
: > : of ethnic Albanians killed by Serbian forces during the air strikes was
: > : probably closer to 5,000."
: >
: > : But when and if forces enter Iraq, expect the humanitarian charges lodged
: > : against Saddam Hussein to prove not only accurate, but understated.
: >
: > : What a difference an administration makes.
: >

User: "Server 13"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	24 Jul 2005 04:01:21 PM

Harry Dope wrote:

Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?

Noticing that not one single American soldier was lost in combat.
Next?
.

User: "Daniel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 05:38:14 PM

Server 13 wrote:

Harry Dope wrote:

Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?

Noticing that not one single American soldier was lost in combat.

Next?

WRONG.
Next?
.

User: "c-bee1"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 09:07:57 PM

"Daniel" <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1122503894.365818.71500@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Server 13 wrote:

Harry Dope wrote:

Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?

Noticing that not one single American soldier was lost in combat.

Next?

WRONG.

Cite, liarboy?
.

User: "Sid9"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 09:26:48 PM

c-bee1 wrote:

"Daniel" <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1122503894.365818.71500@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Server 13 wrote:

Harry Dope wrote:

Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?

Noticing that not one single American soldier was lost in combat.

Next?

WRONG.

Cite, liarboy?

Clinton, son of a broken home, a success in every endeavor.
Bush,Jr, born with a silver spoon in his mouth, a spoiled drunken frat boy,
a failure in every enterprise.
Bush,Jr now making America part of his history of failure
.

User: "richard schumacher"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	23 Jul 2005 08:47:13 PM

In article <yIzEe.46792$Kp2.1997736@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
"Harry Dope" <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:
Unlike Bush, Clinton didn't have to lie or make up ***** to get us
involved in Kosovo. Only a dope would forget or overlook that.
.

User: "Daniel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 05:37:29 PM

richard schumacher wrote:

In article <yIzEe.46792$Kp2.1997736@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
"Harry Dope" <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:

Unlike Bush, Clinton didn't have to lie or make up ***** to get us
involved in Kosovo. Only a dope would forget or overlook that.

Really? Then what would you call CLinton telling both Congress and the
American people that troops would only be there ONE YEAR?
.

User: "c-bee1"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 08:28:16 PM

"Daniel" <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1122503849.135292.79290@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

richard schumacher wrote:

In article <yIzEe.46792$Kp2.1997736@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
"Harry Dope" <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:

Unlike Bush, Clinton didn't have to lie or make up ***** to get us
involved in Kosovo. Only a dope would forget or overlook that.

Really? Then what would you call CLinton telling both Congress and the
American people that troops would only be there ONE YEAR?

Oh, about the same as saying the Iraq war would cost 1.7 billion...
roflmao
Still not one single American combat death from Kosovo.
.

User: "Frank Pittel"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 05:55:24 PM

In alt.politics.usa.republican Daniel <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> wrote:
: richard schumacher wrote:
: > In article <yIzEe.46792$Kp2.1997736@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
: > "Harry Dope" <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:
: >
: > Unlike Bush, Clinton didn't have to lie or make up ***** to get us
: > involved in Kosovo. Only a dope would forget or overlook that.
: Really? Then what would you call CLinton telling both Congress and the
: American people that troops would only be there ONE YEAR?
It's been a long year!!
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
.

User: "Sid9"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	27 Jul 2005 06:34:23 PM

Frank Pittel wrote:

In alt.politics.usa.republican Daniel <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> wrote:

richard schumacher wrote:

In article <yIzEe.46792$Kp2.1997736@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
"Harry Dope" <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:

Unlike Bush, Clinton didn't have to lie or make up ***** to get us
involved in Kosovo. Only a dope would forget or overlook that.

Really? Then what would you call CLinton telling both Congress and
the American people that troops would only be there ONE YEAR?

It's been a long year!!

They die in Iraq.
They don't die in Kosovo.
Nonetheless....Today Rumsfeld announced
the departure date that I predicted.
Bush,Jr, liar, loser, and incompetent, will
declare victory and remove all our troops
from this fiasco ( no matter the situation)
in time to help Republicans get elected
in the November 2006 congressional
election.
Our dead will remain dead.
Those limbless will get prostheses.
AND, best of all!
Iraqis will get back to the
business of killing each
other in their thousands
of years quest for revenge
on their neighbors
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	23 Jul 2005 06:06:00 PM

Kosovo - people were being killed by the thousands. Clinton ended that.
Iraq - people had water, electricity, jobs, peace and stability. Bush ended
that.
To compare the two shows you have no grasp of history or world events.
.

User: "Bishop The"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	23 Jul 2005 06:18:03 PM

On 23-Jul-2005, <dan@dan.com> wrote:

Kosovo - people were being killed by the thousands. Clinton ended that.
Iraq - people had water, electricity, jobs, peace and stability. Bush ended
that.

To compare the two shows you have no grasp of history or world events.

You are joking I hope........or just stupid.
Posted on 03/12/2004 5:32:04 PM PST by Indy Pendance </~indypendance/>
WASHINGTON, March 12 (UPI) -- Allied forces driving toward Berlin at the end of World War
II discovered the Nazi death camps that contained the corpses and barely living remains of
Jews and other enemies of national socialism. When the scale of brutality and murder
carefully was laid bare, filmed and documented, a deeply shocked world promised, "Never
again!"
But within only a few years the Chinese communists killed millions of "small landlords."
In the 1970s, Pol Pot succeeded in killing two-thirds of the Cambodian population.
Countless dead filled the countryside of the former Yugoslavia, and in 1994 militant Hutus
killed as many as a million Tutsis and Hutu moderates within only three months, supposedly
protected by the French government -- which, in fact, withdrew its troops -- and ignored
by the United States and the United Nations.
Now another pandemic of mass killings is being documented, recorded and widely ignored.
This time the perpetrator is Saddam Hussein, whose Baathist Party was said to be based on
that of the Nazis, and accounts of its killing efficiency continue to flow to the
Coalition Provisional Authority. The U.S. Agency for International Development reports
that since Saddam was ousted, 270 sites of mass graves have been reported. These contain
an unknown number of Iraqis, Iranian prisoners of war, Iraqi Kurds and Kuwaiti prisoners
among the long list of those Saddam tortured and killed. British Prime Minister Tony Blair
puts the remains in mass graves at 400,000 so far...
.

User: "Rich Travsky "
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	24 Jul 2005 10:21:48 PM

Bishop wrote:

On 23-Jul-2005, <dan@dan.com> wrote:

Kosovo - people were being killed by the thousands. Clinton ended that.
Iraq - people had water, electricity, jobs, peace and stability. Bush ended
that.

To compare the two shows you have no grasp of history or world events.

You are joking I hope........or just stupid.

Posted on 03/12/2004 5:32:04 PM PST by Indy Pendance </~indypendance/>
WASHINGTON, March 12 (UPI) -- Allied forces driving toward Berlin at the end of World War
II discovered the Nazi death camps that contained the corpses and barely living remains of
Jews and other enemies of national socialism. When the scale of brutality and murder
carefully was laid bare, filmed and documented, a deeply shocked world promised, "Never
again!"
But within only a few years the Chinese communists killed millions of "small landlords."
In the 1970s, Pol Pot succeeded in killing two-thirds of the Cambodian population.
Countless dead filled the countryside of the former Yugoslavia, and in 1994 militant Hutus
killed as many as a million Tutsis and Hutu moderates within only three months, supposedly
protected by the French government -- which, in fact, withdrew its troops -- and ignored
by the United States and the United Nations.
Now another pandemic of mass killings is being documented, recorded and widely ignored.
This time the perpetrator is Saddam Hussein, whose Baathist Party was said to be based on
that of the Nazis, and accounts of its killing efficiency continue to flow to the
Coalition Provisional Authority. The U.S. Agency for International Development reports
that since Saddam was ousted, 270 sites of mass graves have been reported. These contain
an unknown number of Iraqis, Iranian prisoners of war, Iraqi Kurds and Kuwaiti prisoners
among the long list of those Saddam tortured and killed. British Prime Minister Tony Blair
puts the remains in mass graves at 400,000 so far...

You are joking I hope........or just stupid.
For starters, Saddam was the republicons boy. Care to see the picture of him
and Rummy shaking hands?
RT
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	23 Jul 2005 07:36:14 PM

Oh, and another huge difference: in Kosovo, war was already started. We
ended it. In Iraq, there was no war. We started it.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	23 Jul 2005 07:34:53 PM

Saddam in 2003 was no worse than he had always been. Which is to say, he was
a ruthless dictator. But the scale of suffering and deaths from his reign
were not in any way comparable to Kosovo in the 90s. And all the people that
hated Hussein in our government in 2003 loved him in the 80s, even though he
hadn't changed his murderous ways one bit. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, all
of these criminals loved him in the 80s when he was actually murdering more
people than he was in 2003.
So I'll say it again. And you can specifically correct what you deem to be
factually in error, ok?
Kosovo - people were being killed by the thousands. Clinton ended that.
Iraq - people had water, electricity, jobs, peace and stability. Bush ended
that.
"Bishop" <The Bishop@OnTheBoard.Com> wrote in message
news:LeAEe.37193$zY4.24557@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...

On 23-Jul-2005, <dan@dan.com> wrote:

Kosovo - people were being killed by the thousands. Clinton ended that.
Iraq - people had water, electricity, jobs, peace and stability. Bush
ended
that.

To compare the two shows you have no grasp of history or world events.

You are joking I hope........or just stupid.

Posted on 03/12/2004 5:32:04 PM PST by Indy Pendance </~indypendance/>
WASHINGTON, March 12 (UPI) -- Allied forces driving toward Berlin at the
end of World War
II discovered the Nazi death camps that contained the corpses and barely
living remains of
Jews and other enemies of national socialism. When the scale of brutality
and murder
carefully was laid bare, filmed and documented, a deeply shocked world
promised, "Never
again!"
But within only a few years the Chinese communists killed millions of
"small landlords."
In the 1970s, Pol Pot succeeded in killing two-thirds of the Cambodian
population.
Countless dead filled the countryside of the former Yugoslavia, and in
1994 militant Hutus
killed as many as a million Tutsis and Hutu moderates within only three
months, supposedly
protected by the French government -- which, in fact, withdrew its
troops -- and ignored
by the United States and the United Nations.
Now another pandemic of mass killings is being documented, recorded and
widely ignored.
This time the perpetrator is Saddam Hussein, whose Baathist Party was said
to be based on
that of the Nazis, and accounts of its killing efficiency continue to flow
to the
Coalition Provisional Authority. The U.S. Agency for International
Development reports
that since Saddam was ousted, 270 sites of mass graves have been reported.
These contain
an unknown number of Iraqis, Iranian prisoners of war, Iraqi Kurds and
Kuwaiti prisoners
among the long list of those Saddam tortured and killed. British Prime
Minister Tony Blair
puts the remains in mass graves at 400,000 so far...

User: "pete"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	23 Jul 2005 06:56:17 PM

The difference is we made Saddam. He was our dictator. We lost control of
him during Bush Sr. Or don't we look past the Clinton administration?
<dan@dan.com> wrote in message news:Kbednb4jAZHLUH_fRVn-iQ@comcast.com...

Kosovo - people were being killed by the thousands. Clinton ended that.
Iraq - people had water, electricity, jobs, peace and stability. Bush
ended that.

To compare the two shows you have no grasp of history or world events.

User: "Bishop The"
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	23 Jul 2005 05:55:13 PM

On 23-Jul-2005, "Harry Dope" <HD@earthlink.com> wrote:

When President Bill Clinton used the military in Kosovo, his primary
justification added up to one thing -- humanitarian reasons. His supporters
cheered him on, despite this illegitimate, though humane, use of our
military.

The case against Iraq, however, turns on the Iraqi dictator's possession of
and willingness to use biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons
against American allies, American interests and America itself. President
Bush does, indeed, underscore the horror inflicted upon the Iraqi people by
Saddam Hussein. But those who applauded Clinton's Kosovo mission seem, in
the case of Iraq, indifferent as to the "humanitarian angle."

Actor/activist Mike Farrell, for example, says about Iraq, "It is
inappropriate for the administration to trump up a case in which we are
ballyhooed into war." But back in 1999, about Kosovo, Farrell said, "I think
it's appropriate for the international community in situations like this to
intervene. I am in favor of an intervention."

Let's go to the videotape:

Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Now (Serbian troops have) started moving from
village to village, shelling civilians and torching their houses. We've seen
innocent people taken from their homes, forced to kneel in the dirt and
sprayed with bullets. Kosovar men dragged from their families, fathers and
sons together, lined up and shot in cold blood. This is not a war in the
traditional sense; it is an attack by tanks and artillery on a largely
defenseless people whose leaders already have agreed to peace. Ending this
tragedy is a moral imperative."

Bush (Jan. 28, 2003): "The dictator who is assembling the world's most
dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands
of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how
forced confessions are obtained by torturing children while their parents
are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other
methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq, electric shock, burning with
hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills,
cutting out tongues and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no
meaning."

Clinton (March 24, 1999): "Our mission is clear: to demonstrate the
seriousness of NATO's purpose, so that the Serbian leaders understand the
imperative of reversing course, to deter an even bloodier offensive against
innocent civilians in Kosovo, and if necessary, to seriously damage the
Serbian military's capacity to harm the people of Kosovo. In short, if
President Milosevic will not make peace, we will limit his ability to make
war."

Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease
persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds,
Turkemens and others -- again, as required by Security Council resolutions.
. . . The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. They've
suffered too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a
great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it.
The security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate
through cruelty and conquest. And open societies do not threaten the world
with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty
in a unified Iraq."

Clinton (March 24, 1999): "I am convinced that the dangers of acting are far
outweighed by the dangers of not acting, dangers to defenseless people and
to our national interests. If we and our allies were to allow this war to
continue with no response, President Milosevic would read our hesitation as
a license to kill. There would be many more massacres, tens of thousands
more refugees, more victims crying out for revenge. Right now, our firmness
is the only hope the people of Kosovo have, to be able to live in their own
country without having to fear for their own lives."

Bush (Sept. 12, 2002): "We can harbor no illusions, and that's important
today to remember. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990.
He's fired ballistic missiles at Iran and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel.
His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15
and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in northern Iraq. He has gassed many
Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages."

Not that his supporters care, but Clinton apparently exaggerated the
suffering in Kosovo. In November 1999, the Christian Science Monitor wrote,
"U.S. and NATO officials at times implied that as many as 100,000 ethnic
Albanians may have been killed, and they used words like 'genocide' to
describe the Serbian policy. They later lowered the estimate to 10,000. But
preliminary findings from war-crimes investigators indicate that the number
of ethnic Albanians killed by Serbian forces during the air strikes was
probably closer to 5,000."

But when and if forces enter Iraq, expect the humanitarian charges lodged
against Saddam Hussein to prove not only accurate, but understated.

What a difference an administration makes

LIBERAL = HYPOCRITE
Saddam sounds like a lib-loon.........
"By law, a lawyer should be with the defendant," Saddam said. "Is it fair that
the lawyer cannot see the defendant except in court sessions?"
Critics of Saddam's regime have said the ousted leader would have the kinds
of legal rights at trial that he never gave citizens during his reign.
AND GET THIS ONE..........
Saddam's attorneys have said that he should not be tried for anything because
he is immune to all charges under the Iraqi constitution as it was written under
his rule.
LOL!!!!!!!!! He sounds just like a lib-loon.
A LITTLE HISTORY ABOUT Saddam-Lib...
On July 8, 1982, a small group attacked a convoy carrying the Iraqi leader
through Dujayl, a Shiite village north of Baghdad. A series of detentions and
executions in the town followed the failed assassination attempt.
According to the tribunal, 15 people were summarily executed, and some
1,500 others spent years in prison with no charges and without trial dates.
Ultimately, another 143 people had "show trials" and were executed, the
tribunal said.
.

User: "XTS"
Title: Re: Where was Cheney during Vietnam?	23 Jul 2005 11:56:57 PM

Seeking and procuring any fuckin deferment he could.
.

User: "XTS"
Title: Re: Where was Bush during Vietnam?	23 Jul 2005 11:55:40 PM

Texas untill he just left and went AWOL.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Where were Bush's critics during Kosovo?	25 Jul 2005 11:06:18 AM

The proposition that Republicans invaded Iraq for humanitarian reasons
is just pure horseshit. I doubt if even the Republicans believe it.
Human Rights Watch, for example, concluded a long time ago that "the
invasion of Iraq cannot be justified as a humanitarian intervention".
Human Rights Watch also said, "Encouraging military action to meet
lesser abuses may mean a lack of capacity to intervene when atrocities
are most severe. The invasion of a country, especially without the
approval of the U.N. Security Council, also damages the international
legal order which itself is important to protect rights."
If you want to know, by the way, what the Chickenhawk, draft-dodging
pimps for the GOP really think about humanitarian wars just read these
quotes about the war in Kosovo:
Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN): "This is President Clinton's war, and
when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem." [New York Times,
5/4/99]
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to
explain to us what the exit strategy is. --George Bush [Houston
Chronicle, 4/9/99]
Then-House Majority Whip Tom Delay (R-TX): "America needs to quickly
change directions and leave behind this chilling comedy of errors that
has defined our foreign policy." [Copley News Service, 3/22/99]
Senator James Inhofe (R-OK): "(P)resident [Clinton] has decimated our
ability to defend ourselves." [USA Today, 4/5/99]
Representative Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA): "This is the most inept
foreign policy in the history of the United States." [Washington Times,
4/29/99]
Then-GOP Presidential candidate Dan Quayle: "What has happened is we
have taken a political crisis and a humanitarian crisis and escalated
it into a full military crisis. The handling of the situation in the
Balkans reflects the inattention of the Clinton Administration to
foreign policy. . You have the same situation [as Vietnam]. Ambiguity,
no stated, clear cut mission and then you are going to have to be there
quite some time." [Omaha World Herald, 3/28/99]
Then-GOP Presidential candidate Pat Buchanan: "And what are we doing
bombing and attacking this tiny country that has never attacked the
United States to rip away from them a province that does not belong to
us? I believe it is an unjust war. I think we have failed in our
strategic objectives, and it is now becoming basically no longer a war
for Kosovo but a war to save NATO's credibility and NATO's face. And
that does not justify sending in an army of 100,000 American ground
troops into the Balkans." [NBC, "Meet the Press," 4/25/99]
Then-GOP Presidential candidate Gary Bauer: "The President has not
demonstrated he's got a way to solve a crisis or conflict that
literally has been raging since 1350. . They treated each other with an
incredible amount of inhumanity. That's a terrible thing. It offends
our conscience. But how in the world are American boys flying over
Kosovo dropping bombs going to somehow stop something that's been going
on for 600 years?" [Des Moines Register, 4/17/99]
GOP House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL): "Many may question the path
that has taken us to this point. I have my own questions about the long
term strategy of this campaign." [Dallas Morning News,3/25/99]
Then-House Majority Whip Tom Delay (R-TX): "Mr. Speaker, this is a very
difficult speech for me to give, because I normally, and I still do,
support our military and the fine work that they are doing. But I
cannot support a failed foreign policy. . But before we get deeper
embroiled into this Balkan quagmire, I think that an assessment has to
be made of the Kosovo policy so far. President Clinton has never
explained to the American people why he was involving the U.S. military
in a civil war in a sovereign nation, other than to say it is for
humanitarian reasons, a new military/foreign policy precedent. . Was it
worth it to stay in Vietnam to save face? What good has been
accomplished so far? Absolutely nothing." [Congressional Record,
"Removal of United States Armed Forces from the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia," 4/28/99]
Then-House Majority Whip Tom Delay (R-TX): The deployment of U.S.
military forces in Kosovo is "just another bad idea in a foreign policy
without a focus." [Editorial, Saint Paul Pioneer Press (Minnesota),
3/17/99]
Then-House Majority Whip Tom Delay (R-TX): "First of all, it's using
NATO for the first time to attack a sovereign nation. . Its also one
more adventure ina whole line of adventures of failed foreign policy."
["Fox News Sunday," 3/14/99]
Then-House Majority Whip Tom Delay (R-TX): "I had the utmost confidence
in President Bush. He had laid the groundwork, and our national
interest in the Middle East was clear. In the gulf we had a country
that was invaded [Kuwait], and an oil interest to defend. . [In the
Balkans] we have a president I don't trust, who has proven my reason
for not trusting him: had no plan. We have a civil war that was falsely
described as a huge humanitarian problem, when in comparison to other
places, it was nothing." [Washington Post, 5/4/99]
Then-Senate Assistant Majority Leader Don Nickles (R-OK): "I think he's
[Clinton] gotten us into a mess. I don't think you can bomb a country
into signing a peace agreement." [Washington Post, 4/13/99]
Then-Senate Assistant Majority Leader Don Nickles (R-OK): "The
Administration, and NATO as a whole, greatly miscalculated the response
Slobodan Milosevic would have to a bombing campaign. As I predicted,
the Administration has escalated what was guerilla warfare into a much
more serious conflict. The bombings have unleashed an evil reign and
resulted in a humanitariandisaster." [Senator Don Nickles, Press
Release, 4/21/99]
Then-Senate Assistant Majority Leader Don Nickles (R-OK): "I want NATO
to be credible, but for crying out loud, when you are so arrogant to
say here is our wisdom, here is this accord, we determined this is in
your best interest and you must sign it or else we are going to bomb
you-I stated in my speech on the bombing resolution that I don't think
you can bomb a country into submission or into signing an agreement."
[Congressional Record, Senator Don Nickles,5/3/99
Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH): "I don't believe that a ground war in Kosovo
using American troops is going to be very successful." [NBC, "Meet the
Press," 4/18/99]
.

Page 1 of 1

Post reply

INDIAN Atrocities Increased Manifold During Ramadan, Says APHC
Re: Al Gore Proudly Served His Bong, Bush Trained In Jet Fighters During JFK's Vietnam War
Republican majority leader's aide lays low during investigation
John Kerry blasts Bush for failing to prove he wasn't AWOL during Vietnam War.
Re: If Gore where in office during 9/11?
Enron manipulated market 473 days during crisis. Gouged $1.1 billion.
Re: Bush Flew Figher Jets During Vietnam
Re: Liberal Democrats Start Spitting On American Solidiers Again & Calling Them Baby Killers Like They Did During JFK's

Re: SUMMARY: What senators said during debate Wednesday
Naughty Cheney Halliburton CEO during bribery scandal
Muslim Terrorists Stabbed Babies During Massacre
New Swift Vets Ad: Kerry Met With Enemy During Wartime
Oliver North testifying at the Iran-Contra hearings during the Reagan Administration.
Spyware expert says Bush probably used earpiece during debate
Various Bush Lies During the Debates

Topics

Bible

Abortion

Atheism