Posted on 03/20/2006 4:20:57 AM PST by Doctor13
Wasn't it at about this time Hillary was quoted in, IIRC, Talk Magazine urging Bill to commence bombing after not talking to him for months following the Monica scandal.
They let this guy slide and now they want to impeach President Bush. I believe what the liberals really want is a Civil War in this country.
And it shouldn't be long before our pro-Muhammedan group of posters here on Free Republic show up to inform you that no mere mortal is permitted to question Bill Clinton's activities in the Balkans. They'll be armed with lots of links to sites sponsored by George Soros!
That is a possibility.
Anyone know for certain?
They have been playing one side against the other for years, Blacks against Whites. Guess now they will throw in the Hispanics and Muslims to really get it going.
A thing to remember. Also the Serbian Krajina did not have to be destroyed and Kosovo did not have to be purged of Serbs and Gypsies.
Yes, I am sure they will be but for it to work I would have to fall for their lies which I won't. Never fell for any of Clinton's BS and Carter's BS is what made me change parties.
Republicans like Bob Dole were demanding attacks on Serbs and accusing Clinton of Chamberlain style appeasement.
National Review was so viciously braying for the Serbian blood that I had to cancel the subscription.
Here comes the article from that time:
(C) BOSTON GLOBE
29 APRIL 1993
BEFORE WE JOIN A WAR, SOME QUESTIONS
by H.D.S. Greenway
In the last few weeks, the Bosnian town of Srebrenica has become another Guernica in the eyes of the West, and the Clinton administration is being drawn inexorably toward military intervention in the Balkan civil war.
Secretary of State Warren Christopher has laid out what he calls the "severe tests" of an interventionist policy: It must be clearly stated, there should be a strong likelihood of success, there must be an "exit strategy," and it must win sustained public support in this country. None of those conditions has been met.
But a public mood is rising. Television has zeroed in on Bosnia while other civil wars and ethnic cleansings go relatively unreported. Respected opinion makers from both left and right have been beating the intervention drum, taunting Clinton, calling his caution a weakness and making shallow, ill-considered comparisons with Hitler-appeasing Neville Chamberlain.
Before the United States commits itself to war, however, there are three questions that the administration needs to answer if intervention is to meet Christopher's "severe tests."
First, who will be our enemies? Second, what are our war aims? Third, what will we do if limited intervention fails to achieve our aims?
Bosnian Serbs are not allowed to link up their territories in what would become a "Greater Serbia," but the Croats in their part of Bosnia-Herzegovina fly the Croatian flag, use Croatian money and have linked up with Croatia. If we will go to war against Serbian aggrandizement in Bosnia, will we also bomb Croats to prevent Greater Croatia?
Will our war aim be "stopping the genocide now," as Sen. Joseph Biden has said? If so, whose genocide? Only last week in Central Bosnia, Muslims and Croats were at each other's throats and, according to the United Nations, summary executions, massacres and ethnic cleansings were committed by both Muslim and Croat factions.
And while world attention was on Serbs shelling Srebrenica, the BBC reported on the mass graves the Serbs were finding just a few miles away in which lay the corpses of Serbs who had been decapitated, mutilated and tortured by Muslims during the Muslims' Christmas offensive.
Simplistic analysts have put all the blame for the Bosnian civil war on the Serbs and their leader, Slobodan Milosevic, the former Communist turned ultra-nationalist who has played the ethnic card to fan the flames of hatred. That Croatia's leader, Franjo Tudjman, has done much the same thing goes largely ignored. The real cause of the war, however, was as UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali described it in an interview last summer. "You have three ethnic groups, and they have not taken into account the point of view of one of the three, which was the Serbs."
Croats and Muslims were granted rights of self-determination that the large Serb minorities living outside the province of Serbia were denied. Serbs had historical reasons to fear Croatian and Muslim domination, and Milosevic was able to take advantage of those fears.
True, the Serbs are responsible for the most atrocities, but if we intervene to tip the military balance against Serbs, will we be pre- pared to make war on Muslims and Croats if they turn on Serb civilians to enlarge their own territories?
This is not a cut-and-dried matter of forcing an invader out of another country. This is an entangled, tripartite civil war with 500 years of hatred. If putting back together the Humpty Dumpty of Bosnian unity --never more than an illusion-- is our aim, we'd better think in terms of a 100-year "exit strategy."
Lastly, what if a limited intervention fails to end the fighting and accelerates it instead? Unfortunately for Clinton, he will have to live with the results of intervention while pundits promoting war today will be the first to denounce him should things go wrong tomorrow.
Look, I'm a Beatles freak, but I've never heard of this song. What album is it on?
I never had much use for Republicans like Bob Dole just as I have no use for McCain and a few other Republicans.
And National Review? And others?
Face it - the war against Serbs was bipartisan.
Thanks for the article.
Ping for later.
Oh, it's McCartney, not the Beatles. Oof. Thanks. I was new in the States then and didn't follow the politics so much. However, after 911 you can't help but see what a mess Clinton tenure was and how many years it will take to clean up that mess.
In a sense, you're dead on, but I think it's more of a hellbent dream an Utopian oligarchy run by an elitist group of secular, agnostic, or atheist, self appointed tax-moochers that always 'know best' for what's the best for the rest of us in the US and the world with no offers of tolerance and compromise other than 'their way'.
Source:http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0307d.asp
This is as close as I could find.
It was. Go to: Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base
This is a January 16, 1997 report for the Senate Republican Policy Committe.
It's all there.
Obviously, no one read Clinton's treachery regarding his arming the Muslim Bosnians against the Christian Serbs.
A Must Read!
The voting record concerning the bombing of Serbia is no longer available on the House website, but it showed that the Democrats supported it almost unanimously while only a few Republicans supported it.
This isn't to deny that some Republicans supported this ill-conceived foreign relations disaster, but there were more against it than there were for it.
Odd, but the previous link worked for me, but let's try this one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.