I never felt more frustration when my own Republican congressman was right behind Clinton/Nato on this mess.Yes, it is a mess, but governments have policies, and I'm glad Bush can stand up and say he never undermined the american military in a time of conflict.
this is a complicated moral issue and I can see both sides. But politicians should not undermine policy once it's set and in motion.
"politicians should not undermine policy once it's set and in motion"?
"ALBRIGHT LIED -- PEOPLE DIED"
http://www.instapundit.com/archives/014356.php
Clinton/UN/NATO policy continuation would result in the Hague or ICC trial of Saddam Hussein=innocent verdict by hand picked judges, bombing another aspirin factory in response to Sept 11, 2001, arming the enemies of civil society, ICC threat to our troops, et al.
Please, share with us details & justification if you support the BJ pres "policies". John Loftus investigations have shown "Terror networks went untouched for so long. It wasn’t an intelligence failure, it was a foreign policy failure. The orders were not to embarrass the Saudi Government. Year after years, the cover-up orders came from the State Department and the White House. The CIA, the FBI, and the Justice Department just did what they were told.”
Geez, I can only think of a few (ugly) reasons for support of policy based on lies & worrying about past "politicians".