Funny how the NY Times and other liberal organs never talk about Kosovo. Why is that?
Didn't Slick put America on the side of radical muslims in Kosovo?
Does anyone recall how many civilians the bombings killed?
Given to excessive and often trivial or rambling talk; tiresomely talkative.
Wordy and rambling: a garrulous speech.
The recoveries of K-Albanians from the Serbian MUP grounds at Batajnica make any efforts to diminish the number of K-Albanian victims moot - Slobo's regime was murderous, and lost it's mandate to govern non-Serbs by the treatment it meted out to them, and that loss of mandate isn't going to be reversed in Kosovo by any American administration, no matter how hard the Serbs or their allies try to change it.
You'll note that we're in year 5 of the Bush administration, and our recent diplomatic moves in the region, aiming to finish our clean-ups of Milosevic's Bosnia and Kosovo messes, are highly unfavorable to the Serb nationalist interest.
So if taking out their angst on Clinton while we finish the job works for Serbia's dead enders and their proxies, more power to 'em.
Inquiring minds want to know.
Regards,
GtG
"And Kennedy later intoned on the Senate floor, "Before the war, week after week after week after week, we were told lie after lie after lie after lie."
Then Teddy boy work up and realized it was he was lying week after week.
Of course, he wont admit it. Heck, that would be like calling the police after you drove your car in a lake with a woman drown in the back seat - and we know his history on that score.
Here's an old post dealing with this very subject:
According to liberals, lying about war is worse than lying about sex. And while I would generally agree with that, let me give you my perspective: Clinton's lie(s) were much worse. Clinton didn't just lie about sex, he also lied about war to cover for sex. He bombed 4 sovereign nations in the span of 8-months to cover for his domestic afair. War is war...and it's hell, and whether you're killing people from 15,000 feet or 50 feet...people still die. And the last time I checked, bombing a sovereign nation is still an ACT OF WAR. Whoever said make love and not war, never met Bill Clinton; he could literally do both at the same time...including getting a hummer while discussing troop movement (in Bosnia) with a congressman.
Clinton just happened to bomb Afghanistan and the Sudan the day before Monica was to begin her Grand Jury testimony. So outrageous was this operation, that Clinton didn't even consult his Joint Cheifs of Staff before beginning. So worried was Janet Reno, that she actually questioned the legallity of the act. It is now a known fact that this bombing further outraged Bin Laden, as Clinton was supposedly trying to kill him. Unfortunatley, as many pointed out, the intelligence was not only "shaky" as to his whereabouts, the operation was incomplete as we didn't follow-up on further intelligence reports that did indicate were Bin Laden might be. Maybe that's because Clinton's "one-week war on terror" was only a destraction from his "affairs" back at home. As a result, one could argue (if you're a liberal) that Clinton's little gambit only increased Bin Laden's hatred for this country...resulting in 9/11.
And speaking of failed intellligence reports, it was a report that Clinton relied on that claimed the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant (in Sudan) was a VX Nerve producing facility. It wasn't...and we got socked with a multi-million dollar lawsuit, as well as destorying a medical facility that was responsible for over 50% of that country's medicines. The deaths in this bombing weren't just limited to those killed in the plant. As some reports indicated, Al-Shifa produced drugs to fight Turberculosis and Malaria...and THOUSANDS may have possibly died since they didn't have access to these medicines (one report said 10,000). Contrary to claims...this was more than just an "aspirin factory." I didn't see the liberals out lamenting the thousands of deaths that occurred because proper medicines were unavailable to the populous of this country. Then again, why should I? The objective US media NEVER reported this story.
You want more lies? How about the 100,000 mass-graves and "genocide" in Kosovo that have never been discovered? Or how about Cinton's claim that we should "never forget Racak" as he used the Racak Massacre as a pretext for war in Serbia? The Racak Massacre was still being questioned by many in the UN and international community, as some say it was a fraud perpetrated by KLA soldiers who lied about the "execution style" murders of innocent women and children. A Finnish foresnic team in conjunction with the UN once stated that Racak was a straight-up fire fight after 4 Serb cops were killed a couple days before. The bullet wounds were inconsistent with "execution style" injuries. Yet our great objective "elite" media ignored those findings, as they gave Clinton a pass on these "failed" intelligence reports.
Speaking of intelligence failures, maybe we can also find out what failures led to the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. I don't recall the great outrage to find out what "intelligence failure" led to this disaster, which killed at least 3 nationals. How about Train #393 to Belgrade, in which 27 civilians were killed after the deliberate targeting of the bridge there train was on; or even Serb TV, were at least 20 civilians were killed after being deliberately targeted by US/NATO bombs. Hell, that entire war was one big Geneva Convention violation as civilian infrastructure and utilities were "intententionally" targeted for destruction...to wear down their resolve and resistance. It's ironic to listen to someone like Wesley Clark accuse US soldiers of Geneva violations in Iraq when he, himself, has been listed as a war criminal for Geneva violations in Kosovo. And even after 78-days of aerial bombardments from 15,000 feet, Slobo still remained in power for nearly a year.
A simple review of Clinton's claims (and the democrats) in 1998 explicitly imply the exact same threat that Bush spoke of for the reasons for this war in Iraq. And regardless if Clinton waged a "full scale war," the Democrats still didn't question the validity of those statements or the intelligence that led to those conclusions. No. In fact, many of them made the same claims themselves. Yet, today, it is the Democrats who all of a sudden want investigations...and even impeachment. Bring it on. And let's throw in Clinton's 4 bombings of Iraq, that were also acts of war based on those same intelligence reports. How many Innocent Iraqi died because of those strikes? I just don't recall the media taking body counts during Clinton's wars.
Which brings up another statement liberals make: They say if Clinton had done what Bush had done in Iraq, the Republicans would've been all over him. Here's a little fact for ya'...Clinton did do what Bush did...and a lot more (see above). Yet, I don't recall the Republicans or the media reacting anywhere near the way libs have over this war. They have not only impugned the character of this President, they have emboldened the enemy in Iraq. They are giving both aid and comfort to our enemies and allies alike who can now question the validity of our president's motives...even though it is their evidence and motives that are really in question. The mediacrats desires to cripple this president have not only damaged this country, they are damaging the lives of those fighting to protect us...and our lives, alike.
On a final note about lies: There is a big difference between flat-out lying to the American people and what, at the most, is subjective reading of intelligence information that "may" have been inconclusive. The fact is, this is nothing new...as Clinton (see above) and just about every administration has done it. This doesn't even come close to what LBJ did in Vietnam with the Gulf of Tonkin. There is also a difference between lying and selectively choosing information to support your policy...based on a plethora of intelligence information that is pro and con. The difference is, this information was supported overwhelmingly by more than just Bush, including many of the same Democrats who have been attacking Bush.
Just because politicians of opposing Parties have a different perspective on information or foreign policy doesn't make one Party wrong...or liars. This is what politics are about. And there is a difference in lying about a personal matter and disagreeing over policy matters. Whether you like it or not, Bush's so-called lie, was based on the best information he had, and that he believed threatened the USA. His "so-called" lie was not about personal gratification or a means to satisfy himself. On the contrary, he believed he was doing something to protect the citizens of this country. What Clinton did was just the opposite. His "admitted" lie, was nothing more than a lie to protect himself. It was pure selfishness and had nothing to do with the good of the country. In fact, it was so outrageous, that it did irreparable harm to the country as he did all he could to protect himself...including smearing others in the process. Clinton's lie was nothing more than a selfish act to protect his own personal interest; Bush's so-called lie was about protecting this country's interests.
The people who claim that Bush's lie led to more deaths than Clinton's lies are also wrong. Between the reported 4,000 civilian deaths in Kosovo/Serbia (not including combatants), the deaths in Bosnia, the estimated hundreds to the thousands of deaths in the Somalian fire-fight, the collateral damage resulting from Al-Shifa, Afghanistan, the Chinese Embassy; the deaths resulting from the 4 separate bombings of Iraq (which we don't even have figures for)...and even the operation in Haiti, Clinton's death count may be just as high. Ironically, those weren't even official conflicts...which by the way, if we are going to impeach anybody, it should be Clinton. This President not only didn't have a declaration from Congress...he didn't have the support of the UN for Kosovo. All of which Bush had.
marker
bump for later
But Bill just lied about sex and war so it is alright you see!
Just think. If America hadn't interceded in Kosovo, Paris would now be overrun with Muslims and there would be violence all over Europe. Oh, wait.
bump
Peace will return when the Serbian Army liberates the Serbs (as well as many Albanians) in Kosovo.
The damage done by the Klintonistas must be udone.