Posted on 03/13/2003 5:14:33 AM PST by Doctor13
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:01:28 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The article "Critics of Kosovo, Iraq swap war-making reservations" (Nation, Saturday) discusses the different positions held by those people and nations who are against war with Iraq today but supported
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
From their view, they were socialist.
Whatever they are saying, does not tell you who they are nor what they believe; because it is merely lip service to Marx (a freeloader), Lenin (a Jimmy Carville), and Stalin (a Hillary Clinton).
There's the lesson. They're fascist nationalizing socialists who will say and / or do anything to get what they want. They do not actually have an opinion, because to have an opinion, a person must have a body of analytical thought from which to formulate that opinion. Instead, they have only the propaganda echoing around the fax machines of The [formerly Democrat] Party.
Therefore, it is a mistake to argue against the issue they propose, because, while the argument may be accurate, it has no effect upon their rush to avoid individual responsibility by both blaming somebody else and demanding that said somebody else pay the bill.
But when you choose to ignore all of Milosevic's crimes, as Stella has made a career of doing, I suppose there is bound to be some confusion on the issue.
Actually, a lot of them were cheering on the Kosovo action. I got this letter published in the Philly Daily News:
I was rather surprised to find the Daily News coming out in support of the so-called peace protestors and calling for Bush to heed public opinion regarding going to war against Iraq to remove the sadistic Saddam (editorial, February 20th). After all, it was just under four years ago that the Daily News published editorials with these warmongering headlines:
END MILOSEVIC'S REIGN OF TERROR ONCE AND FOR ALL OUR ONLY ALTERNATIVE IS ALL-OUT WAR
WHY A WAR AGAINST MILOSEVIC IS JUSTIFIED \ TAKING A STAND AGAINST GENOCIDE
You were for regime change, armed intervention AND going in without the U.N,, which never sanctioned the Kosovo action. You were swimming against the tide of public opinion, which did not favor sending ground troops into Kosovo. You even stated that "We made that argument because diplomacy has gone nowhere," exactly the situation we are now facing after twelve years of stonewalling by Hussein.
I wonder what changed during the ensuing four years that you would completely flip-flop your positions regarding using armed force to overthrow a bloodthirsty tyrant? And why are the peace protestors thronging the streets today when they were nowhere to be found during the Kosovo intervention?
Oh, that’s right, Clinton was president then and Bush is president now. Silly me, never mind.
You mean the 100,000 Albanians killed by the Serbs, a figure bandied about to justify intervention? Oh, that's right, they only found a couple thousand bodies of indeterminent ethnicity afterwards. But they did disregard intelligence warnings that intervention would make matters far worse - which it did. And they did declare victory by essential capitulating to terms Milosevic was willing to accept all along - that there be peacekeepers, just not Nato peacekeepers.
You can understand why the Albanian Kosovars didn't like the guy (Milosevic). He was basically trying to outlaw and criminalize every aspect of their culture: rape, murder, poisoning wells, white slavery, narcotics trafficking, brutalizing other ethnic groups, international traffic in stolen automobiles and other vehicles....
And oh, that's right, about a thousand bodies have been found in Serbia where Milosevic's henchmen tried to hide them from the forensic teams - the number 10,000 still stands as the best estimate for K-Albanians killed by Serbs because the Serbs have never come clean as to what their Army and Paramilitaries did with their victims.
So yeah, while our intervention made matters one hell of a lot worse for Serb Nationalists, they just don't matter one hell of a lot, so what's your point?
Primarily AFTER observers were withdrawn prior to the attacks, exactly as intelligence had predicted. And despite claims to the contrary, Milosevic was willing to accept peacekeepers, which would have prevented that violence.
And oh, that's right, about a thousand bodies have been found in Serbia where Milosevic's henchmen tried to hide them from the forensic teams - the number 10,000 still stands as the best estimate for K-Albanians killed by Serbs because the Serbs have never come clean as to what their Army and Paramilitaries did with their victims.
And we have the many atrocities and provocations of the Albanians against the Serbs, which continued after the intervention to the point where there are very few Serbs left in Kosovo today. So this was a nasty little civil war, but Clinton and Blair intervened on one side, using lies and exaggerations to justify intervention into what was essential a low-grade conflict.
Stop
End
No further debate is possible without lying, so spare yourself the indignity of travelling down that well worn path.
We do have many atrocities and crimes agains the Serbs, but they are outweighed by those carried out by the Serbs under Slobo.
Pragmatism is a bitch, isn't it?
Nice try, but we've dealt with your B.S. before, it's just drier now. The historical evidence is quite clear - Kosovo was a low-grade civil war made worse, not better, by intervention. You can impress yourself all you want here, but you're an audience of one (maybe two if Torie is lurking about).
Yes, and always as effectively as you just have here - by retreating into demonstrably false dogma.
Get a clue already - it was all "Everything's gonna change once Clinton's gone" wasn't it?
But as far as our Balkan policy, nothing's really changed, has it?
Think you can figure that one out Sparky?
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.