Replies

A couple of anecdotes about the Kosovo war and those who supported or opposed it and how this kinda opened my eyes. I had been a reader of the Weekly Standard before Kosovo came up. But during that conflict I saw that rag for what it is- a shameless shill for empire and the welfare state with a veneer of cultural conservatism. When a faction of Republicans was trying to stop the bombing through a legal challenge the Standard reacted violently against them. Kristol even threatened to bolt the GOP and go over to the Democrats over this fraud of a war if the GOP failed to back Clinton. When the war was over- the Standard's headline was "VICTORY". What they meant by "Victory" was that America had planted itself in yet another country and the Empire was growing. The neocon loyalty to the GOP is not even skin deep. They are parasites on the party. I have never bought a Standard since.

Another anecdote. After the war- Keyes was being interviewed by Novak and (I think) Bill Press. When asked about Kosovo he- in his usual eloquence- denounced the entire venture as a fraud and totally not within US interests. Press attacked him violently but Keyes fended him off and Novak supported him. I knew then foreign policy was going to be a divisive issue within the GOP.

I agree with you fully re: the Kosovo war. The administration never made its case for military intervention; in the end, the rationale for attack (atrocities) were substantiated only by a small fraction; when the US intervened, it made a bad situation infinitely worse (refugee problem, as you say); the US air attacks simply did not accomplish the policy goals, as the Serb forces succeed in hiding their assets and so we were bombing handcarts instead of tanks; the end-game ended comically, with the Russians occupying the Pristina airport ahead of US-Brit troops; and, as you say, the result is the creation of a Muslim protectorate where our enemies can gather an plot unhindered. THAT's a successful war effort?

> I knew then foreign policy was going to be a divisive issue within the GOP.

One of the most pernicious effects of the cold war was that it coopted the conservative movement into the liberal/globalist foreign policy sphere. We came to worship the military and saw wars as glorious, righteous crusades rather than a bloodthirsty expansion of empire. We were transformed from loving freedom to loving the state, from being skeptics of government to docile and obedient sheep. It is now to the point where we welcome global government as long as the US runs it and not the UN. Unfortunately the current expansion has a very good cover story. Remember the policy paper laying out the conquest of the mid east put out by the neocons sometime before 9/11? Project for the New American Century I think authored it. They said they could only get the public on board if we suffered a Pearl Harbor like attack. It sounded like wishful thinking. Well they got their wish and now the rest of us have to live with the consequences of their "creative destruction" schemes. It should have been named Project for a New American Cemetery.

Speaking of devisive issues did you see my thread The War Party's Enablers: all of us posted yesterday? Boy that one hit a lot of raw nerves.