Replies

If you'll recall, we were thinking upwards of 7,000 people died in the WTC attacks - figure you'll be using the same line of argument you're using here in that case any time soon?

As better information became available, the number was revised down - just as happened in Kosovo.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp? You comment to Destro that you're afraid of being 'lefted', but you've climbed into bed with the Serbian Socialist Party and all it's associated scum on this one.

Think about it.

In the meantime, if you wish to pursue this, either find a quote supporting what the original article on this thread puts forth, or acknowledge the author is misrepresenting the facts.

And try to make that an original quote - not something you dredge up from the World Socialist Web Site or some other such nonsense, Ok?

"If you'll recall, we were thinking upwards of 7,000 people died in the WTC attacks - figure you'll be using the same line of argument you're using here in that case any time soon?"

Initial estimates were much higher than that. But there is a big difference. We knew an unjust atrocity had occurred in the WTC attacks. We could see it. The attack was never in question, the unjustness was never in question, only the body count. And it was quickly revised downward as information came available. That it was lower than what any reasonable man would have guessed was great and indicative of some divine protection still afforded us.

In the serbia situation we were relying on the politicians who were telling us that "genocide" was occuring. "100,000 missing and may have been murdered". That indeed made the Serbian Socialist party look like scum.

But what if the Socialists were fighting against Islamic terrorists? Which is what they claimed. A couple of thousand killed in battle could be completely explainable as deaths in a just war against terrorists.

you've climbed into bed with the Serbian Socialist Party and all it's associated scum on this one.

I'm not fond of socialists. Socialism is a failed economic model and is stupid. I am less fond of dictated socialism like the Soviets as opposed to democratic socialism like the French. It's still a stupid model but the people chose it.

But I'm not sure that the Serbian socialists were murderers instead of defenders. We know there are elements in Islam that are murderous, terrorist and expansionary. Which of the two, the Socialist or the Islamists, were more evil? I don't know.

Find a quote.

One of the links I posted last quoted Secretary of State Cohen as saying "100,000 missing and may have been murdered". The facts are pretty clear, from both the Times article and the Boston Globe as well as the other links. They led us to believe a huge massacre had occurred, when it hadn't.

Just in case I wasn't clear. The point being that if "mass genocide" was occuring, then the Socialist's position is unquestionably "unjust".

However, it turns out to be a couple of thousand and that can possibly be explained by a "just" war against terrorists.

So that put's us in the position that the NATO and Clinton polititians clearly exaggerated and possibly outright lied. Which means we have to consider the possiblitiy that the Socialist's were in fact telling the truth.

It may be that the socialists were lying and are guilty of murder and war crimes although not as large as our politicians led us to believe. It may also be that the Socialists are guilty only of being socialists and not of war crimes.