Well, well, well, looks like Dean is pro war afterall!

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Maverick74, Jan 15, 2004.

  1. Maverick74



    Bubba Leaks Dean's Bosnia Letter

    January 14, 2004

    The text of Howard Dean's letter to President Clinton on the Bosnia conflict is just shocking. I'd have to guess that Clinton leaked it himself, as part of his continuing effort to derail Howard Dean's campaign to clear the way for Hillary in 2008. Here's text from Dean's words with "Bosnia" and "Yugoslavia" replaced by Iraq, and the phrase "Bosnian Serbs" replaced by Saddam's Sunni Bathists. See how well this now applies to the Kurds and Shiite Muslims of Iraq under Saddam.

    "After long and careful thought, and after several years of watching the gross atrocities committed by the [Sunni Bathists], I have reluctantly concluded that the efforts of the United Nations and NATO in [Iraq] are a complete failure. I think your policy up to this date has been absolutely correct. We must give, and have given, this policy with our allies and with the United Nations every opportunity to work.

    "It is evident, however, that the cost in human lives in allowing this policy to continue is too great. In addition, and perhaps more importantly for the United States, we are now in a position of ignoring, as many did in the 1940s, one of the worst crimes committed in history. If we ignore these behaviors, no matter where they occur, our moral fiber as a people becomes weakened. As the Catholic Church and others lost credibility during the Holocaust for not speaking out, so will the United States lose credibility and our people lose confidence in themselves as moral beings if the United States does not take action."

    Remembering that Dean is talking about Bosnia, read this: "Since it is clearly no longer possible to take action in conjunction with NATO and the United Nations, I have reluctantly concluded that we must take unilateral action." Dean closes with a line that President Bush himself could've spoken about the mass graves filled by Saddam: "Surely, however, Mr. President, as you watch and read about the huge amount of unwarranted human suffering, particularly of children, you would agree that our current course must now be changed." No wonder he doesn't want those gubernatorial records released! Who knows how many of these gross contradictions we'll uncover?

    Read this too.

  2. Pabst


    What a shameless scumbag. I SO hope he gets the nomination. I don't think Dean will carry 5 states.
  3. Pabst


    Hmm. Whes Bung, ART, NVS, and Madison to comment. Looks like your boy is a duplicitous, lying sack of shit.
  4. Maverick74


    Yugoslavia posed absolutely no threat to the United States -- not imminent, not latent, not burgeoning, not now, not then, not ever. (Unless you count all the U.S. highway deaths caused by Yugos.) The president of Yugoslavia, Slobodan Milosevic, never tried to assassinate a U.S. president. He never shook his fist at the Great Satan. He didn't shelter and fund Muslim terrorists -- though the people we were fighting for did.

    In humanitarian terms, Milosevic didn't hold a candle to Saddam Hussein. Milosevic killed a few thousand Albanians in a ground war. Hussein killed well over a million Iranians, Kurds, Kuwaitis and Shias, among others. Milosevic had no rape rooms, no torture rooms, no Odai or Qusai. He didn't even use a wood chipper to dispose of his enemies, the piker.

    And yet NATO, led by Gen. Wesley Clark, staged a pre-emptive attack on Yugoslavia.

    Under Clark's command, the U.S. bombed the Chinese embassy by mistake, killing three Chinese journalists. Other NATO air strikes under Clark mistakenly damaged the Swiss, Spanish, Swedish, Norwegian and Hungarian ambassadors' residences. Despite the absence of ground troops, Yugoslavia took three American POWs, whose release was eventually brokered by Jesse Jackson. America was standing tall.

    At the end of major combat operations led by NATO Supreme Allied Commander Gen. Wesley Clark, arch-villain Slobodan Milosevic was still in power. (At least Clark won't have to worry about any embarrassing "mission accomplished" photo-ops coming back to haunt him.) Today, almost a decade and $15 billion later, U.S. troops are still bogged down in the Balkans. No quagmire there!
  5. Yugoslavia was a humanitarian effort from day one.

    No talk of Weapons of mass destruction, no talk of terrorism, no hidden agenda of oil.

    Bush could have made a case on the basis of humanitarian efforts....if that were his prime goal and directive. Had Bush made a case for humanitarian efforts from the beginning, who would be complaining now?

    Had his case been enough to convince Americans on the merit of that argument, he would not have the critics today that he has.

    However, humanitarian efforts were not his motive. It was not, it is not. It is just an end justifies the means argument and spin.

    Bush had never shown any great concern for humanity outside of his own immediate family or cronies. The man was simply not interested in humanity abroad.

    To believe that he is suddenly a great humanitarian is lacking foundation and precedent.

    It is now his primary lip service directive, as we lack evidence that we were in danger from WMD or that Iraq and Saddam were sponsoring terrorist that threatened the USA.
  6. Maverick74


    Milosevic killed a few thousand Albanians in a ground war and that warranted the United States to take unilateral action and launch a pre-emptive attack on Yugoslavia? Are you out of your mind? And this was a humanitarian mission? So hells bells margaret, why are we not launching pre-emptive attacks on over 40 different countries right now?