Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: KLP who wrote (79265)	3/3/2003 3:39:29 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) of 281500

What were the Teachers Unions positions on the Bosnia "conflict"? I haven't the slightest idea. I gather you raise that question because you think their willingness to take a position on the Iraq invasion is because Bush and not Clinton is in power. My guess is that if they had a position it would have been in favor of doing something. By the time the Clinton folk, finally, did something in Bosnia, the "ethnic cleansing" campaign was well past ugly. So, in my estimation, they were late to act; though one of Clinton's campaign promises was to do something about it. I'm not certain where that gets us, however, in this conversation about the wisdom of teachers unions taking positions on controversial social questions. You may recall, fwiw, that one of the constraints Clinton felt on his ability to do foreign policy, grew from the Somalia stuff. He thought the American public would not stand for American troops to be put in harms way. I suspect he was correct. It may be that 9-11 changed that. Certainly it did for the Afghanistan campaign. What it means for other campaigns, we just have to wait and see. And clearly we will see.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next