Well, C...you probably have to read the whole exchange...
I was asking why we were in Bosnia...(knowing full well why...or at least what the Clinton administration told us..)
and wondered what the difference was. Bosnia didn't touch our soil. Bosnia didn't kill any of our citizens. America didn't ask the UN "should we go in and clean it...pretty please, sugar on it, and we will pay you all billions for the privilege of going in and perhaps killing hundreds of our own soldiers... etc) So why are the Americans getting so much heat for protecting ourselves, and many others in the world, including the Iraqis' themselves....
KLP said:....We went in, with troops, no UN decision as to yes or no...the folks in the Balkans had not struck the US nor US citizens, no oil, and people being tortured and killed. Didn't see any peace marches, or anti-war protesters at that time.<i/>
JohnM said: Because there a wide swath of the globe was concerned about the Bosnian situation; because the Clinton folk handled the diplomacy far better; because we were perceived as saving lives, not taking lives; etc.
KLP replied: So that I understand, John....Do I hear you saying that ...
-- "The Bosnian situation and the Iraqi situation" are different as far as the people are concerned...that the Iraqi's deserve to be tortured, raped, and murdered...?
And you think it's a great leap.....It would be funny, if it weren't so sad, and so scary for the world...
Wow K,
What a magnificent leap to arrive at that conclusion.<g> |
