Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices 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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: brian1501 who wrote (194675)	7/16/2004 2:11:19 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) of 1577740

No, we had commitments under an alliance that we were fulfilling. BS. We had absolutely no obligation to participate in armed action. Here is NATO article 4: Article 4 The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened. We were obligated to "consult". Not to fight. Article 5 would obligate us to fight, but that requires an armed attack on a member first. Let me get this straight........you think that when NATO decided to attack Serbia, that the American troops under NATO should have consulted with NATO but not gone to war. But instead, Clinton allowed those troops to be committed to fighting under NATO and by doing that, he was doing the very same thing as Bush......making a pre emptive strike. Is that right? Basically we consulted and agreed to help them on Bosnia. We also consulted on Iraq and they decided to screw us. Some friends. The original discussion was about Serbia and Kosovo, not Bosnia. In the first consultation, there was agreement that Serbia was committing atrocities in Kosovo and something needed to be done........Clinton agreed and NATO attacked. In the second consultation, Bush was upset that it have never been proven conclusively that Iraq was without WMDs. Bush and the allies conferred. The allies wanted to let the weapon inspectors finish their job before deciding what to do. Bush couldn't wait......unclear why......pants on fire...that sort of thing. Bush attacked; allies refused to join in. I don't see the similarity other than one could consider the NATO attack on Serbia was pre emptive because Serbia hadn't attacked NATO members. But there was no question that Serbia was abusing its neighbors and was out of control just like Iraq was in 1990 when Bush I attacked. This distinction between Kosovo and Iraq in 2003 is a very important one. Its the distinction that makes Bush and his policies reprehensible. Its what has pitted the world against us. Its what's dividing the country. I got you to admit about a year ago that there was no basis for the Bosnia conflict. Now you're spouting about it again. I hope you don't make me go searching for that post <g>. Again, we were talking about Serbia and Kosovo. ted Brian

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next