SI
SI
discoversearch

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (153155)10/10/2002 10:39:50 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1584914
 
Joe, I supported it because the reports claiming that the Serbs were committing genocide.....forcing people off their land and into camps.

How disingenuous. You are totally political.



To: tejek who wrote (153155)10/11/2002 3:21:30 AM
From: Joe NYC  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1584914
 
Ted,

I supported it because the reports claiming that the Serbs were committing genocide.....forcing people off their land and into camps.

Reports that were never proven true. They never found the 100,000 dead. It was all propaganda, that started days AFTER the bombing started. A similar propaganda is under way now, at least it is BEFORE the war starts (if it does).

If you think that the US is right to go to war as a response to every civil war with casualties (exaggerated into ethnic cleansing / genecide, as needed by the propaganda machine), than you have seen nothing yet, as far as US interventions would need to be concerned. Are we now supposed to invade Zimbabwe, South Africa, from where similar reports are coming out as from Yugoslavia? And that's just scratching the surface.

How about this from today:

-----------------------------------------------------------
Death Reports Emerge in Ivory Coast
Thu Oct 10, 7:46 PM ET
By ALEXANDRA ZAVIS, Associated Press Writer

BOUAKE, Ivory Coast (AP) - The killers were young and armed, bearing guns, machetes and clubs. They roamed the streets of Ivory Coast's second city, chasing victims. Some, they burned alive.

Frightened residents of Bouake — fleeing by the thousands during a lull in fighting that has raged for days — spoke Thursday of how the three-week-old rebellion let loose deadly ethnic rivalries in the this rebel-held, central city of 500,000...

...Aid workers estimate that approximately 150,000 Bouake residents have been displaced by the uprising — the once-stable West African country's bloodiest ever.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Invade Ivory Cost now? How about sorting things out in Kashmir, Northern Ireland, Tibet. Should we attack China? How about attacking Russia over Chechnya. It fits the Yugoslavia profile perfectly: A nation, currently friendly with the US (Russia) sorting things out with domestic separatists/terrorists. How about calling in Albright from retirement to give Russia an ultimatum, that they need to let Chechnyans / Al Qaeda roam free, terrorize Russians inside Chechnya, and even inside Russia, and if Russia does not comply, NATO will start bombing (without Congressional debate, without Congressional approval, without UN approval), just like that, in the middle of night. How about taking out all the bridges on Volga river from Moscow all the way to Caspian Sea? That should be a worthy start of the war?

Just days ago, you were upset (wrongly) about Bush not seeking Congressional approval. How about this:

-----------------------------------------------------------
Washington Journal: Clinton To Ask Congress For Kosovo Resolution
By Frank T. Csongos

Washington, 12 April 1999 (RFE/RL) -- U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen says President Bill Clinton will seek a Gulf War-type resolution from Congress in support of NATO's military campaign against Yugoslavia.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Doh! Almost a month into bombing, and Cohen says Clintonn WILL seek Congressional support.

One by one, your points, your newly found principles are melting away. What is left is one overriding principle: If it is a Democratic president, everything is allowed, if it is a Republican president, actions that were ok for a Democrat President are suddenly an outrage. Meaning, everything you are posting here is pure partisanship, without any rhyme and reason. If making point A fits partisan propaganda today, use it, if the opposite of A fits tomorrow, no problem. Opposite of A is it for the day.

I am looking forward to hearing your explanation on how Clinton is allowed to start war without Congressional approval, while you requested one from Bush.

Also, after your need for UN approval of US wars went up in flames, you may want to let me know your revised opinion.

BTW, if you are interested, my opinion is that President should ask for Congressional approval for starting wars, and shouldn't start wars without it. President, if he feels like, can ask for UN approval, but a lack of UN approval should not stop him from acting.

Joe



To: tejek who wrote (153155)10/11/2002 3:57:27 AM
From: Joe NYC  Respond to of 1584914
 
Ted,

I am having fun with this. It turns out that there was a resolution that would authorize use of air force for bombing of Yugoslavia. Clinton did not wait until the resolution is passed and started bombing without Congressional approval.

When the resolution got to the vote of the full House IT FAILED. Congress had it's say, the resolution was not approved. This means, as far as the US system political system is concern, further action was illegal. Yet, Clinton administration defied Congress and continued. It seems like another case for impeachment.

House Resolution 151, 106th Congress: thomas.loc.gov@@@X

So let's put together a chronology of events:
03/23/99 Senate concurent resolution 21 authorising air operation passes (meaningless without House)
03/24/99 NATO launches airstrikes (without approval of US Congress or UN Security Council)
04/28/99 a month into a war, House votes on the same resolution as Senate, vote is tied, and resolution fails. War is not authorized by Congress
05/04/99 Another week of the illegal war passes. John McCain's resolution authorizing full use of force - not only air (which failed earlier) but ground - comes up for for vote in the Senate. Motion to table (meaning not to even consider it) passes 78-22, meaning Congress again did not grant permission to president to use force. Senate Joint resolution 20: thomas.loc.gov@@@X
05/05/99 President defies Congress and continues bombing.

Joe



To: tejek who wrote (153155)10/11/2002 1:05:03 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1584914
 
Ted, <I supported it because the reports claiming that the Serbs were committing genocide.....>

But Ted. I thought if you gave the Serbs a house, a job, and some hope, they'll become much more reasonable very quickly, no?

Tenchusatsu



To: tejek who wrote (153155)10/12/2002 4:46:45 PM
From: Dan3  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1584914
 
Re: With Iraq, we believe Saddam will commit a crime so we want to take him out a head of time. That's like shooting someone because you think he will kill someone in the future. Its against the law.

Let's take a poll: How many out there think that the present CEO's of the Fortune 500 should be taken out and shot, before they can loot any more companies then run the shell into the ground?

We know where David Ray stands on the issue, if it's good enough for Saddam, it's good enough for Enron's leaders, and their ilk.