To: tejek who wrote (153169 ) 10/14/2002 5:48:33 PM From: Joe NYC Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1584989 Ted,The problems in Yugoslavia threatened to spill out to other parts of Europe, effecting the stability of our allies. You are joking, right? Exactly which allies of US were threatened?Duh! He wasn't asking for a declaration of war. Why? Because Nato is not a substate of the US. Its an independent body that can proceed on its volition. If US dictated Nato policies, why would Rumsfield bother to petition them for support? This is getting more and more bizarre. Flying thousands, or even 10s of thousands of sorties, destroying infrastructure of a medium sized country is not a war? Because NATO was involved, it was not a war?When Clinton was president, people were not angry and demonstrating in the streets when he sought that resolution from Congress. Why is that? Why did he have the support of the American people and Bush doesn't? Why did they trust him to do the right thing but they don't trust Bush? I see you are continuing to make things up as you go. The bombing started without any debate, and until the very end, it was not clear if the threat of bombing was a bluff or a real policy. The administration started to explain things when the bombing was in progress. There was no prior consultation of either the public or congress. As far as support or no support, here is a Gallup survey: Do you favor or oppose the United States being a part of the military action in Yugoslavia? Date Favor Oppose No opinion May 2 58% 36% 6% March 30-31 53% 41% 6% Feb. 19-21 43% 45% 12% Do you favor or oppose sending U.S. ground troops along with troops from other NATO countries to serve in a combat situation in the region? Favor 40% Oppose 55% No opinion 5% By the way, you are doing the great playing the Black Knight in Monty Pythoon in this argument. Joe