Al Re..I bet if I asked you would also say that 58K soldiers died in the Vietnam conflict.
Sure, why not. That one is on you dems though; it took a republican to end it. Didn't you forget Korea, another dem war, with 50,000, and how about WWII with I believe about 400,000 casualties. Now we were attacked by both Germany and Japan, which bought us into WWII, just as we were attacked by the arabs on 9/11; so self defense should normally be a defense, however, you are ignoring the fact that Iraq is part of the war on terror, so maybe you dems should eat the casualties from WWII, just like you are blaming GW for casualties suffered in a war bought on by others.
Bosnia was first and foremost an urgent humanitarian mission, without hidden agendas.
Not according to Brzezinski.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/may1999/stat-m24.shtml
Having consolidated its power in its base in the Western Hemisphere, the US, Brzezinski argues, must make sustained efforts to penetrate the two continents of Europe and Asia.
“America's emergence as the sole global superpower now makes an integrated and comprehensive strategy for Eurasia imperative.”
“After the United States,” Brzezinski writes, “the next six largest economies and military spenders are there, as are all but one of the world's overt nuclear powers, and all but one of the covert ones. Eurasia accounts for 75 percent of the world's population, 60 percent of its GNP, and 75 percent of its energy resources. Collectively, Eurasia's potential power overshadows even America's.
“Eurasia is the world's axial supercontinent. A power that dominated Eurasia would exercise decisive influence over two of the world's three most economically productive regions, Western Europe and East Asia. A glance at the map also suggests that a country dominant in Eurasia would almost automatically control the Middle East and Africa.
“With Eurasia now serving as the decisive geopolitical chessboard, it no longer suffices to fashion one policy for Europe and another for Asia. What happens with the distribution of power on the Eurasian landmass will be of decisive importance to America's global primacy and historical legacy.”
Because he does not expect the US to dominate Eurasia single-handedly, Brzezinski sees American interests being best served by securing a leading role, while facilitating a balance among the major powers favorable to the US. He attaches an important condition: “In volatile Eurasia, the immediate task is to ensure that no state or combination of states gains the ability to expel the United States or even diminish its decisive role.” This situation he describes as a “benign American hegemony.”
Brzezinski sees NATO as the best vehicle to achieve such an outcome. “Unlike America's links with Japan, NATO entrenches American political influence and military power on the Eurasian mainland. With the allied European nations still highly dependent on US protection, any expansion of Europe's political scope is automatically an expansion of US influence. Conversely, the United States' ability to project influence and power relies on close transatlantic ties.
Whats the difference. Different countries, same motives; except that the arabs attacked us first; now we are just returning the favor.
Ethnic killings, millions of refugees, mass graves, Bosnia, Croatia, and spilling into Macedonia, Albania and eventually Greece.
Millions you say. Think again
http://www.radstats.org.uk/no069/article3.htm
An examination of the figures being put forward, which range from 25,000 to 280,000 killed, reveals a vast divergence both in terms of the total number of dead and the proportion of deaths suffered by each ethnic group. Disputes over the numbers of dead on each of the sides continue with the lack of hard evidence, exhibited by the vagueness of the figures and their inconsistency. For example, from late 1992, Bosnian government sources commonly quoted 200,000-250,000 as the number killed in the war, whilst the official Bosnian Institute for Public Health was citing about 140,000, increasing at the rate of about 2,000 a month from April 1993. The names on the electoral registers in many constituencies, whose numbers the rival ethnic groups have sought to maximise, have not been consistent with the numbers of killed and missing also claimed by them. <<<<
Between 150 and 225,000. Why that would just be a good yr for Saddam.
So please don't insult me...there are far worst conflicts in Africa today that result in more casualties in a week...
That would be questionable. Tell me, how many of them have attack us or our allies lately. Why just two days ago Saddam merrily paid another 50,000 to the killers of innocent women and children in Israel. Doesn't that bother you?
when Iraq is a peaceful oasis compared to the Ivory Coast, the Sudan, Malawi?
Now you are describing Iraq as peaceful. Go figure. |
