Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (79352)	3/3/2003 10:35:11 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The perceptions of the Clinton administration actions in Bosnia were grounded in a global perception that something was wrong and needed fixing ...whereas in Iraq, the global perception was that the United States was already on the hook to handle all unpleasant eventualities, at no cost to any other country. (Except Iraq, which doesn't count.) So the news that the US intended to get off the hook by changing the regime was most unwelcome all around.

To: JohnM who wrote (79352)	3/3/2003 11:17:20 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

No, Karen. I'm talking about perceptions. The perceptions of the Clinton administration actions in Bosnia were grounded in a global perception that something was wrong and needed fixing; in the perception that action would save lives, not take lives; and in the reality that the Clinton administration simply handled all the diplomatic stuff much better, on this issue, than the Bush administration has done on Iraq. John, the perceptions you speak of were mostly driven by those in the "Big Industrial Media". If the same pressure were applied to "seek a U.N. resolution", Clinton would have looked far worse then Bush does today. Fortunately for Clinton, those on the right never had any respect for the U.N. to make much of an issue of it. There can be little doubt we (as Americans), have far more reasons to take out Hussein then we did Molosivic. Granted, Milosovic was dangerous and evil, but on a scale of 1-10, Milosovic would get about a four, while Hussein would get an eight. He was certainly no direct, or indirect threat to America the way Hussien is. We killed hundreds (perhaps thousands), of civilians with our bombs over Kosovo, but those were D bombs so it didn't matter as much to the peace-niks. Consider for a moment how an errant bomb dropped on the Chinese embassy would be viewed by the anti-Bush crusaders of today? I shudder to think what it would do to our war effort...