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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (538497)	2/11/2004 11:14:34 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769669

I already did answer him. Here it is: "Bill, it's kind of hard to answer your question. First the bombing in Kosovo wasn't the waging of a "preemptive war." A "preemtive war" is a war caused by the knowledge that you are about to be attacked. Clinton never claimed that we were about to be attacked by the Serbs, did he? Second, Clinton was not a "certified draft dodger." He was anti-Vietnam war; a position that history has shown as revealing good judgement. He avoided service legally, but so did many others. It doesn't make him a good man or a bad one, any more than Bush's, Cheney's or any of the other's decisions to avoid serving in the active military makes them good or a bad men. Third, I've never seen any evidence that Clinton "loathed the military." You confuse loathing of the military with loathing of this country becoming involved in military actions that are terribly misguided and that result in needless cruelty and death. We should all "loath" such involvements. Fourth, Clinton involved our troops in such a way that the risk of life was minimal for them. I like that a lot. Fifth, the question of when and where America should become involved in a conflict that does not involve our economic or security interests directly,and can only be characterized as the use of force for humanitarian purposes, is a tough one. In the Balkan conflict the risk of American life was low, the loss of innocent life on the ground was reported to be high, the intervention stood a realistic chance of being successful and we had an easy way out that would have left no one much worse off. The biggest key, however is that in retrospect, it worked out pretty well for those people, for us and for Europe. That shows that he exercised good judgement. It's hard to take serious issue with that. That's what I think. What do you think?" You're welcome....