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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (42534)	4/16/1999 5:46:00 AM
From: JBL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

An interesting article from one of the rags I sometime quote.... LESSONS OF KOSOVO The New York Times April 16, 1999 A. M. Rosenthal The way adults of any intelligence can find out how well they are dealing with a crisis, personal or national, is to ask themselves two questions. Would we do the same things again if we had the chance? If not, what do we now do to get out of this mess? So: Would the U.S. again decide that to help Kosovo's Albanians we would give Slobodan Milosevic what he wanted most -- the cover to drive a million of them into foreign exile or become displaced persons at home, wandering their roads in terror? Would we spray bombs at a dictator without it occurring to our leaders he would immediately drive out or slaughter the people we were supposed to save? (Were our leaders fools? Yes.) Would the U.S. President again decide that before going to war, he would guarantee not to send ground troops, so Milosevic need not get all worried? Would we again bombbombbomb the capital of the Serbs, who thought of themselves as far more our friends than his? So far this has produced three major results: humiliating Serbs forever, turning friendship into enmity, and persuading many to rally around a man they detest and fear. Would we be roaming around again with a diplomatic begging cup asking Russia, the same addled country that we pity, or any other country that will answer the phone, to find a way out for us? Would we again allow Washington to weaken the world's human rights movements by arousing fears that they will one day mean more bombbomb assignments for America? Would we allow ourselves to forget about those people we could indeed help, not with war, but with economic and political pressures against their tormentors? While we are stuck in the bloody mud of the Balkans, about 35 million other victims of despotism are in exile or tormented at home, victims of dictatorships we enrich. While dictators persecute and kill Chinese and Sudanese Christians, Tibetan Buddhists and Muslim Kurds, it must be admitted that President Clinton and U.S. business executives are at worship. See them -- kneeling at China's feet as they pray to the gods of the Politburo for trade profits. Because we cannot help every suffering group, would we again make a mockery of America's human rights promises by remembering them in Europe but not paying much attention to the persecuted of Africa and Asia? As former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger said on ABC: "At the back of my head I have to ask whether some of this isn't racist. I really mean that." So, we would not deal with Kosovo the same way again. But nobody will hand us a second chance free. The price is acknowledging that the war is a fiasco for America, for Kosovo's Albanians and for Serbs who risked their own lives for freedom. Then we could choose. We could send in troops after all. We could begin a new Balkan war and watch with interest how far it spreads. Or, I urge, we can call for a cease-fire. Say, two weeks to do something more useful than handing Milosevic another ultimatum to get up and get out or Secretary Albright will smack him good. He will have to give up his dream of killing or expelling all Kosovars, just when we were helping him fulfill it. When the Kosovo war is over, we will see how briefly the Serbian freedom movement will remain extinguished. During the cease-fire, an agreement might be worked out that all refugees return to a self-governing Kosovo that remains part of Serbia -- unless the current or future government of Yugoslavia is smart enough to accept a partition that would give it areas and sites holy to Serbs. No, Milosevic will not accept a "NATO-led" protection force for Kosovo so dear to NATO bureaucrats. Remember? NATO has not won the war. But countries inside and outside NATO could do the job -- including Russia -- perhaps patrolling with some small Serbian police units. Otherwise, the Kosovo Liberation Army would operate without hobble and might continue some of the expulsions Serbs have experienced -- like the 300,000 Serbs purged from Croatia by the dictator Franjo Tudjman. Maybe the people of Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania etc. will find better solutions some decade. Meantime, the U.S. should not keep hanging around the Balkans with an occupation force, on the ground or in the air.

To: Neocon who wrote (42534)	4/16/1999 10:30:00 AM
From: John Lacelle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Neocon, Was "A Canticle for Liebowitz" the story of the guy who had archived some LP records and a sound system and would bring it out on special occasions to play an orchestra piece for his friends? If so, I think of that often. I was just wondering last night how I might save my CD collection of classical music, and of course my favorite Keiko Matsui CD "Full Moon and the Shrine". She is the greatest... :*) I imagine that after a nuclear holocaust, music might be one of the few luxuries left. -John