No one has ever given a satisfactory answer for this question. How can intervention in the Balkans be right, and intervention in Iraq be wrong?
Slobodan Milosovic was a problem to his country only. Yes, in spite of the factions, Yugoslavia was a single country. It was forced together by outsiders who didn't understand the region, you say? You mean like Iraq was created by the British, with Kurds, Sunnis and Shi'ites forced together without any thought given for the consequences?
Europe was unable to clean up the mess in the Balkans and innocent people were being slaughtered, you say. The UN was unable to clean up Saddam's mess and have you read the accounts of the mass graves in Iraq?
The world supported us in the Balkans, you say? Really? Russia opposed us. Western Europe had no intention of doing anything until we took the lead.
We are getting into a quagmire in Iraq. The last time I looked we were still in the Balkans, too. Of course you might say that we didn't have to commit to a land invasion of the Balkans. That is true. We bombed the country from 15,000 feet and killed more civilians than Serb troops. Is that supposed to be better?
The war in Iraq is helping the terrorists who oppose us. Excuse me, the war in the Balkans put us squarely on the side of the Kosovo Liberation Army. It is a radical Muslim Army that is funded by Al Qaeda.
Other than the Balkans being Bill Clinton's idea and Iraq being George W. Bush's idea, I am at a loss to find a SIGNIFICANT difference. Oh yeah, for some of you, that is the only difference that matters.
6 comments:
The similarities between Kosovo and Iraq are amazing. Except for WHICH PRESIDENT was in office when the US went in, they are virtually identical situations. Not that the democrats wish to make the connection, mind you. Then again, the democrats have ALWAYS had problems "connecting the dots."
Great commentary, and you pose a question the liberals and anti-Bush crowd cannot answer.
Let's compare about 5,000 of our troops in the Balkans to the number of troops we have in Iraq, right now.
There are differences you know--first off--the Balkans was a NATO mission. Big difference.
There is also another difference, here--when the mission was completed, the MAJORITY of our troops got out, and left the cleanup to a sizeable number of NATO troops, plus Russian troops, who decided to climb aboard after all. That hasn't happened in Iraq, yet.
No comparison.
The Balkans war wasn't about winning, it was all about keeping Slobodan Milosovic from winning his war, and we been in Balkans for over 8 years now.
The war in Iraq is different; it’s all about winning the war and overthrowing Saddam’s government and turning Iraq into a free country with her people electing her own government. That’s the big difference between the two.
Well, to me, the difference you mentioned is the only good one I can come up with..The anti-Bush people would hate if he does anything, it has to make him a criminal, some say war criminal just like Milosivec, but the fact that AlQaeda is now supporting the Muslims in that area, well to Clinton lovers..That's ok..to me, it's not.
Well, to me, the difference you mentioned is the only good one I can come up with..The anti-Bush people would hate if he does anything, it has to make him a criminal, some say war criminal just like Milosivec, but the fact that AlQaeda is now supporting the Muslims in that area, well to Clinton lovers..That's ok..to me, it's not.
Post a Comment