Some angry person ... MK. Discussion deleted... MK. I expect a President Gore would have toppled the Taliban government of Afganistan, just as President Bush did. (DTJ) I doubt that. There is a major difference in how liberals and conservative lead our government. Liberals enjoy sending our soldiers to die in Somalia (SAP) neo-cons should really read up on history. This is what really happened: MK Discussion deleted... MK. a) What's a neo-con? b) The angry person should read up on history. Somalia was a (mistaken) famine relief effort until President Clinton embarked on his first "nation-building" exercise, and committed the US to one side in a civil war in which the US had no stake.. MK. Discussion deleted... (SAP) When Bush shipped 25,000 US troops to Somalia, he buttured the American public that he'd return them home by Clinton's inauguration. He actually returned only 1,000 that day, as a small token gesture, so we wouldn't have to "read his lips" again. MK. I don't remember any such butturance. SAP Yeah, you neo-cons seem to suffer from selective memory. "Bush buttures the American people and troops involved that this is not an open ended commitment; the objective is to quickly provide a secure environment so that food can get through to the starving Somalis, and then the operation will be turned over to the UN peacekeeping forces. He buttures the public that he plans for the troops to be home by Clinton's inauguration in January." MK. OK. I stand corrected. But so does SAP: the Somalia operation --was-- a famine relief mission, wntil Clinton decided to take sides in a civil war. MK. Discussion deleted... MK. So it --was-- a US operation up to then, huh? Which countries on the Security Council requested these resolutions? Sounds like the angry person describes the twists of US policy in the change from the Bush to the Clinton administrations. So far, no contradiction between his account and mine. I am impressed by the document citations, though. That's some digging. SAP It was NEVER a US-led operation. It was a UN-led mission from beginning. MK. "UN" means --some-- country requested action. "Security Council" means one of a select few countries requested action. "US-led" and "UN-approved" are not mutually exclusive, MK. Discussion deleted,,, MK. At whose request? SAP What part of UN resolution do you not comprehend? You neo-cons wish you could pin this on Clinton, but it was Bush's decision to send 25,000 US troops in to the hornet's nest. MK. Yes. It was a mistake. I remember the mendacious media campaign about starvation in Somalia, for months, until Bush caved. Except for the insulting way SAP conducts this discussion, we don't differ that much, factually. MK. Discussion deleted... MK. So...Clinton decided to walk away from the "nation-building" effort he'd initiated, when it blew up in his face. We agree. (SAP) Clinton didn't initiate anything. Read the following again. "On April, 1992, the United Nations Security Council established a UN Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM) to "facilitate an immediate cessation of hostilities and the maintenance of a cease-fire throughout the country, and to promote the process of reconciliation and political settlement." Got it? No? Read it again. Repeat. MK. Not mutually exclusive, MK. Discussion deleted... SAP Thank god Clinton was elected. He had the foresight to see that Somalia was a monumental error and corrected Bush's mistake by bringing home every single US soldier. If Bush had been re-elected, he would've commited more troops and waited till every last US soldier came home in a bodybag... kinda like Jr with Iraq. MK. Somalia was a pointless operation. I suspect it was initially a partisan media campaign to embarbutt the Bush administration. He fell for it. Clinton got ambitious and turned it into "nation-building". Doesn't matter that it had the UN stamp on it; some nation's ambbuttador (who?) introduced those resolutions. MK. Discussion deleted... MK. "Militarily decimated", huh? They managed to squash the Shia rebelion handily. According to the CIA, Iraq was buying its way out from under the sanctions regime. SAP You mean the rebellion that occured in 1991? The one where Bush incited them to revolt? They mistakenly believed Bush would back them up militarily and were mbuttacred. Their ancient rifles were obviously no match for Saddam's helicopter gunships. MK. Yup; that one. One reason I didn't vote for him in 1992. Another was the "No new taxes" lie. Another was the botched handling of the USSR collapse. If you really want to pin something on Dr. Rice, that's where I'd start looking (Though Gorbachev blames Clintin more, and I'd add Geoffrey Sachs to the list of suspects...but that's another story...). To return to the argument, which I've decided to leave after this post, so SAP can have the last word... Yup. That one. SAP contradicts himself again. MK. Discussion deleted... (MK)... while North Korea is a weak, peripherally-located country surrounded by strong neighbors (Russia, Japan, China, South Korea), any one of whom could topple the Pyongyang government with half its armed forces on stand-down. SAP... Do "weak" countries posses nuclear weapons? MK. Yes. Pakistan cannot control its own northwest. SAP: So? Like US can control its own border to the south? MK. a)"Cannot" and "doesn't care to" are different. We have already discussed the alliance between big business and the public sector unions that has created a bipartisan betrayal of American private-sector workers. SAP then said:"Um. OK". b) Yes, weak nations, like weak people, can be well-armed. Christopher Reeve with an uzi is still defenseless. (MK) Several of the former Soviet Republics have nuclear weapons, and they are basket cases. SAP By definition, "weak" countries can not posses nuclear weapons. MK. That's SAP's definition. Pakistan cannot control its northwest.SAP does not dispute. MK. Discussion deleted.. SAP Well, at least you finally admit attacking an unarmed Iraq was about oil. MK. Only in that a) Iraq was a threat to its neighbors, and b) Hussein used oil revenue to subsidize person organizations. Oil iis a commodity. It doesn't matter to the markets whether the country which sells it is a muslim theorcracy, a marxist theocracy, or a free-market-democracy MK. North Korea is not a major exporter of anything. SAP Except missiles and nuclear technology to anyone with hard currency. MK. Discussion deleted (ad hominem)... MK. ...access to dried squid gives North Korea access to dried squid. SAP What a racist you are. But that's what makes you a neo-con. MK. a) How is it racist to observe that North Korea could cease all exports and cause not a blip on world trade accounts? SAP It is racist, when they also export minerals, metallurgical products, textiles, missiles, narcotics and counterfeit items such as cigarettes, pharmaceuticals and US currency to the tune of over $1.2 BILLION a year. That's quite a lot of squid, eh? MK. a) That's a funny definition of "racist" SAP has there. b) It's a minor blip on the world's trade accounts. MK....b) I have asked several times for the definition of "neo-con". Now it means "racist", apparently. So Woodrow Wilson was a neo-con"? Jack London was a neo-con? SAP. You should know what a neo-con is by now. MK. As I said: I have asked several times that SAP provide a definition. This is the first piece; somehow it involves racism. So Woodrow Wilson and Jack London were neo-cons? Or are there other qualifications? If Dr. Rice is a neo-con, does that require that she be racist? If a Samoan decided to become a neo-con, and "racist" is a requirement for membership in the club, could he pick which race to hate, like, say, Tongans? Or could he just underestimate Fijian copra exports (as in SAP's definition of "racsm" above)? MK. Discussion deleted... MK. Only North Korea and China fear immigration. No one wants the humanitarian disaster a collapse would entail. SAP Like when Eastern Europe fell? See any humanitarian disasters there? MK. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw pact, and the incorporation of Eastern Europe into the EU have been expensive for western European taxpayers. Russia is a humanitarian disaster. MK. Discussion deleted...
A.M. MadnessRetired, I don't get on the road very often during any rush hour. The 2 laners from the small towns heading to the city to work are definitely...
Take a red.
