On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:24:34 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:48:09 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:04:18 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 23:24:00 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 02:09:51 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:17:37 -0700, wrote:

Under which presidency was that? Hmmm... GHWB. As I said, it started
as a roll-back from Kuwait.


The no fly zones had nothing to do with rolling back from Kuwait.
It was all about supporting the Northern Alliance.

Huh? I never said they did. Bush I ordered the attack after Kuwait.
That's when it started. But, of course, Bush is a Republican, so it's
ok.


You said it 6 lines up. The no fly zones had nothing to do with
rolling back from Kuwait.

They did. They started after that in August 1992. Bush I was in
office. The second NFZ started in 1996 under Clinton.

You're going to claim that the NFZ had no relationship to the Kuwait
invasion? Take you're head out of the sand.


OK explain the relationship (other than the fact that we had the power
in the region to do it)
There was no direct connection to Kuwait in any way.
To start with the first NFZs were in NORTHERN Iraq. Kuwait is south.

The NFZs were sold to us as humanitarian, saving the Kurds with the
back story that if they could move freely they would topple Saddam.
Where was your head when this story was all over the media?

The NFZs followed the Kuwait roll-back. So, I guess humanitarian goals
aren't valid, according to you anyway. Then, Bush I abandoned the
Shiite in the south. Saddam was contained and he made no further
attempts at regional conquest under Clinton. Then Bush II/Cheney
decided to "finish" the job, and we got a war we didn't need.

I agree we should have simply come home, right after desert storm in
1991. Any further involvement was just going to result in more
involvement.

We did what was appropriate at the time of the UN resolution. Clinton
did as best he could, and he certainly didn't make things worse.

What was the logical conclusion of this operation going to be?
Were we still going to be "flying the box" there 20 years later
enforcing that NFZ and bombing them a few times a week?


According to you..


Perhaps Bosnia was worth it? Or, do you think ethnic cleansing is
ok...

I am not sure we did much more than postpone the next round of ethnic
cleansing. If we really thought we had fixed anything we would come
home but we have just created another Korea where we keep 50,000
troops to keep people who want to kill each other from killing each
other, basically replacing the Soviets who did that for 45 years.

Really? I guess you haven't been keeping up on the current events. Do
a Google search and get back to us.


Enlighten me. Tell me something different. Are you saying the Soviets
didn't tamp down this 500 year feud? Are you saying it didn't start
back up shortly after they left? We did all celebrate their freedom
from communism, until we figured out what they were going to do with
their freedom.

I'm saying that the Bosnian war was successful in stopping the
genocide.

Do you really think they suddenly are going to let bygones be bygones
and forget the feud? As soon as we leave they will be back at it.


According to you, international and all-things expert.


If there was no ongoing threat, why are we still there?

Never said there was "no threat." I said that we're on a peacekeeping
mission. Try again.

"Peacekeeping"? Nice euphemism, ... and what happens when we stop
"keeping peace"?

Exactly what I said will happen. They will start killing each other
again.

According to you. Have you actually looked at who's in Bosnia right
now?

Wow... so many US troops there... it's shocking!

http://www.stripes.com/news/imminent...roatia-1.62196

Keep claiming all your nonsense, but I think you're a bit behind the
times.

It is still a couple thousand guys according to your article which
could not provide the number for Croatia.
I assume they gave this to NATO so we could send the troops to
Afghanistan.

How horrible... we're a successful peacekeeping force. It's a national
disgrace. Call CNN.