Muscatine

Senate probe blames top Bush officials for detainee abuses

Posted in: Muscatine
  • Stock
  • chosen
  • Neighbor
  • Iceland, IA
  • 1625 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Neighbor

I challenge all to take the time.

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6423.htm

 

History class 101 for dave to catch up:

Based on UN Security Council resolution 1031, NATO was given the mandate to implement the military aspects of the Peace Agreement. A NATO-led multinational force, called the Implementation Force (IFOR), started its mission on 20 December 1995. IFOR was given a one-year mandate.
Its primary mission was to implement  the Military Aspects of the Peace Agreement. It accomplished its principal military tasks by causing and maintaining the cessation of hostilities; separating the armed forces of the Bosniac - Bosnian Croat Entity (the Federation) and the Bosnian - Serb Entity(the Republika Srpska) by mid-January 1996; transferring areasbetween the two Entities by mid March; and, finally, moving the Parties' forces and heavy weapons into approved sites, which was realised by the end of June. For the remainder of the year IFOR continued to patrol along the 1,400 km long de-militarised Inter-Entity Boundary Line (IEBL) and regularly inspected over 800 sites containing heavy weapons and other equipment.

Who were also members of the UN? The US.

Who sent US troops to make up the multinational force? Clinton.

What was the mission? To enter Bosmia (uninvited) (Dave's definition would call that "invade".); to cause the cesssation of hostilities (war) Between Bosnia and Serbs; separating the armed forces (I think Dave would call that conquer and divide); to transfer areas (take geographic control-again uninvited); move the conquered forces and heavy waepons to approved sites; and continue patrol and inspections.

Now if that is not invading and conquering under dave's definition; I don't know what is.

So, Clinton sent troops to be used by NATO to invade countries that did nothing to us (under dave's definition). So what was the threat? Seems the threats the democrats listed when Clinton was in office for Iraq far outweigh any threats to the US by Bosnia!

Bosnia did nothing to us. Shall I say it slow like you???? get it now? Class over!


Clearly not my definition of an invasion or the definition that has been presented here. Nowhere in your post did the UN or the U.S. use the word conquer. This is why in my definition the word conquer is in bold print. The U.S. had no vested interest in conquering Bosnia or the Serbs. They responded to a call of help, which is a far cry from a unwelcome invasion of a 3rd world country in the false name of terror.

Call it what you will gentlemen, America now knows the truth. Bush will go down in history as the worst of all time. History will tell that story. It is my hope he escapes prosecution.

Thanks, it's been fun.

Chosen

  • Avatar
  • darylmaxen
  • Respected Neighbor
  • Muscatine
  • 982 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Respected Neighbor

Chosied has been the valedictorian of the Blagojevich School of Applied Logic.  Countless denials of facts, an ambivalence to truth in any form, sidestepping by the mile, faulty  predictions, and when he's done talking, people shake their heads and ask, "What did he just say?"

New classes will be starting in Washington in a few weeks.  Space is limited. 

  • Avatar
  • gta1
  • Neighbor
  • USA
  • 1581 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Neighbor

So trrue DM,

Big bro left a link i went to it, tons of good stuff quotes from dems about the weapons of mass destruction back in 98. quotes from the clintons, kerry, kennedy, gore, pelosi, and many others, then it goes onto show the context from which the quote came.

So if bush lied about wmd's it was because the dems were lying about it in '98

here is the link again that big bro left several replies back.......

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

So now davie says an invasion of another country is not an invasion. That was just one example of Clinton invading another country. There are more.

Like: In September 1994, U.S. troops invaded Haiti under the auspices of restoring democracy, human rights and the rule of law. At the time, the Clinton-conceived operation was hailed by leftists as a model of liberal interventionism, as former Catholic priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide was restored to power and an oppressive military regime was ousted. (Invade and conquer- who's definition? Haiti did nothing to us.)

Clinton invaded Somalia in 1993 (you remember Blackhawk Down?) and bombed an aspirin factory in Sudan. (They did nothing to us.) (Is that written slow enough?) (Not even one broken UN sanction.) (Somalia did nothing to us.)

Yugoslavia in 1999 without UN concurrence. (Clinton's policy was "multilaterally when we can-unilaterally when we must".) (Yugo did nothing to us.)

On and on and on. I guess one need only ask the citizens of those countries if THEY thought they had been invaded by the US without cause? Obviously NOT the first time in U.S. history.

Viet Nam and Korea were both undeclared wars with US democrat presidents sending troops (invading) without those countries doing anything to the US. It's striking how dave's analogy of what took place in Iraq equals all these other examples.

Advertise Here!

Promote Your Business or Product for $10/mo

istockphoto_2518034-hot-pizza.jpg

For just $10/mo you can promote your business or product directly to nearby residents. Buy 12 months and save 50%!

Buynow