I have been disgusted with Clinton for a very long time, and many of my postings have ripped him up one side and down the other. I have called him all sorts of things: the phrase "lying pygmy" comes to mind.

But I also think that some contributors to this forum in their Clinton-hating have gone way off the deep end, to the point where they believe everything he ever can do must be wrong, no matter what it is.

I stumbled across an old posting this morning which blamed him, among other things, for bombing "the sovereign nation of Serbia". We should have bombed Serbia years ago, over Bosnia, in response to the murder gangs which that little Hitler wanna-be set loose. Mass rapes as a war weapon. Come, you people, is that the side you want to be on?

-- Peter Errington (petere@ricochet.net), September 28, 1999

Answers

There is no question wrongs took place there. If we are going to bomb every country where human rights are violated and wrongs take place, then be ready to bomb half the world. Africa comes to mind. Why not drop the big one on them? Or China, if you want to pick on someone your own size? The bombing would never stop.

-- y2khippo (y2khippo@yahoo.com), September 28, 1999.

Question: Why did clinton destroy Serbia?

Answer: Because he could and do it from a distance while still loathing the military....and to divert media attention away from selling nuclear weapon design secrets to the communist red chinese for campaign contributions. Some times known as treason BTW.

-- Weezing Geezer (weezing_geezer@old.org), September 28, 1999.

Thanks Geezer. Not much more to add to THAT. Except perhaps:

worm.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), September 28, 1999.

In no way am I attempting to justify the atrocities in Bosnia, but a look at recent history (50 years) will provide some input as to why the Serbs are engaged in a little payback. A deeper look (600 years) will convince you that no amount of outside intervention will impact the deep-seeded hatreds of the Balkans. The Serbs would like to know, where was the worlds indignation when Hitlers allies were wiping them out?

-- Truth (at@the.ready), September 28, 1999.

Here's a fine compilation of Balkan history from Hardliner.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), September 28, 1999.

If you agree with the idea of one world government then he can bomb any country he wants to. If you agree with the idea of individual countries then the bombing was criminal. The concept that laws are now subject to the will of the majority puts the fate of all of us in the hands of those that can shape public opinion. Excuse me, someone's knocking at my door.....................

-- Mr. Pinochle (pinochledd@aol.com), September 28, 1999.

Cool!!! Always room to Bash the 'malignant one'!! Hope he get run over by a blimp or something equally obscure! And as far as Bosnia-Serbia-et al. (and this goes for ALL countries of the world.) If you want to act like savages, then we'll treat you like savages. Our biggest mistake was even getting involved. We should sit back, let them slaughter each other until no-one is left, then move it clean up and open a resort!! Mickey D's anyone?

-- Billy-Boy (Rakkasn@Yahoo.com), September 28, 1999.

You have too much time on your hands if you are reviewing old posts on Clinton. Y2K must be over. ()

The Christian Identity nutcase types decided to be in favor of Serbia because they are white and 'Christian' and are fighting Albanians, who are mostly Islamic and have a slightly darker compection. That's a clue as to what might be behind that post.

There are still some valid reasons to object to Clinton's policy in the Balkans and his bombing of former Yugoslavia.

-- kermit (colourmegreen@hotmail.com), September 28, 1999.

I am certain that there are some people in the Balkans who deserve to be bombed: Serbian, Croatian, Albianian. The hatred goes back centuries. Bad people have been doing terrible things to other people. How very sad.

The question is: do you commit your country to war when there is no clear idea of how victory is to be attained? Do you do it under the full knowledge that your bombing may be precipitating far GREATER acts of evil by your enemy? Do you do it without the express consent of Congress as if you, yourself were a two-bit scumbag military dictator, completely ignoring the War Powers ACt and the Supreme Law of the Land?

Do you fight this tactically- and strategically-bankrupt conflict in a way that only serves to make your enemy angrier, and not anything close to being defeated? Do you use horrible weapons that often don't detonate until little children come up to investigate them and play with the pretty, shiney spheres, thinking they are toys? Do you broadcast to the world your political insecurities about committing ground troops, thus potentially prolonging the battle and putting the lives of our forces at risk?

If the answer is yes to these questions, well, I donno what to say. Go on being a war-lover. Let your emotions and hate get all riled up for people who never personally hurt you. Sign up yourself if you think you can be good with a gun--or rather now that ceasefire is on-- be like Phil Donahue with a gun.

As for me, I don't want to praise anything that bastard Milosevic has ever done. But we could have canned him peacefully and quietly if we did not like him. Yet once again, we have knowinyly punished the innocent far more than the guilty re Kosovo, all described in arrogant, sadistic, lying words that only Clinton and his henchmen could have thought of. It was Kosovo that turned by dislike for Clinton into outright hatred. I now don't put ANYTHING past the man, including murder, rape, blackmail, conspiracy.

Perhaps I am being unfair. Perhaps BJ-C had an unhappy childhood and "suffers" from deepseated psychological trouble. Well in that case, find him shrink and get him out the way, because a "sick" man is just as bad for the Offfice as an evil man. Either way, I wish we'd impeached him back in January.

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), September 28, 1999.

Anybody considered the benefits of having a universally distrusted president next year? (Even his supporters can't honestly claim to trust him.) I'm glad he wasn't impeached, because some people trust Gore. Now, anything our "great leader" says will be taken with a grain of salt - if not dismissed outright as a lie.

-- Gus (y2kk@usa.net), September 28, 1999.

Monday morning quarterbacking is such an easy game to play.

Perhaps it may have been more politically advantageous to Clinton, to have waited, till Milosevec did something "REALLY" monstrous (How many mass graves does it take to make a REAL monster?), or maybe till he started messing around with the internal politics of our newest NATO partner, Hungary, but I see an eventual show-down with him as being inevitable.

The man is a lizard. In addition to the attacks he launched on the Croats, Bosnians and Kosovars, he's all but completely squelched the opposition in Serbia (Most of the opposition have flrd to either Hungary or Sarejevo) and he's attempted to topple the gov't of his supposed ally, Montenegro.

If you don't think some third rate little fascist S.O.B. like that can turn into a major world problem, remember that old Adolf started out in a Bavarian beer garden.

Clinton may have jumped the starting gun and caused himself some battle damage, but don't expect me to shed too many tears for the "violated" sovereignity of Serbia.

I think Peter is right. I didn't see all these "national sovereignity tears" being shed, when Reagan went to Haiti.

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), September 28, 1999.

Well Bokonon, to be perfectly honest, I was too busy grazing with the rest of the flock at that time in my life. Once Clinton showed up on the scene, I bought a case of PollyGrip to hold my wolve's fangs in. I have my claws done every three weeks now.

:)

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), September 28, 1999.

Will continue,

I bought my poly-grip back in 1980. Maybe Willy doesn't bother me so much, because it's just the same ole same ole.

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), September 28, 1999.