Rove meant REPUBLICANS are SOFT; said "liberals" by mistake. QUOTES:

[LynnTheDem]

1999:

The atrocities are America's fault

"Once the bombing commenced, I think then Milosevic unleashed his forces, and then that's when the slaughtering and the massive ethnic cleansing really started," Nickles said at a news conference after appearing on Meet the Press. "The administration's campaign has been a disaster. ... escalated a guerrilla warfare into a real war, and the real losers are the Kosovars and innocent civilians."

On Fox News Sunday, DeLay blamed the ethnic cleansing on U.S. intervention. "Clinton's bombing campaign has caused all of these problems to explode," DeLay charged in a House floor speech replayed on Late Edition.

The failure of diplomacy to avert the war is America's fault.

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning," "I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
-Trent Lott, Late Edition

Congress should not support the war.

When asked whether they would authorize Clinton "to use all necessary force to win this war, including ground troops," Lott and Nickles --who had voted a month ago, along with 70 percent of the Senate GOP, not to support the NATO air campaign--said they wouldn't.

We can't win.

"I don't know that Milosevic will ever raise a white flag," warned Nickles. DeLay agreed: "He's stronger in Kosovo now than he was before the bombing. ... The Serbian people are rallying around him like never before. He's much stronger with his allies, Russians and others." Clinton "has no plan for the end" and "recognizes that Milosevic will still be in power," added DeLay. "The bombing was a mistake. ... And this president ought to show some leadership and admit it, and come to some sort of negotiated end."

Don't believe U.S. propaganda.

On Meet the Press, Defense Secretary William Cohen argued that Yugoslavia had underestimated NATO's resolve more than NATO had underestimated Yugoslavia's, and Joint Chiefs vice chairman Gen. Joseph Ralston asserted that Milosevic "had already started his campaign of killing" before NATO intervened. Nickles dismissed both arguments. "This war is not going well," he declared. "I heard Secretary Cohen say, 'Well, Milosevic miscalculated how, you know, steadfast we would be in the bombing campaign.' But frankly ... we grossly miscalculated what Milosevic's response would be." Later, Nickles volunteered, "I would take a little issue with Gen. Ralston said. ... The number of killings prior to the bombing, I think, has been exaggerated." Moreover, given NATO's desperate need to "bring Milosevic to the table," DeLay cautioned, "It is not helpful for the president's spin machine to be out there right now saying that Milosevic is weakening." The truth, said DeLay, is that "nothing has changed."

Give peace a chance.

Cohen said it was "highly unlikely" that Clinton would meet with Milosevic in response to Yugoslavia's release of the three captured American soldiers over the weekend, since the Serbs were continuing their atrocities and weren't offering to meet NATO's conditions. DeLay called this refusal "really disappointing" and a failure of "leadership. ... The president ought to open up negotiations and come to some sort of diplomatic end." Lott implored Clinton to "give peace a chance" and, comparing the war with the recent Colorado high-school shootings, urged him to resolve the Kosovo conflict with "words, not weapons."

We have no choice but to compromise.

Unless Clinton finds "a way to get the bombing stopped" and to "get Milosevic to pull back his troops" voluntarily, NATO faces "a quagmire ... a long, protracted, bloody war," warned Lott. Clinton "only has two choices," said DeLay--to "occupy Yugoslavia and take Milosevic out" or "to negotiate some sort of diplomatic end, diplomatic agreement in order to end this failed policy."

We're eager to compromise.

NATO has insisted all along that Milosevic must allow a well-armed international force in Kosovo to protect the ethnic Albanians. When asked whether "the administration ought to insist" that these requirements "be met" as a condition of negotiation, DeLay twice ducked the question. Nickles advocated "a compromise," and Lott expressed interest in Yugoslavia's proposal for a "lightly armed" U.N. peacekeeping force in Kosovo rather than a fully equipped NATO force. "Surely there's wiggle room," said Lott. "Obviously, don't want them heavily armed, but they've got to be armed sufficiently to protect themselves. ... So, I think something can be worked out."

We'll back off first.

Nickles discounted the administration's demand that Yugoslavia halt its ethnic cleansing in order to halt NATO's bombardment: "Secretary Cohen says, 'Well, Mr. Milosevic has to do all these things, then we'll stop the bombing.' Tim, I strongly believe we need a simultaneous withdrawal of the Serbian aggressive forces, have a stopping of the bombing, and an insertion of international police-keeping force." Lott's formulation put NATO's withdrawal first: "Let's see if we can't find a way to get the bombing stopped, get Milosevic to pull back his troops, find a way to get the Kosovars go back in." And DeLay suggested that the United States should pull out unilaterally: "When Ronald Reagan saw that he had made a mistake putting our soldiers in Lebanon ... he admitted the mistake, and he withdrew from Lebanon."

“The Kosovo operation is different and oxymoronic. It is a ‘peace war’ waged by ‘peace hawks’ pursuing a dovish social agenda. Peace hawks are global idealists and former anti-war activists, including the youthful Bill Clinton.”
-Tom DeLay, Floor Statement, 4/15/99

“Doing good on a worldwide scale appeals to peace hawks, who are motivated by altruism, not patriotism.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement, 4/15/99

“There's no national interest of the United States in Kosovo. It's flawed policy and it was flawed to go in. I think this president is one of the least effective presidents of my life time. He's hollowed out our forces while running round the world with these adventures.”
-Tom DeLay The Guardian, 5/17/99

“American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement on Resolution on Peacekeeping Operations in Kosovo, 3/11/99

“Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly. We must stop giving the appearance that our foreign policy is formulated by the Unabomber.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement on Resolution on Peacekeeping Operations in Kosovo, 3/11/99

“Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my complete opposition to sending American troops to Kosovo. There is simply no vision to this mission. There is a six-year trend to send American troops anywhere for any reason, but there are no consistent goals that tie all of these missions together.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement on Resolution on Peacekeeping Operations in Kosovo, 3/11/99

"I rise today to state that no defense funds should be used for ground forces in Kosovo unless authorized by Congress.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement, 4/15/99

“So what they are doing here is they are voting to continue an unplanned war by an administration that is incompetent of carrying it out. I hope my colleagues will vote against this resolution (to fund the troops).”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement on S. Con. Res. 21, 4/15/99

“It is clear that any deployment to Kosovo will similarly drag on and go enormously over budget.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement, 4/28/99

“When asked the question, ‘what if he does not come to the table,’ they said, ‘well, we will go to Phase 2, and Phase 2 is that we will bomb for a few more days. Then he will be going to the table, by crackie.’ And when we asked, ‘Then, what?’ then they said, ‘well, we will bomb for another week and that will force him to come to the table and this will be all over with.’ And then when we asked, ‘Then, what?’ there was silence. This administration started a war without a plan farther along than two weeks.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement, 4/28/99

“I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement, 4/28/99

“Instead of sending in ground troops, we should pull out the forces we now have in the region. Mr. Speaker, I do not think we should send ground troops to Kosovo and I do not think we should be bombing in the Balkans, and I do not think that NATO should be destroyed by changing its mission into a humanitarian invasion force.”
-Tom DeLay Floor Statement, 4/28/99

“I believe the President has made a grave mistake. He has put Americans in danger without clearly articulating what national security interest requiring the use of United States forces is at stake in Bosnia.”
-Tom DeLay, Floor Statement, 11/17/95

“It’s very simple. The president is not supported by the House, and the military is supported by the House.”
-Tom DeLay As quoted in USA Today, regarding Floor votes on Kosovo, 4/30/99

Other hypocritical lying 2-faced rightwingnut bastards when the President happens to have a (D):

“Mr. Speaker, in my opinion, this is the most inept foreign policy in the history of the United States. The Pentagon told the President not to bomb, that it would only exacerbate the problems. We have forced over 1 million refugees. 2,012 were killed in Kosovo prior to the bombing. NATO has killed more Albanians than the Serbs did in an entire year, and yet we have exacerbated those problems.”
-Rep. Cunningham, Floor statement, 4/28/99

“Mr. Speaker, this evening the House had an emotionally charged debate about our policy in Kosovo, and contrary to remarks made after the vote, this was not a vote against the troops. This was a vote against the policy of this administration. All of us support the troops and the young men and women who are doing their duty.”
-Rep. Ed Whitfield, Statement, 4/28/99

"US troops will be deployed in Bosnia no matter what the Congress does. Congress should support the troops without endorsing the president's policy."
-Sen. Arlen Specter, CNN, 12/14/95

“Even though, as Commander in Chief, the President has the constitutional authority to commit United State soldiers to Bosnia, I cannot support a plan that does not minimize the risks to, and maximize the security of, our troops, especially a deployment that is not vital to our national security interest.”
- Rep. Sam Brownback, Floor Statement, 12/14/03

“It is because I support the troops, because I am concerned about their well-being, that I am opposed to sending troops to Bosnia. I have no doubt that the Americans who serve in the Armed Forces of the United States will go where their Commander in Chief sends them. They will serve proudly. They will do their job well. That is not the issue here.”
-Sen. Phil Gramm, Floor Statement, 12/6/95

“‘This is his (President Clinton’s) war,’ said DeLay the other day. And DeLay will be damned if he is going to do anything to help Clinton in his war. ‘The president will run the president’s war,’ he said. ‘We’ll consult with the president, but we’ll get our work done.’ And what is that work? Well, part of it seems to be giving aid and comfort to the Yugoslavian war aims and working against the war aims of the United States. . . This is not ‘his’ war. It is ours. And people who do not understand that do not understand the idea of nationhood, and they call into question their own fitness to lead.”
- Syndicated columnist Michael Kelly, 5/4/99

[Old and In the Way]

1. Absolutely perfect.

Nominated....you are the Republican's worst nightmare. A person with a memory and good organizational skills!

Stunningly amazing how profoundly wrong they were about Kosovo, Clinton's handling of the campaign, and the final ooutcome. They were 100% wrong in their predictions then...as they were 100% wrong in their predictions on Iraq. Kosovo was the right thing to do. Iraq was the wrong thing to do. Clinton saw his war as a defeat for diplomacy. Bush saw his war as an opportunity to inflate his limp ego. Kosovo was done in the right way, the world supported our mission. We accomplished the objective to end the ethnic cleansing...and we left it to rebuild and grow with a minimum of troops needed maintain the peace.

Truely, the Republican agenda then was to cripple a Democratic President, irregardless of bloodletting by the fascists there. While Clinton was trying to address terrorism, what were the Republicans doing in the 90's? Conducting a witch hunt...sending the FBI on wild goose chases trying to find dirt on Bill Clinton. I have no idea how these people can look in the mirror every morning when they wake up.

This ought to be the basis for a great Michael Moore film on how Republicans supported our country when the last popularly elected President made a tough decision to support a NATO intervention to stop a civil war that could have flared into WW3.

Bravo!

[LynnTheDem]

2. The thing rightwingnuts don't get;

Rove & bush & Cheney et al KNOW they are lying when they spew their lies.

As bush said to McCain when McCain called bush on his lies and smearing campaign against McCain;

"John, it's JUST POLITICS."

[Carla in Ca]

6. I agree with everything said here

They know they are lying, and, just how DO they sleep at night?
Great compilation, Lynn. I'd love to see bugman be forced to read all of it aloud.

This is the one that does it for me:


“I believe the President has made a grave mistake. He has put Americans in danger without clearly articulating what national security interest requiring the use of United States forces is at stake in Bosnia.�
-Tom DeLay, Floor Statement, 11/17/95

[LynnTheDem]

8. They sleep because they're so far removed from reality.

It's "just politics".

bush doesn't see 18 year-old Americans, not even old enough to legally have a beer, on the ground screaming and crying for their moms as they lie dying, their blood pumping away into the ground.

None of them see it.

None of them, with a very tiny handful of exceptions, has ever seen combat or lakes of blood or smelled the cordite or heard the screams or felt the pain or seen limbs blown off.

They're rich, they're whole. They won't have to try supporting their family with their eyesight gone, limbs gone, brains gone, their jobs or businesses gone or bankrupt, their veterans' benefits gone. Their lives gone.

Nope, it's JUST POLITICS to them.

[Carla in Ca]

9. Sad, but true

check this out, from the 'support our troops' party.
<http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/23/veterans.budget.ap/index.html>

I posted it in the Indiana state forum as well.


PS-I'm still bothered by that thread from Anarchy1999? the other night. Was that for real?

[Frederik]

10. Well, I think Michael Moore was against the war in Kosovo

so I doubt he'd make that movie. In retrospect, I think that war was wrong, and I don't know about "we left it to rebuild and grow with a minimum of troops needed maintain the peace". The only thing that seems to be growing in Kosovo is organized crime, flesh trade and drug trafficking. It's really messed up. There's no end in sight for the peacekeeping mission either. Looks like Kosovo will have to remain a NATO protectorate.

But at least it was waged by people who know how to wage war effectively, not by ideologues out of the University of Chicago.

[ClintonTyree]

13. And....

Clinton never sent a soldier into combat that didn't come home alive. Bush, on the other hand, seems to love sending people to their deaths. He loved it as Governor of Texas and he giggles when asked about Iraq, quagmires, insurgents etc. now. The man is a sociopath.

[Roland99]

15. Mogadishu?

Although, I blame the Pentagon for that.

[rfranklin]

17. Poppy Bush sent the soldiers to Somalia...

It was a lame duck, "look I'm a humanitarian" gesture that turned into a mess and it was 18 deaths versus about 100 times that in Iraq, (not to mention the tens of thousands of Iraqis and the chaos created by Bush the Lesser.)

[ooglymoogly]

21. bush the lesser....how true

i love it

[AuntiBush]

40. You've Noticed that, too!?! He does! Hence the name...

The "Smirking Chimp." It's like he can barely hold the laughter back. My doctor calls him a "sociopath" all of the time. You called that right ClintonTyree.

[JAbuchan08]

27. That's Kosovo vs. Iraq in a nutshell for me

great post. Love the last line.

[bvar22]

3. Republicans are horrid people.

How do they sleep at night. One would have to be a complete sociopath not to be bothered by this hypocrisy.

Can't ONE of our Representatives or Senators stand up and read these quotes into the record?

Can't one of our Representatives or Senators stand up and read these quotes into the TV cameras on Sunday Morning?

[Toots]

22. Can't one of the Democrats read into the record Republican quotes

No obviously they can not do that. The Republicans may yell at them and make them quake in their boots. Why were none of their quotes against Clinton's '93 budget ever publicized during either Gore's campaign or Kerry's? They were one hundred percent wrong then and they are one hundred percent wrong now and no one calls them on it at all. We read some of these quotes on some obscure web site but never ever ever ever hear them on MSM.

[eridani]

4. Not Clinton's war

It's the same as the Iraq war, the goal being to destroy the public sphere and to make the world safe for 50 cents a day labor. Both are corporate wars.

[Old and In the Way]

5. Sounds like that "not a dime's worth of difference" Nader argument.

Please explain how the we've destroyed the public shere in Kosovo? Inaction may well have ignited another European War. How did the Clinton administration profit from waging that war? How can you say that that region is not better off getting rid of the Fascist Miloshevic?

[eridani]

7. It's about the targets of the bombing campaign

Every single one of the many factories destroyed was either worker owned or state owned. (All the while, a piddly total of 14 Serbian tanks were taken out.) All foreign owned factories were spared. One of the conditions imposed required to avoid bombing was that all Serbian industry had to be opened up to privatization. Care to explain whatthefuck that has to do with ethnic cleansing? The people who profited from this were Clinton's corporate paymasters. Another purpose was to plant Camp Bondsteel in the area as a part of the encirclement of the Middle East.

It was the Albanians who successfully carried out ethnic cleansing in Kosovo under the aegis of NATO. They finally finished the WW II era project of getting rid of the remaining Serbs, Jews and Roms. Milosevic was a Balkan version of Ariel Sharon, attempting to stop this with stupid, brutal and ineffective repression. 2/3 of the Serbian Parliament was in opposition to Milosevic, who won in the first place only because they were divided. This opposition passed a recommendation to turn the province over to UN administration, on the grounds that what Milosevic was doing was obviously backfiring. Naturally the US, in its determination to either destroy or privatize, refused to consider this as a basis for negotiation.

Corporate globalization is a war against the world's population in and of itself. When its victims get recalcitrant, regular shooting wars often result.

[brindis_desala]

16. I agree. The NWO wars are being waged for the corporations.

In South and Central America the purported bugaboo is the drug trade (although that fig-leaf is shriveling) while in Central Asia and the Middle East it's the "War on Terra". If we can assume that nation states will go the way of the horse and buggy what do you see emerging? Ironically, the force of reaction may actually destroy the profits from globalization and democratize labor but can that happen before we have effectively destroyed the planet. I sense you understand this better than me so I would be interested in your opinion and how you formed it.

[eridani]

36. Mainly reading Noam Chomsky

What takes the place of nation states is IMO unpredictable at this point. We are in a crisis situation where things could go our way and we evolve into sustainability, or the Masters of the Universe may yet destroy the planet.

I'm not into Nader's thing of "there is no difference" between Dems and Repubs. This is true only of imperial conquest, which both parties support (only the Dems want to be smarter and less violent about it). On the domestic front, the Dems want to share the loot with the general population and the Rethugs want to reserve it for their wealthiest donors. Pretty important difference, IMO.

[Frederik]

11. You realize that is the exact same argument

as "Isn't the world better off without Saddam Hussein?"

[Old and In the Way]

24. I can't agree.

Milosevic was well on his way to consolidating power and expanding his little fascist power base. What would the region be like today had we turned a blind eye to the death and destruction happening there in the 90's? I remember watching with disgust as Sarajevo was being destroyed. Seems to me that the US, under NATO, went in to stop the bloodshed...not to steal the region's natural resources. I won't argue that there weren't atrocities on both sides and the hatred goes back hundreds of years....but I think the motivations for intervention in that conflict were entirely different than the PNAC designs for going to war in Iraq.

[MrPrax]

26. Um...

Virtually nothing you wrote is actually true.

In actuality, after the Wall came down, there was a recalcitrant little country called Yugoslavia that wasn't alligned to the US or the Soviet system and insisted in maintaining it's economic neutrality, it's publicly owned utilities and companies. One other thing that is interesting about Yugoslavia is it's home to some of the richest mineral sources in the world.

Obviously in order to partition the country, there would have to 'some' reason and demonization as fascist, alleged mass graves, persecution of 'extreme Islamic separatists, etc.

Oddly enough after all the accusations, the IWCT under NATO have announced that the final count of 2788 bodies was the entext of the mass graves.

There seems to be nothing of the accusations that stand up to scruntiny when one looks at the 'failures' of the Lisbon treaty (Korsovo broke it) or the Rambouillet accord which Albright made sure would be unacceptable to the Serbs (as indeed no nation would accept occupation by foreign powers willingly and no leader could sign such a thing)

The bombing was horrendous and shocking--rem the Chinese Embassy?

I think the Dems here that are all-giddy drunk with 'lame' Repuke quotes, should probably check their partisanship at the door on this one.

Clinton was no more acceptable in attacking Yugoslavia as he was pill factories in Sudan or carpet bombing Iraq because Saddam found a spy in the UN weapons team.

Truth hurts

[Old and In the Way]

32. Partioning Yugoslavia?

With the fall of the communist government the inhabitants were doing that themselves. I obviously have different recollections of what was transpiring at the time. I make no effort to say I'm an expert on that war, but I do find this overview pretty much what I remember-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/balkans/overview/bosnia.htm

Seems to me that the UN tried to broker a peace and it failed. Serbs were intent on reconstituting the remnents of Yugoslavia under their control. NATO took action to nuetralize the Serb's actions and military advantage against the Bosnians and Croats in the major refugee centers. I don't recall any corporate agenda being served, except maybe Halliburton who is always ready to profit from the next war.

Was there a PNAC type plan of the Democrats to start a war in that region? Can you point me to any Democrats who profited from that war? Did Democrats send an uinaccountable $8BB into the region? I suspect if there had been a financial motive of Clinton to profit from this war, the Republicans would have happily impeached him on those grounds.

[MrPrax]

34. Sad, but True...

The Wall didn't actually fall down in Yugoslavia. They were never members of the Comecon or the Warsaw Pact at point. Countries like Germany and the UK, in particular, we backing the separatist elements. It certainly didn't help matters that Croatia declared independence and European countries, broke land records, to recognize them and their Tudjman-inspired ultra-nationalist.

The peace deal one I referred to -- as well as the Lisbon Accord which starting the shooting in Bosnia. Serbs were being kept from voting and evicted, the Serbs went in to their 'own' territory essentially and protected them. Then it got ugly...

As far whether a Democrat or Republican got a paycheck out of it, shows a real lack of understanding of how US foreign policy works; they work for Team America and there is virtually no differences in their approaches.

[eridani]

38. The Rethugs are usually in favor of bombing civilians--

--they just had a kneejerk opposition to it in this case because it was Clinton who was doing it.

[eridani]

37. Absolute crap that Milosevic was getting more powerful

2/3 of the Serbian Parliament belonged to the opposition. They were not united enough to defeat him before the war, but they did unite to defeat him afterward. He was not bombed out of office, he was voted out. Note that the opposition didn't appreciate having their infrastructure destroyed and poisoned with depleted uranium either, though.

The Bosnia conflict was singlehandedly started by the US ambassador, who encouraged Alia Itzbegovic not to sign an agreement that would have established pretty much the same areas of ethnic dominance that were put in place after the war. And speaking of fascists, Milosevic (though definitely a cheap thug) was never an actual WW II Nazi, unlike Itzbegovic and Tudjman, who cheerfully advanced the Nazi project of exterminating 500,000 Serbs. (Serbs, IMO, became a lot like Israelis, using their greater suffering during WW II as an excuse for treating their neighbors like shit.)

I agree with you that this wasn't really a PNAC operation--just your usual neoliberal economic imposition of division and privatization--by outright warfare when the local elites can't force it through without violence.

[ClintonTyree]

12. Amazing, isn't it?

Why, reading those quotes would give one the impression that the Republicans are a Party of old softies! When President Clinton took on a FAR weaker opponent than Saddam, the GOP was ready to fold like an old tent. Now that they have THEIR "war pretzlenit" :eyes: and took the nation into a quagmire with no end in sight, no exit strategy, and were ill prepared from day one, everything's fine and dandy! They're not to be held to the same rules that they themselves established.

Hypocrisy, thy name is "Republican".

This is an amazing piece, LynnTheDem. Kudos for all the research and thought put into it. :toast:

[ngGale]

14. Haven't they changed their tune since Clinton...

great research, telling hypocrisy of the right.

[RickWn]

18. Thank you, Lynn

Nicely written and organized. Thanks for all the research that went into this article. I'm printing it out in a moment. Always good to have a handy, concise reference when arguing with some of the lame-brains where I work.

[newyawker99]

25. Hi RickWn!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[RickWn]

35. Thank you, newyawker99

Never felt a handshake or a hug I didn't like. Truth be told, at my rate of posting I will seem a newbie for many, many months to come. I read a lot more than I post. By Christmas or Hannakuh I might be up to 83 posts or so. I'm hoping by then you'll have forgotten the 44th post hug and are waiting in line to give me the 83rd post hug.

With any luck, if I play my cards right, I can get squeezed, hugged, cuddled, coochie-cooed, hand-shook and hand-job'd right up to the 2006 mid-term elections. Take that, Microsoft... you leave a lot to be desired!!

Hey, all kidding aside, newyawker99, I was born in Mt. Vernon, NY. Moved to California as a little cub, but still have fond memories these 50 years later of a great city, a great state, and my Christian dad inviting everyone over for a kosher picnic. My Dad, at 82, is still the most liberal, kind-hearted man I've ever known. He tells me I've got his spunk. Sure hope it eventually proves true.

[geckosfeet]

19. Fabulous. Thank you for your work. It makes a difference.

[KharmaTrain]

20. This Should Be Made Into A TV Ad...

Since so much of this was done on the House floor and on network treehouses, surely the video exists...then super-impose these statments over Rove's crack or other remarks that smell of hypocrisy.

Yes, people have a short attention span. A lot of it is that these remarks weren't widely circulated at the time except in right wing covens and on hate radio. Now would be a great time, since these bastards are creating patriotism litums tests to put them up to their own smell test.

Excellent thread!!!! I could see Robert DeNiro and Dustin Hoffman looking for the next "Old Shoe".

Cheers!

[Kansas Wyatt]

23. Democratic candidates who will be running for Congress....

Should be going back to the film footage and statements made by lying 2-faced Republicans regarding wars under Clinton compared to wars under Shrub, and burn their asses with their own words in their next election.

Never ever let them FLIP FLOP their positions about being against war, then they were for war, but now they are against war again to get re-elected. Republicans set the standard, crush them by telling the people that the Iraq War is exactly what you get with immature FLIP FLOPPERS (REPUBLICANS) who doesn't have a damn clue about what the Hell they are doing or saying.

[RedSock]

29. Dems can't do that ....

The Repubs might get mad at them ...

[Lasher]

28. Thanks, LynnTheDem!

This is exactly the kind of article I like the most: Plenty of FACTS and DIRECT QUOTES that prove these people to be LIARS!

Reminds me of perhaps my favorite DU contribution of all time:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/06/10_wmd.html

[dxstone]

30. Kicked and NOMINATED!

Lynne, you are an absolute NATIONAL TREASURE!
Another wonderful bit of sleuthing/organizing/speaking truth to power...
You GO, girl!
d

ps: God, Delay is FULL of it!
What a nasty little pig-person!

[FreedomAngel82]

31. So they only

proclaim we're soft and they're the tough macho's when it's on their agenda. :eyes: When they can't benefit from it whether with money or politicial capital so they can then be voted into office as the majority and do their plans.

[eyepaddle]

33. Outstanding piece.

I've made many similar arguments to Repuke aquaintances--but with the daily avalanche of foul news these days it's easy to forget.

I must say I disagree with many posters on their summation of the war's motives and outcomes. The Peter Maas book "Love thy Neighbor" is a first class piece of journalism on the Agonies of the former Yugoslavia. At this point I cannot comment on the choices behind all target selection in that air campaign, however in a strong-man dictatorship "state owned" quickly translates into "dictator owned."

Maas makes clear his disdain for Clinton and many UN officials whose number one priority was clearly staying the hell out of this civil war. This gave rise to many absolutely unholy bullshit claims about "there's plenty of guilt to go around in this war." Remember the one about how the muslims were mortaring themselves? That was hystrewrical. It was a three way civil war in which only one side had an actual army. Clinton managed to drag his feet and avoid any entanglement until Bob Dole made Bosnia a campaign centerpiece. It was in response to this political threat that NATO bombed Serbia. Once NATO took action the conflict ground to a halt pretty fast.

After chugging through wars in:1) Slovenia, 2) Croatia and 3) Bosnia and Herzegovina, Milosevic was getting started on round 4. He would have used nationalism to play his base for rubes in much the same way as * does our rubes here in the US. Once Kosovo had played out--what next Macedonia? Montenegro?

The Serbians absolutley fucking insisted that we bomb them again and would in no way take NO for a fucking answer. Are things miserable in Kosovo now? yes, war ALWAYS makes things worse, but at least now mortar rounds aren't landing market squares. Clinton and the Pentagon were in such a hurry to intervene that they waited YEARS to do it.

[AuntiBush]

39. Bush & CO. & Delay can all go straight to H-E-L-L

Along w/their supporters. I'm sick & tired of being... well, sick and tired. This gang makes the old mob look pretty good, right about now.

And do they ever get tired of blaming Clinton? *sarcasm* added.

[scdusek]

41. But 9/11 changed everything, right???