Dean urged Clinton to take unilateral action in Bosnia

[kerrygoddess]

Dean urged Clinton to take unilateral action in Bosnia - USA Today Posted 1/14/2004 12:10 AM

By Steve Komarow, USA TODAY

Democratic presidential contender Howard Dean, a strong critic of what he calls President Bush's unilateral approach to foreign policy, urged President Clinton to act unilaterally and enter the war in Bosnia in 1995. (Related item: Text of Letter - http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-01-14-dean-letter_x.htm)

"I have reluctantly concluded that the efforts of the United States and NATO in Bosnia are a complete failure," he wrote, citing reports of genocide during the Bosnian civil war. "If we ignore these behaviors ... our moral fiber as a people becomes weakened. ... We must take unilateral action."

The July 19, 1995, letter, obtained by USA TODAY, was written on Dean's official stationery as Vermont governor. The language appears to contradict Dean's core complaint that President Bush has followed a unilateral foreign policy, instead of a multilateral approach that relies on consultation and joint action with allies. He has repeatedly attacked Bush's decision to invade Iraq....

Dean told Clinton that America had to intervene alone because the United Nations and NATO were unable to act effectively. He called for Clinton to bomb the Bosnian Serbs and supply arms to the Bosnian Muslims. He opposed using American ground troops.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-01-14-dean-bosnia_x.htm

[slinkerwink]

1. you know damn well that the line of reasoning is different

the first one is because there was a genocide going on in Kosovo that was well publicized.

The second one is because we went to war with Iraq because there were so-called weapons of mass destruction. There wasn't any. Then the new line of reasoning was Saddam's past use of genocide.

The first one was true, and did warrant intervention.

The second one was not true.

[Barbara917]

4. I think the issue here is with one word

unilateral.

[TLM]

23. Why is it that so many attacks on Dean's words...

have to be compressed into one or two words out of context in order to prop up the attacks?


Read the letter... his position on unilateral action has not changed. That position being that unilateral action is only to be done as a last resort and when there is a clear justification.

That's the same position he held with regard to Iraq.


The difference is there was justification for unilateral action in Kosovo. There was not in Iraq.

[SadEagle]

100. Because people don't bother to learn the whole complexity of his views...

... too much work for someone just trying to criticize, you know?

If folks listened to, or read, Dean's foreign policy speech, they would have found out that the position under the discussion today is consistent of one of the less usual positions the governor took --- that it can be acceptable to act unilaterally to stop genocide if there is no other option

Of course, on the whole Iraq thing, some opponents of Dr. Dean seem
to not understand that there are positions other than pacifism and the support of the war, and that people may actually like Dean's pragmatic consideration of the proposition.

edit: fix some wording and spelling. Browser on-the-fly spell check and DU spellcheck and I still got some stuff wrong.. grr...

[dansolo]

92. Dean's problem was not with unilateral action

Dean's critics keep misrepresenting his position. Dean has said that he would have supported unilateral action in Iraq if there was demonstrable proof of the assertions that Bush was making about Iraq being an imminent threat. There was no proof, and the assertions have all proven to be lies.

[kerrygoddess]

5. Wake Up

No Genocide by Saddam?

You've had too much KOOLAID!

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/12/iraq121403.htm

Some of the crimes for which Saddam Hussein might be prosecuted include:
The genocidal Anfal campaign against the Iraqi Kurds, which resulted in the deaths of some 100,000 civilians and the destruction of more than 4,000 villages;

[slinkerwink]

6. yes, but we never used Saddam's past use of genocide as a reason

to invade iraq!

That's the fucking difference.

[AP]

9. This is interesting, because Hussein did kill lots of Iraqis.

And, of course, it's not an excuse for the US to do what it has done. But it is a fact that Bush is using the genocide as one of several justifications.

The logic of this letter muddies the waters for Dean a little bit.

[slinkerwink]

13. you're looking for anything to muddy the waters for Dean.....

hmmm.....muy interesante.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slinkerwink]

32. ahhhhh, personal attack?

mm'k.

[TLM]

35. Look at Kerry's numbers....

what do you expect.


Dean won the DC primary tonight... the long knives are coming out.

[kerrygoddess]

46. Hmmm..... Sharpton so close behinds Deans win in DC

Says so much

[TLM]

55. Yeah says Sharpton has support in DC...

That's not news to anybody.

[Hoppin_Mad]

39. Yes - and so early in her career here - most DU's

Wait much longer - until the attacks and smears on their candidate push them over the edge.

Others come in with guns a blazing.

Oh well

[kerrygoddess]

47. So early in my career

So sorry I spend my time on the Kerry Blog fending off Deaniacs who love to troll!

[kerrygoddess]

12. Dean is slip sliding away...

Slinker

The Fucking Difference is there is NO difference! Dean used the War as an excuse to attack the other candidates who voted for the War although there are numerous references to prove that Dean was in favor of the Biden Lugar Ammendment!

[TLM]

33. LOL! Once again the Biden lugar was not the IWR....

Saying that BL was the same as IWR because both allowed for use of force is like saying that spanking your child is the same as committing infanticide because both use force.


First off, as i pointed out, read the whole letter, Dean position then is the same as it is now regarding unilateral action. It is only to be used as a last resort and only when there is justification.

In Iraq it was neither the last resort nor what their justification.

But hey, don't let that get in the way of a good old Dean bash.

[isbister]

34. candidates who voted for the War

bush was the only candidate that voted for war... you mean voted for the IWR, don't you?

[TLM]

38. Kerry said in the debates he supported the invasion...

and that Bush made the right decision and he supported him.

[isbister]

48. did he?

Link please?

[TLM]

59. Here ya go.... link and a quote

http://www.bankofknowledge.net/2004/archives/000054.html


And Senator Kerry, the first question goes to you. On March 19th, President Bush ordered General Tommy Franks to execute the invasion of Iraq. Was that the right decision at the right time?

SENATOR JOHN KERRY (D-MA): George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.

[isbister]

70. "Kerry said

in the debates he supported the invasion and that Bush made the right decision and he supported him."

STEPHANOPOULOS: And Senator Kerry, the first question goes to you. On March 19th, President Bush ordered General Tommy Franks to execute the invasion of Iraq. Was that the right decision at the right time?

SENATOR JOHN KERRY (D-MA): George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.

So, the answer was no it wasn't the right decision at the right time:

I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity

and then the Senator went on to say "it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein"

and

when the president made the decision, I supported him

and then repeated the approval of disarming Saddam:

I support the fact that we did disarm him

So, he didn't say he supported the invasion and that Bush made the right decision and he supported him as you stated, he said he didn't think it was the right decision at the right time, that once bush made the decision to invade, he (Kerry) supported the president (I believe he also made a statement of support for the troops at the time the war began) and Kerry said he supported the fact that we did disarm Saddam.

[isbister]

31. We actually worked to

cover it up. Bush's dad did!

[TLM]

41. And one does not need unilateral action to stop genocide...

that took place a decade ago.


Genocide taking place today... that's another story.

[isbister]

58. This is correct

but our country should not rule it out, after exhausting all other options, if the situation is ongoing.

[TLM]

61. I agree, and that is Dean;s position as well...

That unilateral action should be a last resort used only when justified.

[rucky]

90. Unilateral action would have been justified in this case, but...

aren't you glad Clinton made the extra effort to get NATO on board?

[Hoppin_Mad]

10. She was pointing out that bush* used WMD threat to go to war

[MercutioATC]

11. Yes, during Bush I's term...it almost disturbed his golf game.

The Kurds were gassed after Desert Storm and we sat by and let it happen, after we encouraged them to rise up against SH.

BTW, we're talking the late 80's here...way before the economic sanctions started to take effect.

[kerrygoddess]

18. Wake Up & Smell The Coffee

Dean is no anti-war candidate!

Since it is clearly no longer possible to take action in conjunction with NATO and the United Nations, I have reluctantly concluded that we must take unilateral action. While I completely agree with you that no ground troops should be committed for other than humanitarian purposes in Bosnia, I would ask that you take the following steps in Bosnia. First, lift the arms embargo as it applies to the Bosnian government. Second, enforce a full embargo of the sort that is now in effect in Iraq on the Bosnian Serbs and upon Yugoslavia. Third, break off diplomatic relations with Yugoslavia. Fourth, commit American air power to support the Bosnian government until the situation is stabilized and the civilian murders and atrocities by the Bosnian Serbs have been stopped.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-01-14-dean-letter_x.htm

[TLM]

45. Dean is not anti-war.... and never claimed to be.

He's anti-unilateral war without justification.


Are you claiming he situation in kosovo where genocide was underway, is the same in terms of immediacy as the situation in Iraq were genocide took place a decade ago?

[isbister]

42. The Kurds were gassed after Desert Storm...

before, wasn't it?

BTW, we're talking the late 80's here...way before the economic sanctions started to take effect.

There weren't any sanctions from the US (for any length of time... to speak of). bush I undermined any effort in Congress to sanction Iraq but they were able to make some restrictions later... and bush I worked around it.

We were selling them WMD kits :-)

[GalleryGod]

79. YEARS Before and with OUR gas!

:shrug:

[ET Awful]

89. Your timeline is a little off. . . .

The gassing of the Kurdish population occurred in 1988, the Gulf War occured years later.

The violent supression of the Shiite uprising in southern Iraq occurred post Gulf War.

[corporatewhore]

21. Oops responded to wrong person

[corporatewhore]

37. a question to ponder about unilateralism and genocide

"don't forget that we live in a country which was founded on ethnic cleansing and genocide. with our recent genocide in iraq, and our increasing ethnic cleansing of arab immigrants at home, should anybody demand immediate unilateral action in US cities?"-just on note i stole that line from someone on another message board about unilateralism
I myself dont have the answer and dont pretend to be an expert on this matter

[liberalnurse]

57. It don't matter one i-oata.....

The post hails from a fallen campaign. I sense it is a desperate effort to inflame. It does not, I have pitty....


Lots of work from professionals will not influence the majority. This proof will be evident on Jan. 19th.

Dean will clean up. We ain't listening to the weak and whining critics.

[deminflorida]

85. But, But, Dean supporters have often called Wes Clark a War...

Criminal because of Bosnia and Kosovo....

But, But, But , But..............

[bearfartinthewoods]

99. the UN and Amnesty international might disagree with the idea

that mass murder wasn't happeneing in iraq as well..

[La_Serpiente]

2. First of all, welcome to DU

Since we here at DU are subject to copyright laws, please shorten the length of your post from the full article to 4 paragraphs.

Gracias

La_Serpiente

[kerrygoddess]

7. Thank You!

:)

[La_Serpiente]

8. From a fellow Kerry supporter to another Kerry supporter

your welcome :-)

[AP]

3. You can seal your own files. But you can't seal the files of people who

sent you letters and you can't seal the files of people to whom you sent letters.

Clinton made a point of unsealing EVERYTHING except national security records marked top secret.

[JI7]

15. the right wing must have went crazy over that

it's funny because i remember reading about the things the right wing would accuse him of. i was a teenager then. as i got older and would read more and become more informed i got to see the truth. i saw how clinton was very m uch into open government and wanted to make things available to the public.clinton was the first to speak out against bush wanting to delay release of records of past presidents. this is how i saw the whole monica lewinsky impeachment thing for the fraud and joke it was. the right wingers looked so pathetic trying to make it into something huge and dangerous.

[patricia92243]

14. Good! Proves he is not anti-war when it is needed

[slinkerwink]

17. ha, thank you kerryisgoddess......

for that illuminating answer by making this post to show that Dean is no dove.

[kerrygoddess]

20. My pleasure!

Dean is no Dove!

[slinkerwink]

26. then why don't you support Dean instead of Kerry?

:shrug:

[kerrygoddess]

43. How shall I list my answers...

Dean's platform is weak...

1)Environmental Record - poor
Environmental Groups Criticized Dean for Siding With Business. “’EP under Governor Dean meant Expedite Permits, not Environmental Protection,’ proclaims Annette Smith, the director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment. Smith is no stranger to Dean's environmental record, having tangled with the Dean administration on everything from the OMYA Corporation's mining to pesticide usage on Vermont's mega-farms. When Smith learned that Dean was holding a press conference at the Burlington Community Boathouse last week to celebrate his eco-legacy, she fired off emails to Vermont environmentalist calling for a protest of the event and wondering if they were ‘going to let Governor Dean ride out on his white horse of environmental leadership?’”

Kerry has a 96% Lifetime Rating from the LCV

2)NRA endorsed Dean in Vermont

I prefer the Anti-NRA candidate


3)Dean would sell small business loans on the NYSE causing loss of privatization for small business owners.

Kerry is former chairman of Senate Committee on Small Business and currently Ranking Member

4) Dean has NO Foreign Policy Experience

Kerry has served on the Senate Committee for Foreign Affairs for 20 years.

5) Dean was skiing while Kerry served in Vietnam

6) Dean has consistently attacked Kerry since early last year

7) Dean calls Congressmen COCKROACHES!


I prefer to support the REAL DEAL!

[Hoppin_Mad]

29. Shouldn't you be backing DK then - the ONLY 'dove' ? -nt-

[kerrygoddess]

44. DK is great

But unelectable.

[Democrats unite]

16. Well another Dean supporter myth debunked.

eom

[slinkerwink]

19. we always knew that he wasn't a dove......

so this isn't a debunking :shrug:

[kerrygoddess]

22. Oh I get it...

You knew he was no Dove and so condone him attacking the other candidates for their vote!

Nice. Says so much for you and your candidate!

[slinkerwink]

28. because their vote was fucking wrong

because there was already evidence debunking the stupid weapons of mass destruction right before the Iraq war. They just didn't pay attention. They rolled right over and let Bush fuck them.

[kerrygoddess]

49. What a mouth

You drink with mouth?

Explain Joe Wilson's claims since you know so much!

[isbister]

54. because their vote was ... wrong

because there was already evidence debunking the stupid weapons of mass destruction right before the Iraq war. They just didn't pay attention. They rolled right over and let Bush fuck them.

Huh? "there was already evidence debunking the stupid weapons of mass destruction right before the Iraq war" so candidates didn't pay attention and voted for the resolution six months earlier?

Does that make sense?

[kerrygoddess]

60. when this President misled the nation in his State of the Union Address

But I wasn't ready to keep quiet when this President misled the nation in his State of the Union Address. Because of that, leakers in the Bush White House illegally revealed that my wife worked in the CIA - endangering her life and that of my family. They tried to intimidate me and others who were willing to speak up and tell the truth. - Joe Wilson

http://www.restorehonesty.com/

[Democrats unite]

36. How many threads have there been accusing Clark...

about Kosovo? Even calling him a butcher! Yea it's debunked please find something new now.

[TLM]

50. Funny i do not see where in that letter Dean supported

bombing civilians and journalists and hospitals and schools, and showering down DU rounds on population centers?

Care to explain how taking issue with Clark's methods in kosovo, means you somehow disagree that intervention was justified at all?

[kerrygoddess]

53. "we must take unilateral action"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-01-14-dean-letter_x.htm

[TLM]

62. Unilateral action means acting alone...

it doesn't mean bombing schools, hospitals, using DU weapons, targeting civilians and killing journalists.


This issues raised regarding Clark and kosovo are about his methods... not the very idea of intervention.

[kerrygoddess]

52. Clark has his own set of issues to clean up beyond Kosovo

Like his support of the the Iraq War.

[shance]

69. Did you read what you wrote?

Lets be fair here. Kerry voted for the IWR which in many ways shows tangible support of the war.

I hear what you are saying, but keep in mind your candidates actions as well.

I like them both, but that is why neither are my first choice.

[Cheswick2.0]

86. what myth would that be?

Are you imagining we don't know who Dean is?

[Barbara917]

24. Doesn't anyone see

a difference in a unilateral action versus a 19 nation mulitlateral NATO-lead war?

[TrueAmerican]

30. Who led it?

Enquiring minds want to know? ;)

[TLM]

51. People choose not to see a lot fo things....

as long as it makes for a better attack on Dean.

[kerrygoddess]

73. Dean attacks himself just fine with out any help

[isbister]

27. Re: Dean urged Clinton to take unilateral action in Bosnia

I've seen where Dean has made that statement before... a certain humanitarian crisis may require the use of arms. I believe some certainly should, we cannot police the world but shouldn't stand by and watch hundreds of thousands or millions of innocents be slaughtered.

The author neglects to mention bush's other key selling points:

- The shaky al qaeda links.

- The fact that the inspectors were in Iraq and bush, through his actions, forced them out.

- The shady behind-the-scenes undermining of our allies and of the inspectors

- The cooking of the intelligence by bush's people

- The pre-determined timetable, the plans

- blah, blah, blah

If the administration operated on the up and up... about everything, then we'd have a different... well, nevermind, up and up... that could never happen. Anyway, all of the Democrats, even pro-war Lieberman believed bush handled things improperly... because he did and any of the Democrats would've handled the situation intelligently.

[hedda_foil]

40. Entirely consistent with Dean's foreign policy statements

Fulfilling the Promise of America:

Meeting The Security Challenges of the New Century



Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

The Pacific Council on International Policy

Los Angeles, California

December 15, 2003

<snip>
During the past dozen years, I have supported U.S. military action to roll back Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, to halt ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, to stop Milosevic's campaign of terror in Kosovo, to oust the Taliban and al Qaeda from control in Afghanistan. As President, I will never hesitate to deploy our armed forces to defend our country and its allies, and to protect our national interests.

<snip>

Meeting the pressing security challenges of the 21st century will require new ideas, initiatives, and energy. But it also will require us to draw on our proudest traditions, including the strong global leadership demonstrated by American Presidents from Franklin Roosevelt to Bill Clinton, to renew key relationships with America's friends and allies. Every President in that line, including Republicans Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and the first President Bush demonstrated that effective American leadership includes working with allies and partners, inspiring their support, advancing common interests.

<snip>

Now, when America should be at the height of its influence, we find ourselves, too often, isolated and resented. America should never be afraid to act alone when necessary. But we must not choose unilateral action as our weapon of first resort.

<snip>

This is an excellent, thoughtful and lengthy speech. I highly recommend it to all of you.

I have no doubt that other candidates will attempt to make hay of the letter to President Clinton. I also have no doubt that their attempts will fall flat within a day or two because Dean is perfectly consistent and has been so since his first foreign policy speech this spring at the CFR.

[kerrygoddess]

56. What Foreign Policy Position

It was a laughing stock!

[MrMoJoeRisin]

63. the position he's taken is…

inside a spiderhole of Deanial.

[TLM]

65. Nice use of republican sound bytes...

too bad we've heard them before... elsewhere.

[kerrygoddess]

74. Awfully defensive

Aren't you

[La_Serpiente]

66. Hey, Welcome to DU

Wow, a Joe supporter.

[TLM]

64. Oh wow... now there's some well thought out commentary....

You want to talk laughing stocks... check out Kerry's national poll numbers.


Maybe he should mortgage another house and use the money to buy a spine and a clue?

[kerrygoddess]

67. Hmmm...

Maybe you missed Zogby today

[shance]

68. Hmm....now im trying to remember if there was OIL in Bosnia.....

Nope....not a drop.

And your point was?

[EXE619K]

71. Oh, a Bosnia thread!

well, the way I see it, Bosnia was hardly a unilateral action. In fact the circumstances in which Bosnian intervention was conducted was very different from that in Iraq.

Obviously, I'm sure you're all aware that military intervention in the Balkans was sanctioned by the UN and NATO. I understand perfectly why unilateral action was being recommended in Bosnia.
Since Aug. 1993, there was a broad support for intervention, among the european nations(esp to the US). The fact that it took so long for Operation Mountain Eagle to commence was that there was opposition from former eastern block countries for having NATO troops in the Balkan region.

There's a HUGE difference between supporting a unilateral action in Bosnia and the one in Iraq. At least, in regards to the intervention in Bosnia, there was overwhelming support from the UN and our allies in NATO for us to go in even before the DPA was signed.

I tell ya, The Balkans suck in December! It's cold as hell, yet when the snow falls on the ground, it melts almost immediately...turning the ground into an "earthly stew".

Any other fellow IFOR folks in here?
Me: C co. 3rdID 1/6 INF
"unity is strength"




DEAN LEADS THE WAY!

[kerrygoddess]

72. NOT

Dean is sliding in the Polls

[liberalnurse]

75. Sliding upward, point-by-point.

Dah.....up is where the winner is.....

Dean is ahead in Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio...etc....

Kerry is lucky to see 4th or 5th with his buddy Lieberman. They validated their love during the debate.

[EXE619K]

76. Would you be happier if I told you.....

...that Kerry is my #2?




DEAN LEADS THE WAY!

[FrenchieCat]

77. yes but the Dean problem is....

that Dean supported UNILATERAL actions in Bosnia.

History records that what Dean supported did not happen...and didn't need to happen.

Bosnia ended up not a UNILATERAL action....Soooooo

Dean's advise in urging UNILATERAL action WAS NOT GOOD ADVISE and Clinton, being as smart as he was....did not take it...

Instead Clinton did what would turn out correct and did not employ UNILATERAL action in Bosnia.

AGAIN....PLEASE DON'T MISS THE POINT OF THE ARTICLE.

[EXE619K]

78. Good Morning French!

I beg of you to reconsider because yes, you and I are both correct that the intervention in Bosnia was not unilateral.

The point is, regarding the Iraq debacle, was there overwhelming support from our allies and the UN for us to intervene and remove Mr. Hussein?

I didn't think so.

Now, allow me to ask you....in your honest opinion, do you think there's a difference in a unilateral action backed by the urging of our allies(Balkans)and a unilateral action with hostile opposition from our allies(Iraq)?

Better yet, if the entire EU and the UN begged us to go into Iraq, would you consider this as a unilateral action?

Why do you think the Euros are having such a big argument in regards to their defense initiatives right now? It rooted from the Bosnia campaign because the bigger European partners in NATO could not mobilize their units fast enough(esp. with dissension from the eastern euro blocks). That's why from le Monde to Die Zeit, they were begging us to take action.

and one more thing.....

THERE'S NO NEED TO YELL AT ME! I'M AN ARDENT DEAN SUPPORTER, BUT I'M NOT IN THE "FLOG AND QUARTER WESLEY CLARK!" CAMP!

...like some other Dean people in here. Geezuz-Kur-I-st!




DEAN LEADS THE WAY!

[FrenchieCat]

80. What I think is....

that this Dean quote in the article from the letters says:
"I have reluctantly concluded that the efforts of the United States and NATO in Bosnia are a complete failure,"

But what Clinton & Clark did was:
Clinton eventually won approval from NATO but not the United Nations for a limited bombing campaign that led to peace talks and a NATO peacekeeping force at the end of 1995. About 3,000 U.S. troops are in Bosnia today.

TO ME THE DIFFERENCE IS STARTLING....the point is not Iraq here...the point is Foreign policy insight......Dean reluctantly concluded wrong.......and called something a failure that ended up being a success. That is what is being missed.

I want my president to have good insight........
and this shows clearly that Dean had none....and was willing to do something unilateraly that was not required.

What about you? What do you think?

[EXE619K]

83. Here's what I thunk.....

Were you in europe during early to mid 90's?

The european press and the vast majority of the european people(at least in the West) thought the same thing in regards to the failures of NATO and the US arms sanctions(I remember watching ZDF many times with euro polls in regards to this issue). There was a division within the UN (led mostly by Russia and China) about the limited bombing campaign in FRY. But, from the early 1990's, most of the western countries in UN was in FULL support of military action. And that's including France and Germany. The UN contingent forces from netherlands and the Danes were in FRY about six months prior to the signing of the DPA.

Clinton did not have to gain "approval" from NATO in regards to a short bombing campaign, or a land intervention. NATO was on our side from the onset of violence in FRY. NATO charter member resolution is moot point! why would you need to convince your allies that you are about to bomb FRY, when they were asking for the same action even before a proposal?

I disagree with your position in regards to poor judgement on Dean's part. How was it a bad judgement on behalf of Dean, when our european allies were saying the same thing?




DEAN LEADS THE WAY!

[shance]

81. The difference between unilateral and pre-emptive. PRETTY BIG.

The use of the word unilateral could be something that media pundits and others who dont like Dean may use in order to degrade his lead and distract from the overall purpose and intent of his letter,

however the truth would then be lost again for the sake of establishment politics and conventionalism.

Take a step back to the situation in Kosovo. Bosnia was already off to a huge catastrophic war, if you could call it a war, it was more like a massacre. It had many similarities to World War II. There was a leader Milosevic, dedicated to "ethnic cleansing" and engaged in countless murders of innocent people and families.

I remember hearing about the rapes and assasinations that were ocurring daily in Kosovo and remember feeling incredibly powerless and I felt some action must occur because what was happening was so horrific and wrong.

Where in Iraq, what was ocurring before our invasion was a continuation of our own economic sanctions, which had rendered the country powerless and hungry, and beholden to us. Yet we still found a reason to bomb their country (remember Shock and Awe), despite the millions of voices across the world who protested and screamed out against it.

So, in attempting to compare the two, the outcome is that Dean fought against genocide on both occasions.

However this one word unilateral, a misusage of words perhaps, is once again totally overshadowing what was a noble effort and attempt to save lives on Governor Deans part.

BOTH times Dean was on the right side. How can that be disputed? Just look what is happening in Iraq right now.

It is apparent, atleast to me, that Governor Dean saw the injustice ocurring in Bosnia and was probably providing support to Clinton to go ahead and take action.

I believe without a doubt we should have intervened, just as we did in WWII, and yet sources even will say that in World War II we were late then , when Hitler had already begun his mass murdering of innocent people.

It was a noble request by Dean, and yes for convenience sake during an election, maybe contradictory.

Heres my question.

Is it more important to focus on a misusage of words, although that is debatable because the situations are two different situations,

or is it more important to look at the two totally isolated incidents, where the motivation and agendas behind Bosnia and Iraq were so vastly and totally different, one being with us trying to stop further bloodshed and one, where we have initiated bloodshed.

One thing I will say, I believe Howard Dean is on the right side of principled action and doing what is right.

Unilateral is now apparently a debatable term, in regards to motivation and grammerical correctness, but there is no question the degree in difference between the two scenarios.

[FrenchieCat]

82. Again the real point is missed....

Which is that this actoin didn't have to be unilateral...but Dean was giving it the go ahead unilateral stamp of approval.........His reasoning? cause the NATO thing ain't working...

Point is that it ended up working, and Dean was wrong. He was wrong on a foreign policy matter that he weight in on.

so, it's that simple. And no, history will not be rewritten to make it look as though he was right.

That's the problem with that holy resume.....

[shance]

84. Which point Frenchy? Point of principle or point of usage of terminology?

Unilateral or Pre-emptive?

You tell me which one holds more meaning?

Dont get caught on a term when there were thousands of lives at stake in both situations. Then it looks like all you care about is the argument itself.

I hear what you are saying, but look at the different situations here. In other words....

YOU CANNOT MAKE A COMPARISON, other than Dean fought on both situations to defend the protection of innocent lives.

[rucky]

93. You're both right

I was gonna make the same points, In my Fred Flintstone sort of way.

the meaning of unilateralism has indeed changed, thanks to the Bush/PNAC Doctrine

Wanna go to war? Here's the due process:

Go to the UN w/ an earnest attempt - even if you know the outcome in advance.
Go to NATO
Build an Ad-Hoc Coalition

you don't skip these steps before you even consider the very last resort:

Act Unilaterally...or not.

If the case for intervention is clear, there shouldn't be much of a problem getting somebody on your side, no matter how "broken" the system may be. The process is just as important as the need for intervention. A strong UN (someday) will prevent futher atrocities.

Under no circumstance is a preemptive war justified.

[KittyWampus]

101. No, The REAL Point Is Dean Would Not Have Used Ground Troops

Thus eliminating a Bargaining Tool during negotiations... both BEFORE AND DURING A WAR.

Simply relying on bombing without the option of ground troops is the Neo-Con's preferred strategy.

It is a potentially ineffective strategy which prolongs conflicts and makes the AFTERMATH PROBLEMATIC.

Without TRAINED armed forces that the US would provide... what would happen after the bombing stopped?

THIS IS A BIG PART OF WHTY IRAQ WAS A FUCK UP!

Further, Diplomacy is an actual part of WAGING WAR. You need to be able to threaten to send in ground troops.

Bosnian Muslims given American arms would NOT have the training, speed, force or command to have been effective DURING airstrikes or AFTER airstrikes.

[Cheswick2.0]

87. well this reporter is clearly a freaking idiot

Comparing apples and oranges and misinterpreting Dean's core complaint about the Iraq war.

[robbedvoter]

88. negotiations, baad. I want it now!

Of course, Clinton knew better, got NATO on board, Clark in charge and a resounding victory. Thank god for Clinton & Clark!

[stickdog]

91. Dean was right! Again! (nt)

[maddezmom]

94. kick

[KittyWampus]

95. The Payoff Here Is: HE OPPOSED USING GROUND TROOPS!!!

Dean opposed using Amercian ground troops.

When you take ground troops off the table you are limiting the Forces options for Political Reasons only.
You MUST NOT let your opponents THINK that troops are EVER off the table.

That would show weakness and non-commitment.
It would indicate that Political considerations are outweighing tactical & strategic considerations.

Furthermore, taking troops off the table removes a point of leverage in negotiations LEADING UP TO WAR. Waging War is a PROCESS that includes diplomacy at every step.

Ground troops must NEVER be off the table when planning any Military campaign as that limits the Forces options.

Doing so would:

Display weakness and lack of resolve
Potentially damages Forces effectiveness
Takes a leverage point off the table

What Dean fails to understand is that waging war is a PROCESS with diplmacy involved at every step along the way. Taking ground forces off the table hobbles the DIPLOMATIC ARM OF WAGING WAR.

And saying Dean would have armed the Bosnian Muslims is not an answer because WE COULD NEVER RELY ON THEM TO ACCOMPLISH MISSIONS.

The Bosnian Muslims would NOT HAVE HAD THE MILITARY READINESS NOR CAPABILITIES to participate with the speed, force and command that the United States own Service.

This proves that Dean didn't know what he was talking about.

And even further it proves Dean was running for PRESIDENT from the getgo and only used Vermont's Governorship as a stepping stone.

[farmbo]

96. Duh!...Unilateral action to prevent a bloodbath...Not to create one...

...as is the case under the Bush doctrine.

To what lengths will the media go in their single-minded attempt to spin Howard Dean into a Rovian caricature?

[Kahuna]

97. Who is this guy, Dean? He is inconsistent in every..

so-called stand that he takes. Nothing shocks me anymore! Oops! Sorry, NSMA. :D

[BigMcLargehuge]

98. adding my two cents on the Bosnia situation

Of course Bosnia was a completely different situation than Iraq

and to anyone who happened to be in Europe at the time, like me, knows that the Europeans were lobbying hard for American assistance. Peacekeepers from Sweden, France, Holland, Norway, and several other countries were already on the ground in Bosnia but aid convoys were hijacked or blocked and peacekeepers were prevented from engagement by the wording of the UN Resolution that put them there.

Still more countries like Germany, Spain, and Italy absorbed hundreds of thousands of Bosnian refugees.

By the time the US entered the fray our European partners were strapped for cash in the worst sense and experiencing backlash from their own citizens over the money spent to fund the peacekeeping effort (that by all accounts was failing if you watched any European TV) and the money spent absorbing refugees.

Compounding the problem was that the participants were no strictly Serbian, they were Bosnians of Serbian extraction led by Radovan Karadjic and funded by the government in Serbia proper, the Croatians of Bosnian extraction funded by Alia Izbegovic's government in Croatia who used Bosnia as their personal chessboard to further the territorial desires of their respective countries.

It was a humanitarian disaster, but there was NOTHING unilateral about the US involvement. I was in England during the seige of Sarajevo and during the massacre at Mostar. Unlike the US Media, who ignored these events or relegated them to the back page, the BBC and ITV covered these events in all their gruesome detail.

Contrast that with the idiot-pResident's push into Iraq, and the pretenses for such action. Bosnia, hundreds of thousands dead, rampant starvation, detainment camps that mirrored their German and Polish counterparts from WW2, tens of thousands of people shot and dumped into mass graves. All to further the territorial and political strength of the Serbs and Croats.

In Iraq WE wanted Oil. We ignored the UN's disapproval and committed to military action anyway. We created a series of false pretenses to set our argument for war, and when these were rebuffed, went to war anyway.

Anyone else feel like a Serb?

[shance]

102. Thanks for the insight.

n/t