An Ungrateful Nation Forgets

[Nexus7]

So Kosovo declared its independence. And it's been in the news. People talked about liberty and other noble things. The Serbs bitched. Even the man-in-the-monkey suit, taking a moment from desperately trying to attach his name to something good in Africa, broke out some forgettable platitude.

But of Bill Clinton and Wesley Clark, not one word!

Breaking the trend of propping up some brutal dictator, or starting an economic war, or other meddling in other countries' affair, Bill Clinton actually fulfilled the promise of America by stopping a genocide. From the military operation to the reconstruction, the planning was so good that barring a few mishaps, Kosovo progressed to as good a future as could be imagined at the end of the past century. It is hard to imagine any other past president doing such a thing.

And yet, the media, the so-called experts, the wankers of the blogosphere, everyone forgot Bill Clinton.

[gateley]

1. Please don't forget Joe Biden - he fought for two years to stop the genocide. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

2. You're Right

I dislike the Father of Outsourced Torture as much as the next guy - but he did get Kosovo right, deserves the credit.

[knitter4democracy]

3. I know some who will never forget it was Bill Clinton.

He and Clark gave the orders to bomb churches on Orthodox Easter. We won't forget that any time soon, especially since the Serbian Patriarch was on their side and doing everything he could to make the churches sanctuaries for the Kosovars and Albanians and get the killing to stop.

[Nexus7]

7. You would rather have that Clinton let the genocides continue then

In war, there are mistakes. There have been multiple grievous mistakes in Iraq.

Yet, to get unreserved credit, Bill Clinton must carry out the perfect mission. He must make every one in the operation operate without error.

Otherwise it is not good enough for some, such as you.

For me though, it is enough that Bill Clinton and Wesley Clark stopped a genocide in its tracks. I give them full marks for that. Nobody else in the wide world did it. Many thought they would, many talked. Bill Clinton did. The Clintons do (obligatory primary reference).

[knitter4democracy]

8. No, but I find it interesting that Clinton stopped all Iraq bombing during Ramadan.

He said that it was because Ramadan was a holy month and to be respected. Then, he turned around and started the Serbian bombing campaign on the holiest of days to the Orthodox.

If he'd waited one day, people working to stop the genocide would've respected him a lot more. As it was, many who were working on our side felt like they were lumped in with the enemies and forced to worship in secret in basements. He angered those who were with us, killed innocents, and gave more ammo to the genocidal maniacs. Bad decision. Waiting one day would've made all the difference. If he could wait a month in Iraq, he could've waited a day in Serbia.

Maybe you should talk with the Serbians who were on our side about it before you slam me. Diplomacy is a wonderful thing, and Clinton and Clark could've used it more to their advantage--especially if they'd known more about what was happening in Serbia.

See, our media and government portrayed it like all Serbians were in favor of wiping out all of the Albanians and Kosovars (both groups are Muslim). It wasn't like that at all. Many were hiding neighbors and friends and trying to keep them safe, the patriarch was cleaning house of any priests who were for the genocide at all and speaking out against it (and he's more of a leader to most Serbs than Milosevic ever was), and many were just plain scared of Milosevic's men. In other words, we had allies amongst the Serbs, not that our media ever told that story. We only heard about it at church and through Orthodox sources.

So, it's not okay to bomb Muslims during Ramadan, but it's hunky-dory to bomb Christians on Easter as long as it eventually stops the war. :eyes:

[Viva_La_Revolution]

4. My Gramma's Care Aid is from Romania, and is going back for a visit in April...

She was so excited, but the recent news has her a little worried.

[Rageneau]

5. We Democrats are a party of cranky, ungrateful brats.

Less than a year ago, both Clintons were accepted, even honored, by rank-and-file Democrats, and even independents and some Republicans had to grudgingly concede they were both excellent politicians, hard workers, tough, Democrats. Six months ago, they were still two of the very best we've ever had.

But today many Democrats are spitting both of their names from their mouths as if they were foul and evil, as if they were the most perverted child molesting traitors in the country.

The haters and screamers, the people doing all the accusing and insultin, of course claim that's because the Clintons have somehow changed, but that's not true. People don't change after 30 years -- especially if they're happy with the way they are. The Clintons did not suddenly become racists. To suggest they did is to do nothing but lie on purpose for political reasons -- to "do anything to win."

It is rank-and-file Democrats who have changed. A bunch of them seem to have become Lear's thankless children, repaying the Clinton's perserverence and contributions by hurling rotting garbage at them -- discarding them like an aging wife, and running off with the pretty young thing who has never done a thing to pay dues or earn the party's loyalty.

[Nexus7]

6. Indeed. But moreover,

Moreover though, there is a special hatred reserved for the Clintons. It is maybe because the constant undermining of the Clintons in the media, the caveats attached parenthetically to every mention of a Clinton achievement, the snide asides, the jokes; maybe these have penetrated into the minds of the people, so that every otherwise sensible, decent people carry the Clinton hatred not very much below the surface.