Holbrooke for a change

[Dr Adequate]

So the woowoos are still pretending that "change" means "only appointing people with no experience"?

How amusing.

 

[BeAChooser]

So the woowoos are still pretending that "change" means "only appointing people with no experience"?

No it's just the type of experience that's the problem. I find it curious that Obama's supporters see no incongruity in appointing an interventionist when for many years those same supporters have been arguing against interventionists. Don't you feel a little betrayed by Obama?

 

[Dr Adequate]

No it's just the type of experience that's the problem. I find it curious that Obama's supporters see no incongruity in appointing an interventionist when for many years those same supporters have been arguing against interventionists. Don't you feel a little betrayed by Obama?

No, of course not, because, like Obama:

I don’t oppose all wars.

After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this Administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such a tragedy from happening again.

I don’t oppose all wars ... What I am opposed to is a dumb war.​

It wasn't "interventionism" I was opposed to. It was flagrant drooling stupidity.

I was, of course, thoroughly in favor of the intervention in Yugoslavia, as it then was. If, as you claim, "Holbrooke was the one who moved Bill Clinton into an interventionist stance in Bosnia and Serbia", then I for one would like to buy him a beer.

 

[BeAChooser]

I don’t oppose all wars ... What I am opposed to is a dumb war.​

Yet he picked a running mate who evidently is opposed to all wars except "dumb ones". How else do you explain Biden's vote against kicking Saddam out of Kuwait back in 1991 but his vote for Bush's war in 2002?

It wasn't "interventionism" I was opposed to. It was flagrant drooling stupidity.

But wasn't our intervention in Kosovo, that Holbrooke brokered, flagrant drooling stupidity? Afterall, we allied ourselves with a terrorist organization and lied about genocide. Then, to extricate ourselves from the mess Holbrooke and Clinton got us in (where we fired off nearly our entire conventional cruise missile inventory to no effect ... except hitting the Chinese embassy ... and even lost a stealth fighter ... that ended up in Soviet hands) and avoid the thousands of body bags that were sure to come if we invaded Kosovo (given that Serb forces there were barely hurt) we had to commit war crimes by deliberately bombing civilian targets from 30,000 feet until Serbia cried "uncle".

I was, of course, thoroughly in favor of the intervention in Yugoslavia

Why? What national interest did we have in doing what we did? (You do know, don't you that Clinton did it to take the focus off the Cox Report on Chinagate, don't you? )

 

[Dr Adequate]

Yet he picked a running mate who evidently is opposed to all wars except "dumb ones". How else do you explain Biden's vote against kicking Saddam out of Kuwait back in 1991 but his vote for Bush's war in 2002?



But wasn't our intervention in Kosovo, that Holbrooke brokered, flagrant drooling stupidity? Afterall, we allied ourselves with a terrorist organization and lied about genocide. Then, to extricate ourselves from the mess Holbrooke and Clinton got us in (where we fired off nearly our entire conventional cruise missile inventory to no effect ... except hitting the Chinese embassy ... and even lost a stealth fighter ... that ended up in Soviet hands) and avoid the thousands of body bags that were sure to come if we invaded Kosovo (given that Serb forces there were barely hurt) we had to commit war crimes by deliberately bombing civilian targets from 30,000 feet until Serbia cried "uncle".



Why? What national interest did we have in doing what we did? (You do know, don't you that Clinton did it to take the focus off the Cox Report on Chinagate, don't you? )

Chance alone should ensure that one day you accidentally say something non-stupid. But if this has ever happened, I must have missed it.

 

[LawnOven]

BeAChooser, how many times did you vote for Bush (the second one)?

 

[jj]

See? I managed to annoy a liberal. So you know I'm on your side, Chooser.

Please don't accuse a moderate conservative who worked for Goldwater as a "liberal" in the future.

 

[gdnp]

Put another way, since when are Albanians a US national interest?

*crickets chirp*

Hey, since they supplied 240 troops to the Iraq war effort.

That's 240 more than France.

 

[joobz]

I get it, Clinton is an evil mastermind bent on doing sinister things so that he could take over the world.

Pinky, what'll we do tomorrow night?

 

[The Fool]

I see you think you're a better pathologist than all the pathologists who have made public statements about the Brown death (and that includes the military pathologists at AFIP who examined Brown's body).

I think you are obviously an apologist for Professor Plum. How do you explain that nobody was allowed to enter the Library until after it was "checked" by the "police"? A guy I met on the bus said that his cousin once met a man who thinks plum did it. This mans testimony has been largely ignored by the main stream media even though the guy offered to cross his heart and hope to die. Not to mention the disappearance of the candlestick.

Not suggesting anything. Just asking questions.


seriously dude.....to believe this crap you need to believe that a .45 slug can enter a head and vanish.....the so called fragments on what are claimed to be this guys xrays look to me like dust specks. They don't add up to enough volume of fragments to make up a pinhead never mind a .45 slug. Clinton couldn't keep a sly blowjob secret yet you credit him with a conspiracy to murder....

Can you give me an estimate of how many people you believe were involved and are taking it to thier grave? Roughly how many?

 

[Undesired Walrus]

How do you explain....

How do you explain ....

How do you explain .....

'I'm just asking questions'.

'How do you explain Bin Laden's family being flown out of America?'

The phrase 'How do you explain' is -by its very nature- the sign of a person who doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. Your logic is no different than a 9/11 truther.

 

[gdnp]

The thing that has impressed me the most about the Obama transition is the air of competence. I remember the Clinton-Bush transition and recall thinking at the time that it seemed that the Bush team was just not up to the task. Appointments seemed to be made based on cronyism and ideological purity--lots of Bush's friends from back in Texas--rather than based on experience and the suitability of the candidate to the job at hand. Other positions at the Undersecretary level went unfilled for months--not because there were problems getting candidates confirmed, but because Bush just hadn't gotten around to nominating anyone.

BAC dislikes Holbrooke because of the role he took in the largely successful intervention in Kosovo, which makes the Bush administration's incompetently administered intervention in Afghanistan and ill-advised and incompetently administered intervention in Iraq look even worse by comparison. But the fact remains that Holbrooke is well suited for this appointment, with the experience and gravitas to do the job. In the Bush administration a similar candidate would have been rejected if he didn't toe the line on abortion and the spot would have been filled with one of George's drinking buddies. Or more likely not filled at all, as fighting Islamic terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan took second fiddle to regime change in Iraq.

 

[BeAChooser]

Chance alone should ensure that one day you accidentally say something non-stupid. But if this has ever happened, I must have missed it.

And what portion of what I stated is untrue? You seem extremely vague in your response. Are you having trouble mustering facts to support your position on these subjects? Perhaps you think silly adhominems are an adequate substitute for actual facts?

 

[BeAChooser]

seriously dude.....to believe this crap you need to believe that a .45 slug can enter a head and vanish.....the so called fragments on what are claimed to be this guys xrays look to me like dust specks. They don't add up to enough volume of fragments to make up a pinhead never mind a .45 slug.

So you are claiming to be an expert in forensic pathology and gunshot? How odd that NONE of the other half a dozen such experts who have made public statements on this matter seem to agree with you, FOOL.

 

[BeAChooser]

'I'm just asking questions'.

'How do you explain Bin Laden's family being flown out of America?'

The phrase 'How do you explain' is -by its very nature- the sign of a person who doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. Your logic is no different than a 9/11 truther.

On the contrary, the difference between me and a 9/11 truther is that the experts are my side of this topic and you, like the 9/11 truthers, are the ones having the problem answering basic questions. You see, I have no problem explaining why Bin Laden's family was flown out of America when they were flown out. I even discussed that topic with 9/11 truthers in the Conspiracy forum a time or two. Go check it out. Now can you demonstrate the same rationality I showed them and answer the questions I asked ... or not?

 

[BeAChooser]

BAC dislikes Holbrooke because of the role he took in the largely successful intervention in Kosovo

I made it quite clear why I dislike Holbrooke. I don't need you to misrepresent my views, gdnp. Holbrooke and the Clinton administration lied about genocide in Kosovo. They fabricated that excuse for war, with the complicity of the mainstream media. Holbrooke and the Clinton administration lied about the Rambouillet peace accord. It was designed to do nothing but force a war with terms that NO nation would have accepted. And the war wasn't nearly as successful as you claim. It highly embarrassed NATO and the US. After all that bombing, Serbia's army and air force left Kosovo virtually unscathed. Most of the bombs we dropped fell on dummy targets. And to end the conflict we violated the Geneva Conventions and deliberately bombed civilians and civilian targets.

But as I said, my biggest complaint is that Holbrooke is clearly an interventionist and nation builder, and given that the democrats made such a big stink about Bush intervening and nation building, I find his appointment just one more indication of how hypocritical democrats are when they swoon over what a wonderful appointment Obama has made.

Or more likely not filled at all, as fighting Islamic terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan took second fiddle to regime change in Iraq.

Well, gdnp, I guess we are going to see how well your candidate and his appointees do over the next four years. I wonder what excuses you'll be offering then, if things don't work out?

 

[gdnp]

But as I said, my biggest complaint is that Holbrooke is clearly an interventionist and nation builder, and given that the democrats made such a big stink about Bush intervening and nation building, I find his appointment just one more indication of how hypocritical democrats are when they swoon over what a wonderful appointment Obama has made.

So wait a minute: You have demonstrated yourself to be an interventionist and nationbuilder through your support of Iraq, yet you are complaining about Holbrooke because (you think) he agrees with you?

Well, gdnp, I guess we are going to see how well your candidate and his appointees do over the next four years. I wonder what excuses you'll be offering then, if things don't work out?

That's easy. I'll just blame it on Bush. Or the obstructionist Republicans in the senate that blocked Obama's programs.

Really, BAC, interventionism and nation-building are not all-encompassing theologies that one must accept or reject in toto. One can believe that the US was right to intervene in WWII and did an admirable job of nationbuilding in Japan and Germany after the war without believing that intervention in Vietnam or the Bay of Pigs invasion was a good idea. Each situation must be evaluated on its own merits. I believe that the Balkans made the cut, and that Iraq did not. You seem to believe the opposite. History will judge.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Ah yes ... you believe it to be an accident because the Clinton administration published a report saying it was an accident?
...Just citing some facts here and awaiting your rational explanation, DR.

We have already done this, and you weren't paying attention then. Not gonna waste the time twice. I'd like to point out to you that people are getting the lumber laid on them for wandering OT. Plumjam got suspended. Please, stick to Holbrooke and interventionism, YOUR chosen topic.

Maybe we should intervene?

Why?

What compelling national interest is served?

Your previous suggestion to intervene in Iran wasn't acted upon, by a president willing to use the hammer when he felt it apt.

Why do you think Obama might, now that W is done with his duty? Is it your understanding the Obama is more bellicose than W, more apt to use force?

DR

 

[kallsop]

Oh, so now we can't be a critic about a specific action the Obama administration makes during some unspecified grace period?

At any time, it's racist.

Really though, with a tax cheat possibly heading for confirmation and lobbyist exemptions starting to get printed, the wheels are falling off rather quickly.

Hope 'n Change, you deserve it.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Hey, since they supplied 240 troops to the Iraq war effort.

That's 240 more than France.

1. I am sorry, you are four years on the wrong side of the question. The relevance of the question in 1999 seems to have escaped you. Seems to me that 240 was a debt paid, but YMMV on interpreting that.

2. Out of a force of about 120, 000, here and there, 240 is ... of political use, mostly. Symbolism and imagery, though I suspect the lads gave a good effort and acquitted themselves well. Had no reports of otherwise when I was in the fun zone, but didn't ever work with them directly.

DR