March 18, 2004
DOES CLINTON HAVE ANY FOREIGN POLICY ACHIEVEMENTS?:
Churches Burn as NATO Boosts Kosovo Peace Force (Shaban Buza, Mar 18, 2004, Reuters)
Albanians set fire to Serb Orthodox churches in Kosovo on Thursday as NATO scrambled to deploy up to 1,000 more troops to stifle an explosion of ethnic violence.A church was torched in the flashpoint town of Mitrovica despite the efforts of French NATO peacekeepers, who fired teargas and rubber bullets to drive off the mob.
Gunshots were heard, but it was not clear where from.
A Serb church and Serb homes were also set ablaze in the central town of Obilic, near the provincial capital Pristina.
Reports from Obilic said NATO peacekeepers had evacuated about 100 Serbs because it could not guarantee their safety -- as happened on Wednesday night in the capital, Pristina.
NATO summoned reinforcements after 22 people were killed in the worst ethnic clashes in Kosovo since the allies and the United Nations took control of the province from Serbia in 1999. Some 500 have been injured, of whom 20 were in intensive care.
Remind us again why we went to war against instead of with the Serbs?
Meanwhile, pompous ass Richard Holbrooke was on Chris Matthews last night criticizing the Bush administrations nation building record--anyone want to compare Afghanistan and Iraq to Haiti, Yugoslavia and Somalia?
Posted by Orrin Judd at March 18, 2004 10:26 AMThe KLA doesn't think the Europeans have the will to actually fight? Can't imagine where they would have gotten that idea...
Posted by: Mike Earl at March 18, 2004 10:39 AMOf course the Clintonistas will argue that everything was fine until January 21, 2001 when Bush took over and everything then went downhill (foreign policy, economy, etc). In other words nothing will sully Clinton's reputation to certain people.
Posted by: AWW at March 18, 2004 11:25 AMThis particular event seems to have been starte by a gang of Serbs chasing three Albanian kids into a river so they could drown.
That's worth defending?
Posted by: Jeff Guinn at March 18, 2004 11:39 AMHolebrook is a know it all horses' ass posing as an objective former UN ambassador (you know) and an expert on foreign affairs. Just another empty suit; a shill for the Democrats looking for a job in January.
Posted by: Genecis at March 18, 2004 11:42 AMThe US should have assisted the Serbs in a centuries-old religious/ethnic conflict, by driving Albanian Muslims from their homes and summarily executing the males ?
Why not help the Hutu carve up the Tutsi in Rwanda ?
US soldiers don't get nearly enough bayonet practice.
It would have been wonderful if Kosovo could have been permanently resolved, but five years of relative peace isn't chopped liver.
If the standard of a foreign policy "success" is that the policy results in a prosperous, lasting peace, then neither Afghanistan nor Iraq are likely to meet the standard of success in the next decade.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at March 18, 2004 11:42 AMOJ, the Serbs are not worthy, unless you want to follow Harry's lead and kill 10% or more of all Muslims. However, we usually don't do things by proxy.
But you are spot on with Holbrooke - he reminds me of McMamara, without the crushing burden of guilt and feebleness.
Posted by: jim hamlen at March 18, 2004 11:51 AMjim:
The folks on the frontline are always called on for unpleasant tasks. The Serbs are no different than the Russians, Israelis, and Indians in other conflicts around the region.
Posted by: oj at March 18, 2004 12:47 PM3%
Posted by: Harry Eagar at March 18, 2004 12:55 PMKerry complains that our troops were ordered into battle without adequate body armor. It appears under his leadership they might have body armor but will be firing rubber bullets.
Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at March 18, 2004 1:27 PMThe point is to reflect on how awkward it is that we sided with Muslim gangsters against Christians just 2.5 years before the Trade Towers fell. The Balkans are a nasty piece of real estate, and those with no blood on their hands are few and far between. But, as a question of American interest, doesn't siding with Islam in Europe look pretty foolish in retrospect?
Posted by: Paul Cella at March 18, 2004 1:42 PMI don't recall the Israelis slaughtering 7500 Palestinian men and boys in one afternoon. Nor do I recall reading about the IDF (or the Shin Bet) raping Arab women as a matter of course.
The Serbs are not worth it - let them go. They wanted to trash their country, and they did. Remember, they fought the Croats and other neighbors before starting in on the Muslims.
Posted by: jim hamlen at March 18, 2004 1:42 PMWretchard at The Belmont Club has more about the mess that is Europe.
Posted by: Paul Cella at March 18, 2004 2:06 PMThis is why most Americans had no interest in the Balkans, which was why Clinton had to stress so repeatedly that no Americans would die during our intervention there. If Europeans want to kill each other for such things, let them. A few years ago the Serbs were strong, and were kicking non-Serbs out of "their" lands. Now Kosovars think they're strong enough to begin the same, perhaps. If not yet, then soon, and certainly if international troops ever leave. But what's so wrong about ethnic cleansing, under the "you have to leave" definition, rather than "you have to die"? Isn't that what Germany's neighbors did to their German populations after WWII?
Posted by: brian at March 18, 2004 2:37 PMI think Paul Cella is right in the since that defending Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo, is not winning us any Brownie points in the Muslim world.
Too bad the Serbs didn't hire better PR 6 years ago. Actually now there are Serbs in Afghanistan helping Americans. How many from Kosovo? How many Muslims from Bosnia?
Posted by: h-man at March 18, 2004 3:10 PMRemember, sheeple:
BILL AND HILLARY ARE GODS COME IN THE FLESH AND GODS CAN DO NO WRONG! EVERYTHING WAS PERFECT IN EVERY WAY IMAGINABLE IN CLINTON'S GARDEN OF EDEN UNTIL THOSE EEEEEEVIL REPUBLICANS STOLE THE ELECTION!
CLINTON GOOD!
BUSH BAAAAAD!
CLINTON GOOD!
BUSH BAAAAAD!
CLINTON GOOD!
BUSH BAAAAAD!