Bill Clinton's Arrogance...

[SavageEagle]

i did a years tour in kosovo, and all i can say is that clinton made the right choice sending troops in... there was some pretty crappy stuff being done to the right people... he does deserve some credit because he (and the UN) went in despite an american population not wanting it... it was a complete success no matter how you look at it and thats why its not on the news... military action leading to good things??? never!

Thanks for the insight. I have a lot to learn about the post-vietnam conflicts. I'd rep you, but I'm out for a few more hours!

The average citizen doesn't care whether WW-II was fought or not..... UNLESS he/she has a personal/family reason to be aware of the impact historical military conflicts have had on this country. Ask any college student where the invasion of Europe started, and when......... most won't know....and worse.... most don't care.

And as sad and upset as this makes ME, you're absolutely right. I almost want to cry thinking about it. I got into a conversation about WWI and WWII with some guys not long ago. They were just absolutely clueless. I ended up giving them a lot of good references and movies true to the times. While they knew some of the movies, I told them to go back and watch them and pay more attention to the background and the little things. From the weapons they use, to the areas they go, to the battle plans that occasionally make their way into the movies.

The biggest movie I always suggest is Patton. If you REALLY want to understand WWII on the European Theater, you HAVE to watch Patton!

 

[Jay]

Working at a VA hospital makes one very aware of the history that has shaped this country. I've spoken with Veterans from WWI, WWII, Korea, and VietNam. It's most often a very humbling experience.

Semper Fidelis

 

[rambone]

I found the statue of Bill Clinton.

 

[Phil502]

There was and still is a lot of crimes being committed against Serbs and Christians in that area. There is a LONG history there and it can't be described in a small window of time. Where in the world do Muslims really give equal respect to non_muslims, I would like to know. Just because the violence against non-Muslims does not play on CBS and NBC that does not mean it is not there. Suppose someone wanted to break off a piece of this country, how would that play? Albanians are trying to break off a piece of Macedonia too, and the UN protected them too. No it's not so simple to me. Here are links to violence no one hears about in this country. Sure they love George Bush and Clinton, thats who endorsed and helped them make a Muslim country out of Kosovo. While I don't agree with the atrocities committed on either side, I still think it is a complex issue that goes back over a VERY LONG time.

The Destruction of the Churches of Kosovo

While The Churches Burn : NOVAKEO.COM

BBC NEWS | Europe | Kosovo rioters burn Serb churches


I forgot Turkey. That's one Muslim country that gives non-Muslims a more level playing field I think.

 

[CarmelHP]

During World War II the Germans raised Muslim SS Mountain Divisions in that region. The Germans were never able to use those divisions outside Yugoslavia because they were too busy massacring Christians to be bothered with what the high command wanted. There is a lot of history in the area, a lot of blood spilled on every side. The Europeans wouldn't touch that conflict right in their back yard. Why that was left up to us escapes me.

There was and still is a lot of crimes being committed against Serbs and Christians in that area. There is a LONG history there and it can't be described in a small window of time. Where in the world do Muslims really give equal respect to non_muslims, I would like to know...... I still think it is a complex issue that goes back over a VERY LONG time.

 

[miguel]

During World War II the Germans raised Muslim SS Mountain Divisions in that region. The Germans were never able to use those divisions outside Yugoslavia because they were too bust massacring Christians to be bothered with what the high command wanted. There is a lot of history in the area, a lot of blood spilled on every side. The Europeans wouldn't touch that conflict right in their back yard. Why that was left up to us escapes me.

Exactly! That's why the Balkans have been referred to as "the powder keg of Europe".

There have been wrongs on both sides, no doubt, and that's what a war is, I suppose. Happily I've never had to experience that myself and with God's grace never will.

My original point was to comment on the strategic error I believe we made in taking sides with the Albanians. We had already been hit by Jihadists several times (the Marine barracks in Lebanon; first World Trade Center bombing...) and then we take sides with the KLA against the Serbs?

At times I don't know what the mouth breathers at State are thinking. Bomb Serbia, but trade with China...no Cuban cigars, but sell F15s to the Saudis. Few common threads there except $$$, methinks.

 

[hornadylnl]

I was in Bosnia from March-October of 97 and it was the biggest waste of time in my life. When we got their the bullets had already quit flying but the tensions were still high. I would liken it to right after slavery was ended. We'd drive through villages where 3 and 4 year old children would flash muslim or serb victory signs. Even the little children were bred to hate. It will take generations to undo that just like it has here. I was only 20 years old so I didn't know much about the politics of it all. We were obviously biased to the muslim side. They gave us less trouble than the serbs did.

I was in Camp McGovern which was just a mile or two out of Brcko. I was in a mechanized infantry company attached to a tanker task force. I was charlie company and our delta company was also with us. They were at the Brcko bridge when the riot happened. This is a long pdf but if you start reading at around page 150 for 20 pages or so, you'll see what happened. I was stuck in another town listening to all of this happen on the radio. http://carl.army.mil/download/csipubs/baumann_bosnia.pdf

Our ROE was you can use deadly force if you felt your life was in danger. We all new full well that if we did, we would go to Leavenworth because our immediate chain of command all the way up would sell us up the river. I had to go up to a hill to stop a potential riot for a radio tower. We were told we couldn't even fire a warning shot without authorization so we had to take our pick handles off of our humvees.

Our morale was terrible. Out of a company of 100 or so guys, over 10 got article 15's while there. It was a complete and utter waste of my time.

 

[abnk]

i did a years tour in kosovo, and all i can say is that clinton made the right choice sending troops in... there was some pretty crappy stuff being done to the right people... he does deserve some credit because he (and the UN) went in despite an american population not wanting it... it was a complete success no matter how you look at it and thats why its not on the news... military action leading to good things??? never!

When were you there, brother? I was there in '01, attached to 10th Mtn.

I dislike Bill Clinton just as much as the next INGO-er, but I agree with IndyGunworks in that he actually did the right thing.

The Novakeo article is heavily biased. The Kosovo conflict was purely based on ethnicity. With the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Cold War, communist/socialist Eastern European countries were no longer Soviet satellites. With that, Yougoslavian states started to secede from the confederation. As I mentioned earlier, with every republic seceding, with the exception Macedonia, the conflict worsened; Slovenia was the lucky one, Croatia had military conflict, but did not suffer extreme civilian casualties due to its strong military, and Boznia-Herzegovina had disastruous consequences that turned out to be an embarrasment for Europe and a difficult situation for us to fix.

At this point, there was still one republic, Montenegro, and two autonomous provinces, Kosovo and Vojvodina that had not gained independence. From strategic and political standpoints, I do not think it is too difficult to see why we intervened. Not in order of importance:

1 The past decade had proven that conflicts got worse as Serbia got desperate. We nor Europe wanted a repeat of Bosnia.
2. The Serbian military and paramilitary were targeting civilians.
3. Kosovo lacked a military (I'll come back to the KLA).
4. With the Greek sentiment turning against us, we needed a friendly country in the Balkans which would allow us access to their bases. Albania was (and is) arguably our biggest ally in the Balkans. At that time, we had a small, subtle Air Force presence there.
5. Serbia was (and is) and the biggest Russian ally in the Balkans.
6. Europe was undecided.
7. The KLA was funded with drug money. We did not take their side; we took the side of the populace. We were still arresting suspected KLA members in '01. An early intervention by us prevented a stronger KLA.
8. There were rumors that if we did not act, there might be an influx of Middle-Eastern Mujahedeen as in Bosnia.
9. Albanian "Muslims" are not the Muslims we think when we hear the word Muslim. They were forcefully proselytized by the Ottomans or converted for social advancement, but fought hard to maintain a national identity.
10. The conflict was not religious. Albanians of different religions were not killing off each other.

I'm sure there are more reasons that I failed to capture or that may not even come to light until many decades later, but I don't think it's too hard to see why we intervened at that time.

In retrospect, it's even easier to see the success. Many lives were saved, people returned to their homes. Peace has greatly improved. The KLA never fully developed. Middle-Eastern fighters never gained a stronghold in the region. Bi-ethnic cooperation is increasing. Serbia and Kosovo have finally turned their focus to economic development. Drug traffic was hurt badly (and we know which Middle-Eastern country makes a living by growing opium). We have solid bases in the Balkans.

Those are strategic/political points. From a constitutional standpoint, I cannot justify our intervention.

One irrelevant point to clarify, the SS unit mentioned earlier was not Muslim, but Albanian. It was actually named after George Kastrioti Scanderbeg, the Albanian national hero, who successfully stalled the Ottomans for decades and was titled by Pope Pious II a Champion of Christ.

I guess I wrote more than I intended. Sorry for the lengthy post.

 

[IndyGunworks]

reps for saying what i didnt have the patience to put into writing.

 

[Phil502]

The Skanderbeg SS was Muslim.

The man Skanderbeg was alive 400 years before WW2

 

[hornadylnl]

In Bosnia, you couldn't tell the difference between the serbs and the Muslims. You only knew by which side of the ZOS you were on.

3 days after 5 of our guys got purple hearts in the Brcko riot, we turned the bridge over to them. That was a huge slap in the face to the people fighting to protect that bridge. People caught out on patrol had to take the barrels off of their 60's to use as a club because they weren't allowed to fire.

 

[JetGirl]

Thanks for taking the time to type that out abnk...that's the kind of answer I was looking for. Reps for making the effort!

 

[TopDog]

while i may not be as up to date on the political aspects of things as i should be it was slightly one sided.... but its a differant culture over there... it was like giving more power to the big sister to baby sit the younder sister.... sure they should have had equal powers, but you trust be big sis to make the right decsion and be able to stand by it.... both sides were commiting some atrocities BUT the fact that an actual serbian military was coming through casing problems was the final straw. we stepped up for the little guy who was just protecting his families... threw out the bad guys.... and left the most responsible part in charge... kosovo is now its own independant country and i dont think is considered a poversed nation anymore..... clinton gets in my book for the kosovo thing.

Only time will tell if it was the right choice or not. Lets take a moment to reflect on 3 recent past mistakes we made in supporting one over the other:

1) The Shah of Iran
2) Saddam Hussein
3) Osama bin Laden

These were different situations and all seemed like the right thing to do at the time. However the end result years later did not work out well for us. And I'm not saying a mistake was made here, but we don't have a great track record of setting up governments for other people or playing king makers.

If I understand history (and there is a good chance I don't) we are much better of doing what we did in Japan. Help rebuild (thank you W. Edwards Deming) and pretty much leaving the politics to the native people of the country.

Oh and one last thought, dirty billy doing something right? Even a monkey gets lucky once in a while and finds a banana...