GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

melon

ONE love, blood, life
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Messages
11,790
Location
Ásgarðr
That is, during the war in Kosovo.

"President Clinton is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be
away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."

-Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"No goal, no objective, not until we have those things and a compelling case is made, then I say, back out of it, because innocent people are going to die for nothing. That's why I'm against it."

-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/5/99

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."

-Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of presidential candidate George W. Bush


Why did they demoralize our brave men and women in uniform?

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."

-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)


"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo."

-Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99


"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years"

-Joe Scarborough (R-FL)


"I'm on the Senate Intelligence Committee, so you can trust me and believe me when I say we're running out of cruise missles. I can't tell you exactly how many we have left, for security reasons, but we're almost out of cruise missles."

-Senator Inhofe (R-OK )

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarifiedrules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"I don't know that Milosevic will ever raise a white flag"

-Senator Don Nickles (R-OK)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"

-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99


Why didn't they support our president in a time of war?


"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

-Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)


"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem."

-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

"The two powers that have ICBMs that can reach the United States are Russia and China. Here we go in. We're taking on not just Milosevic. We can't just say, 'that little guy, we can whip him.' We have these two other powers that have missiles that can reach us, and we have zero defense thanks to this president."

-Senator James Inhofe (R-OK)


"You can support the troops but not the president"

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)


"My job as majority leader is be supportive of our troops, try to have input as decisions are made and to look at those decisions after they're made ... not to march in lock step with everything the president decides to do."

-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)


For us to call this a victory and to commend the President of the United States as the Commander in Chief showing great leadership in Operation Allied Force is a farce"
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)


Why did they blame America first?

Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)


"Once the bombing commenced, I think then Milosevic unleashed his forces, and then that's when the slaughtering and the massive ethnic cleansing really started"

-Senator Don Nickles (R-OK)

"
Clinton's bombing campaign has caused all of these problems to explode"

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)


"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country"

-Pat Buchanan (R)


"These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark ...who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton."

-Michael Savage


"This has been an unmitigated disaster ... Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we've killed. Ask the refugees that we've killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals."

-Representative Joe Scarborough (R-FL)


"It is a remarkable spectacle to see the Clinton Administration and NATO taking over from the Soviet Union the role of sponsoring "wars of national liberation."

-Representative Helen Chenoweth (R-ID)


"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country"

-Pat Buchanan (R )


"By the order to launch air strikes against Serbia, NATO and President Clinton have entered uncharted territory in mankind's history. Not even Hitler's grab of the Sudetenland in the 1930s, which eventually led to WW II, ranks as a comparable travesty. For, there are no American interests whatsoever that the NATO bombing will
either help, or protect; only needless risks to which it exposes the American soldiers and assets, not to mention the victims on the ground in Serbia."

-Bob Djurdjevic, founder of Truth in Media

Why do Republicans hate America?

Melon
 
And this is exactly the reason that the idea of a vast right wing war machine seems flawed, they are partisans who belittle the other side regardless.
 
"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country"

-Pat Buchanan (R )


For the record, Buchanan has consistently spoken out against the war in Iraq as well. I know, I know, it's crazy, but it's true.

Thanks for this.
 
joyfulgirl said:
"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country"

-Pat Buchanan (R )


For the record, Buchanan has consistently spoken out against the war in Iraq as well. I know, I know, it's crazy, but it's true.

Thanks for this.

Pat is VERY consistent with his opinions.
 
melon said:

Why do Republicans hate America?

Melon

Hmmmmm....

Just curious......

I do not believe President Clinton sought congressional approval for his actions.

Is there a difference when Congress grants the President legitimate war powers, and then makes comments like the ones above.
 
Dreadsox said:


Pat is VERY consistent with his opinions.

Yes, I agree. I didn't mean that part was crazy; I just meant that he isn't toeing the party line on the Iraq issue and most people do, on both sides, so it's kind of extraordinary (and impressive) that he is so passionate and outspoken on this issue and going against his fellow conservatives.
 
I disagree with Pat Buchanan enough that I'd never vote for him, but his consistent candor makes you feel as if he actually believes what he says, rather than merely being political hypocrites...

...like all the other illustrious members of the GOP above. :wink:

This is my favorite quote:

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." -Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

Tell us, President Bush, what is your "exit strategy"?

Melon
 
Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Dreadsox said:
I do not believe President Clinton sought congressional approval for his actions.

Is there a difference when Congress grants the President legitimate war powers, and then makes comments like the ones above.

You're nitpicking, although, predictably, if this ever became widely public, I can guarantee that the GOP would deflect from the issues at hand and focus on this.

But there's one problem: this "nitpicking" is absolutely irrelevant. This Bush Administration is one of the most secretive administrations in all American history, and if you want to get technical, Congress never formally declared war either. Since technicalities are the overriding factor in all politics (and you know it is true), both Bush and Clinton's wars are on equal legal footing here--except Clinton always brought us into existing conflicts, rather than "preemptive strikes" like Bush. That's ultimately where Bush has gotten into the most trouble with his "war on terror."

Melon
 
Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Dreadsox said:


Hmmmmm....

Just curious......

I do not believe President Clinton sought congressional approval for his actions.

Is there a difference when Congress grants the President legitimate war powers, and then makes comments like the ones above.

Of course, the powers granted to Bush by Congress were based almost entirely on the mountain of lies the Bush administration told to get those powers.

So I think the powers are far from legitimate.
 
I emailed this list to Chris Matthews. Hopefully he'll play some real hardball with anyone who appears on his show who made those quotes.

Now i just gotta find Jon Stewart's email address :huh:
 
Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

melon said:


You're nitpicking, although, predictably, if this ever became widely public, I can guarantee that the GOP would deflect from the issues at hand and focus on this.

But there's one problem: this "nitpicking" is absolutely irrelevant. This Bush Administration is one of the most secretive administrations in all American history, and if you want to get technical, Congress never formally declared war either. Since technicalities are the overriding factor in all politics (and you know it is true), both Bush and Clinton's wars are on equal legal footing here--except Clinton always brought us into existing conflicts, rather than "preemptive strikes" like Bush. That's ultimately where Bush has gotten into the most trouble with his "war on terror."

Melon

Wow.....the bold felt like you stuck a knife in me.....unpredictably.

Congress granted the President full authority to act in Iraq. The problem that I have, is that at the top of the page, we have a predictable extreme tactic implying that somewhere members of the GOP as a collective group have labled democrats traitors because of their stance on this war.

But I digress, my problem is that it is not nitpicking, but predictably, the thread here deflects the real issue, that lies at the core of my point about authorizing war in Iraq, which the congress did.

The only person to hold responsible for Clinton's actions was Clinton. they are NOT on equal footing.

The Congress, DEMOCRATS as well as REPUBLICANS gave the President the authority to wage war. They are as deserving of being held as accountable as President Bush. The difference, if you are capable of not being partisan for an instant, is that there WAS A VOTE about Iraq, supported by both parties.

Jesus, Cindy Sheehan as at least spoken eloquently about that.

Enjoy this PREDICTABLE partisan thread.....I am out.
 
The question whether American Dems or Cons are more legal or who is on equal ground is idiotic and a total disrespect for life if one thinks about the thousands of victims.

No one has the right to make war, and no war is a "just" war. Obviously, some people think they have the right, which always leads to more pain and suffering one can imagine. We will see if God forgives them for that.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Dreadsox said:
But I digress, my problem is that it is not nitpicking, but predictably, the thread here deflects the real issue, that lies at the core of my point about authorizing war in Iraq, which the congress did.

No, they did not. It's the legal difference between an "enemy combattant" and a "prisoner of war." Congress did NOT formally declare war, and nor have they since World War II. And, you see, that's where the "technicalities" count.

Regardless, do any of those quotes from the GOP mention that? No. And how many American soldiers died in Kosovo in combat? Can you count them on one hand? And, even then, does that matter? Both the GOP and Bush expect unquestioning loyalty on this war, otherwise you are clearly a "terrorist sympathizer" and "un-American." This is why I have said that what you have said is, frankly, irrelevant.

Enjoy this PREDICTABLE partisan thread.....I am out.

HOW is this partisan? Because I'm exposing the GOP for being EXACTLY what they accuse liberals of being on a regular basis? Did you pay attention to the 2004 election?

I'm sorry. I don't know why Democrats always have to act "bigger" than the GOP, while we give them a free pass to be as jingoistic and narrow-minded as they want.

Melon
 
All this proves is that both sides are partisan. Is anyone in here so naive as to think that if Clinton was to do the same thing Iinvade Iraq) the Republicans would be backing him up? I have had enough of people who only toe the party line regardless of what the issue is.
 
Ft. Worth Frog said:
All this proves is that both sides are partisan.

I agree. I never denied this contention, but the problem is that when people think of the Republican Party, they see "patriots" and "real Americans" and when they think of the Democratic Party, they see "traitors" and "communists."

All I'm saying is that people who vote for the GOP primarily on that issue are fooling themselves, and it sounds like, particularly in the last election, there was a lot of people with short memories who did just that.

Melon
 
Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

indra said:


Of course, the powers granted to Bush by Congress were based almost entirely on the mountain of lies the Bush administration told to get those powers.

So I think the powers are far from legitimate.


Shall I post the quotes from the Clinton administration BEFORE BUSH ever came into office?

Shall I post the quotes from German, Russian, and French intelligence services that CLEARLY show that it was not just the US that thought he still had WMD?

I have so many times in here......There was no GRAND CONSPIRACY!

[Q](MELON) Congress did NOT formally declare war, and nor have they since World War II. And, you see, that's where the "technicalities" count.[/Q]

Not being completely knowledgeable about Kosovo, and unsure about Congress being involved in authorizing force, I thought out loud asking if there was a difference.....

I think there is, and I still do not know if Congress ever voted on Kosovo. Congress definitely voted on October 9, 2002 to give the President the authority to use force in Iraq. It was challenged here in Boston Federal Court by concerned parents of soldiers who wanted a formal declaration of war. The court ruled that this vote was legal under the terms of the constitution for the President to wage war.

Now I will go research to see if they ever took a vote for President Clinton's actions.

You may not agree with me. You may call me nitpicking, BUT, to me it IS an important detail. If President Bush had waged war in Iraq without a vote, I would have been right there pissed off. If you search the forum, you will see where I argued that there should have been a more formal declaration of war. That the Congress was not taking this job seriously.

So as for my partisan nitpicking....I would like to think of myself as a non-partisan nitpicker.

As for Kosovo, the ACLU had this to say:

[Q]FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, April 28, 1999

WASHINGTON -- The American Civil Liberties Union today said that the military action in Kosovo ordered by President Clinton violates the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution because it was not authorized by Congress.

In a letter sent to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, the ACLU applauded Rep. Thomas Campbell, R-CA, who has invoked the procedures in the War Powers Resolution to force debate on the use of force in Kosovo. Both of the resolutions introduced by Rep. Campbell, however, are expected to fail.

"It is essential," the letter said, "that congressional approval be sought before more troops are committed."

Congress is also expected to consider two other pieces of legislation, S. Con. Res. 21, which passed the Senate on March 23, and H.R. 1659. But the ACLU said that neither would satisfy the requirements of the War Powers Resolution.

"Launching a sustained military action is a decision that no one person in our democracy -- including the President -- can authorize," said ACLU Legislative Counsel Gregory T. Nojeim, adding that the ACLU takes no position on the merits of the use of force in Kosovo.

Congress adopted the War Powers Resolution in 1973 to ensure that U.S. troops are not sent into hostilities without Congressional authorization, except in cases where a national emergency is created by attack upon the United States.

"It is a power that the framers specified would be shared by Congress and the President," Nojeim added, noting that Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution grants to Congress "the power to declare war [and] grant letters of marque and reprisal." Under the Constitution, Congress is given the ultimate decision as to whether to use force; the President's power is limited to decisions on how to use the military after Congress has authorized the President to act.

Section 2(c) of the War Powers Resolution states that the President has constitutional authority to "introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, ... only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States. ..."

[/Q]
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Dreadsox said:

Shall I post the quotes from German, Russian, and French intelligence services that CLEARLY show that it was not just the US that thought he still had WMD?

I have so many times in here......There was no GRAND CONSPIRACY!

[/Q]



while many countries agreed that it was likely he had weapons, only one country thought this was worth starting a big old war over.

now, the whole word hates us, dozens of Iraqis die every day, thousands and thousands of young Americans are either dead or horribly wounded (and i see them every day coming up from Walter Reed into Silver Spring to eat at Chipotle, Pot Belly, and Red Lobster), and terrorists are still going to be blowing shit up for the next 100 years.

it's over. they're already lowering expectations and looking for an out.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Irvine511 said:
while many countries agreed that it was likely he had weapons, only one country thought this was worth starting a big old war over.

Not true, there were other countries. And I am not about to debate all that shit over again. WHile I supported the fact that I though war was necessary I was VERY critical and felt that there were blunders being made at initial way the administration approached the coalition.


AS for my contention that it is a different situation, Clinton informed Congress that he was sending the bombers in without Congressional approval. He notified them within 48hours of the operation, and that it would happen with or without them, as he had operated in Somalia and Hatti. If I am understanding everything I have read on the topic.

Congress chose to vote to give Clinton the powers after he had notified them that he was launching the mission. It was a very DIVIDED vote.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Dreadsox said:


Not true, there were other countries. And I am not about to debate all that shit over again. WHile I supported the fact that I though war was necessary I was VERY critical and felt that there were blunders being made at initial way the administration approached the coalition.



the Marshall Islands don't count.

since you are a supporter of the war, and have been dismayed at the continuous blunders and near universal poor decisions, i assume you would call for, at the very least, the resignment of Rumsfeld?
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Irvine511 said:




the Marshall Islands don't count.

since you are a supporter of the war, and have been dismayed at the continuous blunders and near universal poor decisions, i assume you would call for, at the very least, the resignment of Rumsfeld?

I am shocked he is still there!
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Dreadsox said:


I am shocked he is still there!



i suppose my question comes from my disappointment, if not outright outrage, at people (not necessarily you) who were very pro-war for very high and mighty reasons (establishment of a democracy in the heart of the Middle East! end US support of homocidal dictators! take down one of the earth's worst regimes!) who are still defending this administration's completely and totally inept conduct of the post-war.

if you really believed in the war, wouldn't you be demanding the heads of Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney and Bush on a platter for fucking it all up so royally?

instead, i hear excuses, excuses, excuses for this pathetically inept administration.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GOP Traitors in a Time of War...

Irvine511 said:




while many countries agreed that it was likely he had weapons, only one country thought this was worth starting a big old war over.

now, the whole word hates us, dozens of Iraqis die every day, thousands and thousands of young Americans are either dead or horribly wounded (and i see them every day coming up from Walter Reed into Silver Spring to eat at Chipotle, Pot Belly, and Red Lobster), and terrorists are still going to be blowing shit up for the next 100 years.

it's over. they're already lowering expectations and looking for an out.

The United Nations passed three different resolutions authorizing the use of military force against Iraq if it failed to comply with the UN resolutions. In addition, since the invasion, the United Nations has passed another 3 resolutions approving the occupation!

Terrorist hate America. Many others around the world disagree with certain US policies, but many continue to work with the United States and send their own troops to support the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Japan has given several Billion dollars to the operations in Iraq as well as sending troops.

The United Kingdom has an entire Armored Division in Southern Iraq and is responisble for security and stability in that region. Poland, Ukraine, South Korea and Italy have all sent thousands of troops into Iraq.

Iraq today now has an opportunity that was impossible while Saddam was in power. They have the opportunity to develop into a strong democratic and prosperous country. The Planets security has been greatly enhanced by the removal of Saddam who was a threat to the planets large energy reserves located just across the Iraqi border in Kuwait and Suadi Arabia. Insuring that Iraq becomes a country that is not a threat to its neighbors and is a cooperative member of the international community will obviously enhance the security of the planet.

Its going to take a long time for Democracy to develop in Iraq, but the country already passed a hurdle that many on the left in here said was not possible. On January 30, 2005 over 8 million Iraqi's proved terrorist and foreign critics wrong when they woke up and voted in their countries first free election in decades.

No doubt, there will be terrorist launching attacks for years to come, followed by critics who will claim that that alone constitutes failure.
 
Back
Top Bottom