Rate Thread
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Choose Your Favorite Pro-War Candidate - by John Pilger
#1
http://antiwar.com/orig/pilger.php?articleid=2089

he shows that democrats aren't much either

a long article but worth reading

The truth is that Clinton was little different from Bush, a crypto-fascist. During the Clinton years, the principal welfare safety nets were taken away and poverty in America increased sharply; a multibillion-dollar missile "defense" system known as Star Wars II was instigated; the biggest war and arms budget in history was approved; biological weapons verification was rejected, along with a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty, the establishment of an international criminal court and a worldwide ban on landmines. Contrary to a myth that places the blame on Bush, the Clinton administration in effect destroyed the movement to combat global warming.

In addition, Haiti and Afghanistan were invaded, the illegal blockade of Cuba was reinforced and Iraq was subjected to a medieval siege that claimed up to a million lives while the country was being attacked, on average, every third day: the longest Anglo-American bombing campaign in history. In the 1999 Clinton-led attack on Serbia, a "moral crusade," public transport, nonmilitary factories, food processing plants, hospitals, schools, museums, churches, heritage-listed monasteries and farms were bombed. "They ran out of military targets in the first couple of weeks," said James Bissett, the Canadian former ambassador to Yugoslavia. "It was common knowledge that NATO went to stage three: civilian targets." In their cruise missile attack on Sudan, Clinton's generals targeted and destroyed a factory producing most of sub-Saharan Africa's pharmaceutical supplies. The German ambassador to Sudan reported: "It is difficult to assess how many people in this poor country died as a consequence . . . but several tens of thousands seems a reasonable guess."

Covered in euphemisms, such as "democracy-building" and "peacekeeping," "humanitarian intervention" and "liberal intervention," the Clintonites can boast a far more successful imperial record than Bush's neocons, largely because Washington granted the Europeans a ceremonial role, and because NATO was "onside." In a league table of death and destruction, Clinton beats Bush hands down.
Reply

#2
yeah i know the truth is just too heavy or stratling
Reply

#3
Oliver Cromwell (25 April 1599 – 3 September 1658) England needs you..!!
Reply

#4
Almac Wrote:Oliver Cromwell (25 April 1599 – 3 September 1658) England needs you..!!

what do you mean? i hate oliver Cromwell and im not even roman catholic
Reply

#5
says by my name crazy poster

you could at least make it "Howard Beale -like imbued poster"
Reply

#6
You seem to think it's shocking. It's not. As plenty of Democrats have said, the Clintons wanted to attack the Taliban while Bill Cllinton was still in the White House for a variety of reasons, including that the Taliban and AQ were believed to be plotting against the US. Democrats tend to love pointing this out because Republicans at the time basically said the Clintons were being ridiculous but then after 9/11 were demanding why Bill Clinton hadn't done anything (so Republicans were trying to blame Democrats while Democrats turned the blame back around).

And though many Americans don't know that Bill Clinton is the one known as "the butcher of the Balklands" in places like Greece and even Russia (probably any country where the Eastern Orthodox are dominant), Michael Moore featured Clinton's war mongering ways in the popular Bowling for Columbine.
Reply

#7
i dont like Clintons

clinton and joe Biden supported the damn kla rather than the serbs

kla is the damn evil Kosovo liberation army

if youre against the Vietnam war thats ok with hippies, but if youre against clintons bombing serbs you must be a commie they think -the left sucks!!

maybe Romney is better i hope
Reply

#8
HollandofFrance Wrote:what do you mean? i hate oliver Cromwell and im not even roman catholic

Now why would you hate an English National hero..?
Reply

#9
Almac Wrote:Now why would you hate an English National hero..?

I find the adoration of Oliver Cromwell quite bizarre. My interests are in Restoration and 18th century literature, which I always say probably informs a personal bias in favour of the Royalist, just because they were much kinder to the arts than those boring Puritans. Nonetheless, I think Cromwell's legacy is more a result of the symbolic importance, as a figure of republican and democratic values that was adopted in the late 18th century by the Whigs (and then the Liberals) and carried on into the modern British conscience, than of his actual achievements. Such that, Cromwell seems to stand in these days largely as a symbol of something he only vaguely embodied in life, as he was essentially a military dictator and religious extremist who banned everything from dancing to Christmas celebrations. We can track much of this to the rhetoric of the Whigs when they were in opposition to Pitt's Tories, who were closely aligned to the royals and Church of England. The Whigs needed something to lend authority to their support of non-conformist protestantism and the limiting of royal power, and the idealized principles of the Commonwealth provided that legitimacy.
Reply

#10
Well said it's nice to read a well informed posting.
Reply



Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  When did you choose .... to be straight? princealbertofb 7 897 05-12-2013, 02:01 AM
Last Post: Mirage

Forum Jump:


Recently Browsing
1 Guest(s)

© 2002-2024 GaySpeak.com