Jump to content

Btw Craig, Clark Did Push For Troops


Recommended Posts

According to the new Time, the "Regan Letters" edition,

"He [clark] fought to have ground troops to force Slobodan Misolsevic to halt the killing of thousands of Albanian Kosovars in the province of Kosovo, which might have made military sense, but would have shattered Nato Unity. But the Clinton Administration took ground troops off the table early..."

HMMMM. Yes Clark did push for ground troops. That contridicts what you've said before. But then again, Time is just like BBC right? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a source ? Clark did not ask nor state the need for troops. Remember a guy called Clinton ? He stated publicly that no troops were needed. Clark by the way was fired as NATO commander.

Yes fired, replaced by Ralston 3 months before his term was over. Why ? Because no one likes working with him, and his ideas on military campaiging are basically wrong.

You don't win wars bombing civilians from 30.000 feet.

His military credentials are a sham.

Ivo Daalder, a former Clinton aide now at the Brookings Institution think tank here, says Gen. Clark bears at least part of the responsibility for Mr. Clinton's stance. "He was one of the believers that a bit of bombing would be enough to get Milosevic to give in." When the Serb leader didn't, Gen. Clark had to scramble to get more planes to ratchet up the bombardment and to get permission to start planning for a possible ground war.

The stresses of the war only heightened the tensions and suspicions between Gen. Clark and the Pentagon. Gen. Clark complained that he was blocked from arguing his case directly with Mr. Cohen. Several former officials say that it was too much communication by the general -- with the media, members of Congress, foreign leaders and especially the White House -- that infuriated Mr. Cohen and Gen. Shelton. Officials say Gen. Clark had almost daily conversations with National Security Adviser Samuel Berger or his deput...

But Chevy Nova, don't let reality get in the way or your pre-determined viewpoints.

Facts are inconvenient things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Facts are inconvenient things.

And you ignore them as much as possible.

It's amazing how many soruces you will declare useless and false when you refuse to admit you are wrong.

Clark by the way was fired as NATO commander.

Thanks to clinton. Wait that's something you like, but it';s by clinton, is your head exploding right now? :)

Because no one likes working with him, and his ideas on military campaiging are basically wrong.

Because EVERYONE thinks the same way Craig thinks!

You don't win wars bombing civilians from 30.000 feet.

His military credentials are a sham.

because all the instructors at West point are stupid! West point is stupid! We don't need it!

Let's ignore that his hands were tied and he had no choice. Thus the next time someone does something and they had no choice, you will blame them anyway?

But Chevy Nova, don't let reality get in the way or your pre-determined viewpoints.

Everytime you say something like this, the facts that you cherry pick, ignore the other evidence, and down right start name calling get embedded in everyone's mind here deeper. Every time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for quoting what I quoted. Very good. Did your post add value ? NO. Did it disagree with the source I quoted ? No. So i assume you agree with my argument that I made. Thanks for that. I really don't understand why you post the things you do - you make no contributions.

Here is the only thing you said above

because all the instructors at West point are stupid! West point is stupid! We don't need it!

Brilliant. Well done. Now cite reasons, sources and the rationale for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. So i assume you agree with my argument that I made.

What the hell are you talking about? I'm beginging to think that you are dillusional.

Thanks for quoting what I quoted.

Um...you do understand WHY?

Did it disagree with the source I quoted

No, it disagreed with you, and most of the quotes are from your post on what you typed, not what you quoted. Cherry picking and selective reading along with fabrication, are those your majors you recieved in college? :)

I really don't understand why you post the things you do - you make no contributions

You are dilluisional.

Brilliant. Well done. Now cite reasons, sources and the rationale for this.

And have no ability to pick up on sarcasm.

However, you did prove something, that when you cannot admit that you are wrong, you simply regressive to 5th grade insults and ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,698
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    IPEM Group of Institutions
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Ethan Wylde earned a badge
      First Post
    • Yakuda went up a rank
      Experienced
    • QuebecOverCanada went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • Jeary went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Gator earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...