downhill21
Well-Known Member
Jesus, that’s bad...
Jesus, that’s bad...
He only killed hundreds when he bombed Serbia. His bombing death numbers pale compared to many other Presidents.
Had to look this up, as I’m not a political historian, & your statement, tho only 2 sentences, seems to contain some inaccuracies. It’s welcome, none the less. Anywho, you’re referring to the NATO bombing of the Yugoslavian Armed Forces in Kosovo. From what I read, 13 NATO countries participated. Plenty of fuck ups & possibly an intentional bombing of part of the Chinese Embassy. Yes, hundreds of innocent dead. That being said, the Serbs n Croats have been warring for hundreds of years. I don’t know if we picked the right side or the wrong side. The action did lead to the withdrawal of Yugoslavian forces from Kosovo, & saved 1000’s of lives from that perspective.He only killed hundreds when he bombed Serbia. His bombing death numbers pale compared to many other Presidents.
Rob Roy is an idiot. You will find that out soon.Had to look this up, as I’m not a political historian, & your statement, tho only 2 sentences, seems to contain some inaccuracies. It’s welcome, none the less. Anywho, you’re referring to the NATO bombing of the Yugoslavian Armed Forces in Kosovo. From what I read, 13 NATO countries participated. Plenty of fuck ups & possibly an intentional bombing of part of the Chinese Embassy. Yes, hundreds of innocent dead. That being said, the Serbs n Croats have been warring for hundreds of years. I don’t know if we picked the right side or the wrong side. The action did lead to the withdrawal of Yugoslavian forces from Kosovo, & saved 1000’s of lives from that perspective.
So my conclusion on your submission is that 1)If 12 other NATO countries felt it was appropriate to fight on the side they did, I’m reluctant to believe the action had zero justification. 2)Blaming Bill Clinton specifically for bombing certain targets in a war zone seems possible, but certainly not proven, nor a realistic motive suggested. Are u suggesting Clinton specifically intended to kill many innocents, & if so, what was his motivation? Why would the other countries participate? 3)Where do you get the idea that other past US presidents have caused merely 100’s of deaths (by your statement)? There are many examples from history that disprove that portion of your statement, but notably, are you forgetting the non-existent weapons of mass destruction that led to Bush’s invasion n war? 4)You seem to be suggesting that that bombing defined Clinton’s presidency, when the opposite is true. 5)My statement doesn’t suggest that Bill Clinton had no flaws. We all do. He’s just a man. But do you have any idea what his successes were? Maybe the big one?...
Everybody seems to go the rounds with Rob and every one quickly finds out he is an idiot and a monomaniac.Rob Roy is an idiot. You will find that out soon.
And very boring.Everybody seems to go the rounds with Rob and every one quickly finds out he is an idiot and a monomaniac.
Monomaniacs always are and almost always assholes too!And very boring.
That would be quite the trick, I think a disappearing act more likely, after a speedy trial, the first of many.
Donald is so easy to put away for the rest of his life that his daughter Tiffany could do, it straight out of law school and might even enjoy it.
well if we have to pardon to physically remove it's just state..that assignment is going to really suck for Secret Service..
as easy as it was to impeach and remove? straight out of law school and paralegal knows more than you..she won't be useful for years to come.Donald is so easy to put away for the rest of his life that his daughter Tiffany could do, it straight out of law school and might even enjoy it.
the one that creates slight disengagement of jaw..brows raise..eyes close by half..why King Clorox of course..scheming!
Collateral damage is murder. Regardless of who supports it or not.So my conclusion on your submission is that
A thoughtful post.............that will unfortunately be wasted on Bob.Had to look this up, as I’m not a political historian, & your statement, tho only 2 sentences, seems to contain some inaccuracies. It’s welcome, none the less. Anywho, you’re referring to the NATO bombing of the Yugoslavian Armed Forces in Kosovo. From what I read, 13 NATO countries participated. Plenty of fuck ups & possibly an intentional bombing of part of the Chinese Embassy. Yes, hundreds of innocent dead. That being said, the Serbs n Croats have been warring for hundreds of years. I don’t know if we picked the right side or the wrong side. The action did lead to the withdrawal of Yugoslavian forces from Kosovo, & saved 1000’s of lives from that perspective.
So my conclusion on your submission is that 1)If 12 other NATO countries felt it was appropriate to fight on the side they did, I’m reluctant to believe the action had zero justification. 2)Blaming Bill Clinton specifically for bombing certain targets in a war zone seems possible, but certainly not proven, nor a realistic motive suggested. Are u suggesting Clinton specifically intended to kill many innocents, & if so, what was his motivation? Why would the other countries participate? 3)Where do you get the idea that other past US presidents have caused merely 100’s of deaths (by your statement)? There are many examples from history that disprove that portion of your statement, but notably, are you forgetting the non-existent weapons of mass destruction that led to Bush’s invasion n war? 4)You seem to be suggesting that that bombing defined Clinton’s presidency, when the opposite is true. 5)My statement doesn’t suggest that Bill Clinton had no flaws. We all do. He’s just a man. But do you have any idea what his successes were? Maybe the big one?...
I guess nonsensical post has itCollateral damage is murder. Regardless of who supports it or not.