"WWII vs Vietnam"

Carl Remick cremick at rlmnet.com
Thu Apr 8 06:59:30 PDT 1999



> Why the turn round if the massive imperialist bombing of the Serbian
> economy, reactionary in character, has not had some impact?
> As well as the
> propaganda war, which Serbia has now lost? I don't support the massive
> scale of the bombing but it is possible that the calculations
> of NATO may
> have turned out to be partly correct.

Ironically, Chris, one of the most ominous outcomes will be if NATO is "successful." It will be that much easier to use force next time. Here's an excerpt from an article in today's NY Times showing how Clinton has grown ever more casual about sending missiles flying:

"A former top foreign policy adviser to the president said that Clinton has learned over the years to separate his personal feelings from his leadership responsibilities. But it was a hard-won lesson.

"'He has moved, for good or ill, toward not taking each death so individually and so personally,' this adviser said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. 'He still orders civilian casualties be kept to a minimum, but there has been a change in the confidence with which he gives orders. He has become commander in chief; he was still feeling his way in 1993.'

"This former adviser said that Clinton had developed a 'switch' [Christ, that again!] that allows him to turn off his concern not only for the lives of civilians but for American troops as well.

"He said that Clinton is troubled by pictures, like those in today's newspapers, of civilians whose homes were destroyed by errant American weapons. He is also deeply troubled by the fate of American servicemen he sends into combat, including the three soldiers captured by Serbian troops on the Macedonia-Yugoslavia border last week.

"'Your heart gets torn apart when you see things like this, and then you have to switch it off and put your mind in gear and calculate it the best you can,' the adviser said. 'The main criteria has to be how many lives you save each way, knowing you will be responsible for the loss of some lives.'

"Current aides portray Clinton today as confident and decisive in dealing with military matters, in contrast to the tentative and brooding president of his first year in office, when the Baghdad bombing and the loss of 18 Army Rangers in Somalia unnerved him. They say he conducts the daily meetings on the Kosovo crisis crisply, reviewing target lists and requests from commanders in Europe for new war-fighting equipment.

"He authorized the dispatch of 24 Apache attack helicopters to go after Serbian tanks in Kosovo after a very brief discussion on Saturday, a senior White House official said. On Friday, he 'almost instantaneously' approved attacks on a set of targets that included buildings in Belgrade and other large Yugoslav cities, despite warnings that the strikes almost certainly would result in some 'collateral damage,' a military euphemism for civilian deaths.

"'I wouldn't say that he has undergone a conversion on the question of civilian casualties,' said Joe Lockhart, the president's press secretary. 'But he knows that, even when you have taken all the precautions, they are still part of this kind of operation. He keeps telling people: "Don't worry about that. Worry about what we have to do." ' "

Even worse is the corrupting effect that Clinton's impetuousness is having on the rest of the Democratic Party (though the longer I remain on this list, the more I wonder if the Dems have ever been anything but corrupt). The following is also from today's NY Times:

"A quarter of a century after the liberal anti-war forces behind George S. McGovern called on America to come home from Vietnam, it is by and large the Democrats right now who are most ardently embracing intervention. In the House and Senate votes last month, nearly all of them backed American involvement in Kosovo. Some figures traditionally on the left say it is because of the nature of this war.

"'Oil versus human beings,' said Representative David E. Bonior of Michigan, the House minority whip, who opposed United States involvement in the Persian Gulf war but does not shy away from the deployment of ground forces in Kosovo. 'I just think Milosevic is a person who is bent on extinguishing people, and I think we need to do everything we can militarily to confront that.'

"'[House minority leader Richard A.] Gephardt, a Missouri Democrat who also opposed the gulf war, said: 'Some of us think our vote on the Persian Gulf war maybe wasn't the right vote. Maybe you learn.'"

The lesson learned? FORCE WORKS.

I suspect this is the beginning of a very long nightmare.

Carl Remick



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list