Republicans had a lot to say about Clinton’s mission in Kosovo. Poor Man reviews some of the choicer statements.
“You can support the troops but not the president”
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)“[The] President…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)“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 George W. Bush“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)“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 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 clarified rules 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)“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“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)“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)
My, how they’ve changed their tune. And not only that; those who say the same things now about Iraq, in nearly the exact same words, are traitors, un-American and worthy of contempt and ridicule.
Is there some irony here or what?
1
By Gordon
Yeah, the irony is that there is no irony.
June 29, 2005 @ 11:08 am | Comment
2
By richard
Don’t you see some irony in Bush & Co. demanding to know when our troops will exit Kosovo, yet when the same demands are made by Dems reegarding Iraq we’re told that would be aiding the enemy?
Bush was for exit strategies before he was against them. Flip flop. Flip flop. Flip flop.
June 29, 2005 @ 11:15 am | Comment
3
By test
test
June 29, 2005 @ 4:06 pm | Comment
4
By Mark Anthony Jones
As I argued in my comments in the thread below – “Bush’s pseudo speech..” – his use of language betrays certain sexual insecurities: just look at all of the sexual metaphors he let slip. We can’t “withdraw” from Iraq until the “job is done”. There can be “no pulling out”, no “exit” strategies like with Kosovo.
Regards,
Mark Anthony Jones
June 29, 2005 @ 8:10 pm | Comment
5
By Jake Liang
First-time commenter.
I think the repub’s were mistaken when they made those statements. But with Kosovo, they hadn’t gone through an event as jarring as the terrorist attacks on 9/11 on America’s own soil to convince them that they had to strengthen their resolve behind the president and not make questionable comments for political gain.
June 29, 2005 @ 9:25 pm | Comment
6
By richard
Fair enough Jake, but their insistence on an exit plan at a time of war then but not now (after all Saddam didn;t attack us) — it’s pure hypocrisy.
Please comment more often!
June 29, 2005 @ 9:35 pm | Comment
7
By American man
I drank a bottle of Santorum for breakfast.It slid down real nicely. A little salty.THAT guy needs to be Anally violated.What a cheesedick.
June 29, 2005 @ 10:46 pm | Comment
8
By American man
Republicans are assholes!Democrates are dicks!Blah,Fuckin’ blah………The only thing more boring than politics is arguing about them.The people you believe in, don’t even believe the shit they say.Just watch porn and wait to die.
June 29, 2005 @ 10:50 pm | Comment
9
By American man
MAj,YOU are a prankster.Who knew?
June 29, 2005 @ 10:51 pm | Comment
10
By Grendel
The difference is only, who (or which side/wing/party) is critized – Representative Tom Delay is still right in the last citation, it’s just that the Democrats are losing their status (nb: not ability per se) as serious competitor for leadership in the US.
July 3, 2005 @ 4:25 am | Comment
11
By Jim
Richard, curiously enough, there seems to be a lack of quotes from leading Dems on the same subject. Probably because they were saying the same things the GOP is saying now?
Clinton did give an exit date – which he was throughly roasted for. Which should have proved to both parties the stupidity of setting exit dates. I thought the Kosovo camapign was pretty courageous for Clinton to have undertaken.
Hypocrisy is hardly unique to either party (Compare, for instance, both parties statements on Social Security in 1998 and in 2004/5). What is sad is that we have come to accept it from the very people we expect to be leading this country.
July 4, 2005 @ 5:55 am | Comment
12
By richard
If there were similar quotes from Dems at the time I never saw them and I’d be shocked if there were. Dems are too smart for such nnsense. The purpose of the collected quotes was to show what Republicans who are now gung-ho about Bush’s strategy were saying about Clinton’s. Why would there be Dems on this list? That would be another exercise.
July 4, 2005 @ 10:00 am | Comment
13
By richard
And I asgree with your last statement. About Social Security, I believe Dems agree it needs changes. It’s a matter of proorities and the extremity of the measures to be taken. Right now, it’s one of the least of our worries, while in the late 90’s it was high on the list.
July 4, 2005 @ 10:03 am | Comment
14
By Jim
Perhaps I was not clear on my meaning. What I was saying was that Dems – at the time of the Kosovo campaign – were saying the same things the GOP is saying now. The point is that both sides are perfectly willing to adopt whatever position is convenient at the moment, irregardless of past statements. And what is truly sad is that we have come to expect no better from them.
And if you think hypocrisy has sunk to a new low, just wait until Bush announces his nominee for the Supreme Court. Both sides are already warming up their big guns. And it is us that will be the losers in all of this.
July 5, 2005 @ 10:06 pm | Comment