Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fw: [KDN] NYT: Bush and the World

Expand Messages
  • Fr. Demetrios Carellas
    Notice how it is always okay to bash Orthodox and accuse them of crimes, but when they are, or have been, slaughtered by Muslims and Roman Catholics duri9ng
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 1, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Notice how it is always okay to bash Orthodox and accuse them of crimes, but
      when they are, or have been, slaughtered by Muslims and Roman Catholics
      duri9ng the past 100 years that is simply the horrors of war.

      +Fr. Demetri
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: D. Dostanic <dostanic@...>
      To: KDN <decani@egroups.com>
      Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2000 1:49 AM
      Subject: [KDN] NYT: Bush and the World


      THE NEW YORK TIMES, Saturday, September 30, 2000


      Bush and the World


      When Slobodan Milosevic's forces ravaged Croatia in 1991, and then began
      their campaign of genocide in Bosnia, President Bush decided that the
      United States would do nothing meaningful to stop him. It was one of the
      most shameful episodes in the history of American foreign policy.

      If George W. Bush is elected president, the indications are that he
      would follow his father's example. That appears from his own words and
      the views of those who would advise him.

      "We should not send our troops to stop ethnic cleansing and genocide in
      nations outside our strategic interest," Governor Bush said earlier this

      Condoleezza Rice, Mr. Bush's campaign adviser on foreign policy, won
      applause at the Republican Convention when she said: "America's armed
      forces are not a global police force. They are not the world's 911."

      But the key figure is Gen. Colin Powell, the almost certain Bush choice
      for secretary of state. I am a great admirer of General Powell - but not
      of what has come to be called the Powell Doctrine. It is that American
      soldiers should not be used abroad except in overwhelming force when
      fundamental U.S. strategic interests are threatened.

      As chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the first years of the
      Clinton administration, General Powell strongly opposed the use of U.S.
      forces to stop the Serbian rape, torture and murder in Bosnia. He not
      only worked inside the government but wrote a newspaper article opposing
      involvement. His opposition was crucial in President Clinton's decision
      to abandon a campaign pledge and stay out of the Bosnian tragedy.

      The consequences of U.S. inaction through the Bush and early Clinton
      years were terrible. Hundreds of thousands of Bosnians were killed or
      forced to flee. In the end, shamed by the mass murder of Bosnians in
      Srebrenica, the U.S. negotiated the Dayton accords and sent forces to
      help police them - under much less favorable conditions than would have
      existed years before.

      Mr. Milosevic, moreover, concluding that the United States was a paper
      tiger, went on to his campaign of terror in Kosovo. That led to still
      deeper U.S. military involvement.

      The premise of President Bush's decision to ignore the Milosevic
      aggression when it began in 1991 was that it was a European problem and
      should be handled by our European allies. But the Europeans will not act
      without American leadership, as events proved.

      The same thinking is evident now in the Bush campaign. Dick Cheney, the
      vice-presidential nominee, said last month that it was time to consider
      recalling our ground troops from Bosnia and Kosovo, leaving the job to
      the Europeans. If we followed that course, the situation in both
      territories would quickly unravel.

      That the United States cannot be "the world's policeman" is an easily
      accepted slogan. But realistically, there is no substitute for American
      leadership and involvement if the worst of human horrors are to be

      Genocide in Bosnia does not engage our strategic interests as would,
      say, a threat to our supply of oil. When those two oil men, George W.
      Bush and Dick Cheney, talk about the vital interests that alone would
      justify the use of American forces abroad, they may well be thinking
      precisely of oil.

      The odd thing is that Governor Bush and his campaign colleagues talk
      with great emphasis about the need to build up our armed forces. To do

      The most frequent threats to peace and stability in the post-cold-war
      era are arising from internal ethnic, religious and other conflicts.
      East Timor, Bosnia and Kosovo are all remote from traditional U.S.
      strategic interests. But if ignored, those conflicts could have
      destabilized large areas important to us: Indonesia, Southeastern
      Europe. To turn our heads away is not the course of realism.

      And there is another consideration that makes the inclinations of George
      W. Bush unrealistic. Americans do not like to see mass cruelties ignored
      by the one country that can stop them. Perhaps that is why President
      Bush, when he and Brent Scocroft published a book on his foreign- policy
      record, did not even mention Bosnia.

      If Americans know that horrors are happening, they are not going to be
      content with a president who says, "I am not my brother's keeper."
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.