: Well, as feared (but expected), McClinton decided to deal with Hitler. If he had any less backbone he'd be a freakin' black hole.
SDF: This comparison between Milosevic and Hitler bears examination. One of them violated national sovereignty and invaded other countries, the other didn't. One of them committed genocide, the other, mere ethnic cleansing. Want to guess which one, RWB?
But instead, let's compare NATO with Hitler. They both bombed Belgrade (NATO more severely), neither of them gives a damn about human life, they both have plans for global conquest, they both involve Germans. NATO is less of a genocidal force than Hitler was, of course, but don't ask the Iraqis or the Kurds about that. No wonder Serbia is so scared. Have I missed anything?
: Our tanks should be rolling through Belgrade right now, crushing the fascist scourge that blackens that nation...
SDF: That was what was promised in NATO's insistence upon the Rambouillet ultimatum, esp. Appendix B which basically called for Milosevic's surrender. The purpose of the subsequent war was described so eloquently by William Cohen: "They needed a few bombs." So it wasn't a matter of spinelessness, but rather of design. The Pentagon is not too stupid to have noticed that mere bombing attacks do not make dictators "cry uncle," especially after that major attempt against Vietnam some years ago. So, no, RWB, NATO is not Santa Claus, it will not grant you all your murderous wishes. By the way, were you planning to fight and die for NATO's invasion of Belgrade?
Meanwhile, the mass media declares victory, while the rest of us can read this comparison and wonder where all our tax dollars are going. Why, they're going to big defense corporations who own the mass media as subsidiaries!