salik79 wrote:
92.? Imamo li ista iz '92.?
Nikada nisam Rusiju branio, namjerno izvrces, nego sam tvrdio da tadasnja Rusija nije imala, niti mogla imati, nikakav uticaj na desavanja u Ex Yu, posto su bili zabavljeni sami sobom...
Cekaj, prvo si rekao 92-93-a:
salik79 wrote:
Narod mi je bio prrd toralnom fizickom eksterminacijom 92. i 93. pa budi ljubazan priloziti njegov govor iz tog vremena.
Sad kad postavim nesto iz 92-e, ti ces pitati ima li sta iz aprila 92-e?
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Joe_Bid ... _Peace.htm
1990s: Military intervention to stop Bosnia ethnic cleansing
One of the earliest critics of Clinton's foreign policy was Senator Joseph Biden. From his position on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden became a staunch proponent of US military intervention in Bosnia to deter Bosnian Serbs from their campaigns of "ethnic cleansing" against Muslims. Three months after Clinton was sworn in, Biden upbraided the administration for not doing "a damn thing" to stop the Serbs from bombarding women and children in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica. Biden called for air strikes by the US and its NATO allies.
They were the vanguard of change for the Democrats. In the 1990s, as Biden demonstrated, some of the liberals who had opposed the use of force in the Persian Gulf were willing to support military intervention for the humanitarian purpose of preventing genocide in the Balkans. America was now viewed as, potentially, a force for good in the world, if only it had the will to act.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02681.html
As the incident with Milosevic shows, Biden is hardly shy about emphasizing his own role in world affairs. Biden's book portrays him frequently confronting Clinton and bucking him up on Bosnia when the president had doubts about his own policy. But the hard legislative work was left to others. Biden did take an early stab at prodding action, writing an amendment in 1992 -- opposed by George H.W. Bush's administration -- that authorized spending $50 million to arm the Bosnian Muslims. But the legislation that became known as the Dole-Lieberman bill was first crafted by House Republicans after Clinton took office, and Biden chose not to pick a fight with the new president even though other Democrats signed on to the measure.
In April 1993, Biden spent a week traveling in the Balkans, meeting with key officials, including a three-hour session with Milosevic. The trip was detailed in 15 pages of the senator's autobiography. Aides said that Biden insisted there be no news media allowed because he did not want the Serbian leader to use the visit as propaganda.
A moze i cijeli govor iz 95-e u kojem se vise puta referira na ono sto je govorio i radio u vezi rata u BiH od 92-e:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c2461248/ ... te-session
Isjekao sam par odlomaka:
Some of us, as long ago as the last 4 months of the Bush administration,
This time it was not Jews. It was primarily Moslems. In 1935 and 1937 and 1939 and 1941 and 1943, had it been Catholics like me, or Protestants, like many in here, who were being taken to death camps, the world would have risen up years earlier. But it was not. It was Jews. And we all turned a blind eye, as a world.
==========
That is exactly how I feel about the proposed deployment of U.S. troops in the I-FoR. For more than 3 years, since September 1992,
==========
Concurrently, I have called for striking from the air at the offending Serbs while the Bosnian Government was building up its own military strength.
==========
Moreover, the Biden Amendment, which I introduced in 1992, and which was successively approved by Congress in 1993 and 1994, authorized assistance to Bosnia through a drawdown of up to $50 million of Defense Department weapons stocks and other military equipment. This year's foreign operations conference report has increased this figure to $100 million
==========
I respectfully suggest, were it not Moslems this time who were in the rape camps, were it not Moslems who were being exterminated as part of this new phrase `ethnic cleansing', that the world would have behaved differently. I wonder how many of us ever thought, as students of World War II or as participants in World War II, that we would ever serve in the Senate and hear the phrase, openly used by one party in a conflict, `ethnic cleansing.' Ethnic cleansing. Is that not an antiseptic term?
Al neka je on "cionista", to je bitno, jelde?
