An unfortunate headline, perhaps - but accurate, nonetheless. There's no other conclusion to be drawn from the statements of former US Secretary of State Madeline Albright published in Der Spiegel today in light of her position on Iraq.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Ms. Albright, America's image in the world isn't in great shape these days. Things are looking especially bad in Iraq with daily reports of violence, the country teetering on the brink of civil war, and now a scandal erupting over an alleged massacre perpetrated by the US military in the town of Haditha. Are you happy that you are not Secretary of State right now?
Albright: It is a mixed feeling. Things are really in bad shape. If the Democrats were still in power, they wouldn't be in this kind of shape... being confronted with the question as to how long it will now take the US to regain its reputation abroad is difficult. I am afraid it's going to take awhile. Reputations of countries are very hard to put back together.
Albright makes a fair point. So I decided to take a look at the alleged war crimes in Iraq while she and the Dems were in power pursuing the principle of containment she goes on to support. I was astounded by what I found. Not only did Albright acknowledge the likely deaths of tens of thousands of civilians, many of them children - she pronounced it an acceptable cost.
CNN: First, Baugh played a CBS-TV "60 Minutes" segment from May 1996 that reported an estimated 500,000 Iraqi children had died from the economic sanctions imposed on August 6, 1990, days after Saddam Hussein's troops invaded Kuwait. Since the war ended with Iraqi's withdrawal in 1991, the number of Iraqi civilian casualties has more than doubled, according to various international aid groups.
"I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it," said Albright, who was then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, which imposed and still maintains the sanctions ... "It is hard for me to say this because I am (a) humane person, but my first responsibility is to make sure that United States forces do not have to go and re-fight the Gulf War," Albright said.
UNICEF found as many as 10,000 Iraqis died every month from shortages and that Iraqi's infant mortality rate quadrupled, he said.
Given the figures from some of the very same liberal groups now so outraged at the possible unnecessary deaths of two dozen civilians in Iraq, all one can conclude is that, as she suggests, Albright and the Dems would be content to see thousands of Iraqi children die every month - so long as no one's there to photograph it for the press.
And of course we can't forget retired General Wesley Clark, who some would still seek to prosecute for war crimes in Serbia.
"At least 1,200 civilians have died in NATO accidents," Steven Erlanger of The New York Times reported at the end of the war. On May 27, 1999, The Wall Street Journal ran an article that said: "On the sensitive topic of civilian casualties, Gen. Clark emphasized that no air war was perfect and that, to prevail, the (NATO) ambassadors should brace themselves for more collateral damage."
From the New York Times, June 8, 2000:
In particular, the human rights group said that NATO's bombing of the Belgrade headquarters of Radio Television Serbia, on April 23, 1999, ''was a deliberate attack on a civilian object and as such constitutes a war crime." Sixteen people died in the predawn attack, nearly all of them technicians, security workers and makeup artists.
NATO has defended the bombing as an attack on the "propaganda machine" of President Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia...
Amnesty also condemned a NATO attack on a bridge at Varvarin on May 30, 1999, in which at least nine people died. "NATO forces failed to suspend their attack after it was evident that they had struck civilians," the report said, and it criticized NATO for ordering its pilots to fly so high that they could not take proper precautions against bombing civilians.
General Wesley Clark: Less than 18 months ago, Wesley Clark offered his testimony before the Committee On Armed Services at the U.S. House Of Representatives. "There's no requirement to have any doctrine here. I mean this is simply a long-standing right of the United States and other nations to take the actions they deem necessary in their self defense," Clark told Congress on September 26, 2002.
"Every president has deployed forces as necessary to take action. He's done so without multilateral support if necessary. He's done so in advance of conflict if necessary. . .
Clark continued: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001. . .
More Clark: "And, I want to underscore that I think the United States should not categorize this action as preemptive. Preemptive and that doctrine has nothing whatsoever to do with this problem. As Richard Perle so eloquently pointed out, this is a problem that's longstanding. It's been a decade in the making. It needs to be dealt with and the clock is ticking on this."
The report was released less than a week after Carla Del Ponte, the chief prosecutor for the war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague, told the United Nations Security Council that her investigation had found no basis for charging NATO with war crimes. Mrs. Del Ponte said that although "some mistakes were made by NATO," she was "very satisfied that there was no deliberate targeting of civilians or unlawful military targets."
MATTHEW ROTHSCHILD But both Moore and McGovern, who are known as peaceniks, need to explain a few things. First, there's the war in Yugoslavia. As Supreme Commander of NATO during the Kosovo war, Clark was ultimately responsible for targeting the bridges and electrical grids of Yugoslavia and for using cluster bombs and depleted uranium. (I asked him at a press conference in Madison, Wisconsin, this fall about depleted uranium. He said: "There is no indication it causes any trouble," except perhaps if you put something in your mouth that is covered with it.). During the Kosovo war, Clark also repeatedly targeted Yugoslavia's TV headquarters, killing twenty people there.
As usual, what is deemed 'a war crime' is selective in accordance with what the powers that be want it to be.
If there was any justice in this world, people like Javier Solana would be right up there with the best of the war criminals, for his actions re Yugoslavia. As it is, most people have not even heard of this guy, already probably just about the most powerful man in the world. Go look for yourself if you don't believe me!!
Instead, you have got this Mr European Union Directive No.666, Javier Solana, himself, on his way to Iran to negotiate peace. What a joke.
Scratch the surface of most of the people in power, or who have been in positions of power in the West, and you will find you are not very far from a One World Government/New World Order advocate.
Javier Solana is furthering his Empire. People like Milosovich, who was not pro expansion of the European Union did not stand a chance. He had to go!! I ask you, where is the prosecution of the opposition in that war, was the killing all one sided?? If Milosovich had been in favour of joining the European Union, what's the betting he would have been around today!
That most of these people are connected to the eugenics movement, either by their membership of the right Club, or by the pals they rub shoulders with, should also be no surprise. What does it matter that a few million are culled here and there to further their ends of a One World Dictatorship.
Except, of course, if it is a bit of propaganda they need to be putting about, namely, anti Bush, anti USA,(as if they care how many civilians die), in order to further that end!!
Let's face it, the people of the US are too strong minded and free spirited to want to go along with that one. That's why the real enemy of freedom will try their hardest to bring the US down, and in doing so, also manage to get control of your wealth.
And that charmer, Mr 666, Javier Solana, will be working on you all big time! There will most likely come a time when you will not want to hear anything bad said about him at all.
Like I said, what a joke!!
Posted by: annie | Saturday, June 03, 2006 at 08:24 PM
annie
you're hot tonight, girl; thanks for the great info.
hobo
Posted by: hobo | Saturday, June 03, 2006 at 11:31 PM