Author Topic: Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?  (Read 1511 times)

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #60 on: October 25, 2004, 09:00:45 AM »
OK, make the case that the UN ground troops could have ended the genocide without the air campaign. Please.

The air campaign was THE central part of Operation Deliberate Force. All your FAC's, counterbattery fire, tanks, whatever played a supportive and essentially minor role. The Air Forces did the "heavy lifting" and the US air forces did nearly 70% of the missions.


Quote
The UN blue-hats are a peacekeeping force, not peace enforcing, it is up to the member nations to pledge green-hats to military operations that requires active intervention.


Yep. And that's why most of the folks here that you argue with view the UN as a waste of time and an ineffective organization. The UN doesn't do shirt except keep the peace where peace is already established. Shooting starts, they bug out. Rwanda? Dutch Bat? June 18: EU begins to debate withdrawal of UNPROFOR troops?

See a trend there?

Take present day Sudan. It's no secret there's genocide going on and that it's been going on for quite some time. The UN hasn't approved any military intervention and it won't. The "peacekeepers" won't go in until the janjaweed are finally tired of slaughtering the Sudanese blacks or they have killed them all.

WTG, UN.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #61 on: October 25, 2004, 03:43:24 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
Another ignorant statement. The was no such thing as a "deliberative air campaign" in Bosnia.


Quote
STATISTICS AS OF 20 DECEMBER 95:

Number of days since Operation DENY FLIGHT started = 983
"No-Fly" Zone fighter sorties flown over Bosnia-Herzegovina = 23,021

Close Air Support and Air Strike sorties over Bosnia-Herzegovina = 27,077
 
Sorties by SEAD, NAEW, tanker, reconnaissance and support aircraft = 29,158
 
Number of training missions flown = 21,164

Grand total = 100,420


Deny Flight wasn't a deliberative air campaign? It ran from 12 April 1993 until December 20, 1995. Man, you have it bad.

Quote
ORGANIZATION:

The Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR)General Wesley K. Clark, USA delegated authority for the implementation of Operation DENY FLIGHT to the Commander in Chief of Allied Forces Southern Europe (CINCSOUTH), Admiral Leighton W. Smith, USN whose headquarters is in Naples, Italy. He delegated control of the operation to the Commander, Allied Air Forces Southern Europe, (COMAIRSOUTH),General Michael C. Short, USAF also headquartered in Naples.



Quote
From General Michael C. Short:

There was a NATO command structure in place in Naples, and it had been there for 50 years. It was Commander in Chief of Southern Europe, with a NATO staff. We inserted in the middle of that staff a U.S. - only operation whose commander was a Navy admiral, whose deputy was a Navy admiral. The [J-]3 was a Navy captain and the [J-]2 was a Navy captain. We called it a joint task force, and they were given operational level responsibility for running a NATO war.


Now... who lead this air war? You might want to call up a list of the "significant events" of Deny Flight. You'll find a lot of stuff like this:

Quote
On 28 February 94, four NATO fighters shot down four fixed-wing aircraft violating the UN "No-Fly" zone. NATO Airborne Early Warning aircraft (NAEW) detected unknown tracks South of Banja Luka early that morning.

Two NATO aircraft, U.S. Air Force F-16s, were vectored to the area and intercepted six GALEB/JASTREB aircraft. In accordance with the rules of engagement, two "land or exit the No-Fly Zone or be engaged" orders were issued which were ignored. While this was happening the violating aircraft dropped bombs. The NATO fighters engaged the planes, shooting down three of them.

A second pair of NATO fighters, U.S. Air Force F-16s, arrived and shot down a fourth violator. The remaining two violators left the airspace of Bosnia-Herzegovina.




You can dress up in your blue beret and prance around all you like, but it won't change the facts. The US ran the command and control on Deny Flight on the airside, plus flying the overwhelming majority of the combat sorties.


 
Quote
Scholz:
 And the air strikes themselves did not stop the genocide. It took operation Oluja and the UN Implementation Force and later Stabilization Force to stop the genocide.
[/b]

[Then, Operation Deliberate Force, began on August 30, 1995, against Bosnian Serb military targets in response to a Bosnian Serb mortar attack on civilians in Sarajevo. With the same US commanders running the show.

DELIBERATE FORCE SORTIE BREAKDOWN FROM 29 AUG 95 - 14 SEP 95

NATION         TOTAL         PERCENTAGE  
         SORIES         OF TOTAL

FRANCE           84           8.1%

GERMANY           59           1.7%

ITALY           35           1.0%

NETHERLANDS       198           5.6%

SPAIN           12           3.4%

TURKEY           78           2.2%

UNITED KINGDOM       326           9.3%

UNITED STATES      2318          65.9%

NATO (NAEW)        96           2.7%

TOTAL         3515         100.0%
 

Once again, US command, control and plannning and the vast majority of the sorties flown by the US air component.

Quit kidding yourself.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2004, 03:45:48 PM by Toad »
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #62 on: October 25, 2004, 03:44:01 PM »
Quote
Scholz:
The UN blue-hats usually go where no one else wants to go. You see, the US or NATO or any other country or alliance didn't want to get involved in Bosnia or Rwanda, Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea etc. etc. etc.[/quot]

Yeah, and the explanation is simple. The UN Blue Hats are like cops that show up after the "mob hit" is over. They stand around, take pictures, document the crime and pretend they're doing something.

If the "mob" shows up again.. they leave. Because, AFTER ALL...

Quote
Scholz:
The UN blue-hats are a peacekeeping force, not peace enforcing, it is up to the member nations to pledge green-hats to military operations that requires active intervention


So, what's the point of going? NOTHING will be done if fighting breaks out again... because the UN rarely, if ever, will authorize it. The blue-hat peacekeepers either pack up and bug out or... they watch in Dutch-like fascination.

Sudan being the present case in point. Everyone is "tsk-tsking" but there's no authorization to go put a stop to it. Because the janjaweed would have to be killed. And UN troops would die killing them. And it's already clear that there's really only a very few nations willing to send their troops to do that. And the Brits and US are already engaged...so that leaves? ??? ?????






Quote
You're clearly ignorant of how that conflict progressed and who were the architects of its resolution.


Quote
A three-week campaign--called Deliberate Force--was launched. It included some artillery fire, but it was dominated by airpower, the weight of which hammered the Bosnian Serb heavy weapons, ammunition depots, command-and-control bunkers, and other targets. At the same time, NATO air forces undertook a parallel operation called Dead Eye, which took down the Serbian Soviet-style air defense network.

Within three weeks of the first bomb on target, recalcitrant Serb leaders agreed to enter serious negotiations with their foes in the three-year-old war. Within two months, the Dayton Accords had been signed, effectively bringing the war to a halt.

The operation is regarded as the prime modern example of how judicious use of airpower, coupled with hard-nosed diplomacy, can stop a ground force in its tracks and bring the worst of enemies to the bargaining table.



I'll stand by what I said.




Quote
Here you are either confusing the Bosnian and Kosovo conflicts, or you have little understanding of what makes a military action legal. Ignorance.
[/b]

Here you are dancing the fan dance behind the feathers of semantics.

What NATO did violated it's own charter as a "defensive alliance". That is unquestionable.




Quote
Here you clearly ignorant of the fact that the US had been involved on the request of the UN since early in the conflict, and the US never "took the lead" and never did anything else than what the UN mandated them to do.
[/b]

And you have ..... forgotten........ that Clinton refused to send US ground troops until AFTER the Dayton Peace Accords. And Deliberate Force, a US led, primarily US executed deliberate air campaign, is given the credit for bringing about the Dayton Accords.

Quote
Ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke, special US negotiator in the Balkans and primary architect of the Dayton peace accords, told AFA's 1996 National Convention that Deliberate Force was the decisive factor in bringing the Serbs to the peace table. Holbrooke flatly declared that the diplomatic effort wouldn't have succeeded "without the United States Air Force and Navy and the precision bombing." Holbrooke said he believed at the time of Deliberate Force that "more bombing" would lead to better diplomacy. "And it was true," he said.


Of the bombing, he observed, "The precision of it, its immediate and visible effects on the negotiations, made a real difference. Those people who argue about airpower have got to stop arguing only about Vietnam and talk about what can be done in the [Persian] Gulf, what was done in Bosnia."


Quote
Scholz:
Here you prove beyond any doubt that you are ignorant as to what constitutes law and legality. The internal rules and regulations of NATO is not law and have nothing to do with the legality of war.


Here you again hide behind semantics. NATO violated its own charter as a defensive alliance. Excuse it all you like but that fact is unquestionable. NATO forces, BY THEIR OWN CHARTER, were prohibited from attacking any of the former bits and pieces of Yugoslavia.




Quote
Scholz:
Here you reaffirm your ignorance by actually stating that NATO only violated their own rules ... not law, yet still you claim it was unlawful.
Quote
[/b]

Well, what would you call it if your national government violated your Constitution's Article 2 if the UN told them it was OK to do so?

Quote
Article 2

All inhabitants of the Realm shall have the right to free exercise of their religion.


What would you call that?






Quote
Here you show complete ignorance of the over 20 non-NATO countries that were involved in the conflict.


Yeah, I know who was there. I also know what they were doing. That's how they got those brown, stinky thumbs.


Quote
So I must conclude that you indeed are ignorant, and mostly just argue to defend your inflated notions of US national pride.
[/b]

Conclude whatever you like. From what I can see, your conclusions are always wrong and this one is no exception. I have no inflated notions of US pride... but I sure can read the fact and reports and see who did what in Bosnia to bring about the Dayton accords.


Quote
Scholz: My somewhat inflated opinion of your knowledge and understanding has finally been corrected. Much to my disappointment.
Quote
[/b]

Well, I don't expect a guy that relies primarily on ad hominem to have a correct opinion about anyone else's knowledge.


Quote
Scholz: Now I have work to do, but I'm confident you'll have another ignorant, factually incorrect and argumentative post waiting for me when I get back.


And I have rather pressing "real life" matters. So I probably won't revisit this thread for a while.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline slimm50

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2684
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #63 on: October 25, 2004, 03:58:02 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Nash
Makes sense to me...

Well, if Nash is for it then I must be agin it:p

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #64 on: October 25, 2004, 04:21:34 PM »
Like I said... ad hominem is your only move.

THe facts are right in front of you and everyone else that reads this.

I think it's obvious who's head is in the sand.

Ta...off to see the doctor.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #65 on: October 25, 2004, 07:41:20 PM »
Careful Toad....if you continue to kick his arse in the argument, he may put you on "ignore". You DON'T want that to happen.....as you would then be unable to correspond with greatness ever again!

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13294
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #66 on: October 25, 2004, 08:02:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by NUKE
Careful Toad....if you continue to kick his arse in the argument, he may put you on "ignore". You DON'T want that to happen.....as you would then be unable to correspond with greatness ever again!


We really feel left out don't we Nuke? ;)
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #67 on: October 25, 2004, 09:06:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKIron
We really feel left out don't we Nuke? ;)


The guy is so open minded that he needs to ignore what doesn't "jive" with the indoctrination he has been subjected to in his UN utopian fantansy land of make believe and suger plumb fairies.

The guy is sensitive and acts like an arse...other than that, I think he's dumb. :lol

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #68 on: October 25, 2004, 11:25:12 PM »
Ah, guys... ya gotta cut him a little slack. He was wearing that blue beret in 95 in Bosnia/Hercegovina.

I can't imagine the demons he must face.

I'm sure he went there with the belief and intent that UNPROFOR actually was going to protect people from being subjected to genocide.

To actually be in the combat zone on duty with a gun in your hand and unable to act while all six UN "safe areas" fell to the Serbs and then finding out ~8000 people were slaughtered by the Serbs in Srebrenica alone... gotta be tough to think about.

So, give him a break.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Bill Clinton as UN Secretary General?
« Reply #69 on: October 25, 2004, 11:35:48 PM »
Hey Toad, the guy is beyond salvation.

Let us pray for his dumb arse.