Issodhos @aol.com wrote:

>    The attack on Yugoslavia was primarily to save the Clinton/Gore
>presidency

Are you saying it was a political decision? Gosh! Now there's a shocker!

> and was easily supported by Liberals who only need an emotional
>reason to embark on killing and destruction.

Big-L "Liberals"? In Australia big-L Liberals are members of the Liberal
Party (which is the main political party representing conservatives). Quite
distinct from small-l liberals, which refers to people who are amenable to
reform, freedom of expression etc.

Didn't know you had a Liberal party over there? Can we interest you in a
second-hand John Howard. Cheap.

>  And there is nothing in the
>Balkans worth killing for that could not simply be bought.

I suspect you are right. So the logical conclusion is that the war was
fought to win the hearts and minds of the US public. It follows that the
majority of people in the US are "Liberals" who wanted a war against
Serbia?

Why was it that this was a politically-popular decision do you think?

> Stop spewing asinine aging New Left rhetoric.

"New Left", is that another political party presumably? They would be old
rightists (in the old lingo) no doubt? ;-)

Bill Bartlett
Bracknell tas