Posted on 10/04/2003 6:08:08 PM PDT by Andy from Beaverton
Exactly, his brilliant "island hopping" strategy was not so self-evident at the time--just about everyone else wanted to fight like in Europe--going forward sweeping everything before you, no enemy in the rear and so on. He was also personally brave--most have heard about his personal leadership under fire in WWI--his men idolized him--but few know that he was nominated for a Medal of Honor in 1914 during the Vera Cruz intervention. And unlike Clark, who would reverse course on a dime or bend like a pretzel to to ensure what he was doing was personally satisfactory to whoever could help him get ahead, MacArthur had convictions. MacArther was relieved for being true to his principles. Clark was relieved for not having any.
Wrong. First, in general, the military can be used any time the President directs as part of his Constitutionally enumerated duties; that's been done numerous times-- suppressing riots and restoring order in Detroit & L.A. etc, enforcing desegregation orders in the south, shutting down the Mex-American border in 1916, and assisting states during natural disasters like Hurricane Andrew.
Second, in situations other than the Constitutional use of the military, the Posse Comitatus law prevents civil authorities from using the military to execute the laws; interpreted in general to mean make arrests, conduct search & seizures, and so on. Of note, it applies to federal forces, not the militias of the states, i.e. the National Guard.
Not only was [Waco] a disaster, it was illegal... it is rather hard to hide the troops and tanks that were there. All total there were 9 Bradley fighting vehicles, 5 Combat Engineer Vehicles, 1 Tank Retrieval vehicle and 2 Abrams Tanks. Reno tried to pass them off as "on loan" from the military.
Federal military forces at Waco were limited to a couple observers and some enlisted personnel who trained the FBI agents in how to use some electronic warfare equipment and helped to maintain it. They had been requested by DOJ through normal military channels. As for the armored vehicles, equipment is not covered by Posse Comitatus, but even then, they belonged to the Texas National Guard and were primarily operated by the FBI. The regular Army had nothing to do with them. This thing has been investigated to death--there was very little military involvement and what there was, was lawful.
Clark has major league "issues", as Oprah and my daughter would say, that in my view make him unqualified to be president. the article points that out. However, the author's crdibility is weakened by including so many inaccuracies and untruths.
Wow. I compliment you Judy. Even by the somewhat liberal standards of the Balkans & Waco threads, this pushes the boundaries. Most people would hesitate to post something so patently untrue, so easily checked, so obviously illogical. Cannily, however, you realized there might be some out there who would have some doubt. So you decided to back up your post with a quote from the most trustworthy and reliable person you could think of--none other than Slobo himself!
[question]...as many as 70 or 80 NATO planes may have been lost...Milosevic's response: ...take these estimates you're hearing and divide by two or three
Not sure I follow your numbers, but hey what's a little math problem when we have 50-100 pilots who were blown up over Yugoslavia three years ago and THEY STILL DON'T KNOW IT! Who's gonna tell those guys what happened to them? Sure hope I don't get that job. And what about their families? I wonder if any of them realize their son or husband or father hasn't returned? And how about those forlorn ground crews, still hanging around the flight line at Aviano 40 months later waiting for good ol Major "Duke" to bring that baby in? And especially what about the poor Wing Property Book Officer? "Dammit, Captain. You graduated from the Academy. I know you can count. Judywillow says we are missing 50-100 planes. Get out there and count them again!" "YESSIR!"
1. You're putting stock into what Milosevic says, long after he's lost any claim to credibility.
2. You are referencing Venik's Aviation site, which is not a source of information, but simply a repeater site for the claims of Milosevic's regime as far as Allied Force goes.
3. It is now 4 years after Allied Force, and the only aircraft recovered by the Serbs are the F-16 and F-117 that NATO admitted to losing at the time - there were non-combat losses, and damaged aircraft, but no other aircraft besides the two who's wrecks were recovered by the Serbs were shot down.
4. You are a Serbian partisan when it comes to Kosovo - all you offer is a conversation with the dead, i.e., your side has been victimized, and you'll brook no acceptance of the fact that the Serbs were the biggest violaters of human rights in the Balkans in the 1990's (or 1980's in Kosovo, for that matter.)
So: you place a foreign interest, being Milosevic's now non-existent Serbia, over the interests of the United States of America, and will even go so far as to attack our military in your perverse quest to defend Milosevic and his crimes.
I have your measure now, shorty.
Get a clue already - your sources are garbage.
Trashing the campaign in Kosovo, and by extension the servicemen who carried it out, however, is beyond the pale as far as I'm concerned.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.