Clinton criticizes Obama for cautious approach to Syria

yes Mr Clinton

We know of your war criminality very well, when is it your turn to go to a war crimes trial?

I see that senility has caught up with old Bill. He thinks this is the late 1990s where the US can do what it likes. Happy to say that boat has sailed a long time ago.
They all come out from under their respective rocks and make some stupid comment or give advice to an incumbent President. Interestingly Kosovo was used to cover up his indiscretions with Monica. In Bosnia (please note Bosnia is not pronounced with a z) the US only crawled out after the Dayton Agreement was signed not before.
For a man that dodged conscription Bill has aplenty of military advice, but I may have underestimated his manoeuvring with Monica when the old battleaxe was away from home.
As far as MaCain is concerned what is the United States of Windbags waiting for? Impose a no fly zone LOL. That is when the S300 missiles will appear and no more NATO aircraft.

Of course, because if Bill were in charge, America would have "liberated" Syria by randomly bombing Damascus and Aleppo. Armed whatever rebels paid them the most money and heaped the most praise upon them in the most awkward English possible. By now, the "freedom fighters" of Syria would have destroyed the last Christian church and driven out the last Christian family. All the while Clinton is congratulating himself for bringing democracy, freedom, and multiethnicity to the country.

(Forever intrigued by Bob's armchair political science Ph.D,

As a regular neocon pundit he's just repeating the neocons nursery rhyme narrative of freedom and democracy in Middle East(like the ones brought about in Iraq and Libya).What Bob won't say is the Syrian armed plan was in place years before the kick-off and the West and its "Democratic allies" in the Gulf have only ever had one plan for Syria - regime change and pave the way for their next phase in their overall plans which is regime change in Iran.

Now we all know of course that 'Al-Qaeda' is a construct wholly made in Langley, Virginia and just as Washington plotted a war against the Soviet union in Afghanistan via Pakistan and Saudi Arabia using Islamic militants 30 years ago, it is plotting a similar kind of war today in Syria.The plan was to follow Libya with a bogus R2P no fly zone that would morph into the rebel air force, as in Libya but Russia and China were not to be fooled again and this is why they support Assad against an externally sponsored insurgency carried out by sectarian Jihadis and supported by the US, Nato and the Gulf fascist Monarchies.

Cia's chickens come home to roost,disgusting hypocricy from the likes of Clinton and McCain how america and west is arming and funding the savage Jihadis to rape Syria as they did Libya based on cocked up deceit and lies.Not this time though.

Horney Clinton should take into consideration the fact that a majority of americans don't want to intervean in another war.
Clinton commited a warcrime when he decided to attack Serbia. He did so to change focus from the Monica Lewinsky affair. To cover his sick and perverted lifestyle thousands of people died.

Most Americans Against Intervening in Syria, Poll Finds
http://news.yahoo.com/most-americans-against-intervening-syria-poll-finds-220600979.html

Clinton's brain has certainly failed him on this one. Any fool ought to remember that it was NATO that bombed Serbia and that Serbs were hardly in any position to defend themselves. The military that was once the SFRY was carved up among three or four different interests.

Does Clinton really want NATO to create a no-fly zone around Syria? Wouldn't that involve Turkey? But Turkey has already been on the edge of confrontation with Syria, perhaps needs to look at a map to see that Syria and Turkey -- a NATO member -- are neighbors. What if war breaks our between Turkey and Syria? What if Assad falls and the Muslim Brotherhood takes over both in Syria and Turkey? That becomes a land bridge between Iran, Iraq and Europe.

Russia stands as a better candidate to stabilize the region than NATO, but that is not saying much.

@ Bob
Oh please do enlighten us by imparting your wisdom on the rest of us. According to you & you only for the moment, what exactly are the "realities that really drive such conflicts". Kindly humor us all, or at the very least myself. I need a good chuckle this evening.

"By now, the "freedom fighters" of Syria would have destroyed the last Christian church and driven out the last Christian family."
(Balkan Anthropologist, 13 June 2013 16:27)

And the 'freedom fighters' would probably have established another center for drug distribution, human trafficking, corruption and abuse of donor money and other kind of criminality.

Sj

Your comments say much about your prejudices but little truth about the realities that really drive these conflicts.

It's not the 90's anymore. Clinton should know, you shouldn't waste a good conflict to try and deflect attention to scandals brewing at home.

Talkback ne 7.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4391739,00.html

Arn.Sweden.

You Serbs are a funny lot.
Serbia was bombed to establish Bondsteel, Serbia was bombed to protect the pipeline, Serbia was bombed for the Trepeca mines, Serbia was bombed to finish breaking up Yugosloavia, Serbia was bombed to distract attention from Monica Lewinsky.
When will you finally accept that you were bombed because of the horrendous violence you unleased on Kosovo and refused to stop until it was Albanian free?
Look at Clinton's approval ratings during the Lewinsky saga he did not need a war he was in the mid to high 60s and even in the 70's before bombing Serbia. The world knew it was being driven by politics. Ironically, even those who strongly opposed Clinton voted for the action against Serbia in the final vote. Those that opposed it even came out and said Serbia deserved it but questioned whether the US was the ones to lead it.

Does Clinton really want NATO to create a no-fly zone around Syria? Wouldn't that involve Turkey? But Turkey has already been on the edge of confrontation with Syria, perhaps needs to look at a map to see that Syria and Turkey -- a NATO member -- are neighbors. What if war breaks our between Turkey and Syria? What if Assad falls and the Muslim Brotherhood takes over both in Syria and Turkey? That becomes a land bridge between Iran, Iraq and Europe.

Russia stands as a better candidate to stabilize the region than NATO, but that is not saying much.
(Paul, 13 June 2013 22:18)

If a war breaks out between Syria and Turkey, Turkey will activate Articles 5 and 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty. An attack against one is an attack against all. No UN resolution will be required for a NATO intervention in Syria as according to the UN, every country has the right to defend itself. So if Syria attacks Turkey, they are automatically attacking 27 other countries per the North Atlantic Treaty. Turkey came close to activating Articles 5 and 6 not so long ago when Assad bombed several Turkish border towns.

How can you say that Russia is a "better candidate" to stabilise the region when Russia has been openly arming and financing hardcore radical foreign Islamic Jihadist extremist terrorists in Syria such as Hezbollah, the Basij, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, Kata'ib, PFLP-GC, Jaysh al-Sha'bi, Shabiha, Lijan militias, al-Abbas brigade, Houthis and many other Iraqi and Iranian insurgent groups?

Sj

The politics in Serbia under Milosevic were nothing to chuckle about.

90000 dead in Syria is nothing to chuckle about.

Do either of these make you laugh?

He's a great, great man!

Who cares what Clinton has to say - really. He considers himself still in politics and should quit commenting about the current administration. But his wife will run in the next election and both of them will be in power again. The USA cannot get rid of them.

How can you say that Russia is a "better candidate" to stabilise the region when Russia has been openly arming and financing hardcore radical foreign Islamic Jihadist extremist terrorists in Syria such as Hezbollah, the Basij, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, Kata'ib, PFLP-GC, Jaysh al-Sha'bi, Shabiha, Lijan militias, al-Abbas brigade, Houthis and many other Iraqi and Iranian insurgent groups?
(Ian, UK, 14 June 2013 10:08)

That's news to me and makes as much sense as the US doing the same thing, except on the other side of Assad. So Russia is actively supporting Assad's campaign of promoting terrorism? They are as stupid as the US was for backing Al Qaeda and the Taliban against the USSR.

When will we learn?

I disagree with Clinton on this one. Syria is a more powerful and bigger country than Serbia can ever dream of being. In the 90's especially, Serbia was a pariah country with an army only able to fight and expel civilians. Involvement in Syria would be too expensive for the US.

Sj

Your comments say much about your prejudices but little truth about the realities that really drive these conflicts.

I see that senility has caught up with old Bill. He thinks this is the late 1990s where the US can do what it likes. Happy to say that boat has sailed a long time ago.
They all come out from under their respective rocks and make some stupid comment or give advice to an incumbent President. Interestingly Kosovo was used to cover up his indiscretions with Monica. In Bosnia (please note Bosnia is not pronounced with a z) the US only crawled out after the Dayton Agreement was signed not before.
For a man that dodged conscription Bill has aplenty of military advice, but I may have underestimated his manoeuvring with Monica when the old battleaxe was away from home.
As far as MaCain is concerned what is the United States of Windbags waiting for? Impose a no fly zone LOL. That is when the S300 missiles will appear and no more NATO aircraft.

yes Mr Clinton

We know of your war criminality very well, when is it your turn to go to a war crimes trial?

Of course, because if Bill were in charge, America would have "liberated" Syria by randomly bombing Damascus and Aleppo. Armed whatever rebels paid them the most money and heaped the most praise upon them in the most awkward English possible. By now, the "freedom fighters" of Syria would have destroyed the last Christian church and driven out the last Christian family. All the while Clinton is congratulating himself for bringing democracy, freedom, and multiethnicity to the country.

I disagree with Clinton on this one. Syria is a more powerful and bigger country than Serbia can ever dream of being. In the 90's especially, Serbia was a pariah country with an army only able to fight and expel civilians. Involvement in Syria would be too expensive for the US.

He's a great, great man!

You Serbs are a funny lot.
Serbia was bombed to establish Bondsteel, Serbia was bombed to protect the pipeline, Serbia was bombed for the Trepeca mines, Serbia was bombed to finish breaking up Yugosloavia, Serbia was bombed to distract attention from Monica Lewinsky.
When will you finally accept that you were bombed because of the horrendous violence you unleased on Kosovo and refused to stop until it was Albanian free?
Look at Clinton's approval ratings during the Lewinsky saga he did not need a war he was in the mid to high 60s and even in the 70's before bombing Serbia. The world knew it was being driven by politics. Ironically, even those who strongly opposed Clinton voted for the action against Serbia in the final vote. Those that opposed it even came out and said Serbia deserved it but questioned whether the US was the ones to lead it.

(Forever intrigued by Bob's armchair political science Ph.D,

As a regular neocon pundit he's just repeating the neocons nursery rhyme narrative of freedom and democracy in Middle East(like the ones brought about in Iraq and Libya).What Bob won't say is the Syrian armed plan was in place years before the kick-off and the West and its "Democratic allies" in the Gulf have only ever had one plan for Syria - regime change and pave the way for their next phase in their overall plans which is regime change in Iran.

Now we all know of course that 'Al-Qaeda' is a construct wholly made in Langley, Virginia and just as Washington plotted a war against the Soviet union in Afghanistan via Pakistan and Saudi Arabia using Islamic militants 30 years ago, it is plotting a similar kind of war today in Syria.The plan was to follow Libya with a bogus R2P no fly zone that would morph into the rebel air force, as in Libya but Russia and China were not to be fooled again and this is why they support Assad against an externally sponsored insurgency carried out by sectarian Jihadis and supported by the US, Nato and the Gulf fascist Monarchies.

Cia's chickens come home to roost,disgusting hypocricy from the likes of Clinton and McCain how america and west is arming and funding the savage Jihadis to rape Syria as they did Libya based on cocked up deceit and lies.Not this time though.

"By now, the "freedom fighters" of Syria would have destroyed the last Christian church and driven out the last Christian family."
(Balkan Anthropologist, 13 June 2013 16:27)

And the 'freedom fighters' would probably have established another center for drug distribution, human trafficking, corruption and abuse of donor money and other kind of criminality.

Sj

The politics in Serbia under Milosevic were nothing to chuckle about.

90000 dead in Syria is nothing to chuckle about.

Do either of these make you laugh?

Talkback ne 7.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4391739,00.html

Arn.Sweden.

@ Bob
Oh please do enlighten us by imparting your wisdom on the rest of us. According to you & you only for the moment, what exactly are the "realities that really drive such conflicts". Kindly humor us all, or at the very least myself. I need a good chuckle this evening.

It's not the 90's anymore. Clinton should know, you shouldn't waste a good conflict to try and deflect attention to scandals brewing at home.

Clinton's brain has certainly failed him on this one. Any fool ought to remember that it was NATO that bombed Serbia and that Serbs were hardly in any position to defend themselves. The military that was once the SFRY was carved up among three or four different interests.

Does Clinton really want NATO to create a no-fly zone around Syria? Wouldn't that involve Turkey? But Turkey has already been on the edge of confrontation with Syria, perhaps needs to look at a map to see that Syria and Turkey -- a NATO member -- are neighbors. What if war breaks our between Turkey and Syria? What if Assad falls and the Muslim Brotherhood takes over both in Syria and Turkey? That becomes a land bridge between Iran, Iraq and Europe.

Russia stands as a better candidate to stabilize the region than NATO, but that is not saying much.

Horney Clinton should take into consideration the fact that a majority of americans don't want to intervean in another war.
Clinton commited a warcrime when he decided to attack Serbia. He did so to change focus from the Monica Lewinsky affair. To cover his sick and perverted lifestyle thousands of people died.

Most Americans Against Intervening in Syria, Poll Finds
http://news.yahoo.com/most-americans-against-intervening-syria-poll-finds-220600979.html

Who cares what Clinton has to say - really. He considers himself still in politics and should quit commenting about the current administration. But his wife will run in the next election and both of them will be in power again. The USA cannot get rid of them.

Does Clinton really want NATO to create a no-fly zone around Syria? Wouldn't that involve Turkey? But Turkey has already been on the edge of confrontation with Syria, perhaps needs to look at a map to see that Syria and Turkey -- a NATO member -- are neighbors. What if war breaks our between Turkey and Syria? What if Assad falls and the Muslim Brotherhood takes over both in Syria and Turkey? That becomes a land bridge between Iran, Iraq and Europe.

Russia stands as a better candidate to stabilize the region than NATO, but that is not saying much.
(Paul, 13 June 2013 22:18)

If a war breaks out between Syria and Turkey, Turkey will activate Articles 5 and 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty. An attack against one is an attack against all. No UN resolution will be required for a NATO intervention in Syria as according to the UN, every country has the right to defend itself. So if Syria attacks Turkey, they are automatically attacking 27 other countries per the North Atlantic Treaty. Turkey came close to activating Articles 5 and 6 not so long ago when Assad bombed several Turkish border towns.

How can you say that Russia is a "better candidate" to stabilise the region when Russia has been openly arming and financing hardcore radical foreign Islamic Jihadist extremist terrorists in Syria such as Hezbollah, the Basij, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, Kata'ib, PFLP-GC, Jaysh al-Sha'bi, Shabiha, Lijan militias, al-Abbas brigade, Houthis and many other Iraqi and Iranian insurgent groups?

How can you say that Russia is a "better candidate" to stabilise the region when Russia has been openly arming and financing hardcore radical foreign Islamic Jihadist extremist terrorists in Syria such as Hezbollah, the Basij, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, Kata'ib, PFLP-GC, Jaysh al-Sha'bi, Shabiha, Lijan militias, al-Abbas brigade, Houthis and many other Iraqi and Iranian insurgent groups?
(Ian, UK, 14 June 2013 10:08)

That's news to me and makes as much sense as the US doing the same thing, except on the other side of Assad. So Russia is actively supporting Assad's campaign of promoting terrorism? They are as stupid as the US was for backing Al Qaeda and the Taliban against the USSR.

When will we learn?