If that were true, then explain to me why he ignored Rwanda. That was on his watch. Or was it just because it was Africa and the people who were getting hacked to death, an estimated 800,000 in about 4 months, were black?

edit: having issues with my key board. should be clearer.

You should't jump to the next thing without either addressing/ conceding the first.

Oh and what the hell does that mean anyway.
Is this even a sentence? "If that were the explain to me why..."

:corn:

LOL!

:lol2:

Why is that? I could give a shit if it was Clinton. Many of our presidents have ignored genocides around the world though, so I guess Clinton could have ignored the one in Bosnia as well.

fixed it.

Heya merc! How ya doin?

I'm doing great man! Why do you ask? Should I be doing poorly? :D

Great to hear - so how are the kids?
Your daughter like her new car?
How was Mexico?
Hows work?
Hows your summer going?

All good man.

Bahamas, not Mexico.

Ohhh, where are the pics from your trip?
You had some real nice ones last year, IIRC.

BTW - I found this interesting bwahahahaha

Perhaps he was estimating what could productively be done by force, and what could not.

Possible. But I don't think Rwanda had the same arms that Bosnia or Serbia had. I don't think Rwanda was on the back door of the Russians. If his only point was to prevent a genocide then it just does not follow the logic of some 10,000 killed in Bosina vs the 800,000 killed in Rwanda. They ignored Rwanda because it was Africa. The Europeans should have taken care of the issue.

It seems that the biggest mistake on Israel's part was misjudging who the protesters were and how to handle the situation. From what I heard, whoever was in charge of the raid assumed the boat was full of peaceful activists so they did not bring in the overwhelming amount of force they should have in that situation. If Israel's soldiers, or whoever they were, were not put in a defensive position no one would have gotten killed. And if no one got killed, the media would not have jumped all over it.

That is correct - their intel was faulty and they claimed they were told by the US that they were peaceful - hence the boarded with paintball guns instead of real weapons. Its back there somewhere in a link previously posted. I'm too lazy to go find it now.

For your argument to be consistent, Clinton would also have ignored Somalia, also in Africa. He didn't.

He inherited Somalia and pulled out when things soured.

We were not in Somalia because of a genocide. At least that is not what we were briefed.