Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Crimea- blame Clinton


Which I'm totally OK with, to a point.


As I've related many times, it was an eye opener for me when a friend whose wife is first generation Croat began telling me and other friends about the atrocities in that region in about 1989. Our response was, yeah, maybe something is going on but if it was that big we'd be reading about it in the NYT. And, "so tell your congressman." To which he said, believe me, the immigrant community is burning up the lines.


So in lfe immitating art ala' Wag the Dog, in 1998, after most of the death and sorting out of ethnic cleansing has already been done, we have a President who has serious political problems (didn't molest a Fireside Girl as in the movie, but close enough) and all the sudden it is urgent that we have a war.


Nevermind that there is no action in international relations that doesn't cause some sort of reaction, immediately or with delay.



5 Replies

More Clinton(s)

Gotta run.


But FWIW. Yes, the Fox obsession with Benghazi is comical at times ("the coverage of the Malaysian jet is just a liberal plot to divert attention from Benghazi") but anyway.


Here's what is the real skinny, in my best guess.


- Benghazi involved both the state Department and CIA

- The heads of those two organizations hated each other going back to Sen. Clinton's grandstanding takedown of the General

   in the Surge hearings and the national security establishment is more comfy with the GOP

- The event occurred in the heat of the election and Mitt Romeny knew about it before the press did

- Sec. Clinton and Pres Obama did not appreciate being rolled and used their higher authority within the Deep State to take the  

  General out.  First order of business after the election......

- The General was a fool to make himself vulnerable but the majority of middle aged men can be made a fool by an

  attractive younger woman who flatters them. And for the most part nobody cares, until they do


So my guess is that there is both less, and more, to the Fox take on it.

Red Steele
Veteran Advisor

Re: Crimea- blame Clinton

Nox, the Clintons abruptly swithed sides on that one, too. Just a week before the bombing started, they had press releases saying they were considering helping the other side. It was surreal to read about it.

Veteran Advisor

Re: Crimea- blame Clinton

Yep, just like bush seeing his rating going down and that it looked like he was not going to fulfill his promise to catch OBL any place he was hiding, decided that it was a good time to invade Iraq and get rid of saddam! Have to get those ratings up!
Veteran Advisor

Re: Crimea- blame Clinton

I'll tell you what 'surreal" is--everything you and the rest of the tinfoil hat wearers post!
gough whitlam
Senior Contributor

Re: Crimea- blame Clinton

I keep getting this overwhelming feeling that you warmongers want the US to attack Russia over Crimea purely to show the rest of the world the military domination you used to have.

After so many military disasters you want to take on an army which hasn't lost a soldier in twenty years and armed to lips with technology and guns.

What is it about you wanna be heroes who possess a antiquated desire to fight at the flight of a bird? Who gives a rats about Crimea? You couldn't pronounce the word a month ago but now you want to export a variety of your freedom there and kill thousands in the process.

Obamas huffing and puffing is the only response that is required. If you listen to fox war should have commenced immediately.