From: Spudboy100@aol.com
Date: Wed Nov 27 2002 - 23:25:12 MST
Mez noted:
<<I've often liked what I've read from Krauthammer on international
policy, though I haven't read anything from him since 9/11, and
suspect that I would disagree with many of his opinions since then>>
Bill Clinton, was as Presidents go, a nice fellow. Clinton sought
international consultation with the EU before making serious political
decisions, he favored the Kyoto accords, thus pleasing the Greens slightly,
he attempted to foster peace between Arabs and Israelis, and he ordered
attacks on Serbia when that war started heating up again.
On his watch, Al Qeida was able to thrive and grow under Saudi funding, and
his soft policies on immigration, except for that little Cuban kid, were very
inviting, even to Islamists who settled in the USA. These are the same people
who conducted the 9-11 attacks. Clinton's foreign policy views on the PLO
were highly inaccurate, and his catering to the Peoples Republic of China
appears to have demonstrated (what must have appeared to the Chinese
leadership) as weakness.
In essence, from a foreign policy view, Bill Clinton was a sucker. He was
easilly played because he is a people pleaser (Monica not withsatanding).
Krauthammer has stated these and many other observations earlier. As for
human clonning, I am opposed unless there is a valid reason. On let us say
Stem Cell Research, Tissue Engineering, and the like; Krauthammer seemed
quite supportive.
A lot of the writers of the National Review and the Weekly Standard seem
pretty top-notch to me. My opinion.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:27 MST