May 30, 1999

Parse And Spin Easing Americans Into Undeclared War

Arrrrragh!

Again it's President Clinton with lies, double speak and parsed definitions. Not under oath this time, but nonetheless equally aggravating.

Three months of Balkan bombing has not coaxed indicted war criminal Slobodan Milosevic to the peace table. Indeed, he seems determined to emulate the Butcher of Baghdad. Saddamn still rules Iraq after six years of bombing by United States planes -- oops, I mean United Nations.

Our commander in chief insisted at the start of Operation Kosovo that American ground forces -- oops again, I mean NATO -- would not be used.

Clinton's words were clear: "I do not intend to put our troops in Kosovo to fight a war."

The hair on my head flexed when I heard that statement on March 24. For an instant I thought I was hearing President Lyndon Baines Johnson's 1964 campaign promise: "I will not send American boys to fight an Asian war."

Is it possible that Clinton has Al Gore's presidential campaign in mind? Nah. That's too political for something as serious as war.

Critics say that by "taking troops off the table," Clinton encouraged Milosevic to stick it out. Now that this prophecy is being fulfilled, Clinton avers: "I have always said we have not, and will not, take any option off the table."

That's the key lie. He didn't "always" say that. He never said it all until he blundered into the Balkan mess.

Clinton's ability to retrofit his words is astonishing -- but no less so than that of the beltway media and assorted Democrats to concur strenuously.

The spin line is that the phrase "to fight a war" did not preclude ground troops in Kosovo. Clinton intends only -- under lawyerly parsing -- to send them into a "permissive environment."

Great! "Mr. Milosevic, will you permit us to invade you and not shoot back when we shoot at you?

Clinton's alter ego, Secretary of State Madeline Albright, let the truth slip out: NATO may have to be used in a "non-permissive environment." This is a cute way of saying Serb cleansers surely will shoot back.

The administration definition of "war" depends upon what its meaning is.

Americans' tender concern now is being massaged for pro-active peacekeeping -- a phrase that will be parsed when public opinion polls are studied.

Last week's Gallup survey reveals that Clinton's approval rating has fallen from its incredible 80 percent during Monicagate to 53 percent -- and falling. After another week of inconclusive bombing, he likely will slide to minority numbers.

The un-parsed truth is that antiseptic war has not yet been invented. Even the smart bombs loosed by U.S. and Britain break things and kill people.

Despite earnest efforts by American pilots to avoid "collateral damage" -- another sly euphemism for mistaken targets and dead people -- accidents happen. Generals depend on it; but only to the other side. In fact, however, mistakes are universal.

Democrats, with their nurtured feelings for people in pain, are dangerous in world crises. They tend to discover "just wars" needing immediate intervention. Republicans, with their ingrown reliance on individual responsibility, are no less dangerous. They tend to ignore all wars that do not involve direct attack on the homeland.

The wonderful U.S. Constitution has a great remedy for zealous outlooks on war. It is contained in Article 1, Section 8: "Congress shall have power ... to declare war ... to raise and support Armies ... but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years."

The Founding Fathers were careful to make a civilian president commander in chief of our armed forces but did not trust him to make war on his own. They stipulated that the peoples' representatives jointly should take that awful step.

All presidents in this century have conducted wars on their own. Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt edged into the World Wars by being neutral on the side of Europe. They were vindicated by subsequent enemy attacks on Americans and by final victory.

Not so fortunate were Harry Truman (Korea), John Kennedy (Cuba, Vietnam) and Lyndon Johnson (Vietnam). They launched disastrous, unpopular, inconclusive wars and obtained congressional acquiescence -- not declaration -- afterwards.

Ronald Reagan (Central America) and George Bush (Desert Storm) also horned in on wars belatedly approved by Congress. However, they were fortunate enough to have clear excuses (communism and oil) and staunch allies who helped them win.

Clinton's biggest mistake was failing to ask Congress to approve his Yugoslavia incursions within the 90 days stipulated by the post-Vietnam War Powers Act. His reason (humanitarian) is not critical to the U.S., and his NATO allies (except for Britain) are squishy.

Forget Monica. Clinton's snub of Congress in the matter of war is impeachment liability big time.

The outlook for Clinton's legacy became more bleak last week with indictment of Milosevic as a war criminal by the United Nations War Crimes Tribunal at The Hague. The Serbian leader cannot make peace now even if the non-stop bombing had otherwise persuaded him. He is a dead man walking.

Unless someone assassinates Milosevic, or his soldiers revolt, NATO-U.S. ground troops may have to go against suicidal Serbs.

Parsing and spinning won't prevail against tanks and bullets.

There is no diplomatic wiggle room left -- if there ever was -- for peace at any price. The only solution remaining is all out invasion.

Let us pray.

By Lindsey Williams, columnist for Sun Coast Media Group newspapers