Need FReeper Help With Understanding Something (Milosovic)

8/17/04 | Doug (itssoamusing)

[itssoamusing]

I'm relatively new to the world of FReeping for the most part. I need some help in understanding what the war in Bosnia was about. I'm particularly interested in the Muslim aspect of this. I've read numerous articles about this and Milosovic. I'm finding it hard to distinguish who was right and who was wrong. The impression I get from what I read is that Milosovic was killing Muslims and also that the Muslims were raping and beheading people etc. I've also been interested in reading about the many uprisings of Muslims throughout history and how it may relate to this. Forgive my poor knowledge of this subject.

Thanks in advance FReepers, Doug

[Calusa]

Are you a Todd Schnitt listener? WIOD 610 AM Miami, Tampa, San Antonio. It's just one naughty expression you used.

[Jim_Curtis]

In the pre-9/11 era, the Serbs dealt with their jihadist problem by going to war with the jihadists and tried to force them out. They decided that "terrorist czars" and "patriot acts" just wouldn't cut it for their situation which was much more desperate than the current US situation.

People like Bob Dole and Joe Lieberman wanted to give weapons to the jihadies to improve their chances of wiping out the Serbs. Other senators, one in particular, argued that this only prolongs the fighting and suggested that the US had a duty to humanity to bomb the Christian Serbs to soften them up for bin Laden's ground troops to go in for the genocidal kill and establish an Islamic foothold in Europe.

[Calusa]

I'm not an experienced chat meister. Is that some kinda code? BTTT. Shock me.

[norton]

Appreciate objectivity, you still amaze me.

To ..soamusing: My take was that very little in the way of rational thought went into our actions toward the former Yugoslavia.

(a) Clinton had to cover his butt and look strong as well [as with Kerry's Vietnam saga]. (b) Clinton had some high class loonies on staff & in control, tough to select between Reno (Waco) and Albright (FRY). (c) Milo was probably the least blame-ridden in the mix but his style was a throwback and he made an easy (personal) target. (d) Clinton wanted to show the muslim world he was 'sensitive' to their desires. (e) Yugoslavia was an already dissolving state made up of many ethnicities (diverse...hint) that gave him the opportunity. (f) Germany and Albania both stood to benefit from reconfiguring the area and were major cheerleaders. (g) There is very little of an Orthodox influence in DC./there was a very strong albanian/muslim influence in the democrat party. (h) As you should know, we were even arming and training muslim forces so they could 'liberate' Serb territory, they eventually did occupy it. Those forces openly included mujahadeen (sp)and Al Quiada, mercenaries and maniacs, who are fighting us today.

(i) Finally, it is hard for Americans (today at least) to understand how people in that region can hate each other so completely when standing back here we can see little or no real difference between one group and the other. It helps that our media and education systems do nothing to correct that general lack of insight.

PS: Of all newly arrived immigrants, most of whom suffer only from the culture shock and lack of primary schooling, the "Kosovars" (Albanians, muslims) are the only group I've encountered that display absolutely ZERO positive attributes.

[itssoamusing]

Try this on for size

[Calusa]

There was one line of thought whereby the plight of the Bosnians was likened to the Holocaust, therefore we should intervene. I know I'm treading on thin ice, but how is it that US foreign policy can be driven by one group's collective guilt or similar psychological issues. Is it just a way for one or another group to project power and express their gains in their status in the pecking order? And there are other groups I see doing this.

[Calusa]

Thank you. I read you loud and clear.

[Diocletian]

Are you asking specifically about Bosnia and not about Croatia or Kosovo?

[combat_boots]

When in an Athens (Greece) bed & breakfast in 2001, I was informed by the innkeeper, a Greek national, to make certain to keep the windows locked at night, as gypsies, Bosnian & Albanians were coming in drives to escape conditions resulting from Bosnia, would climb through the window, and rob us at the very least. Also, he mentioned that the largest business by far in Sarajevo had become heroin trafficking. Apparently, Greek state police were being murdered near the northern borders.

Maybe things have quieted a little by now.

[elbucko]

It's just one naughty expression you used.

I beg your pardon, I did not use any "naughty expression" on any post on this thread. I believe you intended this upbraiding toward someone else.

Are you a Todd Schnitt listener? WIOD 610 AM Miami....

Nope! doesn't reach to where I am in SoCal.

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

A fairly good book (in my opinion) is Kate Hudson's; "Breaking the South Slav Dream: The Rise and Fall of Yugoslavia."

You really need to go back as far the beginning of the 20 century to understand the dynamics of the Balkan conflicts between 1989-1999. Essentially, there are four conflicts to consider: Slovenia; Croatia; Bosnia-Herzegovina; and Kosovo.

[t_skoz]

"Maybe we need a new 12-step program for people who can't stop interfering in other Nation's affairs."

For what it's worth, I agree with you on this sentiment. Although, it will probably get you (hell, maybe even me) banned from here.

From George Washington's farewell address:

"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them."

"Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard."

[t_skoz]

PS welcome to Free Republic

[moni kerr]

Yugoslavia means roughly 'land of the south slavs'. Under the Communist Tito the country was organized along federal lines with 6 republics (Serbia, Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia). However, the decision to give Bosnia-Hercegovian republic status did not sit well with either Croats or Serbs, both of whom had at one time or another administered the territory. To complicate things further B-H was the scene of the Croat fascist sponsored genocide against Serbs (1941-45) and was also the main battleground for the the 3-way civil war between Croat Ustasha, Serb Chetniks and the Communist Partisans (most of whom incidently were Bosnian Serbs).

Sometime during the 50's and 60's the Slavic Muslims of B-H began to develop a national identity based primarily on their religious heritage. Originally there were 5 founding nations (peoples) Serbs, Slovenes, Croats, Montenegrens and Macedonians. The 1963 Constitution recognized 'Muslim' as a people. That is as a Slavic people, since Albanian muslims were not granted the same status, always a sore point for them.

The issue of identity was one of the primary causes of the Yugoslav civil wars. The various nationalities reaserted themselves strongly once the bonds of communism came undone. Milosevic gets most of the blame for starting this trend, but it was probably inevitable anyway. Tudjman should certainly share the blame. During the Slovenian war, a friend of mine remarked with a mixture of disappointment and admiration, that the Slovenes were behaving like Serbs. What they were doing was asserting their national identity. The Bosnian Muslims did the same but with disasterous results. The Albanians were much more successful in that they convinced the world that the disaster of the Bosnian war would be repeated if the nobody intervened.