Slobo’s Stooges

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | March 15, 2006 | Jacob Laksin

[Lx]

Does anyone have a link to the proof of 250,000 dead in mass graves?

[GAB-1955]

Well, since the majority of the population in Kosovo is Albanian, I don't see that many will be rebuilt. But this was the situation before Slobo's speech in 1987, too, wasn't it?

I will admit, like the current Serbian government does, that this whole period was a ten-year civil war in which Serbia tried to hang on to as much territory as possible. It should never have been a holy crusade to save Orthodox Serbia, but Slobo turned it into one, and thus made the situation worse. I recall the reason the Slovenes won is their part of Yugoslavia had the plants with the tanks and AT weapons in them and they were able to stop the Serbian attack. That doesn't mean that Serbia didn't attack.

I actually think that there is a chance for peace, which in this case is a minimum of dissatisfaction on all sides. But Kosovo is going to be a EU-quasi colony for decades. It can't be helped.

[george wythe]

On both extremes of the political spectrum, Milosevic was the victim, never the victimizer.

I have zero sympathy for Milosevic.

He did as much damage to the Serbs as he did to the Croats and non-Orthodox Bosnians. He stoked ethnic and religious conflicts to keep himself in power as ruthless dictator.

Good riddance.

[takenoprisoner]

"Does anyone have a link to the proof of 250,000 dead in mass graves?"

yea right

[takenoprisoner]

What a deal for Yugo, the US fighting for and defending the albanian mafia muslims and the muslim terrorists so muslims could take control of the territory...to freely go about eliminating the Christian Serbs and other non muslims.

beam me up scotty

[NYC Republican]

It’s an appealing sentiment, suggesting as it does that the man who presided over the deaths of 250,000 people in Yugoslavia in the 1990s died unsung and unmourned

And about 150,000 of them were Serbs murdered by muslims and Croatians...

What a bald faced-lie. No one belives your dumb propoganda.

[Proctor]

You are right, NYC - 2banana is wrong - in fact the death toll was LESS!!

From: THE BOSNIA CALCULATION: How many have died? Not nearly as many as some would have you think.

George Kenney

The NY Times Magazine, April 23, 1995

- George Kenney, a Washington writer, resigned from the State Department int 1992 to protest United States policy Yugoslavia. -

Neither the International Committee of the Red Cross nor Western governments have found evidence of systematic killing. Nobody, moreover, has found former detainees of concentration camps who witnessed systematic killing. Random killing took place in the camps, but not enough to account for tens of thousand of dead. And, apart from the few well-known massacres nobody sees signs of missing villages, either.

The Red Cross has confirmed well under 20,000 fatalities on all sides. Extrapolating from that and from the observations of experienced investigators in Bosnia, its analysts estimate total fatalities at 20,000 to 30,000, with a small chance that they may exceed 35,000.

Analysts at the C.I A. and the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research put fatalities in the tens of thousands but hesitate to give a more precise range until the war is over. European military intelligence officers with extensive experience in Bosnia estimate fatalities in the mid tens of thousands. From these and other estimates by generally reliable relief workers, and given the arguments about the physical impossibility of high numbers, I arrived at the range of 25,000 to 60,000 fatalities.

In 1995, lacking the bodies, the charge of Genocide has worn thin. It seems to have almost become sensationalism for its own sake. Apart from any question of the number of fatalities, journalists have begun a hot little debate about how "objective" coverage of Bosnia has been, about whether it has tended to favor the Muslims. Several journalists with whom I spoke expressed the uneasy feeling that something was obviously wrong. In the words of the writer David Rieff, "Bosnia became our Spain," though not for political reasons, which is what he meant, but rather because too many journalists dreamed self-aggrandizing dreams of becoming Hemingway.

Who could do a reliable count? Probably not the State Department. Unfortunately, Secretary of Stae Warren Christopher folded under pressure from the interventionists and began-however furtively -- charging the Serbs with Genocide. Having thus taken sides, the State Department can hardly be expected to investigate reliably.

[GAB-1955]

I consider being called a liar to be a personal attack.

If I am mistaken, correct me. But stating an opinion based on the facts as I know them is not a lie. I know you have strong feelings.

"Blaming Yugoslavia for attacking Slovenia is like blaming the North for the South's assault on Ft. Sumter. "

To this day, there are Southern partisans who consider Major Anderson's move to Fort Sumter from Fort Moultrie to be an act of aggression.

"Second lie you tell is that the Serbs were carrying out a crusade. They were not. "

However, doesn't that seem to be the revisionist position? I will accept that Serbia was fighting out of fear of foreign domination. So were the Croats and Bosnians. I wish it were different. The issues I had were that the Bosnian Serbs in 1995 pulled some stunts that were definitely contrary to the laws of war. Shelling a city is not one of them. Taking the U.N. observers hostage was.

"Your George Soros funded script has no traction here. "

That, sir, is slander. I am not connected with Soros in any manner. I request an apology.

[Proctor]

Sir/Madam,

Your lie is that you stated that the Serbs attacked Slovenia. That is a damnable lie.

Where I come from (the North) those who start wars are the ones that fire the first shots.

Will you now argue that America's trade embargo on Japan and moving Fleet HQ from San Fran to Pearl Harbor provoked Japan?

Serbs shelled cities that Muslims and Croats used to shelter their artillery? Not as bad as when Sherman burned down whole swaths of Georgia or when Dresden was made an open air oven.

Deal with the lie above - the death toll numbers and the fact that you said the Serbs attacked (and by attacked I mean shot first) Slovenia.

[GAB-1955]

Of course the FRY attacked Slovenia. That doesn't mean they started the war. The North attacked Virginia in 1861 -- did they start the war? No. You misconstrued that statement and presumed it was a lie. But you must admit Serb (the FRY Army) did mount campaigns against Slovenia in 1995.

I have been abused by Serbian supporters on this forum before. I have been called a Moslem, a Soros supporter, and now the perpetrator of a damnable lie. None of these statements directed at me are true.

[Proctor]

But you must admit Serb (the FRY Army) did mount campaigns against Slovenia in 1995.

That is also untrue - the Slovenians (egged on by Germany) fired on Yugoslav army barracks (first blood) - the Serbs fired back - and retreated.

I apologize for saying you read from Soro's script - I meant you were reading from Christiane Amanpour's script.

This article is about Milosevic's stooges. Who here can be labeled a Clinton stooge for accepting his adminsitrations false assertions?

[Proctor]

Last, but not least I don't think Yugoslavia should have stayed as on as a nation.

I think the real criminals are those Western Europeans and their American think tank allies that wanted to have Yugoslavia break up along Tito-Communist drawn lines - lines drawn to weaken the Serbian people in the Communist regime because they were the most numerical.

Fear-panic among the Serbs that they will live under the not so tender mercies of Croats and Muslims caused them to react violently. I don't blame them at all.

[Navy Patriot]

Kosovo was ethnic cleansed of Jews, Serbs, Gypsies, and others and has turned into a crime haven black hole.

Can't argue with that.

Your right Front Page has the right to examine both sides, I was disappointed and leery of the author, not angry. It seems surprising that people can forget white slavery, ransom kidnapping, heroin trafficking and children being tossed overboard to dissuade Italian authorities pursuit, and hundreds of police officers being ambush murdered.

[GAB-1955]

That's still pretty strong and incorrect. I came up to my own conclusions based on what I've seen and read over the last 10 years. (No cable in my house, ever; the biggest influence is the London Daily Telegraph).

The fact that I appear more on the Clinton Administration's side on this doesn't mean I love that Administration. (In fact, I suffered personally in ways that you can't imagine at the hands of the Federal government under that Adminstration--but that's another story). Clinton was a dithering, poll-driven weakling who should have taken stronger measures in Somalia and Iraq, and definitely should have kicked the Europeans and U.N. to force a ceasefire earlier in the war and have a calming period. But he didn't, and the Balkans have to live with what they have.

[Proctor]

Sir, (I assume if not my apologies)

You claimed the Serbs/Yugoslavs ATTACKED Slovenia - that is a lie the Slovenians attacked the Yugoslav army first and pretty much the Yugos carried out a fighting withdrawal in defense of their lives.

This was against a Yugoslav army that was still multi ethnic and made of conscripts.

That is the 'lie' I confronted you on.

[GAB-1955]

And since when did a difference in perception become a lie?

[tgambill]

:) Afraid not, too much time, money and politics invested.

[tgambill]

You have Bingo........:)

[tgambill]

"The Serbian media has a BIG credibility gap, another legacy from Slobo" this is true, however, their media is more on the mark than the international media that still claims 8,000 Muslims were murdered by the Serbs and that the Rajak Massacre actually occured, which is not true. Almost none of the media in the U.S. or UK is credible. Media Cleansing:Dirty Reporting