Skip to comments.Anti-Serb Propaganda Misled Americans in '90s
Posted on 03/20/2006 4:20:57 AM PST by Doctor13
click here to read article
check this out and check the date of their beginning. About the same time we started the Balkan operations....
I want to research more about this, as I just recently learned this......It really puts a link into the or one of the reasons we went to the Balkans...and.....it would explain why the history of the Serbs has been changed or manipulated since early 90's......If you find any more info or details, I would be interested.
Margaret Thatcher also supported air strikes against the Serbs.
And National Review. There so much vile hatred of Serbs at NR that I had to cancel the subscription.
Yes, she spoke of rejecting "appeasment" of "Milosevic's" Serbia and thus added another voice demanding the appeasement of the Islamofascists and welcoming for Europe the disgrace of Dhimmitude.
MIDI file. One of my favourite Macca tunes...
We backed the wrong side in this one.
All fueled by muslim oil money. (It's not the oil that's bad, or the money that's bad...)
After he left the Senate he was a paid lobbyist for them, I think.
Does anybody but me think that Saudi money is behind most of the BAD stuff that goes in the world against Christians, Serbs, Jews and Americans??
Also, I think they have secretly funded abortion mills, abortion supporters and politicians who support abortions all over the Western world. THEY WANT US TO KILL OFF OUR FUTURE, OUR BABIES!!
I THINK THEY ARE BEHIND THE DRUG CARTELS.
I THINK THEY FUND THE ACLU IN CASES AGAINST CHRISTIANS.
I THINK THEY FUND JERKS LIKE THE CLINTONS.
I THINK THEY FUND ANY GROUP THAT IS FOR SO-CALLED ALTERNATIVE SEXUAL LIFESTYLES.
I THINK THEY FUND GROUPS THAT FOSTER HATRED BETWEEN THE USA AND RUSSIA( who has alot of oil and gas!! RUSSIANS COULD BE THE COMPETTION!).
I THINK THEY FUND THE NEA!!
IF ANYTHING OR GROUP WANTS TO DESTROY THE MORAL CLIMATE IN THE USA, THE SAUDIS FUND IT.
THE SAUDIS WANT TO TAKE US AS THEIR SLAVES.
IF WE COULD INVESTIGATE SOROS I THINK WE WOULD FIND SAUDI MONEY BACKING HIM UP.
but there is no doubt they bought a lot of propaganda from Beltway parasites on Bosnia and Kosovo.
Former Ustachi facist Franjo Tudjman, you might add.
We are lower than whale pop to muslims and I wold put nothing past them if they thought they could destroy us from within by funding all the things that could make us weaklings.
Drugs, immorality, abortion of innocents and family breakdown as in "alternative-sexuality" familiy life.
Saudis DO HAVE the money to push evil agendas don't they???
But he had his Viagra GIG!! He needed more money???? LOL!!
God Bless the author of this excellent article. She's a FReeper!
Right -- we should have let the Serbs control Bosnia,Kosovo and Albania -- I'm a little unsure if the Serbs even tried to convert the Mussies -- they should have....
Lets face the facts:
Hitler WAS europe in 1940es.
Than Europe hated Jews.
Now they hate Serbs.
Hitler needed cohesive element for Germany and also most of Europe, and that was antisemitism, so people in Germany and Europe wouln`t pay notice to his sick aspirations.
Now, children of antisemites, children of nazis in Europe hate Serbs. Why?
They need cohesive element to avert public eyes from unimployment, recession, failiure of UE and ANTO and colaboraton with Islamists. Serbs are best scapegoats.
There are even more Americans with even more money than the Saudis who have been pushing those agendas.
Remember, the collapse of the soviet union was brought about by a United States under the leadership of a courageous statesman Ronald Reagan. The collective cowardly NATO leadership was "$#itless" at the thought of the soviets. Weighing in on the side of islamic expansion in the Balkans against the tiny Serb nation allowed both cowardly NATO and cowardly clintoon to regain a sense of "manhood".
Clinton lied and innocent people died.
CORRECTION!! Replace "regain" with "acquire". I doubt NATO leadership OR clintoon ever had a sense of manhood.
From the perspective of cold calculation, it was still only a couple of years after the fall of the USSR. The idea of a widespread war in SE Europe was problematic. Initially, NATO sat on the sidelines and gave the Euros a chance to deal with it. Lacking any real recent experience in matters of war, the Euros failed. NATO had to step in. Now, on the matter of what happened next, there is plenty of criticism to go around. A topic for another day ....
In the book "While America Sleeps" by Kagan and Kagan is a good analysis of the issue.
I supported them then - their excesses notwithstanding.
The Serbian/Bosnian conflict represented the "Clash of Civilizations" which professor Samuel Huntington wrote about so eloquently. Christianity vs. Islam, no-holds-barred.
The Serbians knew what was as stake.
They knew that they could not live peacefully with a mixed/Muslim population.
They knew what had to be done.
And they had the nerve to go out and _do_ it.
Thus, "ethnic cleansing".
I contend that the Serbian/Bosnian conflict represents a harbinger of where The West is headed in general - a view of what's to come.
Here on Free Republic, we talk about "Eurabia" - the fall of Europe to Islam.
We say that Islam is incompatible with all the values of a Western culture.
We talk about kicking Islamics out, sending them back to Muslim states.
Lots of "big talk". But - when the chips are down (as they someday WILL be), I wonder how many of the big talkers will turn into fast walkers (especially when something called a "draft" is mentioned!)....
The Serbians walked the walk - and we bombed them for doing so.
The clash of civilizations cannot be won on our terms of engagement. It will only be won on _their_ terms.
The Serbians understood the meaning of "their terms".
If we are not willing to engage in ethnic - and cultural - cleansing, the OTHER SIDE will eventually engage it - against US. They have no qualms - NONE - about establishing a worldwide Islamic state. They believe their way is superior, the destined will of allah (I refuse to capitalize that false deity), and they will do what is necessary to establish that will worldwide. For them the end is justified by the means, and they will use ANY means necessary to achieve it.
I believe OUR culture is superior (yes, SUPERIOR). And faced with such an enemy, there can be no reasonable or rational choice other than to grit our teeth and realize that we, too, must use what means necessary to achieve our goal. We do this not because we want to, but because we must.
That "goal" is the preservation of Western civilzation and the overthrow of Islam, the enemy of freedom.
"NATO"? "Euros" were in NATO. Either way "Euros" negotiated Lisbon Agreement which was going to bring peace.
They were looking for a purpose, and the only purpose, their sole reason d'etre, as far as military alliances go, is waging war.
The Lisbon Agreement was the most overt example of interference ("If you don't like it, don't sign it," Warren Zimmerman to the Bos. Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic), but not the only time the U.S. made any kind of peace impossible.
Have you read the source I referenced?
Some "war". The Serbs were lucky the Croats were ordered to stop in August 1995.
"The rubble of Bosnia was directly responsible for radicalizing a generation of European Muslims."-Mark Steyn
(You can pretty much substitute rubble with "Serbs")
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.