Now we Know why Kosovo War was “Just” and Iraq Isn’t

Political Mavens ^ | 16 May 2007 | Julia Gorin

[radar101]

Former CNS News reporter (and current managing editor of The New Individualist) Sherrie Gossett reports on her blog that in a recent Rolling Stone interview, The New Yorker’s Seymour Hersh outdid himself:

Q. But why isn’t there more of an uproar by the public at atrocities committed by American troops? Have people become inured to those stories over the years?

A. I just think it’s because they are Iraqis. You have to give Bill Clinton his due: When he bombed Kosovo in 1999, he became the first president since World War II to bomb white people.

So there you have, at least in one nutshell, why Kosovo was a war that every media outlet and peacenik wanted: we were bombing white people. And the Serb has always been the most expendable whitey. Frequent UK Guardian contributor Neil Clark has something to say about this on his blog:

Serbo-phobes should take a history lesson

Serb-bashing, the last acceptable form of racism in Europe, sadly shows no sign of abating. The news that Serbia is to take over the presidency of the Council of Europe this week has sent Serbo-phobes into paroxysms of rage.

“If European countries can’t find the courage to act against Serbia, they can’t find the courage to act against anyone,” complains George Monbiot in the Guardian. But the Serb-bashers are wrong: the Balkan republic has every right to be considered a valued member of the European family.

Of all the constituent republics of the former Yugoslavia, Serbia was the least responsible for its violent break-up. The conflict was precipitated, not by Serb aggression, but by the illegal breakaway of Slovenia, egged on by Germany, in 1991.

Foreign intervention was also responsible for the war in Bosnia: the touch-paper being lit by the US ambassador Warren Zimmerman when he persuaded the Bosnian separatist leader Izetbegovic to renege on the EU-sponsored 1992 Lisbon agreement.

While no one denies that Bosnian Serbs committed atrocities, it’s important to remember that the International Court of Justice recently exonerated Serbia of responsibility for the massacre at Srebrenica.

Serbo-phobes castigate Serbia for not extraditing Mladic and Karadzic, the Bosnian Serb leaders, to The Hague. But can one really blame Serbs for questioning the impartiality of a court which was set up by the very Nato powers which illegally bombed their country in 1999, and which, from its inception, has shown a blatant anti-Serb bias?

Far from being a pariah state, Serbia has played a positive role in modern European history: it was the Serb uprising against the Nazis in 1941 which postponed the Wehrmacht’s invasion of the Soviet Union by a crucial five weeks. Were it not for the bravery of the most unjustly demonised people on the continent, Europe would look a very different place today.

I wonder if this has something to do with why one Albanian reader from Staten Island (where ten years ago the three Duka brother-plotters lived, worshipped and still have relatives) — had this to say:

(obscenities--)

Meanwhile, since Neil Clark brought up the subject of the Wehrmacht, here is a quote from 2003 by an athlete representing another of the seceding provinces that we actively supported against the Serbs:

Croatian Slalom racer Ivica Kostelic had won his third consecutive World Cup race in Italy, and was asked by the Croatian paper Nacional to describe how he felt before the race. From England’s Observer newspaper:

“I feel powerful, all-conquering, like a German soldier ready for battle in 1941,” Kostelic said…[T]he previous summer in conversation with a reporter on the same paper Kostelic had talked in awed tones about the scale of the Luftwaffe attack on Britain in 1940, and favourably compared Hitler to other world leaders of the time (unlike Stalin, Hitler killed only those who crossed him, he suggested)…

[The NY Times had the quote this way.]

Expressing a related sentiment after winning the Wimbledon Tennis Championship, in 1993 Goran Ivanisevic described learning to shoot a machine gun to The New York Times:

They let me shoot a machine gun. It was tough to control, but, oh, it was a nice feeling — all the bullets coming out. I was thinking it would be nice to have some Serbs in front of me.

So here are the Balkan wars in a nutshell: The Croatians wanted their Hitler-bestowed Independent State of Croatia back. The Kosovo Albanians wanted their Hitler-bestowed annexation to Greater Albania. And the Bosnians just wanted an independent Muslim state. Any questions?

I’ve got one: Why did we support all three?

[rlmorel]

I have said it before, and I will say it again:

Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Yes. “Atrocities” by our troops are excused by knowing Americans because the Iraqis are, ummm....brown? Sheesh.

I am at the point now, if I see Rolling Stone praise a book or a movie, I make a mental note NOT to read or see it.

[massgopguy]

Clinton said he chose the targets from the White House. A Commuter Train was bombed during Rush Hour and the bomb camera footage made the news. But that not a War Crime. NATO chose to take out all Civilian Infrastructure while Bush only targeted Military targets. So exactly who is the War Criminal? Clinton also had his NATO commander order the British to attack the Russians at Pristina Airport. Why have US-Russian relations soured?

[Rodney King]

The liberals are ashamed of our wealth and strength, so they only support war if there is positively no benefit in it for us.

[FormerLib]

At least we did find those 100,000 mass graves that were used as a justification for our bombing of Serbia.

Of course, we found them in Iraq and they were full of Saddam’s victims.

[SFC Chromey]

site source please:
“Clinton also had his NATO commander order the British to attack the Russians at Pristina Airport.”

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

Good article with a minor typo - easily fixed however.

“If European countries can’t find the courage to act against Serbia, they can’t find the courage to act against anyone,” complains George Monbiot Moonbat in the Guardian.

[F-117A]

“Clinton also had his NATO commander order the British to attack the Russians at Pristina Airport.”

The statement is a bit over the top. The following is more accurate...

"In the early phases of the Kosovo occupation, U.S. Gen. Wesley Clark, the NATO commander in chief, ordered British Gen. Sir Michael Jackson to seize the Pristina airport before Russian troops solidified their control of the most strategic plot of ground in the country. Jackson said no, the Russians kept the airport, and everyone involved has been promoted, except for Clark himself, who is being ushered out of his job."

One Source

[tophat9000]

Q. But why isn’t there more of an uproar by the public at atrocities committed by American troops? Have people become inured to those stories over the years?

A. I just think it’s because they are Iraqis. You have to give Bill Clinton his due: When he bombed Kosovo in 1999, he became the first president since World War II to bomb white people

The above statement is wrong in so may ways...

[Zionist Conspirator]

Q. But why isn’t there more of an uproar by the public at atrocities committed by American troops? Have people become inured to those stories over the years?

A. I just think it’s because they are Iraqis. You have to give Bill Clinton his due: When he bombed Kosovo in 1999, he became the first president since World War II to bomb white people.

So there you have, at least in one nutshell, why Kosovo was a war that every media outlet and peacenik wanted: we were bombing white people.

So does this mean Reagan could have nuked the Russkies and it would have been okay? I mean, the Russkies were white, right? Why were liberals so protective of them?

Matter of fact, I think Russia has always been allied with Serbia and didn't like our bombing Serbs. Neither did Ramsey Clark, for that matter. So how come the Serbs don't have that magic that makes liberals love them?

Um . . . aren't moslem Albanian Kosovars white as well?

I'm confused!