Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Years after Milosevic, Serbia's illusions persist
IHT ^ | August 31st, 2005 | Roger Cohen

Posted on 08/31/2005 3:27:34 PM PDT by mark502inf

The Serbian mistake of 1918, when the victorious kingdom gambled on [establishing] Yugoslavia, rather than consolidating a compact state of Serbia, continues to haunt Belgrade.

Territory governed from Belgrade continues to shrink. Next year, Montenegro can call a referendum to decide whether to secede. -snip-

Montenegro is not alone in contemplating exit. Negotiations are likely to begin this year on the status of Kosovo, formally part of Serbia, in reality a ward of the international community, and in the minds of almost all its ethnic Albanian citizens a putative independent state.

What goes around comes around. Kosovo was the launching pad for the crazed nationalism engineered by Milosevic as Yugoslavia began to crumble. Now it will, in all likelihood, be the last piece of Serbia to go ... -snip-

The problem, however, is that Serbia, ever quick to denounce ethnic Albanian "terrorism" in Kosovo, has scarcely begun to confront the crimes it committed on a vast scale in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s.

A video of Serbs killing Muslims at Srebrenica, shown in June, provoked a shock here. That was salutary. It was also a terrible indictment of the degree of Serbian ignorance ...

-snip- ... progress toward EU membership will not occur until two chief protagonists of Serbian violence, General Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, are handed over to the international tribunal. ...

Within the army, younger officers, with an eye on potential NATO membership, favor Mladic's handover. But older officers cannot accept this. "They say they will never accept the arrest of a man with whom they fought in Bosnia," ...

That's interesting. One of Serbia's many fictions is that the Yugoslav Army never fought in Bosnia and the campaign there had nothing to do with Belgrade. Nonsense, of course, but Serbia remains ambivalent about reality.

(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 911forgotten; balkans; bosnia; bravosierra; clintonista; fabrications; fiction; islamopropaganda; kneepadwearer; kosovo; lies; lyingloser; marktheserbhater; markymarkbinladen; milosevic; serbhatingscum; serbia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last
I'll say this for the Serbs, in spite of fighting wars with Christian Slovenia, the Bosnian Muslims, the Christian Croats, and the Kosovar Albanians; in spite of Macedonia seceding, in spite of a strong movement in Montenegro to get away from Belgrade, in spite of a growing secessionist movement amongst the Hungarian minority in the province of Vojvodina; in spite of three successive U.S. administrations following the same policy of stopping Serb aggression in the Balkans--the Serbs are still absolutely convinced that everyone else is at fault and they are blameless.
1 posted on 08/31/2005 3:27:36 PM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

There's something in the water... unfortunately the side effects don't include infertility.


2 posted on 08/31/2005 3:29:58 PM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Years After Milosevic, Serbia's Illusions Persist
By ROGER COHEN



Every month officers of the armed forces of Serbia and Montenegro are asked if they have taken any foreign trips. The questioning is a routine matter, a hangover from the communist era.

In come the replies - a family holiday in Turkey, a visit to the Black Sea coast. More officers are traveling these days, often with newly acquired passports, although monthly salaries of about $450 (for a lieutenant colonel) limit foreign sojourns.

There is also a problem, not a new one in Serbia, with defining what is inside and what outside the country. Some officers who have visited Bosnia balk at categorizing the trips as foreign travel. They say they were stationed there and will never be able to consider the former Yugoslav territory as "foreign."

The protests are summarily dismissed: An international border now separates Serbia from Bosnia. But such little confrontations, witnessed and related by an army member, say much about the confused state of Serbia as the fifth anniversary of the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic approaches on Oct. 5.

At its most basic level, this confusion centers on geography. Within the greater question of where Europe ends, a matter of growing debate in Brussels, lies the smaller but still volatile question of where Serbia ends.

The historic Serbian mistake of 1918, when the victorious kingdom gambled on a large country that would take the name Yugoslavia, rather than consolidating a compact state of Serbia, continues to haunt Belgrade. Just how to complete the long pullback from this hubris-driven overreach remains unclear.

The territory governed from Belgrade continues to shrink. Next year, under an accord devised by the European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, Montenegro can call a referendum to decide whether to secede.

Its union with Serbia is already something of a fiction - the two republics use different currencies - and many weary Serbs are inclined to say good riddance to the funny federation sometimes called "Solandia."

But Vojislav Kostunica, Serbia's conservative prime minister, is opposed to Montenegrin independence. So is the army. So is the EU, which sees no need for another European mini-state. So are many Montenegrins, who worry about losing access to good Belgrade hospitals and other perks. As a result, the 2006 referendum remains in doubt.

This uncertainty is unhelpful. "The sooner they decide, the better," said Goran Svilanovic, a former foreign minister. "We need to know the answer to this question: Are you in my country or not? People suffer from a chronic identity problem."

The nature of that problem is familiar enough. Belgrade is the capital of a vanishing state that once stretched to the Austrian border. Its peeling stucco and abandoned old cars are emblematic of decline. Nobody needs a thousand guesses to determine who the big loser from Yugoslavia's disintegration was. Slovenia and Croatia have left Serbia in the dust.

But Serbian illusions persist. As the officers' reluctance to qualify Bosnia as foreign suggests, former bigness is hard to reconcile with current smallness. Belief in some Serbian "Sonderweg," or "special way," endures below the surface. That makes acceptance of a mediocre reality difficult.

Part of this reality is that Montenegro is not alone in contemplating the exit. Negotiations are likely to begin later this year on the status of Kosovo, which is formally part of Serbia, in reality a ward of the international community, and in the minds of almost all its ethnic Albanian citizens a putative independent state.

What goes around comes around. Kosovo was the launching pad for the crazed nationalism engineered by Milosevic as Yugoslavia began to crumble. Now it will, in all likelihood, be the last piece of Serbia to go, but not without a bitter struggle over what many Serbs like to refer to as the cradle of their civilization.

When two Serbs were killed last weekend in a shooting in Kosovo, Kostunica and Boris Tadic, the Serbian president, rushed to issue statements of outrage. In essence, their message was that the incident demonstrated how far Kosovo remains from the basic standards Europe and the United States demand of any community with ambitions to self-governance. They had a point.

The problem, however, is that Serbia, ever quick to denounce ethnic Albanian "terrorism" in Kosovo, has scarcely begun to confront the crimes it committed on a vast scale in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s.

A video of Serbs killing Muslims at Srebrenica, shown in June at the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal in The Hague, provoked a shock here. That was salutary. It was also a terrible indictment of the degree of Serbian ignorance a decade after the Bosnian war. Six Bosnian Muslims being shot in 1995 were shown in the video. Six! In the early months of the Bosnian war in 1992, tens of thousands of Muslims were driven from their homes, herded into camps and selectively killed. Over that murderous campaign silence reigns. From Kostunica down, obfuscation of the "They-killed-us-we-killed-them" variety is still encouraged.

"If you ask people here about joining the EU, everyone agrees," said Dusan Pavlovic, a political scientist. "But if you ask them about Serbian responsibility for war crimes, most people would say no. And if you ask them how you can integrate with Europe without accepting responsibility, they stare at you in dismay."

Of course, progress toward EU membership will not occur until two chief protagonists of Serbian violence, General Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, are handed over to the international tribunal. Kostunica and Tadic have committed themselves to their capture, but national sentiment seems divided.

Within the army, younger officers, with an eye on potential NATO membership, favor Mladic's handover. But older officers cannot accept his capture. "They say they will never accept the arrest of a man with whom they fought in Bosnia," said the army member.

That's interesting. One of Serbia's, and Milosevic's, many fictions is that the Yugoslav Army never fought in Bosnia and the campaign there had nothing to do with Belgrade. Nonsense, of course, but Serbia remains ambivalent about reality.


3 posted on 08/31/2005 3:30:36 PM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
when we are right, we don't give in, Mark.

Besides, posting a Cohen article who has publicly stated he is biased and despises the Serbs?

hmmm, while in Beograd and having a casual conversation with him (unbenownst to him I was a Serb-American,but only as an American passing through as a college student/tourist), Cohen states to me that he despises the Serb people. That was back in the summer of 1994, Mark.

Disregard anything he writes about the Serbs.

4 posted on 08/31/2005 4:51:26 PM PDT by ma bell ("Take me to the Brig. I want to see the "real Marines". Major General Chesty Puller, USMC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joan; kosta50; FormerLib; Serb5150; DTA; montyspython; Seselj; Balkans; All; Diocletian; Despero; ..

marks post, bump


5 posted on 08/31/2005 4:52:49 PM PDT by ma bell ("Take me to the Brig. I want to see the "real Marines". Major General Chesty Puller, USMC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf; coconutt2000
The Serbian mistake of 1918, when the victorious kingdom gambled on [establishing] Yugoslavia, rather than consolidating a compact state of Serbia, continues to haunt Belgrade.

The author is completely misinformed on this point.

"Yugoslavism" (preceded by "Illyrianism"), was largely a Croat driven idea. Serbia did not so much aspire to create Yugoslavia, as Croats & Slovenes aspired to join a common south-slavic union where they hoped to be on a more equal footing, rather than constant second class citizens in Austria-Hungary.

Of course Serbia, after the enormous price she paid in blood in WW1, was happy to accept the former Hapsburg territories as compensation. So there was a problem with perceptions from the beginning, as one side initially saw the "Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes" as emancipation, while the other side saw it largely as reparations.

From the Serb point of view, they were being generous by accepting their wayward slavic cousins in a common state on an equal footing, considering that Croats & Slovenes, being Hapsburg subjects, had fought against them in the war. But it proved a dissapointment to Croats & Slovenes who wanted a very loose federal structure, something that would give them quasi-independence. Croatia's pro-nazi Ustasha regime during WW2 would seal the bad blood.

I will agree with the author, however, that it was a mistake for Serbia to accept Croatia & Slovenia into Yugoslavia.

6 posted on 08/31/2005 5:06:13 PM PDT by bob808
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
the Serbs are still absolutely convinced that everyone else is at fault

The media gives the impression that one day Slobodan Milosevic woke up and decided to unleash paramillitaries on Serbia's peaceful co-inhabitants, but that is hardly the case.

Slovenian & Croatian secession started the war, an important point that is quickly forgotten. So Serbs do have a point too...

7 posted on 08/31/2005 5:13:48 PM PDT by bob808
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ma bell
Cohen states to me that he despises the Serb people. That was back in the summer of 1994, Mark.

Disregard anything he writes about the Serbs.

He's more likely to build a shrine to the guy.

8 posted on 08/31/2005 6:07:02 PM PDT by getoffmylawn (...and there's blood on my teeth when I bite my tongue to speak...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

This is a typical piece of propaganda BS, loaded with fabrications and author's opinions / interpretations. No factual information.




Fiction:
>>The Serbian mistake of 1918, when the victorious kingdom gambled on [establishing] Yugoslavia, rather than consolidating a compact state of Serbia, continues to haunt Belgrade.<<

Fact:
November 1918
"A National Council of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs met in Zagreb and called for the unification of all the South Slavs in the Habsburg lands. The Croatian Sabor merged with this National Council. Fearful of Italy, the National Council then pledged allegiance to Serbia. In this manner a unified Yugoslav state came into existence before the formal peace talks began."



Fiction:
>>Kosovo was the launching pad for the crazed nationalism engineered by Milosevic<<

Fact:
Gazimestan - June 28, 1989 -- Excerpts from SM's speech:

..." Yugoslavia is a multinational community and it can survive only under the conditions of full equality for all nations that live in it.

The crisis that hit Yugoslavia has brought about national divisions, but also social, cultural, religious and many other less important ones. Among all these divisions, nationalist ones have shown themselves to be the most dramatic. Resolving them will make it easier to remove other divisions and mitigate the consequences they have created.

For as long as multinational communities have existed, their weak point has always been the relations between different nations. The threat is that the question of one nation being endangered by the others can be posed one day -- and this can then start a wave of suspicions, accusations, and intolerance, a wave that invariably grows and is difficult to stop. This threat has been hanging like a sword over our heads all the time. Internal and external enemies of multi-national communities are aware of this and therefore they organize their activity against multinational societies mostly by fomenting national conflicts."...

So this is how the crazed nationalst Serb leader ignited the fuse, eh? LOL



Fiction:
>>Serbia, ever quick to denounce ethnic Albanian "terrorism" in Kosovo, has scarcely begun to confront the crimes it committed on a vast scale in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s.

A video of Serbs killing Muslims at Srebrenica, shown in June, provoked a shock here. That was salutary. It was also a terrible indictment of the degree of Serbian ignorance ...<<

Fact:
The "video" shows execution of 6 men. Not sure what exactly was it supposed to prove, but it most certainly doesn't prove the alleged massacre of thousands of civilians in Srebrenica.


Fiction:
>>One of Serbia's many fictions is that the Yugoslav Army never fought in Bosnia and the campaign there had nothing to do with Belgrade. Nonsense, of course, but Serbia remains ambivalent about reality.<<

Fact:
The author's confusion (or his intent to confuse and mislead semi-informed readers) is again obvious. JNA (Yugoslav Army) pulled out from Bosnia when the "International Community" recognized B&H as a state.


9 posted on 08/31/2005 6:34:19 PM PDT by Pantagruel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pantagruel
Panta, you sorta missed the point. The video of the Serbs murdering the Bosnians wasn't supposed to "prove" the mass murders of the thousands of Bosnians by Serbs at Srebrenica. That's already been proven. Serbs have confessed, Serbs have been convicted in courts, The Serb Republic issued a report taking responsibility, and the Serb leaders have apologized.

The author's point was that the shock to the Serb citizenry of seeing that video proves the extent to which so many Serbs are living in a state of denial. As further evidenced by your post.

10 posted on 08/31/2005 6:52:01 PM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf; Pantagruel
The author's point was that the shock to the Serb citizenry of seeing that video proves the extent to which so many Serbs are living in a state of denial. As further evidenced by your post

Just as the Americans would be shocked if they were shown all the gruesome things we have done to our adversaries. Every nation lives in denial.

11 posted on 08/31/2005 8:44:55 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
Serbia, ever quick to denounce ethnic Albanian "terrorism" in Kosovo, has scarcely begun to confront the crimes it committed on a vast scale in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s

What a moron Cohen is! Kosovo's Albanians are not different than Palestinian terrorists are.

I'll say this for the Serbs, in spite of fighting wars with Christian Slovenia, the Bosnian Muslims, the Christian Croats, and the Kosovar Albanians; ...--the Serbs are still absolutely convinced that everyone else is at fault and they are blameless

And in spite of the fact that the entire world (even in those countries that officially support us) is against our presencre in Iraq ... we maintain that "everyone else is at fault and [we] are blameless." Recognize the pattern?

12 posted on 08/31/2005 8:52:01 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
the Serbs are still absolutely convinced that everyone else is at fault and they are blameless.

And they are more right than wrong.

13 posted on 08/31/2005 8:57:33 PM PDT by duckln
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: duckln

Read the last sentence in the article.


14 posted on 08/31/2005 9:05:02 PM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
Serbs have been convicted in courts,

You can't call the Hague Tribunal a court! It is a insult to humanity.

15 posted on 08/31/2005 9:08:29 PM PDT by duckln
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

Repeat all the lies you wish, only you Clintonistas hold them to be true.


16 posted on 08/31/2005 10:03:57 PM PDT by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf; Pantagruel
The Serb Republic issued a report taking responsibility, and the Serb leaders have apologized.

Only islamofascist shills are so dim as to believe that; everyone else knows that Paddy Ashdown selected the people to issue the false apology.

Of course, the Clintonistas who post such drek fall upon their kneepads and continue to service their true master.

17 posted on 08/31/2005 10:07:27 PM PDT by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
...fighting wars with Christian Slovenia...

A war with Slovenia? You can't even get your lies right, Osama502inf.

18 posted on 08/31/2005 10:11:31 PM PDT by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf; duckln; FormerLib; Pantagruel; ma bell; getoffmylawn; joan; bob808; Serb5150; DTA; ...
Here is a good answer to this article by someone who knows much about the subject Mr. Cohen is so good at distorting:

September 1, 2005 Rejecting Reality
by Nebojsa Malic

And the Hypocrites Who Do It

In October 2004, Roger Cohen wrote a column for the International Herald Tribune titled "The Serbian Question," arguing that reducing Serbia to a more manageable size and turning it over to the benevolent hegemony of the European Union would finally resolve the issues behind the 1990s wars. It was the ICG platform in a nutshell, reiterated just three months later in a barrage of editorials and adopted in May as Washington's "new" Balkans policy.

Cohen revisited the issue this Wednesday, in another IHT column, titled "Years After Milosevic, Serbia's Illusions Persist." According to him, even though the fountainhead of all evil was deposed and sent to the Hague Inquisition, Serbia is still stubbornly refusing to come to grips with reality.

If so, then – good for Serbia! It isn't the one that has issues with reality.

In his screed, Cohen claims Milosevic used Kosovo as the "launching pad for crazed nationalism" in 1989. Yet even a cursory glance at the oft-mentioned but never quoted 1989 speech reveals precisely the opposite. Cohen accuses Serbia of both the creation and destruction of Yugoslavia; both "crazed nationalism" and a "chronic identity problem" (this from someone suffering from just such a problem, treacherous former Foreign Minister Goran Svilanovic). He even has the temerity to accuse the Serbs of exceptionalism.

Throughout all this, he makes absolutely zero mention of outside involvement in the Yugoslav crisis. There is no reference to Washington's support of Croatian and Bosnian secession, its lavish funding of the separatists in Montenegro, or its financial, logistical, diplomatic, and military support for the Albanian separatists in Kosovo. The expulsions of Serbs from Croatia in 1991 and 1995; the death tolls from Bosnia that indicate it was a brutal civil war, not "aggression" and certainly not "genocide"; the NATO bombing of 1999; the KLA's subsequent ethnic cleansing of non-Albanians from Kosovo – to Cohen, these either never happened, or do not merit mention. Instead, all of it is blamed on some sort of phantom Serbian psychosis. This argument isn't new; it's been used by Austria-Hungary in 1914, by Hitler in 1941, by the Communists since 1944, and is now being aggressively pushed by servants of the American Empire.

On Saturday night, two Serb youths were killed and one wounded when "unidentified attackers" shot up their car near Strpce in Kosovo. It was just another in a long string of deliberate attacks aimed at intimidating the remaining Serbs into abandoning Kosovo to its Albanian occupiers. Of course, mainstream news agencies and newspapers didn't see it that way. Reuters chose to focus on the statement of UN police commissioner Kai Vittrup that "the police consider this to be an isolated incident."

The agency's report also downplayed the protests of Serbian authorities, and provided a lengthy "context" section explaining that Kosovo was occupied by NATO after "Serb forces" were "accused of atrocities," while Serb civilians "fled a wave of revenge attacks."

"I am shocked and appalled by this senseless and tragic crime," UN viceroy Soren Jessen-Petersen told journalists. Nicholas Wood of the New York Times (published in IHT on Monday) was so impressed with this platitude, he actually wrote it up twice in his story about the attack. Or was it the story about UNMIK's reaction to the attack, rather? That seems to be the problem with articles about Kosovo; they are always about the opinions of NATO, UNMIK, the State Department, or the European something-or-other bureaucrat, but never about what actually happened to the people there.

Wood also quoted one Neeraj Singh, "a UN official," who said, "Incidents may happen from time to time, but that does not establish a trend really." Singh should be promoted to the Reality Denial Administration at once; only someone with no sense of decency, or the IQ of toast, could make such an idiotic statement after six years of "incidents" that absolutely do establish a trend. Had Mr. Singh not heard of the farmers of Staro Gracko (1999)? Or the children in Gorazdevac and the Stolic family in Obilic (2003)? Or the pogrom of March 2004?! The pattern is clear as day – except to those whose job is to deny it.

Last week, as the show trial of Slobodan Milosevic resumed, the Hague Inquisition ran into a brick wall, when its definition of "Greater Serbia" was demolished by none other than its most outspoken advocate. According to the clear definition by the currently testifying Radical leader Vojislav Seselj, the prosecutors' concept of "Greater Serbia" is absolutely inaccurate. The waffling prosecutors then tried to redefine the term to fit the indictment, coming up with a "definition" that easily fit the old Yugoslav federation. This prompted a sarcastic comment from Milosevic: "Three years on, and you still have no idea what you're accusing me of!"

For, if Yugoslavia was the same as Greater Serbia, then why would Milosevic and his "co-conspirators" seek to destroy it in order to build a Greater Serbia? The sheer mindlessness of this "logic" is painful. Why, using the Inquisitors' "definitions," Josip Broz Tito could be indicted as a member of the "joint criminal enterprise"! And that concept, even less substantial than the ephemeral "Greater Serbia" of ICTY's imagination, was created specifically for the Inquisition as a way of assigning guilt by perceived association. Alice in Wonderland made more sense…

When in the aftermath of Sept. 11 some Americans started paying attention to claims that Islamic terrorists had infiltrated the Balkans during the conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo, the "strategic class" that had suppressed the jihad dimension of those conflicts immediately issued stringent denials. "Serbian propaganda," was the knee-jerk response of those who had peddled anti-Serb propaganda for years.

Then Serbian authorities arrested one of the Madrid bombing suspects. The arrest was made in June, but only made public Aug. 18, to the muted reaction of Imperial press. To acknowledge that international Islamic terrorists were traveling through the Balkans, or that Serbian authorities had a hand in their apprehension, went against the grain of their Balkans reporting. Only 10 days later did the AP come up with a story that tried to smooth the jagged edge of jihad in the peninsula:

"News reports during the conflict in Bosnia suggested that outsiders joined Bosnia's Muslims in their conflict with the region's Serbs and Croats – though the extent of their impact in the chaos was never clear."

Suggested? There is a mountain of evidence concerning the mujahedin presence in Bosnia, and their "impact" is similarly well-documented in snuff videos used for jihad recruiting. AP reporters also collected statements from NATO and EU spokesmen in Bosnia and Kosovo, who offered meaningless statements of "concern," but also denied there was any al-Qaeda presence or threat.

Rubbish, claimed the Muslim weekly Slobodna Bosna. Citing the locations of jihad camps and the identity of their organizers, the magazine accused the Empire of deliberately ignoring terrorism in Bosnia as part of a strategy:

"The paper quoted former UN representative in Bosnia, Jacques Klein, as having confirmed to the Security Council that Islamic terrorists were active in Bosnia, but added that it was good they were concentrated in one place, because 'the rest of the world would be safe.'"

Ah, the famous "flypaper" strategy that has worked so spectacularly for Madrid and London.

As it becomes clear from just these few examples, it isn't the Serbian people that lack connection with reality. Their politicians, perhaps – but even so, nowhere near to the extent of Empire's presstitutes, bureaucrats, inquisitors, and PR hacks. It is more than a bit rich for them to accuse someone of rejecting reality, when the entire Empire is based on explicit contempt for the "reality-based community."

Serbians do have many illusions, the greatest of which is that the Empire means them well. Right after that is a belief that in today's world there are still laws and rules. The "reality" they are being bullied into accepting has been conjured by lies and maintained by force, and they do well by rejecting it. More people should – and will. The harder the Empire violates reality, the harder it will snap back to reassert itself.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

19 posted on 09/01/2005 2:54:06 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Good morning, Former Lib. Still upholding the Serb standard for truth, I see.

A war with Slovenia? You can't even get your lies right

History and about 284,000 web-sites disagree with you.

As this Slovene writes below, the Slovene war for independence had several causes, but was sparked by Milosevic's nationalist agenda and oppression in Kosovo. The Slovenes did not want the same treatment.

As soon as Kosovo's duly elected government was forcefully ousted by the Serbian leadership, the government of the Socialist Republic of Slovenia sought to bring this violation of the 1974 Yugoslav Constitution (as well as the infringements of the rights of the Albanian majority of this province) to the attention of the international community. For Slovenes the events in Kosovo were an omen of what could happen to them and the other small republics and provinces of the federation. Once the Yugoslav League of Communists was dissolved into republican factions and the federal presidency was effectively in the hands of protagonists for a "Greater Serbia" there remained for Slovenia no other recourse than to request that the federal constitution be re-negotiated to guarantee the sovereignty of the federation's constituent republics and autonomous provinces

20 posted on 09/01/2005 4:50:28 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kosta50

Malic is brilliant as usual. I can't say as much for the trolls though.


21 posted on 09/01/2005 4:52:35 AM PDT by getoffmylawn (...and there's blood on my teeth when I bite my tongue to speak...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
Kosta, Mr. Malic's views are colored by his virulent anti-Americanism--he wants to blame everything on the USA's "Imperial", as he puts it, interference in Balkans affairs. Sorry, the Slovenes & Croats & Bosnians & Kosovars & Macedonians did not all want to get away from Serbia because of outside interference. Their problem was much closer--in Belgrade.

BTW, if he can break away from his busy schedule of International ANSWER meetings or Cindy Sheehan vigils, Malic may be available for your next Free Slobo rally:


22 posted on 09/01/2005 5:02:38 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

Fact?
>>The Serb Republic issued a report taking responsibility<<

Not really, according to Mr. Bukejlovic's (Prime Minister of the Republika Srpska) interview of July 31, 2005
http://www.novosti.co.yu/vest.php?vest=43178&rubrika=Politika



Fact?
...>>Serbs are living in a state of denial. As further evidenced by your post.<<

No. This is your opinion only, absolutely no evidence of "living in a state of denial" in my post. Just good old facts.







23 posted on 09/01/2005 5:19:53 AM PDT by Pantagruel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf; FormerLib
History and about 284,000 web-sites disagree with you

That's gabrage. You did nto read all 284,000 of them! What a crock.

As far as that Slovene's distorted presentation of history -is concerned - it suits your agenda, but that doesn't make it true. If you actually knew the former Yugoslavia, rather than knowing something about it, you would have known that the Slovenes always acted as if they were doing someone a favor for being in Yugoslavia, when in fact it was Yugoslavia that gave them a state for the first time in their history. Their "gratitude" is impressive but not surprising for reasons you will never understand.

It was Slovenia that passed a law that placed the federal Constitution in subordinate position to the Slovenian constitution, an act of juro-political insanity, unheard of and unknown in the world, but very real and possible in the Mickey Mouse state called Slovenia.

You are just dumping a bunch of out-of-context information to obfuscate the issue and promote your warped but very real Serbophobic mind.

24 posted on 09/01/2005 5:30:04 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
Kosta, Mr. Malic's views are colored by his virulent anti-Americanism--he wants to blame everything on the USA's "Imperial

Malich may be disfavorbaly disposed to what he calls the "Empire" but not to all things American. The issue here is not whether he is accurate in his views of America's foreing policy, but whehther he knows a lot about the Balkans and especially the former Yugoslavia -- and the answer is YES he does.

25 posted on 09/01/2005 5:34:42 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: kosta50

Typical messenger shooting mindless troll response. I stand by my post #21.


26 posted on 09/01/2005 6:16:26 AM PDT by getoffmylawn (...and there's blood on my teeth when I bite my tongue to speak...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: kosta50; Pantagruel
This article written on the 10th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre is on target with you two, as well.

The Wages of Denial

Washington -- TEN years ago this week, Serbian forces slaughtered more than 7,000 Muslim men in the eastern Bosnian town of Srebrenica. Despite the efforts of a dedicated few in Serbia, and despite the war crimes prosecutions at The Hague, Serbia is no closer today than it was a decade ago to reckoning with its war guilt.

For years Belgrade has denied involvement by its citizens in Srebrenica and other massacres of the 1990s. The recent broadcast of a graphic video that showed Serbian paramilitary police executing six young men from Srebrenica should have made it very hard to sustain that revisionism. Amazing as it seems, however, the video was not enough to shatter what Serbian human rights activist Sonja Biserko has described as the country's ''state of collective denial.''

Fewer than half of Serbs polled last spring believed the Srebrenica massacre took place. And while much has been made of the video's effects on a shocked Serbian public, it remains to be seen where that public will stand once the furor recedes. The Radical Party, which won 27 percent of the popular vote in the last national elections, making it the largest party in Parliament, has already criticized what it sees as the anti-Serb hysteria that ''wishes at all costs to put the burden of all crimes on Serbia.'' Graffiti has appeared in several cities praising the ''liberation'' of Srebrenica. Rumors circulate that the video was doctored, or that the men committing the crimes were acting independently.

Instead of coming to terms with its past, Serbia has circumvented the issue with the narrative skills befitting a psychopath. For example, a debate on Srebrenica at the Belgrade Law Faculty earlier this year was initially titled ''10 Years After the Liberation of Srebrenica.'' In response to the video, Serbia's president, Boris Tadic, said, ''Serbia is deeply shocked'' that ''the killers had walked freely among us.'' But Mr. Tadic's government surely knows that the killers in the video are but a small fraction of the number who continue to walk the streets of Serbia and Montenegro as free men.

A fairy tale has passed for public memory until now in Serbia and Montenegro and it is conspicuous in its omission of Serb atrocities in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo, which left hundreds of thousands dead. The Serbian version of that history denies the fact that President Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia and those like him enjoyed overwhelming popular support in Serbia during the war, despite the evictions, rapes and unchecked slaughter by Yugoslav troops and irregulars. It suggests that Belgrade today has nothing to do with Belgrade as it was 10 years ago. It aims at an absurd relativism, placing Serbian atrocities within the context of crimes committed by other ethnicities (in fact, the C.I.A. has reported that Serbs were responsible for 90 percent of all atrocities committed in Bosnia). Mr. Tadic was quoted as saying, ''Crimes are always individual.'' All of this is fiction.

At the end of the Second World War, Allied troops forced German citizens to walk through Nazi death camps. They were confronted by crimes committed in their name, in order to ensure that those crimes could not be denied or minimized later. The people of Serbia and Montenegro, by contrast, have never been forced to acknowledge the crimes committed in their name.

There are those who refuse to whitewash Serbia's recent past. The Helsinki Human Rights Committee in Serbia and the independent broadcaster Radio B92 are admirable examples. People like Natasa Kandic, chairwoman of the Humanitarian Law Center in Belgrade, have spent years fighting for the truth, often at great personal risk. Extremists threatened to lynch Ms. Kandic at the law school debate on Srebrenica, and one of them spat in her face.

Eight of Serbia's human rights groups have drafted a declaration on Srebrenica that would obligate the country's government to confess to the massacre and to ''expose and punish any ideological justification of crime.'' But the daily newspaper Blic reported that the majority of parties in Serbia's Parliament refused not only to endorse the declaration but also to debate it.

Serbia must relinquish the fairy tale that its own wartime suffering was equivalent to the devastation it visited on others. Adopting an honest declaration on Srebrenica would have been an important first step, and the Serbian Parliament should have taken it. For as long as Serbia's people deny complicity in war crimes, they undercut any hope for justice and cheat their country out of any decent future. The Western aid money that has poured into Serbia may help rebuild the country's infrastructure, but it will do nothing to cut out the cancer that riddles the country's heart.

Western governments are anxious for reconciliation in the Balkans, which would ensure future stability in the region. They are pushing hard for the arrests of people like Radovan Karadzic, the architect of the genocide, and Ratko Mladic, who carried it out, and they lauded the speed with which the Serbian government detained those suspected of being the killers shown on the video. But those arrests will not be nearly enough.

Such men were not exceptions, nor were they acting independently, and Serbia must acknowledge this truth, rather than denying or minimizing it. That means surrendering all war crimes suspects to The Hague and paying reparations to the victims of war. The West should ask for no less than this when it considers Serbian requests for aid.

Courtney Angela Brkic is the author of ''Stillness: And Other Stories'' and ''The Stone Fields,'' an account of her work excavating mass graves outside Srebrenica.

27 posted on 09/01/2005 6:26:37 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
That's gabrage. You did not read all 284,000 of them! What a crock.

Kosta, that was in response to Former Lib calling the war with Slovenia a lie. That war was very real.

As often seems the case with our Serb FReepers, their version of history is replete with gaps, revisions, and ignorance of actual historical events--even recent ones such as the massacre at Srebrenica--that do not fit Serbian cultural myths.

28 posted on 09/01/2005 6:35:51 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
Mark, we will never see things the same way by presenting volumes of arguments and contradictory evidence. That's why I really don't get involved much deeper in these issues. I have learned that some people never believe what I believe and you are one of them. So, there is no need to go any further.

There is a small but loud and well paid minority in Serbia that prostitutes your point of view (prostitute because they live off of that). Sonya Biserko is one of them. Of course, they are given all the coverage in the West because they work for your side. Their character is of no concern to you because, to paraphrase President Roosevelt, "they may be thugs but they are out thugs."

In Serbia, they are marked people. They are collaborators. Fifth Column. Quislings. Every country has them. No country likes them. Even if they have an inkling for truth, they are tainted.

What is your point, anyway?

29 posted on 09/01/2005 7:26:03 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
even recent ones such as the massacre at Srebrenica--that do not fit Serbian cultural myths

Name one country that doesn't have myths!

30 posted on 09/01/2005 7:27:13 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
That war was very real.

Less than 2 weeks of confused sporadic fighting and only a handful dead... hardly a "war".

Considering the anarchy caused by their unilateral secession, things could have been much uglier. Yugoslavia should in fact be praised for quieting the situation as quickly as it did. I doubt other nations could have handled the situation any better.

31 posted on 09/01/2005 11:03:42 AM PDT by bob808
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
As often seems the case with our Serb FReepers, their version of history is replete with gaps, revisions, and ignorance of actual historical events

How about the accusers? Mr. Cohen here starts off by blaming Serbia for the creation of Yugoslavia, ignorant of the most basic historical facts that Yugoslavia was predominantly a Croatian/Slovenian movement.

How about Milosevic's "infamous" speech in Kosovo in 1989? Have you ever actually read it? Did you read the excerpt posted above? It is about that farthest thing one can imagine from being a "nationalist" rallying cry. Yet it is repeated ad nauseum as such.

What do you think of those basic historical untruths?

32 posted on 09/01/2005 11:11:58 AM PDT by bob808
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
BTW, if he can break away from his busy schedule of International ANSWER meetings or Cindy Sheehan vigils, Malic may be available for your next Free Slobo rally:

Cindy Sheehan is on your side, Mark....She's founded by your mentor and "Fuehrer"...GEORGE SOROS...

Just like Roger Cohen and Courtney Angela Brkic...

33 posted on 09/01/2005 11:57:39 AM PDT by dj_animal_2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf; kosta50

How many troops did the Serbs march against Slovenia?

One helicopter, piloted by a Slovene.

Some war effort, huh? LOL!


34 posted on 09/01/2005 11:33:13 PM PDT by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib; mark502inf; dj_animal_2000; bob808
How many troops did the Serbs march against Slovenia?

Slovenia seceded illegally. Their mutinous reserves took over Yugoslav border crossings and the federal government (at that time headed by a Croat) simply sent troops to secure the country's borders, which is the right of every sovereign state on this earth. Exercising their sworn duty to protect the country from enemies, foreign and domestic (sounds familiar, doesn't it?), and fulfilling a lawful order to secure the borders, the federal units were brutally ambushed by Slovene territorial units. How did this turn out to be an act of "aggression" against Slovenia is beyond me! It becomes an "act of war" only in the twisted minds of some habitual anti-Serbian bigots on this forum. It is no different than the Union troops marching into Confederate territory after the (illegitimate) secessions by the Southern States.

35 posted on 09/02/2005 1:05:28 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
How many troops did the Serbs march against Slovenia? One helicopter, piloted by a Slovene.

Former Lib, you are exhibit A for the author's thesis on Serbian illusions.

Read this:

"After the communist dictator Josip Tito died in 1980, longstanding ethnic, religious, and economic tensions within Yugoslavia became more apparent. Although the country comprised six republics and two self-governing provinces, Serbia (the largest republic) dominated the federal government and army. Resentment of Serbia grew when Slobodan Milosevic (1941-), who eventually became president of the republic, began stirring up Serbian nationalism in 1987. The prosperous republics of Slovenia and Croatia, no longer willing to subsidize less-developed Serbia or to accpet a centralized federal government under its control, declared their independence from Yugoslavia on June 25, 1991. After Slovenia took control of its border crossings, its defense forces blockaded federal army bases in the republic and captured about 2,300 federal soldiers. Meanwhile, the federal army moved tanks in and bombed the airport at ljubljana, the Slovenian capital, and some border posts. Fighting continued until mid-July 1991 by which time several dozen people had been killed. The war ended when the federal army withdrew its tanks and troops to concentrate on the neighboring secessionist republic of Croatia"

36 posted on 09/02/2005 4:37:53 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
Slovenia seceded illegally.

Well, Kosta, the Slovenes disagree--that was what the war was about.

My point was that--no matter how wonderful the Serbs think Serbia is--those who know the Serbs best all wanted out--the Slovenes, the Croats, the Bosnians, the Macedonians, the Kosovars, and now apparently even the Montenegrins.

37 posted on 09/02/2005 4:59:46 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

The stuff you are quoting is again based on incorrect information. Former YU was anything but Serb dominated.






POLITICAL LEADERSHIP OF YUGOSLAVIA (1980-1991)




YUGOSLAV PRIME MINISTERS:


V. Djuranovic (MONTENEGRIN)
M. Planinc (CROAT)
B. Mikulic (CROAT FROM BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA)
A. Markovic (CROAT)





YUGOSLAV FOREIGN MINISTERS:

J. Vrhovec (CROAT)
L. Mojsov (MACEDONIAN)
R. Dizdarevic (BOSNIAN MUSLIM)
B. Loncar (CROAT)




PRESIDENTS OF FEDERAL PRESIDENCY:


L. Kolisevski (MACEDONIAN)
S. Krajger (SLOVENE)
P. Stambolic (SERB)
F. Hodza (ALBANIAN)
S. Dolanc (SLOVENE)
V. Zarkovic (MONTENEGRIN
L. Mojsov (MACEDONIAN)
R. Dizdarevic (BOSNIAN MUSLIM)
S. Suvar (CROAT)
J. Drnovsek (SLOVENE)
B. Jovic (SERB)
S. Mesic (CROAT)




THE YUGOSLAV PEOPLE'S ARMY'S LEADERSHIP IN JUNE 1991
(The Year of Disintegration)


FEDERAL DEFENSE MINISTER
general V. Kadijevic (CROAT-SERB)

FEDERAL DEPUTY DEFENSE MINISTER
admiral S. Brovet (SLOVENE)

CHIEF OF THE GENERAL STAFF
general B. Adzic (SERB)

COMMANDER OF THE FIRST
MILITARY AREA (SERBIA)
general A. Spirkovski (MACEDONIAN)

COMMANDER OF THE FIFTH MILITARY
AREA (CROATIA AND SLOVENIA)
general K. Kolsek (SLOVENE)

COMMANDER OF THE THIRD MILITARY
AREA (BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA)
general A. Luketic (CROAT)

COMMANDER OF THE NAVY
admiral Z. Letica (CROAT)

COMMANDER OF THE MARITIME AREA
admiral P. Grubisic (CROAT)

COMMANDER OF THE YUGOSLAV AIR FORCE
general A. Tus (CROAT)






YUGOSLAVIA'S AMBASSADORS IN SELECTED COUNTRIES (JUNE 1991)


UNITES STATES OF AMERICA:
Dz. Mujezinovic (BOSNIAN MUSLIM)

SOVIET UNION:
A. Runjic (CROAT)

FRANCE:
B. Gagro (CROAT)

UNITED KINGDOM:
S. Rikanovic (SERB)

PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA:
Z. Dragan (SLOVENE)

UNITED NATIONS (New York):
D. Silovic (CROAT)

UNITED NATIONS (Geneva):
N. Calovski (MACEDONIAN)

AUSTRIA:
I. Brnelic (CROAT)

VATICAN:
I. Mastruko (CROAT)

SPAIN:
F. Dizdarevic (BOSNIAN MUSLIM)

HUNGARY:
R. Sova (HUNGARIAN)

EGYPT:
I. Ivekovic (CROAT)

TURKEY:
T. Petrovski (MACEDONIAN)

IRAN:
T. Trajkovski (MACEDONIAN)

ARGENTINA:
R. Mazuran (CROAT)

INDONESIA:
V. Koprivnjak (CROAT)
________________________________________________________


38 posted on 09/02/2005 5:10:39 AM PDT by Pantagruel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Pantagruel

So what, Panta? The Bosnians & Slovenes & Croats & Kosovars & Macedonians didn't want out because of the ethnic make-up of the diplomatic corps. As you well know, seccession was sparked by Serb nationalist nut-job Slobodan Milosevic coming to power.


39 posted on 09/02/2005 6:45:12 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Pantagruel

So what, Panta? The Bosnians & Slovenes & Croats & Kosovars & Macedonians didn't want out because of the ethnic make-up of the diplomatic corps. As you well know, seccession was sparked by Serb nationalist nut-job Slobodan Milosevic coming to power.


40 posted on 09/02/2005 6:46:20 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
Well, Kosta, the Slovenes disagree

And you (conveniently) belive them, right? Have you read the Yugoslav Federal Constitution of 1974? I doubt it. Guess what: it had no provision for secession by a referendum. The reason for that was given in a typical communist convoluted way: since the peoples of Yugoslavia freely opted to live in one country after WWII (the referednum was rigged by the communists), they have spent their right to secession.

Secession could be accomplished not on a local but only on a federal level, and it required a consensus. In fact, all state constitutions required the same, which is why the Bosnian secession as well as Croatian secession were illegal.

The concensual requirement was built into the Constition precisely by the people who later seceded! It was intended to avoid what the communists called "mayorisation" or outvoting by majority populations.

In your ignorance of the subject matter, you simply accept the side that you favor as the "official truth." There is no attempt to be impartial and to consider both sides. Your prejudice is all you need.

41 posted on 09/02/2005 8:02:36 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
...those who know the Serbs best all wanted out--the Slovenes, the Croats, the Bosnians, the Macedonians, the Kosovars, and now apparently even the Montenegrins

Again you are spilling your ignorance on this subject. They "knew" the Serbs how? Serbia is the most mulitethnic state of all former Yugoslav states. Apparently, the Croats, the Bosnians, the Slovenes and Croats had no problem living in Serbia -- along with 20 some other nationalities. So, Serbia could not have been such a bad place.

Montenegrins are Serbs, but communist Yugoslavia made them into a separate "nationality," while admitting that by their origins they are Serbs. However, because Montenegro has a sense of statehood, having been a separate state, it has clearly a dual identity. Thus old 19th century Montenergo's passports would say that the bearer is a "Montenegrin citizen" of "Serb nationality."

All the Montenegrin delegates to the 4th Internationale declared themselves as Serbs. Milovan Djilas, a one-time No. 2 man in Tito's Yugoslvia (Tito was a Croat) said he was a Serb from Montenegro on his dying bed.

Decades of lies fed to Montenegrin generations convinced some that Montenegro is a land of people separate from Serbs. Such as a minority, but in coalition with Bosnian and Albanian Muslims, form a majority party in current Montenegro.

Montenegro is like Austria. A German state that considers itself not part of Germany. If Montenegrins feel the same about Serbia, they should secede. But don't forget that half of all Montenegrins live in Serbia! Half of Serbia's political and cultural elite is Montenegrin. Even if they do separate, they will remain one and the same people.

42 posted on 09/02/2005 8:19:07 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Pantagruel

Don't forget: Tito was a Croat


43 posted on 09/02/2005 8:20:21 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kosta50

He most certainly was, Kosta. I assumed that we all know that, but just in case:

1) J. B. TITO (Croat),
2) E. KARDELJ (Slovene), and
3) V. BAKARIC (Croat),

with their disciples in the post-Tito era

1) S. DOLANC (Slovene),
2) J. VRHOVEC (Croat), and
3) B. MIKULIC (Croat from Bosnia and Herzegovina)


Still, the mindless litany about "Serb dominated" Yugoslavia goes on and on and on...Like a freaking broken record fer Chrissake


44 posted on 09/02/2005 9:53:19 AM PDT by Pantagruel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf; Pantagruel; kosta50

Mark,

When the latinos in California decide they want their own "Aztlan", arm themselves, and declare California their own independent state... will you condemn US troops who move in to try to restore order as "nationalist nutjobs" who are "attacking" California?


45 posted on 09/02/2005 10:03:32 AM PDT by bob808
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Pantagruel; kosta50; mark502inf
Still, the mindless litany about "Serb dominated" Yugoslavia goes on and on and on..

Very true. Tito's own policy was called "Weak Serbia, Strong Yugoslavia" for Heaven's sake!!!

46 posted on 09/02/2005 10:05:15 AM PDT by bob808
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

Aw come on Mark...have you looked at the "ethnic makeup" of the political and military elite or did you somehow miss that?

Anyway, I feel like I'm talking to a wall here. Believe what you want man, I can't help you.

Later




47 posted on 09/02/2005 10:13:56 AM PDT by Pantagruel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: bob808

Looks like we're beating a dead horse Bob, eh?


48 posted on 09/02/2005 10:16:16 AM PDT by Pantagruel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Pantagruel

I hope not. I really do hope Mark considers the issue a little more, as I believe he has been misled on many points.


49 posted on 09/02/2005 10:33:30 AM PDT by bob808
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: bob808
when the latinos in California decide they want their own "Aztlan", arm themselves, and declare California their own independent state... will you condemn US troops who move in to try to restore order

Bob, if the US troops go in and remove every latino in the local government and replace them with Anglos from out of state, dynamite their churches, close the schools, shut down the major businesses, surround the towns with armored vehicles & then shell them or shoot a few civilans before moving in and giving the populace 30 minutes to start walking to the Mexican border--to include those who've lived there for generations, then murder those who don't move fast enough; then yes, I'll condemn US troops. And until that starts happening, your analogy is distinctly imperfect.

50 posted on 09/02/2005 12:59:00 PM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson