GERMANY was deploying tanks to the Macedonian town of Tetovo last night after a Bundeswehr soldier was wounded in intense fighting between Macedonian forces and Albanian rebels on the edge of the town.
Rudolf Scharping, the German Defence Minister, said: "We will not allow anyone to dance around our nose, Albanian terrorists included." He said two Leopard tanks were ordered to move to Macedonia from the Prizren barracks in Kosovo. The Bild newspaper reports in today's edition that tank units in Germany have been placed on 24-hour alert.
The tanks are the first front-line Nato combat forces deployed in Macedonia and mark another step in Nato's growing military involvement in quelling the rebellion there. Mr Scharping told ZDF television that Germany would "draw conclusions from the situation and use heavy weapons if necessary".
Amid fears that the fighting could plunge the region into another Balkan war, Greece has placed forces on the border with Macedonia on high alert, and has also offered military help to Skopje. Bulgaria is already providing military equipment and ammunition to the hard-pressed Macedonian forces, and has offered to send troops.
 |
| Increased presence: American Kfor troops patrol the Kosovo border with Macedonia |
The Nato-led Kfor peacekeeping mission in Kosovo says it has no formal mandate to operate beyond the border, but maintains about 5,000 German soldiers in Macedonia to provide logistical support to Kfor. Nato officials said that it was unlikely that Kfor's mission would be extended to enter Macedonia or Serbia, where ethnic Albanians have also mounted attacks. But Kfor is increasing patrols on its side of the Kosovo border.
In a day of intense fighting, mortar rounds crashed into the centre of Tetovo yesterday, sending thousands of civilians fleeing to safety. Barracks on the edge of the town housing German and Macedonian troops came under fire and a German soldier was slightly hurt. A German Defence Ministry spokesman said: "We have 1,200 soldiers there. The injured man was hurt by flying glass after Albanians started shooting with small arms from the mountains."
For Education And Discussion Only. Not For Commercial Use.
To: The Cruiser
While I was stationed in Germany one of the places that we would deploy to was a German Panzer Base.
Over the years I got to know a few of the German tankers, learned some of their training techniques and even got to take a ride on a Leopard II.
Needless to say, I would not want to have to face them on the battlefield. Especially since my unit was in no way prepared to defend itself against heavy armor.
In my oblique view of the circumstances, the Germans are responding in the same way that the Isrealis would.
Overwhelming response to the situation in order to prevent it from escelating.
Unfortunatly, if one looks at how events are progressing in the mid-east that policy has it's definate pro's and con's.
8 Posted on 03/16/2001 21:14:00 PST by SSgt Mike
To: SSgt Mike
If one reads "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" it is painfully obvious that there were literally hundreds of opportunities to prevent Hitlers rise to power
When Roosevelt asked Churchill what he would call WW2, he quickly answered 'the unnecessary war'. There were also many times it might have been easily prevented. Hitler went into Poland 100% sure that the Brits would not go to war because of his deal with Stalin. Churchill agreed with him, and said that going to war with Hitler at the point was incredibly stupid of the British government.
Even Hitler went on record saying that if he had only known the Russians had twice as many tanks as he thought, he would never have started the Russian war. Even the Holocaust did not start until the loss of German blood in the east made Hitler decide that it was required of him for posterity. Until then, the German activities were largely limited to the old ethnic cleansing routines, not genocide.
History never really repeats, it just makes the same kind of things happen again when you don't expect it.
30 Posted on 03/16/2001 22:32:32 PST by The Cruiser
To: AGAviator
Interesting observation you make Aviator. This is how the Albanians are repaying their gratitude to the Macedonian people for helping them during their time of crisis and need. The humanity of the action by the Macedonian people is repaid by inhumane and barbaric acts of ungrateful people.
The KLA attacks are only about land, camouflaged under a cloak demanding "more rights".
During the last 10 years of Macedonian independence it has become an inevitable practice that every government will have a coalition with the Albanian minority political parties. In the current coalition government, the political party of the Macedonian Albanians holds four key minister seats and several deputy positions. There are 28 Albanian MPs in the 120 seat Macedonian Parliament.
Minority rights are extended to the maximum where education is concerned.
The Albanian minority in the country has education in its mother tongue up to and including University level (a brand new Albanian language University is under-construction at the moment). Many TV and radio stations in Macedonia broadcast full programming in Albanian.
Macedonia had Albanian language TV programs much before even Albania had a TV station. There are numerous Albanian daily newspapers, magazines, and literature printed in Macedonia.
Albanians in Macedonia hold high-ranking executive positions in public enterprises, army, police, local government etc.
The Macedonian Army and Police have Albanian Generals and other high-ranking officers. In the Municipalities where Albanians are more than 20% of the population the Albanian language is an official language of communication. This is just a small fragment of the enormous amount of rights given to the Albanians in Macedonia. Rights given to Albanians in Macedonia have been uplifted to a level much higher than what European conventions and juridical practice in EU countries prescribe. While there was war in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo due to basic minorityrights violations, Macedonian minority rights democracy was flourishing.
Is this what makes the Macedonians "worse than the Serbs" as Albanians have been quoted in international press?!! Were Macedonians really "worse than Serbs" when they were the only ones who welcomed 400.000 Albanian refugees from Kosovo into Macedonia during the NATO bombardment of Yugoslavia!?? Or when the Macedonian government allowed NATO troops to pass though its territory on the way to Kosovo??
Macedonia's stability in 1999 was sacrificed in the name of humanity and the readiness to accept 400.000 Albanian Kosovar refugees in the country while none of the NATO countries was willing to take no more than few hundreds of refugees. Is this the way Albanians are saying THANK YOU for the political, strategic and logistic help which Macedonia gave to NATO and indirectly the Albanian community during the Kosovo crisis!?
Clearly some Albanians have short memories and are most ungrateful for the hospitality extended to them and their countrymen.
53 Posted on 03/17/2001 06:29:05 PST by Vangel
To: Kate22
I am interested in knowing what you think the trigger will be which finally tips Nato into direct confrontation with the KLA
Short of a KLA attack on NATO troops, which is highly unlikely, it would have to be large numbers of Albanians hitting the roads again as a result of KLA activities.
The long term prognosis for the Serbs is either the frying pan or the the fire. Right now they are in the frying pan. Unfortunately, for the Serbs, NATO is the frying pan.
The best bet for the Serbs is to pursue it's identity as Yugoslavia still maintain that it really exists and has legitimate sovereignty over all of it's parts. That's the touchpoint for the KLA. If the Serbs could get a harder agreement or some other real acknowledgement with Bush and NATO on keeping Kosovo in Yugoslavia, that would set off the KLA. With the coming congressional elections, there is an opportunity to buy influence in Congress. They really arent't that expensive. I suggest offering ample kickbacks on any monies that come to Serbia. You could sacrifice Milosevich, but before you do get a solid commitment from Bush and tie the deal down with a money promise. With bush, money talks and nobody walks.
The real opponent is of course the EU which wants Yugoslavia broken up. That's the touchpoint for the KLA.
I haven't heard anything about it in a long time, but is there any more talk of a referendum in Kosovo?
63 Posted on 03/17/2001 10:26:20 PST by The Cruiser
To: AGAviator
I hate to burst your bubble, but if NATO had done nothing there would be even more Albanians in Macedonia than there are
now. Like three quarters of a million displaced persons. Do you think that would have been conducive to stability in Macedonia
and Greece?
Surprising you should say that, since NATO *caused* said displacement with its bombing campaign in Kosovo. If NATO had done nothing, as you said, then what would've happened instead is that the raids and counter-raids of the last decade or so would've simply continued between the KLA and Serb paramilitary forces. No, it required something as overwhelming as the NATO bombing campaign to panic the entire population of the region.
I remember you, AGAviator. I remember your support of Clinton and NATO during our war with the Serbs. At least you're consistant. However, I am consistant, too: NATO is seeing the *very* reprecussions I and others warned of back then. The Balkins have been a cess pool for nearly two thousand years (even the Romans had problems in the region) and a half-hearted and inept intervention by Clinton and NATO isn't going to change that...and didn't, either.
I wonder if Macedonia realizes how thoroughly they've been used? I wonder if Greece feels vindicated? More importantly, I wonder if the situation is going to further deteriorate. I think it will. I think it has to now. It is no coincidence that Bush is pulling troops out of Bosnia right now, IMO. There are things afoot, and what we hear is only part of what is happening.
I was right before and I'm right now. NATO will rue the day they violated their own Charter.
Tuor
65 Posted on 03/17/2001 10:39:55 PST by Tuor
To: eleni121
Unforunately, you are wrong on all counts. (IMHO)
"Well..well the Germans back in the Balkans. And this time attempting to do some good after the slaughters of WWII. Interestingly enough, the Albanians supported the Germans then."
Attempting to do some good?
You're joking of course?
More like picking up where they left off.
Albanians (moslems)+ Germans = Both hate the Slavs (Christians) and work toward their extermination.
No big surprise here.
"The Germans will have their hands full dealing with their former allies especially with all the materiel the narco terrorists are getting from the Middle East and Turkey - their patrons after all."
"Former" allies?
I don't buy it,
and the Germans were the main ones with Iran to equip the Moslems all along.
"What a load of crap Clintoon and the madame has left for for Bush to try to clean up."
Bush isn't going to "clean up" anything.
He supported Klinkton all along
Bush is in with HATO all the way,
never objected to the bombing of our allies in two world wars- the Serbs,
and as far as I can tell, his only goal is to continue the admirable work of his illustrious predecessor,
until the last Christian is dead.
"Clean up" my eye.
66 Posted on 03/17/2001 10:43:43 PST by KO5A
To: Sawdring, AGAviator
It's not so much the wild rantings I mind as it is the rippling effect that misinformation, such as posted by crazykatz, has upon the Foreign Affairs threads here on FR - it feeds upon itself until a point is reached where two opposing sides can no longer hold informed debate, because they're dealing with two very different sets of 'facts'. Two months* from now I'll be going at it with someone else, on some other thread, and this will come back up, stated as if it were a fact, and will require another time consuming detour into something tangential to the subject under discussion. It's such a damned waste of time.
Point out that those facts are wrong, with countervailing information, and instead of a reasoned response, you get incomprehension that someone has the nerve to run counter to the conventional wisdom here on FR.
Not really the way informed debate is supposed to carry on.
Yeah, I chose crazykatz because she's at least predictable when you need her to be.
*Oh, look. You don't even have to wait that long.
68 Posted on 03/17/2001 11:37:04 PST by Hoplite
To: AGAviator
I hate to burst your bubble, but if NATO had done nothing there would be even more Albanians in Macedonia than there are now. Like three quarters of a million displaced persons. Do you think that would have been conducive to stability in Macedonia and Greece?
My concern is with the involvement of our military in a situation that defies a military solution. Without US/NATO involvement, any number of scenarios would be possible, but that is not my concern. Tell me why even one US soldier should die attempting to resolve centuries-old disputes when no 'vital interests' are at stake? Who are the good guys in white hats over there... this week, that is? Will we be siding with the 'evil' Serbs in the near future, so soon after we used them to field-test our latest laser-bomb technology? Like I stated, there is 'no clear military objective', just the means and will to use our military power to change the outcome a little.
I believe that we should not be the world's police force, and that our responsibilities stop at our borders. If you don't know where they are, consult a good world atlas.
81 Posted on 03/17/2001 16:42:19 PST by pariah
To: Kate22
The US/ Nato thought that it would be possible to hand independence to the Albanians, while the EU knew that this would not be possible and would ignite the entire region.
The EU is not ready. They will need a better set of military tools when the time comes, and they are working on it. Right now it is becoming clearer that this is turning into a political badminton game between the US and the EU, and Serbia is the shuttlecock. The stakes include NATO itself and all those European US military bases for the US; for the EU, full and independent control of Eastern Europe. Also afloat is the relationship between France and Germany, and the relationship between the UK and the USA. Neither will be be destroyed, but they may very well significantly change their paths.
Russia, of course, is the wild card.
83 Posted on 03/17/2001 17:19:59 PST by The Cruiser
To: KO5A
You are not receiving well... I said that the Albanians were German allies in WWII. That is a fact.
I wrote that the narco terrorists aka the Albanians were getting materiel from the Middle East and Turkey...I stand by that and whether you buy it or not means nothing to me. You are obviously unaware of the complexities of religion in the Middle East
Finally, W supported our boys over there not Clintoon's policy. He has repeatedly said that the situation needs to be looked at and one of his first moves was to finally begin removing our people from there.
Until the last Christian is dead? Not on Bush's watch...and don't forget...unfortunately the Serbian, Bosnian, and Croat leadership, many of whom are/were friggin Communists, are the ones that started this God awful mess and turned it into a war of national pride against each other in the case of Kosovo, the Albanians. It has become a war on Christians because Clintooon and the madame deviously set it up that way. Slobo and Clintoon are brothers in socialism don't forget.
91 Posted on 03/17/2001 19:45:17 PST by eleni121
To: pariah
My concern is with the involvement of our military in a situation that defies a military solution
Like it or not, we are still in NATO, and this was more a European concern than an American one, but like always, they expect America to do the heavy lifting.
Our responsibilities stop at our borders. If you don't know where they are, consult a good world atlas.
It's fine to say "our responsibilities stop at our borders," but whenever a small country in the Middle East with a huge influence over Congress gets included, we hear "Oh, no, we can't leave them all by themselves. Not them." So there is a certain sense of looking around for other places where we can straighten out someone bad or try to look good ourselves. Because it would be so embarrasing to be perceived by the world as having a foreign policy which only treats one other country as special, even though this is in fact the case.
But you are right about this defying a military solution. You can only have peace-keeping when the parties involved actually want peace. On the other hand, democracy is based on the belief that the majority of people everywhere are basically decent and pretty much want the same things once they're free from demagogues and tyranny. So we will see.
94 Posted on 03/17/2001 21:46:09 PST by AGAviator
To: AGAviator
As usual you shipterd- kla types not only murder bus loads of innocent men, women & kids... but you lie like rugs.
How does it feel to know that the world is seeing your kla "people" for the murderering, whore mongering, drug pushers that they are???
Must hurt huh!
All of Europe knows what scum come out of albania...kla, uck, nla, or by whatever other 3 letters they can MANAGE to string together....they only can deal with 3 at time....hahahahaha!!!
Read this you cretin...According to the Florida Times Union, "The Wall Street Journal now has learned many of the refugees' tales of atrocities were told not to independent human rights activists but to the KLA, which had a vested interest in embellishing and fabricating the facts."
Liar !LIAR!! Your butts on fire, mr. AL GORE AVIATOR!!
96 Posted on 03/17/2001 21:52:01 PST by crazykatz
To: AGAviator
And you still cannot tell the truth can you?
You are no CONSERVATIVE...you are a klintoon foreign policy advocate and a fan of maddie halfbright.
Ronald Reagan would have never allowed the bombing of Serbian civilian sites ...NEVER!!In fact, this situation would have been dealt with in a civilized manner. He would NOT have allowed our military to be the servants of kla terrorists.
My Mother and Dad worked in his campaigns and held several BIG fund raisers for him...they even went to visit him at the White House. He is a gentleman and NOT a war criminal like klintoon, maddie, shea, B-liar, slobo or solarno!
You are not fit to mention his name because you advocate for KLINTOON-style monica-politics!!
105 Posted on 03/17/2001 22:35:58 PST by crazykatz
To: wonders
It is the old Freikorps goals but the methods are economic, not yet militaristic. However, once the economic goals are set, the Fat Eagle merely needs a take crash diet to shed those extra pounds in order to gain the fighting weight necessary to keep the foothold this time.
It is the line of settlement with Russia from 1917. The EU will allow peaceful German dominance and emigration east. The Baltic states, Poland, old Czechsoslovakia. Austria, Slovenia and Croatia. Hungary and Romania will always cooperate. Bulgaria is now the favorite German vacationland and is sending troops to 'help out' in Serbia, (remember when Serbs were killing UN workers because they thought he was a Bulgarian? Old times there are not forgotten.) Bosnia Herzogovina and Montenegro are coming into the roost, the real game now may start to focus on the Vojvodino, depending on how NATO plays out the next year. The real long term goal is the Ukraine, but Russia is working very hard now to pre-empt such an option, and the Russians are also bound and determined to keep Moldavia. As von Manstein pointed out, the best defense of a river is on the opposite bank. Something in which the Russians were always a master.
The Russians may eventually shake France and the UK out of the EU as the German power center in eastern Europe emerges for the Titan that it will inevitably become. Albania is it's pocketful of cheap temporary labor.
The sleeper has awakened.
121 Posted on 03/18/2001 09:45:54 PST by The Cruiser
To: pgkdan
Because while it was happening we here on FreeRepublic KNEW what was happening.
Just about everybody in the world outside of this site recognizes that Milosovec's election in 1989 triggered the resurgence of Serbian nationalism, and once he used the army which he inherited from the communists, a Pandora's box of ethnic warfare was opened.
Now if you want to actually have an effect in the real world and claim otherwise, you have a long, uphill, battle. But the way to do it is to prove your case with facts, not assertions. And may I suggest the yapping, braying Milosovec advocates whom this site brings out of the woodwork do not help your cause in the least. But it's your lives.
126 Posted on 03/18/2001 10:26:14 PST by AGAviator
To: AGAviator,Al Gore Advisor
You LOST!! Admit it....you know it and everybody here knows that YOU are no match for me and MY WITTY remarks to your whining and moaning!!!
I am a conservative while you ...support klintoon's failed policies in the Balkans...It is YOU WHO IS THE LOSER!!!
I am the winner in this contest and always will be BECAUSE I AM ON THE SIDE OF TRUTH...while you support that beastly KLINTOON and his lies about the Balkans.
And, about slobo m.
HE WAS the West's main man as long as he kowtowed to their demands and HURT MY FRIENDS, who are Krajina Serbs and Bosnian Serbs from Bihac...all civilians, I must add. Slobo was no worse than klintoon when it came to hurting MY FRIENDS...AND, I dislike them both.
STOP your lies about whom I support.
Unlike you, I actually do something about the problems of refugees...and they are NOT all Serbs, by the way.
You just keep on supporting billy j and his wag the dog politics....you will pay for that support some fine day! It will NOT be a pretty site!!
131 Posted on 03/18/2001 11:16:21 PST by crazykatz
To: AGAviato, pericles, crazykatz
recognizes that Milosovec's election in 1989 triggered the resurgence of Serbian nationalism, and once he used the army which he inherited from the communists, a Pandora's box of ethnic warfare was opened.
Now if you want to actually have an effect in the real world and claim otherwise, you have a long, uphill, battle. But the way to do it is to prove your case with facts, not assertions interventionist case with facts, not assertions' is on you. Pray give us 'facts" as to how...."Milosovec's election in 1989 triggered the resurgence of Serbian nationalism, and once he used the army which he inherited from the communists"
You are defending a intervention based on this assertion, the burden is on you.......you wish to act so prove you 'just war' case.
ad just as a reminder you have to prove all of the following
1)That there was not a civil war, rather an invasion
2) That there was no other solution but military intervention, all other possibilities were exhausted
3) That the intervention you advocate(d) had a serious chance of making the situation better and not just causing more widespread harm
4) That the intervention you advocate(d)was not only jus ad bello but also jus in bello
I (along with many others) have concluded that the War Party's case for intervention failed each and every single one of these hurdles for the intervention to be a Just War.
and if it ain't a just War, well then it is criminal murder............and the reason katz gets all bent out of shape is that we all believe you are advocating nothing less than murder.
133 Posted on 03/18/2001 13:22:21 PST by vooch
To: The Cruiser
Your post #121 has great merit, and many would do well to get out their maps and history books and study it.
I must remind you of one detail, however. The Bulgarian-American UN Civil Affairs was murdered by an ethnic Albanian mob, after one of them asked him the time in Serbian. He instinctively replied in the Serbian language, and the mob went after him. I took a keen interest in this case, as I was once a UN Civil Affairs Officer.
As for Vojvodina, I have spent some happy times there. Despite some silly agitation from Hungary (who will defer in the end to Austria and Germany once they've played their high cards in Croatia and Vojvodina), I doubt it will blow. The folks there have more common sense than that.
Hungary is a somewhat different animal than you have depicted for the short term only, but will eventually come round as you say. Short-term, they're in the US pocket (as a hedge against Germany)--just look at how US has announced their intelligence posts in Budapest from the rooftops of the mainstream media! Hungary has every reason to distrust Russia and Germany and play this game for awhile. They know they'll eventually end up in Germany's lap. "But milk the cow while you can."
136 Posted on 03/18/2001 18:27:48 PST by wonders
To: wonders vojvodino
I must remind you of one detail, however. The Bulgarian-American UN Civil Affairs was murdered by an ethnic Albanian mob, after one of them asked him the time in Serbian. He instinctively replied in the Serbian language, and the mob went after him. I took a keen interest in this case, as I was once a UN Civil Affairs Officer.
Thanks I remembered the event, but not well. On that basis though, it would seem that injecting Bulgarians into the picture would be a provacation to the KLA, which is something not in the KLA's best interests.
As for Vojvodina, I have spent some happy times there. Despite some silly agitation from Hungary (who will defer in the end to Austria and Germany once they've played their high cards in Croatia and Vojvodina), I doubt it will blow. The folks there have more common sense than that.
It's not in my opinion a matter of Vojvodina blowing, it is more a case of a situation arising where the US pulls out, the Germans hold back, and the Serbs get out of hand readjusting their territorial lines with the Albanians. At some point, say with 1,000,000 refugees afoot again and Europe dead set against remolesting both Serbian infrastructure and German business on the Danube, the door might open on an excuse for the EU to play UN in Serbia on a larger scale.
138 Posted on 03/18/2001 19:23:06 PST by The Cruiser
To: AGAviator, krazycats
Oh my, what an unneccessary war you bunch have got into regarding the refugees.
Anybody here ever talk to a US Intel Officer about how refugees can be used to your advantage, to your enemy's disadvantage? It's straight-line old doctrine.
So, what caused the refugee exodus during the bombing campaign? If you are out to blame NATO or absolve NATO, the only thing that matters is: was it predictable? According to standard US military doctrine, yes it was predictable.
If one wants to understand the true picture, all military doctrine and strategies aside, then one must look at sources not reported by NATO's controlled mouthpieces (mainstream media). Most of us can't do that.
I was privy to Red Cross station-by-station reports during the bombing campaign which were very telling. But I'll get to that later.
First, let's look at what NATO knew beforehand, compared to what was later reported by HRW and other international reporting agencies. The NATO bombing, a terror in itself, also provided cover for Serbian paramilitary forces and criminal groups to do their thing, and for KLA forces and criminal groups to do their thing as well. Ordinary folks (of every ethnicity) were royally scr*wed.
Before the NATO bombing campaign, it was in the interests of VJ and MUP to preclude or at least reign in nasty actions by militant fringe groups. (Shortly before the bombing campaign, official reports from UNHCR and other relief agencies operating in Kosovo reported this was true, and ethnic Albanian IDPs (aka "refugees") were returning to their homes.)
During the bombing, it was a free-for-all. (Americans: think how our armed forces might act if a South and Central American alliance were bombing all our major cities because some Hispanics had agitated for an independent Texas or Florida. Mi Lai might look tame in comparison! "You, you're the cause of my home town getting bombed for what you brown b*stard! KKKK-k-blam! That's how Serb irregulars, and some VJ regulars acted -- so predictable!)
Meanwhile, the KLA could flush out and do away with ethnic Albanians not totally loyal to their cause (something they'd been doing anyway both within Kosovo and in the refugee communities in Western Europe). In addition, KLA had been instructed to produce as many "refugees" as possible, and knew this strategy to be to their advantage in securing the continued use of US/UK/NATO as their air force. It was so simple for them to order jillions of their minions to flee and lie. For those of you who have never lived among ethnic Albanians and understood the patriarchal clan-based organisation of their culture--you cannot begin to imagine how powerful a force this is!
NATO knew darn well this would be the result. It matched perfectly with their own military doctrine taught in their own military academies.
So, how does this match with info on the ground at the time? [Please understand I have ommitted some identifying info for the protection of my friends.] My Red Cross colleagues in Macedonia at the time of the bombing reported the following: "Here at station [deleted] we are seeing many more males than at stations [deleted]. Perhaps this is because the males are dropping off their dependents at [deleted] stations and taking back routes here to pick up some supplies before they "disappear" to elude UCK recruiters. (Extracted from official report at this particular station: Males of military age=73%).
From a similarly situated station, in a personal note (written by a motherly, middle-aged Red Cross worker: "They're wearing the most expensive sport shoes one can buy in this part of the world. Not a scratch on them. No mud or snow. Don't look like they've trekked through h*ell like my sister says they show on the telly. They almost seem embarrassed. One guy took his packet and sheepishly said he had to do what he had to do.
Several interior stations: "Tracing requests indicate these men voluntarily split from their families to either avoid forced UCK recruitment or to join UCK before registration at the border. Suggest these be handled with utmost discretion."
From a station close to the border: "The women would start to tell us about the bombs and about windows shattering and where the children were at the time and specific things, and then the old men would immediately make them be quiet and tell us about Serbs in black masks demanding money had forced them out. The men argued sometimes about the cost of passage, but always agreed in the end with M."
So, the bombing created a situation which, predictably, guaranteed a huge exodus of refugees from Kosovo. Serb forces run amok, Albanian forces run amok, and the bombing itself all together caused it. The only salient point at this time is: NATO knew it would happen, predicted it. All the rest is detail and circumstance.
139 Posted on 03/18/2001 19:30:37 PST by wonders
To: wonders
From a station close to the border: "The women would start to tell us about the bombs and about windows shattering and where the children were at the time and specific things, and then the old men would immediately make them be quiet and tell us about Serbs in black masks demanding money had forced them out... "
I actually witnessed this. Some woman reporter on the border was interviewing refugies on TV (I assume I was watching either CNN or MSNBC) through a translator. The reporter asked why they left. After the question was translated, the refugee woman looked up and said (through translator), "The bombs, the bombs".
The reporter seemed confused by the answer and asked a leading question. "Were you forced out of your home by gunmen"? After translation, the refugee woman looks perplexed and exclaimed again "No, the bombs, the bombs"!
After about an hour, the story became very consistent. They all said they were told to leave their homes by Serbian military.
Sorry I didn't have a tape running but I was only 7 when the US left Vietnam and I'm a little new to dealing with propaganda as it is happening.
144 Posted on 03/18/2001 20:25:59 PST by Incorrigible
To: Incorrigible
...and I'm a little new to dealing with propaganda as it is happening
Sounds to me like you're more savvy than most at recognising it for what it is as it's happening! :) Standing ovation from me! So glad to hear there were some like you out there!
I don't doubt your story at all, based on what Italian relief workers have reported about the "designated interpreters who always manage to be UCK" and "don't translate correctly at all."
I'll tell you a little secret, which any seasoned "refugee worker" knows from experience (and what every very clued-in police and mil-intel folks know from their training) in case of future "refugees" and "wars" you want to keep an eye on:
Immediately after some horror is purported to occur, you can believe the people (if translated correctly) whose pupils are contracted and whose eyeballs do not move AT ALL as they speak, and who appear to have NO emotion, describing events as though they were a movie they watched and were not particularly emotionally involved in. They are telling the truth. DO NOT believe those who show emotion and whose eyeballs travel upper-left to lower-right or vice versa. They're lying, or just repeating what they've been told.
[CAVEAT: A few weeks' or months' time can change this around, depending upon just how traumatised the person was, and the person's particular personality. Trained interview techniques can get around this and find the truth, but that's another, far more complicated story.]
146 Posted on 03/18/2001 20:56:46 PST by wonders
To: SSgt Mike
My memory, from when I was living over there ("dadrueben"), is that the Leopard II was the state of the art. That (still) so?
If, as you suggest, a weak response to aggression will be met with more aggression, I really don't see the downside to an escalation, as a response to the other side's aggression. It's either escalate, or get the heck out, no? Or am I missing something?
As for the WWII analogy, yes, the Allies did have many opportunities to stop Hitler, starting with the Rhineland in '36, when the Frogs couldn't be bothered to interrupt their soccer game, while the Fuehrer led his troops on illegal maneuvers. But I don't see the parallels between Germany then and ... who now? There is no Fuehrer in the region, who has had six years to undertake an incredible military build-up, and who has told the world of his plans for domination and genocide. Instead, we are face with an ever-changing assortment of ragtag, wannabe Fuehrers whose identities aren't even known half the time.
147 Posted on 03/18/2001 21:43:42 PST by mrustow
To: crazykatz
You can call yourself whatever you want, but in truth you are not nothing more than a raving, screaming loony.
(1) You claim you don't like Slobo. Exactly when did you make your displeasure with him known? Cite the link(s) and give the date(s). I have never seen one.
(2) Ronald Reagan invited Afghan "freedom fighters" to the White House, which your parents may or may not have been invited to as well. Although Reagan disliked terrorists, he had nothing against Muslims, or any other people. You do.
(3) Ronald Reagan also said that the political problems in the world are not from its people, but from governments. This is directly contrary to your racial and religious-based kookery.
(4) Reagan started his career out as a Democrat, and he was able to win such large majorities because he was able to convince Democrats, who were just as numerous in his day as they are now, to vote for him because he was magnanimous and had great vision. You use "Democrat" as a term of disdain, which is why people like you will never become the majority, but be off in some corner somewhere howling and screaming about how unfair life is to you and yours.
The rest of the world sees only "America," not "Democrat" or "Republican." One more reason why you are the loser, and will always be one.
And no, I'm not going to spend a Sunday waiting for your puerile drivel to come over the computer. You're lucky I even take the time to tell you the facts of life. You'll never make it in the real world, with people who may not share the same views as you.
148 Posted on 03/18/2001 21:50:01 PST by AGAviator
To: wonders
I know an Air Force officer who was with a Search and Rescue unit that was scheduled to be posted to Kosovo if things got any worse. As such he got daily briefings on the situation, which had to be as realistic as possible, because people's lives would depend on knowing who controlled area, what was going on, and what was likely to happen in a very fluid situation.
You are correct in saying that it was very mixed up. However the same scenario of a Serbian Army advance, covering for paramilitary units to do the dirty work, had played out several times before in the '90's and this time, the West leadership got tired of it and decided to say that enough was enough. There is also evidence that "Operation Horseshoe" was planned months if not years in advance in Belgrade.
NATO was in the Balkans in the first place because Milosovec signed the Dayton agreements, because he wanted not to lose any more captured territory to the Croats. So at this point NATO thought they had some say-so in the region's affairs, like it or not.
Every major Balkan flare-up in the '90's involved Serbia as one of the parties: Serbs-Bosians, Serbs-Croats, or Serbs-Albanians. Like I said, the bombing started because some decision-makers just got tired of it. Wasn't a good thing, but neither was sitting around and doing nothing like the last 8 years.
149 Posted on 03/18/2001 22:04:33 PST by AGAviator
To: AGAviator, vojvodina, vooch, The Cruiser, crazykatz
There is also evidence that "Operation Horseshoe" was planned months if not years in advance in Belgrade.
And there is more evidence which has come out recently in the German press that "Operation Horseshoe" was a fabrication created at the highest levels of the German government, which has stirred up quite a scandal in Germany lately.
But it was hardly made up out of thin air. You see, it is a standard military tactic to use refugees in conflict, and NATO knew this. And I've no doubt that such a plan had been considered in Belgrade in the event of a possible impending attack from FYROM or Albania.
So what would the Serb strategy be? Tie down the enemy (NATO) and tie up its resources, choke corridors with a flood of refugees. Meanwhile, flush out insurgents (KLA) inside Kosovo to protect VJ and MUP flanks from "inside attacks." Had NATO truly wanted to attempt a land invasion from Albania and Macedonia, this would have been an effective strategy.
NATO, knowing from the start they would never tackle a land invasion, knew the flood of refugees could be turned their own advantage on the PR front. One little twist was needed to quell any speculation that there would have been no such flood of refugees had it not been for the bombing: The "Operation Horseshoe" myth, a myth that states it would have happened anyway without the bombing.
As I recall, the original story of "Op Horseshoe" was that it was leaked through some obscure Bulgarian source. Hmm. Am I remembering that right, folks? I also remember reading that NATO announced it as "Op Podkova" (sp?) but that "podkova" (or whatever the word was) was the Croatian version of the word (oops!), not Serbian. Can any Serbs or Croats help me out here? I never had reason to discuss horseshoes with anyone, so I never learned that word. If it is the Croatian version, is it New Croatian or good old regular Croatian?
150 Posted on 03/19/2001 05:44:08 PST by wonders
To: wonders
As I recall, the original story of "Op Horseshoe" was that it was leaked through some obscure Bulgarian source. Hmm. Am I remembering that right, folks? I also remember reading that NATO announced it as "Op Podkova" (sp?) but that "podkova" (or whatever the word was) was the Croatian version of the word (oops!), not Serbian. Can any Serbs or Croats help me out here? I never had reason to discuss horseshoes with anyone, so I never learned that word. If it is the Croatian version, is it New Croatian or good old regular Croatian?
That is how I remember the story. It has clearly been shown by a number of independent sources that the reason Clinton sent NATO in was the stain on the blue dress.
The Serbs army was all over Kosovo. The refugees were more likely the result of the fear of what NATO could do than what the Serbs were doing. If my family was within sight of any Serb military, I would certainly have moved them to make sure they were not near any of the ordinance NATO had at it's disposal to use against them. And I certainly would not have depended on the ability of NATO to tell a tractor towing a wagon full of grandmothers from a tractor towing a wagon full of troops from 15,000 feet. This I would have learned from watching CNN.
151 Posted on 03/19/2001 06:14:35 PST by The Cruiser
To: eleni121
...unfortunately the Serbian, Bosnian, and Croat leadership, many of whom are/were friggin Communists, are the ones that started this God awful mess and turned it into a war of national pride against each other in the case of Kosovo, the Albanians.
You're right, it's a layer-upon-layer clusterf&%k, for sure.
Back in 1999, I wrote the following on a "Kosovo Crisis" message board:
"...the real problem in this region is not ethnic groups fighting it out, but *religious* groups that have grievances against one another and do NOT want to live together.
Blame the victors of World War I, mainly. They carved up the Turkish and Austro-Hungarian Empires in a careless manner, setting up totally unrealistic borders. After World War II, the borders were adjusted again (to where they are currently drawn) to punish the countries that had sided with the Nazis and to reward those who had fought against them.
Some 700-odd years ago, the Turks invaded Europe. About halfway through the area now called Yugoslavia was where they were stopped. Today's ongoing conflict has always seemed like a great big family brawl, and in some ways it is. The population in that part of the world is basically indistinguishable. They all speak the same language. They all come from the same "root stock". But, after the Turk invasion, only half of them remained free from Turk rule. Those people became the Croats, who I believe are Roman Catholic. Some who were subject to Turk rule abandoned their Orthodox Christian religion and became Muslim. These people (now the "ethnic Albanians" being driven from Kosovo) have historically been hated by the Croats for their apostasy. The Turks can't stand the Albanians either, ironically *because* they abandoned their faith rather than going down fighting. Turks don't respect that sort of "go along to get along" butt-kissing behavior. The Serbs (the Orthodox Christians under Turk rule who did NOT embrace Islam) also hate the Croats (remember Bosnia...) because they blame the Croats for abandoning them (the Serbs) to the Turks for so long. They did not help out enough, so they are now hated. Another interesting thing about the Serbs... they have a quaint, dangerous core belief that they are a "victim population"; that they have been oppressed by the Turks, the Croats, the Nazis and now NATO, and that oppression is keeping the Great Serbian Society from leading Europe peacefully. To make matters worse, while the language is common, the alphabets are not! The Croats use a Roman alphabet (like ours), the Serbs follow their Eastern Orthodox leanings and use the same Cyrillic alphabet as the Russians and the muslims (again, "Ethnic Albanians") use Arabic. It is an unmitigated mess.
Though it is hard to imagine any effective solution, one idea has been to resettle the various populations and make them stay put; and most importantly, to RE-DRAW the existing useless territorial boundaries in some manner that is workable. The only way this will EVER happen is on a sub-rosa basis, which is what Milosovic has been doing..."
*****************
The above quote was not supportive of any particular faction. It was simply an expression of how any military involvement by the U.S. would be utterly futile in terms of effecting positive change.
The Balkans are a wonderful example of the failure of multiculturalism, too.
156 Posted on 03/19/2001 10:32:05 PST by Charles Martel
To: The Cruiser
Our most recent serious adversaries were our WWII allies, the Soviets, while the Germans, our WWII foes, have been quite reliable allies for the last 50 years, so I wouldn't make too much of life under Hitler.
We shouldn't help anybody ethnically cleanse anybody, the Serbs inherited most of the Yugoslav communist army so they had greater ability to do this than their neighbors and they did under Slobodan.
Now that problem is gone and another has gotten greater. They're both bad, and two wrongs don't make a right.
160 Posted on 03/19/2001 13:31:32 PST by AGAviator
To: AGAviator
AGA
I believe I asked you to make a JUST WAR case. The burden for intervention rests with your side. Please address the following>
1)That there was not a civil war, rather an invasion
2) That there was no other solution but military intervention, all other possibilities were exhausted
3) That the intervention you advocate(d) had a serious chance of making the situation better and not just causing more widespread harm
4) That the intervention you advocate(d)was not only jus ad bello but also jus in bello
==========
in order for your war to be just all 4 points must be met, otherwise it is simply criminal aggression (ie murder). Yes, I am saying you advocate murder.
163 Posted on 03/19/2001 14:36:29 PST by vooch
To: AGAviator
Why would anyone get paid to advocate views already held by a majority, to a small minority? You're not that important, believe me. The people with your views need to make your case, and instead of presenting facts and reasoned arguments you rant and tell each other how right you are without ever affecting anything in the real world.
Where is pompous pre Kosovo NATO--Gone never to be seen again. A Norwegian politician has just gone public and said that he regretted the support he gave to the bombing campaign. That for a politician is a serious step.
Where are the violin backed media complaining about the human rights of the Macedonians- Nowhere to be seen .
Why isn't NATO threatning these Kosovo terrorists with cluster bombs to be dropped by 'murderous arseholes' from 15,000 feet It was no problem for the monkey media to advocate NATO to do that to the Serbs.
Haven't you noticed how the European's are pulling away from the US power base and everybody knows about it. When Europeans sit back and listen to Strauss's Blue Danube, they think less of the ballrooms of Vienna and more of the bombed bridges of Belgrade
You can call it the Kosovo effect if you like.
FYI the 'majority' are basically told what to think, especially on foreign affairs. But this time they know they were fooled (You should get the tape of 1984 and listen to it 5 times and you will realise what went on.)
What was it that Abe Lincoln said about fooling the people...
164 Posted on 03/19/2001 14:44:55 PST by SANDNES
To: wonders
Good afternoon!
I get such a kick out of poor old Al Gore's Aviator!!
He is under the impression that I am young and poor....with that "you will never make it the real world" comment.
I have already made it the world...I do not have to work...I can travel the world when I want...I can buy what I want...HAVE been very blessed with the funds to do all this!! Plus do all the Charity work I chose to do. I can Make as many donations to causes I feel need help, AS I WANT TO.
My goodness, poor a. g. must think EVERYBODY is like him!
You know, I just wonder how much money poor a.g. has spent on Bosnian muslim refugees' children...how many did he take to the dental surgeon... AT HIS OWN EXPENSE? How many Bosnian Muslims did he invite to a Thankgiving Banquet and how much did it COST HIM??? How many Bosnian Muslims and Kurds did he buy household goods for?? How about Cambodians??? Sudanese?? Ooops, they were NOT Muslims.
The point is this, just to state the facts....I have worked with all sorts of refugees...of all the ones I have worked with...the Serbs and the Cambodians are my favorites.I like their work ethic and friendliness.
But, I must say...kids are kids and I help as many as I can...HERE and in Serbia....and in Romania...and in Russia...and in Ukraine.
If God blesses you with the funds to do this....IT IS MY BELIEF, that that is what you do.
Wonders, I am sorry to have to break it to a.g., but my husband and I have MADE IT or INHERITED IT and we are GIVING IT AWAY TO OTHER PEOPLE'S KIDS AS FAST AS WE CAN.
Guess that is not good enough for a.g.a.....klintoon followers are not known for their KINDNESS or Generosity...just their deafness to klintoon's lies.
165 Posted on 03/19/2001 14:45:43 PST by crazykatz
To: vooch
pluz.......you are expecting us to believe that 1,000 planes flying overheard dropping cluster bombs willy nilly is NOT the cause of a refugee crisis....really now.
1998 - no NATO air strikes, yet: Nearly 270 thousand people have been displaced by the conflict which left hundreds of people dead and more than one hundred villages destroyed. Up to 50 thousand people are camping out in the open, too fearful to go back to their homes. source
No NATO aircraft were required - the only thing needed then, as in 1999, as in anywhere else ethnic cleansing in the Balkans has occurred, was a paramilitary force bent on expelling the population backed by a military which looked on approvingly.
From the thread and report you reference:
29. The NATO air strikes that began on 24 March 1999 were intended to end Serb violence in Kosovo and make the Yugoslav authorities accept the terms of the Rambouillet peace plan. The expectation was that this would be quickly achieved. Instead, the NATO strikes were accompanied by escalating violence on the ground and a large refugee outflow that included organized expulsions. The sequence of violence and displacement underlined the importance of the Western powers in the events that produced the refugee emergency, and made the same states take a direct interest in the humanitarian operation. At the same time, the allied campaign against Yugoslavia was premised on co-operation from Albania and FYR Macedonia, the two countries that also received most of the refugees. Humanitarian and strategic concerns thereby became further intertwined.
35. The relationship between the NATO air strikes and the mass displacement of Kosovo Albanians remains disputed.
36. Critics of the NATO action claimed that the air strikes indirectly caused the humanitarian disaster that followed, since they triggered more intensive Serb military activities on the ground and exacerbated the violence. This led to growing unease among populations of NATO member states over the appropriateness of the military strategy pursued. NATO officials, in turn, presented the bombing campaign as justified to stop the violence perpetrated against the Kosovo Albanians. It was also suggested that the Serb offensive against the civilians was planned, and that the exodus was a fully organized expulsion. If so, this would strengthen the rationale for air strikes.7 But it also raised other questions. In particular, if the intelligence services of NATO members had prior knowledge of a Serb offensive that might be expected to include civilian targets as well, why were humanitarian agencies not informed? Instead, they were taken by surprise and poorly prepared for the exodus.
Your reading comprehension skills, as usual, are suspect. The UNHCR isn't laying the expulsions at NATO's doorstep, but saying that the expulsions were a trigger for the Serb forces to escalate their ethnic cleansing campaign, and that the West was caught unprepared for the results.
Also from the UNHCR (11 Mar, 1999):
More than 60,000 people have been displaced since late December, including almost 30,000 people since the peace talks held last month in Rambouillet, France. Some have managed to return, but more than 230,000 people remain displaced within Kosovo. In all, the year-long conflict has driven 400,000 people out of their homes. Many have had to flee more than once.
When the bombing started, Serb security forces forced the refugees across the borders, whereas previously they had been IDPs.
168 Posted on 03/19/2001 18:43:07 PST by Hoplite
To: crazykatz
Hi katz,
Thanks for the nice post about your wonderful refugee work. As you know, I've worked with refugees, too. Mainly Cambodian, here. Keeping up with some of the Serbs from Krajina now in Canada. The Cambodians are all doing great, with pretty good jobs, bought little houses. And I've got a new Cambodian "nephew"! I've helped sometimes when my funds just barely allowed it, but had to help anyway :)
I guess it's not only how much God blesses you with, but how good a steward you are over whatever you are blessed with (the widow's mite), so I try to do my best. We're sending some stuff this month to a wonderful Dutch-American doctor working mainly in an area of Croatia where there are some ethnic Serbs left. He stayed on after UN and all the big NGOs left. Wish we could send more.
175 Posted on 03/19/2001 20:32:05 PST by wonders
To: Hoplite
You mind working out Slovenia's per capita debt and then comparing it to the USA's?
That figure doesn't really mean anything unless it's compared to GDP per capita.
Slovenia: GDP per capita: $10,900. External debt per capita: $2,542. External debt per capita is 23% of GDP per capita.
USA: GDP per capita: $33,900. External debt per capita: $3,128 External debt per capita is 9% of GDP per capita.
(Source: CIA World Factbook)
176 Posted on 03/19/2001 20:49:37 PST by wonders
To: AGAviator
And if foreigners start coming in to assist one side or the other - like Iranians and Wahhabis in Bosina the '90's, and Russians in Kosovo more recently?
That's a toughie. When NATO went into Bosnia, it got caught between the Serbs and the Albanians, and in the process the Croats ethnically cleansed 250,000 Serbs.
Then, out of further lunacy, NATO demoloshed Serbia's infrastructure and ultimately facilitated the ethnic cleaning of Serbs out of most of Kosovo.
Now the Serbs have not been the most cooperative folks on the planet from out point of view, but what business of ours was it to do what we did to them?
Now the problem is this: If we pull NATO out, then the Serbs will come drive out Albanians. Short of this, what do you suggest?
178 Posted on 03/19/2001 21:38:10 PST by The Cruiser
To: wonders, hoplite
can we pluz keep the Solvenia debt thread on the Slovenia $5.9 billion debt page ?
couple of items which are 'corrupt' the stats in comparing Slovenia debt vs. US.
1) At any percentage Slovenia foreign debt will be by definition a greater burden (meaning risk) than US foreign debt. The depth and breadth of the US economy lessens foreign debt influences vs. the tiny Slovenian economy.
2) It would be better to compare Slovenian foreign debt/GDP with say small prosperous places such as Denemark, Belgium, and Singapore......as well as 'peers' such as Malta, Ireland, & perhaps Portugal.
3) Finally, one should note that regardless of the level of foreign debt, the crucial fact is that Slovenia's is still rising (I would say significantly). 10 years after succession, if Slovenia was a true success story one would expect foriegn debt to be either stable or decreasing. The fact that it is increasing is a troubling sign.
And in a side note to Hoplite. I think we have beaten the issues of the political side of the last period to exhaustion. ( ie; who caused the refugees to flee the bombing ?) And it seems neither of us are contributing to the other one's understanding of the situation. Therefore, I will try to focues on economic topics which apparently we can discuss with some measure of mutual illumination.
I invite everyone who wishes to discuss economic issues to the $5.9 Slovenian debt page. (I'll find & post the link)
180 Posted on 03/20/2001 06:18:18 PST by vooch
To: SANDNES
Serbia's Secret War
Propaganda and the Deceit of History
by Philip J. Cohen
foreword by David Riesman
"Philip Cohen’s book provides a useful counter to current myths about Serbia’s history during the Second World War. By detailing the reality of past Serbian national socialism and anti-Semitism he allows us to understand more clearly the mentality which has been at work in Belgrade, and so the roots of today’s Yugoslavian tragedy."
—Lady Margaret Thatcher,
House of Lords, former British prime minister
In this penetrating study, Philip J. Cohen argues that Serbian leaders have been busily rewriting their nation’s history since the end of World War II. Serbia’s political and church leaders have, according to Cohen, depicted themselves as victims of Nazism in need of a safe homeland—their rationale behind the war to establish "Greater Serbia" in the ruins of post-communist Yugoslavia.
Cohen argues that the existence of Serbian "victim" propaganda is reflected in the world media as well as in popular commentary and scholarly analysis. More astonishing is that this campaign to reverse the wartime role of Serbia from Nazi collaborators to victims has been widely successful, particularly in Israel.
In attempting not only to establish but also explain the Serbian record during the Nazi occupation, Cohen describes the situation in nineteenth-century Serbia, showing the foundation of a political and social system that was partly built on ethnic prejudices and the glorification of violence.
Serbia’s Secret War draws heavily on documents that have been previously unavailable to the West. Some of the written record has been translated and is published here, in full, for the first time.
PHILIP J. COHEN, a medical doctor, has done extensive research on history and politics in the Balkans. He is widely published in scholarly journals and books.
OK, how about this?
190 Posted on 03/20/2001 15:03:45 PST by AGAviator
To: vooch
Who agreed to your criteria? Without going into detail, there’s no war the US has been in that fully fits your “just war” criteria. The Revolutionary War, the Civil War, even WW II in which the US was imposing economic sanctions against Japan and giving England arms to use against Germany pre-1941. I’ve only seen you object to this particular conflict.
You exclude civil wars. Without French assistance in the US Revolutionary War, the British may well have won. Is government by the consent of the governed, or isn’t it? The consensus of the people who live in a region makes a government legitimate. Although Kosovar Albanians were part of Serbia, they were the distinct majority, and the region’s autonomy had been unilaterally revoked by a dictator. Talking about illegal wars, was that legal? Is it legal to use an army against one’s own citizens?
You may say that whatever a dictator does, even acting illegally, is an internal matter. Not really, because NATO was already invited to the region. The NATO presence was supposed to keep the peace, preserve the status quo, and prevent jihadists from coming in and destabilizing the region. If it was really an internal matter then Milosevic should never have gone to Dayton and asked NATO to help protect it.
Even so, the war was to get the Serbian army and paramilitaries out of Kosovo, and for no other purpose. The minute the army started leaving, the hostilities ceased. There was no demand that Kosovo be a separate state. The Serb Army/paramilitary had previously started two other major wars in the region, and NATO didn’t want another Serbian-initiated war breaking out, with its accompanying Srebrenice-style murders of civilians, in the region where it was supposed to be keeping things peaceful.
Were attacks against Serbia keeping things peaceful? Of course not. That’s the problem with the “peacekeeping” concept. Sometimes “peacekeepers” get into fights. You can only have peacekeeping when everybody wants to keep peace.
But were all other possibilities exhausted? Yes, I’d say so. Once you get a reported 80,000 man army with a history of covering for civilian murderers, besides war crimes itself, it’s not time to negotiate.
Did the intervention make the situation better? Depends on who’s speaking. For one to deny, one would have to trust that the Serbians hadn’t engaged in any “ethnic cleansing” for the last 8 years, and they were going to just go after the guerillas and not anyone else. Personally, I doubt it. I think we would have seen another Chechnya.
Jus ad bello and jus in bello? There was no intentional policy to attack civilians. There were several incidents in the war where Serbian civilians were killed. And if nothing had been done, there would have been more than several incidents where Albanian civilians were killed.
Like Here
Or Here
There are few good wars. Clinton didn’t start the wars in the Balkans, Milosevic did. Bush can either move forward and try to salvage a peace, or he can get out and let things go back to the early ‘90’s. It's not our business? Then we need to get out of NATO.
193 Posted on 03/20/2001 17:49:24 PST by AGAviator
To: vooch
Ref your #180:
On my honour, I will try to do my duty to God and my country, and to help other people at all times, especially those at home -- Girl Scout Oath way back then when I was one.
Seriously, I didn't know about the other thread, have been properly chastised, and look forward to learning from you and our esteemed FR colleagues. I'll post on that thread tomorrow (overcoming my feelings of unworthiness, as I've no pretentions as to my being an ecomoist, amateur or otherwise), but meanwhile can't help but remark that YOURemarks have great merit, and I do appreciate them.
197 Posted on 03/20/2001 19:47:38 PST by wonders
To: wonders
I think we have a true ANTI-SEMITE and ANTI-SLAV in al gore's aviator!! A REAL LIVE BIGOT!!
I suspected it all along...in fact, the fellow in question is not only a klintoon fan..he is most likely a guy who ...hates Jews, Romas, Slavs and the Orthodox Christians.
Hey, speaking of croatian fascists...here is a list of A FEW OF THE MANY the Croatian/Bosnian nazi concentration camps in which some aproximate 1,000,000 Serbs, Romas and Jews met their deaths.
SAJNISTE, JASENOVIC, BANJICA and STARA GRADISKA.
I remember that more Serbs died at the hands of nazis in NORWAY, than the people of NORWAY...Serbs were slave labor for the nazis in Norway and in camps at Buchenwahl, Birkenau and Aushwitz.
The Patriarch of the Serbian Orthodox Church was in Buchenwal along with hundreds of priests, nuns and monks.
Yes, it is easy to see that the SERBS were "in love with the nazis" ....yep...slavery and death at the hands of the nazi is volunteerism to the MAX! NOT!!!
The Roman Catholic Church shielded and helped to escape to Argentina the Croatian Nazi/utaschis Ante Pavelic and Father Dragonovich. Of course....that is "just fine"...after all those two guys were just trying to CLEAN up Croatia and rid it of all those SUB-HUMAN SERBS, ROMAS and JEWS!!JUST TO CREATE A CROATIA FOR THE PURE ARYAN CROATS!!!Gee...I guess A.G. thinks of them as HIS PERSONAL HEROES!!
How about a little seig hick-up for Al gore's aviator!!
198 Posted on 03/20/2001 19:51:58 PST by crazykatz
To: nikola
If there's one country that deserves credit for standing up to Hitler from Day One, it's England, not any Slavic country.
I'm kind of getting bored with the constant attempts by Slavophiles to rewrite history and make Germans the bad guys and look the other way about 20th Century Russia. Communism has killed many times more people, including Slavs, than Nazis ever did. But the people communism has killed are in far-off places where no one cares about.
If you'll note Milosevic had both Russia, which has inherited the Soviet system intact, and China, which is a full-fledged communist regime, on his side, as well as Saddam Hussein. Not the best company. I'll stick with England and modern Germany, thanks.
Despite the screeching of people whose views will never be taken seriously by any policy-makers, NATO is attempting to be a force for peace in the Balkans. And what is going on in Macedonia these days, some days after this thread started? Even the democratically-elected Serbian president is not calling for NATO to leave. The only ones having the conniption fits are the Net warriors on this site.
203 Posted on 03/20/2001 22:21:34 PST by AGAviator
To: AGAviator
weak, rests entirely on assumption that Belgrade was a monsterous state. Good perhaps for blue hairs watchinh CNN but not for serious discourse.
1) Civil War vs. Aggression is very, very different. Intervention in a Civil War (on one side or another)carries a far higher standard of proof.
1a)Fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the population in KosMet were anti-KLA. More locals in KosMet fought for the Yugoslav side than did for the KLA.
1b) The KLA never had any shred of legitimacy as anything other than a bandit organization. Therefore it is difficult for you to even make the case that this was a Civil War.
2) You simply dismiss the issue of exhausting non-violent forms of mediation.
2a) Prior to the cluster bombing of the population you support......the observer mission reported a tense but essentially moderate situation with the number of civilain murders decreasing.
2b) Jamie Rubin in his book makes it very clear that the War Party was not trying to find a peaceful soultion in the negotiations, merely a pretext for war
3) You also don't really address the issue if the situation is better than befor the War Party got involved
3a) I submit that under Kfor/KLA rule, more civilains are getting murdered than when the area was ruled by Belgrade. About 2-3 times more civilians are getting murdered than before
3b) The number of IDP's and Refugees is significantly higher than in Feb 1999. In Feb 1999, there were some 150,000 IDPs', ow there are some 400,000 IDP's & Refugees.
3c) White Slavery, Drug Smuggling, & Crime is rampent in the Kfor occupation zone. A stark contrast with before.
4) Jus in Bello......accidents ? Pluz....
207 Posted on 03/21/2001 08:40:20 PST by vooch
To: AGAviator
Hitler " The beginning of the Barbarossa operation ," he told his generals , " will be postponed for four weeks."
This postponment of the attack on Russia in order that the Nazi warlord might vent his personal spite against a small Balkan country which had dared to defy him was probably the most catastrophic single decision in Hitler's career.
...................
For ever afterwards they and their fellow generals would blame that hasty,ill advised decision of a vain infuriated man for all the disasters that ensued.
Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William Shirer page 824 and 825
Maybe the Chechen edition of this book has these pages omitted?
208 Posted on 03/21/2001 08:48:57 PST by SANDNES
To: AGAviator
So the Allied convoys risked the U-Boats in the frozen waters of the North and Arctic Seas to deliver.....Spam?
Your sense of humor is starting to grow on me.
Are you that uninformed? Use your favorite search engine.
One of the funny reference
http://www.197thguard.com/the_frontovik.html:
Rations would often include shchi, a type of cabbage soup, and kasha, which is boiled buckwheat. These are standard Russian peasant staples, and there is an old Russian saying that goes, "Shchi ee kasha, pisha nasha" which means "Shchi and kasha, that's our fare". Typical additions would be tea or coffee, salt, bread, macaroni, salted fish, or canned meat. American Spam was very co nmon, and it has been calculated that there was enough food sent lend-lease to Russia to feed a 12,000,000 man army l/2 pound of food per day for the war. The lend-lease food wouldn't be common until 1943, but many lend-lease staples would be common for the rest of the war. Spam was invariably referred to as "second front", and egg powder used to be called "Roosevelt's eggs" (yaitsa being the Russian word both for "eggs" and ``testicles',). (6) Typical lend-lease foods that would be OK for reenacting would be flour, dried peas and beans, sugar, canned meats, particularly Spam or a facsimile of Tushonka (a kind of stewed pork product in gelatin) butter, vegetable shortening, oil and margarine, canned or dried milk, dried eggs, grits, and coffee.(7) Although coffee was consumed when available, tea was the norm and the traditional drink, and samovars (devices used in making tea that look like coffee urns) can often be seen in the field. Bread and sausage would be a common ration issued for troops during operations, as they could be expected to last a few days without spoiling. Some of the troops reducing the Stalingrad pocket un-intentionally killed some of their own liberated POW's by feeding the emaciated men bread and sausage from their own rations when the liberated men's systems couldn't handle it. (8)
224 Posted on 03/21/2001 21:38:11 PST by madrussian
To: madrussian
Detailed 26-Page Lend-Lease List Here
Lend Lease to Russia
From Major Jordan' Diaries
NY: Harcourt, Brace, 1952
Chapter Nine
MUNITIONS $4,651,582,000 NON-MUNITIONS $4,826,084,000 Total $9,477,666,000
Note: the figure of $11 billion includes services as well as goods furnished.
The U.S. Government has never released detailed reports on what was sent in Lend-Lease, so Major Jordan's data, gleaned from the Russians' own manifests, is the only public record...
It should be kept in mind that Russia was an ally of Japan throughout the war, that it had been the ally of Hitler during the first two years of the war, that its division of Poland with Germany started the war, that it was an agressive imperialist force that attacked Finland and subverted the Baltic states as well, that it had announced that it intended to take over the world and that most of the aid sent in 1945 was sent after Stalin's February speech in which he said he would continue the war but against the United States.
Franklin Roosevelt's alter ego and Lend-Lease administrator Harry L. Hopkins, a KGB agent, declared to Russia before a crowd at Madison Square Garden on June 22, 1942, that: "We are determined that nothing shall stop us from sharing with you all that we have." He was not joking.
226 Posted on 03/21/2001 22:51:54 PST by AGAviator
To: madrussian
Spam? Yummy.
MUNITIONS............$4,651,582,000 (SPAM WHEN DROPPED FROM 10,000 FEET)
NON-MUNITIONS..$4,826,084,000 (SPAM WHEN EATEN)
TOTAL.....................$9,477,666,000
Revisionist history? Ewww!
This list is taken from Russian manifests. It has far more than spam on its 26 pages, including materials useful for constructing atomic weapons.
Was communism inherently better able to mass-produce than the West? Were there active communist sympathizers in the West? Was Soviet industry under Stalin able to replicate the Manhattan Project - under far more severe severe conditions than the US - without help from Western sympathizers?
And did or didn't the West assist in imposing communism on the Eastern European people by providing massive material assistance, funding, and credits?
228 Posted on 03/22/2001 11:13:11 PST by AGAviator
To: Hoplite
Actually, we've already had that discussion
Yes you are quite right, but I noticed you didn't actually come out with any sources you trusted. Very wise!
After studying the American,UK and Norwegian press together with the Internet over the past two years, I have have come to the inevitable conclusion that the main purpose of the press is to misinform it's subject audience. They don't really care what they tell you as long as they can think most people will soak it up. There ar a few exceptions (e.g.Fisk in the Independent is good- they had to give him the prize for best journalist as after the rubbish the other ones said about Kosovo ,I don't think there were any left who could have accepted it without a red face).
By the way the Norwegian press are about the most naieve I have ever read. I get the impression that they recruited directly out of Kindergarden.
P.S. I hope your Alzheimers is getting better. I will have a peruse at your postings when I get time and give you my medical opinion.
229 Posted on 03/22/2001 12:39:48 PST by SANDNES
To: madrussian
You don't want to admit that you were wrong when you dismissed the humangous amount of spam and other foodstuffs sent to the Soviet Union
Not at all. I am simply pointing out there was much, much more than foodstuffs sent and it is disingenuous to dismiss the Allied contribution to Russia as only being food.
We sent everything, war material, foodstuffs, and technological know-how. And it is certain that highly-placed people in the process gave Russia whatever they could to equal or surpass the US.
Again, how did the Soviets replicate the Manhattan project in such a short time? Either their spy and procurements networks really are that proficient, in which case the Cold Warriors were right and even today there is great cause for concern, or Stalinism was a model for industrial development and production efficiency.
I'll go with the former.
231 Posted on 03/22/2001 17:34:15 PST by AGAviator
To: wonders
Using your methodology Ireland has a 14.2% Debt/GDP ratio and Greece has a 28% Debt/GDP ratio, so Slovenia is not alone in being the vacation spot for wealthy foriegners, if that's what the Debt/GDP ratio indicates.
Poor damn Canadians are stuck at 36%... guess we suckered them! Har har!
No, wait, I'm personally carrying a 3,625% Debt/GDP ratio! Argh!
Point being, Debt/GDP ratio is only one indicator of a Country's economic health, and in Slovenia's case, it isn't damning.
232 Posted on 03/22/2001 20:29:41 PST by Hoplite
To: AGAviator
Not at all. I am simply pointing out there was much, much more than foodstuffs sent and it is disingenuous to dismiss the Allied contribution to Russia as only being food.
You are argueing an imaginary opponent. I have never said that food was the only component of the lend-lease. Only that spam and trucks is what the Soviet soldier would remember the lend-lease for. Re-read the passage above how spam was ironically called "the second front". The hardware, although helpful, was only a small fraction of what the Soviets produced themselves.
We sent everything, war material, foodstuffs, and technological know-how. And it is certain that highly-placed people in the process gave Russia whatever they could to equal or surpass the US.
You went as far as to say that the Soviets' weapons were copies of American weapons, Sturmovik and tanks excluded.
Well, tell me more.
Again, how did the Soviets replicate the Manhattan project in such a short time? Either their spy and procurements networks really are that proficient, in which case the Cold Warriors were right and even today there is great cause for concern, or Stalinism was a model for industrial development and production efficiency.
The Soviets have always had good scientists and excellent research. Spying allowed cut a few years of their own research and experimenting. The Soviets were in space first, remember. The Americans got more German expertise than the Soviets did. This little fact is sufficient to
disprove your ridiculous assertion that the Soviets wouldn't be able to produce anything on their own.
I'll go with the former.
Keep your multiple choice answers to yourself. Russia has always had a great potential and communism only hindered, but didn't totally prevent the people's achievements.
233 Posted on 03/22/2001 21:38:49 PST by madrussian
To: madrussian
You went as far as to say that the Soviets' weapons were copies of American weapons, Sturmovik and tanks excluded.
I did not. I said they copied American "equipment," which includes trucks, and also components which can be recombined in new designs.
Katyusha BM-13s were mounted on Studebaker trucks. You can't very well have a rocket launcher without the truck carrying it, can you? The ZIS (ZIL) plant was re-established with Lend-Lease equipment. The Ford-GAZ Model A chassis had many different adaptations too. At war-end, there's the Tu-4 B-29.
Besides the trucks themselves, a huge part of the war effort, the know-how to manufacture them came from the US, because Russia had practically no automotive industry. US expertise and engineers made Soviet mass production possible.
Getting back to the point, World War II was won just as much by the West as by the Soviets.
234 Posted on 03/23/2001 00:30:44 PST by AGAviator
To: AGAviator
I did not. I said they copied American "equipment," which includes trucks, and also
components which can be recombined in new designs.
Katyusha BM-13s were mounted on Studebaker trucks. You can't very well have a rocket
launcher without the truck carrying it, can you? The ZIS (ZIL) plant was re-established with
Lend-Lease equipment. The Ford-GAZ Model A chassis had many different adaptations too.
At war-end, there's the Tu-4 B-29.
Studebaker was only one of the platforms for Katyushas.
As I said, with so many excellent trucks provided via Lend-Lease, the factories could concentrate on building tanks. The Sherman tank was an absolute disaster.
Tu-4 was built only after the war. Long-range bombing wasn't
practiced a lot on the Eastern front, both Soviets and Germans lacked a good long-range bomber.
Besides the trucks themselves, a huge part of the war effort, the know-how to manufacture
them came from the US, because Russia had practically no automotive industry. US expertise
and engineers made Soviet mass production possible.
Mass production of trucks? Trucks being a major component of Lend-Lease was my starting point.
Getting back to the point, World War II was won just as much by the West as by the Soviets.
Not in the amount of German hardware and manpower being destroyed.
235 Posted on 03/23/2001 12:47:28 PST by madrussian