Post by: Manedwolf on February 17, 2008, 08:43:30 AM
Quote
Serbia pledges long-haul fight against Kosovo state
Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:50am EST
(Releads with Serb prime minister, president)
By Ellie Tzortzi
BELGRADE, Feb 17 (Reuters) - Serbia's prime minister and president pledged resistance to Kosovo's declaration of independence on Sunday, but gave out very different signals on how the move would affect Serbia's ties with the West.
Nationalist Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica, who led a diplomatic battle to retain Kosovo, attacked the United States and European Union for supporting the secession of a province Serbs see as their religious and historic heartland.
In a televised address to the nation minutes after Kosovo formally severed ties after nine years under U.N. control, he accused the United States of being "ready to violate the international order for its own military interests".
"As long as the Serb people exist, Kosovo will be Serbia," Kostunica said.
"The declaration by the false state under the tutelage of the United States and EU is the final act of the policy of force which started with the insane bombing of Serbia and continued with the arrival of NATO troops in Kosovo.".
The United States spearheaded the 1999 NATO air war that expelled Serb forces from the province to stop the mass killing of Albanian civilians in a counter-insurgency crackdown.
Kostunica said mass protests would be called soon, but there was little sign of spontaneous popular rage on what is a highly emotional issue for Serbs.
The streets of the capital Belgrade were quiet after the announcement of the secession, with only up to 150 protesters waving Serbian flags in the town centre on a freezing afternoon.
PRESIDENT RULES OUT VIOLENT RESPONSE
Pro-Western President Boris Tadic, whose party is in a very shaky coalition with Kostunica's, decried Kosovo's move but called for calm.
"Serbia will never recognise the independence of Kosovo," but "will go through this peacefully, with dignity", he said.
"Serbia will not turn to violence," he said in a statement. "Serbia will persist ... and defend its interests and international law, no matter how long it takes."
Russia, Belgrade's strongest ally, has already called for U.N. Security Council talks over independence which it rejects.
Tadic favours separating the issue of Kosovo from Serbia's long-delayed EU membership bid. But Kostunica insists Brussels must give up support of Kosovo if it wants Serbia as a member.
The staunchly nationalist Radicals, Serbia's strongest party, had called for mass protests in advance, but were frustrated by the infighting between Kostunica and Tadic.
The party's general secretary, Aleksandar Vucic, called for national unity "above party lines", and said Serbia counted on Russian help to defend its claim to the "occupied" territory.
"Kosovo will never get a seat at the United Nations as long as Serbia has Russia's support," he said. Serbia would also rely on China, India and others to block Kosovo's entry in international bodies.
The most extreme reaction came from the head of the Serb Orthodox Church in Kosovo, Bishop Artemije, who denounced the Serbian armed forces for doing nothing.
"Serbia should buy state-of-the-art weapons from Russia and other countries and call on Russia to send volunteers and establish a military presence in Serbia," he said.
Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:50am EST
(Releads with Serb prime minister, president)
By Ellie Tzortzi
BELGRADE, Feb 17 (Reuters) - Serbia's prime minister and president pledged resistance to Kosovo's declaration of independence on Sunday, but gave out very different signals on how the move would affect Serbia's ties with the West.
Nationalist Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica, who led a diplomatic battle to retain Kosovo, attacked the United States and European Union for supporting the secession of a province Serbs see as their religious and historic heartland.
In a televised address to the nation minutes after Kosovo formally severed ties after nine years under U.N. control, he accused the United States of being "ready to violate the international order for its own military interests".
"As long as the Serb people exist, Kosovo will be Serbia," Kostunica said.
"The declaration by the false state under the tutelage of the United States and EU is the final act of the policy of force which started with the insane bombing of Serbia and continued with the arrival of NATO troops in Kosovo.".
The United States spearheaded the 1999 NATO air war that expelled Serb forces from the province to stop the mass killing of Albanian civilians in a counter-insurgency crackdown.
Kostunica said mass protests would be called soon, but there was little sign of spontaneous popular rage on what is a highly emotional issue for Serbs.
The streets of the capital Belgrade were quiet after the announcement of the secession, with only up to 150 protesters waving Serbian flags in the town centre on a freezing afternoon.
PRESIDENT RULES OUT VIOLENT RESPONSE
Pro-Western President Boris Tadic, whose party is in a very shaky coalition with Kostunica's, decried Kosovo's move but called for calm.
"Serbia will never recognise the independence of Kosovo," but "will go through this peacefully, with dignity", he said.
"Serbia will not turn to violence," he said in a statement. "Serbia will persist ... and defend its interests and international law, no matter how long it takes."
Russia, Belgrade's strongest ally, has already called for U.N. Security Council talks over independence which it rejects.
Tadic favours separating the issue of Kosovo from Serbia's long-delayed EU membership bid. But Kostunica insists Brussels must give up support of Kosovo if it wants Serbia as a member.
The staunchly nationalist Radicals, Serbia's strongest party, had called for mass protests in advance, but were frustrated by the infighting between Kostunica and Tadic.
The party's general secretary, Aleksandar Vucic, called for national unity "above party lines", and said Serbia counted on Russian help to defend its claim to the "occupied" territory.
"Kosovo will never get a seat at the United Nations as long as Serbia has Russia's support," he said. Serbia would also rely on China, India and others to block Kosovo's entry in international bodies.
The most extreme reaction came from the head of the Serb Orthodox Church in Kosovo, Bishop Artemije, who denounced the Serbian armed forces for doing nothing.
"Serbia should buy state-of-the-art weapons from Russia and other countries and call on Russia to send volunteers and establish a military presence in Serbia," he said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/europeCrisis/idUSL17718644
Post by: longeyes on February 17, 2008, 02:26:55 PM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on February 17, 2008, 02:44:07 PM
Post by: roo_ster on February 17, 2008, 07:20:45 PM
They have no lack of know-how and sure seem to have a taste for it. I doubt the bluehelmets could do much about it, other than soak up lead.
Also, I wonder why they were so easy on the NATO (read: USA) forces the last time 'round. Yeah, a lot of their equipment is old, but it doesn't need to be state of the art where they are fighting to be competitive. It coulda been orders of magnitude bloodier.
Post by: RevDisk on February 17, 2008, 08:10:02 PM
I wonder just how long the Serbs & Croats will tolerate the bluehelmets keeping them from giving the Muslims in the Balkans more payback for past rogerings.
They have no lack of know-how and sure seem to have a taste for it. I doubt the bluehelmets could do much about it, other than soak up lead.
They have no lack of know-how and sure seem to have a taste for it. I doubt the bluehelmets could do much about it, other than soak up lead.
I remember standing just over the border into Serbia with a bunch of Serb officers pointing out nice features on their T72's. One of the Majors, not known for being the most diplomatic, responded with "Nifty! Never seen one of these before that wasn't on fire." Sigh...
Mind you, jfruser, we have American soldiers inside Kosovo. Both at Camp Bondsteel and at NATO HQ in Pristine. If Serbia invades with everything, we'd probably withdraw to Camp Able Sentry in Macedonia, which is right by Petrovich International Airport. Best bar in the area is just down the street past the roadblock, a stone's throw from the Macedonian airbase with a bunch of Hind's. Not that I am familier with the current conplans, I was there a while ago.
FYI, Croats hate Serbs more than Albanians. Bosnia wouldn't mind a lil payback as well.
Second FYI, blue helmets were a distinct minority. And I never saw them in numbers outside of Pristine or Ghiljine. Majority of the forces are NATO, under NATO control.
Methinks your info on the Balkans may not be recent.
But yea, if they rolled over the border when I was there, I guarentee you I'd have done more than just "soak up lead". For some odd reason, I don't think many of my coworkers would have stood by and idly died. It would have been interesting to be fighting next to Germans, Finns, Swedes, Swiss, French, British, Polish, Ukrainians, Irish, and Norwegians. We may or may not have been overrun, but we'd have faught before we 'soaked up lead'.Quote
Also, I wonder why they were so easy on the NATO (read: USA) forces the last time 'round. Yeah, a lot of their equipment is old, but it doesn't need to be state of the art where they are fighting to be competitive. It coulda been orders of magnitude bloodier.
Because they didn't have the numbers, logistics or equipment to do so. Genocide is one thing. A full blown war with no real allies is not generally a good idea for a tiny landlocked nation. Closest ally Serbia has is Russia, and that's solely based of racial solidarity and little else. Russia's willing to sell them goods (and not at insanely cheap rates either) and publically 'stand up' for Serbia strictly in a verbal sense. Russia made it quite clear that the Russian military will not back up Serbia.
If we wanted to crush Serbia, we'd simply ask all of the surrounding countries to close the roads and airspace. Then Serbia starves and runs out of fuel in short order. We went relatively easy on Serbia, not the other way around. We bombed some power plants and some military bases, and not much else. We didn't drop all of their bridges and clusterbomb all their roads.
Yea, it could have been bloodier, but it wasn't. Serbia knew its options once NATO stepped in. They ain't that stupid.
http://www.revdisk.net/photos/border.jpg
Post by: LAK on February 18, 2008, 12:46:49 AM
I hope perhaps one day, in my lifetime, the nationalism still at the heart of Serbia, strikes another nation or three in europa. Austria is a good possibility, as are Holland and France. Perhaps the swiss will wake up before it's too late.
And run those people out, along with the global socialists and change agents that allowed them in, and take their country back.
----------------------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.org
Post by: RevDisk on February 19, 2008, 01:57:30 PM
Certainly Serbia never stood a chance alone.
I hope perhaps one day, in my lifetime, the nationalism still at the heart of Serbia, strikes another nation or three in europa. Austria is a good possibility, as are Holland and France. Perhaps the swiss will wake up before it's too late.
And run those people out, along with the global socialists and change agents that allowed them in, and take their country back.
I hope perhaps one day, in my lifetime, the nationalism still at the heart of Serbia, strikes another nation or three in europa. Austria is a good possibility, as are Holland and France. Perhaps the swiss will wake up before it's too late.
And run those people out, along with the global socialists and change agents that allowed them in, and take their country back.
Uhm, I'm gathering that you are unaware that League of Communists of Serbia put Miloaević in power. They later changed their name to Socialist Party of Serbia. Or that nationalist movements in Croatia, Macedonia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina caused them to seperate from Yugoslavia? Or that Savezna Republika Jugoslavija promoted Serb ethnic identity over national unity and attempted to overthrow the surrounding independent nations? The Demokratska opozicija Srbije (democratic opposition group) kicked out Miloaević when he tried rigging the elections. Couple years later, Montenegro voted to become an independent nation.
You are aware that the Serbia of a decade ago, whom I assume is the Serbia you are rooting for, was barely socialist cover for the old Communist regime? The new Serbia (formed June 5th 2006) is only 'nationalist' because every other nation in their ever shifting alliance left through votes or blood. Comparing Serbia to the Swiss Confederation is an insult to the Swiss.
Now the next part is gonna sound a bit odd after all my "Serb bashing". I liked the Serbs I met. Most of 'em, anyways. Same thing for the Croats, Bosniaks, Albanians, and Macedonians. But the second bloody thing I learned from the Balkans is that no group is innocent there and each ethnic group in the region are lying scum that will do anything if it damages any other ethnic group. But they're also not as evil as every other group says. Been that way for 600 years too. First bloody rule is don't mess with the Russian mafia that actually run the whole region, they have more firepower than all NATO forces in the entire region.
Post by: LAK on February 19, 2008, 10:22:17 PM
Albania has been China's closest ally in europe, and most of the heroin coming into europe has been coming through Albania for a very long time. The so-called "KLA" was the maoist army of a drug cartel.
Not only was Serbia a major obstacle to a greater muslim Albania and the heroin trade, it also did not want to play ball with the new socialist europa. The fact that global socialist Bill Clinton made it a target based on a pile of manufactured propaganda with the aid of a maoist drug army was enough for me.
Serbia was just another example of a post-WW2 pattern of destroying governments and states that do not want to join the big global socialist club and their controlled trade.
-------------------------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.org
Post by: Manedwolf on February 20, 2008, 10:05:15 AM
Is that a CETME, or do they get HK stuff now?
Hey, look, a Bulgarian AK! I have lots of those magazines!
(Geez, the inappropriate things I notice in a possible war...)
Post by: Manedwolf on February 21, 2008, 11:38:44 AM
That's the US embassy in Belgrade.
Post by: RevDisk on February 21, 2008, 06:05:29 PM
I am well aware of Yugloslavia's history. I travelled through there in '83. Very civilized place - at the time. It was a popular vacation area for english, germans etc because it was clean, interesting and a very economical place.
Albania has been China's closest ally in europe, and most of the heroin coming into europe has been coming through Albania for a very long time. The so-called "KLA" was the maoist army of a drug cartel.
Not only was Serbia a major obstacle to a greater muslim Albania and the heroin trade, it also did not want to play ball with the new socialist europa. The fact that global socialist Bill Clinton made it a target based on a pile of manufactured propaganda with the aid of a maoist drug army was enough for me.
Serbia was just another example of a post-WW2 pattern of destroying governments and states that do not want to join the big global socialist club and their controlled trade.
Albania has been China's closest ally in europe, and most of the heroin coming into europe has been coming through Albania for a very long time. The so-called "KLA" was the maoist army of a drug cartel.
Not only was Serbia a major obstacle to a greater muslim Albania and the heroin trade, it also did not want to play ball with the new socialist europa. The fact that global socialist Bill Clinton made it a target based on a pile of manufactured propaganda with the aid of a maoist drug army was enough for me.
Serbia was just another example of a post-WW2 pattern of destroying governments and states that do not want to join the big global socialist club and their controlled trade.
You are aware that Afghanistan's heroin trade dwarfs Albania's trade by well over a hundred times? Conservatively, Afghanistan had 1,300 km? of poppy fields in 2004. The Balkans have been a trade nexus since well before the Crusades. It's the gateway to Europe. These days, a lot of drugs enter Greece or Albania and are smuggled north. I remember hearing about heroin from Afghanistan, E from Israel, cocaine from Columbia and Bolivia, etc. Not much weed, too bulky I guess. Some was grown in the mountains for local regional use. In the other direction were SUV's stolen from Germany, weapons from Russia, pallets of Euros, and advanced medicine. Electronics went in both directions too. Russians have a major lock on the human smuggling, and it's a death sentence to try to cut into it.
The UCK (Oo Che Kugh, aka the KLA) was involved in smuggling in all kinds of things, not just heroin. Some went to personal coffers, some went to buy arms. About as Maoist as my left arm, but they can pretend to be any ideology ya want if you have enough cash or influence.
Remember what I said about NO group in the region being the good guys? This is what I meant. Serbs wanted Greater Serbia at any cost. It wasn't a desire to prevent some global socialist conspiracy. It was good ol' fashion ethnic solidarity (and genocide) and flat out 'imperialism'. Conquer your neighbors, kill the inhabitants, repopulate it with your own ethnically appropriate people. Serbia is a socialist nation. With some lingering elements of communism, slowly dying but not quite dead.
Serbs are trying to burn down our embassies in the region. Personally, I don't know why US forces aren't opening fire into the crowds with Mk 19's. But that's just me. They are burning sovereign US territory. They are attacking US soil.
Post by: Tecumseh on February 21, 2008, 06:23:48 PM
Post by: LAK on February 21, 2008, 10:28:52 PM
I am aware of what every customs agency in europe knew at the time; and that was that the KLA was a drug army, and most of the heroin going into europe is via Albania. We are not speaking of production - we know where most of the opium is produced.
Most cannabis probably comes up from places like Africa via Spain, and Holland.
Naturally the Serbs want a "greater Serbia." I hope they get it. They were gracious enough to allow many albanians to live in Kosova and elsewhere; it was when the instigated unrest and attacks against Serb police and army that they put their foot down. As any sane gvernment would do.
--------------------------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.org
Post by: CAnnoneer on February 22, 2008, 04:02:13 AM
We REALLY need to get out of this World Policeman mentality, and pretty damn quick before we bankrupt ourselves completely. While there may be regions where interference is necessary for economic and strategic reasons TIED to OUR national interests, we sure seem to stick our noses where they don't belong.
Post by: Manedwolf on February 22, 2008, 04:03:07 AM
I wonder if Herr Bush is going to invade there now that there is an unstable region? You know so that we can ensure democracy spreads. My fathers half of the family is from Split, a little town on the Mediterranean.
BLARRG HATE BUSH HATE BUSH *foam*
I was waiting for one of those to come along.
Post by: Tecumseh on February 22, 2008, 07:30:05 PM
Yeah, call me confused but I really want to understand why it is in our national interests to mess with Serbia and Serbian ambitions. And if somebody brings Sarajevo 1914, I am going to vomit all over the keyboard; there are no great powers now armed to the teeth and poised to strike one another at a moment's notice over a Balkan instability. If the Serbians wipe out the Muslims, why should we care? If anything, it is to our advantage as a western nation to see Europe less muslim and more united culturally and ethnically.
So genocide is ok now? Why wasnt it to our advantage as Western nation to see Europe less Jewish and more unted culturally and ethnically in the 1940s?Thats pretty sick.
Shouldnt we spread democracy to these people like in Iraq? I seem to remember them welcoming us with open arms... oh wait. Anyways now that it is MIssion Accomplished we should move on and liberate others, right?
Post by: RevDisk on February 23, 2008, 05:15:17 AM
I wonder if Herr Bush is going to invade there now that there is an unstable region? You know so that we can ensure democracy spreads. My fathers half of the family is from Split, a little town on the Mediterranean.
BLARRG HATE BUSH HATE BUSH *foam*
I was waiting for one of those to come along.
Yea, but you gotta admit. It's pretty rare to get a "foaming" Bush hater that's also someone who thinks wiping out Muslims is ok. Maybe it's just me, but I got a laugh out of it.
Quote
Naturally the Serbs want a "greater Serbia." I hope they get it. They were gracious enough to allow many albanians to live in Kosova and elsewhere; it was when the instigated unrest and attacks against Serb police and army that they put their foot down. As any sane gvernment would do.
Gracious enough? Eh? Albanians were in the region prior to the Slavic migration in the 8th century. Then the area went through a bunch of invasions. Romans, Byzantine, Bulgarian Empire, Serbian Empire, and then the Ottoman Empire for a long while. During the Russo-Turkish war, the Slavs tried the same thing they did in the 90's. Tried to kick the ethnic Albanians off the land and kill any who resisted. Same in 1912. The Albanians did the same to the Serbs in 1915 and 1942, kick the Serbs off the land and kill any who resisted. Neither side can claim moral superiority.
Greater Serbia, Greater Albania, hell at a bar in Petrovic, I heard "Greater Macedonia." Greeks kinda laughed at the last one, but hey, everyone's got dreams. Ethnic warfare has crippled the region since the 1389 Battle of Kosovo. Longer than that, likely. If the Serbs try to retake Kosova, they probably will. For a short interval. Then they will lose it. Then the cycle continues. It's a problem when you have two ethnic groups who refuse to die and both want the same turf.
Post by: LAK on February 23, 2008, 06:13:34 AM
Quote
Neither side can claim moral superiority.
Right; and it boils down to whose side you're on.
Post by: RevDisk on February 23, 2008, 06:32:40 AM
Quote
Neither side can claim moral superiority.
Right; and it boils down to whose side you're on. The "**** All of You" side. They have a beautiful piece of land, with plenty of natural resources. Hell, tourist trade off the bazillion religious/historical sites could net them hundreds of millions a year. And everyone is just content to play the ethnic solidarity crap and every few decades try to kill everyone else for ethnic or religious 'purity'. The smart ones get the hell out of Dodge.
I gave the same speech to the Serbian Army, UCK soldiers and hell, even the TMK. Weird thing is, most of them acknowledged the truth in it.
It appears you're not drinking the racial purity Kool-aid. So why are you picking a side to support those that are?
Post by: CAnnoneer on February 23, 2008, 07:29:19 AM
So genocide is ok now?
What do you mean by "ok"? There is a big difference between committing genocide and not interfering if it does happen. There are realities in this life and practical imperatives. There are no magical wands to turn the world into a big pink kumbaya where everybody will treat everybody nicely and all sorts of bad stuff does not happen. The world being what it is demands a certain sense of "realpolitik". If the Serbians have it in them to do the dirty work, one that in the long run would be to the advantage of the western civilization, then we should not interfere. There always are consequences to both action and inaction; the guiding principle is what is good for your side in the long run.
Quote
Why wasnt it to our advantage as Western nation to see Europe less Jewish and more unted culturally and ethnically in the 1940s?
Except 1940s german jews = / = modern muslims. When the jews start blowing stuff up and running planes into the Reichstag etc., then come back and make the equivalence argument. Also, if the implied part of your question is that somehow the Western democracies fought WW2 over the Nazi genocide of Jews, then I suggest you reexamine your history books. The only item that comes anywhere close to be of any relevance is the pressure exerted by prominent American jews onto FDR, to which he would respond with efforts to just win the war faster, which was also an expedient for a number of other geopolitical reasons. With small exceptions, Europe itself couldn't care less.
Quote
Thats pretty sick.
Life is hard. Grow up.
Quote
Shouldnt we spread democracy to these people like in Iraq? I seem to remember them welcoming us with open arms... oh wait. Anyways now that it is MIssion Accomplished we should move on and liberate others, right?
Hmmm, it seems like you contradict yourself here. Could it be that after all, you agree with Pres. Bush?
Post by: De Selby on February 23, 2008, 01:08:40 PM
What do you mean by "ok"? There is a big difference between committing genocide and not interfering if it does happen. There are realities in this life and practical imperatives. There are no magical wands to turn the world into a big pink kumbaya where everybody will treat everybody nicely and all sorts of bad stuff does not happen. The world being what it is demands a certain sense of "realpolitik". If the Serbians have it in them to do the dirty work, one that in the long run would be to the advantage of the western civilization, then we should not interfere. There always are consequences to both action and inaction; the guiding principle is what is good for your side in the long run.
Right, I suppose the rest of the world will just not notice that we ignore genocide when it's to our benefit, and then we'll have an easy time negotiating for all the resources and trade we need in the future, right?
The most ironic thing about the "let's get tough and realistic!" crowd in world affairs is that if such attitudes are made public, they actually make pursuing national interests impossibly difficult, because every population you face ends up burning with hatred and resentment at having to do anything nice for you.
If anyone doubts just how realistic the human hatred for those who support genocide is, just try this:
Bring up your support for and indifference to genocide with your co-workers and friends. See how they react and see what kind of professional reputation you have. Then imagine trying to deal with the rest of the planet as an elected leader whose government is regarded as a sort of reincarnation of the Nazi program of exterminating its enemies.
The so called realists are perhaps the mostly wildly unrealistic of the bunch commenting on these subjects.
Post by: roo_ster on February 23, 2008, 04:48:42 PM
What do you mean by "ok"? There is a big difference between committing genocide and not interfering if it does happen. There are realities in this life and practical imperatives. There are no magical wands to turn the world into a big pink kumbaya where everybody will treat everybody nicely and all sorts of bad stuff does not happen. The world being what it is demands a certain sense of "realpolitik". If the Serbians have it in them to do the dirty work, one that in the long run would be to the advantage of the western civilization, then we should not interfere. There always are consequences to both action and inaction; the guiding principle is what is good for your side in the long run.
Right, I suppose the rest of the world will just not notice that we ignore genocide when it's to our benefit, and then we'll have an easy time negotiating for all the resources and trade we need in the future, right?
Bring up your support for and indifference to genocide with your co-workers and friends. See how they react and see what kind of professional reputation you have.
We prevented genocide of Muslims in the Balkans in the 1990s and nobody gave us any credit or really gave a rat's ass. Why would they care if, next time, we sat it out when the knives came out?
Other folks' co-workers are not your co-workers. My colleagues are technically-minded and terribly literal at times and have no problem following logic out to its end point.
Post by: RevDisk on February 23, 2008, 07:50:53 PM
We prevented genocide of Muslims in the Balkans in the 1990s and nobody gave us any credit or really gave a rat's ass. Why would they care if, next time, we sat it out when the knives came out?
Other folks' co-workers are not your co-workers. My colleagues are technically-minded and terribly literal at times and have no problem following logic out to its end point.
Other folks' co-workers are not your co-workers. My colleagues are technically-minded and terribly literal at times and have no problem following logic out to its end point.
Funny. Outside of Serb controlled areas, whenever I saw more than one nation's flag displayed, the US flag was the first one in line. And I noticed a lot of US flags, well, just about everywhere. But yes, in the media, we didn't get much screen time. Mainly because we did pretty well, no major casualties, more or less won over the support of the people, and didn't have any major setbacks. Except for a secret Russian underground facility, but that's a story for another day. So nothing bad to report meant nothing to report.
Course, lot of folks in this thread probably spent more time in the region than I. More recent too, most like. But hey, everyone's entitled to an opinion.
Post by: LAK on February 25, 2008, 04:01:14 AM
It is more a matter of culture and nation states. The Serbs rightfully and wisely want to retain theirs.
The EU is a multicultural mess; and the whole concept of multiculture was a nonstarter from the beginning. Enoch Powell warned people about this in Britain a long time ago and was misbranded a "racist" etc. Those who knew all along are now saying I told you so, and many others have now woken up in places like Holland and France for example.
It is laughable that the Serbs have been getting "warnings" now about how all this will hamper their consideration into the EU - as if joining that abomination would somehow be a good idea.
------------------------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.org
Post by: CAnnoneer on February 25, 2008, 04:57:22 PM
The most ironic thing about the "let's get tough and realistic!" crowd in world affairs is that if such attitudes are made public, they actually make pursuing national interests impossibly difficult,
Why should they be made public? Are they? Have they ever? Here we talk about geopolitical realities the way thinktanks would, not the way mom and pop would over the Xmas table. Mom & pop's agreement or even knowledge are not necessary. That is why we are a republic, not a direct democracy.
Quote
because every population you face ends up burning with hatred and resentment at having to do anything nice for you.
I seriously doubt anyone does anything nice for anybody on the geopolitical scales. To think that we can buy goodwill at the high levels of power by doing something nice at the low levels is likely naive.
Quote
If anyone doubts just how realistic the human hatred for those who support genocide is, just try this:
Bring up your support for and indifference to genocide with your co-workers and friends. See how they react and see what kind of professional reputation you have. Then imagine trying to deal with the rest of the planet as an elected leader whose government is regarded as a sort of reincarnation of the Nazi program of exterminating its enemies.
Bring up your support for and indifference to genocide with your co-workers and friends. See how they react and see what kind of professional reputation you have. Then imagine trying to deal with the rest of the planet as an elected leader whose government is regarded as a sort of reincarnation of the Nazi program of exterminating its enemies.
Your argument has the same problem as above. We do not live in a hyperdemocracy. What co-workers have to say about it is of little practical importance.
Quote
The so called realists are perhaps the mostly wildly unrealistic of the bunch commenting on these subjects.
Realpolitik has worked quite well since the Stone Age. Pink globalist kumbaya has yet to prove itself as a viable method of social organization. I would not bet my life on the latter.
Post by: De Selby on February 25, 2008, 06:58:53 PM
Quote
Here we talk about geopolitical realities the way thinktanks would, not the way mom and pop would over the Xmas table. Mom & pop's agreement or even knowledge are not necessary. That is why we are a republic, not a direct democracy.
Mom and pop infer your intent from your actions. They aren't dumb; if they were, it wouldn't be a republic.
Quote
I seriously doubt anyone does anything nice for anybody on the geopolitical scales. To think that we can buy goodwill at the high levels of power by doing something nice at the low levels is likely naive.
If no one does anything nice for anyone on the geopolitical scales, how can you find it shocking that Arabs are angry at Western countries, which have certainly done much "for" Arabs in the past 100 years?
But anyway, what you can buy with good will at low levels depends on the system you're dealing with. If you deal with countries where popular support is vital to the high levels of power, then doing nice things at low levels matters very much (obviously).
Quote
Realpolitik has worked quite well since the Stone Age. Pink globalist kumbaya has yet to prove itself as a viable method of social organization. I would not bet my life on the latter.
Really? Who did this study on politics since the Stone Age?
Political movements that engage in genocide and brutality as a means of establishing supremacy uniformly fail, and do so in extremely short periods of time compared to those movements that depend on cooperation. I think your problem is that the study of "viable methods of social organizations" that would be necessary for you to have a shred of evidence in support of this claim never actually happened.
But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good polemic in support of genocide. Lord knows all the other dead genocidal movements on the planet never let reason stop them either.
Post by: CAnnoneer on February 25, 2008, 08:20:23 PM
Mom and pop infer your intent from your actions. They aren't dumb; if they were, it wouldn't be a republic.
Do you follow elections lately?
Quote
If no one does anything nice for anyone on the geopolitical scales, how can you find it shocking that Arabs are angry at Western countries, which have certainly done much "for" Arabs in the past 100 years?
We firebombed and destroyed most of the major German and Japanese cities. We nuked the Japanese. Twice. Now we count both nations among our friends. We have not done a 1/100th of that to the Arab world yet, and they still hate our guts. Figuring out what is wrong with that picture is left as a home exercise.
P.S. Does the above mean we have to do to the Arab world what we did to Germany and Japan, before the Arab world becomes a friend??
Quote
But anyway, what you can buy with good will at low levels depends on the system you're dealing with. If you deal with countries where popular support is vital to the high levels of power, then doing nice things at low levels matters very much (obviously).
And since the power structures in the Arab world are inherently despotic, by your own logic we'd be wasting our time trying to be nice to the lower levels, because they simply do not project power upward as is (supposedly) the case with democratic societies.
Quote
Really? Who did this study on politics since the Stone Age?
Political movements that engage in genocide and brutality as a means of establishing supremacy uniformly fail, and do so in extremely short periods of time compared to those movements that depend on cooperation. I think your problem is that the study of "viable methods of social organizations" that would be necessary for you to have a shred of evidence in support of this claim never actually happened.
But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good polemic in support of genocide. Lord knows all the other dead genocidal movements on the planet never let reason stop them either.
Political movements that engage in genocide and brutality as a means of establishing supremacy uniformly fail, and do so in extremely short periods of time compared to those movements that depend on cooperation. I think your problem is that the study of "viable methods of social organizations" that would be necessary for you to have a shred of evidence in support of this claim never actually happened.
But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good polemic in support of genocide. Lord knows all the other dead genocidal movements on the planet never let reason stop them either.
I am a bit tired of proving to you that 2+2=4. When you go into gibberish mode is where I bow out.
Post by: Tecumseh on February 26, 2008, 08:38:51 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on February 26, 2008, 08:40:36 AM
Well bombing Arab countries and taking away their homes to give to fascists is a good place to start. Where was the nation of Israel before the US and Europe bullied them into existence?
Dude, did you just call Israel fascists?
You are going more and more off the deep end every day. What is wrong with you?
Post by: CAnnoneer on February 26, 2008, 01:54:13 PM
Well bombing Arab countries and taking away their homes to give to fascists is a good place to start. Where was the nation of Israel before the US and Europe bullied them into existence?
Hehehe, I have no particular liking for Israel, but calling them fascists is quite ironic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Amin_al-Husayni
Post by: De Selby on February 26, 2008, 04:33:29 PM
Do you follow elections lately?
Yes-it's quite predictable that, of a bunch of candidates whose policies are more or less identical from the pocketbook perspective, they vote for the one most unlike the previous 20 years worth.
Quote
We firebombed and destroyed most of the major German and Japanese cities. We nuked the Japanese. Twice. Now we count both nations among our friends. We have not done a 1/100th of that to the Arab world yet, and they still hate our guts. Figuring out what is wrong with that picture is left as a home exercise.
This is famously faulty reasoning. Not only did we not resort to genocide (and most studies of carpet bombing indicate that it actually increased support for the ruling regimes in both places), we count both nations as friends because we rebuilt both countries to first world standards. An analysis of the friendships today that leaves out the most important feature, the massive development spending on the part of the US in both Japan and Germany, would be foolish.
Do you honestly believe that if we'd just left them as they were at war's end, 1945, they'd be friends???
This is the kind of selective analysis that proponents of genocide use-they ignore what happened to all those systems that relied on it to win their battles (those societies are all gone) and also ignore the hearts and minds element, which is very real, of the "good" wars this century.
Quote
And since the power structures in the Arab world are inherently despotic, by your own logic we'd be wasting our time trying to be nice to the lower levels, because they simply do not project power upward as is (supposedly) the case with democratic societies.
We are certainly wasting our time playing nice with despots. Simply robbing the dictators of support will illustrate how much hold they actually have on their populations, and we can go from there. It's hard to tell what amount of support these people need when you're actively contributing to their despotic rule.
Quote
I am a bit tired of proving to you that 2+2=4. When you go into gibberish mode is where I bow out.
Note that instead of examples or argument, you just said "oh, it's gibberish." It seems odd that you suddenly find "gibberish" after having responded to a whole post with actual points. Perhaps it only becomes gibberish when you have no reply?
Post by: RevDisk on February 26, 2008, 05:50:20 PM
RevDisk,
It is more a matter of culture and nation states. The Serbs rightfully and wisely want to retain theirs.
The EU is a multicultural mess; and the whole concept of multiculture was a nonstarter from the beginning. Enoch Powell warned people about this in Britain a long time ago and was misbranded a "racist" etc. Those who knew all along are now saying I told you so, and many others have now woken up in places like Holland and France for example.
It is laughable that the Serbs have been getting "warnings" now about how all this will hamper their consideration into the EU - as if joining that abomination would somehow be a good idea.
It is more a matter of culture and nation states. The Serbs rightfully and wisely want to retain theirs.
The EU is a multicultural mess; and the whole concept of multiculture was a nonstarter from the beginning. Enoch Powell warned people about this in Britain a long time ago and was misbranded a "racist" etc. Those who knew all along are now saying I told you so, and many others have now woken up in places like Holland and France for example.
It is laughable that the Serbs have been getting "warnings" now about how all this will hamper their consideration into the EU - as if joining that abomination would somehow be a good idea.
No one is forcing the Serbs to abandon their culture. Nation states, different story. As well they should. Non-Serbs don't want to live under Serb rule. Every country that broke from Serbian rule wanted to be independent. What the Serbs do in their own land is their own business. The minute they step foot into other people's turf, they deserve to be shot. Same goes for any ethnic group trying to take from another ethnic group. What would we do if Canada tried annexing New Hampshire and Vermont? Shoot a lot of Canucks, that's what. You're welcome to believe in racial purity and socialist worker's paradise until you're blue in the face. But other folks will take unlikely if you try to spread it with your army.
The last part would be laughable, except for the fact that apparently a large number of Serbs want to join the EU. Democracy does often get in the way of things, doesn't it?
Post by: LAK on February 27, 2008, 02:14:52 AM
Quote
No one is forcing the Serbs to abandon their culture. Nation states, different story. As well they should. Non-Serbs don't want to live under Serb rule. Every country that broke from Serbian rule wanted to be independent. What the Serbs do in their own land is their own business. The minute they step foot into other people's turf, they deserve to be shot.
Not everyone agrees as to what exactly is whose turf. Of course we ourselves had alot of states attempt to "breakaway" as a nation in this country in the 1860s; seems that Serbia has only been doing what everyone else does in this regard.In fact we have alot of folk intruding on our turf here at home as well - should we be shooting them too?
Quote
You're welcome to believe in racial purity and socialist worker's paradise until you're blue in the face. But other folks will take unlikely if you try to spread it with your army.
Post-Tito Yugoslavia was not nearly as bad or as socialist as you imply. Not a scratch on the horrors of today's China, and not nearly as bad other east bloc states at the time. I travelled through there myself and know english and german folk who vacationed in 1970s and 80s yugoslavia regularly. It was well known and favored as a tourist spot for western europeans at the time. Quite the opposite of East Germany, Hungary, Poland etc. Christian Serbia has been the antithesis of communism in yugoslavia.I do not have any hangups about "racial purity" or other buzz phrases. Most nations or geographical regions have dominant races, ethnic groups etc. Contrary to the global socialist villagers and the engineers of multiculture the world is not a smorgasbord where everyone is free to go and live as they please, where they please, and can expect to be made to feel welcome.
If Albanians want to be free and made to feel welcome - they would be smarter to stay in their own country.
Quote
The last part would be laughable, except for the fact that apparently a large number of Serbs want to join the EU. Democracy does often get in the way of things, doesn't it?
A large number of serbs? According to who? The current day EU is about as socialist as it gets - and getting worse."Democracy"? Perhaps the Serbians know of democracy what the founders of our own nation knew of it; how destructive it is. That is why we do not have a democracy in this country - despite the term being frequently used by politicians who know better. I'd be shooting too if outsiders were forcing democracy on us.
------------------------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.org