ENOUGH IGNORANCE!!!! Some Serbian/Kosovo facts (OFF TOPIC)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

The amount of ignorance displayed here about the historical and current reasons for the Kosovo conflict is staggering. MT's post on "The Serbian War...WHY?" compelled me to address his points...but in a manner which I hope sheds some light on BOTH sides of this issue. We are only getting ONE right now: Clinton's side.
No one cared about Clinton's character before all of this, now everyone is skeptical. How amusing. What most Americans know of this conflict has been spoon fed to us by a known-liar. Plus the fact that if Clinton didn't initialize it, NATO would have NEVER entered this conflict.
Both Greece and Macedonia wanted NOTHING to do with entering what their press has reported as a "civil and religious war". Italy not withstanding, is so outraged at the acquittal of that pilot in the cable-car accident, they themselves debated pulling out of this engagement and forbidding U.S. jets from striking Serbia from their bases there. Then you have Russia and China viewing this aggression as a threat to their internal conflicts. The pot is stewed.
Michael Taylor, you are buying the propaganda package of this Administration lock, stock and barrel. A few facts:
MT wrote:>>>It seems to me that NATO, as a whole, is equally responsible for the current situation. We should have taken action quickly a few months ago but the country was preoccupied with other issues. Also, we were pushing for a peaceful end. I don't think nearly enough has been made about the lengths that Russian and the U.S. and NATO pushed for a peaceful end. I think they gave Milo far too many opportunities to NOT accept peace<<<<
First: NATO should NEVER have had any position in that conflict except for the possibility of Serbia or Albania attacking Macedonia or Greece. NATO was formed as a DEFENSIVE ALLIANCE against Soviet aggression. They were never intended as an Offensive Force. Thanks to Clinton and the Brits, that Mission Statement of the Alliance that took 50 years to build has been destroyed by this politicization. NATO will never enjoy the respect it once had. NEVER.
Secondly: You CANNOT FORCE groups that hate each other to make peace through force. You're an idiot if you think so. The hatreds are centuries long and generations deep. How arrogant for Clinton, you and other Americans to think it can be changed. It shows how shallow the American intelligence on geopolitical issues has become. Clinton isn't the Rodney King of the New World Order. Peace through force NEVER works. PEACE through strength is.
A claim: Serbs are the aggressors, commiting genocide against the Ethnic Albanian Muslims. NATO must stop this to prevent the spread of war to other Balkan regions.
FACT: Clinton has done more to spread this conflict than if everyone simply ignored it. The muslims there in Kosovo are not ethnic minorities, and they are not defenseless as the U.S. press has reported. They are the majority population. The KLA is well financed (questionable sources) and armed. They have been engaged in bombings and other terrorist activities this last year.
If the U.S. position was to stop the conflict from spreading, then the U.S. should have done what Reagan did during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 80's. Send arms and money to the side you want to win, and let them duke it out. Simply contain it that way. Sending in our boys will only make a common enemy for the Balkan people. But Clinton said "NO" to arming the Albanians.
It wouldn't take the Chineese Espionage story off the front page.
Clinton has created mantras and slogans such as "genocide" to describe his view of the conflict. This is pure spin and bullshit.
Would you consider 2,000 dead before the start of this current NATO bombing as "genocide?" By the way, that's 1,000 dead on EACH side since LAST YEAR. According to a Swiss relief agency, atrocities were being committed by BOTH SIDES. The difference was some reports that ALBANIAN MUSLIMS were killing their own people and blaming them on the Serbs, using the U.S. press as a conduit to get the U.S. into the conflict so they could achieve independence. Something they knew they could never achieve alone without help. Source: Greek, Swiss and Italian newspapers.
FACT: Up until last week Milo was mostly despised by his own people. ESPECIALLY for his handling of the Kosovo situation. That's all gone now. Even Milo's political enemies have rallied to his side. Good job Bill.
MT wrote:>>>There are many Viet Nam Veteran Senators and Congressman who say we should make sure we win this action. <<<
Oh yeah? Then why is Clinton and NATO constantly stating "NO GROUND FORCES"? You cannot hold territory or remove an army without ground troops. Remember the Gulf War? When did Sadaam get his troops out of Kuwait????
MT wrote: >>>Regarding Rwanda. Isn't the situation in Africa really very different in some very important aspects? It deals with conflicts between tribes that may go back much further than the history of Europe. Also, they use machetes and hide in jungles. It's a much tougher proposition to fight a war in that area and you can't do it with air power. Wouldn't it require a very large ground action in that area? Also, which leaders do you target? What is the goal? If you think that the politics in Kosovo is complicated then how do you view the conflicts in Africa? Also, Clinton suffered the loss of our Peacekeepers there before. He might understand the "no win" situation of Africa very well. Which side do you take in Africa? <<<
MT, EVERY question you posed applies to Kosovo, NOT to Africa alone.
What difference does it make how far back the conflict stems? What difference is there between whether it's a tribe or a religion??? Passions run deep regardless the geography pal. You obviously also have no clue about Balkan terrain. Jungles or mountains? Is one easier to fight in than another??? Again, you CANNOT win a conflict with air-power alone. And yes MT, WHAT IS THE GOAL In KOSOVO???? What will the Force requirements be to achieve that goal? What is the exit strategy? How much time will it take, and how much will it cost in dollars and blood????
The Clinton Administration is silent on those questions, and so is NATO.
WHY did Clinton suffer losses of our forces in Africa?? The same reasons we will lose men in Kosovo. No plan, no strategy, no goal, no exit strategy, poorly equipped troops under UN command. Now we have our guys under NATO command, which so-far has been almost entirely American in scope.
And MT, WHY did Clinton take the side of the Albanians?
This is why Russia and China are outraged. And contrary to U.S. press reports, so is Greece, Italy AND France. It won't be long before they officially pull out of the conflict, making it a sole-U.S. and British policy. Wonder if CNN will report that?
And finally....NATO DID NOT CREATE THE PROBLEM!!!! This is a civil war. Albania helped the NAZI's ethnically "cleanse" many Serbs during NAZI occupation of that region. Serbia sided with the Allies. Now Serbs have an opportunity to do the same, and hold onto "holy ground".
NATO hasn't even escalated the problem...Clinton did. Clinton has been warning Milo since LAST YEAR and did NOTHING!!
At least not until there was a scandal with enough meat to cause Slick some real trouble. No stories on the Chineese Espionage scandal of late has there been?
This conflict, with NATO forces, is nothing short of the pursuit of Clinton's legacy.
I think he will be remembered as the President who signed the Death Warrant of this once great nation.
Shame on you America. Shame on you for your ignorance, and shame on you for standing idly by in the face of iniquity.
It is soon going to come home to roost.
To all our peril.
Y2K will indded be a "Bump-in-the-road" compared to what things will happen TO US when this escalates.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 29, 1999

Answers

"Peace through force NEVER works"
Then we never should have fought in World War II?

-- Winston Churchill (winne@the.uk), March 29, 1999.

You misunderstand.
You cannot force two sides to "Play Nice" and "Get along" by threat of and use of force.
WWII was stopping aggressor nations from imperializing free nations. We went in there to STOP them. Not to FORCE Chekoslovakia and Germany to get along by some stupid peace treaty.
Besides, WWII was not a CIVIL WAR.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 29, 1999.

INVAR,
Interested to know what you think Milo's agenda/objective is.
This crisis has been brewing for a few years -- not one as you imply. Does Sarajevo/Bosnia ring any bells!!! I believe we intervened there and talked them into giving up their weapons in order to obtain some sort of peace. All that has achieved is leaving them totally vulnerable and open to Milo's evil might. Europe and the US have been trying to bring about a peaceful solution. Many Europeans have been crying out for their leaders to do something more. Europeans have been watching this crisis evolve and escalate over a number of years. I think they just might have reached a point where they couldn't ignore what Milo was doing any longer.
Prior to the air strikes he was amassing 30,000+ troops for what?
NOTE: Rwanda is a whole separate situation that likewise the US and Europe has also been trying to deal with. I think what is unfair for Rwanda is that it is not in such a strategic position as Yugoslavia so doesn't get afforded the same degree of attention.
Others have dragged Ireland into the mix as well. Give me a break. Ireland gets plenty of financial and arms support from Irish/American sources. Both the US and GB have been trying to resolve the problem there peacefully as well. Ireland, like Rwanda, is also not in a strategic position with all due respect that it will errupt and cause a wider conflict.
The problem we are dealing with now relates to current times. It relates to Milo and his political agenda. I think it is wrong to just throw your hands up in the air with the philosphy that, "Oh well, this has been going on for hundreds of years so let them get on with it." Whether we like it or not we have grown over the years into a powerful nation and have allies that have to be taken into consideration. That is the world we currently live in. NATO is made up 19 nations as a whole. This action at present is backed by all 19. Despite what you say about Italy -- the fact is that they are endorsing their approval by allowing our forces to use their airfields. Anything else about what you think they or anyone else plan to do is just pure speculation.
The facts are quite simple. Milo is a tyrant. After trying to deal with him peaceably without any success it would seem that NATO decided that enough was enough. The results of which shall now be debated by armchair scholars for years to come.

-- Anon (anon@oblivion.ooo), March 29, 1999.

Why is this country getting involved in a civil war between two factions in a small European country in the first place? What business is it of ours? Absolutely none. If only we would mind our own business we wouldn't be so despised in much of the world. Perhaps y2k force a halt to our endless meddling in the affairs of other countries.

-- cody (cody@y2ksurvive.com), March 29, 1999.

Invar, Hardliner, any Military-experienced posters, can you comment?
NEW BOMB ?? Y2K-LIKE BOMB ??

RUSSIAN MILITARY ACCUSES USA OF TESTING NEW SECRET BOMB IN YUGOSLAVIA!

[ For Educational Purposes Only ]
RUSSIAN MILITARY ACCUSES USA OF TESTING NEW SECRET BOMB IN YUGOSLAVIA!
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX MONDAY, MARCH 29, 1999 23:09:55 UTC XXXXX
RUSSIAN MILITARY ACCUSES USA OF TESTING NEW SECRET BOMB IN YUGOSLAVIA
Russian military officials late on Monday night accused the United States of testing a new secret weapon in Yugoslavia -- a weapon that is somewhere between conventional and nuclear!
"The United States is using Yugoslavia as a test range for its latest secret means of destruction," representatives of the Russian Defense ministry told reporters late Monday night.
The Pentagon refused immediate comment.
Russia claims that a bomb tested in Yugoslavia radically differs from conventional weapons. "It was created in Los Alamos and is aimed to destroy radio electronic equipment," the TASS newswire reported in Tuesday flashes.
The military said that the bomb generates an electric impulse similar to electromagnetic fluctuations caused by a nuclear explosion.
They added that the bombs are being carried by two strategic B-2 bombers of the Stealth technology. Russian military officials provided no other details.
FOOTNOTE: This late night report from Russia's newswire service continues a strange trend that has developed in the past week. By night, the ITAR-TASS wire moves provocative scare stories -- many on Russia's plans for military maneuvers. [On the first night of NATO bombings in Kosovo, TASS shocked with a report that Moscow was considering moving nuclear weapons to southern regions of Russia. Late night reports that Russian ships were on the move also created intrigue.] But during daylight hours, TASS, the official state news agency for Russia, turns more diplomatic, most military talk vanishes. ...
.... [snip]
------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you all make of this?
xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), March 29, 1999.

I just had an image of "armchair scholar," loading his pipe, thinking deeply about NATOs violation of Yugoslavian sovereignty - and being vaporized by a nuclear fireball.
Russia, China and radical Islam are tighter than ever because of this. I think global elites want to "have a bloodbath and get it over with." That is, they see world war with these enemies as inevitable, and want to provoke them and draw them into conflict while we still have the upper hand; to seize the intitiative and control the situation. It's very Reichstag, very Gulf of Tonkin. We are clearly preparing for terrorist attacks (invasion of Monteray, etc., etc.); we're preparing to deal with an attack on U.S. soil, and excuse we'll use to hit back in the open. But we need to have a context for making a decisive end to terrorist nations. We know we can't take the forecast of being whittled away by terrorist actions; we have to have an excuse to fight in the open, and thereby preempt such attacks. We also WANT to have ground troops "stuck" in Yugoslavia, because the immediate goal is to control and patrol the oilfields of the Caspian Sea, and the pipelines. This mess also obscures Chinagate, which involves hundreds of traitors, apparently, not just WJC. Lots of well-connected asses being covered = WWIII.
This is the only way this could make sense to me.
Prepared.

-- Prepared (thinking@nuketarget.com), March 29, 1999.

A&L
sounds like the Russians are claiming that the US is using a non- nuclear weapon that is capable of generating a significant Electro- Magnetic Pulse (i.e. EMP) effect. While such things have been hypothetically possible for a while - there was even a pointer to a technical discussion of them from one of the threads last week - there has never been a verified use of such a weapon in combat.
interesting,
Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), March 29, 1999.

WHaT, OH whAt IS thE WORLd coMIng tO??????? WhEN diETre IS AgrEEinG WItH INVaR??????? aND His WEll saID PosItiON??????
BuT!!!! yOu dId nOT MENtION The faCt ThaT SERbS WERE thE maJOriTy iN kosOVo UNtIL thE PAst 50 yeArs oR SO!!!!!! thEiR numBerS WEre VAStlY REduceD UndER commUNisT RulE!!!!!!!
diETEr'S HaT Is oFF To INVar!!!!!
bUt doN't lEt iT Go tO YouR HeAD aND STarT MorE BaGGa crAP!!!!!

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), March 29, 1999.

Thanks, Arlin. We were wondering because of the similarities in effects -- Y2K, EMPs, terrorism -- radio + phones + electricity + ?? all out. And those solar flares. So when it's dark and cold next January, the blame will be diffused and everybody will be debating the causes, in between hunt & forage sprees. What a future
xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), March 29, 1999.

"Prepared" may be on to something.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), March 29, 1999.

Anon, I'll get to you in a minute....
Leska, in regards to your requested comment about the use of the EMP weapon in Yugoslavia...yes, it exists...and now China has it thanks to the Espionage scandal.
Prepared, You and I are in complete agreement, amen. After the "bloodbath", nations that may have posed problems for the new Union have swept themselves out of the way, and the real implementation may begin.
By the by, the Reichtstag Fires incident analogy was well practiced by the Albanians in Kosovo to draw in NATO.
dIEteR.....I thought I'd never see the day. Next thing you know, the Cubs will win the World Series....
And now to you Anon...
I never suggested this crisis started overnight. It has been going on for generations. The Cold War simply FROZE these conflicts in time, as the greater conflict between the U.S. and Soviet Union kept the conflict on ice.
The break-up of the Balkans due to the grip of Soviet rule collapsing simply re-ignited this conflict. Sarajevo/Bosnia is part of the same generational conflict as Kosovo. It's Serbian Christians vs. Albanian Muslims. Has been, is now, and will be.
Agreed Milo is a despot, but as I articulated, he was not liked by his own countrymen until this NATO bombing started. Now he's a rallying point for all Serbs, thanks to Clinton and NATO.
If poor Europe was so damned concerned, why the hell didn't they attempt to diffuse the situation by either funding or arming the Serbs or Albanians??? No, as usual, they are waiting for US to do something, then they bitch about it when it doesn't go well. Europe has done NOTHING by itself, except fund a single currency. Europe has its own history of conflicts between themselves, they are hardly a single voice of support.
The reason Milo was amassing 30,000 troops according to Swiss news reports was to sweep into Kosovo to drive out the KLA into Albania, and secure Kosovo for Serbia. The KLA is the Muslim Army, not the "ethnic Albanians". Of course all that is now moot. What we don't know, is whether it's the KLA or the Serbs forcing folks from their homes. The KLA has staged massacres for Western cameras in attempts to draw in NATO before. Obviously they succeeded.
In regards to Rwanda, the stated "goal" of this current NATO attack is to stop the ethnic cleansing and "genocide" going on in Kosovo. That is what Clinton says over and over. Nothing about strategic regional interests, or oil, or coal, or bannannas. That is our stated goal, to stop the killing and establish a peace. If that is our stated goal- to stop "genocide", then WHY NOT RWANDA???? That was TRUE genocide, over 500,000 massacred. This is called hypocrisy Anon. It doesn't sit well with most folks. Clinton HAS NEVER explained what our vital interests in Kosovo are. Just to stop the killing, by killing the so- called killers.
The 19 NATO nations that went along with Clinton's directives did so with MUCH arm twisting. Without a clear mission objective, timeline, force strength, duration and exit strategy- they were as skeptical as Republicans were before they too knuckled under Clinton's political prowess.
...And NOT speculation about their reluctant participation Anon, European papers are reporting their Government officials oppose the way NATO is handling the situation. Both Greek and Italian Ministers of Defense objected STRONGLY to the fact the U.N. didn't even have a vote of condemnation before air strikes took place. Europeans have wondered "Why now?" This Kosovo conflict has been going on for over a year. Clinton is the one who stepped up the timetable. After the Massacre in Kosovo in January, THAT's when the ante went up. Little known report from Swiss observers there was that those bodies were put there by the Albanians, they were not shot there. Only European news reported that. Where is the investigative reporting from the U.S.?
A German paper cited a story about a U.S. reporter who was sent to Kosovo who did not speak the Albanian language and had his investigative story verified by an Albanian interpreter. How could the U.S. reporter independantly verify the facts of massacres the German paper wondered? I wonder too.
European papers have been reporting for weeks that the KLA has been actively seeking NATO involvement into its conflict with Serbia, and that its people were involved in drawing up the treaty they wanted Milo to sign. NATO told Milo to sign that treaty that granted Kosovars Autonomy or ELSE. There was NO Negotiations. Milo was told to sign or die. Even if you're a tyrant.....what would YOU do if given that kind of an ultimatum?
So much for diplomacy.
As far as tonights newscasts of thousands upon thousands of refugees streaming into Albania and Macedonia...How come we didn't see that BEFORE the NATO bombings began? When did this so-called Serbian Genocide start exactly? I thought it was going on BEFORE the bombings, which is WHY we had to bomb them! Strange how the refugees are fleeing AFTER the NATO attacks.
Makes one wonder.
I guess it all depends on what the definition of "Genocide" is.
Welcome to the Clintonspeak world of SPIN.......

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 29, 1999.

Y'all are talking about current and recent past situations as if they are or were the will of said countries people. Just as here in the United States the will of the people does not exist ,(at least currently.)Governments have/are become/ing masters of marketing. This poll says........The market today was.......I feel your pain..... We must stop the Genocide........And we really know what about any of the above?
CP

-- CP (Spoonman@prodigy.net), March 30, 1999.

I realize it was a rhetorical question, but here's the U.N. definition or genocide:

U.N.

Article 17
Crime of genocide (commentary)
A crime of genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) killing members of the group;
(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

U.N.
An individual shall be responsible for a crime set out in article 17, 18, 19 or 20 if that individual:
(a) intentionally commits such a crime;
(b) orders the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted;
(c) fails to prevent or repress the commission of such a crime in the circumstances set out in article 6;
(d) knowingly aids, abets or otherwise assists, directly and substantially, in the commission of such a crime, including providing the means for its commission;
(e) directly participates in planning or conspiring to commit such a crime which in fact occurs;
(f) directly and publicly incites another individual to commit such a crime which in fact occurs;
(g) attempts to commit such a crime by taking action commencing the execution of a crime which does not in fact occur because of circumstances independent of his intentions.
Commentary
(1) The principle of individual responsibility for crimes under international law was clearly established at N|rnberg. The N|rnberg Charter provided for the trial and punishment of persons who committed crimes against peace, war crimes or crimes against humanity. 24/ The N|rnberg Tribunal confirmed the direct applicability of international criminal law with respect to the responsibility and punishment of individuals for violations of this law: "It was submitted that international law is concerned with the actions of sovereign States, and provides no punishment for individuals ...

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), March 30, 1999.

-- stifle that long link!
Russia claims that a bomb tested in Yugoslavia radically differs from conventional weapons. "It was created in Los Alamos and is aimed to destroy radio electronic equipment," the TASS newswire reported in Tuesday flashes. The military said that the bomb generates an electric impulse similar to electromagnetic fluctuations caused by a nuclear explosion.
Odd coincidence -- last Thursday a Delta pilot at a happy hour mentioned that NATO was using some new device that stiffed computers on the ground -- nothing further since no one pursued the topic. (No use asking for more here -- that's all she wrote.)
Hmmmm....

-- One of the old bunch (Gawain@camelot~.org), March 30, 1999.

Europe has done nothing other than produce one currency. That's right brush aside Europe as some insignificant blot on the face of the planet. Just like we brush every other nation aside as of no importance to us other than to be exploited for our own materialistic gain.
To say that we are ARROGANT would be an understatement.
Hell, why don't we just rename the planet Earth to America. Better still lets rename our whole solar system and beyond to just one all encompassing word -- AMERICA.

-- Mercy (us@large.com), March 30, 1999.

WHere OH WHErE HaS DIEtER SEEn tHUS????
"Russia claims that a bomb tested in Yugoslavia radically differs from conventional weapons. "It was created in Los Alamos and is aimed to destroy radio electronic equipment," the TASS newswire reported in Tuesday flashes. The military said that the bomb generates an electric impulse similar to electromagnetic fluctuations caused by a nuclear explosion."
iF tHiS IS trUe, DIetER SayS RACHet uP TENsioNS!!!!!!!!!! oH WOrrY NoT IDioT AmerICaNS!!!!!! HisTORY SAys LenIn IS DEaD!!!!!

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), March 30, 1999.

Invar,
You've made an error which I understand. You're reading my QUESTIONS as if they are statements. They are not. In a sense, I'm thinking out loud and looking for answers. Please go back to the thread where you pulled these quotes and read my response instead of answering them here, out of context.
Much of what you've written here has been written about and discussed in other threads. If you'd read any of my comments on other threads you'd understand that I am worried about this situation, that I don't think we should be involved and that we're getting deeper and deeper into the mire. You are making assumptions and misrepresenting what I wrote without justification. I have to wonder why it is that you decided to post a whole new thread to editorialize your position.
Maybe you just needed a reason to post your own take in a whole new thread and make your position more important. However, what you have written here isn't new and it's been discussed already elsewhere. That's ok. We all make mistakes and I am the first to say that I make more than my share.
However... this is a question I would like you to answer.
NOW that NATO is full on into this situation how would YOU end it?
Senator John McCain, a POW in the Hanoi Hilton, said, "We should do what ever it takes to win". What do you think we should do NOW that we are in this situation? My take is that there isn't any easy way out of this and simply stopping this action would destroy NATO. If NATO is destroyed then what will become of Europe?
We should push to win. If we don't, NATO is dead.
As for this being a push for Clinton toward creating a legacy other than Monica, I think you're right. However, I see mistakes being made in a whole lot of countries and by a whole lot of people. You seem to want to put all the blame on Clinton so badly that you are discounting the other players in this drama.
As for your closing, Y2K will indded be a "Bump-in-the-road" compared to what things will happen TO US when this escalates."
I wrote words to that effect last week.
Mike =========================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

seen just about everything but this
Thanks to Kosovo, the U.S. can control eventual Caspian oil pipeline routes between the Black Sea and the Adriatic, and extend the European influence of favored ally Turkey.

-- R. Wright (blaklodg@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

Invar -
I went back to read your post again and had to ask you about this...
"You CANNOT FORCE groups that hate each other to make peace through force. You're an idiot if you think so. The hatreds are centuries long and generations deep. [snip] Peace through force NEVER works. [...]"
Your comment regarding "hate" may well be true it's irrelevant. History shows that peace can be achieved through force as in World War 1 and World War 2 and even the Cold War.
Unfortunately, because we are an immature species, peace through force is the only means we seem to pursue. Your comment that "peace through force NEVER works." is absolutely false. The problem is that the peace through force is never a sustained peace.
Mike ============================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

To quote Rob Morse of the S.F. Examiner: "Never get in a war with a country that celebrates a defeat in 1389 as a national holiday."

-- Spidey (in@jam.com), March 30, 1999.

It is soon going to come home to roost.
"To all our peril.
Y2K will indded be a "Bump-in-the-road" compared to what things will happen TO US when this escalates."
-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 29, 1999
And that is the problem, to put it mildly. I say bring the troops home and protect the Heartland. My opinion is our enemies want our goods, and revenge. They will come. Some are already here.
Mike, "Your comment regarding "hate" may well be true it's irrelevant. History shows that peace can be achieved through force as in World War 1 and World War 2 and even the Cold War."
Only trouble with that statement is the fact that we have not had peace! Wars have continued throughout this century.

-- defender (lockthedoor@america.saveusa), March 30, 1999.

Okay Michael....
How do you define "Winning" for NATO? This is a question NO ONE has answered, because NO ONE KNOWS. This is a politically-driven policy, which will change like the wind depending on the polls.
What to do now that we're over our heads is too late to even contemplate. It's a lose, lose situation. If we bomb for another few weeks and Clinton declares victory, leaving Milo untouched...Milo wins as an even stronger leader than he ever was before NATO bombed- and he will probably commit even greater atrocities in the future.
If we send in ground troops, there WILL be mass casualties of NATO forces (Mainly U.S.), that will create a war here at home, as the polls go South - and Clinton lives and dies by the polls - he might pull our troops out with our tails between our legs to save his so- called legacy.
If troops remain, and we push for the complete decimation of Serbia (because that's what it will take), the conflict will spread as Russia gets involved in this conflict. Then you're talking WWIII.
This was a civil war that needed to be contained, not intruded upon. Support through arms and cash would have been enough to give the Albanians the ability to defend themselves. But Albanians in Kosovo weren't interested in fighting for independence themselves....they WANTED NATO to do it for them.
This is why I editorialized as you put it. I've not read any threads that reported what the European press has reported...namely that Albanian Kosovars have played the U.S. press like a harp to get us into their little war.
And I do blame Clinton expressly because NATO would HAVE NEVER been engaged in this conflict were it not for pressure from this White House to do it. Neither Kosovo or Serbia are NATO members. NATO was only designed to DEFEND NATO members!!! Yugoslavia did not invite or request NATO assistance. Clinton decided by pure political fiat, after bungling this policy for over ten months!
Yes, you let them kill one another...and contain it. Those that wanted freedom so badly should fight for it...not coerce others to do it for them.
As for the humanitarian "disaster". War is hell. War kills and destroys. That is the nature of war. We cannot stop every instance of atrocities being committed around the world.
The definition that Deborah posted above describes China's human rights violations perfectly, doesn't it? How many MILLIONS have suffered there? How many CHRISTIANS have been executed there last year alone Michael? Do you know? Several thousand. More than were killed on BOTH sides of the Kosovo conflict before the NATO bombs fell.
Are we going to use NATO to HALT genocide in China????????
Beijing is wondering about that. Which is why their new ICBMs are targeted at U.S. cities.
NATO has just set a precedent that has other non-NATO countries worried. Will another U.S. president use NATO as his right arm to bolster his own political standings with soccer moms?
But to your original question Michael.
What to do now? Pray.
There's no winning this one now, because we don't even know what "winning" is in this situation.
We're over our heads. To Serbs, we invaded and took sides against them for an INTERNAL conflict. Serbia did not invade Greece or Hungary or another territory. Yugoslavia was dealing with its own problem in its own way. We are the aggressors here to them. Serbs will spend their lives seeking revenge on us for what we're doing with NATO. Mark my words.
And soon Russia....and China....

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

Invar,
You and I are actually very, very close in how we see this thing. It's really strange but I got a "vibe" from this thing immediately and felt it was a horrible situation.
Like most Americans I don't know or understand all the geo-political aspects of this crisis but it isn't difficult to see the harm this situation is causing for all involved.
When this all started I questioned the logic of those involved in making the decisions regarding this and I still have more questions than answers. Your points are well taken, thank you.
Defender... regarding peace after WW1, WW2, and the Cold War, maybe you missed when I wrote this...
"Unfortunately, because we are an immature species, peace through force is the only means we seem to pursue. Your comment that "peace through force NEVER works." is absolutely false. The problem is that the peace through force is never a sustained peace."
I cannot fully comprehend the finer points and details that an Ethnic Albanian or a Serb might feel regarding this conflict. To say this is a complicated situation with a lot of history would be an understatement.
However, I can appreciate and understand the period of relative peace the U.S. and our allies overseas have realized after the end of World War 2 and NATO has had a hand in helping to provide that relative peace.
That being said I think a very confused NATO has backed itself into a corner and we're all in a world of hurt because of it.
Mike ==================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

Invar,
you are pretty much right on with your accessment of the situation over there. I would however like to add a few things if you don't mind...
1. It is not very well known that one of the biggest massacres of Serb forces have actually been "staged" by KLA forces. This was verified by serb pahtologists as well as INDEPENDENT finnish doctors. However this report did not "fit" into clintoons picture. Read details on it here...
2. Losses of Nato forces seem a lot higher than reported. The YU Air Defenses claim they have shot down seven Nato airplanes, three helicopters, three pilotless remote aircraft and more then 30 missles. This does not include shoot downs by ground troops. In reality the number should be somewhere in between.
The dutch minister has confirmed the shoot down of an F15 but later Nato said it was only the F-117. Also Serb TV showed an airplane wreckage that did not look like the F-117. The canopy actually looked like a F-4 phantom which would strengthen claims that they have 4 pow's. Two of them Germans which fly F-4's. Why not show the pow's on TV..? Well serbian tv reported that they were caught by serbian farmers and then turned over. These farmers might have not been to kindly to these guys.
One of the helicopters that have been shot down was a pilot rescue team carrying 12 SAS members. All dead. Can't find the link for that right now... but it has been confirmed
3. If the serbs are killing ALL men between the ages of 17-65 why are there so many of them in the pictures that cnn, Fox, nbc is showing us...? could it be that some of them are staying behind to fight with the KLA...? Why don't we see photographs or satellite pics of these atrocities..? Surely someone can take some hidden pics and then smuggle them out...?
4. Why are we not hearing more about the way the KLA is funded..? How about the drug smuggling etc...?
5. I do not condone any of the sides in this fight. It's a civil war and I have a hard time figuring out who is on the "right" side on this one. However I do think the media is demonizing the serbs in a big way. If you read the foreign press you get a different picture.
6. As has been said, this could be blowing up in our faces... You don't poke a sleeping, injured bear in his den Just my 2 cents...

-- STFrancis (STFrisky@heaven.com), March 30, 1999.

STFrancis,
Thanks for the links. You just backed-up everything I've stated.
Americans NEED to know the TRUTH about what we've gotten ourselves into.
I think Americans forgot that Truth is the first casualty of war. Sad that we have an admitted liar running the show that is telling us to believe him.
Americans need to know WHY we will soon be a smoking hole in the earth.
You might not care now America......but you will......you will.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

Invar,
I hope you are prepared to deal with blast and/or fallout. Because it would be good to have some among the survivors who can explain how it started, and why it happened.
Prepared

-- Prepared (hammering@blastshelter.now), March 30, 1999.

More proof folks that what I've posted here is not only true, but starting to confirm the worst-possible situation we could find ourselves in.
ABC Radio news reported at 2PM EST that Albanian Leadership is telling all Albanian Kosovars to pick out their government and establish it so they can return to Kosovo triumphant after NATO wins their independence!!!
KLA spokesman are demanding U.S. ground forces get into Kosovo to stop Ol' Milo, and drive him out so they can establish their new country.
See folks...we've been played like harps and suckers. This was a civil war we had NO BUSINESS getting into.
Heard another analogy that is more correct to the Kosovar situation in relation to U.S. history. It would be like if after Waco and Ruby Ridge and the Freemen, that Russia said "Enough of this "Ethnic cleansing of White Seperatists!" "Clinton is attacking his own people!" "We must stop this "Genocide of innocent men and women that want their freedom!" And then Russia and China use the old Eastern Block Alliance to send in jets to bomb Fed forces in Texas, Montana and Utah, until Clinton allowed Utah Montana and Texas to seceed from the union and establish independence.
How do you think most Americans would take that? (Though I personally think many Texans and Montanans would love it, the difference is they would want freedom gained by their own hands and not by someone else.)
This is what the situation was in Kosovo.
This is why we're doomed, aside from Y2K.
The Serbs aren't going to forget this. Ever.
Don't forget Bin-Laden promised revenge too.
...And Sadaam....

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

Prepared,
Am a good distance from ANY major U.S. target, so blast damage here would be minimal. Fallout either radioactive or biological on the other hand may pose a problem, depending on the wind patterns.
It wouldn't matter if any of us were left to tell the truth of how this started. I'm sure Clinton will have the populace brainwashed into thinking this happened because of some evil plot by Ken Starr and the republicans long before the blinding white lights reduce major metro areas to miles of glass.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

INVAR,
I have been reading and researching this subject and I believe you are totally correct. Even before I realized what was being portrayed in the media was not the truth, I knew that getting involved in someone else's civil war was a bad idea. Here are (hopefully) a couple of links to the truth of what you are saying.
Kosovo Quagmire http://www.jbs.org/tna/1999/03-15-1999/kosovo.htm
Milosevic Buoyed by Serbian Nationalism www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-03/30/001r-033099-idx.html
If we keep digging for information perhaps it will keep someone else from digging us a grave.

-- Sharon (Sking@drought-ridden.com), March 30, 1999.

Thanks Sharon, but I think we're too little too late.
If we pull out now, NATO and the US lose credibility, and Europe will be up for grabs, as every despot on earth will take advantage of our weakness. It will be viewed as an action strictly political (which it is, but disguised under massive spin right now).
If we stay, we will risk more pilots and eventually have a ground war. This will then put the U.S. and the Russians head-to-head as they would almost certainly enter the conflict then.
Character didn't matter to Americans during the election and impeachment hearings. But it will...it soon will.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), March 30, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ