Printable View
Your thoughts on the matter of Kosovo, their wanting Independence ? We have heard a little here and there nothing really making and headline here in the US.
Should the US and Europe keep their noses out of it?
Which side to show support to, if one want to?
I believe we US needs to stay out of this. Let these 2 faction sort things out, hopefully peacefully . I stand with Serbia and its sovereignty... Personally I believe with break might destabilize the area....Do we truly want more War?
I was with Serbia maintaining sovereignty with complete autonomy for Kosovo Albanians (as the new Serbian govt had proposed). At this point? I am going to have to simply congratulate the Kosovo Albanians on a mission accomplished. It is done. The only remaining hope I have is a partition to prevent the remaining 1/3 of Kosovo Serbs from being ethnically cleansed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacchus88
J
PS: This link may interest you: http://www.savekosovo.org
It's over though. We have to accept whatever consequences may come.
Who needs em? Not a diss there. The right to self-determination is a big thing and, philosophically, I am sympathetic to the aim of people trying to promote governing in a way that suits there own intrests, espcially if the way that it is currently being done doesn't foster that. Being able to get together with like minded people and do your own thing is one of the key principles of liberty.
In practice though, unfortunetly it's not that simple. I'll just come right out and say it, I'm not in favor of racial segregation, even as a means of combating prevailing racist situations. I think that emphazing a racial divide only leads to increasing racial tensions, instead of eliminating them. prime example: Isreal.
the other big issue here is the problem of secession. see the american civil war. The South had a right to self-determination (as do all US states) by enacting it's own laws that are representitive of it's issues. It doesn't have the right to seceed and in effect "take" it's territory away from the country because that territory doesn't belong to the South, it belongs to the collective property of the United States. I see that as being the situation here.
If all the albanians want to move to albania and leave the country, that's one thing, but they don't have the right to say, "We don't like you serbia, so we are going to take this part of the country and defect it from your government." They CAN do that, it's called a revolution, and they can fight for it and take it by force (actaully they couldn't succesful do that if they tried, but the point stands.) But serbia doesn't have the obligation to grant them independance and recognize thier self-rule if they don't want to.
Really this is a whole big political mess that I think most people don't really understand.
What a lot of people don't know is that there are oil pipelines, in particular in Serbia and Kosovo, that play a key role in Russia's econcomic agenda. For that reason Russia is opposed to Kosovo independance and siding with it's ally Serbia.
Not coincidentially the USA supports Kosovo, obviously to spite Russia and because of our own intrests in the region.
"So what happens when a 21st-century entity (E.U.) faces the challenge of a 19th-century power (Russia)? The contours of the conflict are already emerging -- in diplomatic stand-offs over Kosovo, Ukraine, Georgia and Estonia; in conflicts over gas and oil pipelines; in nasty diplomatic exchanges between Russia and Britain; and in a return to Russian military exercises of a kind not seen since the Cold War."
(Bold and parenthesis are mine) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020502879.html
Also another huge factor that has nations divided other this issue (In particular Greece and Spain) is the precident that Kosovo indepedance would set, being that they have a very similiar situation in thier own countires with minority groups that want independance.
I mean this COULD be a good thing for acceptance of (in particular, Indigenous) solidarity movements, many of which I do stand behind such as Ireland, Lakota Nation, Chechnya, East Timor, etc. But on the other hand I can really see it easily going the other way and dropping the ball. 2 cents.
thanks Jackie T. the website, i have been reading up on the issue. I have seen more than one website, that is strongly against this! Another Islamic bomb ticking away. I know saying not all are bad, which I do agree. I have a few Muslim friend, which agree. I would like to see this Sekt rooted out, and dealt with. Which I got off the phone with such person,...see it as a ticking time bomb. War his on the horizon, it might be few years but it is coming.
Morning glory it will go the another way.....
Russia might own interest region, but they have also been long term ally with Serbia.
My Pleasure. I generally don't delve too far into the religious aspect, I find all three abrahamaic religions to be equally good, bad, and just plain silly. We are in for interesting times, however. Independence movements have kept a close eye on these developments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacchus88
JT
I think we need to stay the fuck out of it ...sorry but snortin around in other countries has brought us no good, and we can't even take care of our own country
Couple things you should keep in mind.
Leading party that proclaimed independence has nothing to do with Islam. Neither of them are true worshipers otherwise this would never happened.
It all started with Tito giving Albanians their country (piece of Macedonia, Serbia and Macedonia) after second world war and inviting Albanians to live freely in Yugoslavia where everyone was equal. They had status of what Kurds have right now in Iraq and turkey before that happened.
Before 1999. separatic movements on Kosovo started driving out Serbs from Kosovo and killing Albanians that didn't wanted to fight for them.
This triggered Slobodan Milosevic in 1999. to do one of most harmful moves for Serbia and to send special troops down to Kosovo. That's why NATO bombarded Serbia. It was also first war proclaimed by NATO against one nation.
Things that happened later you all know well but there's some facts you might not know that's going on wright now.
Kosovo is the main place for black market now for selling people, weapons and drugs. It's a criminal country with agenda that's working only for criminals and working against both Albanian and Serbian people on Kosovo. It's now main stop between east and Europa in heroine handle.
I don't have anything about Albanians but here are some factors that worked out for them. In average Serbian family you'll find 2-3 kids per family. In average Albanian family you have 10-15 children per family. There's also a huge gap in education between Serbs and Albanians that made Albanians easy manipulated by UCK. All islam-christianity talk is propaganda given by west world. Believe me that there's less people seeing this as a religious matter in Serbia than in rest of Europe and USA.
Roots of Serbia rest in Kosovo, that was first and original kingdom of Serbs before even Belgrade was in plan. It was moved to Belgrade during ottomans (turks) 500 years ocupation of balkan.
and so on...
This is something I've heard about, but, to be honest, by this time in history, am not moved by overmuch either way.
Was this necessary???
Ultimately, no, but thanks to the Milosevic government and its supporters engaging in first quashing the Kosovar Albanian autonomy movement(that's right, autonomy, not independence)back in 1988-89, then imposing what became a de facto form of apartheid on the region, with Serbs occupying every possible post in the various government bureaucracies, universities and so on, and the Albanians setting up a parallel system in return.
For nine years, Ibrahim Rugova, who led that movement, and his people waged a non-violent struggle against the Milosevic government's policies and actions in Kosovo, only to be mostly ignored by the world.
In '97, some of the more impatient members of that movement broke away and formed the Kosovo Liberation Army, or UCK in its Albanian acronym, and began a nasty little guerrilla war with the Serb and Montenegrin security forces in the province.
From there, the situation escalated, until the Kosovo War, or maybe the Kosovo Campaign might be a better term, since there was no formal declaration of war between Serbia and Montenegro and the various NATO Alliance countries, in '99.
Since then, Kosovo has essentially, until the declaration of independence by the Kosovar Albanian government a couple of weeks ago, been in a legal and political no-man's land, with the Kosovar Albanians wanting immediate and full independence, and the Serbian-Roma and other ethnic groups in the region wanting to remain a part of Serbia, and both sides wanting as little as possible to do with each other as they can absolutely get away with.
Milosevic and company had hoped, in Kosovo, the Kraijina region of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, to create a kind of Greater Serbia, and through their policies, propaganda and actions, succeeded for a time, only to be repulsed and fail in the end.
Franjo Tudjman in Croatia, Milan Kucan in Slovenia, and Alija Izetbegovic in Bosnia-Herzegovina also used similar tactics and means in their respective countries to get into power and to gain their countries' independence, and certainly Tudjman had at least some of the same kind of delusional ideas of Greater Croatia as his Serbian counter-parts did about a Greater Serbia.
However, Kucan aside here, Tudjman's and Izetbegovic's respective dreams for their countries, like Milosevic's for Serbia, ended up being a lot sorrier and shabbier than they'd hoped.
In the end, it is the so-called ordinary people of the former Yugoslavia for whom I feel sorry, regardless of their nationality, because, for many of them, the death of Yugoslavia and its replacement by its successor states, of which Kosovo is only the latest, meant ruined lives, careers, marriages, friendships and other relationships, impoverishment, war and all the planned madness that goes with it, imprisonment, torture, expulsion, **** and death at the hands of former friends and neighbours.
While Slovenia and Croatia have gone on to have a fair measure of economic and political stability, the other portions of the former Yugoslavia are sadder, poorer, angrier places than they were prior to 1988-92, and probably will be for quite some time to come.
Milosevic, Tudjman and their associates and allies sowed the wind, and reaped the whirlwind, and, in the end, left everyone else to clean up the mess that resulted.
That mess will be a long time cleaning up, if it ever is.
Kosovo and Metohija was always autonomic region of Serbia as well as Vojvodina with they own governing structures.
Pristina as the capitol in KaM and Novi Sad as the capitol in Vojvodina. And they both work(ed) under leadrship of Belgrade.
Formal declaration of war between Serbia and Montenegro? I didn't get this? As I remember NATO started bombings on not only Serbian military forces on Kosovo but on strategic targets as TV stations, schools, bridges, railroads, mines, powerstations and powerlines and so on across the whole Serbia damaging economy and putting it back for 10 years.
At least it felt like war. BTW do both sides need to acknowledge it as a war to be widely accepted as one? And, is war a war when ground forces collide or just when one side attacks by bombing from air and with cruiser missiles?
True. What's done is done, however. I was opposed to the "police action" against Serbia in '99. We'll see what happens. For me, it's over. I can only watch with a bit of sadness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pull~My~Hair
J
Points taken. Yes, it was a war. Goodness knows what will happen now.Quote:
Originally Posted by OliX
J
Nope, not formal declaration of war between Serbia and Montenegro, but no formal declaration of war between Serbia and Montenegro AND the various NATO countries that participated in the bombing campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by OliX
Serbia and Montenegro were still united at that time under the same government against the NATO countries.
As for a formal declaration of war, well, I'm rather old-fashioned on that point, considering that the US government hasn't, since we went marching off to the Korean War in June-July 1950, bothered consulting Congress and issuing a formal declaration of war on another state since then.
It's more of a legal formality than anything else, but there are those people who will state that the NATO bombing campaigns in Kosovo and Serbia in 1999 weren't technically a war since neither the American government nor any other NATO member government that took part in the bombing ever bothered issuing a formal declaration of war against Serbia and Montenegro.
If Serbia and Montenegro's government formally declared war on the US and its NATO allies at the time of the bombings, I would not know of any such declaration that it made, either.
As for the bombings feeling, looking, sounding and being like war, I agree with you there, as, once one strips away all the legal, political and military rhetoric used to both define and to hide the raw physical realities of it, the bombing campaign resulted in dead bodies, wounded people and damaged or destroyed buildings, which are the end products of just about any act of violence inflicted on one group by another, in one way or another.
So, probably best to call the NATO bombing campaign of '99, the NATO-Serbian War, or maybe the Kosovo War, since what was happening in that region, and both sides' interpretations of what was going in Kosovo, was the alleged cause for NATO's launching its air attacks.
Either way, whether an armed conflict is called a dispute, feud, conflict, punitive expedition, campaign or war, its end results pretty much measure up to being about the same-lots of dead bodies, physically and mentally hurt people, damaged and ruined lives, destroyed or damaged buildings and other physical landmarks, and societies changed, and usually not for the better, by the violence they've gone through.
It happened in Serbia and Montenegro as a result of not only Kosovo, but of what happened in the Kraijina and Bosnia-Herzegovina too, just as it happened for the Croats, and Bosnian Muslims, Jews, Serbs and Croats unlucky enough to be in those areas of their countries, where the fighting occurred during those wars.
It's happened in the US, with the various wars that were fought on its soil, first during the colonial era, the Revolutionary War then in the 19th Century, with the War of 1812, various Indian Wars, the Mexican War and the Civil War, as well as a whole bunch of much smaller conflicts that'd take too long to list here.
We had no wars on our soil here in the 20th and 21st Centuries, though we've had foreign attacks on it, like the Pearl Harbor attack that brought the US into WWII, and, of course, the 1993 and 2001 World Trade Center attacks, as well as plenty of armed conflicts between criminal gangs and lots of riots and other forms of violence called civil unrest.
Really, one could look at most nations' histories and see, at least at one time or another in them, periods of time where one or more groups of people, whether invading from outside, or starting up a conflict from inside it, have shed blood, burnt down houses and other buildings, and generally acted like arseholes, in order to get what they wanted.
In the end, generally speaking, the results of these conflicts simply haven't been worth the costs in lives and property destroyed or wasted.
They weren't in the various Yugoslav civil wars of the '90's, the Kosovo War, and certainly not in Iraq, Afghanistan, Darfur or any other conflict you want to name to-day.
In the end, these wars, like so many others throughout history, were the results of people being too stubborn, small-minded, greedy or hypnotised by their own self-image and publicity, to actually sit down, talk with each other and work out their problems and disputes with each other like rational grown-ups usually manage to do.
That's certainly why I didn't pop up champagne corks over Kosovo's independence, and won't.
In the end, too many Serbs, Roma and Kosovar Albanians ended up paying too high a price for it, and for those efforts to prevent it.
Balkan. A sad story.
Did you knew that every 50 years there's a conflict on Balkan. Sometimes smaller sometimes bigger.
Reason? It was always been a crossroad between nations cultures east and west.
I wonder how would Serbia end up. Just Belgrade and surroundings?
I would like to call up on a old prophecy where it says that on the end there will be so much Serbs that you could fit them under a apple tree. And there would be no one else. Sounds a bit harsh but still optimistic.
I got a bit emotional here. Guess I feel too much sorry for Serbs. You shouldn't blame me. On the end, I'm just a Serb. Not Serbian Serb but a Bosnian Serb if it really plays any roll now... when cradle is gone.
Guess Israel style wouldn't help here since world is ruled by credits. Where is Tito when we most need him :)
Zionism sucks...
Well, Olix, I'm a Yank, more or less, but there are times that I get about as tired of a lot of the ultra-nationalistic shit some of my fellow Americans choose to absorb and spout off on a regular basis, as you may have been of some of the stuff you were getting from Pale TV, or maybe even Belgrade TV during much of the '90's.Quote:
Originally Posted by OliX
I don't know, as I wasn't there, and not in your place.
Was thinking about this a bit this evening, and it seems to me that the big problem with nationalism in its many forms and flavours is that, if taken too far, it simply becomes yet another great excuse to indulge oneself in just about any kind of bad behaviour you could care to name, and more.
Also, and I think this is especially true of ultra-nationalism, the kind of thinking and behaviour displayed by at least some ultra-nationalists seems to me to be rooted in a kind of insecure arrogance about oneself, other people and the world around us.
On one hand, everything that the individual's group does is pure gold, even if some of its motives and actions are really pure shit.
But, if anyone, whether it be an outsider or another member of the group who doesn't feel the same way as the individual ultra-nationalist does points that out, the defensive impulse to attack comes right up and out on the observer.
To me, and mind you, I am ignorant of a lot of the various achievements and failures of the vast majority of human groups of all sorts.
But, and am only generally speaking here, I think it's safe to say that, for the most part, most people one finds within any human group tend to be fairly average as far as moral character and intellectual and other abilities go.
They generally mean well enough, most of the time, try their best to follow the general rules of the given culture, sub-culture and society they live in, and make what contributions they can to their cultures with whatever resources and abilities available to them.
They can also be lazy, unwashed, loudmouthed, rude, petty and all of the other negative human qualities of which one could think.
That's part of being human, I think, and applies not only to the vast majority of average folks in any given human group, but also to those who have either outstandingly high or low characters and abilities as well.
People are a funny, often contrary, mix of the best and worst qualities of our species, as well as the greater family of animals of which we are a part, and the variety of mixes of those qualities, both in individuals and groups, is astonishing and incredible to behold.
It seems to me that the more one looks at any given individual or group, the more variety of character, thought and opinion one can find in him, her or it.
Mind you, I don't always keep this in mind, though I should, when looking at the actions of a particular individual or group.
There are times I can be as intellectually lazy, biased and just plain nasty as the next person, and, when I am, I think it says more about me than it does the people against whom I'm expressing my opinions and biases.
So, it's my responsibility to make sure that I don't let myself indulge in that kind of thought or behaviour too much.
Sometimes, I succeed. Other times, I fail.
But, either way, I know that it's my responsibility to try and understand where the other person's coming from, and at least try and see, even if just for a second or two, why and how they feel the way they do.
If I don't, that's my failure.
I can't and don't expect everyone else in the world to try this.
Some people, for whatever reasons of their own, either can't or won't be able to do it, and I think it's silly to expect everyone in the whole world to think and act alike, anyway.
That's the big problem with authoritarian and totalitarian ideologies, in my opinion.
They expect everyone, whether believers in them or not, to think, act and look alike, like so many mufflers off of an auto assembly line, or sausages from a meat-packer's, and, in the end, because, even the most devout believers in any given religion or other ideology have little quirks and flaws of their own, it never really quite works the way that's expected.
Besides, any sort of ghetto, where everyone is supposed to think, look and act the same way, and to hold the same opinions, gets to be boring after a while.
Too much self-congratulation and condemnation of others, as well as just plain hearing the same old voices and seeing the same old faces, day in, day out, and every day of the blessed week, month and year, are bound to get rather old and tired after a while, I think.
Variety, to use an often over-used saying, is the spice of life, whether it's with food, people, opinions, what have you.
There should always be room for the familiar, sure, and sometimes different people and different opinions from one's own can be pretty unpleasant to run into.
That's part of being human too, I think.
Not everything in life is bound to be pleasant, nor can it be.
But, sealing oneself off from the rest of the world in a kind of cage, whether it's a room, house, neighbourhood, region or nation has its drawbacks, too, and, I think, those drawbacks are worse than any found in dealing with different kinds of people, even if they are unpleasant at times.
But, that's just my opinion, and I've gone on far too long about this as it is.
Thanks for hearing from you on this, Olix.
haha. Good reading there guys, at least hopefully for some people other than me.
We shouldn't have to continously rehash history, because shit that happened 200 years ago really shouldn't have a baring on what people are trying to do today. But of course most people are ignorant of thier own, let alone everyone elses, history, so they can probably use the lesson.
The only thing that I really don't like is this notion that I often hear from serbs about how "albanians are criminals". We should know better that the same has always been said about the disenfranchised, usually from those that are in positions of better ecnomic status. and it's generally between 3 and 10 percent of the population of any given demographic that are trouble makers. even in a lawless zone, it's rare that it rises above 20%.
It would be irresponsible to ignore that bias and cultural conflicts play a part in this and really in every society, but it's also important to take a step back and check yourself to make sure that you aren't encouraging it.
...Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Rilea
That's sad. Giving the wrong picture about one self and of a nation as for that matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
Criminal doesn't know nationality. Only illegal profit made of other peoples missery. I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
Thank you, MG, for your comments and insights on this.
You are quite correct in pointing out that many of the descriptions of any group by another as "criminals", "loudmouths", "fornicators", "cheats", etc generally belong to groups that are materially or socially better off, even if only relatively so.
For instance, quite often in the US, UK, France, etc, it's very much the case that lower-middle class, working class, and poor whites, who find themselves in direct economic competition with immigrants, whether of European or non-European extraction, or other marginalised groups, and who resort to adopting these beliefs as a means of economic, social, cultural and even biological self-defence(hence the old American saying, "Would You Let YOUR Daughter Marry One???", for one example).
When combined with cultural, ethnic, racial and religious prejudices on the parts of those holding those beliefs, as well as bad behaviour on the parts of some individuals belonging to those latter groups, well, that's when hard feelings really begin to set and take root.
This is especially true, though not exclusively so, when there are considerable cultural, racial, ethnic and linguistic differences between members of the former group and members of the latter, like with European-Americans and Latin American immigrants and Latinos in the US, white Britons and West Indian, African, Indian and Pakistani immigrants and their British-born children and grandchildren in the UK, white Frenchpeople and Algerian, Moroccan, Tunisian and African immigrants and their children in France, etc.
Then, misunderstandings of various sorts between members of these groups can easily turn into fear, anger and hatred, which, given the proper amount of pushing from politicians, writers, and others who've an interest in seeing this situation worsen to their advantages, can turn into ideas, policies and actions that, sooner or later, most people in the society involved are sorry ever happened, for whatever reasons of their own.
That's why both active dialogue between people of different groups, and, just as important, active listening, which means actually trying to understand where the other person speaking is coming from, and putting oneself in his or her place, are so important.
Mind you, those tactics by themselves, without a great deal of active effort to honestly solve these problems to most people's satisfaction(I personally don't believe that EVERYONE involved in a given problem can be made happy or satisfied by any particular solution), and an equally active commitment to get as many people involved, especially so-called ordinary people, because they are the ones who will be first and most directly effected by any decisions made,in catching many of these problems and resolving them before they have a chance to really worsen.
That's tough to do, I know, and sometimes, it won't always work. But, I think such solutions are infinitely better than keeping on with the sort of social silliness we've had for some time now.
At the very least, it would mean a lot fewer corpses, damaged and ruined lives, and general ugliness all 'round for everyone.
No one should, barring the most extreme circumstances of personal self-defence, should ever have to be put in a position where they'll have to use a weapon on someone else, or to have one used on them.
Once that happens, no amount of apologies, reparations, or vengeance will bring a corpse back to life, re-attach a missing limb, or restore a damaged life.
Just won't happen,as the deed's been done.
The trick is, I think, not to put people into situations where killing or death are the only possible solutions.
Don't know if our often silly, contrary and quite stubborn species will ever get the hang of doing that, but I don't think it would hurt us to at least try it.
Hell, much of the art of politics and business is making one kind of deal or another, anyway.
Maybe, if even half of the negotiating strategies and tactics that are used to cut political and business deals for far more small-minded reasons were used to help resolve these kinds of problems, the world would be a considerably better place.
Then again, who knows???
Never hurts to try it, I think.
In fairness, serbs were also vilified for the actions of Hrkan and Milosevic. It's sad. It's almost a weight off my shoulders though. I think I'll join every (non-communist or fascist) free independence movement on the planet now. :1orglaugh :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
JT
I guess I should have clarified that I'm not a big supporter of the way that the Us handled things in that situation. There have been some people to point out the ironies that while kids were shooting each other in colorado, the US was dropping bombs on kids in serbia. I know that you know what it's like in the region with people so desensitized by the daily violence that they don't even know or care what they are fighting for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie T.
oh MG... You'll be suprised how much they care when it comes to religious views. They care so much that they prove it that there's no god. Phoenix
As for Arkan :) You know that guy Hashim Tachi (spelling?) He's in same drawer as Arkan was.....
The only thing I will ever admit to admiring Arkan for is his taste in women.
Ceca was, and is, a pretty hot little number.
no way.. you can't say that!
how is this sexy? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKIsjnGFPuc
Point taken, but she does have a balcony one could do Shakespeare from.:1orglaughQuote:
Originally Posted by OliX
BTW, noticed in the video you linked to that, not only did she looked bored with what her fellow guest was saying, she was constantly on the look-out to ensure that her tits didn't fall out of her dress.
That, and her bra must have been God-Damned uncomfortable that day.
Thachi. Neither name translates properly into the latin alphabet. Point being: Millions of serbs and albanians were villified for the actions of a few. The whole thing was unjust.Quote:
Originally Posted by OliX
JT
there's a rumor that one of her boobs is bigger than her head. guess which one :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Rilea
Her right one??? Just a guess and probably wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by OliX
:1orglaugh :thumb: :1orglaugh :thumb: :1orglaugh :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by OliX
Just one question, the sex thread turned into a political debate and this just turned into a sexual kinda thing, how lol?
'Cos I mentioned that the only thing I admired about the late Serbian militia leader Arkan was his taste in women, specifically his wife, a prominent Serbian pop singer of the '90's named Ceca, that's how, Mr. Tinman.
Just blame me, and let's move on, shall we????