Org Mobile Site
Thread: Why Bosnia and Kosovo?
In the 1990s, the US got involved in Bosnia and Kosovo and fought against the Serbs who used to rule the area beforehand. However, I can't think of any resources in the area of any geopolitical advantages there are in that region. So it would seem that reasons for involving ourselves in those countries was humanitarian. Yet, at the same time, there were plenty of other nasty ethnic conflicts going on. What made Bosnia and Kosovo different that they would warrant attention? Could it have been timing? That we would have some collective guilt about not interfering in Rwanda that we would try to make up for it in Bosnia? Or did the media just care more about white people than black or brown people? Proximity to NATO allies as we wouldn't want destabilization in their area? Or just plain luck on behalf of the Bosniaks, Croats, and Kosovars?
Backroom...
Originally Posted by Sarmatian:
Backroom...
How far does it have to be before it belongs in the realm of the monastery?Backroom...
Yugoslavia...genocides....care more for White than Black people...
...I think I'll ethnically cleanse this thread to the Backroom.
...I think I'll ethnically cleanse this thread to the Backroom.
Originally Posted by :
That we would have some collective guilt about not interfering in Rwanda that we would try to make up for it in Bosnia
It was a mixture of this and the pathetic failure of the United Nations to keep the so-called Safe Areas free from bigoted murderers.That we would have some collective guilt about not interfering in Rwanda that we would try to make up for it in Bosnia
The bosnians had the foresight to be born white and European
Granted why anyone would waste anything trying to fix the balkans is beyond me
Granted why anyone would waste anything trying to fix the balkans is beyond me
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat:
..I think I'll ethnically cleanse this thread to the Backroom.
"Give me your tired, your poor, ..I think I'll ethnically cleanse this thread to the Backroom.
Your huddled debating points yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming Monastery.
Send these, the homeless, clueless to me,
I lift my flame beside the golden forum!"
I always had an inkling that part of the Balkans intervention was the last gasp of the cold warriors. The Serbs are Orthodox just like the Russians, so close enough. "Everybody is killing everybody, but these guys are Russian proxies!" After that Kosovo was just habit, and unwillingness to admit to our mistakes from the first go around.
Because the European nations was to hestiant to do anything so we can to do the work for them as usual 
.
.Originally Posted by ELITEofKingWarman8:
Because the European nations was to hestiant to do anything so we can to do the work for them as usual.
exactly, becuase all Europeans are spineless women, unwilling to oppress or subjugate any peoplesBecause the European nations was to hestiant to do anything so we can to do the work for them as usual
.Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
exactly, becuase all Europeans are spineless women, unwilling to oppress or subjugate any peoples
exactly, becuase all Europeans are spineless women, unwilling to oppress or subjugate any peoples
Extacly, just look at Libyra now. Sure, France may have "taken the first step" but it was us who really led the way.... as usual.
Originally Posted by ELITEofKingWarman8:
Extacly, just look at Libyra now. Sure, France may have "taken the first step" but it was us who really led the way.... as usual.
Pray tell what are we doing in Lybia right nowExtacly, just look at Libyra now. Sure, France may have "taken the first step" but it was us who really led the way.... as usual.
Supposdliey we got agents on the ground there .
.Originally Posted by ELITEofKingWarman8:
Supposdliey we got agents on the ground there.
Ignorance is blissSupposdliey we got agents on the ground there
.Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
Pray tell what are we doing in Lybia right now
Protecting the EU's oil supply.Pray tell what are we doing in Lybia right now
Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
Ignorance is bliss
Saying I don't know what I'm talknig about?Ignorance is bliss
Originally Posted by ELITEofKingWarman8:
Saying I don't know what I'm talknig about?
I amSaying I don't know what I'm talknig about?
Bosnia was a traditional peacekeeping operation. From what I heard from friends who served there, they did not engage as combat troops. Thus it is a very different kind of intervention.
Regarding Kosovo...
Frankly, I am a bit more cynical. I think it was just convenience. Clinton needed something to distract the attention from the Monica Lewinsky case. Also, he hadn't bombed anyone yet, and no American presidency is complete without a good bombing!
Joking aside, certainly there were other reasons, but when the issue was raised, Clinton I do think my first point played into the mix...and may have been a big part of why he engaged so eagerly. Also, the Democrats tend to think that engaging in a little war will keep the Republicans off their backs, and keep them from looking "weak".
Regarding Kosovo...
Frankly, I am a bit more cynical. I think it was just convenience. Clinton needed something to distract the attention from the Monica Lewinsky case. Also, he hadn't bombed anyone yet, and no American presidency is complete without a good bombing!
Joking aside, certainly there were other reasons, but when the issue was raised, Clinton I do think my first point played into the mix...and may have been a big part of why he engaged so eagerly. Also, the Democrats tend to think that engaging in a little war will keep the Republicans off their backs, and keep them from looking "weak".
Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
I am
And you think you do? Very Unlikely.I am
Originally Posted by ELITEofKingWarman8:
And you think you do? Very Unlikely.
I'm willing to take my chances esp with someone who thinks we have "agents on the ground"And you think you do? Very Unlikely.
Originally Posted by :
Too little is known about Libya's rebels and they remain too fragmented for the United States to get seriously involved in organizing or training them, let alone arming them, U.S. and European officials say.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...edName=topNewsToo little is known about Libya's rebels and they remain too fragmented for the United States to get seriously involved in organizing or training them, let alone arming them, U.S. and European officials say.
But hey you've got that promising writing carreer ahead of you, I'm sure there's nothing to worry about
Originally Posted by ELITEofKingWarman8:
Because the European nations was to hestiant to do anything so we can to do the work for them as usual.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/13/wo...ca/13nato.htmlBecause the European nations was to hestiant to do anything so we can to do the work for them as usual
.His remarks, echoed by Foreign Minister Alain Juppé of France, reflected what officials have described as a complex and at times convoluted coalition, with many participating countries refusing to carry out airstrikes against forces on the ground, even as their planes patrol the skies over Libya.
Britain and France, for example, are now flying the bulk of the attack missions, with Norway, Denmark and Canada also striking Libyan targets on the ground. But other countries, including the Netherlands, Sweden, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, are taking less aggressive roles, enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya or conducting reconnaissance missions, in a nod to political considerations back home.
...
The varying tactics reflect the different ways in which each country in the coalition views the mission, and how tough it has been to corral all the participants into focused attacks.
In Washington, Obama administration officials sought to tamp down a growing sense of concern among some military analysts that the combination of the Americans’ back-seat role, NATO’s inexperience in waging a complicated air campaign against moving targets and botched communications with the ragtag rebel army had thrown the mission into disarray.
QED
Est Europa nunc unita...
“Backroom...”: I am not history!!!!!
I am not THAT old…
To answer (partially) the question: Media campaign and need to have a contra-balance to the systematic support for Israel…
It was good to help Muslims. And they had the advantage to be white… Most of them.
Some Serbs will tell you about Moniqua Lewinsky as well…
It is Europe. Landscapes, population, habits, daily life, every thing is like in Europe/USA.
That was my second war. But this one, I couldn’t keep it out of me. Bosnian hills look Savoie.
Now, why the Serbs were chosen as the badies?
First because the media were slow to react.
When Slovenia became Independent, it was in few weeks, and nobody really understood what happened. The cold murder perpetrated by the Slovene Prime Minister in front of the world Camera then the quick withdrawing of the Federal Army took every body by surprise.
When the Croats started the Barracks Wars, again nobody was there, and when Susak (Croat) shelled Borovo Selo (Serbs) in April 1991 same story. It became a story when the Yugoslav Army finally decided to intervene in Vukovar in November.
The media were there and started to show the poor Croats hunted down by the Serbs.
The fact that the Croatian Nationalists were referring to the ustasa (Nazi) regime was pushed under the carpet with ease and style.
You can add the bombardment of Dubrovnik…
Same story for Bosnia: Systematic rapes, poor defenceless Muslims against the mighty Serbs and the will to not allow truth to spoil a good story started the process, then the media were able to do a proper information job.
No body seemed to notice than the Green Beret (The Eagle of Islam) were created one year before the start of the war…
So, the war between Croats and Muslims, Muslim (Izetbegovic) against Muslim (Abdic), all what can add complexity to the understanding was avoided.
As for Kosovo, well, the machine just carried on.
Of course, it is more complex than this and the Serbian side was not exempt of mistakes and murders. I can probably write a book about it.
In fact I did.
Wasn’t published mind you…
But Serbs were not good at PR.
So they lost the war.
I am not THAT old…
To answer (partially) the question: Media campaign and need to have a contra-balance to the systematic support for Israel…
It was good to help Muslims. And they had the advantage to be white… Most of them.
Some Serbs will tell you about Moniqua Lewinsky as well…
It is Europe. Landscapes, population, habits, daily life, every thing is like in Europe/USA.
That was my second war. But this one, I couldn’t keep it out of me. Bosnian hills look Savoie.
Now, why the Serbs were chosen as the badies?
First because the media were slow to react.
When Slovenia became Independent, it was in few weeks, and nobody really understood what happened. The cold murder perpetrated by the Slovene Prime Minister in front of the world Camera then the quick withdrawing of the Federal Army took every body by surprise.
When the Croats started the Barracks Wars, again nobody was there, and when Susak (Croat) shelled Borovo Selo (Serbs) in April 1991 same story. It became a story when the Yugoslav Army finally decided to intervene in Vukovar in November.
The media were there and started to show the poor Croats hunted down by the Serbs.
The fact that the Croatian Nationalists were referring to the ustasa (Nazi) regime was pushed under the carpet with ease and style.
You can add the bombardment of Dubrovnik…
Same story for Bosnia: Systematic rapes, poor defenceless Muslims against the mighty Serbs and the will to not allow truth to spoil a good story started the process, then the media were able to do a proper information job.
No body seemed to notice than the Green Beret (The Eagle of Islam) were created one year before the start of the war…
So, the war between Croats and Muslims, Muslim (Izetbegovic) against Muslim (Abdic), all what can add complexity to the understanding was avoided.
As for Kosovo, well, the machine just carried on.
Of course, it is more complex than this and the Serbian side was not exempt of mistakes and murders. I can probably write a book about it.
In fact I did.
Wasn’t published mind you…
But Serbs were not good at PR.
So they lost the war.
well, the Serbians are just unlucky that time
just like Khadaffi today
just like Khadaffi today
Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
I'm willing to take my chances esp with someone who thinks we have "agents on the ground"
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...edName=topNews
But hey you've got that promising writing carreer ahead of you, I'm sure there's nothing to worry about
Old quote but hey, everyone loves you so I'm sure that won't cause any doubts about your posts here I'm willing to take my chances esp with someone who thinks we have "agents on the ground"
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...edName=topNews
But hey you've got that promising writing carreer ahead of you, I'm sure there's nothing to worry about
.Originally Posted by ELITEofKingWarman8:
Old quote but hey, everyone loves you so I'm sure that won't cause any doubts about your posts here.
Old quote but hey, everyone loves you so I'm sure that won't cause any doubts about your posts here
.An old quote, from an hour ago?
What a clown
Originally Posted by Brenus:
But Serbs were not good at PR.
So they lost the war.
Well, everybody learned the lesson nowadays. In any conflict, the first thing to do is to hire the most expensive American PR agency, then the second most expensive, then the third and if you have some money left over, the fourth. Whatever pittance there is after that, you equip your troops.But Serbs were not good at PR.
So they lost the war.
Yugoslavia was the 'chink in Stalin's armour', but after the Bloc collapsed, they were just a standing communist state that could cause potential problems and the Western nations wanted to take them down to destroy the strong communist presence in Central Europe. It was all just politics and a stupid public...
Originally Posted by Vuk:
Yugoslavia was the 'chink in Stalin's armour', but after the Bloc collapsed, they were just a standing communist state that could cause potential problems and the Western nations wanted to take them down to destroy the strong communist presence in Central Europe. It was all just politics and a stupid public...
you have a thread with questions for you to answerYugoslavia was the 'chink in Stalin's armour', but after the Bloc collapsed, they were just a standing communist state that could cause potential problems and the Western nations wanted to take them down to destroy the strong communist presence in Central Europe. It was all just politics and a stupid public...
Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
I'm willing to take my chances esp with someone who thinks we have "agents on the ground"
http://warnewsupdates.blogspot.com/2...n-libya-8.htmlI'm willing to take my chances esp with someone who thinks we have "agents on the ground"
This was from back in March. We only know about them because they were caught.
To be honest, anyone who thinks there are not already special forces in the region from all the major involved players is delusional. They are there, they may not be active, they may only be observing, but they are there.
Your own article states:
Originally Posted by :
CIA operatives on the ground are aggressively collecting information on the rebels, their structure, leadership and military capabilities, U.S. officials said.
I think that pretty much translates to "agents on the ground".CIA operatives on the ground are aggressively collecting information on the rebels, their structure, leadership and military capabilities, U.S. officials said.
I wasnt aware British SAS came under American jurisduction
Nor does that make warman right, he's still talking out of his ass
Nor does that make warman right, he's still talking out of his ass
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO