Posted on 02/07/2014 4:57:27 PM PST by Kartographer
Demonstrators in Bosnia-Hercegovina have set fire to government buildings, in the worst unrest since the end of the 1992-95 war.
Hundreds of people have been injured in three days of protests over high unemployment and perceived inability of politicians to improve the situation.
Police used rubber bullets and tear gas to quell unrest in the capital Sarajevo and the northern town of Tuzla.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
Clinton was on the wrong side of that one.
The Serbs should just be allowed to peacefully break away.
It is less than clear to me that there was a right side at all.
We should have just stayed out of it.
Usually, I can figure out the “real” reasons(often monetary for people of influence) we get involved, but I never could figure out why we were in this, and who was really getting any benefit.
That's like saying, "Now that was a night without sunlight."
When was Clinton ever on the right side of anything?
Yep...
It was a perfect example of Noneya...
It was none of the U. S.’s business.
It wasn’t what Clinton wanted it was what Albright demanded.
Lemme guess: a command economy, unsound money and high taxes.
Why did Albright demand it?
heroin trade routes?
I believe a strong undertone in that conflict was the evolution of Islamic regimental sized forces from outside the area, mobilizing to exert influence in regional conflicts. Same guys who had been trained by the CIA a decade earlier, but broke away from CIA influence/control, (CIA removed themselves) but the Islamic middle leadership had been given a taste of covert ops in the world leagues, and decided to extend their own group interests, instead those of the world powers. The war also involved opposing Black Op regimental sized operations of various factions. Later to get it under control, the regular militaries of several powers and coalitions/NATO became involved.
IMHO, it was a convoluted mess.
FWIW, one of the more cognizant liberal senior field grades I bumped into at the time was thoroughly convinced the battles were to coverup intense “UFO alien” involvement. Go figure. I always tended to find the more conventional black ops to better explain the unknown.
LOL. Either one makes more sense than the nonsense that was spewed daily as to why we were there, but I’d go for coventional black ops explanations too. Especially if there is a link to any of the world powers or strong dictators.
Still can’t see what we or the rest of the western powers got out of it, and I don’t really think we did it to massage a guilty conscience either. They must have thought it would spill over to our interests, or else they were impacting something that wasn’t being reported.
Things like pipelines for oil or drug trafficing etc for example would be sufficient reason for some quid pro quo.
I was involved in the planning of the ground forces invasion (which luckily never happened) and we couldn't figure it out either.
She was from that part of the world.
I hate that Yugoslavia broke up. Unfortunately their history of conquests and religious differences made it impossible, without a charismatic and sometimes brutal leader, like Tito in power.
No, it was more like British compromise in WWII, now in all fairness the commies under Tito were more organized than the Pro-Western and Monarchist allied forces in Yugoslavia during WWII, however it was their choice that handed the nation over to the commies.
Would there have been the “balkanization” if Tito never happened and mass war afterwards? Who knows..
“The entire Balkans are not worth the bones of one good Pommeranian grenadier” Bismarck
amen
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.