Mujahedin Operations in Bosnia (FLASHBACK 1995)

Mujahedin units, possibly supported by Iranian SOF, have once again intensified their activities in central Bosnia as the weather has become conducive to offensive combat operations. Their increasing influence on both the Muslim government in Sarajevo and the three army corps located to the west of the city has alienated much of the local populace and developed into another source of irritation for the UN peacekeeping forces in this war-ravaged country. Detachments of Mujahedin have assisted in training selected Bosnian army elements for the past two years, but last summer they also began to spearhead many of the tactical-level attacks against Bosnian Serb forces. The potential for this organization to escalate its activities remains high and thus further threatens regional stability in the republic's hinterland.

Funding for the Mujahedin has been provided by Iran and various other Islamic states with an interest in expanding extremism into the European theater. International radical groups, such as Hizbollah, have also been included on the suspected list of sponsors. Bosnian government sources have grudgingly admitted the presence of the Mujahedin but publicly intimate that they have accepted their presence as a "necessary evil" to maintain the flow of aid from international Islamic contributors. This "aid" has been distributed in forms ranging from hard currency to clandestine arms shipments.

Although the numbers of Mujahedin currently operating in Bosnia remain a matter of speculation, most credible estimates indicate approximately 4000 members. However, professional "holy warriors" constitute only a minority among them. Many of the others are indigenous Bosnian Muslims who demonstrate appropriate religious zeal and allegiance to the organization. In the near term, the Mujahedin will continue to focus on local military operations and establishing their influence with the Bosnian Muslim government. As time progresses, they will likely surpass these original objectives and divert their attention to politicizing the Muslim population and attempting to establish an Islamic republic obedient to fundamentalist doctrine.

Funny what a difference who is President makes.......

1998

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19980101faessay1358-p0/gideon-rose/the-...

Come June, the American troops helping to maintain peace in Bosnia are
scheduled to come home. Recently, however, some senior administration
officials have begun murmuring about staying on longer. "A consensus
is developing," says Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, "that
there will be or should be some form of U.S. military presence" after
the current force leaves. "If we pull out on an arbitrary deadline,"
says the architect of the 1995 Dayton Accord, Richard Holbrooke, "the
situation in Bosnia will become chaotic, eroding the achievements so
far." Such talk does not sit well with Congress, where many were
hostile to the original mission and outraged at its first extension
last year. The stage is set for a battle this spring over U.S. policy
in Bosnia."

-----

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Holbrooke
Although long well-known in diplomatic and journalistic circles,
Holbrooke achieved great public prominence only when he brokered a
peace agreement among the warring factions in Bosnia that led to the
signing of the Dayton Peace Accords in 1995. He is also the only
person to have held the Assistant Secretary of State position for two
different regions of the world (Asia and Europe).

Although he lost out to Madeline Albright in 1997 when Bill Clinton
chose a replacement for Warren Christopher as Secretary of State,
Holbrooke is still seen as a leading contender for that post in any
future Democratic administration. He was an advisor to the
Presidential campaign of John Kerry in 2004. While not an extremist in
his views, (he is perhaps more hawkish than most Democrats), Holbrooke
has a very aggressive style that some find off-putting. Others see him
as an effective, hard-nosed negotiator.

Clinton promised that the US troops will be home in one year, that was 10 years ago.

And it seems he was supporting the wrong side, the one supported and infiltrated by terrorists and that was KNOWN at the time, as this article attests.

Where is the outrage over that?

As you pointed out, the "facts" change, depending on who is president.

"If we pull out on an arbitrary deadline,"
says the architect of the 1995 Dayton Accord, Richard Holbrooke, "the
situation in Bosnia will become chaotic, eroding the achievements so
far."

How come the above was a good enough reason for Clinton to stay in Bosnia, and if we substitute "Iraq" for "Bosnia" it's not a good enough reason for us to stay in Iraq?

Dems are such a bunch of hypocrites!

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.