Replies

(I’m writing fast and don’t have much time – sorry for error in grammer)

You mean the Srebrenica massacre? The event that never happened according to people like you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre

You mean the massacre where alone there 8,500 people were murdered and the bodies recorded and identified? You mean that even which people like you claim were no Muslims and even try to pretend that it was Serbs?

You mean Srebrenica, the town declared a safe zone in 1993 and where Dutch soldiers watched as the events unfolded and you deny this ever happened?

http://www.srebrenica.nl/en/ (Go to past articles – there they report on the Dutch soldiers who WERE there and DID see the atrocities but could not intervene).

**

There is talk here about how the Serbs were pushed out of their land-

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/bosnia.htm

Well, While I’m no hippy peacenik, maybe in this case it was Karma?

**

The entire defense of the Serb actions are based on fallacies and shear rhetoric:

a. Taking an argument to an extreme point where it’s absurd. Example that is kind of related to this in a way. I debated with a German here and explained to him that their was a Global War On Terror. I gave him examples, logical arguments and and and as to why a lot of the events are interrelated and Iran, Syria etc are all part of the larger issue. His counter argument was that this would mean that you need to annihilate 1.2 billion Muslims. Bogus argument obviously. That’s taking a point to a ridiculous extreme to prove ones position but it is complete BS.

b. Make it all relative. “Well, the Serbs only killed 8,500 in Srebrenica (ALONE) and that’s not as bad”

c. The debate ALWAYS is channeled into a discussion about who started it, what happened 100 years ago, that this is part of the global Islamic threat and and and. The real issue MUST be sidestepped if you want to hold onto your position. It’s an unjustifiable position unless you go into the realm of “polemics”.

d. As I said before and as you guys did; a major aspect of your defensive argument is to just blatantly DENY everything. They when you do admit it, you try to make it “relative”. Again, like a NAZI who tries to say that in the US we had segregation or the Indians, you try to make the issue all blurry with this fuzzy logic.

The similarities between the Holocaust and what happened in the Balkans are scary.

-You have one side with all the firepower (Serbs).

-You had one side that was made guilty of all the wrong, evil and ill which the other side had (Suendenbock).

-You had one side that didn’t want to stop what they were doing and only the use of force was going to put an end to it.

-You had the STATE sponsored, organized, planned and executed destruction of another people under false pretences to create “Lebenraum” for the “Uebermensch” as the Serbs see themselves.

-You had one side that had a massive propaganda machine which for a nation that size was quite impressive (Like Goebels). http://www.serbia-info.com/news/1999-04/15/10894.html At the time they even had a mock/fake (look alike) NATO website which when you read it was all spun news. There was a reason why the Serb state run TV channel was targeted in March 99.

What’s most shocking about this is that this is in Europe, in the late 1990s! That the Germany who screamed “Never again” let this happen right on the door step and didn’t do anything until they themselves were adversely affected, that as the Balkans spiraled out of control, as Greece, Turkey and even Iran were more and more becoming involved, Russia backed their old ally the Serbs, the Germans quickly backed their buddies the Croats. Russia was back-dooring weapons into Serbia and and and. A madness you expect in the Middle East was unfolding in Europe!

**

Most Americans don’t even know where Serbia is located. They simply don’t care much. I didn’t fight there, although I’ve been to YU on four occasions for leisure in the past. The Serbs will claim that the US picked sides: Obviously since we beat them into submission (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/kosovo_maps_air.htm ). Ironically the Bosnians are no different. They think we came too late, failed to protect them, and because they are Muslims were indifferent. Neither side is very appreciative of the US action in the former YU.

Are the Bosnians any better? Surly not. If given the chance many would do the same things. But the ones calling the shots where no a rag-tag Bosnian militia armed with a few AK’s. The arms restrictions on trade primarily hit those who were weak to begin with since the Bosnians were not getting arms delivers via Russia. Not until later did the Bosnians/Croats get a lot of heavy equipment. Much of it is old US surplus gear like M60A3 tanks. Some of the Croat officers are professionally trained in US schools in places like Ft. Knox.

Even here there is a lot of Irony. Bush Sr. who proposed an arming of the Bosnians and Croats was made to look like a war mongering blood thirsty animal in much of the European media. Ironically that is exactly what the Germans and others did later. And of course, just as the nuclear deterrence (Which worked very well), just like Libya and and and, they seldom go back and correct their statements. There were no apologies from the leftists like “Der Spiegel” but in the end the proposed idea of the Bush administration (Pre-Clinton who also attacked him in the elections for his position) were applied later and with success. Basically, you can not have a peace in that region without a balance of power and that includes outside forces.

Some relationships can ONLY be dealt with when there is a “Balance of power”. If S. Korea dropped it’s vigilance the North would attack them. Russia strong arms near all its former republics: Ukraine, Republic of Georgia, Belarus….. So to create this balance the Croats/Bosnians were armed. The M60A3 tanks the Croats have are no pre-war stock, neither is a lot of the other heavy equipment they have. From the Serb perspective it must all appear as if NATO picked sides. It’s rather that they just got in-between the war fighting parties. Since the Serbs were the ones dominating the fight and didn’t want to back down they were the ones to get one on the head.

But again, those arguing on the side of the Serbs will resort to arguments that sound more like my 4 year old arguing: “You started it first, NO you did!” It’ll turn into an emotional argument and will be full of semantics: “You can’t compare the Holocaust to the plight of the Bosnians!” (As you try to argue)

And again, let me reiterate this. I am not very appreciative of the Muslim faith. The Serbs are culturally more like me. The Bosnians if given the chance are just as bad and at times did do bad things. I know there was some Islamic sponsored influence in the Balkans. I agree that the Serbs to have a right to defend themselves. At this point let me use another analogy: Two guys are in a fight. Once guy is beating the piss out of the other and the police was called. The Police show up and tries to break up the fight getting in between the two parties. The guy dishing out the whoop-ass doesn’t feel quite satisfied yet and wants to keep beating on the other guy who’s just as much at fault for the fight. Now, who do the Police end up beating on? Does it mean the Police like the guy on the ground who’s getting beat?

**

http://www.nato.int/fyrom/home.htm

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/kosovo1/2001/0828nato.htm

The problem WAS spreading to Macedonia and in 1993 ALREADY there were troops on the ground there. Why don’t you check up something called “Operation Able Sentry” on our friend Google (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=operation+able+sentry ). Eventually this force grew to 3,500 – 5,500 men on the ground.

As I have said over and over and over – ALL you guys keep doing is DENY DENY DENY and make counter accusations.

**

Even the allegations that this was a US lead war is complete Non-sense. In the US there was widespread dissent for our involvement. Clinton came under fire from the Republicans, many US troops oppose being put under UN control and and and. The political forces behind action in the Balkans were the British and the Germans. Those two were the political engines driving the show.

So why did the US lead the air campaign, why was it even the US that led in the ground operations? CAPABILITIES.

We have SEAD capabilities that far overmatch anything which any NATO ally has. We have the C2 and C4I architecture capable of dealing with large-scale, multi faceted, multi-national campaigns in a full spectrum of operations raging from peace enforcement to major theater war. Was it really going to be a Tornado flying the high risk missions when the enemy IADS was still solid? No. When things began to get interesting in the Balkans and NATO was engaged, the US was basically being called on. It’s a matter of perspective. From the Serb perspective it’s a US led war, but in truth it was a European (Great Britain and German) initiative/push for this intervention. Something the Germans behind the intervention today want to downplay since it puts them in an awkward situation in light of Iraq and post 9-11 and their refusal to allow any NATO engagement on Iraq or their minimal effort in Afghanistan. From the US perspective all we got out of YU was “rocks”. Besides “rocks”, YU has ZERO to offer us. This campaign (big picture) cost us money, some lives and economically you can say we had no gain from it in any way. But in usual fashion you will deny it, make counter accusations, bla bla bla.

So let me recap: Grand conspiracy to start war. Grand conspiracy to cover up massive NATO air campaign losses and Serbian success. Conspiracy to lie about genocide which never happened. Conspiracy against Milosevic and his murder was covered up too (let’s not forget the original topic here). And where are the Serbs? Why of course, they are VICTIMS OF NATO AGGRESSION.

First of all, quantity is no replacement for quality of information. What you write is full of erroneous information, semitruths and outright lies.

I find it unnerving to think that such people can become U.S. officers.

Here is what you claim:

b. Make it all relative. “Well, the Serbs only killed 8,500 in Srebrenica (ALONE) and that’s not as bad”

This is outright lie. Bosnian Serbs did not kill 8500 Muslims in Sreberenica. Even Muslim propagandists say "8000". Killing armed men in combat is legitimate war objective.

c. The debate ALWAYS is channeled into a discussion about who started it, what happened 100 years ago, that this is part of the global Islamic threat and and and. The real issue MUST be sidestepped if you want to hold onto your position. It’s an unjustifiable position unless you go into the realm of “polemics”.

Bosnian Muslims created armed Patriotic League, 100,000 strong, under command of Sefer Halilovic (Commander Halil). It was not 100 years ago, it was in 1991, just before the war. Patriotic League was illegal military force and racist organisation (meant to erradicate Serbs). Following your logic and train of thought, Allies flattened German cities for no reason.

d. As I said before and as you guys did; a major aspect of your defensive argument is to just blatantly DENY everything. They when you do admit it, you try to make it “relative”. Again, like a NAZI who tries to say that in the US we had segregation or the Indians, you try to make the issue all blurry with this fuzzy logic.

It is your appeal to emotions (false Nazi analogy, Lebensraum, Goebbels etc.) that hope to blurry the facts. It is actually you who apply Nazi propaganda method: Majority of people will more easilly fall for a big lie than a small one. That is Hitler's teaching, used by an U.S officer today.

The similarities between the Holocaust and what happened in the Balkans are scary.

-You have one side with all the firepower (Serbs).

Another lie. Bosnian Patriotic league was fully armed beofre the hostilities started. Sarajevo was military garrison. So was Srebrenica.

-You had one side that was made guilty of all the wrong, evil and ill which the other side had (Suendenbock).

Before the war strarted, Bosnian Muslm magazine published a cartoon on a front page, depicting Serbs with severed heads and the title: The Fourth Reich is comming. It was an incitement to commit genocide, as per ICTR Rwanda ruling.

-You had one side that didn’t want to stop what they were doing and only the use of force was going to put an end to it.

What side? You had Bosnian Muslims bent to create Muslim Bosnia regardless of the cost. Hitler sacrificed 8 million Germans for Thousand Year reich. Izetbegovic was no different.

-You had the STATE sponsored, organized, planned and executed destruction of another people under false pretences to create “Lebenraum” for the “Uebermensch” as the Serbs see themselves.

What state? What lebensraum? Serbs owned 70% of Bosnian cadastre, arable lands and woodlands before the war. They merely wanted to keep what is theirs. Bosnian Muslims wanted to force them out. They were fighting for your lebensraum.

if you look at the census data made by Austro-Hungary, Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Tito's Yugoslavia and compare it with the census of today, it is evident that both Serb population and Serb owned land shrinked in Bosnia as a result of WWII genocide and Bosnian civil war.

-You had one side that had a massive propaganda machine which for a nation that size was quite impressive (Like Goebels).

Goebbels? You mean this guy?

He got reincarnated into this creature:

The lies comming from his mouth are perfect example of Bernay/Hitler school of persuasion. You are good example. You have fell for it hook, line and sinker.

There was a reason why the Serb state run TV channel was targeted in March 99.

Actually, it was in April 1999. It seems that you have never read UCMJ because bombing of civillian TV station was clear cut war crime per Hague convention on warfare on land. It is war crime. You are quite an officer, hell bent on commiting war crimes.

What’s most shocking about this is that this is in Europe, in the late 1990s! That the Germany who screamed “Never again” let this happen right on the door step and didn’t do anything until they themselves were adversely affected, that as the Balkans spiraled out of control, as Greece, Turkey and even Iran were more and more becoming involved, Russia backed their old ally the Serbs, the Germans quickly backed their buddies the Croats. Russia was back-dooring weapons into Serbia and and and. A madness you expect in the Middle East was unfolding in Europe!

You have no clue what you are talking about. You have no clue of timeline of the events. Your post reminds me of characters in Buffalo Soldiers movie, who sit in US Army barracks in Germany and watch fall of Berlin wall. One asks "what country is Berlin".