Replies

"Tito’s “federalism” was but a misnomer for a grand game of divide et impera, in which the salient objective was to carve up the Serbs, over 40% of the population, into as many different units as possible..... The communist Yugoslav federation existed as a permanent mechanism of keeping old passions and animosities alive and well, and thus providing the ruling clique with legitimacy. “Were it not for us, you’d be at each others’ throats.” When the ruling clique disintegrated, in the absence of the dictator who died in 1980, the threat turned into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The most pernicious, and – as it turned out – the most permanent legacy of Tito’s system concerned the boundaries among the federal units. The Serbs had lived in one state since 1918, when Yugoslavia came into being. They reluctantly accepted Tito’s arbitrarily drawn internal boundaries between the six federal republics - which left almost one third of their nation outside Serbia-proper - on the grounds that the broader Yugoslav framework afforded them a measure of security from the repetition of the nightmare of 1941-45, when they were slaughtered en masse by their Croat and Muslim neighbors. But they were adamant that they would resist any attempt by the breakaway republics of Croatia and Bosnia to force over two million Serbs living in those republics to become minorities, literally overnight, in their own land."

It is clear that all the entities forming the Former Yugoslav Republic were artificial, and forced on the various constituent peoples.

What we have seen recently, and what will continue is the further unravelling of this monstrosity, and the continued denial by the Serbs, of the freedom of peoples to decide for themselves how they are governed.

You don't have a clue don't you!?

Let's make it simple for you:

Why should I be a minority in your country, when you can be a minority in my country!?

Try to find an answer and you will see things a lot clearer, regarding the wars in Croatia and Bosnia in the 90's. Always bear in mind the timeframe 1941-1945 and the NDH, which had THE most important psychological impact on the serbs in that region during the last decades.

LOL! I met Trifkovic a few times - very long winded.

Internationally recognized rules for recognition of a new state are 1: The support of the majority of the peoples on that terriroty; 2: The physical control over that territory; 3: The protection of its minorities.

The Serbs of Croatia were denied their right to self-determination. I have a number of official croatian letters (dated May '91) of dismissal for serbs who refused to sign the famous 'croatian oath of loyalty'. The Croats never at any point offered credible protection of its minorites, totally the opposite in fact.

The Serbs of Bosnia were denied their right to self-determination, despite make up ~32% of the population. Posters like Hoplite seem to believe that the Serbs must have been crazy not to trust the moslem fundamentalist Izetbegovic who in his first 9 months of the rotating Presidency visited by far an large only Molsem, cash rich countries. A real sign of his 'multi-ethinic' beliefs. I'm not suprised that the Croats didn't trust him either. Somehow, Serbia was expected to completely ignore their own bretheren and leave them in a state they did not wish to live in with a President who refused to leave office despite the rotating Presidency agreement.

It seems you clearly believe in the freedom for outside powers to economically rape whichever state/country they wish and do their best to guarantee a conflict that will produce the desired results.

VRN