To: wonders; branicap
Wonders, thanks for pinpointing NATO. Of course, we can go further than that... why stop and generalize with NATO. Partition may make sense to pragmatists, re: K&M it doesnt make sense to me. I dont recommend, but I do prefer #84.
Dr. Brane, you implement the 3 policies of #84... takes care of the future imbalance.
97 posted on
02/11/2003 1:49:12 PM PST by
Tamodaleko
(should I voluntarily surrender to Hague?)
To: Tamodaleko; joan; wonders; Gael; kosta50
Tamo, I agree with you wholeheartedly!My idea about "sale" of Kosovo is,basicaly,reinterpretation of one author from Belgrade,published in the Belgrade`s weekly NIN two weeks ago.We can discuss it some other time.
Joan,last week British Government had introduced new anti-asylum measures.Seven countries were added to the list of countries whose citizens will be automaticaly refused asylum in UK.
Yugoslavia(Serbia&Montenegro) is on the list!!!
Why?
Because,number of Albanians coming to UK and claiming asylum is on the increase!But,oh God,world is a funny place,this time,Albanians are claiming that "if they go back to Kosovo they will be killed by their Albanian countrymen for colaborating with Miloshevich regime!!!"
Thousands of them!The same situation and explanation is in Germany and Austria!
99 posted on
02/11/2003 2:46:08 PM PST by
branicap
To: Tamodaleko; joan; branicap
I understand Serbs wanting to keep all of Kosovo out of a sense of sovreignity and history and cultural heritage and all those noble sentiments. If the people of Serbia want to keep it badly enough to chuck their tax money into that black hole for all eternity, then fine, it's their business. If they'd rather let the Albanians have their miserable little plot in the south and live there in poverty and crime (with UNESCO protecting their cultural and religious monuments there) while Serbia kept the northern part, fine.
Ref the three points in #84:
1. US policy w/illegal immigrants You mean give them amnesty and citizenship and welfare so they can vote Democrat? No, seriously, my answer to that one is "requires second point".
2. Rumsfeld's policy w/war against terrorism Tried it, got 'em bombed by NATO.
3. Bush's policy of taking down the regime Again, requires second point.
100 posted on
02/11/2003 3:22:51 PM PST by
wonders
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson