what do you think about kosovo? and tibet?

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by pedro1974, Mar 24, 2008.

  1. pedro1974

    pedro1974 Well-Known Member

    Hi all, I hope noone get upset about this topic and about my ideas.

    I cant understand how the usa and ue permitted (supporting and recognizing it) the born of kosovo, a fake state, stolen at the serbia nation.

    they said the 90% of popolation is albanian, but they dont says to us why the serbs had to abandoned that own land, how the churchs were destroyed by criminals covered by usa and ue...

    as well I cant understand how usa and ue can do nothing for stop the brutal repression in tibet.
    even a kids could recognize that tibet is an other country, different from china and its just occupated by them with the force.

    usa and ue always think to rapresent the freedom and the good part of the world, they were in afghanistan and iraq for "help" the local popolation (...) :roll:
    why they dont do nothing for the tibet?
    china is too big for them?
    china is a good partner?

    thanks for your opinions
  2. eso

    eso Well-Known Member

    I have not time right know, but I will try to write longer reply about this topic later. In short - I think that after the horrible war, no ideal solution exists.

    Well, these questions are (unfortunately) much easier to answer.

    China has intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads.

    China owns American dollar - every one American owes $4000 to China - read this article: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200801/f ... se-dollars

    There is 1.3 billlion Chinese citizens and American and European companies dream about selling goods to them.
  3. Alexx

    Alexx Well-Known Member

    Cannot speak about Tibet, I have not enought information about it (which is probably because of China forbiden press from being there).

    But to Kosovo - it is easy to say "Kosovo is Serbia" or "Kosovo is Albanian" but the truth is more complicated.

    Last year, I was in Nish (Niš) - closest bigest serbian town to Kosovo borders. All people I have been speaking with, told me not to go to Kosovo, because I will be killed there or so, but none of those people (serbians) has never even been there. There is no regular public transport between Serbia and Kosovo, I was told there are some "unmarked" white vans going from Nish to Prishtina, but I did not find them.

    So since then I am asking myself: "Why do they so hardly insist on Kosovo being Serbian, when they do not go there, and do not recomend foreigners to visit Kosovo?"

    If nothing goes wrong, I am gonna go to Kosovo this summer, from Macedonia (regular bus line 10 times daily, none to Serbia - curious, isn't it?) to see on my own and speak with people living there to get objective opinion.

    Till then, I will just hope there is not gonna start some "conflict".
  4. pedro1974

    pedro1974 Well-Known Member

    thanks for your replies.

    of course I do not wish any conflict in kosovo, but I have to support the serbian cause.

    think about "someone" decide miami is not an american territory only cause 90% of the popolation come from hispanic countries (that its truth...).
    or some german city with turkish, or italian, french zone as well...

    for what I know, kosovo was a serbian territory for centuries, they built church.

    what I cant understand, how the countries that supported the kosovo indipendence, didnt use the same right for other region?
    why france still occupied territories in polinesia, in extreme asia?????
    why uk agree with kosovo freedom and not with the northern ireland?
    why holland (and belgium in the near past had many african colonies) recognized the new state and not the indipendence of some small island in caribic sea they own?

    if there is a reason should be the same everywhere.
  5. eso

    eso Well-Known Member

    Again - if it happened after gory war, who knows. These things happen, where people start to kill and rape their neighbors. Sometimes they have to be separated for some time. Like in Ireland, or Israel/Palestine or Korea.

    I believe that main difference is ethnic clensing executed by Serbian forces and 20 000 Kosovo women raped by Serbian soldiers and policemen.

    Personaly I'm not very enthusiastic about Kosovo independence, because I'm afraid there is big chance that Kosovo will change in islam state. But I don't think that Serbia could rule in Kosove either.

    It's like German resettlement from Sudetes in 1945. I'm sure it was tragedy for some Germans, but in atmosphere of that time there was no other solution.
  6. Petr_B

    Petr_B Well-Known Member

    Well, I will answer these questions for you, it's really simple.
    #1 I believe that during the era of the First Republic many Czechs didn't visit "Sudety" nor they felt the need to do that and yet they still didn't want to let them go, right?
    #2 Because they think it's not safe there.

    There's so many suspicious things about Kosovo and NATO attack on Serbia in 1999:
    * If one watched Wag the Dog movie, it's really hard not to draw parallels between it and Serbia bombing, considering it happened right at the time of Levinski's case.
    * Did Albright use it in an attempt to prove that even woman can have balls?
    * On what basis NATO attacked Serbia, I don't know much about NATO but I assume it should act only if one of its members is attacked/endangered?
    * What about Yugoslavia's (at that time) UN membership being suspended for the time of NATO ambush, was is the right thing to do?
    * It's rather ironic that US government leading "War on Drugs" and "War on Terror" supports Kosovo Liberation Army, many members (and leaders) of which have been engaged in both drug trafficking and terrorism.
    * There are other theories about why Clinton's administrative attacked Serbia, at least some of them being true: They wanted to appease Muslims, to compensate for Israel support. They wanted to increase military presence and thus control in the region (search for Camp Bondsteel). They want to exploit vast mineral resources in Kosovo, control the traffic routes, ....

    You might want to check out expert opinion of people who know about what they are talking, e.g. like this interview with former high-ranked United Nations official or our own J. Dienstbier, who've been engaged in Balkan affairs for quite some time. These are not like e.g. some 9/11 lunatic conspiracy theories.

    Anyway, for me the Serbia bombing were rather cold shower. It happened shortly after Czech Republic joined NATO and we were told how peaceful organization which exists only to protect its members it is. Well, we could see how it really is, but it's better to get rid of one's illusions sooner than later.
  7. Alexx

    Alexx Well-Known Member

    I just guess past should be left in past, but what is important is future. If there is gonna be peace in the region, Kosovo liberation army will have nothing to liberate, serbians sooner or later put up with Kosovo independence, and one day, hopefully, both Serbia and Kosovo, and all other ex-Yugoslavian countries, will be part of EU and schengen area with no inner borders and will live next to each other peacefully, as czechia or poland with germany, or france with england. That is what I believe in, and I hope they will realize, both albanians and serbians, that this is possible and important goal.

    But now situation looks like small version of cold war between Serbia (Russia) vs. Kosovo (USA), as we know it from 1950-1990 Germany in better case, or Korea (or Vietnam) in worse case.
  8. BMoody

    BMoody Well-Known Member

    I talked to a Serbian international student here in Nevada recently and she pointed out that Kosovo was an extremely important historic part of the Serbian identity. It had to either do with a famous battle there or the start of a Serbian kingdom at that point. Essentially, the Albanians, to her, were unwelcome immigrants onto her homeland.

    She then went on about how she and her family would fight and die for Serbia. Scary stuff aye?

    The U.S. and E.U., in my book, should have left Kosovo to the Serbs. I believe that now there very well maybe a war over it again. Let's hope not. If there is no war over it, then perhaps it was for the better, but if there is one, then it was definately not worth it.

    As for Tibet, the whole world should condemn China's imperialism there, but economies and power politics don't always bow down to moral principles.
  9. kibicz

    kibicz Well-Known Member

    Its exactly the same as Sudety in Bohemia - first it was Czech-settled area where German colonists gradualy gained majority(not everywhere) - sending them back was the best possible resolution(How calm is it now). Too bad EU and USA would never approve it in Kosovo.. every nation deserves its own state, but not second state at another´s land..
  10. PGN

    PGN Well-Known Member

    Here's why NATO got involved:

    http://www.osce.org/publications/odihr/ ... 506_en.pdf

    Here's interviews of people directly involved from both sides:

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... cleansing/

    I'm not sure why there is any debate, look at the links, they are not pro US, EU, or NATO. There was ethinic cleansing going on, if we as a society, race, creed or what have you accept ethinic cleansing, then yes, we should never have gotten involved. The Human Race has advanced to the point where we don't accept this.

    There are a couple things that I don't understand or disagree with;

    The thread started out with basically why did US/EU/NATO interfer with Kosovo and in the same post why isn't the US interfering with Tibet. So we are bad ( :roll: ) for getting involved in Kosovo and we are bad( :roll: ) for not getting involved in Tibet......where is the logic in this? Is this a bash the US thread?

    We next come up with ICBMs with nuclear warheads....20 Silo based missiles....we're not talking MAD that we had in place during the cold war.

    Reply to the stereo typing of Americans....evey one American does not owe $4000 to China nor do we all drive SUVs not exercise and eat fast food everyday.

    The latest profile for Miami of persons of Hispanic or Latino origin is 61.3%, not 90%.

    Generally establishing facts from Hollywood movies is not real history. Albright proving that she had intestinal fortitude, NATO attacking Serbia, War on Drugs, Lewinski, appeasement of the Muslims, exploit mineral resources.......

    There was ethinic cleansing, everyone sat on thier rear ends during Rwanda in 93 as ethinic cleansing was occurring. I remember the Russian aircraft coming into the airport in Bangui while bits and pieces of real stories, not Hollywood stories started to filter out of the jungle. We, meaning the civilized world totally screwed up there.

    NATO illusions? Showing that ethinic cleansing is not an accepted method....that mission was stabilize, humanitarian relief, and separate the warring factions.

    Sorry if I offended anyone.
  11. Petr_B

    Petr_B Well-Known Member

    I'm not a lawyer so I guess it would be no use to read some documents to see if the war was legal by international laws or not.

    I understand it points out US hypocrisy/dual standards, on one hand they crush the little country (Yugoslavia/Serbia), on the other hand they let much worse things (China and many others) go. By the way, you can stop waving the US flag, I'm not one of US bashers but I'm not blind/dumb either.

    What does Hollywood to do with this, these are valid assumptions, don't get confused by the movie link (have you even saw it?).

    The question is not whether there were incidents involving Serbs/Albanians. Bad image of Serbs aside, there's little doubt there was something bad happening there. The question is how many people were REALLY affected, not counting those incidents staged by KLA (I won't take cheap shots and compare it to "We have to attack Iraq because we know for sure it has WMDs and it's ready to use them.")
    But, did the situation really demand this bad solution, where many and many Serbs were killed in bombings and worse, NATO failed to prevent retaliation on Serbs residing in Kosovo, resulting in reverse ethnic cleansing.
  12. eso

    eso Well-Known Member

    I agree with you on everything you wrote except this one.

    Yes, you do ;) Of course, not voluntarily :)
    But through your government and companies, which goods you buy from, you do :)
  13. wer

    wer Well-Known Member

    Peace for our time, that sounds familiar.

    Die letzte territoriale Forderung? That sounds very familiar.

    ...the settlement of the (...) problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace.

    Damn it, that sounds very very familiar.

    For Serbians, it is also a religious center, a lot of Orthodox churches and monasteries are placed there.

    But I think the Serbians are scared of extinction by salami tactics at the most. Every small national state is scared of it and insistence on territorial integrity and inviolability of frontiers is the only defense against it.

    Please, read carefully. The first post is not about interference with Kosovo, it’s about independence of Kosovo.

    We can discuss what is ethnic cleansing, whether there was some ethnic cleansing, from witch side, whether an intervention was needed, what form of intervention was the right one etc.

    But this all is irrelevant in the matter of the independence. During the NATO campaign in Serbia, NATO/UN/EU/USA guaranteed the territorial integrity of Serbia. Since the establishing of the UN control in Kosovo there were practically no problems with Serbians, but a lot of problems with Albanians. So, what justifies the radical change of opinion?

    This evidently points out the double standards. I think the problem of Kosovo is enough for one thread, we can discuss Tibet in a new thread.

    And yes, there are double standards, or in fact, in the matter of Albanians there are even triple standards, just compare the NATO approach to Albanians in Montenegro, Serbia and Macedonia.

    You are the first who mentioned something like that.

    Ho! Ho! One American’s share of the US debt is about $31000, $4000 is the share of the US debt to China.
  14. PGN

    PGN Well-Known Member

    Petr, it is unfortunate that you will not allot the time to read those links. It has nothing to do with being a lawyer. When you mentioned the Wag the Dog movie as one of your points but won't look at all angles of the discussion....well, there really isn't a discussion is there?

    Petr, that is US bashing, the event was a NATO operation yet you say that it points out US hypocrisy/dual standards. Why don't you feel that it points out NATO or U.N. international tribunal hypocrisy?

    It's not a matter of "waving the US flag" it's a matter of applying standards selectively to the US without including the rest of the nations/organizations involved. I'm not promoting the US nor waving the US flag, something to think about; look at DjAvatar's posts here and notice the places that have been visited by that poster. Could it be that the more travel that is done, the more understanding of different cultures happen....just a thought.

    Yes, I have seen the movie, it would be difficult to discuss if I hadn't, and yes I really wish that you would read those links provided earlier so that you can get a holistic understanding of the dynamics involved in that event.

    Petr, please expand your knowledge of the subject. Your segue into Iraq, no problem, that isn't cheap shot, it appears that you want to be confrontational, than again maybe not. You can bring that up in another thread or PM me if you want. :wink:
  15. PGN

    PGN Well-Known Member

    Eso, no I don't so na..na..na...na..na, I'm rubber your glue, everything bounces off of me and sticks to you. :lol: A disclaimer, that last sentence was lighthearted joking.

    Now serious:

    My intuition tells me that the global financial monster that we* have created isn't as black and white as that. A burp in the markets in Europe, Asia, or America has a global effect. I don't have stocks, bonds or any other financial burden that China has invested in. I don't owe China.

    Of course I'm no financial guru so I could just be living in a pohatku (sp).

    *When I post 'we' I mean the world community, not the US.
  16. PGN

    PGN Well-Known Member

    Wer, you may not be picking up the theme of the post, talking about Afghanistan, Iraq, Tibet, and China has very little to do with Kosovo independance. Reading the post carefully brings this theme out.

    IMO, that is relevant when the thread started going the way of NATO attack on Serbia, Hollywood Movies, members attacked/endangered, appeasement of Muslims and so on.

    By not addressing these points within the thread, how do you address Kosovo's independance?

    There is a trend in some of the threads here which stereotypes Americans, the SUV, exercising, fast food IMO is the same as claiming that every American owes China $4000.

    Ho! Ho! $31000, no we don't......Same effect as your sentence :wink:

    Where are you getting this scoop from, I really would like to understand where you're coming from on this.
  17. eso

    eso Well-Known Member

    I believe that in article I linked it's nicely explained:
    http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200801/f ... se-dollars
  18. PGN

    PGN Well-Known Member

    Eso, I did read it, that's where I got the segue to MAD in my post. MAD is mentioned on the 4th page of the article :wink:

    Overall it is a good article and is nicely written and brings out some interesting points to ponder. Something to keep in mind is that it is one man's opinion. Predicting the market is akin to predicting the weather. I will add in that no where in the article does he talk about the Bretton Woods arrangement that reflected the internation system that was used from 1945 to 1973. Economists talk of us* being in an unofficial Bretton Woods II phase of economic development.

    IMO, breaking a single source down into every "American owes China $4000" does not take into account all of the dynamics that play in this scenario.

    *meaning the world, not US only
  19. GlennInFlorida

    GlennInFlorida Well-Known Member

    "I owe my soul to the company store"
    Tennessee Ernie Ford - 1955

  20. Sova

    Sova Well-Known Member

    First to answer pedro1974's question, which in turns relates to the other comments I've quoted.

    @pedro1974: Yes, China is too big for both the EU and USA to go to war over Tibet. Any attempt at a military resolution to the Chinese occupation of Tibet would start a global conflict likely to dwarf that of World War II. Remember, there are about 1.2 billion Chinese, and yes, as someone else pointed out, they have nukes, as well. And no, it has absolutely nothing to do with being trade partners.

    @pedro1974, Petr_B, and wer: There can be no "easy" military resolution in Tibet as in Kosovo. Note I say "easy" only as a relative word, since while preventing Serbian occupation and ethnic cleansing of Kosovars was readily possible from a military standpoint, doing the same in Tibet is not militarily feasible without an immense loss of life on both sides and likely throughout the world.

    We don't live in an ideal world; hence, one can not look on these two decisions as a double standard. To do so is superficial reasoning, at best. Such decisions have to be made based on weighing the predicted outcomes and consequences of action (one reason why the Iraq conflict has become such a mess). Military action in Tibet is suicidal (and this even before considering the military logistics of terrain, supply chains, etc.). No rational human could justify the consequences of taking such action there without the existence of an imminent threat from China of more aggression/expansion.

    (by the way, why do you think China hasn't invaded Taiwan? same reason--they don't want to start a huge war, either)

    So, get off your high horses, or lobby your own government to send an army to Tibet--that is, if you think sending troops to fight for a free Tibet is such a simple and obvious decision! :x

    @PGN: If you recall, the U.S. under George Bush senior tried something similar in Somalia in '92, and to what effect? Virtually none, and this largely because there was no governmental infrastructure for the aggressors to defend. They just melted into the woodwork, and conducted a guerrilla war against the U.S. and later the U.N. So after 2-1/2 years, the U.S. and U.N. cut their losses, gave up and left.

    The crazy thing about it was that the U.S. was criticized first not for going to Somalia, then when they failed to achieve any lasting peace were criticized for going at all. I seriously doubt that the U.S. or the U.N. would have had any more success in Rwanda.

    It's not that I don't believe that these causes are not worth fighting for. It's that logistically they are all but impossible, and therefore impractical.

    P.S. Sorry for the long rant.

Share This Page