302. jexster - March 28, 1999 - 9:45 AM PT
There'll be no ground troops with 70% of the people opposing it and oppostion among other allies too.
But to answer the academic question, we could send troops through Albania and all or part of the 10,000 now in Macedonia once the Serbs are sufficiently shell-shocked.
303. AzureNW - March 28, 1999 - 9:50 AM PT
pellenilsson -
Well, if Serbs are around, their ears are really burning. I've been surprised at many of the comments I've heard about Serbs, expressed from all over the political spectrum. No one seems concerned at all about offending them if they are listening.
304. pellenilsson - March 28, 1999 - 9:53 AM PT
jexter Message #302
LOL. Have you any idea, any idea at all, of the nature of the terrain between Albania and Kosovo? Are you at all familiar with Enver Hoxha's policy of isolationism which not only discouraged but prevented building communications with the neighbours, especially the renegade Tito? Putting in troops through Albania, what a joke!
305. AzureNW - March 28, 1999 - 9:56 AM PT
Re: Message #303
I bring this up because I think it portends the course of this war. I'm seeing a wide range of average Americans, ignorant and educated, conservative and liberal, rich an poor, all slavering at the prospect of bashing the Serbs into oblivion. Just thought you'd like to know.
306. pellenilsson - March 28, 1999 - 10:06 AM PT
Azure Message #305
But what do the Serbs say? There must be a significant community in the US and many of them are likely to support Milosevic. Emigrant communities are often quite extreme. Are they to be bashed too? Taken into protective custody perhaps? Like the Japanese during WWII.
307. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:10 AM PT
Pseudo:
Your desire to refrain from placing the blame on this on our leaders is perplexing. If George Bush was in office, let's say, he would most likely agree with your view and refrain then from taking military action.
Why then do you wish to pretend this is some sort institutional problem, then? Ultimately, leaders make the decisions.
I understand you have, in general, a desire to keep out of partisan politics and look at things as problems of institutions or theory. But it was Bill Clinton who ordered American troops into the region, not NATO. The US has a veto over such actions.
308. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:13 AM PT
And Arky:
You are only able to grasp things on the most superficial of levels; you are hardly the one to chide for shallow analysis.
Apparently you think there are two sides to this issue. Well, no duh. There are two sides. However, there is a right decision and a wrong decision. Personally, I feel Clinton has made the wrong decision.
The fact that you will, as per usual, say nothing because you don't even trust your limited mental faculties to form an opinion does not deter the rest of us from expressing ours. You're not offering your own support or criticisms; you're content to snipe from the sidelines and merely carp about others' statements.
309. spudboy - March 28, 1999 - 10:15 AM PT
And then there are those Republican paragons of courage and consistency.
310. AzureNW - March 28, 1999 - 10:19 AM PT
pellenilsson -
I haven't heard anyone publicly express any support whatsover for Milosevic in my region, even though there are a lot of Russians here. There was a demonstation by a Serb community in Chicago in the news this week, but that's the first Serb community in the US I've ever heard of.
No one here feels threated by Serbs, they simply despise them as an unspeakably vile people. A Serb who openly supported Milosevic here would have a *lot* of explaining to do.
311. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:21 AM PT
Spudboy:
We could have armed the Kosovars. That would have been "doing something," as Lott suggested.
But no. That would lead to further war. And war is bad, in liberal's minds, unless it's a high-minded southern Fatboy shooting cruise missiles. Then war is good.
So now we have a poorly armed Kosovar population being slaughtered by well-armed Serbian irregulars (and hell, maybe regulars; who knows?) All because Clinton decided he had to make war WITHOUT making war.
312. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 10:22 AM PT
AzureNW
“Obviously, none of the people I know personally are Serbs, but I would say they represent a wide spectrum of ordinary Americans.”
You would be wrong. I don't believe a wide spectrum of Americans all agree that all Serbs are the vilest people on earth.
313. pellenilsson - March 28, 1999 - 10:23 AM PT
Azure Message #310
"that's the first Serb community in the US I've ever heard of."
I guess you know less about the US than I do. End of discussion.
314. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 10:24 AM PT
arkymalarky
“And this is a NATO action and has the support of the other NATO allies.”
Does this mean that if Bill gets cold feet, the operation is likely to continue because it isn't his action?
315. AzureNW - March 28, 1999 - 10:26 AM PT
The joke being laughed at in an open restaraunt on Friday night was napalm (sp?) as a clean burning way to remove the Serbs after all the Albanians leave.
316. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 10:28 AM PT
I watched quite a bit of Serb footage of the downed F-117.
Can someone with a bit of military knowledge help me out? Why didn't we send in a few B-52s and B-2's with a few loads of 2000 pound bombs to break the plane into rubble. I'm not suggesting the resulting rubble would provide no clues about the technology, but it certainly would make it more difficult.
As I watched the footage of the burning plane, I could only assume they were waiting for it to cool off so they could sell it to the highest bidder.
317. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 10:29 AM PT
"You are only able to grasp things on the most superficial of levels; you are hardly the one to chide for shallow analysis."
Au contraire, Boba. I fully grasp the depth of your idiocy, and it is indeed profound.
318. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 10:32 AM PT
Did anyone catch the caller to Cspan this morning, noting that Americans thought it was so horrible for Tito to use force to keep the peace. How much better to use our approach, where we use NATO to use force to keep the peace.
Meet the new Boss;
Same as the old Boss.
319. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:32 AM PT
Arky:
It's also rather humorous that BTerry and I are "shallow" for faulting Clinton's decision, whereas your implied opinion -- that Clinton is acting prudently and properly, no matter what he does -- is somehow automatically "deeper."
Why?
Just because you're supporting a liberal, I guess. Your opinion is automatically clothed in the mantle of high-mindedness.
320. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:33 AM PT
"Meet the new Boss;
Same as the old Boss."
What song is this from, FTC?
321. jexster - March 28, 1999 - 10:34 AM PT
Albania is a perfect insertion point for commandos. Rangers Ready!
Actually, I would not be surprised if, after a sustained bombing campaign, a relatively small number of Royal Hussars and Bundeswehr commandos would be decisive.
The question, however, is academic to all except Pentagon planners who are developing such scenarios and you, Pennie, who seem to delight in the academic and men made of straw.
322. jexster - March 28, 1999 - 10:37 AM PT
Unlike Pennie, I am not overawed by an army that thrives on atrocities. Pretty easy to shoot unarmed civilians and herd them with T-72's. Quite a different matter to fight a disciplined force, even a small one.
323. jexster - March 28, 1999 - 10:39 AM PT
Tommy WHO?
324. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 10:44 AM PT
Boba,
I wasn't chiding you and BTerry for faulting Clinton. I share your views to a degree, though I do think it's important to remember that it is a NATO action, which means it has their support for the most part. It was the ridiculous back and forth, from BTerry's Message #264 through about #279, with no substantive considerations regarding the situation. It was degrading the quality of discussion, imo, which is fine. I don't control the tone or direction threads take. But I felt compelled to comment on it.
325. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:48 AM PT
Arky:
One good thing about Republicans: When we have a war, we make no apologies about it. We actually fight a war.
We do not attempt to square the circle and attempt to fight a war by NOT fighting a war; i.e., by conducting a "police action" or granting "military assistance" or by ordering "reprisals" against the Serbs.
And Arky:
Here's three little rules I use for determining if we should be involved in war:
1) Is it important to US interests? I.e., is it worth losing 10,000 young American lives for?
2) Are we on the "right" side, or the colorably "right" side? THis is not as important as the first point, but it's always nice.
3) Is this essentially a conventional warfare, where Americans will enjoy the full benefit of their technological and material advantage? Or is this more like Vietnam, a civil war, a guerilla war, where American soldiers are little better off than peasants with AK-47's?
Here's Kosovo in my opinion:
1) Not vital to the US, not even close. Yes, people can "feel bad" about the violence. So what? 2 million people have been killed in Somalia so far and we bugged out of there. Didn't affect my life any.
2) We're barely on the "right" side. The Kosovars want independence; the Serbs refuse to grant it. The Kosovars are probably right; then again, isn't Lincoln generally applauded for sinking the country into civil war to keep the south?
Let them duke it out themselves. If our hearts are with the Kosovars, give 'em Stinger missiles and anti-tank weapons and M-16's. It worked in Afghanistan.
3) There is a somewhat defined frontier, but this war will be more of a guerilla war than a conventional war, fought house-to-house in towns and in the hedgerows. On the ground, America's great firepower will mean fairly little; our soldiers will only enjoy a slight advantage over the
326. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:48 AM PT
On the ground, America's great firepower will mean fairly little; our soldiers will only enjoy a slight advantage over theirs.
Now, that's not the most penetrating of analyses, I'll grant. But I'd be shocked, Arky, if you had an analysis that even came close to that shallow briefing I just gave.
To you, Democrats are always right and Democratic Wars are always good. That simple.
327. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:50 AM PT
Yes, Arky, BTerry and I engaged in very brief back-and-forth statements at one point.
These statements are known as "Jokes," more specifically "sarcasm."
I know "sarcasm" ain't big in Arkansas yet, but it's caught on like wildfire out here in NYC. Look out for it-- I think this whole "sarcasm" thing is going to sweep the nation.
328. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 10:56 AM PT
'
Re: NATO suppport
NATO is a defensive alliance. I have no idea why we're attacking another country involved in a civil war. Yugoslavia isn't even a member state, so it doesn't threaten the alliance.
And NATO is just getting the US a "little bit pregnant." When the time comes for ground troops, Americans will make up 80% of the force.
Of course Europe supports the action. They won't be doing any of the fighting.
329. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 10:57 AM PT
Boba,
You make some very valid points, several of which I've thought about. But stability throughout Europe, not just in Western Europe, is in our national interest, and Milosevic has the potential to affect that stability as he has in the past. That doesn't mean that now is the time or Kosovo is the issue over which Milosevic should be challenged. I don't feel I know enough about the potential for a broadening of the conflict with or without our action to have a firm opinion, though I tend to oppose the intervention, at least at this point. However, we left ourselves little alternative after making statements during the negotiations which confined our options, imo.
330. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:00 AM PT
"But stability throughout Europe, not just in Western Europe, is in our national interest, and Milosevic has the potential to affect that stability as he has in the past."
How has he affected stability in the past?
If he killed every single Kosovar, how would that lead to instability?
The only way that a civil war can affect Europe's stability is if the great powers take sides and jump into the war -- just like what happened in WW1, when Russia supported the Serbs vs. the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Just like a damn fool President jumping into the fire, when the Russians STILL support the goddamned Serbs.
331. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 11:00 AM PT
And Boba, get over yourself. Your and BTerry's (particularly BTerry's) remarks in that little exchange were idiotic. Idiocy can be funny, I'll grant you, but please believe me when I tell you that in this case it wasn't.
332. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 11:03 AM PT
"How has he affected stability in the past?"
Well, you see, Boba, there was this country called Yugoslavia. And it had different ethnic groups living there, some of whom practiced different religions. And some of the ethnic groups decided those belonging to the other....
Nevermind.
And I'm contributing to that which I criticized, so I will stop now.
333. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 11:03 AM PT
BobaFett
Interesting. After deciding to double-check I see that it is “*Make* the new boss, same as the old boss.”
WON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN by The Who
334. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:04 AM PT
Arky:
No, I won't believe you, because you A) don't have a sense of humor and B) sarcasm doesn't have to be funny to effectively convey the scorn you have for someone or someone's beliefs.
I could give a shit if you didn't appreciate our little mockfest on liberals. You always go off into a tizzy; why should this time be any different?
Attack on Moscow Embassy Foiled
By Angela Charlton
Associated Press Writer
Sunday, March 28, 1999; 12:44 p.m. EST
MOSCOW (AP) -- Gunmen with grenade launchers and an assault rifle opened fire on the U.S. Embassy in Moscow on Sunday, in an attack apparently linked to opposition to NATO airstrikes on Yugoslavia.
Police firing pistols drove the attackers away from the embassy, which was hit by several bullets but suffered minimal damage. No one was hurt.
Protesters in other capitals around the world demonstrated Sunday against the ongoing NATO operation, directing most of their anger at the United States.
No one claimed responsibility for the Moscow attack. Russia fiercely opposes the NATO bombings, and rallies have been held at the U.S. Embassy since Thursday.
335. bottomfdr - March 28, 1999 - 11:06 AM PT
Jexster: You are right about the Yugoslavian army. That army like the army of Iraq, like the armies of Latin America. like the armies of most such nations are good for only one thing: waging wars of atrocity against their own disarmed people. The Yugoslavian army would be eaten alive by NATO forces.
336. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:07 AM PT
Arky:
More idiotic blather:
As you said:
"Well, you see, Boba, there was this country called Yugoslavia. And it had different ethnic groups living there, some of whom practiced different religions. And some of the ethnic groups decided those belonging to the other..."
As I have already answered:
"The only way that a civil war [in Yugoslavia] can affect Europe's stability is if the great powers take sides and jump into the war -- just like what happened in WW1, when Russia supported the Serbs vs. the Austro-Hungarian Empire."
You see, the lesson of WW1 is don't start a war over the fucking Balkans. Clinton seems to think the lesson is, "Start a war over the Balkans so you can avoid a later war in the Balkans."
Idiocy.
Who the fuck cares about Kosovo? Give 'em weapons. Let them settle it themselves.
337. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 11:13 AM PT
Let's see, we are bombing Yugoslavia because one group of people in the country is killing another group of people in the country.
And we have a long history of intervention every time this takes place.
For example, the Chinese were slaughtering the Tibetans until we went in there and stopped them.
Oh wait. We didn't do that. But it isn't nice to attack campaign contributors.
But we certainly intervened when the east Timorese were attacked.
Oh wait. We didn't do that. It isn't nice to attack campaign contributors.
Face it Milosevic. If you don't contribute to the Democratic Party, you'll be bombed into submission.
338. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:14 AM PT
"The Yugoslavian army would be eaten alive by NATO forces."
Probably incorrect. The Yugoslavian army would be at least as effective as the Iraqis in a conventional (frontier/battle-line) type war. They'd inflict more casualties, but they'd certainly lose.
In an unconventional war, which a ground war in Yugoslavia would probably be (at least it would be more akin to an unconventional (guerilla-type) war than a purely conventional war), America loses most of its advantage and we become just a bunch of teenagers with M-16's, just like in Vietnam.
A war in Yugoslavia wouldn't be nearly as bad as Vietnam in this respect, but it would be somewhere between the Gulf War and Vietman.
339. AzureNW - March 28, 1999 - 11:15 AM PT
BobaFett -
The U.S. military establishment loves having a target they can compare to Hilter. There are probably 10,000 young Americans within my zip code willing to risk their lives for a chance to use high-tech weapons in a real war against real bad guys.
340. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:16 AM PT
FTC:
You know, as a matter of setting the historical record straight, *I* was the first one to vomit in the park.
341. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:20 AM PT
"There are probably 10,000 young Americans within my zip code willing to risk their lives for a chance to use high-tech weapons in a real war against real bad guys."
Incorrect. You are truly a dope, Azure. The men in our military are almost always resistant to going to war.
Think of it this way: Do you like it better at work when you have down time or when you're going beserk?
Do you imagine they like leaving their families? Do you imagine they like risking their lives? Getting little sleep? Living in tents?
And the military is against this war more than others. The simple reason: a confused situation guarantees more US casualties. The Gulf War was a fairly straightforward situation: the bad guys are on that side of the line, we're on this side. So our soldiers are probably a bit worried.
In addition, they have no idea what the fuck they're fighting for.
342. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 11:20 AM PT
Someone on one of the news shows suggested that the Kosova action is a Wag-the-dog action to deflect reaction to the Cox report of China, due soon. Does anyone Know when this report will be delivered? One person suggested it will be delayed until the war is over, in which case we might be at war for awhile.
343. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 11:22 AM PT
Who is the official arbiter of who is a terrorist organization?
Someone on one of the news shows reported that the KLA is a terrorist organization. How can I confirm this?
344. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:23 AM PT
FTC:
Someone said it would be out by April first, but they're trying to get it out before then.
It is going to cause a fucking firestorm. We do not yet know the third of it.
As for wag the dog:
It has occurred to me. But this President has so many scandals that they will ALWAYS coincide with one of his regularly-scheduled tantrum bombings. There's just no avoiding it. If you have a scandal a month and a missile attack a month, there's going to be a lot of overlap.
345. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:25 AM PT
FTC:
The KLA was being regularly described as a terrorist, or at least a guerilla warfare, organization a year and a half ago.
Within the last three months they've been annoited freedom fighters.
They're both, of course. But let's not kid ourselves that the KLA is out there wearing powdered wigs and distributing Thomas Paine-style pamphlets.
346. bottomfdr - March 28, 1999 - 11:34 AM PT
The real danger is that this conflict could spread to whole area. The really big question is: if Russia tries to penetrate Turkey frtom the rear, will Greece help?
347. ScottLoar - March 28, 1999 - 11:38 AM PT
Message #325 is correct, and it only took 325 posts.
348. AzureNW - March 28, 1999 - 11:40 AM PT
"The men in our military are almost always resistant to going to war."
Why do you think they smile when they talk about war? Why did they join the military in the first place?
Did you happen to see William Cohen and General Shelton(?) enthusiastically describing to CNN's Wolf Blitzer the results of the bombing so far? They were very clearly enjoying themselves.
Bobo, you are the dope if you deny that career military personnel enjoy war. It's the whole purpose of and justification for their existence! You must not pay much attention to what is going on around you.
349. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:45 AM PT
Azure:
Sure. I'm positive Cohen and Shelton are psychopaths who get a sexual tingle when they think about "one hit kills" and "collateral damage."
Further, officers need war to advance their careers. Not so the Enlisted man, who probably enlisted because of poor career prospects and the hope of respect and college money. They're the ones who actually do the fighting, you know.
(Except for pilots and low-level (field) officers. They're fighting officers.)
Personally, I'm in law. Do I like it? Not really. I don't imagine that most soldiers are "into" killing.
PS: THey have psychological battery tests to screen out people who are actually "into" killing. The army will train you to kill without much remorse-- but they don't want you coming in all eager to shoot people's brains out.
350. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:51 AM PT
PS:
Cohen and the SAC Nato are out flacking for CLinton over the downed Stealth.
They CLAIM they're "still investigating what caused the downing."
Bull fucking shit.
The pilot is alive. The pilot can tell them if he was struck by artillery or a missile or if it was simply a mechanical malfunction.
Obviously, the plane was shot down. Otherwise, They wouldn't be "investigating" anything. If the pilot told them it had suffered a malfunction, they wouldn't be "investigating" that-- they'd just say it suffered a malfunction; not Clinton's fault, you see, you see? After all, this plane was built in the Bush Administration.
the very fact that they won't report what the pilot believes happens demonstrates that the pilot believes he was shot down.
But the pass-the-buck, avoid-the-truth Presidency won't just admit this.
What a miserable cocksucker.
351. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 11:52 AM PT
BobaFett
“Let them duke it out themselves. If our hearts are with the Kosovars, give 'em Stinger missiles and anti-tank weapons and M-16's. It worked in Afghanistan.”
I agree with much of what you said in Message #325, but I'm concerned about this movement to arm the Kosovars.
The situation isn't parallel to Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a sovereign country that was fighting for its survival against an invading force.
The situation is Yugoslavia is a civil war. While there may be examples where we should intercede in a civil war, I cannot think of any off the top of my head, and I certainly don't see why this situation deserves an exception from my general rule.
If as a country, we want to intercede in every situation where there is an affront to humanity, we are going to be very busy, or very hypocritical.
352. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:54 AM PT
I retract the last post.
If the plane was indeed shot down, I suppose there is some military reason not to admit it. No reason to confirm that the Serbs were successful in whatever tactic they employed, which will only urge them to continue using it.
Of course, they think they shot it down anyway. But no need to confirm this for them, I guess.
So I take back what I said about Cohen and the sup. Allied commander/NATO.
353. bottomfdr - March 28, 1999 - 11:56 AM PT
Cohen and Shelton are psychopaths? They tingle? How about Dick Cheney and General Powell during the Gulf War? Did they tingle? Were they psychopaths? Or did being appointed by a Republican president give then immunity? Wow, you talk about silly.
354. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 11:57 AM PT
FTC:
It is a civil war, but a civil war like the US civil war, with one geographical region pitted against another.
Kosovo is 90% ethnic Muslim and overwhelmingly favors separatism. This it is largely Kosovo vs. Serbia. You can say it's a civil war, but it's similar to two neighboring countries fighting.
There will be loads of guerilla fighting, of course. But this isn't neighbor fighting neighbor. It's the north versus the south.
355. pellenilsson - March 28, 1999 - 12:00 PM PT
jexster Message #321
"Albania is a perfect insertion point for commandos. Rangers Ready! Actually, I would not be surprised if, after a sustained bombing campaign, a relatively small number of Royal Hussars and Bundeswehr commandos would be decisive.
The question, however, is academic to all except Pentagon planners who are developing such scenarios and you, Pennie, who seem to delight in the academic and men made of straw."
Amazing, truly amazing. I'm talking about mountainous terrain and very bad roads and you call that "academic".
But by all means. Bring on the Hussars! Gung-ho! Gung-ho! But I fear they will go the way of the Light Brigade. Gung-ho!
356. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:02 PM PT
Bottomfeeder:
You're an idiot hack. My post was a sarcastic rejoinder to Azure's assertion that Cohen and Shelton were enjoying themselves discussing the destruction they had wrought.
Even confirmed war-lovers like Patton understand the horror of war. I think it was Sherman who said, "War is hell, and thank god that it is, lest men come to like it so much."
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong about Sherman saying that.
357. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 12:04 PM PT
BobaFett
What's the point of telling me that the civil war is geographically based? Does that mean it is OK to intercede?
No way.
As a sovereign country, we ought to respect other sovereign countries or have a damn good reason for interfering.
How would we have liked it if foreign countries had decided that the South had the better argument and sent in forces?
How would we like it today if some ethnic group in some US city decided to declare autonomy and a foreign country decided to support them? We'd go ballistic (literally and figuratively.) Does that mean it's OK because we have the firepower to get away with it?
No.
We ought to follow reasonably ethical and coherent rules.
358. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:07 PM PT
FTC:
I thought your problem with it being a "civil war" was the internacine nature of it, as opposed to the "cleaner" battlelines which are drawn in an invasion.
I did not realize you were relying on the legal issue of a "civil war."
I thought you meant that a "civil war" will necessarily be a dirtier and bloodier war than a conventional invasion type war.
That's what I thought you were getting at, and that's why I brought up the North/South thing.
359. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 12:08 PM PT
BobaFett
Bottomfdr may be an ignorant hack, but I thought the post was a weak attempt at crude humor.
But I am famously humor-impaired™, so perhaps I was wrong.
360. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:10 PM PT
FTC:
No, he misunderstood me. He thought I was really saying they were psychopaths. That's why he went into his knee-jerk defense and asked if the Republican Powell and Schwartzkopf were psychos also.
Perhaps he meant to be humorous, but he misunderstood me and thus launched into a hyperventilating defense when none was needed.
361. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 12:12 PM PT
Boba, you're mixing your quotes. Lee said, "It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
And this isn't simply a civil war, since there is Albania to consider, and Macedonia. Talks of escalation and expansion may be premature, but Yugoslavia doesn't exist in a vacuum.
362. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:13 PM PT
Arky:
Sorry to disagree, but I thought I remembered reading that "War is hell" is only PART of the quote, which goes on to say "and it is well that it is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
At least that's my recollection. But I'm not a big Civil War guy so I could very easily be mistaken.
363. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:16 PM PT
Speaking of quotes, has anyone heard this one before? Some guy just e-mailed it to me:
God is dead. --- Nietche.
Nietche is a fucking homo. --- God.
Pretty fucking erudite and "witty," huh? I figure the fray "intellectuals" will get a big kick out that.
364. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:16 PM PT
Nietzche, I meant.
I think.
365. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 12:19 PM PT
You are. I looked it up to get the exact wording. It can be found at Lee quotes
366. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 12:21 PM PT
Dadgum it, it didn't work because I had to copy it by hand instead of c&p. I must have gotten part of the address wrong. You can do an AltaVista search to get Lee quotes, though, and it was the only entry and that quote was the first quote there.
367. AuNaturel - March 28, 1999 - 12:25 PM PT
The terrain in Kosovo is perfect resistance terrain. A man with a good bolt action actually has a big advantage over an M-16 (or an AK47). Take a few shots from 800 meters, kill or injure a few of the enemy and run like hell. At that range modern battle rifles are almost useless and nothing else can be brought to bear before they are gone. The forests are too thick and the mountains are too steep for vehicles to leave the roads. Your armor can be neutralized or destroyed by landslides in the summer, avalanches in the winter and by destroying bridges, tunnels and emankments at any time.
Airpower? Almost useless in thick forest and mountains. You have to see the enemy to attack them.
The Soviets discovered in Afghanistan that a boulder rolling down a sufficiently long and steep slope can take out the most modern tank. So can a molotov cocktail or a stick of dynamite in the correct spot. I hope we don't haqve to learn this as well.
When the fighting is over for now and the guerrilas have faded back into the civilian population, how do you know who to arrest? They don't wear a scarlet "G" you know. When they retreat back to Serbia proper or Macadonia or Montenegro and the rules of engagement don't allow you to follow, what then?
The Germans found to their chagrin that holding Serbia, even with Croatian help was sheer hell. The Russians didn't bother even trying to occupy it at the end of the war. With the Russians supplying Serbia we are looking at another Vietnam.
Arm the Kosovars like we should have armed the Bosnians and let them fight their own battle. (Sheesh! this sounds like an ad supporting the Second Amendment!)
368. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 12:26 PM PT
Lee quotes
That should work. I'd typed an l as an I.
369. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:28 PM PT
Arky:
The day is yours.
370. bottomfdr - March 28, 1999 - 12:28 PM PT
Bobafett: You flatter the hell out of yourself,pal. Your posts aren't sarcastic; they're just goofy. That's not to say that you don't have a certain erudition. It's just that you are a nut case.
371. arkymalarky - March 28, 1999 - 12:30 PM PT
Haha.
That's to Boba, btw. I'm not going to confess how much I laughed at Bottomfdr's post.
372. pellenilsson - March 28, 1999 - 12:35 PM PT
Boba
Can I ask you a favour? I'm really very interested in the subject at hand. I do appreciate your posts. Please don't go off on a tangent on account of #370.
373. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:36 PM PT
Nut case? I've got a document signed by the director of the Creedmore Psychiatric Hospital certifying that I'm now perfectly sane and mentally "well" again.
I doubt many of you people have that kind of documentation as to *your* sanity.
374. Pseudoerasmus - March 28, 1999 - 12:37 PM PT
Message #343: It would have helped had you been paying attention for the last two years.
Arkymalarky: The breakup of Yugoslavia does not destabilise Europe. The independence of Kosovo, and its necessary result, a civil war in Macedonia, can. There are far more interested parties in the future of Macedonia (Greece, Bulgaria, Albania and Serbia) than in the fate of Kosovo. And what is the most likely way for Kosovo to become independent??? NATO action.
375. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:37 PM PT
Pelle:
too late.
376. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:44 PM PT
"The terrain in Kosovo is perfect resistance terrain. A man with a good bolt action actually has a big advantage over an M-16 (or an AK47). Take a few shots from 800 meters, kill or injure a few of the enemy and run like hell. At that range modern battle rifles are almost useless and nothing else can be brought to bear before they are gone."
While I agree with Au's general point, I'd just like to point out that we have sniper rifles too. But the larger point, which she is correct about, is that when we're reduced to small arms, we're the equals of peasants armed with AK-47's, or even bolt-action rifles. Take airpower and armor and artillery out of the picture and we're in Vietnam all over again.
Of course, we did have a *limited* use of airpower, armor, and artillery in Vietnam. But a fight in Kosova would be similar to Vietnam in how often we'd face the enemy as virtual equals. And if we face them as equals, we'll die in roughly equal numbers. A war of attrition.
377. bottomfdr - March 28, 1999 - 12:46 PM PT
Damn it BobaFett, that last post had some humor in it. Knock it off.
378. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:47 PM PT
You think I'm joking?
Keep thinking that. We'll see how funny you think it is when a disemboweled rabbit shows up on your stoop.
We'll see. Oh yes. We shall see.
379. pellenilsson - March 28, 1999 - 12:49 PM PT
Boba
" But the larger point, which she is correct about, is that when we're reduced to
small arms, we're the equals of peasants armed with AK-47's, or even bolt-action rifles. Take airpower and
armor and artillery out of the picture and we're in Vietnam all over again."
Exactly.
380. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 12:54 PM PT
Russian FM threatens to provide Serbs with arms
MOSCOW, March 27 (AFP) - Russian opposition to NATO air strikes on Yugoslavia rose in pitch Saturday, with hints that Moscow could suspend an arms embargo to Belgrade and with firm condemnation of the strikes by the Duma, the lower house of parliament.
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov implied that Moscow could break the arms embargo, saying that "those who have perpetrated the act of aggression themselves have drawn a line" over all UN resolutions concerning the former Yugoslavia, including the embargo.
381. bottomfdr - March 28, 1999 - 12:55 PM PT
The anology with Vietnam doesn't hold up. The Viet Cong could fade into the general populace because they had a lot of sympathy from the people. These atrocity committing Serbs would have to fade back into a population which is 90% Albanian. Believe me, the Albanians would be more than glad to point them out to NATO forces.
382. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 1:02 PM PT
And I'd just like to point out that historically no war has ever been won by air power alone.
The closest airpower has come to winning a war was Japan and Iraq. But in Japan's case, the surreder came because of two atomic bombings plus an imminent invasion and blockade. In Iraq, while airpower did pound the army into a shell of itself, it still took a land invasion to win the war. And Saddam withheld his Republican Guards from battle, to boot.
Clinton's curious belief that *he* can win wars through bombing and missile attacks, while no one else ever has, is strangely Hitlerian. Hitler also believed that new technologies would allow him to succeed in conquering Europe where everyone else had failed. WHile he got lucky in the sense that tanks and U-boats and modern airpower were more effective than had previously been believed, he belief that events would simply conspire to grant him victory was, of course, ultimately dashed.
And so Clinton clings to the notion that *his* little collection of advantages-- the Stealth fighter and cruise missiles -- will allow him to win a war from the air. He believes this for no other reason than he WANTS to believe it.
Which is the same reason Hitler thought he could capture and hold Europe.
383. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 1:04 PM PT
Pseudoerasmus
“It would have helped had you been paying attention for the last two years.”
Good show. Jump in with a gratuitous slam, and then fail to answer the question. Your lack of civility can be tolerated when you have the decency to follow your showoff slams with the answer, but when you resort to denigrating the question without an answer, your “contributions” are not appreciated.
So am I to assume that it is generally knowledge as to who is the arbiter of terrorist organizations? My apologies for not knowing, although if it were so well-known, I'll bet others would have answered.
384. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 1:04 PM PT
Re: 381
Wrong. Marauding bands of Serbs need only slip back into the Serbian poplulation in the North after executing hit and run attacks. Sure, we'll catch some. Others we won't.
And there are Serbain enclaves inside of Kosovo they can hide in and operate out of, too. Just like in Vietnam.
Guerilla fighters can vanish admidst a friendly civillian population very easily.
385. pellenilsson - March 28, 1999 - 1:04 PM PT
bottomfdr Message #381
You are not on top of things. Already parts of Kosovo have been cleansed from Albanians. It would not take less than one month to deploy a NATO ground force, probably much longer. What do you think about the situation on the ground in that perspective?
On the whole, I have been of the opinion (as have others in this thread) that with Albanians making up 90% of the population of Kosovo there is no way the Serbs could drive them out.
I'm not so sure anymore.
386. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 1:07 PM PT
FTC:
I *did* answer your question; I said that a year and a half ago news reports frequently referred to the KLA as terrorists. Although there was some nuance to this description; terrorist/guerilla liberators/organized crime bands is what they are.
I believe the KLA has never been listed on the US list of terrorist organizations, however. Which doesn't mean much. There's a lot of politics in that list. Remember that Reagan never named Russia as a sponsor of terrorism?
387. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 1:07 PM PT
FTC:
...although I agree that PE's attack was pretty uncalled for.
388. FreetoChoose - March 28, 1999 - 1:12 PM PT
BobaFett
I saw your post.
I thank-you for your post.
It was useful information, although it doesn't answer part of my question. You didn't mention who was describing them as a terrorist organization.
“I believe the KLA has never been listed on the US list of terrorist organizations, however.”
This suggests there is such a list. Do you know who maintains it? Is it online?
389. bottomfdr - March 28, 1999 - 1:13 PM PT
Well, then if all the Albanians are driven out and there are only Serbs left, the job is easier. Everybody you see, you shoot.
390. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 1:14 PM PT
FTC:
Yes, the US puts out an lists of terrorist organizations. I have no idea if this is the State Dept or justice Dept or military or if they all put out their own lists.
There may be many such lists, since I think there must be laws that say "You can't trade with a country which sponsors terrorism" and then of course we must legally declare which states these are and whom they support.
Where is the list? No idea.
391. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 1:16 PM PT
FTC:
Try the NYTimes, though. I read an article there a year ago describing the KLA as guerillas/terrorists/mafiosa. It may or may not be collected with their articles on Kosovo.
392. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 1:20 PM PT
FTC:
Here is the article I'm referring to:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/030298kosovo-rebels.html
393. jexster - March 28, 1999 - 1:21 PM PT
Yea Boba, the WP says the same thing about the KLA. Ngo Dinh Diem seems like a regular Geo. Washington compared to these folks. But by comparison, the Serbian Army??? Slavic nutcases.
394. BobaFett - March 28, 1999 - 1:23 PM PT
From the article...
"In a Jan. 23 attack whose boldness stunned the Serb authorities, rebels stepped into the road near the village of Srbica in the middle of the day and shot dead a local Serbian official, Desimir Vasic, 45, riddling his car with bullets as he lay slumped forward in the driver's seat."
The article also describes the rebels' raids on police stations and such.
395. pellenilsson - March 28, 1999 - 1:26 PM PT
jexster
"Slavic nutcases."
Get a perspective. There are many slavic peoples. Try this on for size:
"Negro nutcases".
396. Pseudoerasmus - March 28, 1999 - 1:27 PM PT
Message #383
Dingbat. Simple knowledge of the chronology of the Kosovo situation since 1989 suffices to show what the KLA is. Do you know anything about the 1996 accords between the Serbs and the ethnic Albanians that resulted in the years' boycott by Albanians of Serbian-run state schools and universities? And how those accords were undermined by KLA terrorism?
397. Pseudoerasmus - March 28, 1999 - 1:28 PM PT
...that resulted in THE END TO the years' boycott....
398. jexster - March 28, 1999 - 1:29 PM PT
Here's three little rules I use for determining if we should
be involved in war:
1) Is it important to US interests? I.e., is it worth losing
10,000 young American lives for?
If its 9,999 lives lost Boba is for it.
399. jexster - March 28, 1999 - 1:32 PM PT
"The anology with Vietnam doesn't hold up. The Viet Cong
could fade into the general populace because they had a lot
of sympathy from the people."
Boy is that a no-brainer. Who's the idiot that's trying to draw Vietnam parallels? There's a straw person even Pennie Ellison could demolish.
400. jexster - March 28, 1999 - 1:34 PM PT
Negro Nutcases = Hutus and Tootsies
Slavic Nutcases = Serbians and on a bad hair day, Ukrainians. Wanna hear the tale about Ukrainian Nationalists and the Violet Death Ray in Kiev, 1918.
The Austrians were right. Greater Serbia should have been crushed in 1914.