No more Slobadan Milosevic...snif,snif

[clandestino]

Goodbye, slooobadan
Who could hang a name on you?
When you change with every new day
Still I’m gonna miss you...


Milosevic's family and supporters are blaming the tribunal for his death… Maybe they should blame it on revenge of the hundreds of thousands of souls that Mr. Milosevic killed in his genocides, while the World watched… Now I hope his family has the decency, and the sympathy, to share the wealth he made with the families of those who he killed. Milosevic's death came just a few months before the expected conclusion of his trial for genocide, which had lasted more than four years. Milosevic's widow, Mirjana, said, "The tribunal has killed my husband." Well, thank goodness, at least the tribunal is good for something. The International Criminal Tribunal released a statement saying that Milosevic's death "will prevent justice to be done in his case.” Say that to the disfigured people six feet underground…

[which doctor]

It's a good thing he died.

[Dr Mindbender]

What a bastard.

If there is a hell, I hope hes boiling in lava with Hitler, Stalin and the rest of the gang....

[Janus]

Why is this new thread in History when there's one in the Politics forum?

Anyways, it must be upsetting for some that Milosevic died without actually being punished for his war crimes particularly those in Kosovo.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 05:04 AM
Why is this new thread in History when there's one in the Politics forum?

Anyways, it must be upsetting for some that Milosevic died without actually being punished for his war crimes particularly those in Kosovo.
Wether or not people cried for him is irrelevant. Plenty of people mourned Hitler, especially Mrs Goebels and what a fucking nut-case she was.
At the end of the day, Slobbo was the big cheese in charge and the buick stopped with him when it came to murdering all those people.

[Janus]

Wether or not people cried for him is irrelevant.
Where did I mention that?


At the end of the day, Slobbo was the big cheese in charge and the buick stopped with him when it came to murdering all those people.
Yes, he was responsible for the ethnic cleasing policies in Kosovo.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 05:41 AM

Wether or not people cried for him is irrelevant.
Where did I mention that?


At the end of the day, Slobbo was the big cheese in charge and the buick stopped with him when it came to murdering all those people.
Yes, he was responsible for the ethnic cleasing policies in Kosovo.
Oh whoops. Sorry misread, its 5am here and ive not slept *yawn*

[Ian]

I'm pretty sure everyone who posted in this thread doesn't have a clue about ex-yugo politics.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 12 2006, 12:35 AM
At the end of the day, Slobbo was the big cheese in charge and the buick stopped with him when it came to murdering all those people.
Was he driving the Buick? ;)

Miles

[Wanted Man]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 05:41 AM
Yes, he was responsible for the ethnic cleasing policies in Kosovo.
Bullshit. Read about the real ethnic cleansing here:

http://emperors-clothes.com/yugo.htm#1


I'm pretty sure everyone who posted in this thread doesn't have a clue about ex-yugo politics.
True. I bet most of the people who are cheering here only remember Milosevic' name from 1999. Back then they probably had no clue about things like capitalism, imperialism and the opposition against them, and only saw some bloody pictures on the news, and that apparently this was a bad guy, but luckily the NATO intervened. And then he went on trial, and he made a pretty good case for himself, so the media shut up about him as quickly as they started whining about him before. Then he dies, and suddenly the whole bit about him gaining immense popularity during the trial is left out, and we once again hear the "evil mass murderer" story. And this time he'll never be able to come back and defend himself.

[Ian]

I recommend everyone so retarded to applaud the death of Milosevic to read the book 'To Kill a Nation' by the American Michael Parenti compiled mostly out of western sources, it dispels many of the myths.

[emokid08]

Glad he's dead. I agree that it's upsetting that he din't get what was coming 2 him. I would have loved to see justice brought to such a monster.

Just a kind sorta related thought - Many believe that had the Soviet Union been around, Milosevic and the atrocities he help frame would never have been able to happen. I don't know, just tossing that out there.

[Ian]

Do any of you get your opinions on current events outside of CNN?

Sure Yugoslavian politics are hard to inform oneself about, but you all seem to have just given up and taken the option of discounting a socialist leader because TV told you to. Read some of the many articles at http://agitprop.org.au/stopnato/ or even read some of Milosevic's quotes, to heard this supposed monster 'in his own words'

"Serbia has never had only Serbs living in it. Today, more than in the past, members of other peoples and nationalities also live in it. This is not a disadvantage for Serbia. I am truly convinced that it is its advantage. National composition of almost all countries in the world today, particularly developed ones, has also been changing in this direction. Citizens of different nationalities, religions, and races have been living together more and more frequently and more and more successfully."
(incidentally this quote comes from his Speech to Kosovo Field, the one the CIA told you he used to whip up a nationalist frenzy)

[Vladislav]

He was murdered. The media is full off shit ........ like usual. His lawyer probably did.
Milosevic was a very hated person by the majority of people.

[Ian]

Funny you say he was hated, on SBS tonight in Australia they interviewed people in Serbia on the street and many were clearly upset by his death, a grown man was crying, a woman who had protested against him throughout the nineties was visibly shaken, to many in Serbia he is akin to Tito.

[Qen]

I'm from Kosovo and I'm an albanian. I was a little upset because he didn't get his verdict. If people here on this board was in Kosovo during the war, they would understand that he was responsible for genocide.

I know this because many of my releatives suffered from the war, My uncle was arrested and inprisoned for no reason. So my only wish right now is to see Kosovos intependence soon.

[clandestino]

There are some people here who have argued that the criminality of Milošević's actions during the Bosnian War have been exaggerated to provide justification for the military intervention. It is fair to say, though, that their views are fairly marginal and not supported by the majority of academic historians of the Yugoslav conflicts… and yes, Milošević was not considered by some contemporaries to be a radical nationalist himself (although some of his followers were). Milošević's rhetoric did not make use of hate speech….but neither did your moms, and she still beat the crap out of you…dude Ian, CNN sucks, I agree... still better than FOX news whre u get your info...lol Why don't you ask Qen to give his perspective, afterall he was there, unlike you surfing in Australia...Genocides have no excuses, not for the name of communism, not for anything else. Still some people love sloooobanbanvic, just as fascist still like Hitler and deny the Holocaust.. are you a fascist Ian? Its funny, just wondering...

[321zero]

Milosevic was a bastard, but the news that he died in his cell after being refused medical treatment doesn't make me happy. I'd have to see Clinton, Major and Kohl hanging high first.

The west was responsible for the dismemberment of Yugoslavia. Germany's unilateral recognition of Croatia initated the ethnic cleansing (of Kriena Serbs), and the United States unilateral recognition of Bosnian independance without reference to the wishes of the (33%) Serbian population led to the proclaimation of the Republika Srpska and the consequent civil war.

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by 321zero+--> (321zero)...Kriena...[/b]

It's Krajina.


Originally posted by Qen+--> (Qen)I'm from Kosovo and I'm an albanian. I was a little upset because he didn't get his verdict. If people here on this board was in Kosovo during the war, they would understand that he was responsible for genocide.[/b]

Since you're mentioning the fact that he's responsible for appaling treatment of Albanians in Kosovo, I hope that you would agree with me that he's not the only one to be blamed for war crimes and ethnic war in Kosovo.

Besides his generals - I'm thinking KLA leaders and Albanian ultra-right politicians. Would you agree with me?


[email protected]
I'm pretty sure everyone who posted in this thread doesn't have a clue about ex-yugo politics.

Prolly.


clandestino
...hundreds of thousands of souls...

Hundreds of thousands?


* * *

Milosevic should be blamed in particular for the decade of dehumanising pseudo-life to which 12 million of people in Serbia and Montenegro were sentenced by his dictatorship, followed by the mafia terror, destruction of culture, mind and the developing capability of the whole nation(s).

All the talk of "war crimes" masks what is really important. Is Milosevic the only person to be blamed for the war in ex-Yugoslavia?? Is there only a one nation which should take the fall for the sake of international spectaclist politics of the capital?

If you would think that, you would be a pathetic "revolutionary left".

[Dean]

I would love and mourn the death of anyone in my family if they turned into a person such as he did. To be glad that death occurs, or to wish death upon others for the purpose of revenge is the very failing of love itself... people undergo drastic changes and yet at heart are still the same person; how can you love somebody, if it is not eternal? How can you love one person and hate another?

[Ian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 11:29 PM
I'm from Kosovo and I'm an albanian. I was a little upset because he didn't get his verdict. If people here on this board was in Kosovo during the war, they would understand that he was responsible for genocide.
Then what? An independent Vojvodina? Bela Kranja in Slovenia were threatening to break away in 2003, why shouldn't they have a seperate state? I think the answer is pretty simple, they would have a seperate state if they were able to rid their regions of Serbians and Roma in the way the NATO backed KLA has.

I don't surf by the way.

[rouchambeau]

Genocide or no, it's good that he was taken out of power and is now dead. May the same fate come to all leaders who abuse their power.

[321zero]

<sarcasm alert>

Oh yeah, and isn&#39;t it good that USUK has moved on to Iraq too. Let Freedom reign&#33;

[clandestino]

Originally posted by DJ&#045;[email protected] 12 2006, 07:04 PM
Is Milosevic the only person to be blamed for the war in ex-Yugoslavia??.....
...If you would think that, you would be a pathetic "revolutionary left".
No Slobabandan is not the only person to be blamer for the war in ex-Yuguslavia... Thats freakin obvious, not even Hitler was the only responsible for the Holocaust... I don&#39;t thinks its up to you to say that anybody is a pathetic revolutionary. Unless its sarcasm... than, go ahead, sarcasm away. Otherwise, it might cause emotional dstress on some people.lol Revolutionaries these days are more sensitive to verbal abuse than past revo. Ian, you live in Australia and don&#39;t surf? You need to come over to my country (Brasil) and live a little.

[Rosario Central]

In a way I admire his courage, he came from noble uprisings, and against all odds he became a figuere for his homeland, I doubt he was responsible for the ethnic cleansning, as tensions were already high, and people were waiting for an excuse to slaugter one another, RIP Slobadan&#33; Also RIP all of those who lost their lives in that conflict, the muslims, the christians, the people&#33;

[Ian]

Why blame Milosevic for the wars? Why not blame the KLA or the Albanian Kosovars who badly treated the Serbs in Kosovo prompting Milosevic to promise protection (a supposedly antagonistic response&#33;&#33; How dare he promise to protect the Serbs, Roma and Albanians to some extent from the heroin trafficking KLA).

Srebrenica was not Milosevic&#39;s fault, Mladic was not under his control, he had tried to reign in the paramilitaries and pushed hard for prosecutions and got many. But of course blame Milosevic for the crimes of NATO, because clearly it was Yugoslav Army forces around Srebrenica and not Dutch imperialist forces.

Hell, while we celebrate the passing of a socialist why not celebrate the murder of 6000 Serbian&#39;s by NATO bombs? Or drink a toast to acheiving a goal of bombing a nation back 100 years...

[RedStarOverChina]

I&#39;m very suspecious of the corporate media... Just because they say he&#39;s a mass murderer doesn&#39;t make it so.

The fact that they poisoned him to death before they reached a verdict shows somethings that&#39;s very suspecious.

[chebol]

Spare a thought for all the Depleted Uranium from NATO shells during the balkan war, and ask that question "Where is it now?".....

[Wanted Man]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2006, 08:20 AM
I&#39;m very suspecious of the corporate media... Just because they say he&#39;s a mass murderer doesn&#39;t make it so.

The fact that they poisoned him to death before they reached a verdict shows somethings that&#39;s very suspecious.
Thoughtcrime&#33; It&#39;s obvious that he poisoned himself to near-death just to get a one-way ticket to Moscow(which vowed to return him after treatment, but ssh :rolleyes: ) to see his family. So they could, like, escape and hide out in the Russian countryside, even though he&#39;d be good as dead. A likely story. ;)

[chebol]

Milosevic&#39;s Serbia: No Relation to Socialism
http://mihalisk.blogspot.com/2005/08/milos...elation-to.html (http://mihalisk.blogspot.com/2005/08/milosevics-serbia-no-relation-to.html)

Occupation Regime in Kosova Begins Privatisation Program
http://mihalisk.blogspot.com/2005/08/occup...ova-begins.html (http://mihalisk.blogspot.com/2005/08/occupation-regime-in-kosova-begins.html)

http://mihalisk.blogspot.com/2004/12/reply...-counts-in.html (http://mihalisk.blogspot.com/2004/12/reply-to-ed-herman-on-body-counts-in.html)
http://search.blogger.com/?ui=blg&q=mihalisk

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2001/435/435p24.htm
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2000/424/424p19.htm
http://www.dsp.org.au/kosova/4_glw.htm
http://www.dsp.org.au/links/back/issue13/Karadjis.htm

[Mesijs]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2006, 06:47 AM
Why blame Milosevic for the wars? Why not blame the KLA or the Albanian Kosovars who badly treated the Serbs in Kosovo prompting Milosevic to promise protection (a supposedly antagonistic response&#33;&#33; How dare he promise to protect the Serbs, Roma and Albanians to some extent from the heroin trafficking KLA).

Srebrenica was not Milosevic&#39;s fault, Mladic was not under his control, he had tried to reign in the paramilitaries and pushed hard for prosecutions and got many. But of course blame Milosevic for the crimes of NATO, because clearly it was Yugoslav Army forces around Srebrenica and not Dutch imperialist forces.

Hell, while we celebrate the passing of a socialist why not celebrate the murder of 6000 Serbian&#39;s by NATO bombs? Or drink a toast to acheiving a goal of bombing a nation back 100 years...
They&#39;re all to blame. Milosevic is ALSO to blame for it. Please don&#39;t tell me he&#39;s an innocent, lovely person who did nothing. He was the leader of the country that fought a bloody war.

Mladic was a commander of Milosevic&#39; army. NATO intervened beacuse innocent people were killed because of their ethnicity. And don&#39;t talk about &#39;Dutch imperialist forces&#39;, that&#39;s pure idiotism. The Serbs were killing thousands of muslims and the NATO tried to keep the order. Now who&#39;s the criminal, Slobodan or NATO?

Right, a socialist. That&#39;s it&#33; He&#39;s a socialist, so let&#39;s just forget all the ethnic cleansing, murders and rapes. By the way, he first was a banking director and then a leading person in the communist party. Indeed very socialist...

It&#39;s really sad to see so much people on this forum who are praising and defending bloody mass-murders just beacause they are &#39;socialist&#39;.

[Ian]

read what I said, he was no angel, but no hitler

[Comrade Yastrebkov]

When the US government of the time goes on trial for the horrific bombing of Yugoslavia, then it would be fair to put Slobodan on trial. As it is, whatever the media say, blaming him alone for the atrocities committed by both sides during the conflict is absurd. And whatever the media says, they themselves admitted to over 20 000 people attending his funeral - so this figure has to be doubled. He was obviously loved, not hated by his nation.

[Lamanov]

Gennady Ziouganov (Геннадий Зюганов, president of Communist Party of Russian Federation (http://www.cprf.ru/)) spoke at his commemoration meeting. I saw it on Serbian BK-TV today; proclamations of "national brotherhood" and "struggle against western nazism".

Bastard. Fucking pseudo-communists&#33;


Originally posted by Comrade Yastrebkov+--> (Comrade Yastrebkov)And whatever the media says, they themselves admitted to over 20 000 people attending his funeral - so this figure has to be doubled.[/b]

Actually, it was about 80000, so says the Serbian police.


Comrade Yastrebkov
He was obviously loved, not hated by his nation.

No, that&#39;s not true. The "nation" (80000 people and others which did not attend) is in a state of fucking confusion. The rest of Serbia (millions of people) despises him.

[Ian]

What is so pseudo-communist about Zhuganov&#39;s speech, everything about it is what is to be expected of a communist making a speech. Are you an idiot?

And sure, only 80 000 went to his funeral, so that means everyone else hates him, get a clue, 10 million people out of 6 and a half billion went to anti-war protests in 2003 against the Iraq war. Does that mean 0.01% of population of the earth opposed the illegal invasion? NO&#33; The great majority did, the same may easily ring true for Serbia, which I assume you have little acquaintence with.

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2006, 12:53 PM
What is so pseudo-communist about Zhuganov&#39;s speech, everything about it is what is to be expected of a communist making a speech. Are you an idiot?
"Pan-Slavism" is "normal" for communists nowdays? :lol:

If Milosevic represents "freedom" of the people of Serbia - as Зюганов claims - that&#39;s enough for me to call them pseudo. And if you would agree with him that would make you a pseudo-leftist too.


[...] NO&#33; The great majority did, the same may easily ring true for Serbia, which I assume you have little acquaintence with.

I lived in Serbia. I live in Bosnia now. I travel to Serbia very often. I watch Serbian TV stations here. I speak Serbian and I&#39;m a Serb national... I&#39;m "acquainted" quite enough. :&#33;: (edit: Oh, yeah; not to mention the Serbian/Balcans history as a huge part of my history studdies.)

It&#39;s not really everyone else hating him, but the majority of people which even today vote on elections for opposing parties. Even though today Serbian Radical Party has the biggest voters&#39; support, most of people in Serbia don&#39;t attend elections. Their abstinence is response to both Milosevic&#39;s/Seselj&#39;s SRS-SPS coalition and the ruling "Democratic" coalition.

[Hiero]

I speak Serbian and I&#39;m a Serb national... I&#39;m "acquainted" quite enough. (edit: Oh, yeah; not to mention the Serbian/Balcans history as a huge part of my history studdies.)

You could probally find a Serbain who is well studied in Serbian/Balcan history who would be pro Milosevic.

Anyway i think you missing the point, which is fact.

The imperialists demonise any anti-imperialist individual and group to gain public support for imperialism. They have done this with Milosevic.

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by Hiero+Mar 20 2006, 12:30 PM--> (Hiero @ Mar 20 2006, 12:30 PM) You could probally find a Serbain who is well studied in Serbian/Balcan history who would be pro Milosevic. [/b]
Actually, you could find people "well studied in history" who are even worse... open fascists, etc. That&#39;s not really an issue here.


Hiero
The imperialists demonise any anti-imperialist individual and group to gain public support for imperialism. They have done this with Milosevic.

That&#39;s true, and no one is disputing that.

But Milošević was demonized through his own dictatorship over Serbia even before Imperialists were ready to openly call him their enemy. That&#39;s also undisputable.

[xprol]

If the NATO/CIA disinformation agents presented this thread to their bosses, they would get a pay rise. They would not deserve it because its not difficult to confuse anarchists and Trots with pro-imperialist propaganda.

[Mesijs]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2006, 12:30 PM

I speak Serbian and I&#39;m a Serb national... I&#39;m "acquainted" quite enough. (edit: Oh, yeah; not to mention the Serbian/Balcans history as a huge part of my history studdies.)

You could probally find a Serbain who is well studied in Serbian/Balcan history who would be pro Milosevic.

Anyway i think you missing the point, which is fact.

The imperialists demonise any anti-imperialist individual and group to gain public support for imperialism. They have done this with Milosevic.
You talk like an idiot in an ivory tower with a very well developed dogmatism.

Milosevic was AN IMPERIALIST HIMSELF&#33; What the hell is socialist in attacking other people and committing genocide on people with another race. Milosevic did everything what is exact the opposite of a true socialist.

And what is imperialist in protecting people who are killed by both Milosevic&#39; men and the fascists in the war? It&#39;s not like the NATO made Yugoslavia into a colony and exploited the working class...

Karl Marx himself would turn around in his grave because of all you people who defend the biggest mass-murderers in his name. And the sad thing is that you believe all the lies about the &#39;good&#39; Milosevic, the &#39;good&#39; Mao, and some of you guys about the &#39;good&#39; Stalin, the &#39;good&#39; Kim-Il Sung and maybe even the &#39;good&#39; Pol Pot. It&#39;s a big shame.

[xprol]

Mesijis,

The issue is not whether or not anyone is &#39;Good&#39; or not. The issue is whether NATO smashed up Yugoslavia or not, triggered civil war and stole all its recourses for the exclusive use of capitalists.

All the posts that fall in with the &#39;west&#39; propaganda, just show how easy it is for the &#39;left&#39; to be diverted onto talking about the &#39;Bad&#39; man instead of exposing the imperialist war drive. You included.

[Hiero]

Actually, you could find people "well studied in history" who are even worse... open fascists, etc. That&#39;s not really an issue here.

Excaclty. It was you who started talking about your credentials.

[Phalanx]

NATO did bomb Serbia and cause many, many killed. But they weren&#39;t responsible for the wars in Croatia and Bosnia. This was mostly Milosevic&#39;s doing. He left the heavy weapons to the Serb militias and he pushed out and took over one-third of Croatia. Milosevic was a very bad person, and I&#39;m still in disbelief that people here support the imperialist bastard.

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by Chinghis [email protected] 21 2006, 12:32 AM
He left the heavy weapons to the Serb militias and he pushed out and took over one-third of Croatia.

All those areas of which you speak of were populated by ethnic Serbs before the war (for centuries), both in Bosnia and Croatia. People everywhere were being "pushed out" by ethnic majority to which they did not belong - by Serbs, by Croats, by Muslims.

You make it sound very simple, or even worse: like it&#39;s the Serbs in general (peasants and workers, to be more precise) to be blamed for starting the war (and by simply having weapons at their disposal, which, oh shit, Milošević "just left there"). :lol:

The war was not "mostly Milosevic&#39;s doing". What about nationalist leaders, preasts, war profiteers, smuglers, Titoist bureaucrats who switched parties and took control of economy, war gangs and criminals? What about Izetbegović, Šešelj, Tuđman, Silajdžić, etc.?


It seems to me how this thread is killing historical materialism for the purpose of one&#39;s having-a-solid-opinion-on-anything.

[xprol]

Imperialist crisis is driving all war, including the smashing of Yugoslavia. The wide mouthed infantile &#39;lefts&#39; on this sight have shown that they will swallow most of the propaganda put out by the shiny TV/ Internet disinformation networks which are bigger than anything communism can put up at present.

Having swallowed the easily digestible propaganda from the man, they predictably attempt to crap out enough shit to drown a whole class in their own stinking confusion. &#39;Farther, do not forgive them. They know what side they are on.&#39; They are on their own anti-communist side&#33;

[rouchambeau]

read what I said, he was no angel, but no hitler

Since when does being Hitleresque be the point at which we can be happy in a person&#39;s death?

[Mesijs]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2006, 11:47 PM
Imperialist crisis is driving all war, including the smashing of Yugoslavia. The wide mouthed infantile &#39;lefts&#39; on this sight have shown that they will swallow most of the propaganda put out by the shiny TV/ Internet disinformation networks which are bigger than anything communism can put up at present.

Having swallowed the easily digestible propaganda from the man, they predictably attempt to crap out enough shit to drown a whole class in their own stinking confusion. &#39;Farther, do not forgive them. They know what side they are on.&#39; They are on their own anti-communist side&#33;
You know where I believe in? Free education, free healthcare, state help for elderly people, and a wealthy economy combined with a wealthy moral standard.

I do not believe in nationalism, imperialsim, ethnic cleansing, mass executions, censorship.

Now who&#39;s the anti-communist here?


And man, you should really get rid of that tunnel-vision. The only thing you won&#39;t call propaganda are the direct quotes of Mao and Stalin, and the writings of anyone who supported them. The rest of the sources, even facts, you call &#39;imperialstic propaganda&#39;. That&#39;s very easy.

What about the invasion of Afghanistan? What about the invasion of Tibet? What about the war between Cambodia and Vietnam? Let me guess: the imperialists triggered it&#33; Please, stop reading this Maoïst and Stalinist propagda. Are you also going to tell me that the gulag, the great purges and the cultural revolution were fantastic happenings?

[viva le revolution]

As regards Milosevich, he was no Marxist-Leninist, but he definitely was an anti-imperialist.
Why did NATO attack Yugoslavia? Some ignorant people think it is because the US government and other Western democracies are interested in "human rights" and defending the Kosovan people. These ignoramuses could not be further from the truth. They obviously have not learnt the lessons of history and ostrich like they wish to keep their heads buried in the ground. It is precisely
this type of ignorance that led to the colonization of the Third World in the first place. However, most people realize that something is amiss. Intuitively they realize that the Kosovan crisis is not as simple as it appears at first sight. This article is written for these very people. It is imperative that all Third World countries, of which naturally Pakistan is a part, understand the true dynamics of the conflict and are not swayed by U.S. propaganda.

The US and British ruling class propaganda instruments CNN & BBC are lambasting the Serbs for crimes against humanity and genocide. It is strange that a government that has committed and backed some of the largest genocides in recent history, a government, furthermore, that pursues a policy that is leading to mass starvation and deprivation in Iraq should come out so strongly and vocally for the defense of the Kosovan people. The United States government funded and then continued the genocidal war in Vietnam, it killed four million people in North and South Korea, backed Suharto who killed a million people in Indonesia, it was responsible for perpetuating the Apartheid regime, it waged chemical and biological warfare against the Cuban, Soviet, and Chinese people, it invaded Panama, Dominican Republic, Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, it armed and equipped the contras in Nicaragua, it equipped Renamo in Mozambique, it is the only state to use nuclear weapons against another people, it is responsible for the death of 1.3 million people in Iraq due to the economic sanctions out of which 600,000 are innocent children, and is responsible for innumerable other crimes in the 20 "rendering the US war machine incapable of inflicting further damage," or "restricting their ability to make war." The media has always been silent on these occasions.

It should come as no surprise if I say that the United States government is the biggest perpetuator of wars in the twentieth century even more than Nazi Germany. In terms of the number of lives US policy has been directly responsible for, they have surely beaten Mr. Hitlers record. Some would
say that I am exaggerating. But these people obviously have not been doing their homework or reading their history. For it is clear that the US government has supported military dictatorships with arms and money for the last 50 years and these military dictatorships have been responsible for bleeding the masses to drain them of their revolutionary energy. The biggest threat to democracy and peace in the world today are not Saddam Hussain or Slobodon Milosovich. No, it is the entire
US ruling class that is hell bent on gaining advantage over its other imperialist rivals.

A Little History of Yugoslavia.

The Balkans is strategically a very important region in Europe. Not only is it the only land route to the Middle East, it is also critically close to the oil and mineral rich region of the Caucuses. It is not by coincidence that the First World War was started in the Kingdom of Serbia. Neither is it a coincidence that Hitler deemed the Balkans so important that he delayed his invasion of Russia (operation Barborossa) by a crucial 6 weeks in order to take over the Balkans (operation Retribution). Some say this delay meant that German troops had to fight in the winter, and this winter fighting cost them the war. Regardless of the validity of this argument, it is clear that Hitler
considered capturing the Balkans before an attack on Russia so important that he was willing to risk a winter war. Surely Hitler knew that Napoleons forces suffered defeat partially because of the fierce Russian winter. The strategic importance of the Balkans can be gauged from the fact that Hitler was willing to take this risk despite a glaring historic precedent.

The Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin, Macedonian, and Slovenian people resisted against the Nazi attack and through a popular war under the command of Martial Tito and with the help of the larger Soviet offensive were able to defeat the Nazis and create an independent and sovereign state that was dedicated to the ideals of socialism. During the cold war the US government manipulated the Yugoslav Federation away from the socialist block. However, with the end of the cold war the US government had no further use for this one time ally against the Soviet Union simply because the Soviet Union did not exist anymore. Thus, began the era of the dismemberment of the Yugoslav Federation. Subsequently, the US government has pursued a policy of breaking up the Yugoslav Federation into small swallowable pieces by encouraging and funding ethnic wars and then "intervening to stop them" but essentially taking them over.

Why is the US so interested in Yugoslavia?

Everyone must have heard of the war on Yugoslavia but most people can not make out the motive behind such a war. The reasons are quite clear. I can point to 5 strategic reasons for the current mission in Yugoslavia. All these reasons are compiled from the very speeches of US members of state.

1) DESTROY SOCIALISM IN EUROPE: The US is interested in destroying every last vestige of Socialist states in Europe. This has been the strategy of the US for the last 50 years. Yugoslavia, although a Socialist state, unfortunately played a role in this very mission during the cold war. However, today it is the last remaining socialist state in Europe, and therefore, a potential threat to the stability of capitalism in Europe. The US recognizes that a socialist Europe means the demise of
capitalism in the world. It is willing to use deceit and force to manipulate the circumstances in such a way that Europe remains reactionary and capitalist.

2) PREVENT A COMMUNIST RUSSIA: The US government has proved much further ahead in its thinking than the rest of the world in understanding the situation in Russia. The fact is that capitalism has failed in Russia and US government is expecting a major backlash against the ruling class of Russia and a return to some form of Socialism in Russia. We, like ignorant fools, think that
socialism is a lost cause but all the time the US is making plans for the next war against a potential socialist state. They term this "precautions against a hostile Russia." However, they are not saying this overtly because they do not want to push Russia in that direction by public statements. That is, they do not want to make Russian citizens aware and uneasy that the US is already considering them a potential enemy. A statement of that kind will push the Russian masses further away from
western ideologies and towards communism. Thus, the US is playing a delicate game, a game every imperialist power must know how to play, maintaining friendly relations on top while preparing for confrontation on the ground. The expansion of NATO clearly proves what I am saying. The inclusion of Checkoslavakia, Hungary and Poland is nothing but the inclusion of buffer states against a "potentially hostile" (translate communist) "Russia."

3) MILITARY MONOPOLY: The US is interested in destroying any power in the world that can be a potential military threat to the US. It wants to create a military monopoly because like a true imperialist state it understands that military might is the key to world power. It was for these very reasons that the US attacked Iraq. That is, to make sure that Iraq was no longer a strong military power capable of challenging US ruling class interests in the Middle East. The mission of these
airstrikes is correctly stated by Bill Clinton; "to limit the capacity of the Serbs to make war." The result is that the balance of power shifts in favour of the US government. On the other hand, there seem to be no plans underway to limit the ability of the US to make war. They remain the country that spends the most on its military and possesses the largest military force world history has every seen.

4) MIDDLE EAST: Yugoslavia provides a land route to the Middle East. Since the Middle East is strategically the most important region in the world--just as Yugoslavia is strategically the most important region in Europe--having land access to this region is very important. Bill Clinton himself said that a pro-west Yugoslavia is the best defense against "perverted theories of Islam that are anti-western." What that basically means is that a pro-west Yugoslavia is the best defense against an anti-imperialist Islamic movement.

5) CENTRAL ASIA: Having a friendly face in Belgrade, the capital of Serbia, is the best thing for the protection of investments that US oil tycoons have made in the Caucuses. Central Asia is rich in oil and natural resources and US corporations are ready for the picking. They have already made huge investments in the region. These investments have to be protected against a possible Socialist uprising in which case the workers would take over these industries. A stable and pro-west Yugoslavia is the best thing for protecting US investments in the Caucuses.

The Third World War

Most people think of a world war in terms of millions of people dying, carnage, and slaughter. However, they don&#39;t realize that both world wars started with very small seemingly isolated wars that spread as the imperialist powers got greedier and greedier. Consider the following similarities between World War II and the current situation.

1) Nazi Germany was the one great power and had managed to align several states towards its side. It had one of the largest military machines and one of the most advanced economies. Fascism was very popular in all of Europe and its propaganda machine was the best in the world. They won millions of people to their own side with lies and deceit.

The United States today is the only superpower and has managed to align Germany, Britain, and to some extent France and Japan towards its side. It has the most advanced economy in the world. Its ideology--free market capitalism--has become the most popular ideology in the world today. The worlds best media sources are monopolized by the US and through these media sources they have got millions to agree with them.

2) Nazi Germany was interested in small wars in the name of peace to "regain the land it had lost in the First World War." Thus, short wars were fought and Nazi Germany took over parts of Checkoslovakia, Poland, Hungary etc. The rest of the world just looked on and most said it was for the best.

The US is interested in regaining the territory it lost during the cold war to the Communists in the name of peace and human rights. It is willing to fight short wars to take over these small countries with or without military alliances and install puppet governments in these countries.

3) The biggest enemy of Nazi Germany was Communist Soviet Union. It was trying to build a Europe that was capable of defeating the Communists. It was the most anti-worker and anti Communist country in the world at that time. The biggest enemy of the US is Communist China and a potential Communist Russia. It is trying to build a Europe that is capable of defeating any Socialist ideology. The US is today the most antiworker and anti Communist country in the world.

4) A global crisis of capitalism in the 1930&#39;s forced countries to become more aggressive to regain their trade advantage. A global crises of capitalism exists today that is forcing countries to become more aggressive and competitive to maintain their trade advantage.

There are many other similarities but the point is that Nazism in Germany was an outgrowth of the imperialist system of Germany, and the wars being declared by the United States in several parts of the world are also a product of the imperialist system of the United States. The short wars that lead up to the mass carnage have already begun. We are sitting around astounded just like people did in the 1930&#39;s. We have to build up a movement against US aggression towards other people as quickly as possible if we want to avoid the carnage of the Second World War. If we keep placid
as people did in the 1930&#39;s then the consequences will be devastating. The Balkans will be the powder keg of a third world war.

"But Wait a Second, What about the Kosovan People"

At this point I expect you to interject and say "alright I except all this about the imperialism and the US but what choice do we have? If we don&#39;t ask the US to intervene then the Kosovan people will be "ethnically cleansed."" Let me state quite clearly that this argument is an argument fabricated by the US to convince the world that there is no other choice to save millions of lives except to send NATO troops into Kosova. In fact, the US has fabricated the whole situation in Kosova and Germany for the purpose of convincing people that intervention is the only answer. I would love to take the whole lie apart piece by piece but the magnitude of the lies practiced on the people are so large that it would take an entire book. Fortunately such books are written (read "NATO in the
Balkans voices of opposition." assorted authors).

The facts of the case are that Germany and the US funded and backed the so-called Kosovan Liberation Army (KLA). They recruited mercenaries (hired soldiers) to kill people in Kosova and to inflame people&#39;s passions. They were the ones that started the entire war and when the Yugoslav state reacted to restore law and order, as any government would do against a terrorist attack by an invading force against its own people, they were accused of "ethnic cleansing." Countless reports have been roaming around on the Internet as far as two years back about infiltration of the Kosovan border from Albania. I myself, being an Internet freak while I was in college, picked them up and read them quite regularly. The KLA at that time was one family stocking up ammunition and preparing for the go ahead from the US. This is an old imperialist strategy. In the sub-continent it was called "Divide and Rule." Divide the people up by supporting extremist factions and then rule over them when their revolutionary unity is broken up. That is how they conquered the sub-continent, that is how they conquered the Soviet Union, that is how they conquered Africa, that is how they conquered the Middle East and nearly every region I can think of.

[needtoknow]

How many of you actually lived trough the wars in Serbia? I have. I was there in from the start until the end and I was there during the so called" NATO saving Albanian&#39;s for Slobodan Milosevic&#39;s regime" fiasco. NATO did little saving and more bombing on civilians than anything. What do you call bombing children’s hospitals, bombing every single civilian train there was and destroying every bridge around Serbia so people couldn&#39;t leave the country to save their children? They called all these events as a simple mistake because they were targeting the army. They did little damage to the army that was supposed to be terrorizing the Albanians and focused on destroying every hospital, industry, bridge etc Serbia had. They wanted to destroy Serbia as a country to make sure the country never recovered again.



All those areas of which you speak of were populated by ethnic Serbs before the war (for centuries), both in Bosnia and Croatia.

Finally some facts.

[Thorez]

It seems that a fair chunk of you have been duped by the western imperialist press into thinking that Slobodan Milosevic was a "war criminal" even though he was never convicted of such crimes; repeatedly he was falsely asserted as being a war criminal by the likes of NBC. The concept of "war criminal" has always been preposterous. Charges of "war crimes" simply amount to humiliating punishment for the losers in a conflict. Never are the victors charged with war crimes.

It is utterly absurd to accuse Milosevic genocide simply because of reactionary conduct towards the Albanian terrorists backed by Al-Qaeda whose founding was made possible through CIA assistance. It is undeniable that the Albanian terrorists of the KLA were the ones who provoked the 1999 conflict. It would be foolishly propagandistic to suggest that Milosevic unprovokingly attacked innocent ethnic Albanians.

It must be taken into consideration that Serbs in neighbouring states were persecuted yet NATO did not unleash air strikes; just observe Croatia&#39;s Operation Storm. Several hundred dead Albanians (two thousand) does not remotely border towards "genocide". By that rationale, the September 11 attacks of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon could be considered "genocidal :rolleyes:

Slobodan Milosevic similarly to Mohammed Mossadegh, Salvador Allende, and Sukarno was a hero for his respective people who sought to liberate them from western fascism. Because of his defiance of the West and his drive for self-determination for the Serbian people, he was ousted in an illegal coup d&#39;etat in 2000 organized by American oligarchs e.g George Soros. Frankly, the only ones whose conduct suits indictments for war crimes are Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Madeleine Albright, and other appropriate figures. Their conduct was no less harmful than Milosevic. I&#39;m not enthusiastically in favour of Milosevic, but whenever there is an enemy of NATO, he must always be supported by revolutionary Marxist circles whether in Afghanistan or Venezuela.

[Scars]

Milosevic was only one among many nationalist criminals that took power in Yugoslavia after Josip Tito&#39;s death in 1980. The whole issue is too fresh, too raw to try to make any sort of truely objective judgement about how things turned out how they did, but it was a tragety regardless.

He was not &#39;anti-imperialist&#39;, he was a Serb Nationalist. If NATO had been bombing the fuck out of Bosnia and giving Serbia weapons and money to wage war then he would be all chummy chummy with the American&#39;s and their buddies. Don&#39;t confuse self interest with anti-imperialism.

As for people continuing to propagate the Stalinist lies about the nature of Yugoslavia, people need to move beyond 1948 crap and read up about Yugoslavia, particularly read about the Worker Management system that Tito introduced. Yugoslavia and Tito were certainly not perfect, but they were a hell of a lot better than the rest of Eastern Europe and Tito&#39;s rule was the longest period of peace and posperity in the Balkans for several centuries.