You had no case. Why don't you read the entire article?


*edit* Here, Uncle Wiki can teach you many things, too:

Link.

If the United States committed war crimes and ethnic cleansing of those Mexicans, and say the United States was a weak and unpopular power, than it's more than likely that the major powers in the world would be more willing to allow a separation. The reality with that example is that the United States is a strong sovereign power, and if there would be war crimes they would be hidden, masked to save face, or condemned with little power to do anything about it. The American people may lose faith in their government, but the state wouldn't fail.

In many way, it's a number of conditions which separate Kosovo's separation from those of other secessionist movements. Firstly, Yugoslavia had been an unpopular and weak state, compared to the rest of the world. Secessionist movements had already occurred. Throughout Yugoslavia there had been violence, and - despite a decent army - the government chose policies that were not well received by the rest of the world.

Secondly, because of how close Yugoslavia is to the rest of Europe, and of historical precedent in previous wars, any violence in Yugoslavia is a concern to the rest of Europe - especially given the situation after the fall of the Soviet Union. NATO would've been called in regardless. If this had been Africa, few governments would do anything about it. If this had been in the heart of Western Europe, North America or South America, the secessionist movement would've been squashed or universally condemned. More than likely, any violence would be considered terrorism, and the movements would be more inclined to be peaceful. The Balkans, being on the borderline of Europe, did not have that option. There were concerns that violence would spread outwards towards its neighboring weak states and into the rest of Europe.

Lastly, and most importantly, Yugoslavia used violence, war crimes and to a degree ethnic cleansing to try to solve the problem. Serbia now must contend with the blemish of such acts. Given the prior conditions, it's not tolerated. It's this which outweighs all historical or religious importance that Kosovo may have for Serbia. It's also what tends to separate most other secessionist movements (although, in strong states with high popularity there are cases of this, but they're usually downplayed for the sake of stability). It's for this reason, regardless if Russia pouts and other states are concerned, that an independent Kosovo is a reality. The West could not tolerate allowing Kosovo back into Serbia, especially given the majority (92%) do not want that. Nor would it necessarily be desired to have Kosovo and Albania 'formally' combine. Doing so would suggest the West wants to (publicly?) direct the sovereignty of other states.

As for the 4% of leftover Serbs. Despite many of them being poor and old, what will more likely happen is that North Kosovo will gain some autonomy within the state of Kosovo. The other majority enclave of Serbs, Štrpce, would more than likely be overrun by Albanians in little time.

Er you do realize the Albanians started the aggression in Kosovo right and no the ethnic cleansing is nowhere near as bad as it was portrayed in U.S.

In the 1980's the Socialist Autonomy of Kosovo government was run by Albanians and after Tito's death the Albanians in charge did everything possible to make it tough on the ethnic Serbian citizens to find jobs or get any help from the government. Thats when Milosevic started rising to power and getting most of the Serbs to support him with his nationalistic message aimed at Kosovo. After Yugoslavia broke up and the war started between Serbia, Croatia and Bosnian Muslims the Albanians in Kosovo started losing their position in the government and thats when terrorist attacks and ethnic cleansing on the Serb citizens there started. In 1999 Serbian troops were deployed to Kosovo and sure they killed a lot of innocent Albanians but then again this hardly holds your argument that Serbs are the aggressor here. Truth is there is none and you should learn some facts or shut the fuck up.

Fucking moron.......

Thorgrim, the American people may have given money to those who was in need. However, Bush would be the last person in Earth to ever do something (or any goverment for that reason). All the money for such situations come from taxes and not from the pockets of the governors.

False, it has been documented that the US government and many others have given aid.

That isn't even part of the debate, you just made a useless statement that had no bearing on anything said in this thread. I on the other hand addressed a post with facts that prove something to the contrary.

You are actually right about my post, but can you really say that I am wrong about Bush? Concerning Kosovo can anyone explain the eagerness of the U.S to recognise a state in the Balkans that can only provide destabilisation? This happen at my doorstep not his ranch. All those who are against have serious reasons. Russia consists by many ethnicities and justifiably worries about them taking examble from Kosovo. Palestinians consider the one-sided proclaimation of independancy, here in Greece we have the F.Y.R.O.M. issue and there's already been an attack on our embassy in Skopia on monday. So I find it completely relevant that a man that takes a break(!!!) from his vacation to announce anything serious for other countries that he has not a clue of, is gravely upseting especially when his next "break" could be about the Balkans.

I agree in the Bush matter. He obsiously does not care for anything. No governor ever cared for anything.

But actually I don't mind an independent Kosovo. As I've said many times the smaller the states the better. I'm also in for the independence of Northern Epirus.

In a perfect world we wouldn't have a use for countries or states or even borders but instead we live in an age of greed which inflames conflict and every incident that promotes conflict just puts another nail in humanity's coffin.
And has anyone noticed the decadence of the worlds leaders both moral and intelectual?

This rivalry has its roots back in WWII. Muslims (Albanians and Bosnians) sided with Hitler and Christians (Serbs and Croatians) sided with the Allies.

Er you do realize the Albanians started the aggression in Kosovo right and no the ethnic cleansing is nowhere near as bad as it was portrayed in U.S.

In the 1980's the Socialist Autonomy of Kosovo government was run by Albanians and after Tito's death the Albanians in charge did everything possible to make it tough on the ethnic Serbian citizens to find jobs or get any help from the government. Thats when Milosevic started rising to power and getting most of the Serbs to support him with his nationalistic message aimed at Kosovo. After Yugoslavia broke up and the war started between Serbia, Croatia and Bosnian Muslims the Albanians in Kosovo started losing their position in the government and thats when terrorist attacks and ethnic cleansing on the Serb citizens there started. In 1999 Serbian troops were deployed to Kosovo and sure they killed a lot of innocent Albanians but then again this hardly holds your argument that Serbs are the aggressor here. Truth is there is none and you should learn some facts or shut the fuck up.

Fucking moron.......

Whether or not what you say is valid or not, it's perception that matters. And to the West, the Yugoslavia government and military under Milošević were the aggressors. Given that this is the case, the Serbs were the ones being blamed. In the UN sanctioned ICTY, it is mostly Serbs whom are being indicted with war crimes. It does not matter if this is disproportional, or if the Serbs under Milošević's government were less aggressive, it all matters how the strong states of the West view this situation.

To most of the outside world, Serbia (viewed as the successor state of that Yugoslavia) is viewed more negatively than other states, because of the perception of the Serbs having committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. Albanians in Kosovo are generally seen as more righteous, especially after the NATO intervention in part to protect them.

When it comes to Kosovo, portrayal matters more than 'fact'. I stand by everything I said.

Also, next time lay off the ad hominem, thanks.

Money that came out of taxes.

I have to correct you: the Croatians also sided with Hitler, so in fact the Serbs were the only allies against Nazi Germany in that time and region.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usta%C5%A1e

I didn't knew that about Croatians. Anyway, thanks for the correction.

By the way, Greek guerillas fought against Hitler as well in that reason (mainly in the Albanian mountains).

I don't know if anyone is watching CNN or not but protesters in Serbia burned down the American Embassy.

Yeah, it's quite sad.

divide and conquer.the same old game:the smaller the countries, the easier to handle them. USA gov never gave a shit about human rights and such things, but only rhetorically to excuse foreighn policy. the only reason for a new independent country is this:the smaller the countries, the easier to handle them and the same time another puppet willing to save the american interests in the geopolitical game.

There's reports of a charred body having been found in the burned US Embassy, though I'd guess it's a protester given that there's no reports of any Americans missing.

The US has done many good things for Kosovo in the past, they love America over there.

Very much so.

Not sure about globalist politicians, though.

I have named Vatican as an example of miniature state with super authority.

YaY for the opium and prostitute slave traffickers! Now they have their own degenerate nation. Why can't metalheads do the same thing? Make our own degenerate metal nation of long hair, metal studs and beer!

Just as a side question to Svartalf:

Why would Texas become an independent country? My personal view (as someone not from America) of Texans (though probably a stereotype) is that those people a proud to call themselves americans...

Actually thats not entirely correct either, the Croatians didn't side with Hitler but when Yugoslavia was invaded Germany instilled a puppet regime run by Ante Pavelic and his Ustase party in Croatia, same thing with Serbia where they had a government run by a Nazi supporter Milan Nedic.

The Axis occupation of Yugoslavia in 1941 allowed the Croatian radical right Ustaše to come into power, forming the "Independent State of Croatia", led by Ante Pavelić, who assumed the role of Poglavnik Nezavisne Drzave Hrvatske (i.e. Leader of the Independent State of Croatia). Following the pattern of other fascist regimes in Europe, the Ustashi enacted racial laws, formed eight concentration camps targeting minority Serbs, Romas and Jewish populations. The biggest concentration camp was Jasenovac in Croatia. The NDH had a program, formulated by Mile Budak, to purge Croatia of Serbs, by “killing one third, expelling the other third and assimilating the remaining third”. The first part of this program began during WWII with a planned genocide in Jasenovac and other locations in the NDH[6] The main targets for persecution, however, were the Serbs. Hundreds of thousands of Serbs are estimated to have been killed in this cycle of violence....

In the pretext to WW II, Prince Regent Paul signed a treaty with Hitler (as did Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary). However, a popular uprising amongst the people rejected this agreement and Prince Regent Paul was sent to exile. King Peter II assumed full royal duty....

The Serbs who originally fought against the Nazi occupators decided to make a deal with them and not attack each other, and instead focus on the Partizans a movement which started in Croatia and Slovenia and then spread to Serbia, Bosnia and Macedonia. So in turn majority of actual Croats who weren't forced to fight where on the side of the Partisans and against the Nazi's.

In April 1941, Yugoslavia was invaded by Nazi Germany. On July 30 the first rebels made their presence armed action was carried out. The participants then proceeded to Kopaonik and, together with other insurgents from the Ibar valley and the mountain villages, began the struggle against the occupation. On August 10, 1941 in Stanulović, a mountain village, they formed the Kopaonik Partisan Unit Headquarters. Their liberated area was called the Miners Republic and lasted 42 days. They joined the ranks of Tito and the Peoples Liberation Army and Partisan Detachments of Yugoslavia later on.

The ruthless attitude of the German occupation forces and the genocidal policy of the Croatian Ustaša regime, aimed at Serbs, Jews, Gypsies and anti-Ustaša Croats, created a strong anti-fascist resistance in the NDH. Many Serbs and other nationalities stood up against the genocide and the Nazis. Many joined the Partisan forces created by the Communist Party (National Liberation Army headed by Josip Broz Tito) in the liberation and the revolutionary war against Nazis and all the others who were against communism. There was another resistance movement, namely that of royalist General Dragoljub Draza Mihailovic, which was mostly active in Serbia, and among the Serbian people in Montenegro, Bosnia, Hercegovina. The Royalists fought the Ustashe and the Communists, as well as the Germans.

I didn't knew that about Croatians. Anyway, thanks for the correction.

By the way, Greek guerillas fought against Hitler as well in that reason (mainly in the Albanian mountains).

divide and conquer.the same old game:the smaller the countries, the easier to handle them. USA gov never gave a shit about human rights and such things, but only rhetorically to excuse foreighn policy. the only reason for a new independent country is this:the smaller the countries, the easier to handle them and the same time another puppet willing to save the american interests in the geopolitical game.

I would think that is an unreasonably cynical view of the situation. While it is certainly true that US acts in its self-interest on several occasions under the guise of being a savior of democracy and freedom,in this case the human rights violation committed by Serbia is well accepted by the international community.

If the intention of the United States was just to split up a country, then one would have imagined protest from some EU nations. After all, didn't France and Germany, amongst several others, oppose invasion of Iraq? However, in this situation Kosovo got its recognition from these nations within 48 hours of declaring independence, an indication of the extent to which Serbia had lost its credibility.

Also remember NATO troops were deployed to prevent the Serbian atrocities on the ethnic Albanians in '99. Further, Milosevic was later found guilty on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity by the International Court of Justice. All this cannot be a grand plan hatched up by the West acting in unison to divide Serbia. In any case, how powerful and influential was united Serbia in contemporary world affairs for the West to try so hard?

I know about the Greek guerrillas, and certainly did not want to diminish their role, I was just referring to the ex-Yugoslavia territories.

and since when US policy became so sensitive to the atrocities? the answer is this:since has interests in a particular area. do you remember the 1 million dead leftists in Indonesia in 1965? do you remember the genocide in East Timor in 1974? or the gas attacks against the Kurds by Saddam right after the first Gulf war? and just because i have a cynical view of the situation, do i have to remind you the cynical statement of Clinton during the days of massacre in Rwanda? "USA is not going to involve in regions with no anerican interests". do you remember Kirkpatrick's statement about Taliban in 1996? do i have to remind you the atrocities of dictators in latin America, dictators supported by the us gov? where was in all these cases the merciful people who decided to help the Albanians in Kosovo?

And please, stop thinking the EU as one concrete organization: each country has its own relations with USA,there is no common foreign policy,

and hell, did i said EU is the good guys and US the bad?

And about splitting countries:what's the easier target? Russia including all the former soviet democracies or a Russia surrounded by a bunch of countries with corrupted leaders with some of them enthroned by post modern coup d' etat? (Georgia, Ucrane)

i have no any problem with people who struggle for their freedom but the word freedom makes no sense to me since you fight a status quo just to put the authority of another state to rule your life