Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Yaacov who wrote (4361)	4/18/1999 3:28:00 PM
From: George Papadopoulos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

> What have you done int he past 2000 years?? Yeah sure buddy I would take the time to let you know...Now could you please tell me the last time Italy won a war! > thanks, that is my favorite, you should try some tomato with the extra-virgin olive My father makes some awesome olive oil...would you like some? > You have yourself to blame! Gosh I am so scared now...I think I'll go to a Greek island near Crete to avoid the Nato repercussions. > Therakia is Thrace! Thanks, couldn't tell. > No thanks, I just had some Halva!! A town half hour west of my father's house makes the best Halva, they invented it there (Farsala). A choochoobee will still go fine after some fine halva! > Serbs yes, but greeks?? You should document yourself!! > George, read mroe books, don't rely on your brother, buddy helicopter pilot!! I do...maybe you should try to do the same. > Last but not list, In Greek, you say about Italians "the same face and the same race!" >Last but not list, In Greek, you say about Italians "the same face and the same race!" I have never heard that...then again I haven't lived there for many years. But I am shocked at how anti Greek you are! Now I no longer will support Italy's soccer team in Mundial, now there;) >I have no hositlity about Greeks and your rightful place is in Europe, but there times that you can't abondon your friends, right or wrong you don't betray your parterns! Your words do not match your "no hostility about Greeks" talk. As far as abandoning friends Serbs are considered friends by the Greek people and they stand by them! I see it that the Greeks are the only country who is willing to stand up against this senseless bombing...everyone else just goes along listening to Allbright. >Good luck to you and thank you for suggestion, send me the name of the Island and I will tell if I haven't been there Same to you. As far as the island suggestion take a pick, they will sure all be empty if this senseless bombing does not stop soon.

To: Yaacov who wrote (4361)	4/18/1999 3:32:00 PM
From: George Papadopoulos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

Nukie that's especially for you...Do your sources classify this guy as a Serb sympathizer or Muslim hater too? Nato must head for door marked exit ============================= April 18, 1999 The Sunday Times sunday-times.co.uk Air power has failed and the allies' only real option is to get out, writes General Sir Michael Rose . . . . The tragic accidental bombing by Nato of civilians in Kosovo will not surprise those who understand the difficulties aircrews face flying missions over Yugoslavia and the limitations of Nato air power. Its weapons systems were designed for general war against the Warsaw Pact - not for the limited type of engagement taking place over Yugoslavia. Think back to February 1994, when Nato issued another ultimatum. Then the United Nations brokered an agreement between the Bosnians and the Serbs to establish a 20-kilometre exclusion zone around Sarajevo; Nato said it would launch airstrikes against any heavy weapons that remained within the zone. But surveillance aircraft found it impossible to determine accurately whether there were any tanks or guns in the exclusion zone. On one occasion, air reconnaissance identified a Serbian mortar position that turned out to be a collection of haystacks. Nato had to rely on UN military observers on the ground to verify possible targets. It is not easy for pilots flying at more than 400mph over broken country to identify the sort of targets that will have to be destroyed if Nato is to succeed in Kosovo. The lesson that can be drawn from the sad incidents that have occurred so far is that air power is a blunt weapon, wholly inappropriate for use by itself in this form of conflict. Without soldiers on the ground able to verify targets and direct airstrikes, the terrible mistakes (the bombing of a passenger train and refugee convoy) that occurred last week will inevitably continue to happen. Such a lesson is not clearly understood by Nato. On April 14, at the daily press conference, Jamie Shea, the alliance's press spokesman, said Nato had chosen a modus operandi in line with its policy not to be at war with the Serbian people. The alliance, he said, wished to avoid inflicting "unnecessary pain on the Serbian people or their economy". Within a few hours many Kosovo Albanians had been killed and wounded by Nato airstrikes. Expressions of regret, however sincere, coupled with bland assurances that Nato is doing all it can to avoid such mistakes - and that anyway Milosevic is to blame - are an insufficient response to these mistakes. Civilised people will not stand by for ever and watch the Serbian people, who have already been reduced to the edge of survival by their brutal rulers, being bombed. One of the more worrying characteristics that has emerged during the first month of the war is the degree to which rhetoric has taken over from reality. Daily, we are being subjected to increasingly irrelevant accounts of military actions being routinely undertaken by Nato against civilian and military targets in Yugoslavia - without any real analysis as to whether what is being done is delivering the stated objectives. Instead, we get the sort of fairy tale told by Shea that "every morning President Milosevic wakes up and realises that in the last 24 hours he has become weaker, he also sees that Nato is becoming stronger". These musings are usually accompanied by emotional descriptions of the terrible things that are being done by Milosevic's brutal regime - as if their repeated telling would somehow justify the continuation of a Nato strategy that has already failed. Before long, the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo will be halted - not because of anything Nato may have done, but because there will be no Kosovo Albanians left in Serbia. The alliance's credibility is already hanging on a thread. Clear thinking coupled with firm action, not words, are required if it is to emerge intact from its war in the Balkans. We urgently need to find a way for Nato to extricate itself with some vestige of honour from this increasingly messy situation. Assuming it is now too late to prevent Milosevic from achieving his objectives in Kosovo, Nato will be left with the options of continuing the air campaign for the foreseeable future, escalating the war to include the use of ground forces, or seeking a political compromise. Nato and the Americans seem to favour the first course of action. This would reinforce failure, leave the initiative to Milosevic and assume the continuing unity of the alliance. But success would still not be guaranteed. The second option, while making military sense, having moral right on its side, still seems to be ruled out by most of the contributing countries; they are either too worried about the possibility of military casualties or do not believe they have armies properly equipped or trained to fight a ground offensive in Kosovo. Such an option would also require the presence of combat troops on the ground for many years. Most armies have been drastically reduced in size since the end of the cold war, and it is unlikely that they could undertake the sort of commitment still being met in South Korea by the American army almost 50 years after the Korean war ended. At present levels of operational deployment, tour intervals in the British Army are less than 12 months. This is unsustainable even in the short term. The third and, in my view, the most likely option is that Nato will agree a political compromise through the mediation of the Russians and the UN. It would meet some, but not all of Milosevic's political aspirations. With his typical ruthlessness, he would probably judge that by ceding part of Kosovo to the Albanians he would be ridding Serbia of a big problem for ever. The long-term benefits of this would greatly outweigh the loss of territory that a partition would imply. He has done so before: in 1994 he struck a secret deal with Franjo Tudjman to quit Krajina in return for an early end to the war in Bosnia. Whatever the outcome of the war, Nato cannot continue to ignore the fact that it has suffered a strategic defeat. It cannot go on using words to conceal the absence of a suitable exit strategy from the increasingly counterproductive war in which it is now involved. Above all, it is worth reminding the political and military masters of Shea, who recently described life in Kosovo as "nasty, brutish and short", that Thomas Hobbes also wrote that words were "the money of fools". General Sir Michael Rose is a former commander of the UN in Bosnia and author of Fighting for Peace. Copyright 1999 Times Newspapers Ltd.