posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 07:13 AM
Thank you for reading and being inspired from my news submission, nathraq. If it's of any comfort, back when this charade was climaxing in early
1999, I was a student in a Model UN class representing Russia. When our UN decided to vote on a resoultion based on whether or not NATO should bolster
its security forces with a full-scale military invasion, I was the only one on the security council with the gall to veto it when everyone else
mindlessly agreed (even albania, who was sitting next to me). And the teacher uncharacteristically intervened, saying "Russia must have had too much
vodka to even think about vetoing this bill." At the time, I didn't know exactly what he meant because I was too embarrassed to have been outright
rejected and singled out like that. But now I understand the bigger picture.
NATO had no business in Serbia. The ethnic cleansing thing was over dramatised, for one thing. The snipers and civil conflicts taking place in the
1990's before the NATO invasion were mostly instigated and funded through US and EU espionage agencies for one primary purpose. The NATO operation
was a test to see if they could function as a global police force. When they failed, clinton sent in some reinforcements like stealth bombers that
took out civilian targets like radio stations and other media. So in short, I would like to express my regrets to you if you had been a witness to
some of the atrocities and horrible wrongdoings that had taken place in that area.
Your comparison can apply to several different themes, not limited to the Mexicans of Texas. I appreciate the fact that you liken a theme you are
familiar with to one that most of the posters of this board recognize. To answer your questions:
No, I would never justify the war under the pretext of albanian protection. Mostly because the events that led up to the culmination of the conflict
were rigged by foreign agencies, and did not originate from that region. The common tie you are observing here is the The Powers That Be's classic
ploy to divide a society against itself, so they can move in and take advantage of the situation. You see this situation in America during the first
half of the 1900's, you see this situation in Palestine right now, and you can see this situation in China and Taiwan (which will probably bear
fruit, much to their pleasure).
Yes, I believe the Serbs are justifed with their stance primarily because of their historical ties to the area, as you have mentioned. Even as part of
a soviet state under USSR, their borders were respected and acknowledged, and it should have remained that way. NATO proves its bias the moment it
moved in with its so-called peace-keeping forces, primarily because it was partially responsible for the destabilization of the area.
As for Americans being justified, well... that one I have no answer for as I am completely neutral. I understand the need for underprivileged mexicans
to emigrate, seeking to establish themselves in the overpromoted american dream. On the other hand, I also understand the fear that americans have
towards a large influx of emigrants because our economy is already having problems with internal employment. The solution I propose to both problems
is to fix them at the source. Improve the living conditions in mexico (can and should be done) while also discouraging outsourcing and encouraging a
return to manufacturing power within the United States. Will these solutions be applied? only time will tell.
[Edited on 4/1/2004 by AlnilamOmega]