It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kosovo to Serbia the same as Texas to America??

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 06:53 AM
link   
In lieu of the recent ATSS post:

Submission: U.S. Cutting Funds to Serbia

First, a brief history on the Kosovo region:

History

Within Kosovo are several historic sites of special significance to Serbians. Most date from the 13th and 14th centuries, when Kosovo was the heart of the Serbian Kingdom. Today, some remain sites of pilgrimage; all are places that most nationalist Serbians argue are inseparable parts of Serbia.

Kosovo is an intregal part of Serbian history and culture. As waves of Albanians swarmed to this area, the Serbs felt they were being overwhelmed by an influx of foreigners.

To Stateside Now....

First, a brief history of Texas...


Texas History Timeline


Friction has characterized relations between mainstream society and Tejanos since 1836. Mechanisms designed to maintain white supremacy, such as violence, political restrictions, prohibition from jury service, segregation, and inferior schooling caused suspicion and distrust within the Mexican community. Repatriation of Mexican citizens during the depression of the 1930s and Operation Wetbackqv in 1954 inflicted great anguish on some of the communities touched by the drives, as Tejanos perceived them to be racially motivated. In more recent times, conflict between the two societies has persisted over such issues as immigration, the right to speak Spanish in schools, and the use of public money to support the Tejano poor. Even as Anglo-American society attempted to relegate Tejanos to second-class citizenry, Mexican Americans have sought to find their place in America. Middle-class businessmen have pursued integration into the economic mainstream, and the politically minded have worked for the involvement of Tejanos in the body politic. Such were the objectives of organizations as LULAC, the G.I. Forum, and MALDEF. Though recent immigrants wrestle with two allegiances, their children have ordinarily accepted the offerings of American life. Indeed, Texas Mexicans have proven their allegiance toward the state on numerous occasions, especially during the country's several wars. Seldom have drives toward separatism gained support across the spectrum of the community. Probably the most prominent movement emphasizing anti-Anglo sentiments was the Chicano movement, but even its rhetoric appealed only to certain sectors of the community. In the Lone Star State, Mexican Americans stand out as one of the few groups having loyalties to the state while simultaneously retaining a binary cultural past.

Now, in a comparison of the two very different and unique areas of the world, would you justify the the War over Serbia to protect the Albanians?

I am not trying to be biased towards one group or the other. I am of Croatian Descent, and we've had our share of problems with the Serbs over the years.

But I do understand them trying fiercely to hold on to Kosovo. Just as I understand the Mexican viewpoint of Texas, and the American Southwest. The only difference I see is that American took Texas and the southwest after the Mexican-American War. The Mexicans(and Indios) have always been there. On the other hand, Kosovo has always been part of Serbian history. The influx of Albanians is only a couple of hundred years old.

Are the Serbs justified in their stance on Kosovo?


Are Americans in Texas justified in their stance on Mexican immigration policies?






peace




posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 07:13 AM
link   
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]



posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 07:40 AM
link   
This is a very interesting post. Thank you for the comparison and information from both of you. I'm sorry that I am not able to add anything at this time, but within time I will.



posted on Apr, 2 2004 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlnilamOmega

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.


[Edited on 4/1/2004 by AlnilamOmega]



No, I wasn't there. I was living in Germany at the time.

And true, after the Kosovo fiasco, Nato seemed to be able to pull their act together, up until Gulf War II, and the split of member opinions.



posted on Apr, 3 2004 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Hi ......pretty sad to see what the world has come to....
here is a web site I found.......

www.kosovo.net.../view/20

more?

www.kosovo.net...

[Edited on 4/3/2004 by helen670]



posted on Apr, 3 2004 @ 08:20 AM
link   
I figured it as the Cubans deciding to take over Florida. Would we just let them, or would the U.N. or somebody come and bomb us if we try and keep what is ours?

I agree with you guys, we've gone where we didn't belong, and did what we should not have done.



posted on Apr, 3 2004 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
I figured it as the Cubans deciding to take over Florida. Would we just let them, or would the U.N. or somebody come and bomb us if we try and keep what is ours?



For sure if Cubans came and tried to take florida,we would stop them. Im not sure if the UN or another country would get involved. What if China tried to take florida, or Russia, a real country? That might not be the same.

[Edited on 3-4-2004 by SpittinCobra]

I understand the other countrys are a little off topic.

[Edited on 3-4-2004 by SpittinCobra]



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Well, it seems the Kosovar Prime Minister turned himself in at the Hague:




PARIS, March 8 -- Prime Minister Ramush Haradinaj of Kosovo, an ethnic Albanian who rose from nightclub bouncer to guerrilla commander before switching to politics, resigned Tuesday after announcing he had been indicted for war crimes. He said he would travel to The Hague to wage a defense before an international court.


Story

What's good for the goose, is also good for the gander I suppose.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join