[PEN-L:7061] Rosaer on Kurds/Kosovo

[ts99u-1.cc.umanitoba.ca [130.179.154.224]]

Barkely,
  We have been through this a number of times, so this is my last 
post on this issue. (Definite, no further, finis, end!!! ;-))

You have demonized Milosevic from the begining.  I have been 
neutral on this issue arguing that  Milosevic, whatever, his 
negatives, was better than the alternatives. Well, we can debate 
this but, now you are demonizing him, not for what he has done, 
but what you think he might have done or what NATO argues he 
was going to do.  This is not up to your standard of scholarship 
which is usually impecable.  Milosevic was a conservative with 
regard to the Bosnian situation and, as we both know, had reached 
agreement on the political structure of Bosnia before your friend, 
Zimmerman, intervened and loosed the carnage of the Bosnial war.  
Don't blame Milosevic for this because the blame lies right in the 
American State Department.  Furthermore, Milosevic was always a 
conservative in the carnage following the American precipitation of 
the Bosnian war -- if you look carefully, he tried to restrain the most 
vicious of the para-militaries (you know who I am talking about) and 
he was not a supporter of the extreme elements in Bosnia.  In fact, 
his support of the Dayton agreement was a real come-down from 
so-called 'Serbian interests.'  Of course he was rewarded by NATO 
by the worst ethnic cleansing that the region has ever seen, the 
expulsion of 500000 Serbs from Krajina with the tacit and active 
support of your government, the Americans.  So much for Serb co-
operation with Americans who are obviously as trustworthy as a 
rattlesnake.  So don't give me shit about how nasty Milosevic is.  
He is at least as honorable as your president and, probably, more 
dependable.

I suggested that, given his history, there is no reason that 
Milosevic should be considered as supporting ethnic cleansing.  
Your response is, positively, amazing.  "Yes but just because he 
expoused tolerance before, it doesn't mean he hasn't become a 
bigot since."  You are absolutely right.  But you do not give one 
iota of evidence that he has changed his position -- except 
regurgitate the NATO position that he is an evil man -- without 
evidence, without example, without any concrete evidence that 
there is the slightest  element of truth in the NATO propoganda ( 
which we all know from other posts on this list are totally wrong 
and designed to be misleading.)
     Barkely, I have always respected your opinions and your 
knowledge of the Balkans.  I don't know what it is that has made 
your assessment of the current crisis so 'bereft of reasonable 
judgement' that you have become almost hysterical in your 
demonization of Milosevic who, probably not a nice guy, would at 
least be as nice a dinner guest as Clinton, Albraith or Gore, and 
certainly a better dinner companion than the disgusting Blair and 
his vermin followers.