Knowing the U.N., they probably forgot to feed him.

Natural causes? Yes, I guess you can call it that. When people get too close to exposing Clinton, it's natural that they turn up dead. The debacle in the former Yugoslavia is even more of a disgrace than most of Clinton's foreign policy miscues.

Those (Christians) who have been slaughtered with impunity for a thousand years are on trial for trying to rid themselves of the scourge (Moslems) to their land. The real purveyors of genocide have been allowed to smuggle arms in from Iran and establish a beachhead in Europe they haven't had since the end of the Ottoman Empire at the turn of the last century.

I know Bush has a lot of his plate, but the potential for trouble in the Balkans is probably worse than in the Middle East simply because it's happening below the surface of world attention and when it explodes, terrorists will be well established and ready to rumble.

Now, about Saddam....

Erp - One would hope the Europeans would take care of the mess in there backyard but I'm not counting on it.

erp: Wow! This timeI'm the one that's awed. Great stuff.

Bruno: I'm telling you, the bsst thing for all concerned would be for Saddam to be executed after his trial. If is important that the Baathists and the Europeans both are shown that they don't matter.

Knowing Amsterdam's sex industry and Europe's embracement of totalitarians over the years, he probably went out like Nelson Rockefeller.

Actually, if you'll recall, they couldn't "turn off" Rocky.

I guess he got a "life" sentence after all?

erp: So you think Srebrenica was justified?

Some fellow on Lucianne.com posted this comment about Slobo's "natural" death:

"Anybody seen Jack Bauer lately?"

I hope everyone will excuse my excessive self reference:

Ali, One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, as one man's slaughter is another man's ethnic cleansing.

I'm assuming from your name that you are a Moslem and I hope that you don't think that I am brushing all Moslems with the tar brush of killer and/or terrorist, because I'm not. In NYC where I grew up, there were many Moslems who were indistinguishable from other friends and neighbors and I reject any innuendo about what I may or may not justify.

As an adult, I worked with Arabs from all over the Middle East and had students from various Arab countries working for me. My favorite music is Egyptian and I still play a very scratchy "Port Said" on a cassette recorded from an old LP. I used to even be able to sing all the lyrics. Years ago, there were a lot of belly dancing taverns in New York and they were a favorite late night destination after dinner on the weekend.

I'm giving my bona fides because, I am very tired of the knee jerk reaction that one is a bigot and hater if one actually tells the truth instead of the received wisdom about Islam.

What I am saying is that right now, the good guys and the bad guys in the former Yugoslavia are directly inverse of what the media would have us believe. Whatever is your version of the past, we need to deal with the present ... and BTW it's my ancestors whose churches are being used as stables, whose people have been slaughtered and whose property has been confiscated with the blessings of bubba and his pal kofi and even so, strangely, I haven't burned a car, turned my kids into suicide bombers, or flown a plane into a building.

Deuced if I know why not?

erp:

You didn't answer Ali's question.

While the Serbs have legitimate historical grievances and the Bosnians were/are depicted by the MSM with the one-sidedness normally reserved for the palastinians, the end still doesn't justify the means. However, as the trial was mostly meant as a confirmation of the righteousness of European politicians, this is probably the best end for the entire show.

jim, I did answer it, and for more details check out the comments on lucianne.com... and BTW, I'm not defending Slobo, I'm condemning the victimization of murdering Moslems. In the thank God for small favors department, at least they've stoppped referring to these murderers as "ethnic Albanians."

Rebecca West. " Black Lamb and Grey Falcon" Been awhile since I read it. Depressing.

The Balklands is a swamp. Who are the good guys? Dude, it’s the Balklands. Everyone’s a bastard. That said, if the Kosovo war happened again today I doubt there’s be much appetite in the West for bombing Christians to protect muslims. In the intervening years the muslims have shown utterly no gratitude for the Kosovo intervention, so to hell with them.

erp:

I believe Milosevic started the war in order to carve a Greater Serbia from the ashes of Yugoslavia by steamrolling Slovenes, Croats, Bosnians and Kosovars.

If Kosovo\Bosnia have become havens for jihadists and the residents have started destroying Christian places of worship, it's the end consequence of making war on Muslim lands as in Chechnya and Afghanistan.

AFAIK there wasn't much Islamic radicalism there in the years immediately prior to the wars. At least the Bosnians I knew who left thanks to the war were indistinguishable from the average European in terms of drinking alcohol, eating pork and wearing mini-skirts.

Murdering 7000 men in basically one day, after separating out the women and children, is more than a 'slaughter'. And there were others (perpetrated by the Serbs, directly and by proxy, via the Tigers) as well, such as Pale.

There have been Islamofascists and terrorists in Kosovo, but to my knowledge, they weren't in Bosnia until after the genocide took place. What happened in Srebernica is a stain on all Europe.

Srebernica was as evil as Rwanda or what is happening in Darfur or Zimbabwe. To throw our hands in the air and pretend otherwise is quite wrong. To shake our heads and say that both sides were equally guilty is quite wrong. Milosevic, Karazdic, and Mladic (and the others, like the men who ran the para squads) were as evil as Heydrich. There may have been Kosovars as bad, and we just don't know their names - but I do not believe there were any Bosnians like that.

What happened at Srebernica cannot be 'justified'. It can be denied or prevaricated or interpreted (to use a modern word), but it cannot be justified.

I didn't realize that I was being so cryptic.

I thought I was being clear.

I am justifying nothing.

What I am saying is that the Moslems living in the former Yugoslavia, remnants of the Ottoman Empire which enslaved the people for a thousand years, have been portrayed as innocents and the Catholics/Orthodox Christians/Serbs who have had long history of atrocities perpetrated against them, have been portrayed as genocidal monsters by a public opinion orchestrated by the Clintonistas and their wholly owned subsidiary, the U.N.

I am sickened by the media spin this weekend repeating the big lie endlessly until it is now firmly in place as the gospel truth.

BTW - Clinton was subpoenaed to testify at Milosevic's trial. Does anyone seriously think that would have ever happened?

"Enslaved" is antihistorical.

Early on in the breakup of Yugoslavia, the Wall Street Journal ran a piece trying to explain what was going on. They ended by quoting the "mayor" of the Christian half of a village that had just demolished the bridge connecting them to the Muslim half of the village. He explained that this was retribution for the Muslim's having destroyed their church -- 500 years ago.

This is just not a scenario that Americans can handle competently, other than to cut through all the historical nonsense and try to enforce the status quo. It also buttresses Cohen's Theory of history: history is bad; the more you have the worse off you are.

oj. don't go semantical on me.

David, once again, I am NOT justifying vendettas that last 500 years. Far from it, and
of course nobody in their right mind would try to explain one of the most Byzantine chapters in the history of mankind to people who have 30 second attention spans.

My beef is that the media and thus the gospel truth, have gotten who victimized whom backwards. It's very similar to the debate about who are the victim and who the aggressor in the so-called Holy Land.

erp:

Slavery isn't semantics to slaves.

How much more proof do you need? Slav > Slave

The Romans enslaved them. Should Slobo have tried genociding Italians?

We 'forget' history when we want to. Which side were the various Balkan tribes on in WWII? Anyone care to guess?

And who proved more 'resistant' to Communism (among the groups)? Who embraced it?

Those facts are only 60 years old. Will the Balkanites of 2400 be fighting over them then?

OJ: prior to the Romans, there were the Greeks (Macedonians, really). Perhaps Slobo should have just kept going into Athens. Would have been a nice run-up before the Olympics, no?

The Serbs will do whatever's necessary and do it well and they're on the frontline if there is a clash of civilizations. We needed to stop the killing, but preserve Serbia.

Come now - the Balkans are so 90s. Or teens, if you prefer.

The only way the Serbs will be on the front line is if an actual army decides to invade Europe from the South. Chechnya is more of a terror haven now, and is likely to remain that way for a long time.

The front line is London, Paris, Madrid (still), Amsterdam, Berlin, Vienna, Rome, and other European major cities. And Syria, Iran, Baluchistan, and Waziristan. Maybe Cairo.

If genocide is what's "necessary", then let's nuke everybody in Europe right now. There would be more oil for us, and the Chinese would be suitably impressed.

jim:

Yes, which is why Moscow should be left its nukes.

Which is why we will be condemned to repeat history in the Balkans.

Gavrilo Princip was not a Muslim.

Gavrilo Princip used a Browning m1910 Semi-Automatic one of which ahemm.. I just happen to own. (.32 ACP)