B92 Blog

about the threat that a comet, or some other space junk could hit the Earth. There is, for example, a common denominator everybody have been searching for :). In every Hollywood blockbuster based on this fiction, Earth was protected by dozens of nuke missiles sent to intercept an incoming object of destruction, i.e. by some worldwide defense alliance.

P.S.

Sorry for trolling

... but a military alliance.

NATO is US-dominated military alliance set against military forces of Russia, China and dozens of less relevant ones (none of which are joining any time soon).

To put it in really simple and understandable terms: NATO's primary function is to be credible threat against these in all scenarios, including localized and global wars, with or without use of nuclear weapons.

All other quoted purposes are cosmetic excuses (invasion of Martians, potential use against so-called terrorism, etc.)

So joining NATO is simply picking sides in the future war - obviously even Serbian politicians can understand this.

It will be interesting to see what importance will be given to the latest threats that Serbia may join Russian military alliance. Putin is liable to take on this offer as compensation for lost allies, or at least to use it as a bargaining device.

Serbia, as usual, gets nothing except prolonged tenure for politicians.

I agree with every word you have written SG, with a couple of things I would like to point out additionally. As you have correctly noted those countries which NATO is supposed to be against wonćt be joining forces soon so It is not prudent to say the least to ally ourselves with the side which is both outnumbered and out gunned by this alliance. The countries which are members of the alliance participate overwhelmingly in the world's economy, so for a country which has such a frail economy as ours opposing it could be economic suicide. All of our neighboring countries are either members of the alliance or are well on their way to it, so we risk the position of a pro Russian island in a NATO sea. And finally the argument that our opposition to NATO is helpful to Serbia's diplomatic battle for the future status of Kosovo is a lie. It doesn't move Serbia an inch closer to the reintegration of Kosovo, but pushes Serbia miles away from the alliance and into a strategical hot spot.

Why Serbia has to choose either side, at all? What if, i.e. Serbia remains as an Unallied country? Good military cooperation, only, with both(?) sides sounds pretty good to me, for a bunch of reasons.

Mongoose, The Unallied

Why Serbia has to choose either side, at all? What if, i.e. Serbia remains as an Unallied country? Good military cooperation, only, with both(?) sides sounds pretty good to me, for a bunch of reasons.

If Serbia remained unallied durnig the II WW, god knows how many victims on our side would be avoided, and how majority of problems we have even today would not exist at all. If there was no March, 27th, 1941 (do you know that gen. Simic, one who overthrew the princ Pavle, after few days tried to renew the peace treaty with axes forces) ...

I don't agree! Can you imagine how Serbia would 've been ran-over by the Allies, if it had remained in the Axis treaty? Anyway, It was heavily bombed in 1944 & 1945 as an Ally!

But, what happened later, after Tito had said historical "NO!" to Stallin?

Mungos, The Unallied

Oh Mungos the unallied, although I don't argue that the historic no of 48 was not a positive development, would it not have been an even more positive development that we had chosen to completely ally ourselves with NATO. A little reminder in 1953 Yugoslavia virtually became a NATO member through the defense treaty with Turkey and Greece only to step out of it a few years back. When a small ship tries to steer her way between two ocean liners it runs a heavy risk of eventually being crushed by any sudden change in their position.

Mungos

I don't agree! Can you imagine how Serbia would 've been ran-over by the Allies, if it had remained in the Axis treaty? Anyway, It was heavily bombed in 1944 & 1945 as an Ally!But, what happened later, after Tito had said historical "NO!" to Stallin?

What about Bulgaria and Romania, regarding the II WW not NATO. They did not have their clever Tito, suffered behind the iron curtain for a while ... but are now full members of EU. Bulgaria and Romania did not have Tito, so they could freely solve their national minority problems ...

Oh Mungos the unallied, although I don't argue that the historic no of 48 was not a positive development, would it not have been an even more positive development that we had chosen to completely ally ourselves with NATO. A little reminder in 1953 Yugoslavia virtually became a NATO member through the defense treaty with Turkey and Greece only to step out of it a few years back. When a small ship tries to steer her way between two ocean liners it runs a heavy risk of eventually being crushed by any sudden change in their position.

No! We were doing much better as a leader of the Unallied Countries Movement. Otherwise, we would 've never helped that much liberation of the colonies in Africa and Asia... At least. There are some other related figures, but I wouldn't like to discuss, now.

Mongoose, The Unallied 'til Death

"Between sword and shield, I would always choose - shield!"

What about Bulgaria and Romania, regarding the II WW not NATO. They did not have their clever Tito, suffered behind the iron curtain for a while ... but are now full members of EU. Bulgaria and Romania did not have Tito, so they could freely solve their national minority problems ...

1. They had suffered a lot of casualties, fighting on the Axis side
2. They suffered latter, being handed over to the Soviet Union, T. Zivkov and N.Chaushescu
3. They STILL have a bad reputation because of their involvement w/ Axis.
4. They are (full) mebers of EU because they are needed as such.:)) (So-called "disposable ally")

Mongoose, The Unallied

Mungos

Oh Mungos the unallied, although I don't argue that the historic no of 48 was not a positive development, would it not have been an even more positive development that we had chosen to completely ally ourselves with NATO. A little reminder in 1953 Yugoslavia virtually became a NATO member through the defense treaty with Turkey and Greece only to step out of it a few years back. When a small ship tries to steer her way between two ocean liners it runs a heavy risk of eventually being crushed by any sudden change in their position.

No! We were doing much better as a leader of the Unallied Countries Movement. Otherwise, we would 've never helped that much liberation of the colonies in Africa and Asia... At least. There are some other related figures, but I wouldn't like to discuss, now.

Mongoose, The Unallied 'til Death

"Between sword and shield, I would always choose - shield!"

And when I look at the state most of these countries we were leading into a better future are in I cannot but marvel what a bang up job we did o))). Not to mention what happened here when the bubble burst, and the cold war ended.

1. They had suffered a lot of casualties, fighting on the Axis side
2. They suffered latter, being handed over to the Soviet Union, T. Zivkov and N.Chaushescu
3. They STILL have a bad reputation because of their involvement w/ Axis.
4. They are (full) mebers of EU because they are needed as such.:)) (So-called "disposable ally")

1. Serbia and Serbians all around Balkan had suffered much more, fighting on god knows whose side.
2. Serbia had suffered later being stripped off any kind national and state policy ... put aside that the rouling policy of Yugoslavia was, in some matters opposed to the Serbia (i.e. albanians)
3. We also have a bad reputation, despite all of the victims Serbia has put on the oltar of the Great Allied victory in II WW
4....

Mungos

Why Serbia has to choose either side, at all?

Why not ? Choosing a side means responsibility for the choice you have made, and that is exactly what Serbia lacks in its policy.

Choosing a side means responsibility for the choice you have made

Agree ... but there is another one question that needs to be answered: "What is in it for us?", so that we could choose with a clear mind.

Or to chose sides, just because it has to be done without any further explanation. In that case .... we have been there allready (for example 27.3.1941)

All of you guys are very right, as well as myself.
Serbia MUST join NATO, although it is not in its interest and would probably pay very high price as much as would pay otherwise. But, who cares?! These are just small barbarian groups called Serbs, Albanians, Croatians...

Mungos, The Unallied

adam weisphaut

Oh Mungos the unallied, although I don't argue that the historic no of 48 was not a positive development, would it not have been an even more positive development that we had chosen to completely ally ourselves with NATO. A little reminder in 1953 Yugoslavia virtually became a NATO member through the defense treaty with Turkey and Greece only to step out of it a few years back. When a small ship tries to steer her way between two ocean liners it runs a heavy risk of eventually being crushed by any sudden change in their position.

Da je Jugoslavija resila da se ranih pedesetih (ili kasnih cetrdesetih) prosloga veka potpuno prikljuci NATOu desilo bi se, verovatno nekoliko stvarcica. Jedna medju njima bila bi ubrzano seljenje na jug ruskih tenkova stacioniranih u Madjarskoj.

Za sahovske pacere se kaze da su to oni igraci saha koji izive u ubedjenju da samo oni planiraju i samo oni imaju dobitnu strategiju. Ovaj forum potvrdjuje da ista definicija vazi za sve pacere, time and again...

E sad ako je Domi došao kreće ozbiljna diskusija.
Jugoslavija je de fakto bila članica NATO početkom pedesetih kroz sporazum sa Turskom i Grčkom samo se seti ogromne američke pomoči koju je primila u tom periodu (samo da spomenem među ostalim nekoika stotina borbenih aviona koji su dugi niz godina bila okosnica Jugo vazduhoplovstva) Pravi razlog za neulazak u NATO nije bio vojne nego ideološke prirode. Jednostavno kako je kom. država mogla da opravda ulazak u NATO, tako da je kriza iz 56 kada je Rusiji trebala, podrška JBT da bi sprečila da zapad pošalje pomoć madjarskim revolucionarima preko SFRJ zapravo omogučila početak politike klacklaice koja je naravno bila održiva samo onoliko koliko je i trajao h. rat.. To je bilo dobro za kom partiju,i delovalo je dugo kao idealna pozicija ali kao što možeš da primetiš na duge staze se pokazalo neodrživo i poplločalo put za katatrofu koja je sledila..

adam w

Jugoslavija je de fakto bila članica NATO početkom pedesetih kroz sporazum sa Turskom i Grčkom samo se seti ogromne američke pomoči koju je primila u tom periodu (samo da spomenem među ostalim nekoika stotina borbenih aviona koji su dugi niz godina bila okosnica Jugo vazduhoplovstva) Pravi razlog za neulazak u NATO nije bio vojne nego ideološke prirode. Jednostavno kako je kom. država mogla da opravda ulazak u NATO, tako da je kriza iz 56 kada je Rusiji trebala, podrška JBT da bi sprečila da zapad pošalje pomoć madjarskim revolucionarima preko SFRJ zapravo omogučila početak politike klacklaice koja je naravno bila održiva samo onoliko koliko je i trajao h. rat.. To je bilo dobro za kom partiju,i delovalo je dugo kao idealna pozicija ali kao što možeš da primetiš na duge staze se pokazalo neodrživo i poplločalo put za katatrofu koja je sledila..

potpis... :)

i preporuka ofc...

Hmmm... maybe "Ze Germans"? :) Or evil aliens? Or maybe NATO wants to replace UN?

Especially if they act as Russian or Chineese spies...:))))

Mungos, The Unallied

"Ze Germans"

Who are they? I might have missed a whole big plot.

Dunjice,

it's a replica from the movie "Snatch"... it's something like this:

- What do you need a gun for, Tommy?
- For protection.
- Protection? From whom? Ze Germans?
...

Thx, Atomski, na objasnjenju! Cini mi se da Ze Germans ima veze s time kako Nijemci obicno izgovaraju "the" - otprilike "ze".

Upravo tako! Čita se, tj. lik iz filma (Turkish) to izgovara kao "Zi Dž'rmans" ali pošto sam hteo da napišem komentar na engleskom...
Poenta je u tome da nema NATO od koga da nas brani... osim od nas samih, možda. Što bi Radovan III rekao, najgore je kad smo samo mi oko nas...

Pozdrav!

This, I believe, is a second insulting post against your host country, and my fatherland, in this blog.

As Soylent Green pointed this is taking sides in ongoing preparations for the war against Russia, for the conquest of Siberia, as described in Brzezinsky's "Great Chessboard". The importance of the BAlkans, and particularly SErbia in this clash is well described there.

If all are joined in NATO, which has already been denied to Russians back in 1990's, than internal terror would occur.

This, I believe, is a second insulting post against your host country, and my fatherland, in this blog.

As Soylent Green pointed this is taking sides in ongoing preparations for the war against Russia, for the conquest of Siberia, as described in Brzezinsky's "Great Chessboard". The importance of the BAlkans, and particularly SErbia in this clash is well described there.

If all are joined in NATO, which has already been denied to Russians back in 1990's, than internal terror would occur.

I have red some fragments of that book. Terrible!
I have a documentary with Mike Ruppert, the former Chief of anti-narcotic Department of Los Angeles Police, who is mentioning exactly this book, in the context of his experience and whitnessing of CIA's huge drug smuggling operations and great drug-oil conspiracy, as well as 9/11 (September, the 11th 2001) hoax., as related.

Mongoose, The Unallied (Conditionally)

Is Mr. Farmer just fishing?

Ah Semele have you come here again to advocate the new DSS' no NATO agenda ? How quick of you to follow up on the main board's decision, I'm impressed!

Trouble Around the Corner
By George H. Wittman
Published 9/17/2007
George H. Wittman, a member of the Committee on the Present Danger,
was the founding chairman of the National Institute for Public Policy.

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12017

Kosovo, with its primarily Moslem population, has been of unique importance to the United States. Proving to the Islamic world that America would fight for the rights of a Moslem-dominated community in Europe has become one of the few foreign policy initiatives shared by the Clinton and Bush administrations.

Of course it wasn't always such an easy transition. Clinton's adventure in Balkan politics, and subsequent commitment of NATO air and ground forces in 1999, initially was condemned by many leaders of the conservative wing of the Republican Party. The Russians, however, helped shift conservative thinking.

Moscow's adamant defense of its Orthodox Slav cousins and the Serbian sovereignty argument of Slobodan Milosevic smelled too much of a revival of earlier communist alignments. This became even more clear when the Russian army units supposedly under UN command actually acted to block British and American forces seeking to secure key positions.

By the time George W. Bush settled into office, Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Condi Rice had decided that with a minimum commitment of American ground forces and consequent little danger to American life and limb, considerable political propaganda use could be made of the U.S. effort to protect a majority Moslem homeland. The only trouble has been that al Qaeda, Afghanistan and Iraq came along and the American/EU/NATO/UN good works toward Moslems in Kosovo were essentially ignored by the Islamic world.

At this point, both Kosovars and Serbs are in agreement that they still hate each other. It has been said that virtually all Serbia believes Kosovo must remain Serb -- even though most of the rest of the world disagrees. Generously, Serbia's Foreign Office has indicated that Belgrade would not be making efforts to destabilize Kosovo "by physical, military or security means." It will only use legal means, it said, to prevent a unilateral declaration of independence. This has satisfied no one.

The fact is that Kosovo's leadership has made clear that it intends to establish UDI by December 10 if the negotiations next planned for September 18 do not produce agreement. This has sent the EU into a frenzy of activity with suggestions that such action would precipitate a return to the bloody warfare of the '90s.

Facts don't seem to matter too much in the Balkans where hundreds of years of imperial exploitation, foreign invasion, and bloody conflict are the historical norm. The approximate 2.1 million population of Kosovo is made up now of nearly 90% ethnic Albanians, virtually all of whom are Moslem.

This province ekes out an existence with 40-50% unemployed living through subsistence farming and cross border smuggling. Forty-five percent of its revenue is made up of remittances from abroad and UN in-country programs. Kosovo has a marginal agriculture and a very small basic manufacturing capability, although its construction industry thrives on exporting both products and workers to neighboring Balkan states. Other than some local coal mining, its mineral deposits are largely undeveloped. Serbia, nonetheless, is determined to hang on to this impoverished province. Tradition is a powerful motivation in that part of the world.

There have been various proposals for the partition of Serbia that would spin off the portion south of the Ibar River as a new Kosovo. The problem is that United Nations Resolution 1244 itself states Kosovo is a Serbian province. While such details might seem to be able to be worked out by some delicate UN negotiation, the acceptance of the concept of partition might reopen a vast number of historical ethnic border conflicts throughout the multiple nations of former Yugoslavia.

The Russians have recently reiterated their firm stance in support of their Serb cousins. Putin's very modern ambitions do not dissuade him from using the oldest of pseudo-legitimate ethnic identities to buttress his foreign political actions. The Serbs, in turn, while happy to have Russian support for their point of view, are ultimately most interested in keeping clean their EU copybook in hopes of eventual full membership in that union.

Meanwhile Washington appears to have downgraded the political importance of aiding Kosovo for Islamic political propaganda purposes. It's not so much a matter of losing interest as it is a willingness to turn the sticky problem of Kosovo over to the UN and European Union. The Bush Administration is basically sitting with its fingers crossed hoping the United Nations' special envoy, Martti Ahtisaari, will be able to devise a plan that satisfies both Belgrade and Pristina sometime before the December 10 deadline.

No one wants any more trouble around the Kosovo corner -- except the bad guys.


George H. Wittman, a member of the Committee on the Present Danger, was the founding chairman of the National Institute for Public Policy.

I REPEAT:
"No one wants any more trouble around the Kosovo corner -- except the bad guys."

I REPEAT:
"No one wants any more trouble around the Kosovo corner -- except the bad guys."

I REPEAT:
"No one wants any more trouble around the Kosovo corner -- except the bad guys."

I REPEAT:
"No one wants any more trouble around the Kosovo corner -- except the bad guys."

I REPEAT:
"No one wants any more trouble around the Kosovo corner -- except the bad guys."


JEL SAD JASNO!! MIIIIIII-RNO!

Do you happen to include in your definition of bad guys those tycoons whose interest it is to keep Serbia away from European integrations as well?

JEL SAD JASNO!! MIIIIIII-RNO!

Vidim da je stranačka disciplina na nivou ?

Bas tako Adame Weisphaute.

Kristina,
U ovom krajnjem scenariju koji ti spominjes mi cemo moci samo da gledamo i zalimo ako se to bude desavalo Rusiji.

Posled prvog i drugog rata, pa onda balkanskih ratova 90tih godina VEOMA je jasno da mi imamo trajne neprijatelje u zapadno-juznom polukrugu oko nas i medju nama. Sto znaci da nas mogu neutralisati u svakom momentu, i to jedva cekaju kao i uvek. Zato Rusi ne mogu racunati na nasu pomoc u doomsday scenariju.

Za ovaj scenario koji opisujete nije vazno da li smo mi U NATO PAKTU ili VAN NATO PAKTA. Kada je Regent Pavle pokusavao da se dogovori sa nemackim fasistima, hrvatski i italijanski fasisti su osujetili te pokusaje, a da ne govorimo da je unutrasnja srpska opozicija lako oborila rezim uz pomoc Engleza.

Opet bi se naslo dovoljno ljudi u Srbiji da obori vladu u slucaju ekstremnih situacija i to opet na nesrecu svih Srba.

ZATO ne treba razmisljati o doomsday scenariju koju gospodin Farmer iznosi da bi uneo konfuziju u srpske dijaloge.

Ono sto je vazno je da se razume je da Srbija pravi pakt sa "djavolom" iz svojih interesa, a ne zato sto zeli da bude djavolov saucesnik. A nas interes je da stitimo Srbe na Balkanu od daljnjeg progona danas i uvek.

Semele,

Primljeno k znanju.

Takticki, zvuci sasvim racionalno i istinito.

Nedostaje stratesko, dubinsko sagledavanje.

Mi na jugu imamo i neke trajne saveznike. Posle 1221 - treba procitati i Genadijevo pismo logotetu. A ima i nekog zanimljivog stiva iz 1895, sa jednim paragrafom koji govori o nama. Ako se zajednicki izborimo protiv zajednickh Dositeja i Ilariona Ruvarca stvari bi izgledale drugacije.

Pa posalji "linkove".

Za cenjenje sagovornike uključujem Vukovu latinicu u pogon:

Znaš kako je pisao lukavi hrvatski filolog Dalibor Brozović o "sprovodjenu" zajedničkog filološkog projekta, ...

"takav se mit ne pobija otvoreno, bučno i ofanzivno, takvu mitu treba naprotiv prirediti svečani sprovod."

pa tako treba i sa baka Natom.

ZATO ne treba razmisljati o doomsday scenariju koju gospodin Farmer iznosi da bi uneo konfuziju u srpske dijaloge.

...rekao bih, zahebava na racun NATOa ( i, moguce, usput pomalo na racun Kostunice). Sto Adam i njegovi to ne vide, to me ne cudi. I ako vide pravice se da ne vide. Ali me ovaj tvoj komentar upucuje da ti to pomalo ne vidis...

budi?
Domazete,
U eri brze komunikacije sva paznja ne moze biti usmerena na pojedinosti.
Enlighten me please.
Sto se tice Adama i co. i oni imaju prava na "Aufklarung".
Pozdrav sa ove strane atlantskog spoja.

Obrati paznju na Chapter XXII. Skolarijevo pismo logotetu ne postoji online. Potrazi ga, izvestava o Firenci u koju despot Djuradj nije hteo.

P.S. Jos jedan pozdrav za sensei Domazeta.

...drage dame.

Semele,

Ako se CBFov tekst procita relaksiranog oka mislim da se moze videti da se radi o lahkoj zahebanciji na racun Poslovnog Udruzenje kome je jedini nacin da ostane u biznisu pruzanja zastite to da izmislja nove protivnike. Ko kaze da su se Sicilijanci prvi setili.

Izvinjavam se na kratkoci, ali sam u strasnoj guzvi.

semele

JEL SAD JASNO!! MIIIIIII-RNO!

mirno k'o na pomen imena djenerala nedica kad parivodic reche koracu...
ili mirno mirno, ono kao opushteno sve je u redu mirno...

ili neko trece mirno...

americki mirno

is actually fun! Let's say we all join NATO. Then what?
Well, it reminds me of the situation when various sports commentator, reporters, etc., choose the best soccer team in the world: they select among the best world players and make a "dream team". Now, there is this little thing that the Team has nobody to play against. Really. Who do they play? Cosmos from NY? Nah.
Then some genius comes up with the brilliant idea: Hey, lets split the Team in two and play against each other! So, they do that, organize the match, sell the tickets, and everybody makes some money.
The same thing with NATO.
We now have the mightiest military on the planet, just sitting there. It is the nature of force to want to demonstrate itself. To show how strong and big it is. So we gotta pick up a fight with somebody. But who? Vicious hordes of Zulu warriors advancing towards Paris? (Btw, these guys are pissed off big time at Europeans, but that is another subject).
So here is the idea: This mega super duper dial-o-matic NATO can attack Switzerland!
Under what pretext, you ask. Oh c'mon, those bastards, they've been selling us cheese with holes! Swiss cheese, Swiss cheese, they shout. Swiss cheese my a*s, it's just a hole surrounded by a little cheese. Casus belli, par excellence, for those who speak French.
OK, so we attack Switzerland, raid their banks, get the money and treasures, and everybody lives happily ever after. That is my idea. It it certainly better than to split this mega alliance in two and fight each other:)

Oh c'mon, those bastards, they've been selling us cheese with holes!

It is actually not the biggest problem. The worst thing is that the Swiss leave the BEST cheese at home for their own consumption and export the leftovers to the NATO world. Is it not a good reason to act? ;-))

Exactly!
I can see you are getting my drift:)

It was actually

Swiss cheese

thet drew my attention ;-)

And those SWATCH whatever ... the sole reason why they invented them was to ware our officer stuff down. Half of OTAN headquarters have not yet figured out how to wind them up.

save Serbia
and kill yourself,
Kostunice
Kostunice

Kostunica should simply cancel the Serbian military. Then there's no need for military alliance.

Bingo!

(and the rest should follow the example :-)))

dunjica

Bingo!

(and the rest should follow the example :-)))

It's not going to happen, but were it at all possible I' d be the first to endorse it.

Wow, Mr. Welsphaut, in that case, the world beter do something about it ! I mean, if a person of such relevance is willing to endorse...., what's the world waiting for....?

nestorijanac

Wow, Mr. Welsphaut, in that case, the world beter do something about it ! I mean, if a person of such relevance is willing to endorse...., what's the world waiting for....?

They are waiting for you to endorse it first my dear Nestorioan friend. Because you bear such great relevance.in the world, of course

Well, let me then do it right now..... There, I did it ! I have just endorsed it.
You can go ahead now, my dear friend...

Oh no my Nestoirian friend you have got it all wrong, all we have to do is wait for the world to act on the words of such a great one like you in comparison to whose stature mine inevitably pales