Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:55:06 -0500 (EST)
From: danceswithcarp <dcombs-AT-bloomington.in.us>
Subject: Re: Aaron likes butchers (corrected Ver 1.1)



Sorry, the ifrst post was unedited, this is the grammatically right
version.


On Sat, 17 Apr 1999, Aaron Micheau wrote:

> >Weaken Milosevic's ability to rule, then let all of these Noble And
> >Well-Intentioned Fucking Serbs I keep hearing about run with the ball.  
> >I thought that's what giving peace a chance was all about.  Duh.
> 
> Let's see, since the bombing began, those Serbs have rallied to Milosevic,
> because, according to you, "they see their state in peril".  So somehow, if
> the bombing continues- increasing the peril- Serbs will do a 180 and turn
> against Milosevic?  Is this, like, how the Iraqis overthrew Saddam Hussein-
>  Oh, wait a minute...

Not at all a problem.  You and your toadie-ilk keep saying that the serbs
were just right there on the brink of doing something before the NATO war
started. So, make it impossible for the tanks and apcs to cross rivers or
be refueled and all of a sudden the playing field for the +interior+
anti-milosevic forces is level.  Then we see whether your line is a crock
of shit, or whther the serb people can set up alternatives to Milosevic.  
If they go nationalist, then I'd have to say their committement to
revolution wasn't too deep to begin with, wouldn't you?

>   ... ummm...  is this like, one of those dreams that made perfect sense
> until you woke up and thought about it?
> 
> According to the Long Haul NATO plan, NATO ground troops will destroy the
> infrastructure of Serbia and push the Serbian nationalists out of Kosovo in
> a ground offensive.  Then they will usher the Kosovar Albanians back into
> Kosovo under NATO protection.  All well and good. 
> Except that, in all of the months it takes to do that, vindictive Serbian
> nationalists will have burned and levelled all of the Albanian homes and
> villages.  Leaving Albanians homeless, campless, and without food supplies
> (will NATO feed them then? help them rebuild?). 

Yeah, this is exactly what will happen if the NATO war stops now without a
plan.  There will not be an albanian-kosovar pot left to piss in.

Are you saying "Give Milosevic a chance to change his mind?"   How long,
then do we wait?  100,000 dispossessed refugees?  200,000?  300,000?  A
MILLION?  The problem is you have no alternative to war.  None.  Zip.
Nada.  And you don't give a shit how many albanians are robbed until you
come up with one.

> Kosovo will be littered
> with DU shells, and who knows what that shit does to you (except for
> thousands of Gulf War vets and Iraqi Shiites, who might have interesting
> theories...).  

You simply don't have a clue as to what depleted uranium is and how it
behaves, do you?  No one, no where, has shown that DU becomes hot to any
appreciable levels after impact.  It is not plutonium.  What has been
shown is there is a detectable burst of micro-radiation on a solid impact
that lasts for a microsecond.  This is a "detectable" burst, not a lethal
one.  You simply repeat half-assed leftist propoganda here.  You ought to
look it up.

And your reference to the "Gulf War Syndrome" is equally ignorant.
Veterans of the War Between The States, WW1, WW2, Korea, The Arab-Israeli
Wars, the Falklands and Vietnam have ALL displayed the same symptoms as
Gulf War veterans.  This is nothing new in the annals of war.  It's
essentially called Post-Traumatic Stress, or Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder.

Duh.

> Then of course, there's the KLA, which will promptly begin a
> revenge campaign against whatever Serbs they can find, and NATO will find
> itself either suppressing the KLA, a la US troops in Somalia, or tacitly
> supporting the KLA, a la British colonials in Palestine.  In either case,
> the likely outcome is a ignomious (but indignantly victorious) NATO
> withdrawal, 

Maybe you don't read your own stooges' propoganda.  What has been posted
here is that NATO will be there forever.  Now you're saying this isn't so.
Which particular piece of hysteronics is the fact?

> The easiest problem is all of the
> starving, cholera-stricken Serbs in Serbia. Whether or not the civilian
> population there is being targeted by NATO is irrelevant, because NATO is
> deliberately targetting civilian structures- factories, heating and power
> plants, food processing plants, etc.  Destroying this infrastructure will
> have the obvious results come wintertime.  

Yes, it will have possible positive outcomes.  The people can set up TAZ's
and PAZ's.  Or are you saying there is no possiblity at all for the
introduction of anarchy and creating communities that help themselves?
This is the shit-test for anarchists, aaron; either shit, or get off the
pot.  Not once do you presume that the PEOPLE might do better without the
Serbian state to provide for them


> and other such shrill attacks. We are all sending emails on this list
> aren't we? Or did i miss something?  i could just as well say, "what are
> you doing Carp, toting an automatic rifle to Kosovo?"  i've made it quite
> clear that i think negotiation has a much better chance of actually helping
> Albanian Kosovars, 

Would you negotiate with a rapist?  Maybe where you come from people
negotiate with psychopaths and sociopaths, but this guy has the blood of
100,000s of thousands on his hands.  And you want to NEGOTIATE with him?  
For what?

"Hey?  Milosevic?  We'll forget what an absolute murdering fascist you are
and wipe away all of your sins if you will just let these nice people back
into thier family homes.  PUH_LEEEEEEEEEEZE?"

You really do live in a sheltered environment.


> and NATO has done nothing but torpedo, sabotage, and
> dismiss any attempt at negotiation.  You haven't addressed this point other
> than to quote silly adages about marriage counseling and caricature 'The
> Left' as if there's actually a significant group which holds these
> fictitious positions you allude to.  You sound like Rush Limbaugh.  What's
> next, Carp, 'Feminazis'?

I'm beyond your "left," aaron.  Your "leftist" approach has failed
miserably in the 20th century and I hope it is the one thing we leave
behind at Y2K.  You and your ilk simply can not argue reality.  Everything
you want is predicated upon people behaving as if they just walked out of
textbook on theoretically perfect behavior.  Well, so far in my life I've
never seen a perfectly behaved person.   The "Rush Limbaugh" attack is
hardly new coming from your likes.  When you find that your crackpot ideas
don't make sense you decide that Rush has everyone wrapped up in a
conspiracy against you and cry foul.

And the analogy on Jeffrey Dahlmer fits this situation perfectly.  You and
your apologista friends are more than willing to either permanently
dispossess the albanian Kosovars, or send them right back into the room
with the cannibal.  Who do you presume is going to protect all of these
happily returning albanians, anyway?  Or do you assume they won't need it.
And if they do, then won't that take foreign troops?  And isn't that what
the R...Accords called for?  Your hypocrisy is showing, aaron.

> Really,  you are too much of a cynic to make credible moral arguments, and
> you'd do better to leave the hysterics to Roger.

Hahahahahaha.  And you are too steeped in the ideoology of a failed
pacifist left to come up with any solutions beyond mere balloons that will
pop on their first contact with a prick.
 
> and who's this 'Arkan' person, anyway?

Well, this just goes to show you how poorly informed you are on the real
situation in the Balkans:  ARkan is the head serb executioner from Bosnia
who invented "ethnic cleansing."  He's an indicted international war
ciminal and he is leading the milita sweep across Kosovo which is what
comes behind the serb tanks; he admits he is doing this, and Milosevic
admits he is there.  Milosevic calls him a "serb patriot." These are the
Eizentgruppen who do the actual murdering and raping and burning and you,
who is offering up Ghandian-like platitudes as solutions don't know about
him?

This is what I mean by you seem to be horribly misinformed about reality.
If you have no idea what's happening and who is causing it, how can you
presume to have a solution (not).

 
> >I thought you supported wirld-wide attacks against american
> >civilians as a means of toppling the regime. 
> 
> i don't.   where'd you get that idea?

>From reading your posts.  You seem to always support the dictators and
totalatarian approaches to organizing societies in the real wirld.

Now, if you'll just tell me what page of the hymnal to turn to, we'll all
join hands and see if we just can't sing the Boogie Man away...


carp