Serb community "will not be given executive powers"

And the whole South belong to Serbia. For now just up to Albanian borders but Albania will not exist forever. NATO will leave soon enough.

The North belongs to Prishtina. Game Over!

albanians saying its unacceptable because of kosovos laws bla bla well it's serbia and serbias laws. your phony laws have just been made up.

Even a tinier group of people in Brcko Bosnia were given a district. Why? Because it goes against Serbian interests. Anything that goes against Serbian interests is acceptable to the West. Look at Kosovo. It does not satisfy any of the defined criteria of a state but the West is still pushing for that solution. Why? I already answered that. The West is so predictable.

"To accept any agreement that is consistent with the Constitution and laws of Kosovo, not to accept any agreement that is inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of Kosovo," will be Thaci's principle as he sits opposite Ivica Dačić, according to this article.

Silly. And since Serbs do the same, i.e. not to accept anything that is 'inconsistent with the Constistution of Serbia', how shall a compromise be reached?

About 'executive powers': In the Federal Republic of Germany, for example, police is placed not on state level, but on the level of provinces.

About 'executive powers': In the Federal Republic of Germany, for example, police is placed not on state level, but on the level of provinces.
(Comm. Parrisson, 1 April 2013 14:07)

Wrong, since Germany does not have provinces but states. But also when it comes to the interior ministry of each of those states then they can't overrule the federal interior ministry in Berlin. Last but not least, this is not about decentralization (which I promote too), but about preventing a tiny group of people to give enough power to obstruct political life of entire state, e.g. what we are witness of in BiH. This is why Prishtina never ever will give them that kind of power. Not because it is about principles or stubbornness but about protecting themselves from that bad experience.

Even a tinier group of people in Brcko Bosnia were given a district. Why?
(Teslavio, 1 April 2013 15:54)

Why? Because somebody in the West thought it would be better that Serbs have their little entity in Bosnia rather being destroyed by the victorious Croatian army, while still making sure that RS does not have even the slightest chance to secede. The Brcko condominium was a good idea to ensure that. Bottom line, Serbs signed the Dayton Treaty and Brcko is part of it. Kosovo could have been also part of the Dayton agreements but Serbs rejected it. So, tough luck for you.

"Last but not least, this is not about decentralization (which I promote too), but about preventing a tiny group of people to give enough power to obstruct political life of entire state, e.g. what we are witness of in BiH. "
(John, 1 April 2013 15:02)

Some truth in it. But seen from this perspective, then power should have never been given to a group people belonging which belong to various mafia clans and who are faking elections to stay in power to obstruct the development of a whole state, like we witness in Kosovo. And no, turning of Kosovo into Europe's main drug hub is not a development.

Some truth in it. But seen from this perspective, then power should have never been given to a group people belonging which belong to various mafia clans and who are faking elections to stay in power to obstruct the development of a whole state, like we witness in Kosovo. And no, turning of Kosovo into Europe's main drug hub is not a development.
(Comm. Parrisson, 1 April 2013 19:20)

If it would have been up to me and the majority in the 1990s, Rugova would have become in charge. Unfortunately, his peaceful way failed and others came in, with different approaches. The rest is history. I also see deficiencies in the rule of law, but as a post war country that is not much of a surprise too. However, when it comes to criminals in political circles, Kosovo makes no assumption with the entire Balkans. Some are more, some are less involved but basically they are all the same, so your point falls very short here. It is also unlikely that in a Serbian Kosovo that would be different. During the 1990s, Kosovo was in all references the worst part of Europe and compared to those times, Kosovo improvement significantly.

Silly. And since Serbs do the same, i.e. not to accept anything that is 'inconsistent with the Constistution of Serbia', how shall a compromise be reached?
(Comm. Parrisson, 1 April 2013 14:07)

The Constitution of Serbia means nothing in Kosovo; it is UNSCR 1244 that rules in Kosovo - even the Russian Ambassador told that to the celebrating Serbs in North Kosovo.

Why? Because somebody in the West thought it would be better that Serbs have their little entity in Bosnia rather being destroyed by the victorious Croatian army


Hahahha that "victorious croatian army"needed the support of NATO aswell as the arbih to fight the VRS, thats how strong that croatian army is/was. Never could do anything on their own without their back covered and btw what was the croatian army doing in bosnia?Dont you consider that an aggression?We all saw how strong the croatian army was 91-95 when it took the JNA less than a week to throw them into submission. Strong "army" I must say hahahahah

"During the 1990s, Kosovo was in all references the worst part of Europe and compared to those times, Kosovo improvement significantly"

You should ask yourself why? You also failed to mention that during the time of Yugoslavia and Tito lesding up to 1990, Albanian Kosovars in Kosovo lived better than they did in their own country Albania! After the breakup of Yugoslavia caused by the West/NATO that is when Kosovo began to decline. Why? Well because the West allowed and enabled terrorists (the KLA which was funded by Osama bin Laden) to inflitrate and destroy anything good that ever existed there.

The North belongs to Prishtina. Game Over!

And the whole South belong to Serbia. For now just up to Albanian borders but Albania will not exist forever. NATO will leave soon enough.

albanians saying its unacceptable because of kosovos laws bla bla well it's serbia and serbias laws. your phony laws have just been made up.

About 'executive powers': In the Federal Republic of Germany, for example, police is placed not on state level, but on the level of provinces.
(Comm. Parrisson, 1 April 2013 14:07)

Wrong, since Germany does not have provinces but states. But also when it comes to the interior ministry of each of those states then they can't overrule the federal interior ministry in Berlin. Last but not least, this is not about decentralization (which I promote too), but about preventing a tiny group of people to give enough power to obstruct political life of entire state, e.g. what we are witness of in BiH. This is why Prishtina never ever will give them that kind of power. Not because it is about principles or stubbornness but about protecting themselves from that bad experience.

Even a tinier group of people in Brcko Bosnia were given a district. Why? Because it goes against Serbian interests. Anything that goes against Serbian interests is acceptable to the West. Look at Kosovo. It does not satisfy any of the defined criteria of a state but the West is still pushing for that solution. Why? I already answered that. The West is so predictable.

Even a tinier group of people in Brcko Bosnia were given a district. Why?
(Teslavio, 1 April 2013 15:54)

Why? Because somebody in the West thought it would be better that Serbs have their little entity in Bosnia rather being destroyed by the victorious Croatian army, while still making sure that RS does not have even the slightest chance to secede. The Brcko condominium was a good idea to ensure that. Bottom line, Serbs signed the Dayton Treaty and Brcko is part of it. Kosovo could have been also part of the Dayton agreements but Serbs rejected it. So, tough luck for you.

"Last but not least, this is not about decentralization (which I promote too), but about preventing a tiny group of people to give enough power to obstruct political life of entire state, e.g. what we are witness of in BiH. "
(John, 1 April 2013 15:02)

Some truth in it. But seen from this perspective, then power should have never been given to a group people belonging which belong to various mafia clans and who are faking elections to stay in power to obstruct the development of a whole state, like we witness in Kosovo. And no, turning of Kosovo into Europe's main drug hub is not a development.

"To accept any agreement that is consistent with the Constitution and laws of Kosovo, not to accept any agreement that is inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of Kosovo," will be Thaci's principle as he sits opposite Ivica Dačić, according to this article.

Silly. And since Serbs do the same, i.e. not to accept anything that is 'inconsistent with the Constistution of Serbia', how shall a compromise be reached?

About 'executive powers': In the Federal Republic of Germany, for example, police is placed not on state level, but on the level of provinces.

Some truth in it. But seen from this perspective, then power should have never been given to a group people belonging which belong to various mafia clans and who are faking elections to stay in power to obstruct the development of a whole state, like we witness in Kosovo. And no, turning of Kosovo into Europe's main drug hub is not a development.
(Comm. Parrisson, 1 April 2013 19:20)

If it would have been up to me and the majority in the 1990s, Rugova would have become in charge. Unfortunately, his peaceful way failed and others came in, with different approaches. The rest is history. I also see deficiencies in the rule of law, but as a post war country that is not much of a surprise too. However, when it comes to criminals in political circles, Kosovo makes no assumption with the entire Balkans. Some are more, some are less involved but basically they are all the same, so your point falls very short here. It is also unlikely that in a Serbian Kosovo that would be different. During the 1990s, Kosovo was in all references the worst part of Europe and compared to those times, Kosovo improvement significantly.

Silly. And since Serbs do the same, i.e. not to accept anything that is 'inconsistent with the Constistution of Serbia', how shall a compromise be reached?
(Comm. Parrisson, 1 April 2013 14:07)

The Constitution of Serbia means nothing in Kosovo; it is UNSCR 1244 that rules in Kosovo - even the Russian Ambassador told that to the celebrating Serbs in North Kosovo.

Why? Because somebody in the West thought it would be better that Serbs have their little entity in Bosnia rather being destroyed by the victorious Croatian army


Hahahha that "victorious croatian army"needed the support of NATO aswell as the arbih to fight the VRS, thats how strong that croatian army is/was. Never could do anything on their own without their back covered and btw what was the croatian army doing in bosnia?Dont you consider that an aggression?We all saw how strong the croatian army was 91-95 when it took the JNA less than a week to throw them into submission. Strong "army" I must say hahahahah

"During the 1990s, Kosovo was in all references the worst part of Europe and compared to those times, Kosovo improvement significantly"

You should ask yourself why? You also failed to mention that during the time of Yugoslavia and Tito lesding up to 1990, Albanian Kosovars in Kosovo lived better than they did in their own country Albania! After the breakup of Yugoslavia caused by the West/NATO that is when Kosovo began to decline. Why? Well because the West allowed and enabled terrorists (the KLA which was funded by Osama bin Laden) to inflitrate and destroy anything good that ever existed there.