Friday, 29.10.2010.
13:45
NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Friday that the alliance would cut its Kosovo force from 10,000 troops to 5,000 troops.
Izvor: Tanjug
IMAGE SOURCE
pre 15 godina
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Their hero, the caveman-in-chief, will finally now have the opportunity to meet in person the "virgins in paradise" as a reward for his "jihad"
pre 15 godina
Camp bondsteel is part of series of new US bases; others are in Romania and Bulgaria and soon Montenegro – it’s strategy even used by the Romans. The frontline used to be Germany during the Cold War, but that has now moved on and it’s the Middle East with its energy so the forts have to move closer to the “natives”. These bases have a twofold purpose – first to have men and equipment at the ready and the second is to intimidate and remind the local and surrounding regional populace of who is boss, much like when the US sends warships to a certain area, such as North Korea after that incident with the South Korean sub.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Bondsteel for Middle East ? Come on don't tell me you are still going by Kostunica's fantasies. There are much cheaper ways to achieve that intimidation than permanently setting up a base in Camp Bondsteel. A US naval task force sent just when needed would have much more firepower than Camp Bondsteel and some entire armed forces in the region and be much less expensive. American's don't have to remind insignificant others (like Albania, Kosovo, Serbia, Macedonia, and co.) who is the boss. Only the weak do that (like Russia with Georgia)…
The Vietnam war was a loss that caused the US to avoid any direct overseas conflicts for 3 decades.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, and the Americans were clever enough to work to cut losses rather than continue for decades something that was not worth it. And they did not avoid conflicts for 3 decades. They did intervene when they had a security interest (of course they did not invent a war just to show you that they could intervene). So they intervened in Nicaragua in the 80s and Iraq-Kuwait in the 90s.
The war with Iraq over Kuwait was a set up to try and get rid of Saddam. The US urged the Shites to take up arms against the regime, but stopped short of providing support which I imagine the US wanted a “people’s uprising” much like the stunts they organized in Bagdad when the US went in the second time. The Shites suffered terribly at the hands of Saddam but you see the US did not want to topple the old boy when someone in Washington realized that once Saddam was gone Iran would step into the void and through the Shites control the oil rich nation.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Which makes sense, doesn't it ? US decided to topple Sadam when it was in their interest. The same as for Kosovo, US only serves its own interests as it should otherwise would cease to be a superpower.
Kosovo was simply a cover up Billy boys indiscretions and a means of getting rid of Milosevic who made Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, I think we are saying the same thing. They went to war to get Serbia out of Kosovo because they were fed up with Milosevic. Losing Kosovo would have caused Milosevic to lose power, as well, as it did. Mission achieved; time to pull out. That's what happens when you try to, as you put it, "make Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid". Ghedaffi learned the lesson very quickly.
Before the Albos start to hyperventilate over my statement please read the bit about what happened to the Shites again – the US is no friend to anyone or anything except if it benefits them and Kosovo has no minerals or energy.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
I think it would be naïve for everybody to think that US helped Kosovo because it is a Kosovo's friend. Americans only help their interests. Serbia wanted endless talks to solve Kosovo's status, which meant that US would have had to keep significant number of soldiers in Kosovo for a long time. So US supported the most pragmatic solution to get itself out of Kosovo as soon as possible saving manpower and money for more important things; but it did not do it out of love for Albanians.
Kosovo was not an astounding win because of the vast military gear the Serbian army took out when it left, but let’s say it was a win for NATO.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Nobody wanted to destroy the Serbian army. The mission was to get that army out of Kosovo, and that was achieved.
It gave the US false courage to attempt two other forays such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Why false ?! The same tools used in Serbia were successfully applied in Iraq and Afghanistan and US won those wars in days. As for the post-war phase, Serbia's experience is irrelevant since US did not occupy anything in Serbia outside Kosovo. Don't confuse post-war with war. US has the capability to defeat most countries of the world in a matter of days or, maximum, weeks if they see a benefit exceeding the costs. Of course, it does not have the capability to occupy them forever.
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Victory is defined in relation to the mission that somebody has. Tell me what the mission is and I can tell you whether we have a victory or not…
The point I was making is that US is not in Afghanistan to stay forever. It would be stupid. Even if they're losing, they still should pull out to cut the losses, otherwise they cease to be a superpower.
Its manufacturing excuses to leave the region – it simply cannot afford the cost in dollars.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
I think I said the same thing. That's what every superpower SHOULD do if they want to remain a superpower. When the cost is not worth the benefit, pull out. The moment you cease to pull out when it's not worth it, you cease being a superpower and will have the fate or Rome or USSR.
Iraq is a mitigating disaster for the US and they have to pull out because they have not achieved their purpose and the US military losses are much higher than claimed plus money is running out.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
They achieved for Sadam to be out. What else do you want them to achieve ? To govern the Iraqis ? That would be a disaster. US continues to be a superpower precisely because limits itself to a mission (like Japan, Germany, Iraq, etc.), builds the initial institutions and then leaves it to the population of those countries to govern themselves. If they take the opportunity, like Japan and Germany did, they can do very well. If they don't, there's nothing US can do about it. It's not US' job to govern them forever.
The level of violence is the same as before but the US media don’t report it as in the past – out of sight out of mind. Iraq has no government for many months after an election and even then it’s useless so you see Iran now has a permanent foot hold in Iraq. The US went into Afghanistan and Iraq as a super power it now has to rely on others to do that same job – money problems.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
See above. If those people don't know how to govern, it's not US job to spend money and blood for that beyond what they had to for achieving their mission for their interests. US is not there to babysit the Iraqis forever with US taxpayers' money.
The IFC sped up a lot of things that were to take possibly a decade or two – China was not supposed to overtake Japan in the world economy as No 2 until 2030; they did just that in December 2009. It’s now hot on the US heels and may have overtaken them right now; next comes India then Brazil and Russia.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
And what's the problem with that (even if we may not be around if and when that happens) ? Luxemburg is much better than US even though it's a fraction of the superpower.
Hilary Clinton is scheduled to visit Australia next month to discuss opening up a smaller base in Darwin. You see the Chinese have kicked the US out of the China Sea and there are no friendly countries ready to give them a base in the entire region except Japan and South Korea.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
But South Korea and Japan ARE the region together with China. Where do you want to build the base, in the city-state of Singapore and get it's ingabitants out :) or in China ?!
By 2017 India will make Diego Garcia ineffective, but this will speed up if the US “goes into a second recession” next year, as if they have left the first one.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
What does it mean "India will make Diego Garcia ineffective" ?
Dude, I have the impression that you see international relations as a continuous confrontation and a zero-sum game. US, India, China and others are not in war or anything like that - to the contrary they are interdependent. Just because Serbia sees itself as surrounded by enemies and it is these enemies' fault for all Serbia's ills, it does not mean that other countries have the same sick mentality.
Lawrence Eagleburger once said “we nearly went broke sending the USSR broke”.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Great… thanks for proving my point. A superpower should balance benefits to costs. So once a mission is achieved and there are no more benefits to be achieved, you pull out, otherwise you are going to go broke. That's why US continues to be a superpower because has understood this.
These halcyon days are over – little by little it’s going back at a fast rate and 2010 is only the start. Look at Obama – he has aged before your very eyes and he is only 2 years into the job.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, you are right. He has aged by 2 years since 2008 the same as me and you.
Dude, the whole point of my previous post was that a superpower should not attempt to occupy other countries to stay there forever. Only if you hate that superpower (as it appears you do) you'd advise it to go and occupy forever other countries. That would be the definitive way of destroying that superpower.
pre 15 godina
Thank you for the correct posting. Under 1244 NATO is neutral.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
NATO has never been involved in the politics of Kosovo, its job is to provide security there according to 1244 which specifically lays out the removal and prevention of any military operations of Serbia.
This no longer is perceived to be an issue, therefore it is unnecessary to keep the present level of numbers. However, should the security situation change, a sudden surge in NATO numbers would not need consideration by the UNSC. As long as 1244 is in force their mandate is in effect. With the network of bases already there, any needed increase in personnel could be accomplished in a matter of days.
pre 15 godina
(icj1, 30 October 2010 04:39)
Camp bondsteel is part of series of new US bases; others are in Romania and Bulgaria and soon Montenegro – it’s strategy even used by the Romans. The frontline used to be Germany during the Cold War, but that has now moved on and it’s the Middle East with its energy so the forts have to move closer to the “natives”. These bases have a twofold purpose – first to have men and equipment at the ready and the second is to intimidate and remind the local and surrounding regional populace of who is boss, much like when the US sends warships to a certain area, such as North Korea after that incident with the South Korean sub.
The Vietnam war was a loss that caused the US to avoid any direct overseas conflicts for 3 decades.
The war with Iraq over Kuwait was a set up to try and get rid of Saddam. The US urged the Shites to take up arms against the regime, but stopped short of providing support which I imagine the US wanted a “people’s uprising” much like the stunts they organized in Bagdad when the US went in the second time. The Shites suffered terribly at the hands of Saddam but you see the US did not want to topple the old boy when someone in Washington realized that once Saddam was gone Iran would step into the void and through the Shites control the oil rich nation.
Kosovo was simply a cover up Billy boys indiscretions and a means of getting rid of Milosevic who made Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid. Before the Albos start to hyperventilate over my statement please read the bit about what happened to the Shites again – the US is no friend to anyone or anything except if it benefits them and Kosovo has no minerals or energy. Kosovo was not an astounding win because of the vast military gear the Serbian army took out when it left, but let’s say it was a win for NATO. It gave the US false courage to attempt two other forays such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature. Its manufacturing excuses to leave the region – it simply cannot afford the cost in dollars.
Iraq is a mitigating disaster for the US and they have to pull out because they have not achieved their purpose and the US military losses are much higher than claimed plus money is running out. The level of violence is the same as before but the US media don’t report it as in the past – out of sight out of mind. Iraq has no government for many months after an election and even then it’s useless so you see Iran now has a permanent foot hold in Iraq. The US went into Afghanistan and Iraq as a super power it now has to rely on others to do that same job – money problems.
The IFC sped up a lot of things that were to take possibly a decade or two – China was not supposed to overtake Japan in the world economy as No 2 until 2030; they did just that in December 2009. It’s now hot on the US heels and may have overtaken them right now; next comes India then Brazil and Russia.
Hilary Clinton is scheduled to visit Australia next month to discuss opening up a smaller base in Darwin. You see the Chinese have kicked the US out of the China Sea and there are no friendly countries ready to give them a base in the entire region except Japan and South Korea. By 2017 India will make Diego Garcia ineffective, but this will speed up if the US “goes into a second recession” next year, as if they have left the first one.
Lawrence Eagleburger once said “we nearly went broke sending the USSR broke”. These halcyon days are over – little by little it’s going back at a fast rate and 2010 is only the start. Look at Obama – he has aged before your very eyes and he is only 2 years into the job.
…if Kosovo wants to the north, Kosovo needs to grow up and deal with the north itself. NATO still lives by 1244 and is status neutral.
(American Eagle, 30 October 2010 09:56)
Thank you for the correct posting. Under 1244 NATO is neutral.
pre 15 godina
NATO is moving to a deterrent force. We are not Kosovo's army. If Kosovo wants to the north, Kosovo needs to grow up and deal with the north itself. NATO still lives by 1244 and is status neutral.
pre 15 godina
Milos Obilic,
Skenderbeg was Serbian too
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
You are still in pre-20th century... History has shown over and over again that regardless of how strong you are you cannot occupy other countries forever. Americans were the first superpower to learn this lesson of history, so they go to war to achieve a mission and pull out, they don’t go to war to occupy forever another country – that’s a lost cause.
They went to war with Japan in WWII to dismantle Japan’s capability to make war again, and when the mission was achieved, pulled out. They went to war with Germany to liberate Europe, and once the mission was achieved pulled out. They went to war in Vietnam to not allow the takeover by the communists, did not achieve the mission, and decided that was time to cut the losses and pulled out . They went to war with Iraq to liberate Kuwait, and pulled out once the mission was achieved. They went to war with Serbia to force it to withdraw from Kosovo, and once the mission was achieved they are now pulling out. They went to war in Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban and capture Bin Laden achieving the first and failing for the second. They went to war to topple Sadam, achieved the mission and pulled out.
It is this strategy that allows US to remain a superpower because it enables it to maintain the capacity to intervene when needed for their security interests. If they had continued the occupation of all countries that they temporarily occupied in the last 100 years they would have had very soon the fate of Rome, or if you want a more recent example, the fate of USSR.
pre 15 godina
Good for Kosova.
A new place of stability in the region and the world;
Quickly to send the remaining NATO-troops to the criminals part of Kosova, which is the North and populated by the Serbs.
Kosova, we love you!
(Prishtina, 29 October 2010 21:36
If NATO did not “send troops to the north” while it had over 10 000 it certainly is not going to do that now. For those that can’t read the signals; NATO is running out of cash and the 5000 will be even further reduced in the new future because after the losses in Iraq and now Afghanistan, Camp bondsteel is useless. It’s not because of the Kosovo police being trained up and there will never be a Kosovo army because there is no money in the bank left and nor does the EU want a threat to them.
Up until recently no talks were on the agenda, but now the US/EU have changed their minds. What do you think these talks are all about? How to further subsidze Albanians with free electricity or free accomodation? No it’s to allow some form of free movement to Albos to look for work.
The EU wants to return 200 000 Albos back to Kosovo so that tells you that visa free movement for Kosovo is not on the cards despite most of the EU “recognizing an independent Kosovo”. The EU/US will never allow Kosovo to join with Albania. After 12 years of freedom from Serbia, no foreign investment. What is left is a long and slow road back to where it started from.
Let’s be realistic, apart from monasteries and churches which the Serbs built, what does Kosovo have of value that would entice anyone to invest? How can the Albos live in Kosovo? Tourism? Ask the Croats how their economy is going just living off tourism and at least they have plenty of sea and beaches and ancient ruins to attract tourists.
Negotiations means compromises on both sides, but your people are going to have to give up a lot more than the Serbs.
Let me remind you that talks were NEVER on the agenda for the US prior to the GFC.
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
An army stays in a foreign country only as long as it's needed. FACT.
pre 15 godina
Good for Kosova.
A new place of stability in the region and the world;
Quickly to send the remaining NATO-troops to the criminals part of Kosova, which is the North and populated by the Serbs.
Kosova, we love you!
pre 15 godina
NATO moving north? ROFL!!! How do you propose moving camp bondsteel north?
pre 15 godina
I dont think any Albanians like 'Nelli' actually think that KPS with its pistols, hunting rifles & LandRovers replacing KFOR somehow cancels out the withdrawl. @ Milos Obilic: No it's a coincidence. I wouldn't be that stupid even if I was using sockpuppets, which I'm totally against any way
pre 15 godina
They do their best, do they can, get them ready for Afghanistan.
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
Dude, NATO is a winning army and it's being replaced with Kosova Security Force. Those remaining 5.000 KFOR troops will most likely move to northern part of Kosova and get rid of criminals there. By the time they get their job done in northern part of the country Kosova most likely will be a NATO member and the remaining 5.000 troops will go home(mission accomplished).
pre 15 godina
With Britain cutting its defense budget now by 10%, much to the displeasure of the US, the allocation of NATO troops will be redistributed to the most highly volatile zones, of America's strategic interests. This weakening of NATO will continue even more, as additional countries start reducing their military spending in an attempt to crawl out of the world's economic crises. And if armed conflict starts with Iran, look out. I think I can hear Serbian MUP boots heading towards a southern administrative line.
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
Which is why the Soviet liberators can be found on the streets of Belgrade to this day. FACT.
Are you Arsim in disguise?
pre 15 godina
NATO has overseen the cleansing of over 250,000 minorities from Kosovo. With the few remaining refugees, it is logical that it takes less NATO soldiers to sit by and watch the rest cleansed out of the Province. Undoubtedly, those 5,000 will be stationed primarily in the North. NATO is a tax-based expense that is not necessary. NATO sucks!
pre 15 godina
Those KFOR soldiers left should be sent to the northern part of Kosovo where criminality is ripe and prospering.
Let me tighten that noose for you.
pre 15 godina
They don't need the "Yugoslav" problem, Iraqi and Afghan problem are big enough to deal with.
One of the main reason to get Kosovo up and running as a country is precisely that. Once it's up and running, they can hold on it just with Camp Bondsteel, no need for much more.
Ideally for Amis, Serbia and Kosovo would be two separate countries inside of EU, both parts of NATO and helping out with some humanitarian... mission (I deleted the word "bombing") in some remote country.
LOL, people like Jeremic or Kurti are a MPITA (major pain in the asset) and source of much frustration. How they dare to object the endless goodness (NATO - EU - McDonald's - Santa Claus - Burger King) what awaits them?
OK, it's not really NATO or EU, just PROMISE of NATO and EU. But McDonald's, Santa Claus and Burger King will be there for real - and for good boys only.
pre 15 godina
NATO, get out of Serbia!
pre 15 godina
"There were 50,000 NATO troops in Kosovo in June 1999 and their number was gradually reduced to current 10,000."
And now, further down to 5,000, which is 10%. And still, some people think NATO would have an interest to stay in the independent dream state of Kosovo any minute longer than needed.
pre 15 godina
"KFOR to be reduced to 5,000 troops"
The Yankees are fooling no one but themselves. Who are they kidding? Here's the real reason in my view why they are cutting back --> http://www.federalbudget.com/
pre 15 godina
"There were 50,000 NATO troops in Kosovo in June 1999 and their number was gradually reduced to current 10,000."
And now, further down to 5,000, which is 10%. And still, some people think NATO would have an interest to stay in the independent dream state of Kosovo any minute longer than needed.
pre 15 godina
NATO, get out of Serbia!
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
Dude, NATO is a winning army and it's being replaced with Kosova Security Force. Those remaining 5.000 KFOR troops will most likely move to northern part of Kosova and get rid of criminals there. By the time they get their job done in northern part of the country Kosova most likely will be a NATO member and the remaining 5.000 troops will go home(mission accomplished).
pre 15 godina
"KFOR to be reduced to 5,000 troops"
The Yankees are fooling no one but themselves. Who are they kidding? Here's the real reason in my view why they are cutting back --> http://www.federalbudget.com/
pre 15 godina
Those KFOR soldiers left should be sent to the northern part of Kosovo where criminality is ripe and prospering.
Let me tighten that noose for you.
pre 15 godina
With Britain cutting its defense budget now by 10%, much to the displeasure of the US, the allocation of NATO troops will be redistributed to the most highly volatile zones, of America's strategic interests. This weakening of NATO will continue even more, as additional countries start reducing their military spending in an attempt to crawl out of the world's economic crises. And if armed conflict starts with Iran, look out. I think I can hear Serbian MUP boots heading towards a southern administrative line.
pre 15 godina
NATO has overseen the cleansing of over 250,000 minorities from Kosovo. With the few remaining refugees, it is logical that it takes less NATO soldiers to sit by and watch the rest cleansed out of the Province. Undoubtedly, those 5,000 will be stationed primarily in the North. NATO is a tax-based expense that is not necessary. NATO sucks!
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
Which is why the Soviet liberators can be found on the streets of Belgrade to this day. FACT.
Are you Arsim in disguise?
pre 15 godina
Good for Kosova.
A new place of stability in the region and the world;
Quickly to send the remaining NATO-troops to the criminals part of Kosova, which is the North and populated by the Serbs.
Kosova, we love you!
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
pre 15 godina
They don't need the "Yugoslav" problem, Iraqi and Afghan problem are big enough to deal with.
One of the main reason to get Kosovo up and running as a country is precisely that. Once it's up and running, they can hold on it just with Camp Bondsteel, no need for much more.
Ideally for Amis, Serbia and Kosovo would be two separate countries inside of EU, both parts of NATO and helping out with some humanitarian... mission (I deleted the word "bombing") in some remote country.
LOL, people like Jeremic or Kurti are a MPITA (major pain in the asset) and source of much frustration. How they dare to object the endless goodness (NATO - EU - McDonald's - Santa Claus - Burger King) what awaits them?
OK, it's not really NATO or EU, just PROMISE of NATO and EU. But McDonald's, Santa Claus and Burger King will be there for real - and for good boys only.
pre 15 godina
I dont think any Albanians like 'Nelli' actually think that KPS with its pistols, hunting rifles & LandRovers replacing KFOR somehow cancels out the withdrawl. @ Milos Obilic: No it's a coincidence. I wouldn't be that stupid even if I was using sockpuppets, which I'm totally against any way
pre 15 godina
NATO moving north? ROFL!!! How do you propose moving camp bondsteel north?
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
An army stays in a foreign country only as long as it's needed. FACT.
pre 15 godina
(icj1, 30 October 2010 04:39)
Camp bondsteel is part of series of new US bases; others are in Romania and Bulgaria and soon Montenegro – it’s strategy even used by the Romans. The frontline used to be Germany during the Cold War, but that has now moved on and it’s the Middle East with its energy so the forts have to move closer to the “natives”. These bases have a twofold purpose – first to have men and equipment at the ready and the second is to intimidate and remind the local and surrounding regional populace of who is boss, much like when the US sends warships to a certain area, such as North Korea after that incident with the South Korean sub.
The Vietnam war was a loss that caused the US to avoid any direct overseas conflicts for 3 decades.
The war with Iraq over Kuwait was a set up to try and get rid of Saddam. The US urged the Shites to take up arms against the regime, but stopped short of providing support which I imagine the US wanted a “people’s uprising” much like the stunts they organized in Bagdad when the US went in the second time. The Shites suffered terribly at the hands of Saddam but you see the US did not want to topple the old boy when someone in Washington realized that once Saddam was gone Iran would step into the void and through the Shites control the oil rich nation.
Kosovo was simply a cover up Billy boys indiscretions and a means of getting rid of Milosevic who made Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid. Before the Albos start to hyperventilate over my statement please read the bit about what happened to the Shites again – the US is no friend to anyone or anything except if it benefits them and Kosovo has no minerals or energy. Kosovo was not an astounding win because of the vast military gear the Serbian army took out when it left, but let’s say it was a win for NATO. It gave the US false courage to attempt two other forays such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature. Its manufacturing excuses to leave the region – it simply cannot afford the cost in dollars.
Iraq is a mitigating disaster for the US and they have to pull out because they have not achieved their purpose and the US military losses are much higher than claimed plus money is running out. The level of violence is the same as before but the US media don’t report it as in the past – out of sight out of mind. Iraq has no government for many months after an election and even then it’s useless so you see Iran now has a permanent foot hold in Iraq. The US went into Afghanistan and Iraq as a super power it now has to rely on others to do that same job – money problems.
The IFC sped up a lot of things that were to take possibly a decade or two – China was not supposed to overtake Japan in the world economy as No 2 until 2030; they did just that in December 2009. It’s now hot on the US heels and may have overtaken them right now; next comes India then Brazil and Russia.
Hilary Clinton is scheduled to visit Australia next month to discuss opening up a smaller base in Darwin. You see the Chinese have kicked the US out of the China Sea and there are no friendly countries ready to give them a base in the entire region except Japan and South Korea. By 2017 India will make Diego Garcia ineffective, but this will speed up if the US “goes into a second recession” next year, as if they have left the first one.
Lawrence Eagleburger once said “we nearly went broke sending the USSR broke”. These halcyon days are over – little by little it’s going back at a fast rate and 2010 is only the start. Look at Obama – he has aged before your very eyes and he is only 2 years into the job.
…if Kosovo wants to the north, Kosovo needs to grow up and deal with the north itself. NATO still lives by 1244 and is status neutral.
(American Eagle, 30 October 2010 09:56)
Thank you for the correct posting. Under 1244 NATO is neutral.
pre 15 godina
They do their best, do they can, get them ready for Afghanistan.
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
You are still in pre-20th century... History has shown over and over again that regardless of how strong you are you cannot occupy other countries forever. Americans were the first superpower to learn this lesson of history, so they go to war to achieve a mission and pull out, they don’t go to war to occupy forever another country – that’s a lost cause.
They went to war with Japan in WWII to dismantle Japan’s capability to make war again, and when the mission was achieved, pulled out. They went to war with Germany to liberate Europe, and once the mission was achieved pulled out. They went to war in Vietnam to not allow the takeover by the communists, did not achieve the mission, and decided that was time to cut the losses and pulled out . They went to war with Iraq to liberate Kuwait, and pulled out once the mission was achieved. They went to war with Serbia to force it to withdraw from Kosovo, and once the mission was achieved they are now pulling out. They went to war in Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban and capture Bin Laden achieving the first and failing for the second. They went to war to topple Sadam, achieved the mission and pulled out.
It is this strategy that allows US to remain a superpower because it enables it to maintain the capacity to intervene when needed for their security interests. If they had continued the occupation of all countries that they temporarily occupied in the last 100 years they would have had very soon the fate of Rome, or if you want a more recent example, the fate of USSR.
pre 15 godina
Good for Kosova.
A new place of stability in the region and the world;
Quickly to send the remaining NATO-troops to the criminals part of Kosova, which is the North and populated by the Serbs.
Kosova, we love you!
(Prishtina, 29 October 2010 21:36
If NATO did not “send troops to the north” while it had over 10 000 it certainly is not going to do that now. For those that can’t read the signals; NATO is running out of cash and the 5000 will be even further reduced in the new future because after the losses in Iraq and now Afghanistan, Camp bondsteel is useless. It’s not because of the Kosovo police being trained up and there will never be a Kosovo army because there is no money in the bank left and nor does the EU want a threat to them.
Up until recently no talks were on the agenda, but now the US/EU have changed their minds. What do you think these talks are all about? How to further subsidze Albanians with free electricity or free accomodation? No it’s to allow some form of free movement to Albos to look for work.
The EU wants to return 200 000 Albos back to Kosovo so that tells you that visa free movement for Kosovo is not on the cards despite most of the EU “recognizing an independent Kosovo”. The EU/US will never allow Kosovo to join with Albania. After 12 years of freedom from Serbia, no foreign investment. What is left is a long and slow road back to where it started from.
Let’s be realistic, apart from monasteries and churches which the Serbs built, what does Kosovo have of value that would entice anyone to invest? How can the Albos live in Kosovo? Tourism? Ask the Croats how their economy is going just living off tourism and at least they have plenty of sea and beaches and ancient ruins to attract tourists.
Negotiations means compromises on both sides, but your people are going to have to give up a lot more than the Serbs.
Let me remind you that talks were NEVER on the agenda for the US prior to the GFC.
pre 15 godina
NATO is moving to a deterrent force. We are not Kosovo's army. If Kosovo wants to the north, Kosovo needs to grow up and deal with the north itself. NATO still lives by 1244 and is status neutral.
pre 15 godina
Thank you for the correct posting. Under 1244 NATO is neutral.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
NATO has never been involved in the politics of Kosovo, its job is to provide security there according to 1244 which specifically lays out the removal and prevention of any military operations of Serbia.
This no longer is perceived to be an issue, therefore it is unnecessary to keep the present level of numbers. However, should the security situation change, a sudden surge in NATO numbers would not need consideration by the UNSC. As long as 1244 is in force their mandate is in effect. With the network of bases already there, any needed increase in personnel could be accomplished in a matter of days.
pre 15 godina
Milos Obilic,
Skenderbeg was Serbian too
pre 15 godina
Camp bondsteel is part of series of new US bases; others are in Romania and Bulgaria and soon Montenegro – it’s strategy even used by the Romans. The frontline used to be Germany during the Cold War, but that has now moved on and it’s the Middle East with its energy so the forts have to move closer to the “natives”. These bases have a twofold purpose – first to have men and equipment at the ready and the second is to intimidate and remind the local and surrounding regional populace of who is boss, much like when the US sends warships to a certain area, such as North Korea after that incident with the South Korean sub.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Bondsteel for Middle East ? Come on don't tell me you are still going by Kostunica's fantasies. There are much cheaper ways to achieve that intimidation than permanently setting up a base in Camp Bondsteel. A US naval task force sent just when needed would have much more firepower than Camp Bondsteel and some entire armed forces in the region and be much less expensive. American's don't have to remind insignificant others (like Albania, Kosovo, Serbia, Macedonia, and co.) who is the boss. Only the weak do that (like Russia with Georgia)…
The Vietnam war was a loss that caused the US to avoid any direct overseas conflicts for 3 decades.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, and the Americans were clever enough to work to cut losses rather than continue for decades something that was not worth it. And they did not avoid conflicts for 3 decades. They did intervene when they had a security interest (of course they did not invent a war just to show you that they could intervene). So they intervened in Nicaragua in the 80s and Iraq-Kuwait in the 90s.
The war with Iraq over Kuwait was a set up to try and get rid of Saddam. The US urged the Shites to take up arms against the regime, but stopped short of providing support which I imagine the US wanted a “people’s uprising” much like the stunts they organized in Bagdad when the US went in the second time. The Shites suffered terribly at the hands of Saddam but you see the US did not want to topple the old boy when someone in Washington realized that once Saddam was gone Iran would step into the void and through the Shites control the oil rich nation.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Which makes sense, doesn't it ? US decided to topple Sadam when it was in their interest. The same as for Kosovo, US only serves its own interests as it should otherwise would cease to be a superpower.
Kosovo was simply a cover up Billy boys indiscretions and a means of getting rid of Milosevic who made Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, I think we are saying the same thing. They went to war to get Serbia out of Kosovo because they were fed up with Milosevic. Losing Kosovo would have caused Milosevic to lose power, as well, as it did. Mission achieved; time to pull out. That's what happens when you try to, as you put it, "make Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid". Ghedaffi learned the lesson very quickly.
Before the Albos start to hyperventilate over my statement please read the bit about what happened to the Shites again – the US is no friend to anyone or anything except if it benefits them and Kosovo has no minerals or energy.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
I think it would be naïve for everybody to think that US helped Kosovo because it is a Kosovo's friend. Americans only help their interests. Serbia wanted endless talks to solve Kosovo's status, which meant that US would have had to keep significant number of soldiers in Kosovo for a long time. So US supported the most pragmatic solution to get itself out of Kosovo as soon as possible saving manpower and money for more important things; but it did not do it out of love for Albanians.
Kosovo was not an astounding win because of the vast military gear the Serbian army took out when it left, but let’s say it was a win for NATO.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Nobody wanted to destroy the Serbian army. The mission was to get that army out of Kosovo, and that was achieved.
It gave the US false courage to attempt two other forays such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Why false ?! The same tools used in Serbia were successfully applied in Iraq and Afghanistan and US won those wars in days. As for the post-war phase, Serbia's experience is irrelevant since US did not occupy anything in Serbia outside Kosovo. Don't confuse post-war with war. US has the capability to defeat most countries of the world in a matter of days or, maximum, weeks if they see a benefit exceeding the costs. Of course, it does not have the capability to occupy them forever.
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Victory is defined in relation to the mission that somebody has. Tell me what the mission is and I can tell you whether we have a victory or not…
The point I was making is that US is not in Afghanistan to stay forever. It would be stupid. Even if they're losing, they still should pull out to cut the losses, otherwise they cease to be a superpower.
Its manufacturing excuses to leave the region – it simply cannot afford the cost in dollars.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
I think I said the same thing. That's what every superpower SHOULD do if they want to remain a superpower. When the cost is not worth the benefit, pull out. The moment you cease to pull out when it's not worth it, you cease being a superpower and will have the fate or Rome or USSR.
Iraq is a mitigating disaster for the US and they have to pull out because they have not achieved their purpose and the US military losses are much higher than claimed plus money is running out.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
They achieved for Sadam to be out. What else do you want them to achieve ? To govern the Iraqis ? That would be a disaster. US continues to be a superpower precisely because limits itself to a mission (like Japan, Germany, Iraq, etc.), builds the initial institutions and then leaves it to the population of those countries to govern themselves. If they take the opportunity, like Japan and Germany did, they can do very well. If they don't, there's nothing US can do about it. It's not US' job to govern them forever.
The level of violence is the same as before but the US media don’t report it as in the past – out of sight out of mind. Iraq has no government for many months after an election and even then it’s useless so you see Iran now has a permanent foot hold in Iraq. The US went into Afghanistan and Iraq as a super power it now has to rely on others to do that same job – money problems.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
See above. If those people don't know how to govern, it's not US job to spend money and blood for that beyond what they had to for achieving their mission for their interests. US is not there to babysit the Iraqis forever with US taxpayers' money.
The IFC sped up a lot of things that were to take possibly a decade or two – China was not supposed to overtake Japan in the world economy as No 2 until 2030; they did just that in December 2009. It’s now hot on the US heels and may have overtaken them right now; next comes India then Brazil and Russia.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
And what's the problem with that (even if we may not be around if and when that happens) ? Luxemburg is much better than US even though it's a fraction of the superpower.
Hilary Clinton is scheduled to visit Australia next month to discuss opening up a smaller base in Darwin. You see the Chinese have kicked the US out of the China Sea and there are no friendly countries ready to give them a base in the entire region except Japan and South Korea.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
But South Korea and Japan ARE the region together with China. Where do you want to build the base, in the city-state of Singapore and get it's ingabitants out :) or in China ?!
By 2017 India will make Diego Garcia ineffective, but this will speed up if the US “goes into a second recession” next year, as if they have left the first one.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
What does it mean "India will make Diego Garcia ineffective" ?
Dude, I have the impression that you see international relations as a continuous confrontation and a zero-sum game. US, India, China and others are not in war or anything like that - to the contrary they are interdependent. Just because Serbia sees itself as surrounded by enemies and it is these enemies' fault for all Serbia's ills, it does not mean that other countries have the same sick mentality.
Lawrence Eagleburger once said “we nearly went broke sending the USSR broke”.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Great… thanks for proving my point. A superpower should balance benefits to costs. So once a mission is achieved and there are no more benefits to be achieved, you pull out, otherwise you are going to go broke. That's why US continues to be a superpower because has understood this.
These halcyon days are over – little by little it’s going back at a fast rate and 2010 is only the start. Look at Obama – he has aged before your very eyes and he is only 2 years into the job.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, you are right. He has aged by 2 years since 2008 the same as me and you.
Dude, the whole point of my previous post was that a superpower should not attempt to occupy other countries to stay there forever. Only if you hate that superpower (as it appears you do) you'd advise it to go and occupy forever other countries. That would be the definitive way of destroying that superpower.
pre 15 godina
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Their hero, the caveman-in-chief, will finally now have the opportunity to meet in person the "virgins in paradise" as a reward for his "jihad"
pre 15 godina
NATO, get out of Serbia!
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
pre 15 godina
NATO has overseen the cleansing of over 250,000 minorities from Kosovo. With the few remaining refugees, it is logical that it takes less NATO soldiers to sit by and watch the rest cleansed out of the Province. Undoubtedly, those 5,000 will be stationed primarily in the North. NATO is a tax-based expense that is not necessary. NATO sucks!
pre 15 godina
With Britain cutting its defense budget now by 10%, much to the displeasure of the US, the allocation of NATO troops will be redistributed to the most highly volatile zones, of America's strategic interests. This weakening of NATO will continue even more, as additional countries start reducing their military spending in an attempt to crawl out of the world's economic crises. And if armed conflict starts with Iran, look out. I think I can hear Serbian MUP boots heading towards a southern administrative line.
pre 15 godina
"KFOR to be reduced to 5,000 troops"
The Yankees are fooling no one but themselves. Who are they kidding? Here's the real reason in my view why they are cutting back --> http://www.federalbudget.com/
pre 15 godina
Those KFOR soldiers left should be sent to the northern part of Kosovo where criminality is ripe and prospering.
Let me tighten that noose for you.
pre 15 godina
NATO moving north? ROFL!!! How do you propose moving camp bondsteel north?
pre 15 godina
They don't need the "Yugoslav" problem, Iraqi and Afghan problem are big enough to deal with.
One of the main reason to get Kosovo up and running as a country is precisely that. Once it's up and running, they can hold on it just with Camp Bondsteel, no need for much more.
Ideally for Amis, Serbia and Kosovo would be two separate countries inside of EU, both parts of NATO and helping out with some humanitarian... mission (I deleted the word "bombing") in some remote country.
LOL, people like Jeremic or Kurti are a MPITA (major pain in the asset) and source of much frustration. How they dare to object the endless goodness (NATO - EU - McDonald's - Santa Claus - Burger King) what awaits them?
OK, it's not really NATO or EU, just PROMISE of NATO and EU. But McDonald's, Santa Claus and Burger King will be there for real - and for good boys only.
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
Dude, NATO is a winning army and it's being replaced with Kosova Security Force. Those remaining 5.000 KFOR troops will most likely move to northern part of Kosova and get rid of criminals there. By the time they get their job done in northern part of the country Kosova most likely will be a NATO member and the remaining 5.000 troops will go home(mission accomplished).
pre 15 godina
Good for Kosova.
A new place of stability in the region and the world;
Quickly to send the remaining NATO-troops to the criminals part of Kosova, which is the North and populated by the Serbs.
Kosova, we love you!
pre 15 godina
I dont think any Albanians like 'Nelli' actually think that KPS with its pistols, hunting rifles & LandRovers replacing KFOR somehow cancels out the withdrawl. @ Milos Obilic: No it's a coincidence. I wouldn't be that stupid even if I was using sockpuppets, which I'm totally against any way
pre 15 godina
They do their best, do they can, get them ready for Afghanistan.
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
Which is why the Soviet liberators can be found on the streets of Belgrade to this day. FACT.
Are you Arsim in disguise?
pre 15 godina
"There were 50,000 NATO troops in Kosovo in June 1999 and their number was gradually reduced to current 10,000."
And now, further down to 5,000, which is 10%. And still, some people think NATO would have an interest to stay in the independent dream state of Kosovo any minute longer than needed.
pre 15 godina
Good for Kosova.
A new place of stability in the region and the world;
Quickly to send the remaining NATO-troops to the criminals part of Kosova, which is the North and populated by the Serbs.
Kosova, we love you!
(Prishtina, 29 October 2010 21:36
If NATO did not “send troops to the north” while it had over 10 000 it certainly is not going to do that now. For those that can’t read the signals; NATO is running out of cash and the 5000 will be even further reduced in the new future because after the losses in Iraq and now Afghanistan, Camp bondsteel is useless. It’s not because of the Kosovo police being trained up and there will never be a Kosovo army because there is no money in the bank left and nor does the EU want a threat to them.
Up until recently no talks were on the agenda, but now the US/EU have changed their minds. What do you think these talks are all about? How to further subsidze Albanians with free electricity or free accomodation? No it’s to allow some form of free movement to Albos to look for work.
The EU wants to return 200 000 Albos back to Kosovo so that tells you that visa free movement for Kosovo is not on the cards despite most of the EU “recognizing an independent Kosovo”. The EU/US will never allow Kosovo to join with Albania. After 12 years of freedom from Serbia, no foreign investment. What is left is a long and slow road back to where it started from.
Let’s be realistic, apart from monasteries and churches which the Serbs built, what does Kosovo have of value that would entice anyone to invest? How can the Albos live in Kosovo? Tourism? Ask the Croats how their economy is going just living off tourism and at least they have plenty of sea and beaches and ancient ruins to attract tourists.
Negotiations means compromises on both sides, but your people are going to have to give up a lot more than the Serbs.
Let me remind you that talks were NEVER on the agenda for the US prior to the GFC.
pre 15 godina
Milos Obilic,
Skenderbeg was Serbian too
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
You are still in pre-20th century... History has shown over and over again that regardless of how strong you are you cannot occupy other countries forever. Americans were the first superpower to learn this lesson of history, so they go to war to achieve a mission and pull out, they don’t go to war to occupy forever another country – that’s a lost cause.
They went to war with Japan in WWII to dismantle Japan’s capability to make war again, and when the mission was achieved, pulled out. They went to war with Germany to liberate Europe, and once the mission was achieved pulled out. They went to war in Vietnam to not allow the takeover by the communists, did not achieve the mission, and decided that was time to cut the losses and pulled out . They went to war with Iraq to liberate Kuwait, and pulled out once the mission was achieved. They went to war with Serbia to force it to withdraw from Kosovo, and once the mission was achieved they are now pulling out. They went to war in Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban and capture Bin Laden achieving the first and failing for the second. They went to war to topple Sadam, achieved the mission and pulled out.
It is this strategy that allows US to remain a superpower because it enables it to maintain the capacity to intervene when needed for their security interests. If they had continued the occupation of all countries that they temporarily occupied in the last 100 years they would have had very soon the fate of Rome, or if you want a more recent example, the fate of USSR.
pre 15 godina
NATO is moving to a deterrent force. We are not Kosovo's army. If Kosovo wants to the north, Kosovo needs to grow up and deal with the north itself. NATO still lives by 1244 and is status neutral.
pre 15 godina
(icj1, 30 October 2010 04:39)
Camp bondsteel is part of series of new US bases; others are in Romania and Bulgaria and soon Montenegro – it’s strategy even used by the Romans. The frontline used to be Germany during the Cold War, but that has now moved on and it’s the Middle East with its energy so the forts have to move closer to the “natives”. These bases have a twofold purpose – first to have men and equipment at the ready and the second is to intimidate and remind the local and surrounding regional populace of who is boss, much like when the US sends warships to a certain area, such as North Korea after that incident with the South Korean sub.
The Vietnam war was a loss that caused the US to avoid any direct overseas conflicts for 3 decades.
The war with Iraq over Kuwait was a set up to try and get rid of Saddam. The US urged the Shites to take up arms against the regime, but stopped short of providing support which I imagine the US wanted a “people’s uprising” much like the stunts they organized in Bagdad when the US went in the second time. The Shites suffered terribly at the hands of Saddam but you see the US did not want to topple the old boy when someone in Washington realized that once Saddam was gone Iran would step into the void and through the Shites control the oil rich nation.
Kosovo was simply a cover up Billy boys indiscretions and a means of getting rid of Milosevic who made Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid. Before the Albos start to hyperventilate over my statement please read the bit about what happened to the Shites again – the US is no friend to anyone or anything except if it benefits them and Kosovo has no minerals or energy. Kosovo was not an astounding win because of the vast military gear the Serbian army took out when it left, but let’s say it was a win for NATO. It gave the US false courage to attempt two other forays such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature. Its manufacturing excuses to leave the region – it simply cannot afford the cost in dollars.
Iraq is a mitigating disaster for the US and they have to pull out because they have not achieved their purpose and the US military losses are much higher than claimed plus money is running out. The level of violence is the same as before but the US media don’t report it as in the past – out of sight out of mind. Iraq has no government for many months after an election and even then it’s useless so you see Iran now has a permanent foot hold in Iraq. The US went into Afghanistan and Iraq as a super power it now has to rely on others to do that same job – money problems.
The IFC sped up a lot of things that were to take possibly a decade or two – China was not supposed to overtake Japan in the world economy as No 2 until 2030; they did just that in December 2009. It’s now hot on the US heels and may have overtaken them right now; next comes India then Brazil and Russia.
Hilary Clinton is scheduled to visit Australia next month to discuss opening up a smaller base in Darwin. You see the Chinese have kicked the US out of the China Sea and there are no friendly countries ready to give them a base in the entire region except Japan and South Korea. By 2017 India will make Diego Garcia ineffective, but this will speed up if the US “goes into a second recession” next year, as if they have left the first one.
Lawrence Eagleburger once said “we nearly went broke sending the USSR broke”. These halcyon days are over – little by little it’s going back at a fast rate and 2010 is only the start. Look at Obama – he has aged before your very eyes and he is only 2 years into the job.
…if Kosovo wants to the north, Kosovo needs to grow up and deal with the north itself. NATO still lives by 1244 and is status neutral.
(American Eagle, 30 October 2010 09:56)
Thank you for the correct posting. Under 1244 NATO is neutral.
pre 15 godina
A winning army never pulls out. FACT.
(highduke, 29 October 2010 16:10)
An army stays in a foreign country only as long as it's needed. FACT.
pre 15 godina
Thank you for the correct posting. Under 1244 NATO is neutral.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
NATO has never been involved in the politics of Kosovo, its job is to provide security there according to 1244 which specifically lays out the removal and prevention of any military operations of Serbia.
This no longer is perceived to be an issue, therefore it is unnecessary to keep the present level of numbers. However, should the security situation change, a sudden surge in NATO numbers would not need consideration by the UNSC. As long as 1244 is in force their mandate is in effect. With the network of bases already there, any needed increase in personnel could be accomplished in a matter of days.
pre 15 godina
Camp bondsteel is part of series of new US bases; others are in Romania and Bulgaria and soon Montenegro – it’s strategy even used by the Romans. The frontline used to be Germany during the Cold War, but that has now moved on and it’s the Middle East with its energy so the forts have to move closer to the “natives”. These bases have a twofold purpose – first to have men and equipment at the ready and the second is to intimidate and remind the local and surrounding regional populace of who is boss, much like when the US sends warships to a certain area, such as North Korea after that incident with the South Korean sub.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Bondsteel for Middle East ? Come on don't tell me you are still going by Kostunica's fantasies. There are much cheaper ways to achieve that intimidation than permanently setting up a base in Camp Bondsteel. A US naval task force sent just when needed would have much more firepower than Camp Bondsteel and some entire armed forces in the region and be much less expensive. American's don't have to remind insignificant others (like Albania, Kosovo, Serbia, Macedonia, and co.) who is the boss. Only the weak do that (like Russia with Georgia)…
The Vietnam war was a loss that caused the US to avoid any direct overseas conflicts for 3 decades.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, and the Americans were clever enough to work to cut losses rather than continue for decades something that was not worth it. And they did not avoid conflicts for 3 decades. They did intervene when they had a security interest (of course they did not invent a war just to show you that they could intervene). So they intervened in Nicaragua in the 80s and Iraq-Kuwait in the 90s.
The war with Iraq over Kuwait was a set up to try and get rid of Saddam. The US urged the Shites to take up arms against the regime, but stopped short of providing support which I imagine the US wanted a “people’s uprising” much like the stunts they organized in Bagdad when the US went in the second time. The Shites suffered terribly at the hands of Saddam but you see the US did not want to topple the old boy when someone in Washington realized that once Saddam was gone Iran would step into the void and through the Shites control the oil rich nation.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Which makes sense, doesn't it ? US decided to topple Sadam when it was in their interest. The same as for Kosovo, US only serves its own interests as it should otherwise would cease to be a superpower.
Kosovo was simply a cover up Billy boys indiscretions and a means of getting rid of Milosevic who made Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, I think we are saying the same thing. They went to war to get Serbia out of Kosovo because they were fed up with Milosevic. Losing Kosovo would have caused Milosevic to lose power, as well, as it did. Mission achieved; time to pull out. That's what happens when you try to, as you put it, "make Billy and his allies look quite inept and stupid". Ghedaffi learned the lesson very quickly.
Before the Albos start to hyperventilate over my statement please read the bit about what happened to the Shites again – the US is no friend to anyone or anything except if it benefits them and Kosovo has no minerals or energy.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
I think it would be naïve for everybody to think that US helped Kosovo because it is a Kosovo's friend. Americans only help their interests. Serbia wanted endless talks to solve Kosovo's status, which meant that US would have had to keep significant number of soldiers in Kosovo for a long time. So US supported the most pragmatic solution to get itself out of Kosovo as soon as possible saving manpower and money for more important things; but it did not do it out of love for Albanians.
Kosovo was not an astounding win because of the vast military gear the Serbian army took out when it left, but let’s say it was a win for NATO.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Nobody wanted to destroy the Serbian army. The mission was to get that army out of Kosovo, and that was achieved.
It gave the US false courage to attempt two other forays such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Why false ?! The same tools used in Serbia were successfully applied in Iraq and Afghanistan and US won those wars in days. As for the post-war phase, Serbia's experience is irrelevant since US did not occupy anything in Serbia outside Kosovo. Don't confuse post-war with war. US has the capability to defeat most countries of the world in a matter of days or, maximum, weeks if they see a benefit exceeding the costs. Of course, it does not have the capability to occupy them forever.
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Victory is defined in relation to the mission that somebody has. Tell me what the mission is and I can tell you whether we have a victory or not…
The point I was making is that US is not in Afghanistan to stay forever. It would be stupid. Even if they're losing, they still should pull out to cut the losses, otherwise they cease to be a superpower.
Its manufacturing excuses to leave the region – it simply cannot afford the cost in dollars.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
I think I said the same thing. That's what every superpower SHOULD do if they want to remain a superpower. When the cost is not worth the benefit, pull out. The moment you cease to pull out when it's not worth it, you cease being a superpower and will have the fate or Rome or USSR.
Iraq is a mitigating disaster for the US and they have to pull out because they have not achieved their purpose and the US military losses are much higher than claimed plus money is running out.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
They achieved for Sadam to be out. What else do you want them to achieve ? To govern the Iraqis ? That would be a disaster. US continues to be a superpower precisely because limits itself to a mission (like Japan, Germany, Iraq, etc.), builds the initial institutions and then leaves it to the population of those countries to govern themselves. If they take the opportunity, like Japan and Germany did, they can do very well. If they don't, there's nothing US can do about it. It's not US' job to govern them forever.
The level of violence is the same as before but the US media don’t report it as in the past – out of sight out of mind. Iraq has no government for many months after an election and even then it’s useless so you see Iran now has a permanent foot hold in Iraq. The US went into Afghanistan and Iraq as a super power it now has to rely on others to do that same job – money problems.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
See above. If those people don't know how to govern, it's not US job to spend money and blood for that beyond what they had to for achieving their mission for their interests. US is not there to babysit the Iraqis forever with US taxpayers' money.
The IFC sped up a lot of things that were to take possibly a decade or two – China was not supposed to overtake Japan in the world economy as No 2 until 2030; they did just that in December 2009. It’s now hot on the US heels and may have overtaken them right now; next comes India then Brazil and Russia.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
And what's the problem with that (even if we may not be around if and when that happens) ? Luxemburg is much better than US even though it's a fraction of the superpower.
Hilary Clinton is scheduled to visit Australia next month to discuss opening up a smaller base in Darwin. You see the Chinese have kicked the US out of the China Sea and there are no friendly countries ready to give them a base in the entire region except Japan and South Korea.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
But South Korea and Japan ARE the region together with China. Where do you want to build the base, in the city-state of Singapore and get it's ingabitants out :) or in China ?!
By 2017 India will make Diego Garcia ineffective, but this will speed up if the US “goes into a second recession” next year, as if they have left the first one.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
What does it mean "India will make Diego Garcia ineffective" ?
Dude, I have the impression that you see international relations as a continuous confrontation and a zero-sum game. US, India, China and others are not in war or anything like that - to the contrary they are interdependent. Just because Serbia sees itself as surrounded by enemies and it is these enemies' fault for all Serbia's ills, it does not mean that other countries have the same sick mentality.
Lawrence Eagleburger once said “we nearly went broke sending the USSR broke”.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Great… thanks for proving my point. A superpower should balance benefits to costs. So once a mission is achieved and there are no more benefits to be achieved, you pull out, otherwise you are going to go broke. That's why US continues to be a superpower because has understood this.
These halcyon days are over – little by little it’s going back at a fast rate and 2010 is only the start. Look at Obama – he has aged before your very eyes and he is only 2 years into the job.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Yes, you are right. He has aged by 2 years since 2008 the same as me and you.
Dude, the whole point of my previous post was that a superpower should not attempt to occupy other countries to stay there forever. Only if you hate that superpower (as it appears you do) you'd advise it to go and occupy forever other countries. That would be the definitive way of destroying that superpower.
pre 15 godina
The Taliban have not been defeated unless you don’t have television in your home. In fact your “victors” are right now negotiating with the Taliban and telling you “they must become part of the Government” blah, blah or some BS of that nature.
(sj, 30 October 2010 12:52)
Their hero, the caveman-in-chief, will finally now have the opportunity to meet in person the "virgins in paradise" as a reward for his "jihad"
23 Komentari
Sortiraj po: