| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
The Euroessayist Fjordman explains why an independent Kosovo will help no one except the global jihadists.
Hans Rustad runs Document.no, the largest independent weblog in my country. A recent post there contained criticism of me, and I have already answered some of it. However, Mr. Rustad also claimed that I support a revisionist view of the Balkan wars of the 1990s which is "just as factually wrong, immoral and politically dangerous as David Irving's Holocaust revisionism." I consider that statement to be too awful to ignore, and decided to write a reply in English.I have said repeatedly that I believe the Balkan wars were far more complex than we are led to believe by the political establishment, and I fear that we out of ideological blindness have come to support some pretty dangerous Muslim forces. I respect Mr. Rustad for exposing the bias against Israelis in the mainstream media, and I am sad to see that he accepts uncritically a similar bias against the Serbs. My point is that you cannot understand recent history in the Balkans without taking the previous seven centuries of Islamic oppression into account.
Sir Jadunath Sarkar, the pre-eminent historian of Mughal India, wrote this about dhimmitude, the humiliating apartheid system imposed upon non-Muslims under Islamic rule: "The conversion of the entire population to Islam and the extinction of every form of dissent is the ideal of the Muslim State. If any infidel is suffered to exist in the community, it is as a necessary evil, and for a transitional period only. (…) A non-Muslim therefore cannot be a citizen of the State; he is a member of a depressed class; his status is a modified form of slavery. He lives under a contract (dhimma) with the State. (…) In short, his continued existence in the State after the conquest of his country by the Muslims is conditional upon his person and property made subservient to the cause of Islam."
This "modified form of slavery" is now frequently referred to as the pinnacle of "tolerance." If the semi-slaves rebel against this system and desire equal rights and self-determination, Jihad resumes. This happened with the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire, who were repressed with massacres, culminating in the genocide by Turkish and Kurdish Muslims against Armenians in the 20th century. This same pattern is now used against the state of Israel. Israelis are not only attacked because they are Jews, but because they do not meekly disarm and accept the status of servitude that they should have according to Islamic law. They are disobedient dhimmis, just as the Armenians were.
According to Dr. Andrew G. Bostom, editor of the excellent book The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, even the Turcophilic 19th century writer Ubicini acknowledged the oppressive burden of dhimmitude in this moving depiction:
"The history of enslaved peoples is the same everywhere, or rather, they have no history. The years, the centuries pass without bringing any change to their situation. Generations come and go in silence. One might think they are afraid to awaken their masters, asleep alongside them. However, if you examine them closely you discover that this immobility is only superficial. A silent and constant agitation grips them. Life has entirely withdrawn into the heart. They resemble those rivers which have disappeared underground; if you put your ear to the earth, you can hear the muffled sound of their waters; then they re—emerge intact a few leagues away. Such is the state of the Christian populations of Turkey under Ottoman rule."
Bostom asks, "Why has the quite brutal Ottoman devshirme-janissary system, which, from the mid to late 14th, through early 18th centuries, enslaved and forcibly converted to Islam an estimated 500,000 to one million non-Muslim (primarily Balkan Christian) adolescent males, been characterized, reductio ad absurdum, as a benign form of social advancement, jealously pined for by 'ineligible' Ottoman Muslim families?"
Writer Vacalopoulos describes how Jihad-imposed dhimmitude under Ottoman rule provided critical motivation for the Greek Revolution:
"The Revolution of 1821 is no more than the last great phase of the resistance of the Greeks to Ottoman domination; it was a relentless, undeclared war, which had begun already in the first years of servitude. The brutality of an autocratic regime, which was characterized by economic spoliation, intellectual decay and cultural retrogression, was sure to provoke opposition. Restrictions of all kinds, unlawful taxation, forced labor, persecutions, violence, imprisonment, death, abductions of girls and boys and their confinement to Turkish harems, and various deeds of wantonness and lust, along with numerous less offensive excesses — all these were a constant challenge to the instinct of survival and they defied every sense of human decency. The Greeks bitterly resented all insults and humiliations, and their anguish and frustration pushed them into the arms of rebellion. There was no exaggeration in the statement made by one of the beys if Arta, when he sought to explain the ferocity of the struggle. He said: 'We have wronged the rayas [dhimmis] (i.e. our Christian subjects) and destroyed both their wealth and honor; they became desperate and took up arms. This is just the beginning and will finally lead to the destruction of our empire.'"
As scholar Reuben Levy noted: "At Constantinople [Istanbul], the sale of women slaves, both negresses and Circassians [likely for harem slavery and/or concubinage], continued to be openly practiced until...1908."
In 1809, after the battle on Cegar Hill, by order of Turkish pasha Hurshid the skulls of the killed Serbian soldiers were built in a tower on the way to Constantinople. 3 meters high, Skull Tower was built out of 952 skulls as a warning to the Serbs not to challenge their Muslim rulers.
Similar Jihad massacres were committed against the Greeks, the Bulgarians and other non-Muslims who slowly rebelled against the Ottoman Empire throughout the 19th century. Professor Vahakn Dadrian and others have clearly identified Jihad as a critical factor in the Armenian genocide in the early 20th century. As Efraim Karsh, author of the book Islamic Imperialism: A History points out, "The Ottomans embarked on an orgy of bloodletting in response to the nationalist aspirations of their European subjects. The Greek war of independence of the 1820's, the Danubian uprisings of 1848 and the attendant Crimean war, the Balkan explosion of the 1870's, the Greco-Ottoman war of 1897--all were painful reminders of the costs of resisting Islamic imperial rule."
In his book Onward Muslim Soldiers, Robert Spencer quotes a letter from Bosnia, written in 1860 by the acting British Consul in Sarajevo, James Zohrab: "The hatred of the Christians toward the Bosniak Mussulmans is intense. During a period of nearly 300 years they were subjected to much oppression and cruelty. For them no other law but the caprice of their masters existed....Oppression cannot now be carried on as openly as formerly, but it must not be supposed that, because the Government employés do not generally appear as the oppressors, the Christians are well treated and protected."
According to writer Ruth King, "during the bombing of Serbia on behalf of Moslem Albanians in 1999 Saudi Prince Khaled Bin Sultan, commander of the allied Saudi troops during the first Gulf War, called on the US to do the same against Israel on behalf of Palestinians. The fate of Jews and Serbs, which has intersected in the past, is doing so again. The jihadist effort to expunge Jews from Palestine mirrors the Moslem goal of incorporating Kosovo into a 'greater Moslem Albania' while expelling Christian Serbs. When Serbia became independent of Byzantine rule in the 12th century, its economic, cultural, social and religious institutions were among the most advanced in Europe. Serbia functioned as a bridge between Greco-Byzantine civilization and the developing Western Renaissance. The center of the Serbian Orthodox Church was in Kosovo where churches, monasteries and monastic communities were established. A form of census in 1330, the 'Decani Charter,' detailed the list of chartered villages and households, of which only two percent were Albanian. The Ottomans invaded Serbia in 1389 and consolidated their rule in 1459, propelling major parts of the Balkan peninsula and adjacent southeast Europe into a Koran-dictated Dark Ages."Early in the twentieth century Serbian Christians were roughly two-thirds of the population of Kosovo. After WW2, Communist dictator Tito did not allow Serbs who fled from their homes to return and did not enforce border controls as thousands of Albanians moved into Kosovo.
As King says, "Initially, the media reported the situation in Kosovo fairly. For example, in July 1982 The New York Times noted: 'Serbs have been harassed by Albanians and have packed up and left the region. The Albanian nationalists have a two-point platform, first to establish what they call an ethnically clean Albanian republic and then to merge with Albania for a greater Albania. Some 57,000 Serbs have left Kosovo in the last decade.' Five years later, in 1987, the Times was still reporting the persecution of Serbs within Kosovo. 'Slavic Orthodox churches have been attacked, wells poisoned, crops burned, Slavic boys knifed. Young Albanians have been told to rape Serbian girls…. Officials in Belgrade view the ethnic Albanian challenge as imperiling the foundations of the multinational experiment called federal Yugoslavia….Ethnic Albanians already control almost every phase of life in the autonomous province of Kosovo, including the police, judiciary, civil service, schools, and factories.'"
It was this situation that led to the rise of Serb nationalist leader Slobodan Milosevic. However, instead of reporting about the advancing Jihad to make some sense of the situation, Western media, according to Ruth King, "went into a frenzy of accusations against the Serbs, much as it has against Israel and with similar distortions. The media depicted the armed, violent and jihadist Moslem Albanians as 'unarmed civilians' despite the fact they called themselves an army and perpetrated assaults, bombings, murder of civilians and targeted assassinations of Albanians loyal to Serbia. President Clinton outrageously referred to a 'holocaust' perpetrated by Serbia and compared the Moslems of Kosovo to the Jews—this, even though the Serbs had behaved well toward the Jews during the real Holocaust and Clinton himself was pressing Israel's Jews to accept the 'peace partnership' of Arafat, a brutal terrorist far worse than Milosevic, admittedly a dictator and a Communist thug."
Moreover, "While the brutality of the Milosevic regime was indeed a complicating factor, he is long gone, but the KLA [Kosovo Liberation Army] continues its assault on Serbs, on their churches, priests, homes, even on civilians sitting in cafes, this under the nose of the U.S. and UN troops."
Bosnia's wartime president Alija Izetbegovic died in 2003, hailed as a moderate Muslim leader. Little was said in Western media about his 1970 Islamic Declaration, where he advocated "a struggle for creating a great Islamic federation from Morocco to Indonesia, from the tropical Africa to the Central Asia," and that "The Islamic movement should and must start taking over the power as soon as it is morally and numerically strong enough to not only overthrow the existing non-Islamic, but also to build up a new Islamic authority."
As Hugh Fitzgerald says, "One must keep in mind both the way in which some atrocities ascribed to Serbs were exaggerated, while the atrocities inflicted on them were minimized or ignored altogether. But what was most disturbing was that there was no context to anything: nothing about the centuries of Muslim rule. Had such a history been discussed early on, Western governments might have understood and attempted to assuage the deep fears evoked by the Bosnian Muslim leader, Izetbegovic, when he wrote that he intended to create a Muslim state in Bosnia and impose the Sharia not merely there, but everywhere that Muslims had once ruled in the Balkans. Had the Western world shown the slightest intelligent sympathy or understanding of what that set off in the imagination of many Serbs (and elsewhere, among the Christians in the Balkans and in Greece), there might never have been such a violent Serbian reaction, and someone like Milosevic might never have obtained power." Yet, "In all of Europe, only a few French journalists and the Austrian writer Peter Handke tried to explain Serbian fears and Serbian history."
Alija Izetbegovic received money from a Saudi businessman, Yassin al-Kadi, who has been designated as a financier of al-Qaeda terrorists. Evan F. Kohlmann, author of Al-Qaeda's Jihad in Europe: The Afghan-Bosnian Network, argues that the "key to understanding Al Qaida's European cells lies in the Bosnian war of the 1990s." In 1992, the government of Izetbegovic issued a passport to Osama bin Laden. The Wall Street Journal reported in 2001 that "for the past 10 years, the most senior leaders of al Qaeda have visited the Balkans: The Egyptian surgeon turned terrorist leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri has operated terrorist training camps, weapons of mass destruction factories and money-laundering and drug-trading networks throughout Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Turkey and Bosnia."
Yosef Bodansky, director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Conventional Warfare in Washington, has stated that the Balkans was a "springboard for Islamic extremism" in Europe and that Iran was the main driving force behind it. Both Iran and Saudi Arabia supplied funding, weapons and men to the Bosnians during the war. Saudi Arabia has invested more than $1 billion in the Sarajevo region alone, for projects that include the construction of 158 mosques. Terrorist organization Al-Qaeda gained a strong foothold in the Balkans during the 1990s.
Martti Ahtisaari, former President of Finland and later Chief United Nations negotiator for Kosovo, caused anger when he stated that "Serbs are guilty as people," implying that they would have to pay for it, possibly by losing Kosovo. I disagree. It is one thing to criticize the brutality of the Milosevic regime. It is quite another thing to claim that "Serbs are guilty as a people." If anybody in the Balkans is guilty as a people, it is the Turks, not the Serbs.
Dimitar Angelov elucidates the impact of the Ottoman Jihad on the region:
"…the conquest of the Balkan Peninsula accomplished by the Turks over the course of about two centuries caused the incalculable ruin of material goods, countless massacres, the enslavement and exile of a great part of the population – in a word, a general and protracted decline of productivity, as was the case with Asia Minor after it was occupied by the same invaders. This decline in productivity is all the more striking when one recalls that in the mid-fourteenth century, as the Ottomans were gaining a foothold on the peninsula, the States that existed there – Byzantium, Bulgaria and Serbia – had already reached a rather high level of economic and cultural development….The campaigns of Mourad II (1421-1451) and especially those of his successor, Mahomet II (1451-1481) in Serbia, Bosnia, Albania and in the Byzantine princedom of the Peloponnesus, were of a particularly devastating character."
Author William Dorich states that "The Serbs lost 52% of their adult male population fighting in the First World War as American allies. Twenty-four years later the Serbs were the only people in the Balkans to declare war on Nazi Germany. Hitler bombed the 'open city' of Belgrade on Palm Sunday in 1942, killing 17,000 Serbs in one day. Surrender followed ten days later as the Nazis invaded. The Serbs lost another one-third of their population in the Holocaust again fighting as American allies, especially against their own Croat, Bosnian Muslim and Albanian Nazis."
Serge Trifkovic, author of the books The Sword of the Prophet and Defeating Jihad, documents how Yasser Arafat's uncle Mohammad Amin al-Husayni cooperated closely with Nazi Germany in recruiting Bosnian and Albanian Muslims for Waffen SS units. Serbs had to wear blue armbands, Jews yellow armbands. For Muslims, this was a Jihad against disobedient dhimmis, and thus a continuation of the genocide against Armenians a few years earlier, which was one of the inspirations for the Holocaust. More than a quarter of a million Serbs, Jews and Romani people (Gypsies) were killed by Muslim troops in Nazi service.
Trifkovic cites James Jatras as claiming that Washington's irrational Balkan policy is to a significant extent the product of the ignorant and misguided notion that the U.S. can curry favor in the Islamic world by sacrificing Kosovo's Christians to the violent Jihad-terror elements that dominate Kosovo's Albanian leadership: "Such an unfounded notion shows a breathtaking incomprehension of the worldwide jihadist threat. International opposition and the Bush Administration's failing domestic credibility put a weight on the policy, however, which can be dealt a fatal blow if enough Americans raise their voices against it."
Miroljub Jevtic, professor at the Belgrade University and author of a number of books on the topic of Islam and politics, believes the Western world is in favor of detaching Kosovo from Christian Serbia by fiat and making it into an independent (Muslim) state. The main argument of those supporting this scenario, notably in the United States, is to improve their image in the eyes of the Islamic world and "co-opt the influence of Islamic 'extremists.'"
However, Jevtic notes that "the fact that since the arrival of NATO to Kosovo over 150 Christian churches have been destroyed and some 400 mosques have been built, or are under construction, is for the Muslims a proof that if there is a faith which is supported by true God -- it is Islam! Because, why would the Christian God, why would Jesus, permit the destruction of churches, where He, Jesus, is glorified? Why would He, at the same time, permit the construction of mosques, where His existence as God is denied? Why would He permit it, moreover, in the presence of men who bear arms and who claim to be Christians?"
Miroljub Jevtic warns that the European Union support for Albanian Muslim demands could backfire badly: "Granting the independence to Kosovo will be taken as proof of Europe's own wish to cease to exist, as it not only allows the expansion of Islam but is actively promoting it by aiding those who are destroying churches, raping nuns, spitting on crosses and daubing with excrement holy images of Christ."
In Kosovo, dozens of churches and monasteries have been destroyed following ethnic cleansing of Christian Serbs by the predominantly Muslim Albanians, all under the auspices of NATO soldiers, and Muslims are not ungrateful. Kosovo Albanians plan to honor their "savior," former US President Bill Clinton, by erecting a statue of him. At the same time, in 2007, four Albanians from Kosovo along with other Muslims were arrested for conspiring to attack Fort Dix, a military base in New Jersey, in order "to kill as many soldiers as possible."
The House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos (D-CA) called upon "jihadists of all color and hue" to see Kosovo as "yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe." But a video of Osama bin Laden meeting with two 9/11 hijackers revealed that the mass murderers were motivated by a desire to avenge Muslims... in Bosnia, where the USA intervened on behalf of Muslims. Meanwhile, no Christian Serbs have staged any terror attacks against the United States or Western European countries in retaliation for the NATO bombings. So who are really the bad guys here?
In a commentary, "We bombed the wrong side?" former Canadian UNPROFOR Commander Lewis MacKenzie wrote, "The Kosovo-Albanians have played us like a Stradivarius. We have subsidized and indirectly supported their violent campaign for an ethnically pure and independent Kosovo. We have never blamed them for being the perpetrators of the violence in the early '90s and we continue to portray them as the designated victim today in spite of evidence to the contrary. When they achieve independence with the help of our tax dollars combined with those of bin Laden and al-Qaeda, just consider the message of encouragement this sends to other terrorist-supported independence movements around the world."
Western governments are pushing for independence for a group of Jihadist thugs who recently wanted to create the Osama bin Laden mosque in Kosovo. This name was eventually changed for public relations reasons since the Albanians knew they needed American political support. In June 2007 the visiting US President George W. Bush was hailed as a hero by a group of Albanians, who also apparently stole his watch. "Sooner rather than later you've got to say 'Enough's enough — Kosovo is independent,'" Bush told cheering Albanians. As German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung later commented, "Why should the Albanians settle for autonomy when George W. Bush had already promised them their own state?"
President Bush declared a "war on terror" after the Jihadist attacks on the United States in 2001. Six years later, all he has achieved is bleeding American tax payers financially and American soldiers literally while overseeing the eradication of non-Muslim communities in Iraq. Now his administration supports independence for terrorist-sponsoring Muslims in the Balkans and in the Palestinian territories. Unless he does something very substantial in 2008, George W. Bush risks being remembered as one of the worst presidents in American history.
I listened to a speech by Patrick Sookhdeo, a former Muslim who recently launched his latest book, Global Jihad: The Future in the Face of Militant Islam. Sookhdeo had done a lot of excellent – and frightening – research regarding the Islamization of Western Europe, especially Britain. He recalled having a conversation with a senior Western official regarding what would happen if Muslims in a region of, say, Britain or the Netherlands, should declare that they would no longer accept the laws of the central government and would form a breakaway Islamic Republic. This official then stated that they would probably just have to quietly accept that. When witnessing the Muslim riots in France, which more and more resemble a civil war, this question is no longer just hypothetical.
As writer Julia Gorin has warned, "An independent Kosovo will serve as a nod to secessionists worldwide," and "history will show what no one cares to understand: the current world war began officially in Yugoslavia."
Granting Jihadist Muslims independence in Kosovo after they have conducted ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims will establish an extremely dangerous precedent. Not only is it immoral to sacrifice the freedom or perhaps existence of smaller nations, be that the Serbs or the Israelis, in order to save your own skin. As the example of Czechoslovakia demonstrated during WW2, it is also counterproductive. Supporting independence for Muslim Albanians in Kosovo will not lead to stabilization of the Balkans; it will rather lead to the Balkanization of the West. The new thug state will serve as a launching pad for Jihad activities against non-Muslims, just like an independent Palestinian state would do in the Middle East.
In the case of Kosovo, the Russians are right and Western leaders, both in the European Union and the United States, are wrong. The Serbs have suffered enough. Give them a break!
In a conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims, other infidels should always support the non-Muslim side. That goes for Kosovo as much as it goes for Kashmir or southern Thailand. It's time to end the demonization of the Serb people and support their struggle against the global Jihad. We are all next in line.
Posted by Robert at December 4, 2007 2:43 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
We never learned from the First War of the 20th Century, so why would we learn from the last one?
Posted by: Jauhara Al-Kafirah![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 4, 2007 3:02 PM
Kosovo will be another infidel gift to the ummah for which the "thanks" will never end.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at December 4, 2007 3:44 PM
Yielding to Islam is ALWAYS a very bad idea. I would concur with Fjordman. But afre we too late to stop Kosovo's integration into the umma?
Thus for very practical reasons it may be in Serbia's best interests to ditch the place as seen from a demographic perspective Serbia already lost the place to Islam long ago (I am certain the Muslims are now by far the majority of the population there). Bear in mind, that Serbia will just not be fighting Albania, Bosnia, and Kosovar Muslims in its bid to hold onto Kosovo, it will be fighting a jihad waged by the entire umma who will probably come to Kosovo's side against the Serbs.
Now if Serbia wants to retain Kosovo, I support and respect their decision to so do and have no criticism of that per se.
But is Kosovo WORTH Serbia's blood and treasure to hang onto at this point? Some may say, and I have no problem with that. But Serbia may be unable to hold onto Kosovo anyway and may find itself forced to write it off to Islam (even if the Bush boatload of dhimwits stays out which it SHOULD).
Posted by: pythagoras at December 4, 2007 3:52 PM
Onward muslim soldier...
Posted by: Hermit at December 4, 2007 5:01 PM
I was all for the Western actions against Serbia in the 90's but a lot of water has gone under the bridge very quickly since then. Reincorporating Kosova in Serbia is a dead duck thanks to the memory of Milosevic's behaviour but something might be salvaged.
Giving the Serbs the province of Mitrovica and perhaps, also Pristina city, along the lines of the Republika Srpska in Bosnia,would be a good way of getting the Russians on side and punishing the Kosovans for their aggressive and often criminal behaviour over the last eight years (not that the EU has taken much notice).
at December 4, 2007 6:18 PM
I guess if there was someone more enlightened than that old apparatchik Milosevic running Serbia, maybe things would have been different. But a lot of cons and anti-Commnunists took teh Mooselimb's side back then out of misplaced revenge against Communism.
Posted by: Dumbo at December 4, 2007 6:24 PM
Pythagoras, that's the same as asking Jews whether Jerusalem is worth it to them. Backing out won't gain the West or the Serbs anything except more demands in the future. They've been terrorizing and cleansing Kosovo for quite some time now and nothing has really changed lately. I guess all that hard work can now be rewarded by another state for them.
Julia Gorin has some terrific insight on the topic.
Posted by: SerbInfidel at December 4, 2007 7:56 PM
Where's Morgaan Sinclair? This thread needs an injection of her tremendous insight and unbiased opinions.
Posted by: Pelayo at December 4, 2007 9:11 PM
Serb Infidel:
Not at all, my friend.
Greece lost over 90% of its territory to the Turks by the early 1900s. All the fighting in the world won't bring Greece's former territories in Asia Minor back to Greek sovereignty. I think the Greeks know that or they would be fighting the Turks now.
Kosovo may have gone the same way Greece's Asia Minor has. And as did many other parts of the globe, regrettably. Pointing this reality out does NOT make me sympathetic to it at all.
I have no problem whatsoever with Serbia taking Kosovo back--if it can, that is.
The trouble is it may be about thirty years too late for Serbia to do this. The demographic jihad looks to this observer like it was not won by the Serbs in Kosovo.
And I know already you don't want to hear it. The truth hurts, huh?
Posted by: pythagoras at December 4, 2007 11:09 PM
"Serb Infidel:
Not at all, my friend.
Greece lost over 90% of its territory to the Turks by the early 1900s. All the fighting in the world won't bring Greece's former territories in Asia Minor back to Greek sovereignty. I think the Greeks know that or they would be fighting the Turks now."
Pythagoras I agree with your statement in general, but even though all the lands of the Greeks cannot be returned, Kosovo is not a huge place that is unreachable. It is right in the heart of Serb territory and must be fought to maintain. Once you show a willingness to surrender for peace, you will always be attacked.
As a side note that has nothing to do with Islam, we see the Greeks are in a new fight with their Slav brothers in the Skopje Macedonia region. These people are relentlessly attempting to steal Greek history of Macedonia and ultimately eye the port of Thessaloniki. One of the reasons that these events are even allowed to happen is that Greece has allowed herself to be disrespected by her neighbours and are viewed as willing to appease.
Greece has even endorsed the entry of Turkey into the EU, though I believe that is simply a case of politics knowing that others will resist. However it is a dangerous game they are playing and would ultimately be better served saying to Turkey straight out, F off!
The Greeks have never been shown respect by Turkey on anything yet they appease. This is where I truly admire the Serbs, damn politics, damn looking soft in hopes of cutting their losses, they come forward and state "over our dead bodies!" I love these people for their fortitude, and hope that my Greek family digs deep and finds that legendary Greek fighting spirit again.
Please don't read into this that I wish for war, quite to the contrary, but I believe the best defense is showing how willing you are to defend all. The rest of Europe needs to look at the Serbs and instead of looking down at them, should look up to them for being the courageous people they have shown to be.
Posted by: The fanatic at December 5, 2007 1:37 AM
Serb Infidel
Agree absolutely with Fjordman,Julia Gorin & yourself. Why the Hell should Serbia give up 15%
of its territory? RUSSIA IS RIGHT, AMERICA FOLLOWED BY ITS POODLES IS SO,SO WRONG.
But this time watch from the sidelines as NATO is
forced to defend itself from Albanian thugs. Yeah,
none of yanks from Camp Bondsteel are going anywhere-Bush expects ém to get that oil pipeline
through Balkans bypassing Albania [wonder why?]
completed so as to avoid increasingly dangerous
Bosphorus route. Well, K.L.A won't like it-it's
THEIR STATE-they got rid of the Serbs-Americans will be a piece of cake if you terrorize them enough...NATO Bully Boys are only brave when dropping bombs from jet fighters on civilians in
little countries-that's COLLATERAL damage!
Was no coincidence Bosnia was suddenly granted E.U Stabilisation etc after Putin's win in Russian
Elections. The Great Bear is making a spectacular comeback
whilst The Empire is stuck in the quicksands of
Iraq & Afghanistan; its prestige permanently damaged, it's leaders so detested by most of the
world that billions will cheer seeing America get
a bloody nose,riddled with debt,corruption and failing economy. [Sorry my American friends but that's the way it is-don't believe Fox News].
Pythagoras, time to take off those rosy coloured
specs...
at December 5, 2007 4:04 AM
Far from surrendering 15% of its territory, Serbia should be inviting in a division of Russian soldiers to show the USA and other nations it means what it says.
Kosovo is Serbian and must remain so.
The creation of an islamic Kosovo is a menace to every european state and to the christian population therein. It is a springboard for subversion and mass murder and the creation of Eurabia.
It is a criminal and political cesspit. The conduit european statelet for the trafficking of drugs from Afghanistan, a centre for people smuggling and crime of every conceivable sort.
Far from ceding this country to the wahhabi dominated islamic terror lords currently in control we need a new international thinking which will wrest this domino back and start cleansing out the terrorist threat in Macedonia while they are at it.
Giving militant Islam victory in Kosovo is the start of the rot which will encourage islamic enclaves the length and breadth of Europe and beyond.
We have a pattern here. Mass immigration, mass breeding, small scale ethnic cleansing with menace, cleansing homes, streets, suburbs, villages, towns, demands for separate institutions and sharia and finally terrorist violence, nothing ruled out.
This pattern is well under way in European nation after European nation - not least my own, England.
How long before the English face demands for the South Yorkshire Islamic Caliphate, or 'free' Lancashire. Not long if they get Kosovo, believe me.
Our whole dependence is on Russia and President Putin. Invite them into Serbia tomorrow, sit them on the Kosovo border and tell the USA and the EU unelected bureaucrats to get lost in the hell hole of their Saudi friends. After all thats where Idi Amin spent his retirement - they will feel right at home.
Rosie
at December 5, 2007 7:34 AM
Greece lost over 90% of its territory to the Turks by the early 1900s. All the fighting in the world won't bring Greece's former territories in Asia Minor back to Greek sovereignty. I think the Greeks know that or they would be fighting the Turks now."
That is not a very apt analogy.
Greece lost to Turkey in Greek Turkish war. Tragic and sad, but natural – natural in the sense that countries do fight since the beginning of history and the weaker ones do lose territory to stronger. And, indeed, had Greece’s military power increased to match Turkish “they would be fighting the Turks”.
But what happened in Kosovo was a completely different matter.
There was never a Albanian-Serbian war resulting in Serbia’s defeat and resulting loss of territory. In fact there was no war at all. Kosovo was ripped from Serbia as a result of a decision followed by military bullying by history greatest superpower who simply handed the province to the Albanians.
There is no superpower guarding the territory seized by Turks and thus guaranteeing that it stays in Turkish hands. Turks are more than capable to guard and keep it Turkish.
But Albanians alone could never keep Kosovo against Serbs. Without the presence and commitment of NATO the Serbs would restore Kosovo to its proper owner in a matter of a few days.
The unusual, indeed, aberrant nature of Kosovo “war” is not that Serbia lost its territory to a military stronger adversary – these things are “normal” (if history may be regarded as normal).
But Serbia lost war to NATO - but the territory to Albanians.
No, there is no comparison whatsoever between the Turkish-Greek and Serb-Albanian conflict.
at December 5, 2007 7:48 AM
Throwing scraps to a tiger.
Until it is strong enough to take what it wants.
The Clinton (Bush/West's) Doctrine.
Posted by: profitsbeard at December 5, 2007 11:33 AM
I can see the argument that Pythogoras is making, but I agree w/ Serb Infidel nonetheless. I don't think the analogy to Jerusalem is accurate - it would be more accurate to equate Kosovo w/ Judea & Samaria - expecting the Serbs to cede Kosovo would be like expecting the Israelis to cede Jerico, Hebron & Nablus. While it may seem a lost cause w/ all those Albanian Mohammedans having flooded Kosovo, there has been unrest in Sandzak - SW Serbia proper, outside Kosovo, so Serbia ceding Kosovo would be like the proverbial offering the leg to the croc.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at December 5, 2007 11:36 AM
I'm really happy to see this subject being discussed in depth. The Yugoslavian wars happened before we had Internet or anything similar to correct bias from MSM, and in a region where we simply didn't know very well, it seems that the media went into 'Lemmings mode' and duplicated the bias of each other, assuming that the Serbians were really the criminals and everyone else victims.
Reality, as usual, is a lot more complex. And particular so in the Balkans. But a couple of fairly straight documentaries opened the subject for me - in particular on those supposed Nazi-style concentration camps in Bosnia. That caused an outrage. Her is a documentary that shows how the story was created:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=12348048107498892
Much of what we did there, including UN involvment, probably deepened and extended the conflict significantly. Which is something I'm having some trouble handling, as I'm usually very pro-American. But the endless mistakes and failures from particular the Clinton administration left the door wide open for radical Islam, including bin Laden in person.
To Fjordman's already excellent reading suggestions, I'll add two titles:
Media Cleansing, which deals specifically with the biased reporting on the Yugoslavian wars.
Christopher Deliso: "The Coming Balkan Caliphate", which documents in detail the extent of Wahhabi infiltration of the Balkans, including construction of hundreds of mosques for Saudi money. This, in particular, is a time bomb that we would be very wise to identify and dismantle. Wahhabi Islam is foreign to the Balkans, which used to be quite relaxed about religion, in particular after the Ottomans were thrown out.
I will keep watching what goes on there.
Posted by: Henrik at December 5, 2007 12:40 PM
For more analysis, including a letter I sent to Danish parliament members (paper - not just email), you may have a look at the 1389 blog.
Personally, I think a division of Kosovo *and* Bosina would be the way to go. And possibly a well organized population exchange like the Greeks & Turks did in the 20's.
Posted by: Henrik at December 5, 2007 12:45 PM
Thomas H. is right.Albanians are in no position to hold Kosovo without US support.But what many people outside the Balkans do not understand is that this is not a mistake.It is a strategic decision from US policymakers to support Balkan Muslims because Balkan Christians are considered pro-Russian.
In reality the whole Balkans affair shows that the US still considers Russia as enemy No1 and not Islam.
Fjordman rightly refers to Western papers in the 80s which were much more pro-Serb about Kosovo.But in the 80s there was a soft pro-Western Communist regime in Yugoslavia and a hardline Communist regime in Albania.US favored Serbs then because it considered Yugoslav Communists more pro-Western than Albanians.When Communism collapsed US stopped calculating along hard or soft Communists and started calculating along civilizational lines.And in this calculus Orthodox Christians are considered worse than Muslims for the simple reason that Othrodox Christianity is the religion of Russia.So do not expect any policy change.
Of course Russians understand that all this is about them and will respond accordingly in other matters.
Unfortunately a united anti-jihad front is only in the pages of JihadWatch and not in the real world.
at December 5, 2007 2:40 PM
The MSM are very critical of President Bush but they bent over backwards to apologise for Bill Clinton, when he was president.
One fact that was barely mentioned in the US press: Serbia was our ally in World War II; they fought against the Nazis. France and Russia did not forget their old ally. I think the French sympathy for Serbia was overruled by NATO. I am sure the Russians see a parallel between Serbia/ Kosovo and Russia/ Chechnya. I am American but don't see a problem with Russia's defense of Serbia.
When I first heard about the outbreak of war in Bosnia, I remembered that World War I started in Sarajevo. Unfortunately, most Americans don't know much about 20th century world history.
--
CT Yank
at December 5, 2007 3:11 PM
I was just reading a 'Time' magazine puff piece about Kosovo. Tucked away in the middle of it was one very, very tiny glimmer of hope, like a taper lit in a dark corner. A young Albanian man was cheerfully explaining - much to the reporter's obvious astonishment - that he was no longer a Muslim. He had read a copy of the Gospels - in Albanian - given to him by a Protestant missionary, and had become a Christian. The context was such that I don't think there was any taqiyya involved - it was quite clear the reporter was about as astonished as someone lifting up a rock and having some strange creature hop out from under it (people actually CONVERT to CHRISTIANITY...EEEWW!).
Whatever happens on the military/political front, there is something else that should be happening, and should go on happening. The Russian and Serb Orthodox, Albanian Orthodox and Greek Orthodox, the Protestants, the Catholics, should join forces - heavy duty round-the-clock prayer and fasting (get whole monasteries onto the job; get the monks of Athos to pray) while flooding the place with the Bible in Albanian and Serbian - Bible readings on the radio, paper copies of the gospels distributed from one end of the country to the other, tape recordings, the 'Jesus' film, and - pull out all the stops - the MUSIC, everything from western style modern rock gospel and ballad 'choruses', to the glories of the Eastern Orthodox liturgy (put all that stuff in Albanian!). Music, and respect for the vernacular, are Christianity's two great aces-in-the-hole, when competing with Islam (which suspects and rejects music and doesn't use it in worship, and which despises the vernacular, exalting Arabic). Donate to the Bible Society in Albania (yes - it exists!) and the Bible Society in Yugoslavia - give every possible support to every Christian church in both countries, and pray that they will be able to co-operate.
(I will add that, some time ago in Kyrgyzstan, when the Gospels were distributed in Kyrgyz alongside a Kyrgyz Quran, many literate Kyrgyz obtained BOTH, read, compared...and decided that the Gospels were definitely more human-friendly...there is now a Kyrgyz-speaking church made up of converts from Islam).
Which is the greater challenge? To try to physically annihilate the Muslim Albanians of Kosovo - or to reclaim them for the faith that their ancestors were terrified out of, or brainwashed into (as kidnapped children, enslaved girls) centuries ago?
I'm not naive about this. I'm not saying that appropriate military actions in self-defence should stop - by no means.
But Serb Christians are facing a monstrous, deeply entrenched spiritual stronghold, a Dark Tower. Against that, other weapons are needed besides the physical. Do we believe in a God who can raise the dead...or don't we?
Pray for those who, like the young man in the article I read, HAVE abandoned Mohammed and chosen the way of Christ. They have a long, hard road ahead of them. But if they were to multiply, and prevail, the future could surprise us all.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at December 5, 2007 4:27 PM
Kosovo is and must be Serbia,Europe has lot their soul, Albania and Bosnia must be reunited in the christendom, we can´t have white muslims, it´s very dangerous. But we still live well until....
Posted by: Franze at December 5, 2007 5:17 PM
Rosie
Succinctly and accurately put.
You are the only commenter here who gets the big picture. This truly is the death-knell for Europe. Clinton, Bush snr and Dubya, Major and Blair should be tried as war criminals. What they have done to our allies the Serbs is appalling and it shames us all.
Milosovic told us all that what was happening in Kosovo was the canary in the coalmine and he was ignored and vilified and yet - look now.
Milosovic deserves to be compared to Martel, Charlemagne, Lionheart. Those who didn't listen and who sold-out the Serbs to appease the Muslims for Saudi oil are nothing more than cowards. Traitors. Collaborators. Shame on them all.
All eyes on Russia. I hope Putin has more balls than all of his western counterparts. Otherwise, Gorin's "WWIII started in Yugoslavia" will haunt us all.
Lionheart.
at December 5, 2007 6:56 PM
I suppose if neo-con Reagan had never torn down the wall the Russian mafia would never had been let loose to sell both weapons and Soviet state secrets to every middle eastern mullahracy, kleptocracy and dictator with loads of oil money to spend.
Posted by: syn at December 5, 2007 7:17 PM
Infidel Pride:|
The example of Kosovo resembles most closely LEBANON (to cite the most recent case history of a brutal Islamic territorial theft). And by the way, the Lebanese Maronite Christians will in all probability NOT be able to retake their homeland either (it's too far gone at this point). Ask the lovely jihad victim, Miss Brigitte Gabriel on this.
Islamicizing Kosovo like recently-Islamicized Lebanon appears to be just too far gone for reclamation by Christian Serbia (I could be wrong, but I am not waiting with bated breath either).
I NEVER, by the way, supported the idea of officially recognizing an Islamic, sovereign Kosovo. And I never will either. The world does NOT need any more Islamicized states (even though it appears we now have several more on the way--ugh!).
at December 5, 2007 9:04 PM
fanatic: The point I made is that however the Greeks feel, the reality is they are not getting their stolen territories back from Islam anytime soon (if ever). Wars or no wars.
at December 5, 2007 9:08 PM
Where will this appeasement of islam jihad end? Remember Hitler and the western alliances appeasement during the 30's? First is Bosna, then Kosovo, then Sandjak, then Presevo, then Albanian majority territory in Macedonia, Greece and Montenegro thus creating a Greater Albania. From there you go to France and Great Britan since they have a significantly large Muslim population to the point that the French and Britons are no longer the significant majority (perhaps that is why they are so pro-islam - or maybe playing the appeasement game like in the 30's) in their own country. History is repeating itself. The western governments apparently haven't learned that appeasement is not the answer and that the people will again fight a war that their government leaders have led them to while these very same government leaders run and hide.
Posted by: mamavuk at December 5, 2007 11:19 PM
"Greece lost to Turkey in Greek Turkish war. Tragic and sad, but natural – natural in the sense that countries do fight since the beginning of history and the weaker ones do lose territory to stronger. And, indeed, had Greece’s military power increased to match Turkish “they would be fighting the Turks”.
But what happened in Kosovo was a completely different matter.
There was never a Albanian-Serbian war resulting in Serbia’s defeat and resulting loss of territory. In fact there was no war at all. Kosovo was ripped from Serbia as a result of a decision followed by military bullying by history greatest superpower who simply handed the province to the Albanians.
There is no superpower guarding the territory seized by Turks and thus guaranteeing that it stays in Turkish hands. Turks are more than capable to guard and keep it Turkish." posted by thomas h
Actually there are more similarities here than meets the eye. The Greeks in their wars were interfered with more than once by western powers who helped Turkey. Turkey has maintained an edge in military might as a direct result from military aid she's received from the US.
Now we look at Yugoslavia and the Serbs, well they have been screwed over by the superpowers and as it stands today, the Albanians will be given all the might and support needed to become a dominant player in the region. Turkey could not possibly be a power without help, and Kosovo cannot possibly go on its own without being propped up by the US.
at December 6, 2007 1:42 AM
They are so confident of Kosovo that the slaughter starts in Serbia proper.
From 'Serbianna' today and coming to a European country near you courtesy of the USA and Britain not to mention those unelected Bureaucrats who run the Soviet style empire known as the EU.
http://www.serbianna.com/news/2007/03014.shtml
Rosie
at December 6, 2007 6:33 AM
fanatic says above:
“The Greeks in their wars were interfered with more than once by western powers who helped Turkey. Turkey has maintained an edge in military might as a direct result from military aid she's received from the US.”
“… the Albanians will be given all the might and support needed to become a dominant player in the region. Turkey could not possibly be a power without help, and Kosovo cannot possibly go on its own without being propped up by the US.”
Well, if one wants to look for similarities regardless of their significance then there is no end of them.
I don’t think that a rather unspecified and nebulous : “The Greeks in their wars were interfered with more than once by western powers who helped Turkey” can measure up to the hard and central to my comment fact that while the Albanians, except occasionally raping and murdering civilians and torching churches, basically picked their noses having the US Air Force doing the fighting, the Turks fought their war with Turkish men. Also, Turkey has been able to keep its gain long before the US military aid has been available to it.
Besides, Greece too has been a recipient of the US military aid from the very moment it entered the NATO - or as long as Turkey.
Now, if you want to imply that if the aid is stopped for both Turkey and Greece the latter would be able to recapture its lost territories you may do that, but these are speculations, for not to say fantasies, much too unreal for me to engage.
As for your prediction that “the Albanians will be given all the might and support needed to become a dominant player in the region” I can’t see how can the US or the West, or anyone else can ever perceive the Kosovo Albanians a strategically appropriate candidate for a role of a “dominant player”.
They have once offered a pretext for an ill-advised geopolitical move for the irresponsible US boy-president and his parrot brain secretary, but by now, after their 15 minutes of fame, they are nothing, but an embarrassing and costly liability from which America doesn’t really know how to extricate itself.
If you would follow the American foreign policy discussion you would easily see that an option of making the Albanians “a dominant player of the region” is conspicuously missing amidst all the tentatively advanced solutions for the Kosovo mess.
“Turkey could not possibly be a power without help, and Kosovo cannot possibly go on its own without being propped up by the US.”
You unwittingly highlight the most significant difference between the two;
The former needs help to continue being a POWER, while the latter can’t go on its own without being propped up!
I couldn’t have put it better. Really, if that is similarity then who needs differences?
Posted by: thomas. h at December 6, 2007 9:05 AM
The Africanization of the Balkans
The lessons of Zimbabwe are lost in darkest Kosovo.
By Denis Boyles
Hits all the important points from my (American) perspective.
I think we're risking a major war with Russia trying to create an Islamist-Marxist narco-jihad kleptocracy in Kosovo.
Every time this comes up I still can't believe we got heavily involved in the Balkans, risking war with China and Russia while there. Here we go again. Russia and the Serbs have a point. Remember when Britain and France got directly involved in our American Civil War?
You don't because they weren't that stupid. We, the U.S., OTOH...
Posted by: Beagle at December 6, 2007 1:11 PM
Sorry thomas I didnt realize this was going to get this heated.
Actually Germany stepped in and directly helped the Turks in the Greek Turkish war in 1897, this was the first war that stopped Greek advancement into its old territories. The Greeks until that time had been successful in every campaign against the Turks since 1821. That was with Turk soldier against Greek soldier.
The French and British were also involved later in the Greek war of 1922 leading up to the slaughter in Smyrna.
The US has helped Greece but it pales in comparison to what aid Turkey has been given in the past 50 years. So if you want to talk fantasy, go ahead, I was just stating what was and is real.
The Turks just as the Albanians are recipient of help from present time superpowers, and as such are in a position of privilege put there by their friends of immense power.
Posted by: The fanatic at December 6, 2007 5:49 PM
In Fjordman's excellent essay 'How the Feminists' "War against Boys" Paved the Way for Islam' he mentions a Lars Hedegaard column entitled "The dream of submission". Is that article available anywhere online?
Posted by: timothy222222 at December 6, 2007 7:54 PM
The Albanians who have infiltrated into Kosovo over the past century do indeed have a place where they can, and must, return: Albania. True, they might not want to go back to Albania, given the mess that their own relatives and countrymen have made of the place, but then, that's their problem.
Not to insist that they return home would be to reward a full century of genocide on the part of the Muslim Albanians against the Christian Serbs.
Posted by: 1389 at December 7, 2007 6:24 AM
Great article!
However, one small disagreement:
Milosevic was no Serb nationalist, but a hapless appeaser who was repeatedly hoodwinked by the US and NATO, and ultimately disposed of. See Emperor's Clothes for background. That site has the whole history of MSM pro-jihadist taqiyya!
If you want to know what a Serb nationalist is all about, I am a Serb nationalist.
1) I claim that the Serbian people has a right to exist.
2) I claim that those of us who are of Serbian ancestry have the right to be known and identified as Serbs (or as Serbian-Americans, Serbian-Canadians, Serbian-Australians, as the case may be), without anyone else thinking that this gives them the right to attack us.
3) I claim that Orthodox Christian Serbs have the right to continue practicing our religion, wherever in the world we may happen to be.
4) I claim that we as Serbs have the same right to defend themselves against attack that anyone else has - and that this includes the right to cooperate among ourselves for mutual protection.
Anybody out there who disagrees with me? I've already thrown the glove down - if you pick it up, you'd better be loaded for bear.
As this article indicates, anyone who dares to spread false information to libel the Serbs is giving significant aid and comfort to al-Qaeda-affiliated enemy jihadist/narcoterrorists in the Balkans. I expect valid logic supported with provable factual information. I expect the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Anything else will be met with the most thorough takedown imaginable.
Posted by: 1389 at December 7, 2007 6:40 AM
Great article!
However, one small disagreement:
Milosevic was no Serb nationalist, but a hapless appeaser who was repeatedly hoodwinked by the US and NATO, and ultimately disposed of. See Emperor's Clothes for background. That site has the whole history of MSM pro-jihadist taqiyya!
If you want to know what a Serb nationalist is all about, I am a Serb nationalist.
1) I claim that the Serbian people has a right to exist.
2) I claim that those of us who are of Serbian ancestry have the right to be known and identified as Serbs (or as Serbian-Americans, Serbian-Canadians, Serbian-Australians, as the case may be), without anyone else thinking that this gives them the right to attack us.
3) I claim that Orthodox Christian Serbs have the right to continue practicing our religion, wherever in the world we may happen to be.
4) I claim that we as Serbs have the same right to defend ourselves against attack that anyone else has - and that this includes the right to cooperate among ourselves for mutual protection.
Anybody out there who disagrees with me? I've already thrown the glove down - if you pick it up, you'd better be loaded for bear.
As this article indicates, anyone who dares to spread false information to libel the Serbs is giving significant aid and comfort to al-Qaeda-affiliated enemy jihadist/narcoterrorists in the Balkans. I expect valid logic supported with provable factual information. I expect the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Anything else will be met with the most thorough takedown imaginable.
Posted by: 1389 at December 7, 2007 6:41 AM
Before NATO/KLA took over Kosovo there was a Jewish population.
Under Belgrade rule, Jews were a respected minority who were given many minority rights.
Whoops-a-daisy
Now there's no Jews so no problem.
It seems that NATO officers looked on as the Jewish people were torched out of their homes
What? Still not laughing?
Jewish witnesses spoke of pleading in vain to NATO officers. They were too busy, it seems. The National lottery was on it seems. Priorities, priorities.
Come. That's hilarious.
NATO and Bin Laden working in synch.
Sept 11. 1999. Whoops-a-daisy.
Posted by: ewha1 at December 7, 2007 7:36 AM
That should have read "Sept 11. 1999. Whoops-a-daisy."
As any fule kno.
Posted by: ewha1 at December 7, 2007 7:42 AM
Erm. 2001 anyone? Cough. Sneeze.
Posted by: ewha1 at December 7, 2007 7:45 AM
I fully agree with 1389. Milosevic will burn in hell because he prevented Serbs from a unified action at the point of time when this action might have been successfull (early 90).
He did it on a ground of multiculturalism. Milosevic and his wife were fanatic opponents of nationalism, especially of Serbian nationalism, they (especially the wife) were anti-Serbian the way that Serbian social-democrats and communists have always been. In Yugoslavia, Serbian communists could built careers only along with adoption anti-Serbian resentments that were cultivied for decades by the communist nomenclature (consisting mostly of Slovenian and Croatian communists. Croatian communists in many cases were fashists and changed the sides end of the Second World War).
Milosevic did not committ the crime of genocide for which he was accused and delivered to Den Haag. This crime hasn´t been committed, but invented by the Western media.
It is also worth noting that Serbs are the victims of the wars in 90es: Croatia expelled 600000 Serbs (200 000 in the early 90, from the cities and 400000later on in the 90, mainly from Kraina, a region in Croatia that was over 90% populated by ethnic Serbs). Muslim-Croatian part of Bosnia has also been ethnically clensed from the Serbs.
Serbia remains THE ONLY COUNTRY of the region that is still multicultural and having ethnic minorities who can live in peace and relative prosperity and enjoy extensive national rights and autonomies.
Serbs have lost the wars in the 90es because they unfortunately decided to follow this multiculturalist and appeasing ideology, even though they were surrounded by aggressive Jihad on one side and similarly agressive and endemic Croatian clero-fashism on the other side. I believe that we need to treat our enemies in a similarly merciless way if we want to survive. Especially given the circumstance that we are not facing only Jihad as enemy, but also the so called West that believes (and this is historically speaking nothing new ) that it can gather advantages by feeding the Moslems with morsels of the Serbian territory. Besides, certain Western nations are still suffering from an ugly form of chauvinism. Hating Serbs , wrting about them in a rasistic and fashistic manner is still allowed and noone needs to worry about the consequences of such behaviour.
We are now facing the situation that any Serbian neigbour (most of them with long jihadist or fashist references that one will search in vain throughout the Serbian history) can display ANY sort of claim towards a Serbian territory and will be entitled to cut off a slice from Serbia. According to EU and USA Serbia should be reduced to territory around Belgrad to which noone can raise a claim (yet).
Posted by: Serbian girl at December 7, 2007 8:23 AM
fanatic,
The account of the Turkish Greek wars is available from many different sources and at least all that I have consulted tell a story of repeated Greek defeat vis a vis the Turkish military might. None of them attributes the defeat to the “Involvement of Western Powers”, (which BTW favoured Greece at least as many times as Turkey), but to the sheer supremacy of the Turkish military might.
In fact the very creation of independent Greece was a direct result of the Great Powers fighting and defeating Turkey in the Greek War of Independence (1821-32). In 1827 an Anglo-French fleet destroyed the Ottoman and Egyptian fleets at the Battle of Navarino, while the Russian army advanced as far as Edirne before a cease-fire was called in 1829. The European powers forced the Porte to recognize Greek independence under the London Convention of 1832.
To say, as you do, that “The Greeks until that time had been successful in every campaign against the Turks since 1821” with Turkey being practically manacled by "the Powers" is a bit of an overstatement.
"The Powers" saved again Greece from a total crush by Turks when Greece, following its Crete adventure, caused the Porte to declare war in 1897. Although the Ottoman army defeated the Greeks decisively in Thrace, the European powers forced a compromise peace.
you say “The French and British were also involved later in the Greek war of 1922 leading up to the slaughter in Smyrna”
“Involved” yes, but only to save the Greeks from the consequence of its, again, crushing military defeat when the Turks, commanded by Kemal Atatürk, beat Greeks at the Sakarya River (Aug. 24-Sept. 16, 1921). A year later the Turks assumed control of Smyrna (September 1922) and drove the Greeks out of Anatolia.
Anyway, the thread is not about Turkey or Greece, or who beat whom and how often. The Turkish toughness, the sturdiness and courage of its soldiers has been recognized and respected by all over the ages and I have no interest in publicizing its qualities. On the contrary; my loathing of the negative traits of the Turks: inhumanity, brutality, slavish subjection to their rulers, sadistic cruelty toward defenseless civilians and nationalistic fanaticism is much greater than my respect for their fighting prowess.
The thread is about Kosovo and its future. I thought that your claim that the Kosovo Albanians, are going to be a “major regional player” because , again, the US and NATO wants them to be one, is not just implausible to a point of being hilarious, but completely ungrounded in historical settings and geo-political realities of today. I also rejected your Turkey-Albania analogies as perfectly out of place and I showed why.
I believe I presented my thoughts in a clear and simple fashion.
You never argued anything consistently and I doubt you will.
I, in any case, lost an interest in continuing exchange with you on that subject.
at December 7, 2007 9:27 AM
Dear Thomas I do not disagree with you as much as you think, and I do agree as I did state early on in my posts that they were about Kosovo and not Greece. I simply stated what I felt about comments relating to Greeks earlier. The current events in Kosovo relating to the Serbs are a travesty, and I can say without a doubt that I have been talking about this since the 1999 war, and am finally being believed instead of berated by people. An awful lot of people were sucked into believing the falsities of this conflict and I had the benefit of a very well informed friend who kept me up to speed as early as 1995 in regards to the conflicts in that region.
Now I would like to comment on this phrase,
"you say “The French and British were also involved later in the Greek war of 1922 leading up to the slaughter in Smyrna”
“Involved” yes, but only to save the Greeks from the consequence of its, again, crushing military defeat when the Turks, commanded by Kemal Atatürk, beat Greeks at the Sakarya River (Aug. 24-Sept. 16, 1921). A year later the Turks assumed control of Smyrna (September 1922) and drove the Greeks out of Anatolia."
That is a blatantly wrong my friend. They were directly off shore and watched as Greek and Armenian civilians were killed. Not only that, they repelled anyone that swam to their ships in attempts to get away from the slaughter. If they were there for the reasons you state the genocide would have never happened. The French and Brits were not alone there, the Russians, Italians and US were there also. As a matter of fact the two countries that actively participated in seeing Greece lose were the French and Italians, but all were complicit. I cannot deny that many of the named were instrumental in assisting Greeks with their uprising, they did not have the means as they were enslaved for hundreds of years leading up to the revolution. However there is lots of evidence of double crossing as many wished to exploit Greece for their gain.
I leave this topic as well, I only wish the Serbs the best, and hope that the US and allies see their wrongs here, if they don't they are setting up that region to be Europe's hotbed of violence once again. This will spread in many directions and will eventually envelope many other countries in her vicinity.
http://www.greece.org/genocide/smyrna1922.htm
Posted by: The fanatic at December 8, 2007 5:37 PM
Thomas, Fanatic is right about Western powers helping the Turkish nationalists of Ataturk defeat the Greeks in 1922. But Fanatic unfortunately was not specific enough.
Greece was allied with the Western powers, Japan, and Russia in WW One. The Greeks were promised territorial gains in Anatolia [Asia Minor] for their participation in the war, whereas the Ottoman Empire was on the side of Germany & Austria-Hungary. The Ottoman state was essentially defeated in WW One. The Greek army was advancing through Anatolia on the way to Angora [Ankara]. In 1920, the Supreme Allied Command [or Supreme Allied Command Council] told the Greeks to stop their army in the midst of their advance. This meant stopping along a line difficult to defend. The Greeks complied. In the next two years, Ataturk, leading a Muslim revanchiste movement, more Muslim than Turkish nationalist, was able to rebuild the Turkish forces. Ataturk, whose name at that time was still only Mustafa Kemal, was given the honorary sobriquet of Ghazi, that is, Muslim border warrior against the infidel. He was still several years before calling himself a nationalist and secularist.
Anyhow, the Turks rebuilt, retrained, and rearmed their forces with aid from Western powers and Communist/Bolshevik Russia [how nice that Commies and capitalists collaborated!!!]. In 1922 the Turks resumed the war and were able to defeat the Greeks relatively easily. The massacre at Smyrna --called the Smyrna Affair-- ensued. Now Smyrna is called Izmir. [for more details, see, inter alia, the biography of Ataturk by Lord Kinross. See, Thomas, I am giving you a reference to check up].
So Fanatic is right that the West [and Communist Russia] intervened in favor of a Turkish nationalist/Muslim Ghazi victory!!! Now, the same pattern that the West used against the Greeks they have also used against Israel over the past 60 years. In the 1947-49 Israeli War of Independence, in the 1956 Sinai Campaign, in the 1967 Six Day War and the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Britain and the US [Russia too in 1956, 1967, & 1973] worked to stop the Israeli advances, to limit Israel's victories. Now, Bush & Rice are trying to strangle Israel by helping the PLO & Hamas. [The US is not helping Hamas, you say?]. In this light it is unfortunate that both Israelis and Greeks cannot see the common pattern of Western diplomatic action to hobble each of them. And neither side seems to be learning enough from history.
Posted by: Eliyahu at December 10, 2007 9:22 AM
just want to add some more bibliography:
George Horton, The Blight of Asia
Marjorie Housepian, The Smyrna Affair [later republished apparently with the title Smyrna 1922, and the author's name given as Marjorie Housepian Dobkin].
Ernest Hemingway, "On the Quai at Smyrna" in In Our Time.
Lord Kinross, Ataturk.
Posted by: Eliyahu at December 10, 2007 9:34 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)