Russia Threatens to Strike Terror Bases

"John Mullen" wrote in message ...
"Denyav" wrote in message
...
seriously doubt that anyone in Russia proper wants Chechnyan rebels with
nukes,
do they?
Dave

Nuclear tipped ICBMs are not very suitable weapons aganist terrorists ,but
they
are excellent weapons to deter countries that use terrorists as proxies.
The recipients of Putins televised message is without any doubt are Anglos
who
use Al-Queda and other so called islamic terrorists as proxies to realize
their
domestic and foreign policy goals.

Putins message is only a lightly disguised way of saying to US "Stop
Al-Queda
terrorism inside Russia,or else".

If they are really serious,I am pretty sure that so called islamic
terrorism
will take a vacation in Russia.

What nonsense!

John

The US has a history of using islamic based insurgence as a wedge
against various European countries. The behaviour of the US during
the Yugoslave/Bosnian/Kosovo issues was highly pro-islamic, clearly
calculated to win favour in the middle east for the US oil interests
and zionist sympathies while snuffing out any possible rival post
eastern block alignments based on slavic ethniticities, orthodox
christianity. This was despite the fact that the former yugoslave
people were facing unprovoked terrorism, drug running, kidnapping and
murder in Kosovo. It was merely necessary to reframe sincere
anti-terrorism measures and the civil conflct as 'ethnic cleansing'
and 'genocide' (such crimes did occur but at a miniscule fraction of
the agit-prop propagandised rate and only AFTER NATO bombing reduced
the situation to disroder: the crimes also clearly weren't one sided)

Eunometic wrote:
The US has a history of using islamic based insurgence as a wedge
against various European countries.

Any proof to this absurd claim? The one you tried to use below doesn't fly.

The behaviour of the US during the Yugoslave/Bosnian/Kosovo issues

The US came in because the Europeans had allowed, through their own
inaction, a local mess to become so bad they couldn't handle it
themselves. The Europeans were very upset to find out their local
militaries were incapable of doing much of anything, and perhaps there
was a good reason after all for the US's defense budget.

If this is the type of thanks the US receives after it was invited in by
the Europeans to clean up their own mess in their back yard, then
perhaps next time we'll let you go it alone.

stop spam wrote in message ...
Eunometic wrote:
The US has a history of using islamic based insurgence as a wedge
against various European countries.

Any proof to this absurd claim? The one you tried to use below doesn't fly.

The behaviour of the US during the Yugoslave/Bosnian/Kosovo issues

The US came in because the Europeans had allowed, through their own
inaction, a local mess to become so bad they couldn't handle it
themselves. The Europeans were very upset to find out their local
militaries were incapable of doing much of anything, and perhaps there
was a good reason after all for the US's defense budget.

If this is the type of thanks the US receives after it was invited in by
the Europeans to clean up their own mess in their back yard, then
perhaps next time we'll let you go it alone.

That would be another one of those "invitations" that were preceded by
intense lobbying and pressure.

The US was chumping at the bit to have a go at a military intervention
and at the time was following a policy of agitating its Allies to take
more responsibillity globally (ie spend more money to unburden the US)
in implementing what was US policy anyway.

I don't see that ANY western european, US or NATO involvement was
required at all. It was confined to being a civil war that would most
likely have ended in dissolution of Yugoslavia along slightly
different (and better borders). It did not threaten neightbouring
countries and flows of refugees could be handled by population
transfers within the borders of the former Yugoslavia. It was far less
bloody than the butcherous American Civil war. What it seems to have
boiled down to is an unjustified intervention on vastly exaggerated
human rights grounds that was really about appeasing the muslim
populations in the Middle East and Turkey for strategic reasons.
There are in my opinion more people dead becuase of NATO intervention
than without it.

"Eunometic" wrote in message
om...


The US has a history of using islamic based insurgence as a wedge
against various European countries. The behaviour of the US during
the Yugoslave/Bosnian/Kosovo issues was highly pro-islamic, clearly
calculated to win favour in the middle east for the US oil interests

Utter tosh

The USA was initially reluctant in both cases to get involved and
the first country to recognise Bosnian independence
was Germany

Keith

On 9 Sep 2004 13:44:10 -0700, (Eunometic)
wrote:


The US has a history of using islamic based insurgence as a wedge
against various European countries. The behaviour of the US during
the Yugoslave/Bosnian/Kosovo issues was highly pro-islamic,

So you think the Serbs had a right to just kill and expell all the
muslims in Kosovo?

You are sick.

If that is your history of "using islamic based insurgence as a
wedge," you are also laughably pathetic.

wrote in message ...
On 9 Sep 2004 13:44:10 -0700, (Eunometic)
wrote:


The US has a history of using islamic based insurgence as a wedge
against various European countries. The behaviour of the US during
the Yugoslave/Bosnian/Kosovo issues was highly pro-islamic,

So you think the Serbs had a right to just kill and expell all the
muslims in Kosovo?

You are sick.

If that is your history of "using islamic based insurgence as a
wedge," you are also laughably pathetic.

Look mr. before YOU write ANYTHING about FRY, get to learn some
facts who has been living in Kosovo and which nationality/religion they
are/were. Just to give you a tip:

-Kosovo is INTEGRAL PART of Serbia (not Serbia and Montenegro) as much as
some county in the State of New York. That's the bloody Constitution of
Serbia states since 1945. It is not a "republic". It has as much right to
split as much as you have to split your municipality from your country. It
was simply "envisaged" as a part where overall ethnic minorities are in
majority! Go blame Tito for that!

- "Kosovars" do not exist, they are ALBANIANS of CHATOLIC as well as of
MUSLIM nationality (Chatolic in lesser percent). The ratio Albanians:Serbs
was roughly 80:20% BEFORE 1999 (not 1991!), now it is 96-97 percent
ALBANIANS, 2-3 percent SERBS and 1 percent others (including NATO).

Since you probably heard about Kosovo in 1999 or earliest in 1991, you
should know that former Yugoslavia was uncusesfully fighting Albanian
nationalism and separatism in Kosovo since 1980 when Tito died. The product
of such dissapointment was a Sebian nationalism, and Milosevic appeared like
Hitler appeared after the Crisis in 1933. Then other "Great fathers of
nation" appeared after him. Then all the hell broke loose in entire former
Yu.

- Milosevic is a WAR CRIMINAL that should be condemned because he, Tudjman
and Alija f***d up Croatia (10-11% Serbs 1991, now around 3%-"replaced" by
Croatian refugees from Bosnia, thanks to Karadjordjevo and a handkerchif
map) and B&H that was, before the war, shuffled with Muslims, Croats and
Serbs at equal rate.

Those three "leaders" above literally polarized the country(ies, Croatia and
B&H) to Serbian, Croatian and Muslim part despite claims of EU and SFOR or
NATO. The "Migty Trio" created such national movements in B&H (and Croatia)
unseen since the times of Otoman Empire.

And this happened in the heart of Europe in the late 20 Century.

NATO was "sooo kind" and allowed ethnic cleansing of SERBS, not ALBANIANS on
Kosovo AFTER they came in Kosovo. Milosevic was still in power when they
arrived because he is/was not interested in Serbian people but to have
POWER. When Yugoslav Army left Kosovo, qute soon so did the Serbs. If you do
not believe, go to Pristina today and try to utter a word in Serbian and you
will be lucky not to get beaten. Up to 1999, you could hear an Albanian talk
in Albanian in BELGRADE on BELGRADE TELEVISION that he is from Kosovo and
that he is in a "foreign country". Say that in Pristina as a Serb and you
will get KILLED. Any NATO/UN/EU "low level" foreign worker that mingles with
people in Kosovo knows this.

The gross misunderstanding and tackling of the "Balkan stuff" of Europe
towards Balkans since Austro-Hungarian Empire, up 'till European Community
and USA now, has ALWAYS resulted not just in killed Muslims, but Croats and
Serbs too.

Where were you when a Milosevic's pion Babic was forcing 150,000+ Croats out
from self-proclaimed "Republic of Serbian Krayina" (part of Croatia) in
1991-95? Where were you when Tudjman forced out around 350,000+ Serbs in
August 1995 from entire Croatia and "imported" Croat from B&H? Where were
you when those Croats were forced to get out of Bosnia from, let's say,
Kakanj or Prozor or Tuzla (from Muslims) and to move to Croatia? Where were
you when those Muslims were forced out from Banja Luka by Serbs who fled
before Muslims in Sarajevo? Where were you when the Serbs were forced out of
Drvar and 99% Serbian-populated Drvar is now 99% Croat-refugees populated
Drvar? Do you know the numbers of Serbian, Cratian, Muslim and Albanian
people in mass graves "produced" by all three/four nationalities and who
shot or slauthered them?

It is a Vicious Circle.

Mister, you should have been here. It is not called "Balkanian Cauldron" for
nothing or because after some dish.

We, the ordinary people that suffered consequences from this war (being
bashed, killed, tortured, displaced, hungry, dirty...) do not CARE who
started it anymore. This was not WW2, this was a CIVIL WAR.

Now go and explain Fmr Yu history 1991-1999 and beyond to somebody who does
not live here. In Balkans.


Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA