Well said. But I'm skeptical about the comparison to Milosevic. Idk much about that guy except that the American media hated him during the Yugoslav war. I'd be happy to receive education on this subject.
You'd think from AB's comparison that Milosevic oversaw his country's carpeting of a neutral country across the world with cluster munitions
Ofc, it's an American comparison and is not worth shit.
Read To Kill a Nation by Parenti
Below is Milosevic's preface to the Serbian edition of that book
PREFACE TO YUGOSLAV EDITION
I congratulate all those people who gave their contribution to translating and publishing of the book - TO KILL A NATION - THE ATTACK ON YUGOSLAVIA - in our country. Its author, Michael Parenti, is an American to whom every true veracious inhabitant of the Planet ought to be grateful for the great courage and ability to see and understand the events that marked the last decade of the twentieth century.
His fellow country man, Ernest Hemingway, wrote in 1948 in the introduction to his novel "Farewell to Arms" (which was, actually, published for the first time in 1929):"..wars are created, caused and started by the economic differences, and they are waged by the pigs which are trying to benefit from them".
For the killing of Yugoslavia, all media, political, economic and military means were used.
The war against Yugoslavia was conducted on behalf of the great powers (Vatican, Germany, America...) because Yugoslavia stood in the way of their interests. It stood as an obstacle to the goals of the new world oppressors, the new colonialism. It represented "a bad example" for all those countries and peoples who wished to stay free and independent, and who wish to have the international relationship on the equality basis.
The powers which preempted the name - the International Community, only had understanding for those who supported them. They didn't even want to hear for the ones who didn't share their point of view and for the ones opposing the New World Order.
The International Community, meritorious for the breaking of Yugoslavia, encouragement of extreme nationalism in all Yugoslav republics (especially in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina) and responsible for the national conflicts, accused others for such actions; the ones that stood as an obstacle to their intentions, the ones who were the victims of these intents - it accused Serbs for the evil which it itself caused and performed.
This was not just the immorality of the International Community, that is, of a certain part of it which advocated such immorality, but it was a crime of that certain part of the International Community as well. In a certain way this was a crime towards Croats and Muslims too, because they were pushed back to the past, to irrational nationalistic savagery. But, this crime, targeted against Serbs, was the greatest of all crimes ever directed towards any of the peoples in the second half of the twentieth century in Europe.
Even the military support and involvement of Islamist extremists bothered no one despite they were the first Mujahideens ever appearing in the military conflicts in the European domain till that time. Nor was the military support of the regular Croatian Army given to the Croatian military units in Bosnia-Herzegovina of any interest to anyone.
It was only Serbia's material and moral help to the Serbian population living in warring Bosnia-Herzegovina that was causing rage and disgust of the so-called International Community to such extent that actions against "tyrannical and militant" political authorities in Belgrade were immediately taken, being in the shape of brutal economic and all other sorts of sanctions which were imposed to the just reorganized FR Yugoslavia, along with the military intervention against Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1995 and against FR Yugoslavia in 1999, in the collaboration with the Albanian terrorists and separatists. Today Serbs in Croatia and Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbs in Serbia and all Serbs in general are guilty for the crimes of which they were the victims.
The war against Yugoslavia was and still is waged without any moral scruples. Illegal "Court" in The Hague is one of the means of that war and the proof that it (the war) is still ongoing.
But the events, contrary to the intentions of the creators of the New World Order and of The Hague "Court", show every day that there is a growing consciousness in the World of the need to unite the forces of resistance to the new oppressors.
Michael Parenti is among those people who undoubtedly gave great personal contribution to that resistance.
Milosevic was absolutely an opportunist piece of shit tho and is likely at least somewhat responsible for a lot of death. He did nowhere near the damage that Kissinger did but this was a rare Parenti L defending this guy so much.
Milošević's main problem was that he was a socialist and against USA (atop of depending on Russia/Yeltsin too much as it turned out), so everyone from the "free world" and every single nationalistic piece of shit (including quite a lot of "the left") from ex-Yu keep on spreadig the bullshit against him even today.
PS instead of him, Tony could put any, ANY president of the USA - but of course he didn't.
Milošević's main problem was that he was a socialist
He was no such thing. He was a nationalist through and through. The fact that he was a member of the communist party at some point doesn't matter at all, he wasn't the only one that "suddenly" turned nationalist after LCY fell apart. That entire party was unfortunately a cesspool of rabid nationalism for a long time before it fell apart.
I read his comment not that Milosevic deserved to be at The Hague, just more a matter of fact. Milosevic is the most high profile person detained at The Hague, I believe.
Well said. But I'm skeptical about the comparison to Milosevic. Idk much about that guy except that the American media hated him during the Yugoslav war. I'd be happy to receive education on this subject.
You'd think from AB's comparison that Milosevic oversaw his country's carpeting of a neutral country across the world with cluster munitions
Ofc, it's an American comparison and is not worth shit.
Read To Kill a Nation by Parenti
Below is Milosevic's preface to the Serbian edition of that book
Milosevic was absolutely an opportunist piece of shit tho and is likely at least somewhat responsible for a lot of death. He did nowhere near the damage that Kissinger did but this was a rare Parenti L defending this guy so much.
Thank You! I will read this book.
Milošević's main problem was that he was a socialist and against USA (atop of depending on Russia/Yeltsin too much as it turned out), so everyone from the "free world" and every single nationalistic piece of shit (including quite a lot of "the left") from ex-Yu keep on spreadig the bullshit against him even today.
PS instead of him, Tony could put any, ANY president of the USA - but of course he didn't.
He was no such thing. He was a nationalist through and through. The fact that he was a member of the communist party at some point doesn't matter at all, he wasn't the only one that "suddenly" turned nationalist after LCY fell apart. That entire party was unfortunately a cesspool of rabid nationalism for a long time before it fell apart.
Maybe i'm being generous, but i felt it was more like "Milosevic is on trial at The Hague, i don't understand why Kissinger isn't there, too"
I read his comment not that Milosevic deserved to be at The Hague, just more a matter of fact. Milosevic is the most high profile person detained at The Hague, I believe.