<nettime> Arguments You CANNOT Use

["Slobodan Markovic" <twiddle@EUnet.yu>]

>Kosovo is (or was) 90% Albanian. They were an independent Republic
>under Tito, and had the constitutional right to secede.

    Kosovo was never "independent Republic". During Tito's rule, it 
    was still integral part of Serbia (officially called Autonomous
    Province of Kosovo). According to 1974 Constitution of SFRY, 
    only constituting republics (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia,
    Montenegro and Macedonia) had right to secede. Kosovo never 
    had that right.

>In view of the ghastly record of the Yugoslav Serbs under Milosevic: 
>Bosnia, Croatia, etc., it is a matter of some puzzlement how anyone 
>who claims to be civilised can feel any sympathy for them.

    This is total nonsense. For instance, you can put it like this:

    "In view of the ghastly record of the Americans under various
    presidents in past 200 years: Indians, black people, Vietnamese,
    etc., it is a matter of some puzzlement how anyone who claims to 
    be civilised can feel any sympathy for them."

    As every president, Slobodan Milosevic DOES NOT represent the 
    opinion of all people living in Serbia. As in every country, he 
    represents at most 30% of all population, but even in those 30% 
    there are many of them who don't agree 100% with his concrete 
    political moves.

>NATO is not suffering a defeat. As in Bosnia and Croatia, they 
>have the time, the resources, and the commitment to win Kosovo its
>independence, whether from the air or on the ground.

    If NATO's aim is to win Kosovo independence, then they have
    failed in the beginning. The case of Kosovo is fundamentally
    different from cases of Bosnia and Croatia.

    In these cases Milosevic never had any moral or legal 
    background to claim parts of Croatia or Bosnia independent 
    Serbian territories. NATO is now in the same situation - it
    doesn't have any moral or legal background to claim or make
    Kosovo independent territory.

    NATO has only the argument of force. After all, it is pure
    military organisation and it never had any other arguments 
    except armed force.

    In civilised world and for civilised people, the argument of 
    force is always the worst one.

    Greetings,

            Slobodan Markovic   | http://solair.eunet.yu/~twiddle
            Internodium Project | http://www.internodium.org.yu

---
#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner@desk.nl