From: luciano@athos.Berkeley.EDU (Luciano Lavagno)
Subject: Re: Meggy and Yugoslavia
Reply-To: luciano@athos.Berkeley.EDU (Luciano Lavagno)
Organization: UC Berkeley IC CAD Group
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:45:49 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.185954.20289@walter.bellcore.com>,
cza@maestro.bellcore.com (Cengiz Akgun) writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.023516.7268@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
>luciano@athos.Berkeley.EDU (Luciano Lavagno) writes:
>>
>>Romania and Greece can be persuaded to support the sanctions, in my humble
>>opinion, more easily than you can persuade the warring factions to stop
>killing
>>each other. Moreover, it is not just a matter of expensive oil. Once you
>have
>>shot your last bullet, you can use your gun as a club, but it becomes way
>less
>>effective. And guns wear out fast (when used) and need replacement, spare
>On the contrary, the Bosnian muslims are plenty.  They
>can multiply very fast again from what were left behind
>after those last bullet.   I know you don't mean this
>Luciano. But you can end up with this type of horrible conclusions
>also.  

I know, unfortunately.

>Forget about Europeans and US for the ground assault, now 
>Turkey is saying ready for this job underr UN flag.  They are willing 
>to deal with these urban hoodlums.  They are offering NATO allies to 
>sustain the air power and let them take care what the ground work 
>requires to stop the bloodshed and exodos. They are ready to restore the
>Bosnian borders.  They are also willing to shed their own blood for 
>this job.  After all, they've done it in Korea, the other end 
>of the Globe.  This becomes more near and dear to their heart.   
>This not a lip service.   I think UN owes this to Bosnians.  
>Not approving this offer shows the true colors.  

I am not sure that the point is whether anybody is WILLING to do it, but
whether it is going to WORK at all, assuming anybody is willing to do it (and
France seemed to be ready, as well as some former officials in the UK, even
though neither is a Muslim country...).
I was questioning the latter point, and I hope that the UN and national
officials are considering exactly the same point.

By the way, I have a theory about why Mr. Boutros Ghali is (apparently) opposed
to the intervention. I believe he is thinking about Lebanon, where a VERY
similar situation has developed. 
People driven out of their land, who were given weapons (and sometimes open war
support) so that they could make trouble, rather than new land or a support in
their protest, irreversibly destabilized a previously (by all accounts)
peaceful country.
Then, after some botched Western attempts to restore law and order (and I am
sure that Mr. Bush remembers the marines killed in their barrack when he shows
so little enthusiasm), Syria invaded Lebanon, in order to stop the bloodshed
(completing what Israel and Syria itself had partially done before). Now there
is no indication that there will be an end to this occupation (of course unless
I missed some important recent facts there).

I may agree, though, that military intervention may be better than nothing at
all, and I feel really ashame for the poor show the so called "united Europe"
is giving. Maybe we are not ready for unity yet, and the Bosnians are suffering
(IN PART) because of that.

Ciao !
Luciano
-- 
Luciano Lavagno            luciano@ic.Berkeley.EDU            +1-510-642-5012
Dept. of EECS, 207-69 Cory Hall, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA