From: kutluk@ccl.umist.ac.uk (Kutluk Ozguven)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.turkish,soc.culture.europe,soc.culture.yugoslavia,soc.culture.greek,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.french,soc.culture.german,soc.culture.italian
Subject: Re: Meggy and Yugoslavia
Date: 13 Aug 92 12:43:12 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre

In <1992Aug11.031027.6133@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> mb2p@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Marco  Bertamini) writes:

>England has always been too ready to intervene in foreign
>countries. Think about Argentina or Ireland for that matter. Serbia

IN Bosnia "England" opposed intervention when other Europen countries
insisted on it. Today, the British government still oppose
intervention.  Lady Thatcher is not in the government and her words
were to criticize the West's inertia.

>can claim Bosnia just as England can claim the Faulkland (sp?) islands.
>(I know there are big differences, but just think about the principle).

I feel that you don't know anything on the crisis,  and you don't respect
human suffering at all. 

>Providing arms to one party? This is even worse than a military
>intervention. It means that we would get direct responsabilities 
>for the killings. Although I must admit that our military factories
>would benefit from it :-(.

Serbia invaded 2/3 of Bosnia, and drove 1.8 million Bosnians away,
and massacred at least 40 thousand Bosnian civilians.

The Bosnians will get back their land, or they will be th enew
Palestinians *in Europe* who will be the cause of instability and
constant struggle [to regain their country].

In the long term  supplying arms and ending the conflict is infinitely
better than not a long term war against Greater Serbia.

>My point was that sanctions can be more strict, and there are
>other things to do. For example the idea of indipendent news
>easily available all over Yugoslavia is very important. You are
>saying that Serbia can get stronger after this war. I don't
>think so, I think the opposition is getting stronger in Belgrade.
>I also know for sure of people (Serbs) who are trying to get out of
>Serbia as soon as they can.

Sanctions cannot work. Romania and Greece have  common interests with
Serbia. Montenegro is a Serbian country too. If you check the map,
the effect of expensive oil etc. will not be as strong as the 
triumph of Serbian nationalism and its gains in Bosnia, Croatia and
probably Kosova next.

>>|> As a matter of fact, both the
>>|> Italian and the German constitutions say very explicitly that
>>|> they refuse military intervention as a way of solving international
>>|> problems. 
>>
>>Then what was Italian Air Force doing at the Gulf war?

>from my point of view, they were doing something unconstitutional.

This is not Italy figting against Abyssinia to earn some money.
This is a interEuropean stability problem with a modern genocide. 
If the Europe hide behind ridiculous facts as you say above,
this is equivalent to toleration or even support of the
fascistocommunits Belgrade government's ethnical cleansing.
This is equivalent to starting a new spirit of legitimacy to
all NeoNazis in Europe.

>> ARMAGAN A. OZDINC
>ciao,   Marco

Kutluk
Xref: sparky soc.culture.turkish:8861 talk.politics.mideast:18572 talk.politics.soviet:6973 soc.history:7317