From: miha@proteus1.UUCP (Sinisa Mihailovic)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bosna-herzgvna
Subject: Re: who was in 'power' in BH (was: Re: Call It Anything but Peace)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 19:02:35 EST
Organization: Proteus Communications, Washington D.C. * node 1

blazic@ecf.toronto.edu (BLAZIC Joseph R) writes:

> > Oh, I see - so "the Serbian leaders didn't let their people vote" and can
> >I ask you how did they manage to do that? Hehehe, Joe what are you talking
> >about?  If  there  was a miligram of truth in what you are speaking about,
> >how  can  anyone  take  control  over so many people?
> 
> Re-read the above.  The referendum was boycotted on behalf of all Serbs
> by Karadzic and co., which made any Serb who walked into the polling
> station a "traitor".  Nationalism is a strong force, one that ordinary

           Well, if Serbs do have such an attitude towards traitors, how
do you explain Vreme which is an "independent" magazine published in Rijeka,
as I recall and leads very treatcherous policy towards both Serbs and Serbia?
How do you explain Bosnian Serbs and Serbs from Coratia, muslims, people from
mixed marriages, etc... who don't want to fight and are currently in Belgrade?
So far no one did them any harm and they are there for quite a while.
  And  what  are  the  means of such control, I mean, how can you control so
much people efficiently. You really can't believe that Serbs do not want
to live with Bosnian muslims and Bosnian Croats, but at the other hand you
believe that Croats (speaking of Croatia now) do not want to live with rest
of the peoples in former Yugoslavia? So, if the decision is made by Croats,
it's the rightfull one and if the decision is made by Bosnian Serbs then
somebody forced them? This discussion is becoming pointless. I won't ask
you to prove any evidence because I believe you can't (even if that was true,
and from what I have heard so far, it is not).

> folk usually don't go against.  Example: you really think that on an
> *individual* basis that local Serbs were that dumb to heavily shell
> their own towns into oblivion (i.e. Vukovar, Gospic, Karlovac, Sarajevo,
> etc etc).  The fact remains that Karadzic did not give Serbs in Bosnia-
> Hercegovina the opportunity to vote FREELY.

  No, that is what you believe, that's not a fact. At the other hand Bosnian
Serbs I had oportunity to speak with, told me that decision is not so sudden
as all are trying to represent it and that vote was matter of choice. I have
also heard from them that among many other reasons dating from the past (i.e
slaughter  of  Serb civilian population during WWII) was the fact that Serbs
were  put  in  the  position  similar as in Croatia - i.e. they've  lost all
atributes  of  constitutive  nation.  Together with similar attitude towards
Serbs (expelling  Serbs  from  jobs,  illegal seizure of property, increased
crimes),  fact that there was 50,000 regular Croat Army soldgiers in Bosnia,
and other things it made them vote for their independence.
The reason for shelling is that they have been expelled from their towns, so
there were only two things to do, to turn around and accept expulsion or to
fight for their homes. They have choosen latter, do you blame them for that?
If so, what would you do if someone expelled you from your home?

> >didn't  vote for the B&H because they wanted their own state so they voted
> >for it.  See a parallel with Croatia - why did Croatia seceede from former
> >Yugoslavia? 
> 
> Because they didn't see a future in a Yugoslavia where they had one vote
> out of eight, and Serbia had FOUR.

  Beep -  wrongo, Serbia had 3 (three). Don't count Montenegrins as Serbs
because  someone could count muslim, Croat Slovene and Macedonian vote as
one following similar logic. The fact is that Serbs made more than 45% in
former  Yugoslavia  and  the fact is that they wanted to change votes for
Serbia to one (which would happen automatically with the change of federal
constitution  if  you  remember).  Also note that number of votes was not
important  in  the system where consensus was the only factor that played
the part in decisions. Just remember the number of Slovene and Croat vetos.
So the argument about number of votes is obsolete.

> Conversely, Serbs had and were guaranteed equal status and fair
> representation in the Bosnian parliament, but they got up and left
> when they didn't get what they wanted.

  Serbs did want to seceede, their demands were not accepted, so what do
you expect them to do? What did the Croats do in Similar situation?

> >Are you trying to tell me that they don't have the same
> >right  as  Bosnian  muslims, Croats and Slovenes do? That would be a great
> >confession of racism.
> 
> No I'm not.  

 So, why don't Bosnian Serbs have the right for secession? This is what this
war is all about.

> >  Joe, did you serve in army? Have you been in territorial defense? If so,
> >you should know that territorial defense was armed and it was consisted of
> >the LOCAL people, so there was no fact of nationality included. All of the
> >arms  left in B&H were  territorial defense arms, because YPA, didn't have
> >the right to take it, and what would they achiweve trying to take  weapons
> 
> Yes, the YPA is a legitimate organization.  Funny how I saw many many
> pictures of YPA forces fighting on the Serbian side, and none on the
> Bosnian side.  Why didn't they intervene and remove the guns from the
> hills of Sarajevo?

  Was. YPA doesen't exist anymore. That what you have seen are the uniforms
of territorial defense which proves my point.

> >from  either  of  sides?  So  YPA  didn't  leave  the weapons to anyone in
> >particular,  it  has  left the weapons to territorial defense, which would
> 
> Liar.

  Great argument in the discussion. I asked you something about the territorial
defense and I'll repeat  the question: is it or is it not true that territorial
defense  (which  was the  greatest part of Yugoslav Armed Forces - meaning much
greater than YPA) were armed, had own their arms  and weapons storages, and had
been  consisted  of local people? Is it true that those storages were not under
the jurisdiction of YPA and had been left in Bosnia?

> >to mention that Bosnian Serbs did a number of sucessfull attacks on muslim
> >- held arms and weapons storages, which were owned by territorial defense,
> >too.
> 
> There's always a reason...

  That's one of them, yes.

> >  Can  I ask you why did you erase my response to this from above? Is it
> 
> Because I don't believe in postings over 6 pages!  No one reads them.
> Waste of bandwidth.

  Those were only 4 lines of text long.

> If you can't make the distinction between "Serb-HELD" camps and "camps
> in Serbia" then there was no point in discussing this with you.

  I make a great discintion between Bosnian-Serb-held and Serb-Held, you
should, too.

> Yes, all those insulting articles that I quote from...
> BTW, casual insults are meaningless.  If you want to say something, be
> specific.

  Insults whatever the kind are still insults.

> >behave  in  civilized  manner.  If you have nothing better to say and to
> 
> Arrogant and patronizing is how this sounds.  Do you puff out your chest
> when you write?

  Yes, I am aware that it sounds patronizing which was not the main idea.
No I don't poof from my chest, most of the time when I read or write in
this conference I feel sorrow that I think you probably can't for one simple
reason - you (assumption) were not there where I was and you probably didn't
see what I had.

> As I usually do back up my postings with references from the foreign media,
> NOT Tanjug, or HINA, or whatever.  Why don't you ask around, maybe you
> are not remembering correctly.

  I was mainly speaking of discussions, Joe. I must be sincere, though, I
didn't have only you in mind.

> >I understood, UN and EC officials there are clear borders, now.
> 
> Exactly.  And how did this happen?

  It happened before the war started, with baricades and other nasty things
that were going on.

> >  Do  you really think that people who killed each-others can ever live
> >together? If the Bosnian Serbs do not want to live with Bosnian muslims
> 
> Yes they can if all politicians wish it so.  They did it after WWII, WWI...
> What it takes is political will from ALL leaders.  There is no such 
> COMMON will now.

  You should know what the terrible opression of the Serbs was after the
WWII to avoid Sebian revenge, you must have heard something about "Goli
Otok" concentracion camp. Serbs (from all over former Yugoslavia) really
believed in life together but not anymore. That's simply a fact everyone
will have to accept.

> >and  that  is  what  they say, what then? If there is no cantonization,
> >only  answer  is  war. How are you going to force Bosnian Serbs to live
> >with Bosnian muslims? Militarily? - Who is going to take responsibility
> >for  such  a genocide  over one complete nation? With sanctions towards
> 
> Which genocide do you mean?

  Would be genocide caused by military action to force Serbs to subject to
muslims which they clearly shown they don't want.

> Kosovo, and then Macedonia.  Pristina (capital of Kosovo) is surrounded
> by dozens on tanks in the hills above.  Albanians are leaving the city
> regularly in buses.  They're just sitting ducks.  [this reported this
> week on CBC television, and obvious to most people following things]

  Off course, CBS didn't report about the efforts to talk with Albanians,
neither about many other things. As  for Kosovo, after one-national based
"poisoning"  and  other  things   from  it's political life (and I had an
oportunity to see both  sides of the story), of ot wasn't sad it would be
funny - after all these years of forcefull expulsion of Serbs from Kosovo,
after  so  much  money  spent in it (which probably was invested in drugs
thru Alban mafia since no other results were shown), now they (Squiptars)
are trying to tell the world (so far very sucesfully) how cruel the Serbs
are and how innocent they are. Hopefully one day there'll be solution for
all this and lot of things that are now hidden will be revealed, but then
again,  maybe  they'll  never be - it would require much of explaining to
"generations to come"...  At the end, everybody gets what he deserves and
I hope so shall it be.

-- miha