NationStates Jolt Archive

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

Um...

Russia cannot take on both the US and Europe.

EDIT: Since when is Kosovo part of Russia?

Um...

Russia cannot take on both the US and Europe.

EDIT: Since when is Kosovo part of Russia?

Kosovo is a territory of Serbia. The Americans and the Europeans are trying to carve it into a seperate country against the consent of the Serbs.

There is nothing that gives them the right to do it except that their guns are bigger than Serbian guns. If the NATO tries to carve away Kosovo, the Russians should protect Serbia by declaring war on NATO (which is the US and Europe).

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

Yeah, good idea, I bet the Poles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partitions_of_the_Polish-Lithuanian_Commonwealth) will be right there supporting them, too. :rolleyes:

Um...

Russia cannot take on both the US and Europe.

EDIT: Since when is Kosovo part of Russia?

Well? Since he is thinking of the USSR days; maybe he thinks Yugoslavia is still around?

Kosovo is a territory of Serbia. The Americans and the Europeans are trying to carve it into a seperate country against the consent of the Serbs.

Um...the Serbs are a minority in Kosovo.

There is nothing that gives them the right to do it except that their guns are bigger than Serbian guns. If the NATO tries to carve away Kosovo, the Russians should protect Serbia by declaring war on NATO (which is the US and Europe).

And back to my comment that it would end very badly for Russia since Russia does not have any real launching platforms for a said war. Also, if Russia declared war, more than Europe and the US would be involved in it.

Well? Since he is thinking of the USSR days; maybe he thinks Yugoslavia is still around?

That's the only explanation I can come up with.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

Serbia to be attacked, Russia to invade across Europe. I wonder what that might lead to.

Porbably wouldn't be the best idea for Russia to get involved, the last thing anyone needs is a big war, and while Russia would obviously be able to do a hell of a lot of damage, I doubt they would be able to hold off all of NATO. They could go nuclear, but I doubt anybody wants to go nuclear over Kosovo. But anyway, I don't really think involvement in this mess is too clever. No doubt Britain would get dragged in, as we're part of the NATO dinosaur. We should stop getting dragged into other people's conflicts.

The reason the US and Europe want Kosovo to go independent is because Kosovo wants to go independent.

I BEFRIEND CHESTNUTS;13270442']Porbably wouldn't be the best idea for Russia to get involved, the last thing anyone needs is a big war, and while Russia would obviously be able to do a hell of a lot of damage, I doubt they would be able to hold off all of NATO. They could go nuclear, but I doubt anybody wants to go nuclear over Kosovo. But anyway, I don't really think involvement in this mess is too clever. No doubt Britain would get dragged in, as we're part of the NATO dinosaur. We should stop getting dragged into other people's conflicts.

Jee...sounds like the United States in the past when dealing with Europe. Somehow we always seem to get dragged into European Conflicts. :D

The reason the US and Europe want Kosovo to go independent is because Kosovo wants to go independent.

We have a winner ladies and gentlemen.

Um...

Russia cannot take on both the US and Europe.

EDIT: Since when is Kosovo part of Russia?

And do you think that matters to Russia? :p

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

Give me a break. The Russians couldn't take on Europe or the U.S. individually, let alone together.

Um...the Serbs are a minority in Kosovo.



So? Mexicans are a majority in New Mexico, does that give New Mexico a free pass to break up with the US?

no russia should not kick the US's rear.

they cant do it and even if they could do it, it would not be worth the price they would have to pay to get it done.

So? Mexicans are a majority in New Mexico, does that give New Mexico a free pass to break up with the US?

Does New Mexico have a majority on separation?

EDIT: The majority of the people living in New Mexico are Americans and not Mexican.

And get whomped by a combined NATO force? What sort of madness would make that seem a well advised move to the Russian commanders?

So? Mexicans are a majority in New Mexico, does that give New Mexico a free pass to break up with the US?

Oddly enough, some people already think New Mexico has. I heard that the Governor of New Mexico tried to get tickets to the Atlanta Olympics and he or his staffer was told, "Oh, no, sorry, we can't send tickets out of the United States." That's why NM license plates have "USA" on them.

The Serbs get bent out of shape about Kosovo because they fought gloriously (and unltimately in vain) there in the 15th century against the Ottomans. Sacred ground and all that, you know.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

If Russia were to somehow miraculously "whoop America's butt" then the little UK wouldn't have anyone to hide behind and talk big talk with no action.

Does New Mexico have a majority on separation?

EDIT: The majority of the people living in New Mexico are Americans and not Mexican.

In the same way that the majority of people in Kosovo are Serbians. Albanian-Serbians and Serbs.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

Hmm, bad news. I hope everything will still be okay there when I'm going there in 5 days :(

Does New Mexico have a majority on separation?

EDIT: The majority of the people living in New Mexico are Americans and not Mexican.

and even those of mexican descent have no desire to make new mexico part of mexico. that would be quite the losing proposition.

Oddly enough, some people already think New Mexico has. I heard that the Governor of New Mexico tried to get tickets to the Atlanta Olympics and he or his staffer was told, "Oh, no, sorry, we can't send tickets out of the United States." That's why NM license plates have "USA" on them.

The Serbs get bent out of shape about Kosovo because they fought gloriously (and unltimately in vain) there in the 15th century against the Ottomans. Sacred ground and all that, you know.

The Serbs get bent out of shape because Kosovo is has long been a part of Serbia, long before 15th century (the battle occurred in the 14th century actually). Kosovo independence would violate the Serbian sense of nationhood in the same way that New York independence would be shocking to Americans.

Kosovo is a territory of Serbia. The Americans and the Europeans are trying to carve it into a seperate country against the consent of the Serbs.

There is nothing that gives them the right to do it except that their guns are bigger than Serbian guns. If the NATO tries to carve away Kosovo, the Russians should protect Serbia by declaring war on NATO (which is the US and Europe).

N...no.

I'm pretty sure its the Kosovars who want to, as you put it, 'carve it into a seperate country'. You know, Kosovars. The people who live there? 90% of them want to be free from Serbia.

The US and the EU have little to do apart from recognising the sovereignty of Kosovo internationally.

In the same way that the majority of people in Kosovo are Serbians. Albanian-Serbians and Serbs.

WRONG!! I read the article. You should to. It states clearly that Serbians are a minority in Kosovo.

Ethnic Albanians make up the majority of the population in Kosovo. There is small Serbian minority in the country, which has been under U.N. administration since 1999, when NATO ejected Serbian forces from the province.

You lose.

and even those of mexican descent have no desire to make new mexico part of mexico. that would be quite the losing proposition.

To make Kosovo part of Albania would be the losing proposition. Albanian-Serbians should be convinced to change their minds rather than go ahead with this secession nonsense. If New Mexicans suddenly started to clamor for independence, I'm certain other Americans would try to change their minds, and we should let the Serbs work with the Albanians in the same way.

In the same way that the majority of people in Kosovo are Serbians. Albanian-Serbians and Serbs.

No. About 10% of Kosovo's population are ethnic Serbian. They're located mostly in the North of the province.

The other 90% are ethnic Albanian.

WRONG!! I read the article. You should to. It states clearly that Serbians are a minority in Kosovo.



You lose.

They do not consider themselves Serbians. They can change their minds! It's clear that everyone living in Kosovo is a Serbian. Not an ethnic Serb, perhaps, but a Serbian, a citizen of the unified country known as Serbia.

To make Kosovo part of Albania would be the losing proposition. Albanian-Serbians should be convinced to change their minds rather than go ahead with this secession nonsense.

Hold on a sec. Point to where they want to be part of Albania! I do not see such a thing written in this article.

a citizen of the unified country known as Serbia.
Formally, Serbia and Montenegro, formally Yugoslavia.....

Hmmm. What happened there......

The Serbs get bent out of shape because Kosovo is has long been a part of Serbia, long before 15th century (the battle occurred in the 14th century actually). Kosovo independence would violate the Serbian sense of nationhood in the same way that New York independence would be shocking to Americans.

14th, 15th century, I guess I was skimming too quickly.

I suppose it does violate their sense of nationality, I wasn't really commenting on that. And I suspect there are more than a few people in the US who would not shed a tear if New York, especially the City, left the US. But that's neither here nor there.

Didn't a Russian declaration of military support for Serbia in 1914 really get things rolling in that first big European dust-up? I seem to recall reading something about that.

No. About 10% of Kosovo's population are ethnic Serbian. They're located mostly in the North of the province.

The other 90% are ethnic Albanian.

Ethnic Chinese in the US are considered American. Ethnic blacks in the US are considered American, even though black people are not the majority "typical" Americans.

Ethnic Albanians in Serbian Kosovo should be considered Serbian.

So? Mexicans are a majority in New Mexico, does that give New Mexico a free pass to break up with the US?

Technically, yes.

Ethnic Chinese in the US are considered American.
By themselves?

Ethnic blacks in the US are considered American, even though black people are not the majority "typical" Americans.
Oh this should be good. Please. Elaborate.


Ethnic Albanians in Serbian Kosovo should be considered Serbian.

Only if they themselves want to be. Seems like the 90% who are ethnically Albanian ain't to happy being classified as Serbian... giving what Milosevic did to them in the 90's.

Hold on a sec. Point to where they want to be part of Albania! I do not see such a thing written in this article.

That's irrelevant. Whether Kosovo becomes totally independent, or joins Albania, would be a massive violation of Serbia's existence.

Um...the Serbs are a minority in Kosovo.



And back to my comment that it would end very badly for Russia since Russia does not have any real launching platforms for a said war. Also, if Russia declared war, more than Europe and the US would be involved in it.

Um...White people are minority in California. Hence Mexicans have the right to carve California out of the US.

Let's not forget the present population demographics is a direct result of ethnic cleansing in which the Albanians, from Albania, either killed or scared the Serbs out of their homes in Kosovos.
The west is all hypocrites when it comes to ethnic cleansing.


Russia is still the second most powerful nation on earth after the US. It can screw up the European and American economies not to mention screw up all of their cities.

They do not consider themselves Serbians. They can change their minds! It's clear that everyone living in Kosovo is a Serbian. Not an ethnic Serb, perhaps, but a Serbian, a citizen of the unified country known as Serbia.

What makes you think you are right? I know you are wrong but yet when I presented the facts that you are wrong, you still try to paint yourself right. Guess what? You lost this debate.

The people of Kosovo, the vast majority of the people I might add, want to be independent from Serbia. They are not Serbs anymore than I can call myself European even though I am of European decent. I suggest you take a course on the difference between a nation and a state when dealing with Europe.

Ethnic Chinese in the US are considered American. Ethnic blacks in the US are considered American, even though black people are not the majority "typical" Americans.

Ethnic Albanians in Serbian Kosovo should be considered Serbian.

Unless they want to be considered Albanian.

That's irrelevant. Whether Kosovo becomes totally independent, or joins Albania, would be a massive violation of Serbia's existence.

OR.... not.

Not really a believer in self-determination are we?

I doubt Russia could take on India, much less the USA

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

I respect Russia's military. Efficient, steadfast and deadly. I especially like their jet fighters. But seriously, war between Russia and the US or NATO would be suicide...for both parties.

And I think Kosovo should be independent. It's the Kosovar's decision not...y'know...Russia's. They've lived under good ol' Serbia too long, in my humble opinion.

no, they make to much money selling gas to us and their military sucks, so they can only lose.

That's irrelevant. Whether Kosovo becomes totally independent, or joins Albania, would be a massive violation of Serbia's existence.

Actually it is relevent as you made the point.

Well? Since he is thinking of the USSR days; maybe he thinks Yugoslavia is still around?

Serbia was a member state of Yugoslavia. Kosovo was not. Kosovo was just a region of Serbia. Not even an autonomous one at that. As such, Kosovo's Albanians do not have the right to carve apart Serbia.

14th, 15th century, I guess I was skimming too quickly.

I suppose it does violate their sense of nationality, I wasn't really commenting on that. And I suspect there are more than a few people in the US who would not shed a tear if New York, especially the City, left the US. But that's neither here nor there.
You were commenting on why Kosovo is so beloved by Serbia, and I corrected your reasoning. And you are incorrect about NY; the vast majority of the US would prefer that NY stays in the union.

Didn't a Russian declaration of military support for Serbia in 1914 really get things rolling in that first big European dust-up? I seem to recall reading something about that.

I certainly did not call for a war, so I'm not sure why you are bringing up 1914. I've called for Albanian-Serbians to change their minds - peacefully - on this matter, instead of the UN and NATO working relentlessly to destroy Serbia.

As such, Kosovo's Albanians do not have the right to carve apart Serbia.

I'm pretty damn sure any group has the right to self determination.

Jesus, did we just rewind to pre-World War I days...? :confused:

The reason the US and Europe want Kosovo to go independent is because Kosovo wants to go independent.

Actually, Albania wants Kosovo to be independent so they can annex it into a "Greater Albania". That is why they had their people illegally immigrate into Kosovo. So the Albanians could become the majority and declare Kosovo a seperate state.

Actually it is relevent as you made the point.

It would take a blind man to not realize that there is a distinct possibility that Albanian-dominated Kosovo may clamor for union with Albania if it becomes independent, so I brought the point up. But we don't need to think that far ahead yet, we are still talking about Kosovo and Serbia.

Um...White people are minority in California. Hence Mexicans have the right to carve California out of the US.

Do they and are they? Do you have proof that Mexicans make up the majority? Do you have the census data for the state of California?

Let's not forget the present population demographics is a direct result of ethnic cleansing in which the Albanians, from Albania, either killed or scared the Serbs out of their homes in Kosovos.

And that Milosevich tried to ethnicly cleanse the Albanians from the same area. Jee....

The west is all hypocrites when it comes to ethnic cleansing.

Not just the west but the entire world is a hypocrit when it comes to it. That whole Genocide Convention thing does seem to get lost quite a lot.

Russia is still the second most powerful nation on earth after the US. It can screw up the European and American economies not to mention screw up all of their cities.

And Russia would cease to exist as a nation if they want to do that. And no, they are not the second most powerful nation on earth. The only reason they are a power is because of their possession of nuclear bombs. Other than that, they are totally screwed.

OR.... not.

Not really a believer in self-determination are we?

No, self-determination has resulted in the worst excesses in all of human history. Nazism, Italian fascism, and every other odious ideology built upon the idol of national/ethnic self-determination.

Unless they want to be considered Albanian.

Or Kosovar?

Um...White people are minority in California. Hence Mexicans have the right to carve California out of the US.

Let's not forget the present population demographics is a direct result of ethnic cleansing in which the Albanians, from Albania, either killed or scared the Serbs out of their homes in Kosovos.
The west is all hypocrites when it comes to ethnic cleansing.


Russia is still the second most powerful nation on earth after the US. It can screw up the European and American economies not to mention screw up all of their cities.

Like there'd be much left of Russia after they screwed up a single US or European city. And you know what? The global economy's a little too tightly interwoven for one nation to go messing with the economy of another. All sorts of unexpected consequences could come from that.

As for hypocrisy regarding ethnic cleansing, no one's hands are clean, especially not the Serbs'.

No, self-determination has resulted in the worst excesses in all of human history. Nazism, Italian fascism, and every other odious ideology built upon the idol of national/ethnic self-determination.


Hmmmmm. Freedom and independence were the first things that popped into my head. But, hey. Go with what you think is right. *pats on head*

Serbia was a member state of Yugoslavia. Kosovo was not. Kosovo was just a region of Serbia. Not even an autonomous one at that. As such, Kosovo's Albanians do not have the right to carve apart Serbia.

Now who is being a hypocrit? You stated that Mexicans can carve up California because "the majority are mexicans" but yet now you are saying that Albanians, which make up the most of Kosovo, can not use self-determination to decide to be independent? You just shot yourself in the foot there.

Actually, Albania wants Kosovo to be independent so they can annex it into a "Greater Albania". That is why they had their people illegally immigrate into Kosovo. So the Albanians could become the majority and declare Kosovo a seperate state.

Back that up with evidence.

Actually, Albania wants Kosovo to be independent so they can annex it into a "Greater Albania". That is why they had their people illegally immigrate into Kosovo. So the Albanians could become the majority and declare Kosovo a seperate state.

http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif
http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif
http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif

What makes you think you are right? I know you are wrong but yet when I presented the facts that you are wrong, you still try to paint yourself right. Guess what? You lost this debate.

Where have I been wrong? Ok, I mistakenly called Mexicans the majority in New Mexico but that is a typo. Mexicans are the great plurality in New Mexico.

The people of Kosovo, the vast majority of the people I might add, want to be independent from Serbia. They are not Serbs anymore than I can call myself European even though I am of European decent. I suggest you take a course on the difference between a nation and a state when dealing with Europe.

I think you are confused about the difference between nation and state. Albanian-Serbians aren't Serbs, but they are Serbians. Serbs does not equal Serbians.

I know fully the difference between nation and state. Serbia is, should remain, a multinational state.

Does New Mexico have a majority on separation?

EDIT: The majority of the people living in New Mexico are Americans and not Mexican.
Maybe, but I happen to know that the majority of Mexicans in California favor separating California from the US.

... to destroy Serbia.

which would be a bad thing because it is such a unified nation :rolleyes:

Maybe, but I happen to know that the majority of Mexicans in California favor separating California from the US.

That, however, would be considered an act of war and they would be squashed rather quickly. Unless they triggered an earthquake and blamed it on that.

Hmmmmm. Freedom and independence were the first things that popped into my head. But, hey. Go with what you think is right. *pats on head*

Civil war in Yugoslavia, civil war in Congo, genocide in Rwanda, Hitler's annexation of Sudetenland and destruction of Poland - all committed in the name of ethnic self-determination. Are you ignorant of those historical events?

Oddly enough, some people already think New Mexico has. I heard that the Governor of New Mexico tried to get tickets to the Atlanta Olympics and he or his staffer was told, "Oh, no, sorry, we can't send tickets out of the United States." That's why NM license plates have "USA" on them.

The Serbs get bent out of shape about Kosovo because they fought gloriously (and unltimately in vain) there in the 15th century against the Ottomans. Sacred ground and all that, you know.

Umm....Kosovo was part of Serbia long long before that.
Back before the 9th century, Kosovo was the political, cultural, and religious capital of the Serbs.

Maybe, but I happen to know that the majority of Mexicans in California favor separating California from the US.

proof?

which would be a bad thing because it is such a unified nation :rolleyes:

So simply because a nation is disunified means that people should not be spending more time unifying a nation rather than breaking it apart at every opportunity? The path of least resistance is not always the best path to take.

I fail to see the point in atomising the former Yugoslavia further. Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia, fine, granting Kosovo greater autonomy within the Serbian state, fine, but hiving off a province that has historically been part of a state will only lead to greater, and purposeless, bloodshed. Besides, it's against the UN charter to force Serbia to part with the province (i.e., self-determination v. territorial integrity of a nation-state). The Serbs, in this instance, are more in the legal right than the ethnic Albanians.

That written, Russia doesn't have the means to attack Europe at the moment and any suggestion to the contrary is sheer lunacy.

Hmm, bad news. I hope everything will still be okay there when I'm going there in 5 days :(

Hope your not American. The Albanians rioted against the Americans last year because the US did not unilaterally declare Kosovo to be a seperate country from Serbia.

I fail to see the point in atomising the former Yugoslavia further. Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia, fine, granting Kosovo greater autonomy within the Serbian state, fine, but hiving off a province that has historically been part of a state will only lead to greater, and purposeless, bloodshed. Besides, it's against the UN charter to force Serbia to part with the province (i.e., self-determination v. territorial integrity of a nation-state). The Serbs, in this instance, are more in the legal right than the ethnic Albanians.

That written, Russia doesn't have the means to attack Europe at the moment and any suggestion to the contrary is sheer lunacy.

Wisely said.

Maybe, but I happen to know that the majority of Mexicans in California favor separating California from the US.

Mexicans in California are called "tourists" here in the States.

So simply because a nation is disunified means that people should not be spending more time unifying a nation rather than breaking it apart at every opportunity? The path of least resistance is not always the best path to take.

And how, pray tell, are you going to get them to get along?

I'm not saying that NATO should have any hand in this at all, I personally think they should be let sort it out on their own.

N...no.

I'm pretty sure its the Kosovars who want to, as you put it, 'carve it into a seperate country'. You know, Kosovars. The people who live there? 90% of them want to be free from Serbia.

The US and the EU have little to do apart from recognising the sovereignty of Kosovo internationally.

What Kosovars? They've all been removed via NATO sanctioned ethnic cleansing. Just because NATO had Albanians move into Kosovo does not make the Albanians Kosovars.

Civil war in Yugoslavia,
Caused by mashing multiples fractious peoples forcefully together under a Communist regime.


civil war in Congo
Which has what to do with self determination? Most of that is simple power struggle. Given the country is as big a Western Europe I'm quite surprised it's held up this long.

genocide in Rwanda
I fail again to see how self determination had anything to do with this? Neither the Tutsi's or Hutu's wanted an independent and new state. One side merely wanted to wipe out another.

Hitler's annexation of Sudetenland and destruction of Poland - all committed in the name of ethnic self-determination.
Hitler's expansionism has nought to do with self determination. Try 'Empire' building.

Are you ignorant of those historical events?
Not really. I've two degrees in history.

WRONG!! I read the article. You should to. It states clearly that Serbians are a minority in Kosovo.



You lose.

You should read up on Serbia and kosovo in the 90's when the Serbs were the majority until ethnic cleansing pushed them out.

You lose.

What Kosovars? They've all been removed via NATO sanctioned ethnic cleansing. Just because NATO had Albanians move into Kosovo does not make the Albanians Kosovars.

proof?

What Kosovars? They've all been removed via NATO sanctioned ethnic cleansing. Just because NATO had Albanians move into Kosovo does not make the Albanians Kosovars.

I reiterate:

http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif
http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif
http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif

Umm....Kosovo was part of Serbia long long before that.
Back before the 9th century, Kosovo was the political, cultural, and religious capital of the Serbs.

The Ukraine used to be the center of a Gothic empire back before the 9th century. Italy used to be a Gothic kingdom before the 9th century. Parts of Algeria, Tunisia and Libya used to be part of a Vandal kingdom before the 9th century.

My calendar says it's the 21st century. Times change. People change. Borders change.

And how, pray tell, are you going to get them to get along?

Get ethnic Albanians to realize the historical truth that they are welcome immigrants to Serbian Kosovo and should live side by side withtheir neighbors. They don't have some magical, UN-sanctioned right to declare a new state wherever they tread.

I'm not saying that NATO should have any hand in this at all, I personally think they should be let sort it out on their own.
That's the best policy, I think.

Actually, Albania wants Kosovo to be independent so they can annex it into a "Greater Albania". That is why they had their people illegally immigrate into Kosovo. So the Albanians could become the majority and declare Kosovo a seperate state.
AHHHH YOU TWAT the current ethnic composition dates back to the Ottomans, when many Albanians and Turks settled in Kosovo
It would take a blind man to not realize that there is a distinct possibility that Albanian-dominated Kosovo may clamor for union with Albania if it becomes independent, so I brought the point up. But we don't need to think that far ahead yet, we are still talking about Kosovo and Serbia.
No, in a referendum or poll or something,only something like 15% accepted this proposal

They do not consider themselves Serbians. They can change their minds! It's clear that everyone living in Kosovo is a Serbian. Not an ethnic Serb, perhaps, but a Serbian, a citizen of the unified country known as Serbia.

This reminds of how ethnic Mexicans in the US southwest don't consider themselves Americans. They consider themselves Mexicans. That goes for both illegal immigrants and mexicans actually born in the US. They think of themselves as Mexicans rather than Americans.

Get ethnic Albanians to realize the historical truth that they are welcome immigrants to Serbian Kosovo and should live side by side withtheir neighbors. They don't have some magical, UN-sanctioned right to declare a new state wherever they tread.


That's the best policy, I think.

Really? Look how well they sorted things out right after Yugoslavia disintegrated. I believe that's when we first heard of "ethnic cleansing."

Get ethnic Albanians to realize the historical truth that they are welcome immigrants to Serbian Kosovo and should live side by side withtheir neighbors. They don't have some magical, UN-sanctioned right to declare a new state wherever they tread.

And you're also going to click your heels together 3 times and get the Serbs to stop hating them too?

Can't we all just get along doesn't really work.

Hold on a sec. Point to where they want to be part of Albania! I do not see such a thing written in this article.

It is widely recognized that the Albanians want to unite Kosovo into Albania. Just as you've heard of "Greater Serbia", the Albanians have grandiose scheme for a "Greater Albania". Serbia is not the only nation in the area dealing with Albanian seperatists.

It is widely recognized that the Albanians want to unite Kosovo into Albania. Just as you've heard of "Greater Serbia", the Albanians have grandiose scheme for a "Greater Albania". Serbia is not the only nation in the area dealing with Albanian seperatists.

Proof?

Formally, Serbia and Montenegro, formally Yugoslavia.....

Hmmm. What happened there......

Part of the terms for NATO ending its illegal attack on Serbia was that Serbia and Montenegro were banned from calling themselves Yugoslavia. It's not that they no longer wanted to call themselves Yugoslavia, it was that the US and Europe said if you keep calling yourself that, we are going to kill all your people.

Caused by mashing multiples fractious peoples forcefully together under a Communist regime.

Yes, simply because they don't want to live together any more and they want to go back to living "among their own kind" they are allowed to commence a decade long, bloody civil war. They need to learn to live together and operate as one country. The US, UK, and so many other countries in the world have progressed past the tribal-ethnic mindset, and have at least attempted to live together as a unified country, even though there are people of all colors and backgrounds.



Which has what to do with self determination? Most of that is simple power struggle. Given the country is as big a Western Europe I'm quite surprised it's held up this long.
The primacy of tribal identity over the desire to live alongside others. The same theme runs throughout the worst excesses and crimes committed throughout history in the name of ethnic selfdetermination.

I fail again to see how self determination had anything to do with this? Neither the Tutsi's or Hutu's wanted an independent and new state. One side merely wanted to wipe out another.

One side and the other each attempted to assert their ethnic "rights" over the land. So similar to the Sudeten Germans of 1938, the Serbs and Croats of the 1980s, and the Albanians of today.


Hitler's expansionism has nought to do with self determination. Try 'Empire' building.
The idea that a "nation" of people have the right to live together is a backward, tribal notion that has led to much bloodshed. Hitler's motivation to create an all-German empire stems from the same primitive motivations driving the Albanian-Serbians to secede from Serbia and create their own all-Albanian state. Yes, I'm comparing Hitler to Albanians, which will undoubtedly cause ignorant people to throw a fit, but the commonality in their tribal, backward mindsets are plain to see.

Not really. I've two degrees in history.

Go back to the textbooks then.

Bismarck's prediction might just still be relevant: "If there is ever another war in Europe, it will come out of some damned foolish thing in the Balkans."

By themselves?


Oh this should be good. Please. Elaborate.



Only if they themselves want to be. Seems like the 90% who are ethnically Albanian ain't to happy being classified as Serbian... giving what Milosevic did to them in the 90's.

Your ethnicity does not give you the right to carve up other people's countries. Milosevic was defending Serbian territory.

And you're also going to click your heels together 3 times and get the Serbs to stop hating them too?

Can't we all just get along doesn't really work.

It has worked for thousands of years, before people invented the notion of racial and ethnic identity. Plenty of multiethnic states have been successful, including the old Austrian empire or the Ottoman empire.

Just because a sea change in people's mentalities is more difficult than clicking heels together 3 times doesn't mean it isn't worth pursuing.

Really? Look how well they sorted things out right after Yugoslavia disintegrated. I believe that's when we first heard of "ethnic cleansing."

Only step in if there's violence. There's no reason NATO should exist solely to validate tribal land disputes.

What makes you think you are right? I know you are wrong but yet when I presented the facts that you are wrong, you still try to paint yourself right. Guess what? You lost this debate.

The people of Kosovo, the vast majority of the people I might add, want to be independent from Serbia. They are not Serbs anymore than I can call myself European even though I am of European decent. I suggest you take a course on the difference between a nation and a state when dealing with Europe.

In which case, it is incumbent on the albanians in Kosovo to leave. They don't have the right to steal other people's land.

I'm pretty damn sure any group has the right to self determination.

Jesus, did we just rewind to pre-World War I days...? :confused:

Self determination means the right to immigrate. Not the right to carve up other countries just because you don't like them.

Yes, simply because they don't want to live together any more and they want to go back to living "among their own kind" they are allowed to commence a decade long, bloody civil war. They need to learn to live together and operate as one country. The US, UK, and so many other countries in the world have progressed past the tribal-ethnic mindset, and have at least attempted to live together as a unified country, even though there are people of all colors and backgrounds.
Nope. The UK is still embroiled in that. In fact less than 10 years ago, there was still a bloody war going on in the UK. Shows what you know I guess *shrugs*


The primacy of tribal identity over the desire to live alongside others. The same theme runs throughout the worst excesses and crimes committed throughout history in the name of ethnic selfdetermination.
No, power and religion would have been the reason behind the worst excesses and crimes committed in history. Nationalism and self determination has only been around since the late 1800s.



One side and the other each attempted to assert their ethnic "rights" over the land. So similar to the Sudeten Germans of 1938, the Serbs and Croats of the 1980s, and the Albanians of today.
Riiiiight.



The idea that a "nation" of people have the right to live together is a backward, tribal notion that has led to much bloodshed.
To determine ones future oneself is a 'backward and tribal notion'. Interesting. Idiotic, but interesting.

Hitler's motivation to create an all-German empire stems from the same primitive motivations driving the Albanian-Serbians to secede from Serbia and create their own all-Albanian state. Yes, I'm comparing Hitler to Albanians, which will undoubtedly cause ignorant people to throw a fit, but the commonality in their tribal, backward mindsets are plain to see.

No, I don't see the link between a man wanting to forge a new Empire in Europe and a group of people wanting to run their own state.


Go back to the textbooks then.
Don't worry. When you actually hit university, you'll see what I mean.

Self determination means the right to immigrate. Not the right to carve up other countries just because you don't like them.

self-de·ter·mi·na·tion
3 - the determining by the people of the form their government shall have, without reference to the wishes of any other nation, esp. by people of a territory or former colony.

Only step in if there's violence. There's no reason NATO should exist solely to validate tribal land disputes.

"Only if"? Trust me, there will be violence. And we really are dealing with tribal land disputes here, aren't we? The trouble is, the disputes are carried on with automatic weapons and artillery. Maybe the Albanians and the Serbs should each pick an elite unit from their army, and we could host the battle over here in Wyoming or Montana or Nevada. One month, whoever's left wins Kosovo. We could televise the whole thing to the whole world via satellite.

That, however, would be considered an act of war and they would be squashed rather quickly. Unless they triggered an earthquake and blamed it on that.

Just as Kosovo declaring independence from Serbia would be an act of war. Serbia has the right to use force to defend its own territorial integrity.

So simply because a nation is disunified means that people should not be spending more time unifying a nation rather than breaking it apart at every opportunity? The path of least resistance is not always the best path to take.
You know, with the deep divisions between the French and the muslims in southern France I wonder if they would support the Muslims separating the southern part of France into a seperate nation.

Or with all the differences seperating America, why don't they support seperating America into a bunch of seperate states based on the right of ethnic self determination.

I fail to see the point in atomising the former Yugoslavia further. Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia, fine, granting Kosovo greater autonomy within the Serbian state, fine, but hiving off a province that has historically been part of a state will only lead to greater, and purposeless, bloodshed. Besides, it's against the UN charter to force Serbia to part with the province (i.e., self-determination v. territorial integrity of a nation-state). The Serbs, in this instance, are more in the legal right than the ethnic Albanians.

That written, Russia doesn't have the means to attack Europe at the moment and any suggestion to the contrary is sheer lunacy.

The Serbs have repeatedly offered the Albanians in Kosovo a great deal of self autonomy. Greater autonomy in fact than any other nation has offered to their own subdivisions. The Albanians keep rejecting it and keep demanding total independence. The Serbs are the ones bending over backwards, but the Albanians declaring Kosovo to be independent will be the final straw for that will break them. It will result in war.

Nope. The UK is still embroiled in that. In fact less than 10 years ago, there was still a bloody war going on in the UK. Shows what you know I guess *shrugs*
So you support the breakup of the UK simply because there has been "a bloody war" or a potential for one? Or the breakup of Serbia for the same reason?

No, power and religion would have been the reason behind the worst excesses and crimes committed in history. Nationalism and self determination has only been around since the late 1800s.
That's exactly what I said. "The worst excesses and crimes committed throughout history in the name of ethnic selfdetermination." That statement would only apply to the 1800s and later, wouldn't it?




To determine ones future oneself is a 'backward and tribal notion'. Interesting. Idiotic, but interesting..
To determine one's future based on ethnic identity is by definition a "tribal notion". Nationalism is in its essence a tribal ideology; the first nationalist theorists actually consciously romanticized the tribes from antiquity they imagined to be their precursors.

No, I don't see the link between a man wanting to forge a new Empire in Europe and a group of people wanting to run their own state.
I don't have to spell it out for you do I? The only reason Hitler came to power was because there was a receptive audience (Germans) who had been enamored with the idea of running their own, all-German, state. Liberals like Schiller or a conservative like Bismarck were both nationalists, doesn't matter if they were democrats or dictators, they all were motivated by the same, misguided tribalist principles.

Don't worry. When you actually hit university, you'll see what I mean.

I know what you mean and from experience I can tell you that one history degree is good and all, but you should've gotten a more useful degree rather than a second history degree.

Mexicans in California are called "tourists" here in the States.

Actually they're called illegal immigrants.

"Only if"? Trust me, there will be violence. And we really are dealing with tribal land disputes here, aren't we? The trouble is, the disputes are carried on with automatic weapons and artillery. Maybe the Albanians and the Serbs should each pick an elite unit from their army, and we could host the battle over here in Wyoming or Montana or Nevada. One month, whoever's left wins Kosovo. We could televise the whole thing to the whole world via satellite.

Serbians and Albanians have lived for hundreds of years, for the vast majority of time peacefully, under the Byzantine Empire, under the Ottoman Empire, under Yugoslavia. You seem to have a reflexive expectation or even hope that people of different ethnicities should fight each other. That is not the case. There are values that transcend nationality, and people need to rediscover these values that have been trampled by the modern love affair with ethnic strife.

Caused by mashing multiples fractious peoples forcefully together under a Communist regime.



Which has what to do with self determination? Most of that is simple power struggle. Given the country is as big a Western Europe I'm quite surprised it's held up this long.


I fail again to see how self determination had anything to do with this? Neither the Tutsi's or Hutu's wanted an independent and new state. One side merely wanted to wipe out another.


Hitler's expansionism has nought to do with self determination. Try 'Empire' building.


Not really. I've two degrees in history.

You've heard of the communist nation of Yugoslavia but you've apparently never heard of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia which existed prior to the communist state.

So you support the breakup of the UK simply because there has been "a bloody war" or a potential for one? Or the breakup of Serbia for the same reason?
I support the break up of the UK if that's what the people want.


That's exactly what I said. "The worst excesses and crimes committed throughout history in the name of ethnic selfdetermination." That statement would only apply to the 1800s and later, wouldn't it?
Expansionism, empire building and colonialism are three off the top of my head that cause more suffering and death that countries' self determination.


To determine one's future based on ethnic identity is by definition a "tribal notion". Nationalism is in its essence a tribal ideology; the first nationalist theorists actually consciously romanticized the tribes from antiquity they imagined to be their precursors.
What would you determine your future on then? Religious beliefs? A line on a map? What's you link to your community?


I don't have to spell it out for you do I? The only reason Hitler came to power was because there was a receptive audience (Germans) who had been enamored with the idea of running their own, all-German, state. Liberals like Schiller or a conservative like Bismarck were both nationalists, doesn't matter if they were democrats or dictators, they all were motivated by the same, misguided tribalist principles.
So any group of people who want to rule themselves, you'll compare with the Nazis?

Yeh. I see that alright.



I know what you mean and from experience I can tell you that one history degree is good and all, but you should've gotten a more useful degree rather than a second history degree.

I did. It's called a Masters. Like I said, when you actually hit university, you'll understand.

The Ukraine used to be the center of a Gothic empire back before the 9th century. Italy used to be a Gothic kingdom before the 9th century. Parts of Algeria, Tunisia and Libya used to be part of a Vandal kingdom before the 9th century.

My calendar says it's the 21st century. Times change. People change. Borders change.

Red Herring.

This is not the dark ages. We don't allow ethnic groups to move into other countries only to let them carve those countries up.

This is the 21st century. We don't allow migrants to break up other countries anymore.

Albanians are the current majority, for the last 4 years. They are not the historical majority.

я согласна.

Serbians and Albanians have lived for hundreds of years, for the vast majority of time peacefully, under the Byzantine Empire, under the Ottoman Empire, under Yugoslavia. You seem to have a reflexive expectation or even hope that people of different ethnicities should fight each other. That is not the case. There are values that transcend nationality, and people need to rediscover these values that have been trampled by the modern love affair with ethnic strife.

What I've seen are peoples long suppressed in their conflicts with each other by the Byzantines, Ottomans, Austrians, and by Yugoslavia, going back to "working things out."

I would much rather they decided these things through a rediscovery of those values which transcend nationality, but it's been so long since they've had nations that I fear it may be a long time before they come to that point.

Actually they're called illegal immigrants.

Which entirely disproves your earlier point that it would be the same thing for illegal immigrants to break apart a country vs. a democratic vote

[QUOTE] You've heard of the communist nation of Yugoslavia but you've apparently never heard of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia which existed prior to the communist state. [/QUTOE]

Which was smashed togehter by a bunch of opportunists of a bunch of weak coutnries, and then managed to get put in the Treaty of Versaillles, which was our fault. But still, its an understandable mistake


*Putinjend alert, Putinjend alter*

We're talking about REGIONAL self-determination. If the majority of Kosovars (as in inhabitants of Kosovo) vote to secede from Serbia, they should be able to.

I support the break up of the UK if that's what the people want.



Expansionism, empire building and colonialism are three off the top of my head that cause more suffering and death that countries' self determination.



What would you determine your future on then? Religious beliefs? A line on a map? What's you link to your community?

A desire to improve my community. Shared ethical values of such as charity or humility. I do not insist, as the Albanians have, that my community or my country must be ethnically pure.


So any group of people who want to rule themselves, you'll compare with the Nazis?

Yeh. I see that alright.
People wishing to rule themselves for the reason of ethnic or nationalist exclusionism can easily be compared to the Nazis. It is rather easy to compare the terrible genocides committed by all sides of the Yugoslav war, to Nazis. The same nationalist, tribal impulse that is motivating the current troubles with Kosovo motivated the Yugoslav wars of the 1980s and 90s, or the nationalism of the 1930s.

Red Herring.

This is not the dark ages. We don't allow ethnic groups to move into other countries only to let them carve those countries up.

This is the 21st century. We don't allow migrants to break up other countries anymore.

Albanians are the current majority, for the last 4 years. They are not the historical majority.

I tell you what, my sauropod friend, had you opened this thread with a less bellicose OP ("If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe."), and instead proposed to discuss the problem of Kosovo, the ethnic Albanians and the justice (or lack thereof) of their claim to sovereignty over the area, we wouldn't be having an argument. I might even have taken your side.

I keep thinking about that quote I posted earlier: some damned foolish thing in the Balkans.

Brach, you are aware of the fact that the Russians routinely repatriated Russian nationals in to the Eastern European states, Central Asia, and the Ukraine as a way of ensuring that Russians would emerge as a powerful elite that would help ensure these states continued adherence to the Soviet party line, right?

Peace in Kosovo needs to be preserved so that a bunch of assholes who get all worked up over minute differences between their cultures and backward, impoverished, mountain territories don't start killing again. The last thing we need is more genocide in the region.

What I've seen are peoples long suppressed in their conflicts with each other by the Byzantines, Ottomans, Austrians, and by Yugoslavia, going back to "working things out."

I would much rather they decided these things through a rediscovery of those values which transcend nationality, but it's been so long since they've had nations that I fear it may be a long time before they come to that point.

The inertia of the situation should not be a reason to prevent us from working toward the goal of a happier outcome. Breaking up Serbia would simply perpetuate and validate the petty tribal nationalism that is nowadays the only thing people know or are capable of imagining. There are alternatives, no matter how unlikely they may seem to our 21st century minds that have been skewed by a century of horrible tribal conflicts.

I'm a little confused as to why this is being discussed as though Russia posed a military threat to the United States.

Don't get me wrong, I have great respect for the Russian culture, people and history. I studied Russian in high school because of that.

But right now, there is no way, shape or form that the Russian military could sustain an all-out war against the United States. It hasn't got the money, infrastructure or supplies. The individual soldiers and staff of the Russian military have historically been among the most courageous and unbreakable warriors in modern history, but this isn't Germany vs. USSR in the Winter of 1942.

1)Russian equipment is demonstrably inferior to American. This was shown during our last two wars where T-72s proved to be no match for M1A1s. The T-80 is just a T-72 with some upgrades, and there aren't many T-90s to go around, and their ability to stand against American armor is unknown. Also, not one American fighter was lost to a Russian built fighter in any air engagement during either Gulf War. Although the SU-37 is considered to be one of the finest fighter aircraft in modern history, they'd be bogged down by a lack of supply and hopelessly outnumbered.

2)Russia has no known stealth fighters or bombers. The USA has both. Coupled with a lack of adequate jet fuel supply, American air superiority would be inevitable and quickly achieved.

3)The Russian Navy is not now, nor has it ever been a match for the U.S. Navy. Russia has no supercarriers. The USA has more than we know what to do with. Sink half our carrier fleet and we'd still have enough to overwhelm the Russian Navy.

4)The USSR is gone. Cold War era tactics always assumed a significantly stronger and better equipped adverary-the USSR. Russia is a fraction of that strength and the USA has not been so weakened.

5)Experience. The USA has been in two wars in the last 20 years. Our troops are experienced, our tactis adapted, and our equipment improved as a result of our actions against Iraq and Afganistan. The Russian army hasn't seen major combat since its invasion of Afganistan that ended over 20 years ago.

The Russian army does have a couple of advantages, but I think they'd only make the war last longer, but not win it. I suspect there is a numerical advantage, since the Russian Army has always been a behemoth. The other advantage is good, old fashioned Russian stoicism, which lends itself well to morale.

The Russian army will not break. In a war of attrition, it wins. If the USA were to go to war against Russia, the war would have to be overwhelming and decisive. The army would have to be crushed, not broken. This, however, assumes an American invasion of Russian soil. If it's a foreign war on other than Russian soil, the USA wins.

America's rear is in no danger of being whooped by the Russians, for better or for worse.

The inertia of the situation should not be a reason to prevent us from working toward the goal of a happier outcome. Breaking up Serbia would simply perpetuate and validate the petty tribal nationalism that is nowadays the only thing people know or are capable of imagining. There are alternatives, no matter how unlikely they may seem to our 21st century minds that have been skewed by a century of horrible tribal conflicts.

Maybe letting Yugoslavia break up wasn't such a hot idea, huh? Tito kept everyone in line, if nothing else.

I agree with you that there should be an alternative, but my outlook is taint by the half of that terrible century I've lived through.

I'm all with letting Russia rip America a new one, just let everyone GTFO first so no one dies.

:D

Neo Bretonnia, you pretty much nailed it. Russia couldn't defeat France, Germany, or the UK by themselves, let alone those three allied or fighting with the US through NATO. The Russian army is still mostly a tattered, backward, and decrepit ruin that lacks the infrastructure to fight any kind of prolonged conflict successfully...they won't pose a threat to the US or Europe for decades, if at all. They'd be annihilated.

NATO should withdraw from Kosovo immediately. That murderous, unprovoked invasion on false pretenses set the groundwork for invading nations for whatever reason, the precedent for Bush's invasion for Iraq, and the continued occupation of Kosovo while the Kosovo government represses everyone who is not ethnically Albanian is an insult to civilization. Russia and China should stand up for Serbia and stop the US from following through on its threats.

I tell you what, my sauropod friend, had you opened this thread with a less bellicose OP ("If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe."), and instead proposed to discuss the problem of Kosovo, the ethnic Albanians and the justice (or lack thereof) of their claim to sovereignty over the area, we wouldn't be having an argument. I might even have taken your side.

I keep thinking about that quote I posted earlier: some damned foolish thing in the Balkans.

While we are at it, we should not lose sight of the fact that the Albanians, Serbs and Croats all dream of Greater "insert ethnic name here" land. They are all driven by bloodthirsty nationalism. They're all guilty of ethnic genocide.
However, you can't correct genocide by allowing another genocide. You're not going to be able to stop the nationalism by carving up nations. That is only going to cause worse problems and worse wars. What you need to do, what NATO and Russia need to do, is force the three groups to live with each other under the same government in peace. Only when they are able to live with each other peacefully and respectfully should we even consider letting them talk about having their own nations.

A people who can't live with others peacefully or respectfully is a people who have no right to their own country.

Brach, you are aware of the fact that the Russians routinely repatriated Russian nationals in to the Eastern European states, Central Asia, and the Ukraine as a way of ensuring that Russians would emerge as a powerful elite that would help ensure these states continued adherence to the Soviet party line, right?

Peace in Kosovo needs to be preserved so that a bunch of assholes who get all worked up over minute differences between their cultures and backward, impoverished, mountain territories don't start killing again. The last thing we need is more genocide in the region.

You can't stop genocide by breaking up a country. It was the break up of a country that caused genocide in the first place. Kosovo independence will cause more genocide. The only way to prevent is to keep Serbia unified.

While we are at it, we should not lose sight of the fact that the Albanians, Serbs and Croats all dream of Greater "insert ethnic name here" land. They are all driven by bloodthirsty nationalism. They're all guilty of ethnic genocide.
However, you can't correct genocide by allowing another genocide. You're not going to be able to stop the nationalism by carving up nations. That is only going to cause worse problems and worse wars. What you need to do, what NATO and Russia need to do, is force the three groups to live with each other under the same government in peace. Only when they are able to live with each other peacefully and respectfully should we even consider letting them talk about having their own nations.

A people who can't live with others peacefully or respectfully is a people who have no right to their own country.

Then perhaps it's time to recreate Yugoslavia and impose just such a regime, one that will "force the three groups to live with each other under the same government in peace" (I guess we'd have to include Albania). The trouble is, I see no evidence of their wanting to live together in peace, so maybe your concluding remark is on point.

Give me a break. The Russians couldn't take on Europe or the U.S. individually, let alone together.

look either way you llok at it shit is gonna fly ok

NATO should withdraw from Kosovo immediately. That murderous, unprovoked invasion on false pretenses set the groundwork for invading nations for whatever reason, the precedent for Bush's invasion for Iraq, and the continued occupation of Kosovo while the Kosovo government represses everyone who is not ethnically Albanian is an insult to civilization. Russia and China should stand up for Serbia and stop the US from following through on its threats.


China and Russia couldnt stop Europe let alone USA and Europe.
And btw since when is Serbia and Russia not a part of Europe??

So? Mexicans are a majority in New Mexico, does that give New Mexico a free pass to break up with the US?
:sniper:
Hate to shoot down that brilliant idea, but if the majority of mexicans in New Mexico wanted to be part of Mexico, they wouldn't have bothered with the trip north.

:sniper:
Hate to shoot down that brilliant idea, but if the majority of mexicans in New Mexico wanted to be part of Mexico, they wouldn't have bothered with the trip north.

You completely missed the point. My point is that whether or not Mexicans in New Mexico wanted to secede the state and join Mexico, they shouldn't be allowed to either way.

A desire to improve my community. Shared ethical values of such as charity or humility. I do not insist, as the Albanians have, that my community or my country must be ethnically pure.


What is it with you and this assumption that theres gonna be a genocide? Itd be pretty hard with everyone looking. I mean i dont even think Putin wants a genocide, unless he could somehow pin it on the Americans to distract the people from how sucky their life actually is.

Besides that, all these claims abouot Albainia causing ethnic cleansing are ridiculous. Albainia was in chaos during most of the Kosovo war, and while KLA did commit genocide, so did Serbia. that doesnt diminish the atrocity of any of those crimes. but it seems like there is this perception that Yugoslavia was godly and angelic before the war. This isnt the case

Ah yes, and let me just correct something here. Russia has a kick-ass army, its airforce is almost comparable to ours, although the navy is shit and should be rusting at the bottom of the sea.

Russia's military expenditures now come second in the world, shortly after the US, according to many military estimates, including one from the Secretary of State, Department of Defense, Pentagon, and the Department for Homeland Security.

Still, you are correct in that it does not have a stealth bomber or fighter, although they are currently developing one that should be almost on par with the one we are developing. They still have the most nukes in the world, although they are poorly guarded and their radar is shit. Thier tanks are nothing to speak of, although if they use Chinese tanks, they may soon become something. They still are inferior compared to the Abrahms though.

In missles russia is actually currently ahead, not that it really matters because we would both kill each other anyway.

In terms of guns, if we invaded Russia, we would have huge problems due to the M-16, for it is weak and cannot punch through enough wall to count for something, while the AK 47 can. however, If Russia invaded us, it wouldnt matter, we would actually have the advantage, beacues the M-16 is more accurate, and our buildings are thick enough to negate any advantage the AK47 would have.

So while we actually would kick there asses, Euope would not (although it could successfully defend itself in terms of an invasion), China and Russia together could actually take us down (if we were by ourselves), although they would get deystroyed in the Process.

http://www.cybergooch.com/images/artwork/kirov01.jpg

lol, Kirov

The Serbs get bent out of shape because Kosovo is has long been a part of Serbia, long before 15th century (the battle occurred in the 14th century actually). Kosovo independence would violate the Serbian sense of nationhood in the same way that New York independence would be shocking to Americans.

JOKES ON YOU! SERBIA WASN'T A COUNTRY UNTIL THE 1800'S!

All of them were jointly part of either Austria-Hungary(or one or the other before the two were joined) or officially part of the Holy Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire.

JOKES ON YOU! SERBIA WASN'T A COUNTRY UNTIL THE 1800'S!

All of them were jointly part of either Austria-Hungary(or one or the other before the two were joined) or officially part of the Holy Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire.

uhm ... no. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Empire) There were various Serbian principalities in between, especially in the early 19th century.

Um...

Russia cannot take on both the US and Europe.
Can't realistically take on one of them at the same time without resorting to WMDs, to be honest.

Far, far too poor to sustain a long war, seeing as their troops are having to be prostituted in St. Petersburg to pay for their upkeep. Unless they won in about 20 minutes, which they wouldn't, due to the really quite good German army and French military, which is perfectly OK, as well as the thousands of American and British troops in Germany and Poland.
EDIT: Since when is Kosovo part of Russia?
It's still a part of Serbia, which Russia has always had a very close relationship with, see the outbreak of World War One, for example.

Ah yes, and let me just correct something here. Russia has a kick-ass army, its airforce is almost comparable to ours, although the navy is shit and should be rusting at the bottom of the sea.

Russia's military expenditures now come second in the world, shortly after the US, according to many military estimates, including one from the Secretary of State, Department of Defense, Pentagon, and the Department for Homeland Security.

Still, you are correct in that it does not have a stealth bomber or fighter, although they are currently developing one that should be almost on par with the one we are developing. They still have the most nukes in the world, although they are poorly guarded and their radar is shit. Thier tanks are nothing to speak of, although if they use Chinese tanks, they may soon become something. They still are inferior compared to the Abrahms though.

In missles russia is actually currently ahead, not that it really matters because we would both kill each other anyway.

In terms of guns, if we invaded Russia, we would have huge problems due to the M-16, for it is weak and cannot punch through enough wall to count for something, while the AK 47 can. however, If Russia invaded us, it wouldnt matter, we would actually have the advantage, beacues the M-16 is more accurate, and our buildings are thick enough to negate any advantage the AK47 would have.

So while we actually would kick there asses, Euope would not (although it could successfully defend itself in terms of an invasion), China and Russia together could actually take us down (if we were by ourselves), although they would get deystroyed in the Process.

I agree with some of this, although I still maintain that the U.S. has vastly superior air power. Russian pilots at the moment are experiencing massive fuel shortages, cuts in logging flight time as a result, and don't have any real combat experience. The USAF has none of these problems.

Also, while Russia may be developing a stealth aircraft, it's not available yet and even if it were, the difference in Russian technology vs. American makes it hard to imagine it being on par with our own. Also don't forget the F-22 has stealth capability as well.

Good points about the AK-47 vs M-16. The AK is a much more reliable weapon.

come on you can ask north Korea beside they are friends with Russia and hate America. btw, north Korea is the 3rd largest army in the world

uhm ... no. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Empire) There were various Serbian principalities in between, especially in the early 19th century.

The 19th Century is the 1800's.
And said principalities in earlier than the 18th century were at least forced to admit that Austria/Hungary/Austria-Hungary/Germany/Prussia were stronger. It was controlled like that before the 19th century more or less the same way that the Soviet Union controlled East Germany.

And if you're going to quote sources at me, please use something better than wikipedia, for god's sakes! If I can plant a heavily-biased section to an entry, and have it still be there, then that's saying something about how much it can be trusted.

Ah yes, and let me just correct something here. Russia has a kick-ass army
Not really. On paper, it's very strong, in reality, it's quite underfunded, to say the least.
its airforce is almost comparable to ours
Again, not really. It has a few decent planes, that's true. Only a few, though.
although the navy is mostly shit and is mainly rusting at the bottom of the sea.
Fixed.
Russia's military expenditures now come second in the world, shortly after the US, according to many military estimates, including one from the Secretary of State, Department of Defense, Pentagon, and the Department for Homeland Security.
Nope. Great Britain does.
Still, you are correct in that it does not have a stealth bomber or fighter, although they are currently developing one that should be almost on par with the one we are developing. They still have the most nukes in the world, although they are poorly guarded and their radar is shit.
Thier tanks are nothing to speak of, although if they use Chinese tanks, they may soon become something. They still are inferior compared to the Abrahms though.
1) Their tanks are pretty good, and most can fire ATGMs from the turret. On the other hand, their tankers aren't very well trained in actual combat, or so I've heard.

2) Chinese tanks are shite.

3) The M1A2 isn't all that much better than a T-90M. The European Leopard 2 is quite something, mind, as is the Challenger 2.
In missles russia is actually currently ahead, not that it really matters because we would both kill each other anyway.
If you're factoring nukes into it, then the whole discussion is UTTERLY MOOT.
In terms of guns, if we invaded Russia, we would have huge problems due to the M-16, for it is weak and cannot punch through enough wall to count for something, while the AK 47 can. however, If Russia invaded us, it wouldnt matter, we would actually have the advantage, beacues the M-16 is more accurate, and our buildings are thick enough to negate any advantage the AK47 would have.
1) The AK47 (really the AKM) is only issued to militia and supply units, the AK74M, which uses a similar round to NATO rifles, is the standard issue rifle.

2) The AK47 can't just punch through a brick wall, and if we're talking about wooden walls, then so do 5.56mm rounds. Or even 9mm pistol rounds. Or, more to the point, we can drop a whole bunch of artillery on their wooden huts.
So while we actually would kick there asses, Europe would not (although it could successfully defend itself in terms of an invasion), China and Russia together could actually take us down (if we were by ourselves), although they would get deystroyed in the Process.
Erm. I think enough people have invaded Russia and lost for people to hopefully have given up in thinking about it, let's be honest. It's far, far too large to capture all of, and as Hitler discovered, it doesn't matter even if you do capture, say, half of it, because they'll just regroup somewhere else and win in the end.

Don't really see why that's different for the US, to be honest. The US also has the problem of having to fly or ship in supplies, instead of going all of the way via train or road, as the European powers have attempted in the past.

come on you can ask north Korea beside they are friends with Russia and hate America. btw, north Korea is the 3rd largest army in the world
The North Korean army is shit...

come on you can ask north Korea beside they are friends with Russia and hate America. btw, north Korea is the 3rd largest army in the world

Yes, Iraq had the 4th largest and 4th best -equipped and it was deystroyed in a week.

We rock convential. Its the asymettric and the unconvential that we suck at

Yes, Iraq had the 4th largest and 4th best -equipped and it was deystroyed in a week.

We rock convential. Its the asymettric and the unconvential that we suck at
Fourth best-equipped for what, exactly?

It had a whole load of tanks crewed by tankers who didn't know what they were doing, and a whole load of artillery which was never used because their forward observers got panned in about 9 seconds, generals who knew fuck all, and infantry which wasn't interested in fighting much.

Their army was fine for bullying Iran, but that's about it. Had they invested in a whole bunch of ATGMs, and got together a force with decent morale and training, they'd have been much, much better off than how things panned out.

Um...White people are minority in California. Hence Mexicans have the right to carve California out of the US.
Have you honestly seen an independence movement from any mexican group in California? Oh, that's right, you haven't, because we treat our citizens right. Key difference right there.


Let's not forget the present population demographics is a direct result of ethnic cleansing in which the Albanians, from Albania, either killed or scared the Serbs out of their homes in Kosovos.
The west is all hypocrites when it comes to ethnic cleansing.
Two wrongs don't make a right, which is why they should both be seperated.


Russia is still the second most powerful nation on earth after the US. It can screw up the European and American economies not to mention screw up all of their cities.
If you count Europe as one unit (which in all honestly, with the EU, you should), they aren't. Cancelling out nuclear capabilities for all of the nations with that ability, Russia isn't that powerful or efficient militarily. China could probably kick it's butt, but that's an argument for another time.

come on you can ask north Korea beside they are friends with Russia and hate America. btw, north Korea is the 3rd largest army in the world
At the expense of ...their population, of which is starving right now, while their economy falls to shit. Great strategy.

Fourth best-equipped for what, exactly?

Losing.
I seem to recall hearing about a battle in the Gulf War where the US army destroyed the ENTIRE Iraqi tank force, with only 3 tanks lost on our side. And two of those were reparable, and were only scrapped by their crews to avoid capture. Only one was completely destroyed by the enemy.

Does anyone else smell flamebait? I could swear...

Does anyone else smell flamebait? I could swear...

Ehh... moreso trolling, but not really actionable, seeing as they're debating it, rather than making the original post and fleeing from the battle scene. :p

China and Russia couldnt stop Europe let alone USA and Europe.
And btw since when is Serbia and Russia not a part of Europe??

They have nuclear capability, which has stopped the US from doing something stupid before. They should consider putting that on the table since the US is so keen on re-igniting the Cold War.

And where did I say Serbia and Russia are not a part of Europe? Nowhere.

Losing.
Yes, exactly.
I seem to recall hearing about a battle in the Gulf War where the US army destroyed the ENTIRE Iraqi tank force, with only 3 tanks lost on our side.
Err, I think not, no. There was 73 Easting, which was a large US and UK victory over the Iraqis, but we hardly polished off their whole tank force in one go ;)

Not really. On paper, it's very strong, in reality, it's quite underfunded, to say the least.

No. Stop using the OFFICIAL estimates of the Russian Government, and start looking at the ones that are made by outside sources. In a good deal of these Russia comes in 2nd.

Still, you are correct in that it does not have a stealth bomber or fighter, although they are currently developing one that should be almost on par with the one we are developing. They still have the most nukes in the world, although they are poorly guarded and their radar is shit.
Basically what I said, so no argument there

1) Their tanks are pretty good, and most can fire ATGMs from the turret. On the other hand, their tankers aren't very well trained in actual combat, or so I've heard.

2) Chinese tanks are shite.

3) The M1A2 isn't all that much better than a T-90M. The European Leopard 2 is quite something, mind, as is the Challenger 2.

You're right on points 1 and 3. I had no idea that Russian Tanks had such good armor, although admittedly they used old M1s for the test. And you are right about the Leopard, although it aint that great. Chinese tanks, however, show some ingeinious innovations, especcially the newest one, although it is lacking in some basic safety procedures
.

1) The AK47 (really the AKM) is only issued to militia and supply units, the AK74M, which uses a similar round to NATO rifles, is the standard issue rifle.

2) The AK47 can't just punch through a brick wall, and if we're talking about wooden walls, then so do 5.56mm rounds. Or even 9mm pistol rounds. Or, more to the point, we can drop a whole bunch of artillery on their wooden huts.

I think the U.S. Marines in Black Hawk down would have a diffrent view of the situation. There seems to be this issue there with two feet thick wood walls, which the M-16 can barely punch through, while the AK-47 can rip them to shreds.

Erm. I think enough people have invaded Russia and lost for people to hopefully have given up in thinking about it, let's be honest. It's far, far too large to capture all of, and as Hitler discovered, it doesn't matter even if you do capture, say, half of it, because they'll just regroup somewhere else and win in the end.[/QUOTE

Don't really see why that's different for the US, to be honest. The US also has the problem of having to fly or ship in supplies, instead of going all of the way via train or road, as the European powers have attempted in the past.

i was talking about if they invaded us

Yes, exactly.

Err, I think not, no. There was 73 Easting, which was a large US and UK victory over the Iraqis, but we hardly polished off their whole tank force in one go ;)

From what I've read so far the worst casualties during Operation Desert Storm was because of friendly fire incidents.

You're right on points 1 and 3. I had no idea that Russian Tanks had such good armor, although admittedly they used old M1s for the test. And you are right about the Leopard, although it aint that great. Chinese tanks, however, show some ingeinious innovations, especcially the newest one, although it is lacking in some basic safety procedures
.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Chinese tanks just modified Soviet tanks?

JOKES ON YOU! SERBIA WASN'T A COUNTRY UNTIL THE 1800'S!

All of them were jointly part of either Austria-Hungary(or one or the other before the two were joined) or officially part of the Holy Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire.

Jokes on you. Serbia existed as multiple independent kingdoms in the 1400's until their united army was defeated by the Turks. And Serbia, at no point in its history, was EVER part of the Holy Roman Empire.

They have nuclear capability, which has stopped the US from doing something stupid before. They should consider putting that on the table since the US is so keen on re-igniting the Cold War.



Ahem. Cough cough. Not like Russia hasnt been bullying tiny democratic neighbors lately, has made a huge issue (missle defense, which is moot anyway) out of something that could never affect them, hasnt bascially gotten rid of its democracy or anything, basically sold weapons to every country professing to be our enemy, etc.

No, that had nothing to do with the re-igniting of the Cold War. No, it was US Imperalism, as always. How convineint.

Putinjend, anyone?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Chinese tanks just modified Soviet tanks?

No. the Soviets and the Chinese were never friendly enough basically after the 50s to sell anything to each other. Hell, somewhere I read that they had even composed attack plans for each other, and that the KGB had tried to assasinate Mao Zedong

Jokes on you. Serbia existed as multiple independent kingdoms in the 1400's until their united army was defeated by the Turks. And Serbia, at no point in its history, was EVER part of the Holy Roman Empire.

It was nominally. So was 90% of Eastern Europe, for that matter. Doesn't necessarily mean it was effectively controlled by the Holy Roman Empire.

Besides, it was not, a single, united country of Serbia, not in the concept of Venice, Genoa, Castille, Portugal, Aragon, the Papal States or England.

It was nominally. So was 90% of Eastern Europe, for that matter. Doesn't necessarily mean it was effectively controlled by the Holy Roman Empire.

Besides, it was not, a single, united country of Serbia, not in the concept of Venice, Genoa, Castille, Portugal, Aragon, the Papal States or England.

Well, I just finished doing my homework:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Empire
http://www.serbia-info.com/enc/history/medieval.html

There you go.

Ehh... moreso trolling, but not really actionable, seeing as they're debating it, rather than making the original post and fleeing from the battle scene. :p

Not really as the original premise of the Russians being involved is false because the trioka consists of the EU, the US...and the Russians.

Massive Doh!

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20071206/tts-uk-serbia-kosovo-ischinger-ca02f96_2.html


Ischinger and mediators from the United States and Russia, known as the troika, are to submit a report by Monday to the United Nations on four months of failed negotiations between Serbs and Albanians on the fate of the breakaway province.

Ischinger is the EU negotiator.

The reason the US and Europe want Kosovo to go independent is because Kosovo wants to go independent.

because albanians have pushed the serbs out.. Kosovo has always been part of serbia.. It was under Ottoman rule that the albanians moved in.. and during the Civil war in Yoguslavia the albanians forced many of the serbs out.. but the land is still serbian.. Just because you steal someone elses land doesn't make it yours..

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

As if Russia hasn't done this before as well.

Ahem. Cough cough. Not like Russia hasnt been bullying tiny democratic neighbors lately, has made a huge issue (missle defense, which is moot anyway) out of something that could never affect them, hasnt bascially gotten rid of its democracy or anything, basically sold weapons to every country professing to be our enemy, etc.

No, that had nothing to do with the re-igniting of the Cold War. No, it was US Imperalism, as always. How convineint.

Putinjend, anyone?

The main accusations of Putin ending democracy just so happen to come from the oligarchs and their cronies who used political means to plunder Russia, as well as certain US thinktanks and interventionists such as the National Endowment for Democracy that wishes to buy their way into power in Russia by way of funding front groups in Russia, including fascists like the Neo-Bolshevik Party and Chechen terrorists, while ignoring the fact that Russian media is about as state-owned as that of the United States.

As for 'bullying' democracies, these democracies just so happen to be approached by the US for the strategic placement of its armed forces right in Russia's backyard. The missile defense system would be easily defeated by a mass of decoys and the like; its real purpose, as Foreign Affairs military analysts have noted, is to be an adjunct to first-strike capability, and that its presence necessarily entangles the Czechs and Poles in any war if conventional forces attempt to disable the missile shield. And it is selling weapons to our enemies because they know they have common cause with them in our belligerent stances towards Russia and the others. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, after all.

Again, I hope that they will try to dissuade the US government from intervening again in Kosovo, so as to avoid setting another precedent for aggressive war.

because albanians have pushed the serbs out.. Kosovo has always been part of serbia.. It was under Ottoman rule that the albanians moved in.. and during the Civil war in Yoguslavia the albanians forced many of the serbs out.. but the land is still serbian.. Just because you steal someone elses land doesn't make it yours..

While we're on the subject of repaying 500 year old land claims, I'd like to note that the Serbs pushed the Greeks out back in the days of the Byzantine Empire. Maybe we should relocate the Serbs back to the Ukraine where they belong and give the land back to its Greek owners. Or we can stop ridiculous bitching about titles to land that disappeared long ago.

because albanians have pushed the serbs out.. Kosovo has always been part of serbia.. It was under Ottoman rule that the albanians moved in.. and during the Civil war in Yoguslavia the albanians forced many of the serbs out.. but the land is still serbian.. Just because you steal someone elses land doesn't make it yours..

Um, well actually, it does.

Um, well actually, it does.

well yes sadly it does sometimes :mad:

The main accusations of Putin ending democracy just so happen to come from the oligarchs and their cronies who used political means to plunder Russia, as well as certain US thinktanks and interventionists such as the National Endowment for Democracy that wishes to buy their way into power in Russia by way of funding front groups in Russia, including fascists like the Neo-Bolshevik Party and Chechen terrorists, while ignoring the fact that Russian media is about as state-owned as that of the United States.

As for 'bullying' democracies, these democracies just so happen to be approached by the US for the strategic placement of its armed forces right in Russia's backyard. The missile defense system would be easily defeated by a mass of decoys and the like; its real purpose, as Foreign Affairs military analysts have noted, is to be an adjunct to first-strike capability, and that its presence necessarily entangles the Czechs and Poles in any war if conventional forces attempt to disable the missile shield. And it is selling weapons to our enemies because they know they have common cause with them in our belligerent stances towards Russia and the others. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, after all.

Again, I hope that they will try to dissuade the US government from intervening again in Kosovo, so as to avoid setting another precedent for aggressive war.

You spin me right round, baby, right round...

While we're on the subject of repaying 500 year old land claims, I'd like to note that the Serbs pushed the Greeks out back in the days of the Byzantine Empire. Maybe we should relocate the Serbs back to the Ukraine where they belong and give the land back to its Greek owners. Or we can stop ridiculous bitching about titles to land that disappeared long ago.

difference is that is less than 20 years since the albanians forced the serbs out... you can't compare the other thing to what happens now as it was 600-800 years ago.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Chinese tanks just modified Soviet tanks?
No, they're homegrown designs, usually knock-offs of Soviet designs, although lately they're of original design.
From what I've read so far the worst casualties during Operation Desert Storm was because of friendly fire incidents.
Absolutely true.

No. the Soviets and the Chinese were never friendly enough basically after the 50s to sell anything to each other. Hell, somewhere I read that they had even composed attack plans for each other, and that the KGB had tried to assasinate Mao Zedong

No, they're homegrown designs, usually knock-offs of Soviet designs, although lately they're of original design.

Thanks for the clarification

because albanians have pushed the serbs out.. Kosovo has always been part of serbia.. It was under Ottoman rule that the albanians moved in.. and during the Civil war in Yoguslavia the albanians forced many of the serbs out.. but the land is still serbian.. Just because you steal someone elses land doesn't make it yours..

it was, if i recall correctly, 87% Albainian before the war began. That still leaves them in a clear majority. Also, they were being treated unfairly by the Serbian governmet, which had been reduced to sheer totalitarianism

You spin me right round, baby, right round...

Yes, the US government has spinned this whole affair indeed.

Yes, the US government has spinned this whole affair indeed.

And the Russian government hasn't? Facts can be selected both ways. Don't pretend that either side has the moral high ground.

The main accusations of Putin ending democracy just so happen to come from the oligarchs and their cronies who used political means to plunder Russia,

Despite the fact that those oligarchs that are not complaining are the ones in the Putin administration. They now have consolodated power in the hands of a few wealthy buearocrats. Nice job.

as well as certain US thinktanks and interventionists such as the National Endowment for Democracy that wishes to buy their way into power in Russia by way of funding front groups in Russia, including fascists like the Neo-Bolshevik Party and Chechen terrorists, while ignoring the fact that Russian media is about as state-owned as that of the United States.

Oh how I can't wait to hear this one explained and sourced

As for 'bullying' democracies, these democracies just so happen to be approached by the US for the strategic placement of its armed forces right in Russia's backyard. The missile defense system would be easily defeated by a mass of decoys and the like; its real purpose, as Foreign Affairs military analysts have noted, is to be an adjunct to first-strike capability, and that its presence necessarily entangles the Czechs and Poles in any war if conventional forces attempt to disable the missile shield. And it is selling weapons to our enemies because they know they have common cause with them in our belligerent stances towards Russia and the others. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, after all.

I was actually referring to Estonia. But if you'd like to explain how a few old Patriot missle interceptors could possibley damage Russia in any way, be my guess.

Again, I hope that they will try to dissuade the US government from intervening again in Kosovo, so as to avoid setting another precedent for aggressive war.

AKA the US should let Russia do what it wants where it wants without any protests? yeah right

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

Are you crazy? That's as stupid as going to war over having your arch-duke assassinated...and the implications are could be greater. Remember: Putin runs Russia, not Bush.

Aside from that Russia would get their ass handed to them after making life hell for everyone and driving the price of oil up...and getting Republicans elected.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/kosovo.nato/

If the Americans attack Serbia again, the Russians should declare war on the US and on Europe.

This is not the first time the US and Europe have gone around carving up other nations to further their own self interests.

Russia should first worry about its new Stalin wannabe (Vladimir Putin) and it should also worry about its own ongoing Civil War in Chechnya before declaring war on another Superpower (the USA) and its allies.

Kosovo is a territory of Serbia. The Americans and the Europeans are trying to carve it into a seperate country against the consent of the Serbs.

There is nothing that gives them the right to do it except that their guns are bigger than Serbian guns. If the NATO tries to carve away Kosovo, the Russians should protect Serbia by declaring war on NATO (which is the US and Europe).

And nothing gives Russians the right to meddle in this. If Kosovo wants to be free, it should.

This suggestion remembers me a lot of World War I, Russia meddling and "defending" interests in the conturbed balkans.

Seems like your proposal matches your name, Brachiosaurus.;)

So? Mexicans are a majority in New Mexico, does that give New Mexico a free pass to break up with the US?

What was Texas before it was part of the U.S.?

What was Texas before it was part of the U.S.?

Oo! Oo! I know! Pick me! Pick me!

It was a republic, monsieur!

If Russia wants to bring war on the United States, let them. There's one less country the U.S.A. needs to worry about in 2 years.

If Russia wants to bring war on the United States, let them. There's one less country the U.S.A. needs to worry about in 2 years.

Your first post = Epic Win

Be proud - few people can say that.

Your first post = Epic Win

Be proud - few people can say that.

Thanks...saw the thread and couldn't help myself.

What was Texas before it was part of the U.S.?

An independent and free Republic. Before That is was part of Mexico, which got its borders drawn from Imperialists. How far back are you willing to go? Mexico encouraged the immigration, and the Texans were idiots who rebelled because they realized the shit they signed hurt them a great deal in mexico, in economic ways. However, I seem to remember that the U.S. had nothing to do with this, until Texas was annexed into U.S. territory.

Also, there are several fundamental diffrences, ie WHEN CAN YOU GET IT OUT OF YOUR FREAKING HEAD THAT ALBAINIA DIDNT MAKE PEOPLE MOVE TO KOSOVO, THEY WERE THERE ALREADY.

If Russia wants to bring war on the United States, let them. There's one less country the U.S.A. needs to worry about in 2 years.

you are Brilliant. Jayate's right that absolutley rocked.

Epic.

This seems to have an all too nostalgic familiarity to it.

Aside from that. Russia would be boned if they tried not only to take on the US, but the rest of NATO as well.

JOKES ON YOU! SERBIA WASN'T A COUNTRY UNTIL THE 1800'S!

All of them were jointly part of either Austria-Hungary(or one or the other before the two were joined) or officially part of the Holy Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire.

The jokes on you. There was a Serbia before there was either an Austria-Hungarian Empire.

The Serbs were in the area during the 630's AD. The area was given to them by the Emperor Byzantine in return for whooping the rears of the Avar barbarians.

Serbs became Christian in 865AD. Before this time, and dating as far back as the early 6th century AD there were actually 6 Serbian kingdoms: Raska, Duklja, Travunia, Zahumlje, Pagania and Bosnia.
Raska was the first and main Serbian state. It was what we today call Kosovo. Albania was a mere province of it.
Duklja was modern day Montenegro.
Travunia was located in eastern Herzegovina and southern Dalmatia.
Zahumlje was also located in southern Dalmatia and included parts of Herzegovina.
Pagania was also in southern Dalmatia and included many of the islands.
Finally you have Bosnia which is the only Serb state to retain its name. The Bosnians are actually all serbians.

Raska conquered all of the former and there was one Serbian state by the 11th century. Austria does not go that far back. Though the Byzantine does. But clearly these states seperate from the Byzantines.

Serbia became 4 states in the 12 century. By 1349, Serbia was one of the main nations of Europe. Routinely defeating western europeans on battlefields.

By the time of the Turkish invasion at the Battle of Kosovo, the powerful kingdom of Serbia had already been collapsing. In fact it was the battle of Kosovo that destroyed the Serbian Empire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia#Early_history

And nothing gives Russians the right to meddle in this. If Kosovo wants to be free, it should.
The same's true of the EU and US, to be quite honest.
This suggestion remembers me a lot of World War I, Russia meddling and "defending" interests in the conturbed balkans.
Aye, because it's not like Britain, Turkey, France, Italy and Austro-Hungary had interests there. Not like the British were actually involved in the Black Hand. Oh no.

difference is that is less than 20 years since the albanians forced the serbs out... you can't compare the other thing to what happens now as it was 600-800 years ago.

If you recall correctly, it was the serbs doing the majority of the forced relocation on Muslim croats. I seriously don't know what the hell you're talking about with Albanians.

If you look at it really carefully, you might notice that Albania's borders haven't changed since a century and a half. So much for "forcing the serbs out".

Have you honestly seen an independence movement from any mexican group in California? Oh, that's right, you haven't, because we treat our citizens right. Key difference right there.


Two wrongs don't make a right, which is why they should both be seperated.


If you count Europe as one unit (which in all honestly, with the EU, you should), they aren't. Cancelling out nuclear capabilities for all of the nations with that ability, Russia isn't that powerful or efficient militarily. China could probably kick it's butt, but that's an argument for another time.

MECHA: Primary goal of which is to seperate the southwest from the United States to form the Mexican state of Aztlan.

The same's true of the EU and US, to be quite honest.

Ah, yes, but I think this is were-involved-because-they're-involved type of things

Aye, because it's not like Britain, Turkey, France, Italy and Austro-Hungary had interests there. Not like the British were actually involved in the Black Hand. Oh no.

No argument there. We were bad

So? Mexicans are a majority in New Mexico, does that give New Mexico a free pass to break up with the US?

QFT

GO Russia!

And the Russian government hasn't? Facts can be selected both ways. Don't pretend that either side has the moral high ground.

It isn't too hard to be on a higher moral ground than the US right now. They didn't carpet-bomb Serbia and aren't planning to do it for the second time in less than a decade.

Despite the fact that those oligarchs that are not complaining are the ones in the Putin administration. They now have consolodated power in the hands of a few wealthy buearocrats. Nice job.

Mr. Putin has arrested oligarchs such as Mikhail Khodorkovsky for sundry crimes, including murder, and expelled the US and British interests who gained control of Russia's resources by manipulation of the political system under Yeltsin. that is why Russia is now having the greatest prosperity in years, which is why Putin is so popular.

Oh how I can't wait to hear this one explained and sourced

One need look no further than the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, led by such neoconservatives as Richard Perle, who have largely driven America's policy concerning Chechnya, which is belligerent towards Russia. Or look at the NED's support of Gary Kasparov, who is used as a more respectable front-man for the opposition NBP which controls Other Russia. They are upset that political parties can no longer accept foreign subsidies, which would allow the US and others to place someone in power who would give them oil concessions.

I was actually referring to Estonia. But if you'd like to explain how a few old Patriot missle interceptors could possibley damage Russia in any way, be my guess.

I said that the missile defense shield would be used as an adjunct for a first-strike, not as a first-strike. The basic idea is that you fire your missiles first to destroy as much of their capacity as possible, and then when they shoot their remaining missiles back at you you shoot them down with the missile shield. It is useless as a solely defensive measure, as it is easily overwhelmed by a swarm of missiles and decoys. But when used after a first strike it allows one to get away with starting nuclear war.

AKA the US should let Russia do what it wants where it wants without any protests? yeah right

No. The US should stop trying to boss the rest of the world around, like in Serbia. Russia is merely responding to US aggression against their allies and against themselves. If we stop doing this and stop trying to subvert the Russian government, then they will be friendlier to us.

MECHA: Primary goal of which is to seperate the southwest from the United States to form the Mexican state of Aztlan.

What's your point? The MECHA is a racist organization. So was Serbia, exercising ethnic cleansing on Bosnian Muslims/ Croats. You might as well defend the KKK while your at it.

It isn't too hard to be on a higher moral ground than the US right now. They didn't carpet-bomb Serbia and aren't planning to do it for the second time in less than a decade.



Mr. Putin has arrested oligarchs such as Mikhail Khodorkovsky for sundry crimes, including murder, and expelled the US and British interests who gained control of Russia's resources by manipulation of the political system under Yeltsin. that is why Russia is now having the greatest prosperity in years, which is why Putin is so popular.



One need look no further than the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, led by such neoconservatives as Richard Perle, who have largely driven America's policy concerning Chechnya, which is belligerent towards Russia. Or look at the NED's support of Gary Kasparov, who is used as a more respectable front-man for the opposition NBP which controls Other Russia. They are upset that political parties can no longer accept foreign subsidies, which would allow the US and others to place someone in power who would give them oil concessions.



I said that the missile defense shield would be used as an adjunct for a first-strike, not as a first-strike. The basic idea is that you fire your missiles first to destroy as much of their capacity as possible, and then when they shoot their remaining missiles back at you you shoot them down with the missile shield. It is useless as a solely defensive measure, as it is easily overwhelmed by a swarm of missiles and decoys. But when used after a first strike it allows one to get away with starting nuclear war.



No. The US should stop trying to boss the rest of the world around, like in Serbia. Russia is merely responding to US aggression against their allies and against themselves. If we stop doing this and stop trying to subvert the Russian government, then they will be friendlier to us.

Yes. The US has every right to do what is best for the world and in it's own self interest before some psychotic government (not pointing any fingers) decides to try to take on the responsibility itself and ruin us all. We have the power and we need to do what it takes!

Yes. The US has every right to do what is best for the world and in it's own self interest before some psychotic government (not pointing any fingers) decides to try to take on the responsibility itself and ruin us all. We have the power and we need to do what it takes!
Nah, you've fucked the world up quite enough in the last few years. Give it a break, eh?

Oo! Oo! I know! Pick me! Pick me!

It was a republic, monsieur!

Indeed. And before it won its independence from Mexico it was fighting for statehood. Who were the fighters? Mostly illegal immigrants from the U.S.

Ah yes, the English. How could I forget?
Are we still a little angry about the revolutionary war?
The United States has paved the way for the modern world and you know it. The car, the computer, the lightbulb. The US is the pioneer while everybody else, ahem, just sits back and enjoys the ride.
Nothing worse than parasites.

Nah, you've fucked the world up quite enough in the last few years. Give it a break, eh?

relax, eh?

Ah yes, the English. How could I forget?
Are we still a little angry about the revolutionary war?
The United States has paved the way for the modern world and you know it. The car, the computer, the lightbulb. The US is the pioneer while everybody else, ahem, just sits back and enjoys the ride.
Nothing worse than parasites.

Not entirely accurate (I wouldn't call them parasites), but it's funny how they talk about the US fucking over the world when Europe is far more responsible for its present, fucked-over form. The US is reacting to the hell Europe created.

Remember kiddies, Iraq and Israel are BRITISH creations

Not entirely accurate (I wouldn't call them parasites), but it's funny how they talk about the US fucking over the world when Europe is far more responsible for its present, fucked-over form. The US is reacting to the hell Europe created.

Remember kiddies, Iraq and Israel are BRITISH creations

I suppose that some people just might be bitter that they are the cause of something much more powerful than they.
More powerful than any single country, in fact.

Ah yes, the English. How could I forget?
Are we still a little angry about the revolutionary war?
Not really. Much more pressing engagements in the world.
The United States has paved the way for the modern world and you know it.
Not really, no.
The car
Internal combustion version, the Swiss, steam-powered, the Belgians, Flemish, to be more precise.
the computer
We British got there first both in terms of analogue and indeed electronic computers, squire ;)
the lightbulb.
British. We made one in 1802, you know. And then the arc lamp in 1807. And then a 'proper' running lamp in 1835. And one involving a proper vacuum in 1840, and indeed we got the first patent in 1841, four years before John Wellington Starr got one in the US.
The US is the pioneer while everybody else, ahem, just sits back and enjoys the ride.
Care to give me something that you guys actually invented first, outside of condensed milk?
Nothing worse than parasites.
Yes, quite.

"Oh, you designed the jet engine? Hmm, time to go back on reciprocal research agreements and just cadge the blueprints. Incidentally despite your work on the atomic bomb, no, no you can't have any documents ascertaining as to how to make one"
relax, eh?
Hey, if "relax, eh?" was US foreign policy, I'd be chuffed. But it isn't, so I'm not.

Come on people, this is rdiculous! Russia ,the US,Britian and France all have nuclear weapons!I do not want a nuclear holocaust over a small obscure country such as Kosovo. disputes such as this have a proper place to resolve disputes-the United Nations.

It isn't too hard to be on a higher moral ground than the US right now. They didn't carpet-bomb Serbia and aren't planning to do it for the second time in less than a decade.

Really? What ever happened to "Never again?" They were commiting ethnic cleanisng. They go bombed. Boo-hoo. By your logic it was cruel and inhumane for the Soviet Union to Carpet-bomb Germany

Mr. Putin has arrested oligarchs such as Mikhail Khodorkovsky for sundry crimes, including murder, and expelled the US and British interests who gained control of Russia's resources by manipulation of the political system under Yeltsin. that is why Russia is now having the greatest prosperity in years, which is why Putin is so popular.
Which is why the State has gained another 5% of the nations economy. Who controls the state? The bueruacrats. Who now are oligarchs, having gotten incredibley rich from this profiteering. And I'm pretty sure native Russian Mobsters gained control of Russian buisness more than U.S. and British Intrests.


One need look no further than the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, led by such neoconservatives as Richard Perle, who have largely driven America's policy concerning Chechnya, which is belligerent towards Russia. Or look at the NED's support of Gary Kasparov, who is used as a more respectable front-man for the opposition NBP which controls Other Russia.

One need look no further than the fact that Putin got a 98% of votes in Chechnya to start having doubts about either a) your statement or b) the Russian democratic process. If you take a fringe group and apply it to all of a country, I would have long ago concluded that all Russians are racist Nazis

They are upset that political parties can no longer accept foreign subsidies, which would allow the US and others to place someone in power who would give them oil concessions.

By that same argument we should nationalize our food industry and use it as a weapon against you, making you pay far higher prices. Which is what I advocate doing, btw. At least, i think your Russian, and I'm not too sure we should be selling food to a country that a) is not democratic and b) is trying to intimidate and control some of our allies

I said that the missile defense shield would be used as an adjunct for a first-strike, not as a first-strike. The basic idea is that you fire your missiles first to destroy as much of their capacity as possible, and then when they shoot their remaining missiles back at you you shoot them down with the missile shield. It is useless as a solely defensive measure, as it is easily overwhelmed by a swarm of missiles and decoys. But when used after a first strike it allows one to get away with starting nuclear war.

if a few old patriot missle sites are enough to stop a Russian response, they have bigger problems than the U.S.

No. The US should stop trying to boss the rest of the world around, like in Serbia. Russia is merely responding to US aggression against their allies and against themselves. If we stop doing this and stop trying to subvert the Russian government, then they will be friendlier to us.

Thats not the type of isolationism that allowed Hitler to come to power. No. Not at all. What are you talking about? Maybe if we just left him alone, he would be friendlier to us.

Not at all accurate
Fixed.
but it's funny how they talk about the US fucking over the world when Europe is far more responsible for its present, fucked-over form. The US is reacting to the hell Europe created.

Remember kiddies, Iraq and Israel are BRITISH creations
Both mistakes that the US is gleefully worsening. Giving weapons to Israel and launching a pointless war on Iraq, which did... err... what was it again? to merit its reduction from vaguely functioning state to sub-Saharan Africa levels.

Nice one, guys ;)

America is a superpower, the EU is no pushover either. What the hell gives you an idea that Russia could take on the US, a super power and the most powerful military and economic power on earth, and the European Union, collectively the richest confederation on earth?! The russians would get their asses kicked!

Not really. Much more pressing engagements in the world.

Not really, no.

Internal combustion version, the Swiss, steam-powered, the Belgians, Flemish, to be more precise.

We British got there first both in terms of analogue and indeed electronic computers, squire ;)

British. We made one in 1802, you know. And then the arc lamp in 1807. And then a 'proper' running lamp in 1835. And one involving a proper vacuum in 1840, and indeed we got the first patent in 1841, four years before John Wellington Starr got one in the US.

Care to give me something that you guys actually invented first, outside of condensed milk?

Yes, quite.

"Oh, you designed the jet engine? Hmm, time to go back on reciprocal research agreements and just cadge the blueprints. Incidentally despite your work on the atomic bomb, no, no you can't have any documents ascertaining as to how to make one"

Hey, if "relax, eh?" was US foreign policy, I'd be chuffed. But it isn't, so I'm not.

Ok, you're being a little ridiculous here.
I dunno what kind of cars you're driving over there but here we use internal combustion engines.
The United States actually had a computers used in world war II. They were obviously created prior.

You asked for a list of things we invented, here you are "old chap"
1784 Bifocal Glasses

Benjamin Franklin is usually credited with the creation of the first pair of bifocals in the early 1760's, though the first indication of his double spectacles comes from a political cartoon printed in 1764. A great number of letters and publications from that time period refer to Dr. Franklin's double spectacles, including his first reference to them in a letter dated August 21, 1784.
1794 Cotton Gin

Eli Whitney patents his machine to comb and deseed bolls of cotton. His invention makes possible a revolution in the cotton industry and the rise of "King Cotton" as the main cash crop in the South, but will never make him rich. Instead of buying his machine, farmers built bogus versions of their own.
Also lead to the increasing want/need for slave labor.

1801 Steam-Powered Pumping Station

The Fairmount Water Works harnesses steam power to provide water for the city of Philadelphia.
1803 Spray gun

Dr. Alan de Vilbiss of Toledo, Ohio, invented this device to replace swabs as the method of applying medication to oral and nasal passages.
1805 Self Propelled Amphibious vehicle

Oliver Evans' "Orukter Amphibolos" dredges the waters near the Philadelphia docks. Its steam-powered engine drove either wooden wheels or a paddle wheel. Evans demonstrated his machine in Philadelphia's Center Square, where he passed the hat for money.
1806 Coffee pot

Coffee drinkers the world over no longer have to chew their brew. Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford, invents a coffee pot with a metal sieve to strain away the grounds.
1818 Profile lathe

Thomas Blanchard of Middlebury, Connecticut, builds a woodworking lathe that does the work of 13 men. His invention helps to lower wood prices.
1831 Reaping machine

The McCormick Reaper, which cut grain much faster than a man with a scythe, failed to catch on. McCormick sold the first unit around 1840; by 1844, only 50 had sold. After taking his operation to Chicago, McCormick prospered. By 1871 his company was selling 10,000 reapers per year.
1833 Sewing machine

Walter Hunt invents the first lock-stitch sewing machine, but loses interest and does not patent his invention. Later, Elias Howe secures patent on an original lock-stitch machine, but fails to manufacture and sell it. Still later, Isaac Singer infringes on Howe's patent to make his own machine, which makes Singer rich. Hunt also invents the safety pin, which he sells outright for $400.
1834 Threshing machine

John A. and Hiram Abial Pitts invent a machine that automatically threshes and separates grain from chaff, freeing farmers from a slow and laborious process.
1836 Revolver

To finance the development of his "six shooter," Samuel Colt traveled the lecture circuit, giving demonstrations of laughing gas. Colt's new weapon failed to catch on, and he went bankrupt in 1842 at age 28. He reorganized and sold his first major order to the War Department during the Mexican War in 1846, and went on to become rich.
1837 Power Tools

Thomas Davenport of Brandon, Vermont, is one of the first to find a practical application for the electric motor. He uses a motor he built to power shop machinery and also builds the first electric model railroad car.
1840 Paint Tube

John Rand invents a collapsible metal squeeze tube. The container immediately hits markets in Europe, where it is used to hold and dispense artists' pigments.
1842 Ether Anesthesia

Crawford Williamson Long, of Jefferson, Georgia, performs the first operation using an ether-based anesthesia, when he removes a tumor from the neck of Mr. James Venable. Long will not reveal his discovery until 1849.
1843 Mechanical Refrigerator

American John Gorrie produced the first mechanical refrigeration unit in 1842.
1846 Cylinder Printing Press

Richard M. Hoe creates a revolution in printing by rolling a cylinder over stationary plates of inked type and using the cylinder to make an impression on paper. This eliminated the need for making impressions directly from the type plates themselves, which were heavy and difficult to maneuver.
1857 Passenger Elevator Safety System

Elisha Graves Otis dramatically demonstrates his passenger elevator at the Crystal Palace Exposition in New York by cutting the elevator's cables as it ascends a 300 foot tower. Otis' unique safety braking system prevents the elevator from falling; his business prospects rise.
1858 Burglar Alarm

Edwin T. Holmes of Boston begins to sell electric burglar alarms. Later, his workshop will be used by Alexander Graham Bell as the young Bell pursues his invention of the telephone. Holmes will be the first person to have a home telephone.
1859 Oil Well

Drilling at Titusville, Pennsylvania, "Colonel" Edwin Drake strikes oil at a depth of 69.5 feet. Prior to that, oil, which had been used mostly as a lubricant and lamp fuel, had been obtained only at places where it seeped from the ground. Western Pennsylvania witnesses the world's first oil boom.
1860 Water Tower

The City of Louisville, Kentucky begins using the first modern water tower, to equalize pressure and allow for clean running water. This was the first major advancement in water technology since the fall of the Roman Empire
1860 Repeating rifle

B. Tyler Henry, chief designer for Oliver Fisher Winchester's arms company, adapts a breech-loading rifle invented by Walter B. Hunt and creates a new lever action repeating rifle. First known as the Henry, the rifle will soon be famous as simply the Winchester.
1861 Modern Pin Tumbler Lock

Linus Yale Jr. improved upon his father's original design (patented in 1848) in 1861, using a smaller, flat key with serrated edges that is the basis of modern pin-tumbler locks.
1863 Roller Skates

James Plimpton of Medford, Massachusetts, gives the world the first practical four-wheeled roller skate. This sets off a roller craze that quickly spreads across the U.S. and Europe.
1865 Web Offset Printing

William Bullock introduced a printing press that could feed paper on a continuous roll and print both sides of the paper at once. Used first by the Philadelphia Ledger, the machine would become an American standard. It would also kill its maker, who died when he accidentally fell into one of his presses.
1867 Barbed Wire

Farmer Henry Rose, invents the product that will close down the open cattle ranges by closing in cattle onto individual plots of privately owned land. I.L. Ellwood and Company's Glidden Steel Barb Wire will dominate the market; by 1890 the open range will be only a memory.
1870 Pneumatic Subway

Working in secret to hide his operation from Boss Tweed, who opposes it, Scientific American publisher Alfred Ely Beach builds a pneumatic subway under Broadway in New York. Beach's single subway car, which features upholstered chairs and chandeliers is driven along the 300 foot tunnel by a 100 horsepower blower.
1875 Electric Dental Drill

George F. Green of Kalamazoo, Michigan invented an electric powered device to drill teeth.
1875 Mimeograph

While using paraffin in an attempt to invent and improve telegraphy tape, Thomas Alva Edison discovers a way to make duplicate copies of documents instead.
1877 Telephone The early history of the telephone is a confusing morass of claim and counterclaim, which was not clarified by the huge mass of lawsuits which hoped to resolve the patent claims of individuals. The Bell and Edison patents, however, were forensically victorious and commercially decisive.

1879 Incandescent Light

After many experiments with platinum and other metal filaments, Edison returned to a carbon filament. The first successful test was on October 22, 1879;[8] and lasted 13.5 hours. Edison continued to improve this design and by Nov 4, 1879, filed for a U.S. patent (granted as U.S. Patent 0,223,898 on Jan 27, 1880) for an electric lamp using "a carbon filament or strip coiled and connected ... to platina contact wires."[9] Although the patent described several ways of creating the carbon filament including using "cotton and linen thread, wood splints, papers coiled in various ways,"[9] it was not until several months after the patent was granted that Edison and his team discovered that a carbonized bamboo filament could last over 1200 hours.
1880 Hearing Aid R.G. Rhodes improves on the ear trumpet with another primitive hearing aid. The device is a thin sheet of hard rubber or cardboard placed against teeth which conducts vibrations to the auditory nerve.

1881 Maxim Gun The first true machine gun was invented in 1881 by Hiram Maxim. The "Maxim gun" used the recoil power of the previously fired bullet to reload rather than being hand powered, enabling a much higher rate of fire than was possible using earlier designs. Maxim's other great innovation was the use of water cooling (via a water jacket around the barrel) to reduce overheating. Maxim's gun was widely adopted and derivative designs were used on all sides during the First World War. The design required less crew, was lighter, and more usable than earlier Gatling guns.

1882 Electric Fan Dr. Schuyler Skaats Wheeler invented the two-bladed desk fan, which is produced by the Crocker and Curtis electric motor company.

1885 Skyscraper After the Great Fire of 1871, Chicago has become a magnet for daring experiments in architecture. William Le Baron Jenney completes the 10-story Home Insurance Company Building, the first to use steel-girder construction; more than twenty skyscrapers will be built in Chicago over the next 9 years.

1887 "Platter" Record Edison's tube recording system produces distorted sound because of gravity's pressure on the playing stylus. Emile Berliner, a German immigrant living in Washington, DC, invents a process for recording sound on a horizontal disc. The "platter" record is born.

1888 Camera In Rochester, New York, George Eastman introduces a hand-held box camera for portable use. The camera is pre-loaded with 100 exposure film; after shooting the photographer returns the whole camera to the manufacturer for development and a reload.

1891 Escalator Jesse W. Reno, introduces a new novelty ride at Coney Island. His moving stairway elevates passengers on a conveyor belt at an angle of 25 degrees. The device will be shown at the Paris Exposition of 1900, where it is called the escalator.

1896 Automatic Hat James Boyle, of Washington, invents a hat that tips automatically.

1901 Safety razor King Camp Gillette, former traveling hardware salesman of Fond du Lac, invents double-edged safety razor. By the end of 1904, he will have sold 90,000 razors and 12,400,000 blades, but he will die in 1932 with his dream of a utopian society organized by engineers unrealized.

1902 Air Conditioner Willis Carrier manufactured the world's first mechanical air conditioning unit in 1902.

1903 Aeroplane The Wright brothers are generally credited with building the world's first successful human flight in a powered aeroplane and making the first controlled, powered and heavier-than-air human flight on December 17, 1903. In the two years afterward, they developed their flying machine into the world's first practical fixed-wing aircraft. The brothers' fundamental breakthrough was their invention of "three axis-control," which enabled the pilot to steer the aircraft effectively and to maintain its equilibrium. This method has become standard on fixed wing aircraft of all kinds. From the beginning of their aeronautical work, the Wright brothers focused on unlocking the secrets of control to conquer "the flying problem," rather than on developing more powerful engines as some other experimenters did.

1911 Self Starter Charles F. Kettering, who developed the electric cash register while working at National Cash Register, sells his electric automobile starters to the Cadillac company. This device increases the popularity of the gasoline-powered car, which no longer needs to be started with a hand crank.

1921 Wirephoto The first electronically-transmitted photograph is sent by Western Union. The idea for a facsimile transmission was first proposed by Scottish clockmaker Alexander Bain in 1843.

1924 Gas Chamber Execution In an effort to make capital punishment more humane, the State of Nevada introduces death by gas chamber. Convicted murderer Gee John takes 6 minutes to die.

1929 Frozen Food Clarence Birdseye offers his quick-frozen foods to the public. Birdseye got the idea during fur-trapping expeditions to Labrador in 1912 and 1916, where he saw the natives use freezing to preserve foods.

1931 Radio Astronomy While trying to track down a source of electrical interference on telephone transmissions, Karl Guthe Jansky of Bell Telephone Laboratories discovers radio waves emanating from stars in outer space.

1937 Chair Lift James Curran build a chair lift for the Dollar Mountain resort in Sun Valley, Idaho. Dollar Mountain follows with an order for six more.

1938 Nylon A team of researchers working under Wallace H. Carothers at E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company invents a plastic that can be drawn into strong, silk-like fibers. Nylon will soon become popular as a fabric for hosiery as well as industrial applications such as cordage.

1942 Defibrillator Dr. Claude Beck develops a device for jump-starting the heart with a burst of electricity.

1945 Microwave Oven Cooking food with microwaves was discovered by Percy Spencer on October 8, 1945, while building magnetrons for radar sets at Raytheon. He was working on an active radar set when he noticed a strange sensation, and saw that a peanut candy bar he had in his pocket started to melt. Although he was not the first to notice this phenomenon, as the holder of 120 patents, Spencer was no stranger to discovery and experiment, and realized what was happening. The radar had melted his candy bar with microwaves. The first food to be deliberately cooked with microwaves was popcorn, and the second was an egg (which exploded in the face of one of the experimenters).

1946 Carbon Dating In 1946, Willard F. Libby invented the procedure for carbon-14 dating.

1947 Polaroid camera Dr. Edwin H. Land introduces a new camera that can produce a developed photographic image in sixty seconds. Land will follow in the 1960s with a color model and eventually receive more than 500 patents for his innovations in light and plastics technologies.

1953 Heart-lung machine Dr. John H. Gibbon performs the first successful open heart surgery in which the blood is artificially circulated and oxygenated by a heart-lung machine. This new technology, which allows the surgeon to operate on a dry and motionless heart, greatly increases surgical treatment options for heart defects and disease.

1955 Nuclear Submarine The Nautilus, the first nuclear submarine, revolutionizes naval warfare. Conventional submarines need two engines: a diesel engine to travel on the surface and an electric engine to travel submerged, where oxygen for a diesel engine is not available. The Nautilus, the first nuclear sub, can travel many thousands of miles below the surface with a single fuel charge.

1957 Polio Vaccine Dr. Jonas Salk develops a polio vaccine using strains of polio too weak to cause infection but strong enough to activate the human immune system.

1959 Integrated Circuit Jack Kilby of Texas Instruments filed a patent for a "Solid Circuit" made of germanium on February 6, 1959. The integration of large numbers of tiny transistors into a small chip was an enormous improvement over the manual assembly of circuits using discrete electronic components.

1960 Oral contraceptive On May 9, 1960, the FDA announced it would approve Enovid 10 mg for contraceptive use, which it did on June 23, 1960, by which time Enovid 10 mg had been in general use for three years during which time, by conservative estimate, at least half a million women had used it

1960 Laser Working at Hughes Research Laboratories, physicist Theodore H. Maiman creates the first laser. The core of his laser consists of a man-made ruby -- a material that had been judged unsuitable by other scientists, who rejected crystal cores in favor of various gases.

1964 Operating System IBM rolls out the OS/360, the first mass-produced computer operating system. Using the OS/360, all computers in the IBM 360 family could run any software program. Already IBM is a giant in the computer industry, controlling 70% of the market worldwide.

1965 Minicomputer Digital Equipment introduces the PDP-8, the world's first computer to use integrated circuit technology. Because of its relatively small size and its low $18,000 price tag, Digital sells several hundred units.

1970 Optical Fiber Corning Glass announces it has created a glass fiber so clear that it can communicate pulses of light. GTE and AT&T will soon begin experiments to transmit sound and image data using fiber optics, which will transform the communications industry.

1972 Calculator Jack St. Clair Kilby (November 8, 1923 – June 20, 2005) is a Nobel Prize laureate in physics in 2000 for his invention of the integrated circuit in 1958 while working at Texas Instruments (TI). He is also the inventor of handheld calculator and thermal printer.

1974 Product Barcode The first shipments of bar-coded products arrive in American stores. Scanners at checkout stations read the codes using laser technology. The hand-punched keyboard cash register takes one step closer to obsolescence.

1979 Human-Powered Flight Cyclist Byron Allen crosses the English Channel in a pedal-powered aircraft called the Gossamer Albatross. The flight takes 2 hours, 49 minutes, and wins a £100,000 prize for its crew, headed by designer Dr. Paul MacCready. Constructed of Mylar, polystyrene, and carbon-fiber rods, the Albatross has a wingspan of 93 feet 10 inches and weighs about 70 pounds.

1981 Space Shuttle For the first time, NASA successfully launches and lands its reusable spacecraft, the Space Shuttle. The shuttle can be used for a number of applications, including launch, retrieval, and repair of satellites and as a laboratory for physical experiments. While extremely successful, the shuttle program will suffer a disaster in 1986 when the shuttle Challenger explodes after takeoff, killing all on board.

1982 Artificial Heart Dr. Robert Jarvik implants a permanent artificial heart, the Jarvik 7, into Dr. Barney Clark. The heart, powered by an external compressor, keeps Clark alive for 112 days.

1983 Internet The first TCP/IP-wide area network was operational by January 1, 1983, when the United States' National Science Foundation (NSF) constructed a university network backbone that would later become the NSFNet. (This date is held by some to be technically that of the birth of the Internet.) It was then followed by the opening of the network to commercial interests in 1985. As of March 10, 2007, 2.114 billion people use the Internet, according to Internet World Stats, for many uses including e-mails and accessing the World Wide Web.

1988 Graphic User Interface Xerox PARC creates the first modern GUI.

1990 Hubble Telescope The space shuttle Discovery deploys the Hubble Space telescope 350 miles above the Earth. Although initial flaws limit its capabilities, the Hubble will be responsible for numerous discoveries and advances in the understanding of space.

1994 Top quark April 23 - American physicists at Fermilab discover and observe the top quark.

1995 Galileo (spacecraft) The Galileo spacecraft after 6 years and 2.35 billion miles gains orbit around Jupiter. It will make at least 10 passes of the Galilean moons and act as a relay station for the Galileo probe.

1998 Stem cell line Researchers announce that they have successfully grown human stem cells in a laboratory, a major advance that could one day help in organ transplantation, gene therapy and treatment of such maladies as paralysis, diabetes and AIDS.

2000 Human Genome Project The publicly funded Human Genome Project, led by Francis Collins and the privately funded Celera effort, led by Craig Venter simultaneously publish their decoding of the human genome (in Nature and Science, respectively).

2003 Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe February 11 - NASA's WMAP takes first detailed "baby picture" of the universe. The image reveals the universe is 13.7 billion years old (within one percent error) and provides evidence that supports the inflationary theory.

2004 NASA X-43 NASA builds the X-43, attaining speeds in excess of Mach 9.8, the fastest free flying air-breathing hypersonic flight.

2004 Spirit Rover Mars Exploration Rover - A, known as Spirit, is the first of the two rovers of NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Mission. It landed successfully on Mars on 04:35 Ground UTC on January 4, 2004, three weeks before its twin Opportunity (MER-B) landed on the other side of the planet. Its name was chosen through a NASA-sponsored student essay competition.

2006 Cervical Cancer Vaccine University of Louisville researchers discover the world's first ever cancer vaccine. It is estimated to save millions of women's lives annually throughout the world.

...Just to name a few, buddy.
Enjoy

Let them try. It'll be funny.

Let them try. It'll be funny.

To the ones who are left.

IE Africa, China, Isreal, Austrailia, and South America

I agree that all countries in the world teamed up on the US for whatever reason, it would probably lose and they could then decivilze the planet.

Let them try. It'll be funny.

US+Europe GDP: $26.19 trillion
Russia GDP: $1.746 trillion

US+EU population: 798,073,529
Russia population: 142,725,000 and shrinking

They'd last about as long as Iraq.

IE Africa, China, Isreal, Austrailia, and South America

The other 5.3 billion people?

Not really. Much more pressing engagements in the world.

Not really, no.

Internal combustion version, the Swiss, steam-powered, the Belgians, Flemish, to be more precise.

We British got there first both in terms of analogue and indeed electronic computers, squire ;)

British. We made one in 1802, you know. And then the arc lamp in 1807. And then a 'proper' running lamp in 1835. And one involving a proper vacuum in 1840, and indeed we got the first patent in 1841, four years before John Wellington Starr got one in the US.

Care to give me something that you guys actually invented first, outside of condensed milk?

Yes, quite.

"Oh, you designed the jet engine? Hmm, time to go back on reciprocal research agreements and just cadge the blueprints. Incidentally despite your work on the atomic bomb, no, no you can't have any documents ascertaining as to how to make one"

Hey, if "relax, eh?" was US foreign policy, I'd be chuffed. But it isn't, so I'm not.

To name a few..
Bifocal Glasses
Cotton Gin
Repeating rifle
Telephone
Airplane
Defibrillator
Microwave Oven
Polio Vaccine
Operating System - this makes a computer work
Internet
Hubble Telescope

Ah yes, the English. How could I forget?
Are we still a little angry about the revolutionary war?
The United States has paved the way for the modern world and you know it. The car, the computer, the lightbulb. The US is the pioneer while everybody else, ahem, just sits back and enjoys the ride.
Nothing worse than parasites.


Why is it that these 'super-patriots' always harp on about the 'Revolutionary War' as some great event...given todays geopolitical state.

Paved the way....ok....well lets use your examples

The car. Actually (as has been already pointed out) European. Also with regards to paving the way the current configuration of the motorcar is actually British by way of Cadillac. The Austin 7. Read about it. Sure you pioneered the idea but it was the English who brought it to the world. So all you really did was...lead the English. Ta for that.

The computer. English...well British and European. Bletchley Park and Colossus. 2nd World War. First commercial computers were English. Lyons Company. Read about it.

The light bulb.

Already been covered in another post.

You fail.

US+Europe GDP: $26.19 trillion
Russia GDP: $1.746 trillion

US+EU population: 798,073,529
Russia population: 142,725,000 and shrinking

They'd last about as long as Iraq.

Yeah, but Iraq didn't have this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Rocket_Forces

US+Europe GDP: $26.19 trillion
Russia GDP: $1.746 trillion

US+EU population: 798,073,529
Russia population: 142,725,000 and shrinking

They'd last about as long as Iraq.

Exactly.
I like the way you put things.

Why is it that these 'super-patriots' always harp on about the 'Revolutionary War' as some great event...given todays geopolitical state.

Paved the way....ok....well lets use your examples

The car. Actually (as has been already pointed out) European. Also with regards to paving the way the current configuration of the motorcar is actually British by way of Cadillac. The Austin 7. Read about it. Sure you pioneered the idea but it was the English who brought it to the world. So all you really did was...lead the English. Ta for that.

The computer. English...well British and European. Bletchley Park and Colossus. 2nd World War. First commercial computers were English. Lyons Company. Read about it.

The light bulb.

Already been covered in another post.

You fail.

Whatever it takes to make you guys feel better I guess; but who are you trying to fool?

I hate to rain on your parade but the United States corporation known as IBM actually created the operating system basis as we know it today so that people can use computers in their homes. Think about it... what good is a computer without an operating system.

Yeah, but Iraq didn't have this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Rocket_Forces

That's about all they have...it's the only division of the Russian army that has maintained the quality and technology necessary to compete with the US. However, I don't think Putin would be crazy enough to use nukes over Kosovo, but who knows?

That's about all they have...it's the only division of the Russian army that has maintained the quality and technology necessary to compete with the US.

That's not just "about" all they have, it's all they have. However, if their only goal is to defend themselves it's all they need.

Of course, Russia doesn't have the expeditionary force needed to invade a wet paper bag.

To name a few..
Bifocal Glasses
Cotton Gin
Repeating rifle
Telephone
Airplane
Defibrillator
Microwave Oven
Polio Vaccine
Operating System - this makes a computer work
Internet
Hubble Telescope

Bifocals - Salvino D'Armate and Alessandro Spina
Cotten Gin - look up charkhi
Repeating Rifle - Arms get invented and improved all the time. But ok. Granted
Telephone - iffy - Antonio Meucci, Johann Philipp Reis, Alexander Graham Bell, and Elisha Gray

Airplane - meh was bound to happen eventually and just further development from previous work elsewhere
Defibrillator - Swiss
Microwave- English
O/S- English
Internet - French/Dutch/English - first global packet switching network was built by SITA
Hubble - pan global effort

heh you're a funny guy! LOL :p

Here's an important thing to note when considering who invented what. The original inventor of a device doesn't really matter; what matters is the person who invents the practical version and brings it to market. The vast majority of inventions were made practical and brought to market by Americans, whether people like it or not. Without our country's technical base and economic resources, many inventions would never have gotten off of the drawing board or prototype lab.

That has to be taken in to account when considering the impact America has made on the world. Our country has done a lot to advance technology and it has paid off by making us the largest, most advanced, and most productive in the world.

That's not just "about" all they have, it's all they have. However, if their only goal is to defend themselves it's all they need.

Of course, Russia doesn't have the expeditionary force needed to invade a wet paper bag.

I think Putin would only use nukes if we did first; his country's not going to accept nuclear obliteration in an attempt to somehow "win" a conflict.

Bifocals - Salvino D'Armate and Alessandro Spina
Cotten Gin - look up charkhi
Repeating Rifle - Arms get invented and improved all the time. But ok. Granted
Telephone - iffy - Antonio Meucci, Johann Philipp Reis, Alexander Graham Bell, and Elisha Gray

Airplane - meh was bound to happen eventually and just further development from previous work elsewhere
Defibrillator - Swiss
Microwave- English
O/S- English
Internet - French/Dutch/English - first global packet switching network was built by SITA
Hubble - pan global effort

heh you're a funny guy! LOL :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_inventions
I know you're gonna be too pathetic to read it but it's there.
You are in fact wrong in every aspect in the prior reply.
I know it's tough to accept but you're gonna have to get over it, buddy.

BTW, (hubble) NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration, an agency funded by the US government

Jealousy is an ugly thing, but hey, all you have to do is speak english and pass a test and you're a citizen. No need to be jealous or hate.

Whatever it takes to make you guys feel better I guess; but who are you trying to fool?

I hate to rain on your parade but the United States corporation known as IBM actually created the operating system basis as we know it today so that people can use computers in their homes. Think about it... what good is a computer without an operating system.

Oh dear.

Actually MIT and General Motors in the early fifties. Not IBM. However the fact is that England led the way with developments which led to the creation of operating systems. Mainly via Cambridge University.

Here's an important thing to note when considering who invented what. The original inventor of a device doesn't really matter; what matters is the person who invents the practical version and brings it to market. The vast majority of inventions were made practical and brought to market by Americans, whether people like it or not. Without our country's technical base and economic resources, many inventions would never have gotten off of the drawing board or prototype lab.

That has to be taken in to account when considering the impact America has made on the world. Our country has done a lot to advance technology and it has paid off by making us the largest, most advanced, and most productive in the world.

This is so true.
These English people are being so ridiculous it makes me laugh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_inventions
I know you're gonna be too pathetic to read it but it's there.
You are in fact wrong in every aspect in the prior reply.
I know it's tough to accept but you're gonna have to get over it, buddy.

BTW, (hubble) NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration, an agency funded by the US government

Jealousy is an ugly thing, but hey, all you have to do is speak english and pass a test and you're a citizen. No need to be jealous or hate.

No. Actually the joke is on you. I referenced all my info from wiki. Mainly coz I knew you would post that link.

You fail. On an epic scale.

Oh dear.

Actually MIT and General Motors in the early fifties. Not IBM. However the fact is that England led the way with developments which led to the creation of operating systems. Mainly via Cambridge University.

Everybody knows you're blowing smoke out of your...

You have done nothing but make things up this entire time because for some reason you're bitter that America is the world leader.

I'm sorry man, but that's how it has been the entire industrial revolution, is now, and always will be. You're gonna have to accept it.

Here's an important thing to note when considering who invented what. The original inventor of a device doesn't really matter; what matters is the person who invents the practical version and brings it to market. The vast majority of inventions were made practical and brought to market by Americans, whether people like it or not. Without our country's technical base and economic resources, many inventions would never have gotten off of the drawing board or prototype lab.

That has to be taken in to account when considering the impact America has made on the world. Our country has done a lot to advance technology and it has paid off by making us the largest, most advanced, and most productive in the world.


Sure...no argument from on that. I'm just having a bit of fun.

Oh dear.

Actually MIT and General Motors in the early fifties. Not IBM. However the fact is that England led the way with developments which led to the creation of operating systems. Mainly via Cambridge University.

Good reference. GM. All American car manufacturer. The world leader in vehicular units. Interesting that you bring up yet another great american conglomerate.
Thank you for proving my point.

Everybody knows you're blowing smoke out of your...

You have done nothing but make things up this entire time because for some reason you're bitter that America is the world leader.

I'm sorry man, but that's how it has been the entire industrial revolution, is now, and always will be. You're gonna have to accept it.

Why am I bitter when I have American citizenship?

Good reference. GM. All American car manufacturer. The world leader in vehicular units. Interesting that you bring up yet another great american conglomerate.
Thank you for proving my point.

Odd that it took you two posts to figure out that General Motors in an American company.

Or am I giving you too much credit?

No. Actually the joke is on you. I referenced all my info from wiki. Mainly coz I knew you would post that link.

You fail. On an epic scale.

I fail because the link proves me right and you to be a liar?

That makes a lot of sense.

Oh well, you know, I know, and every person reading this knows.

Why am I bitter when I have American citizenship?

I'm gonna be honest with you, I don't know why you are.

Bifocals - Salvino D'Armate and Alessandro Spina
Cotten Gin - look up charkhi
Repeating Rifle - Arms get invented and improved all the time. But ok. Granted
Telephone - iffy - Antonio Meucci, Johann Philipp Reis, Alexander Graham Bell, and Elisha Gray

Airplane - meh was bound to happen eventually and just further development from previous work elsewhere
Defibrillator - Swiss
Microwave- English
O/S- English
Internet - French/Dutch/English - first global packet switching network was built by SITA
Hubble - pan global effort

heh you're a funny guy! LOL :p

Can you prove any of this. Give us some links. Or can't you because it's a bunch of bull crap?

Odd that it took you two posts to figure out that General Motors in an American company.

Or am I giving you too much credit?

Are you kidding me? I own a GM. We used to have a GM fridge. I know everything there is to know about GM.

I fail because the link proves me right and you to be a liar?

That makes a lot of sense.

Oh well, you know, I know, and every person reading this knows.

A liar?

Um...that is not allowed here I think. Its called flaming.

Anyway...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defibrillation - Defibrillation was first demonstrated in 1899 by Prevost and Batelli, two physiologists from University of Geneva, Switzerland. They discovered that small electric shocks could induce ventricular fibrillation in dogs, and that larger charges would reverse the condition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone - Credit for inventing the electric telephone remains in dispute. Antonio Meucci, Johann Philipp Reis, Alexander Graham Bell, and Elisha Gray, among others, have all been credited with the invention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_gin - According to Joseph Needham a precursor to the cotton gin was present in India, which was known as a charkhi, which had two elongated worms that turned its rollers in opposite directions. [1]

need I continue?

too fucking easy.

the quality of the trolls is really quite piss poor. :upyours:

I think Putin would only use nukes if we did first; his country's not going to accept nuclear obliteration in an attempt to somehow "win" a conflict.

I think that depends on the nature of the conflict. If it's an invasion of Russia itself, I don't doubt he would. Anything else, likely not.

Maybe, but I happen to know that the majority of Mexicans in California favor separating California from the US.

May I see proof of your statement?

Civil war in Yugoslavia, civil war in Congo, genocide in Rwanda, Hitler's annexation of Sudetenland and destruction of Poland - all committed in the name of ethnic self-determination. Are you ignorant of those historical events?

Um I see you failed history when it comes to the Sudetenland. An area that had a majority German Population and was given the go ahead by the powers of the time. "We have achieved peace in our time" P.M. Chamberlain *may he rot in hell*

A liar?

Um...that is not allowed here I think. Its called flaming.

Anyway...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defibrillation - Defibrillation was first demonstrated in 1899 by Prevost and Batelli, two physiologists from University of Geneva, Switzerland. They discovered that small electric shocks could induce ventricular fibrillation in dogs, and that larger charges would reverse the condition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone - Credit for inventing the electric telephone remains in dispute. Antonio Meucci, Johann Philipp Reis, Alexander Graham Bell, and Elisha Gray, among others, have all been credited with the invention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_gin - According to Joseph Needham a precursor to the cotton gin was present in India, which was known as a charkhi, which had two elongated worms that turned its rollers in opposite directions. [1]

need I continue?


The first use on a human was in 1947 by Claude Beck,[1] professor of surgery at Western Reserve University.
- made usable by the US. Suprised? I'm really not.


Bell's patent application for the telephone was filed in the US patent office on February 14, 1876. The usual story says that Bell got to the patent office an hour or two before his rival Elisha Gray, and that Gray lost his rights to the telephone as a result.[2] But that is not what happened according to Evenson[3].

- the question of who beat who is between 2 americans. Suprised?

What Kosovars? They've all been removed via NATO sanctioned ethnic cleansing. Just because NATO had Albanians move into Kosovo does not make the Albanians Kosovars.

:headbang:

You Brachiosaurus are a nut.

The first use on a human was in 1947 by Claude Beck,[1] professor of surgery at Western Reserve University.
- made usable by the US. Suprised? I'm really not.


Bell's patent application for the telephone was filed in the US patent office on February 14, 1876. The usual story says that Bell got to the patent office an hour or two before his rival Elisha Gray, and that Gray lost his rights to the telephone as a result.[2] But that is not what happened according to Evenson[3].

- the question of who beat who is between 2 americans. Suprised?

Ahh...now not only are you moving the goal posts you are failing to realise that all those links come from...wiki....your 'reliable' source.

Gads...really...go away...learn some shit then come back.

I think my work is done here. I have more productive things to do that prove an idiot to be a liar as well, but thanks, it's been fun.

You should read up on Serbia and kosovo in the 90's when the Serbs were the majority until ethnic cleansing pushed them out.

You lose.

As opposed to all the other ethnic cleansing going on in Serbia as well during the time frame we're talking about. If it was not for NATO, it would STILL be going on.

I think my work is done here. I have more productive things to do that prove an idiot to be a liar as well, but thanks, it's been fun.

Loser :p

Ok i never said wiki was reliable; but compared to you Bill Clinton looks honest. This thread was tons better before you decided to throw your weight around.
I don't really care that you're not going to accept that you're wrong, and have been this entire time. The fact is that you know it, and so do I.
You can keep telling yourself and others that you're right, but people really know the truth, I'm just the only one with the perserverance and patience to deal with a pig head like yourself. Ok, so thanks again, now if you'd kindly leave.

It is widely recognized that the Albanians want to unite Kosovo into Albania. Just as you've heard of "Greater Serbia", the Albanians have grandiose scheme for a "Greater Albania". Serbia is not the only nation in the area dealing with Albanian seperatists.

You still have yet to provide proof of that. so care to show it?

Your ethnicity does not give you the right to carve up other people's countries. Milosevic was defending Serbian territory.

And Hitler was defending German Territory when he persecuted then attempted to cleanse Germany and all German lands of Jews. :rolleyes:

Ok i never said wiki was reliable; but compared to you Bill Clinton looks honest. This thread was tons better before you decided to throw your weight around.
I don't really care that you're not going to accept that you're wrong, and have been this entire time. The fact is that you know it, and so do I.
You can keep telling yourself and others that you're right, but people really know the truth, I'm just the only one with the perserverance and patience to deal with a pig head like yourself. Ok, so thanks again, now if you'd kindly leave.

Wow. Seems to me its you who decided to throw their weight around.

Elementary School is it?

Anyway. Its apparent you are a troll. And not a very good one at that.

Only step in if there's violence. There's no reason NATO should exist solely to validate tribal land disputes.

I see you failed History again. Why do you think NATO stepped? It was not because of a tribal dispute but because there was a freakin' GENOCIDE GOING ON!!

In which case, it is incumbent on the albanians in Kosovo to leave. They don't have the right to steal other people's land.

What makes you think they stole the land? Proof it or leave the debate. It is obvious you know jack about it.

Wow. Seems to me its you who decided to throw their weight around.

Elementary School is it?

Anyway. Its apparent you are a troll. And not a very good one at that.

Well I couldn't help but notice that you're just an over opinionated alcoholic with a very warped mind so I decided to stop wasting my time.
Not enough hours in a day, then you get thrown in and it gets a whole lot shorter.

Well I couldn't help but notice that you're just an over opinionated alcoholic with a very warped mind so I decided to stop wasting my time.
Not enough hours in a day, then you get thrown in and it gets a whole lot shorter.

LOL!!!

Not really as the original premise of the Russians being involved is false because the trioka consists of the EU, the US...and the Russians.

Massive Doh!

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20071206/tts-uk-serbia-kosovo-ischinger-ca02f96_2.html



Ischinger is the EU negotiator.

Since when did you become a moderator? I wasn't informed of that.


It was the way the original poster brought his point across that gave it a trollish look. The point he's debating isn't what made it troll-like.

MECHA: Primary goal of which is to seperate the southwest from the United States to form the Mexican state of Aztlan.

Point taken; however, compare the percentage of Mexicans in California who believe this to the amount of Kosovo citizens who want independence. I bet you'll find a stark contrast in numbers.

Since when did you become a moderator? I wasn't informed of that.


It was the way the original poster brought his point across that gave it a trollish look. The point he's debating isn't what made it troll-like.

errr...since like....never.

Its a null argument is my point. The premise of the discussion that the Russians will attack the EU/US is fallacious at present as the Russians are in the camp of the west. They will not go to war against the west over Kosovo. I mean lets get some perspective here.

So? Mexicans are a majority in New Mexico, does that give New Mexico a free pass to break up with the US?

Judging by your name I think you do believe it does.

errr...since like....never.

Its a null argument is my point. The premise of the discussion that the Russians will attack the EU/US is fallacious at present as the Russians are in the camp of the west. They will not go to war against the west over Kosovo. I mean lets get some perspective here.

Idk about the russians being in the Camp of the West exactly, if ya know what I mean. They seem to be a lot friendlier with china than with anyone else.


anyway, since this thread got hijacked by trolls, Im going to try and steer it back on topic:

#1: You cannot use the "If you dont like it leave" or "They should leave because its not their country" thing.

#2: I'm pretty sure you guys are trolls (Bronch and some other dude whose name will come to me) considering as how you've convieniently ignored the key issue that you guys refuse to talk about when asked: What makes you so sure that the Albainians were forced there, or moved there on some sort of initiative from the Albainian Gov.? When I think about it, you've never answered this question, yet it is kinda central to your argument