Grimes about Kosovo war

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

Obvious suspect is Era who has a history of such things. I was responding to a post when it was deleted.

Laberia stated the Kosovo government accepted the Rambouillet proposal while Milosevic didn't as if this is proof Milosevic's offer of autonomy wasn't offered? (Hard to tell if that's his position since he wasn't specific beyond saying it was nonsense.

This was the proposal at Rambouillet:

In the end, on 18 March 1999, the Albanian, American and British delegation signed what became known as the 'Rambouillet Accords'[3] while the Serbian and Russian delegations refused. The accords called for NATO administration of Kosovo as an autonomous province within Yugoslavia; a force of 30,000 NATO troops to maintain order in Kosovo; an unhindered right of passage for NATO troops on Yugoslav territory, including Kosovo; and immunity for NATO and its agents to Yugoslav law. According to Tim Judah, the Serbian side used Annex B only later on as a reason for the failure of talks; at the time, the Serbs rejected any discussion of the involvement of foreign troops, let alone the extensive rights that would have been afforded them by Annex B.[4]

In commentary released to the press, former United States Secretary of State Henry Kissinger declared that:

The Rambouillet text, which called on Serbia to admit NATO troops throughout Yugoslavia, was a provocation, an excuse to start bombing. Rambouillet is not a document that an angelic Serb could have accepted. It was a terrible diplomatic document that should never have been presented in that form.[5]

— Henry Kissinger, Daily Telegraph, 28 June 1999
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambouillet_Agreement

Laberia's reasoning is if Milosevic was willing to give Kosovo autonomy he would have accepted the proposal but no government would have accepted the conditions placed by NATO. Even Kissinger saw the obvious. Milosevic was willing to offer autonomy but not the conditions offered by NATO. Milosevic's big beef with NATO was he didn't want them setting up shop in his country. He had rejected them before. That's understandable. You don't have real control of your nation if you have a large foreign army in your borders that is not subject to your laws.

[Trilecce]

Obvious suspect is Era who has a history of such things. I was responding to a post when it was deleted.

Laberia stated the Kosovo government accepted the Rambouillet proposal while Milosevic didn't as if this is proof Milosevic's offer of autonomy wasn't offered? (Hard to tell if that's his position since he wasn't specific beyond saying it was nonsense.

This was the proposal at Rambouillet:



Laberia's reasoning is if Milosevic was willing to give Kosovo autonomy he would have accepted the proposal but no government would have accepted the conditions placed by NATO. Even Kissinger saw the obvious. Milosevic was willing to offer autonomy but not the conditions offered by NATO. Milosevic's big beef with NATO was he didn't want them setting up shop in his country. He had rejected them before. That's understandable. You don't have real control of your nation if you have a large foreign army in your borders that is not subject to your laws.

Kosovo is very simple once you look at it with human eyes. Sure every nation should be considered the sovereign of their possesions. But does that mean that they can kill, poison and misstreat their popuöation however they want without even recognizing their most basic human rights?

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

Kosovo is very simple once you look at it with human eyes. Sure every nation should be considered the sovereign of their possesions. But does that mean that they can kill, poison and misstreat their popuöation however they want without even recognizing their most basic human rights?

NATO's interest in Kosovo was not humanitarian.

[Deymark]

IncelSlayer was banned for "Hate Speech" for a thread with a historical happening "old couple defending his home against KLA", yet the sock Kush who made the other thread, was only full of propaganda and hate speech and was only deleted after you brought this in discussion.

[Trilecce]

NATO's interest in Kosovo was not humanitarian.

All of NATOs interest are humanitarian in the end. What do you think the sovjets built 250'000 tanks for? To plant flowers in France?

[Laberia]

Obvious suspect is Era who has a history of such things. I was responding to a post when it was deleted.

Laberia stated the Kosovo government accepted the Rambouillet proposal while Milosevic didn't as if this is proof Milosevic's offer of autonomy wasn't offered? (Hard to tell if that's his position since he wasn't specific beyond saying it was nonsense.

This was the proposal at Rambouillet:



Laberia's reasoning is if Milosevic was willing to give Kosovo autonomy he would have accepted the proposal but no government would have accepted the conditions placed by NATO. Even Kissinger saw the obvious. Milosevic was willing to offer autonomy but not the conditions offered by NATO. Milosevic's big beef with NATO was he didn't want them setting up shop in his country. He had rejected them before. That's understandable. You don't have real control of your nation if you have a large foreign army in your borders that is not subject to your laws.

Please, try to be serious.
First of all try to quote me correctly.
Second, if you want to discuss about the last war in Kosova, you have to go back in time.
Third, since you started this discussion in the middle of the events and not from the beggining, i want to make you a simple question:
What happened with the autonomy of Kosova?
And fourth, can you guarantie a normal discussion in this thread? Because there is a psychopathic person around in this forum. He has given my more than thousands thumbs down, only today 36.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

All of NATOs interest are humanitarian in the end. What do you think the sovjets built 250'000 tanks for? To plant flowers in France?

The Soviet Union fell a decade prior to the war in Kosovo.

NATO is a way to keep nations in check. It's like approving of one mob family over another one.

Example: The Qadhafi regime was humbled and hadn't been a threat to anyone for years but he fucked up and it had nothing to do with being naughty to Libyans.

Hillary Emails Reveal True Motive for Libya Intervention

It's not a conspiracy theory when you can look at her e-mails thanks to Wikileaks.

One example out of many.

[Kamal900]

If most Americans were like you then America and the world would have been a much more better place right now.

[Skerdilaid]

Who gives a shit? The objective has partially been achieved. You really are something, though, Grimes.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

Please, try to be serious.
First of all try to quote me correctly.

How can I quote you when the thread was deleted by Era? What is it that you said that was misrepresented by me. Normally when someone says "quote me correctly" they point out what it is that was misquoted. You haven't done so.

Second, if you want to discuss about the last war in Kosova, you have to go back in time.

In other words you don't want me to look at the situation as it is but rather to take into account some historical grievance that every side plays. The question is what is offered as a solution. Was it rational? If not then why not? Where there any other proposals? Were they rational?

Third, since you started this discussion in the middle of the events and not from the beggining, i want to make you a simple question:
What happened with the autonomy of Kosova?

What is the issue if autonomy was again given? That's a concession. If Milosevic went back on his concession, then it would be a different matter but instead of trying for a peaceful solution the KLA - whose leadership you can't even deny was led by members of the criminal underworld - rejected it without NATO presence. What did NATO demand of the Serbian government? No restraint to their troop movements. Serbian laws wouldn't apply to them (including troops) and... the military base that they had wanted from the beginning. To accept such a proposal is to give up national sovereignty and career suicide for any government leader. To paraphrase Kissinger: it was a fucked up proposal.

And fourth, can you guarantie a normal discussion in this thread? Because there is a psychopathic person around in this forum. He has given my more than thousands thumbs down, only today 36.

Can you guarantee a normal discussion with me? You said in a deleted thread was that all I did in my post was copy and paste and that was not true. That you would only debate the issue if I wrote a sentence or two. Clearly everyone can see that isn't the case from the OP post (the post you had referred to).

I have nothing to do with anyone thumbing you down or up or not all. That has nothing to do with me. Nothing you or I write is changed by someone TU or TD. So I have no idea why you bring it up other than to give the impression there is something underhanded with how I debate (hence you asking me to guarantee a normal discussion and implying I have control over some people I don't even like thumbing you down), which is a lame tactic. You can later refer back to what you said when you decide to stop discussing the subject and 'save face'. That's insulting to me.