Kosovo vs Nagorno-Karabakh. what is the difference?

#3
The key difference is that the latter gives you a much higher score in Scrabble.
 
#4
Not so many f*cking Albanians in N-K?

N-K's main national export is not gang-raped teenage prostitutes and criminal syndicates?

Oh, I give up, gie's a clue...
 
#5
KGB_resident said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6166497.stm

Why the West doesn't insist on Nagorno-Karabakh independence?
I guess for a couple of reasons - the first is that NKO more or less freed itself (admittedly with much help from the VV-MVD and even the Guards Airborne in December '89) from the Azeris during 89-90, so the ethnic interface more or less follows the oblast' border.

The second is that neither side is really in a position to renew open warfare because that would comprehensively trash both economies.

The third is that, whether you call it Kirovabad or Agadam or whatever, the West understands two key facts about NKO:

a. There's no oil
b. It's not our problem
c. The media couldn't give a stuff and probably couldn't find NKO on a large scale map of the Nagorno-Karabakhskaya Avtonomnaya Oblast'.

Compare and contrast with Kosovo, which was invaded by NATO and ethnically cleansed by the Albanians to please the Independent, the Guardian, the New York Times and the Washington Post.
 
#6
Glad_its_all_over said:
KGB_resident said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6166497.stm

Why the West doesn't insist on Nagorno-Karabakh independence?
I guess for a couple of reasons - the first is that NKO more or less freed itself (admittedly with much help from the VV-MVD and even the Guards Airborne in December '89) from the Azeris during 89-90, so the ethnic interface more or less follows the oblast' border.

The second is that neither side is really in a position to renew open warfare because that would comprehensively trash both economies.

The third is that, whether you call it Kirovabad or Agadam or whatever, the West understands two key facts about NKO:

a. There's no oil
b. It's not our problem
c. The media couldn't give a stuff and probably couldn't find NKO on a large scale map of the Nagorno-Karabakhskaya Avtonomnaya Oblast'.

Compare and contrast with Kosovo, which was invaded by NATO and ethnically cleansed by the Albanians to please the Independent, the Guardian, the New York Times and the Washington Post.
Couldn't agree more. I believe that it is a right time for the EU to begin to shift its positions. It is clear that the only realistic solution for Kosovo is its formal status as a part of Serbia with a wide autonomy.
 
#7
KGB_resident said:
I believe that it is a right time for the EU to begin to shift its positions. It is clear that the only realistic solution for Kosovo is its formal status as a part of Serbia with a wide autonomy.
Given that it's now an article of public faith in EU that it was all started by the wicked old Serbs and the poor, innocent Albanians were just on their way back from rescuing kittens and reading to old folk, I doubt this will be acceptable, regardless of the merits.
 
#8
smartascarrots said:
KGB_resident said:
I believe that it is a right time for the EU to begin to shift its positions. It is clear that the only realistic solution for Kosovo is its formal status as a part of Serbia with a wide autonomy.
Given that it's now an article of public faith in EU that it was all started by the wicked old Serbs and the poor, innocent Albanians were just on their way back from rescuing kittens and reading to old folk, I doubt this will be acceptable, regardless of the merits.
It is an absurd situation. EU tries to open the Pandora box and act against own interests. There are some territories inside EU with similar (to Kosovo) problems. So the current EU position could create new problems in the future.

I believe that it is in EU intersts not to supports separatists anywhere.

The only cause of current 'hard-line' EU approach is an attempt not to lose a face.
 
#9
Wasn't Kosovo all about diverting press attention fron Clinton, a fat minger and a decent cigar. Or did I get it wrong?
 
#11
Actually, the Europeans, under the guise of the OSCE have always been concerned about the fate of NKAO. That aside, the difference between it and Kosovo is one of power politics. There was no chance back in the bad old days of 90-92 that NATO could have done anything in NKAO, seeing as the Russian Army was trying very hard to stop a seemingly endless round of ceccessionist states on her Southern border, mostly by very Russian means.

Former Yugoslavia, on the other hand, gave Washington an ideal opportunity to move 'NATO' a few paces closer to the FSU without getting a proper kicking. Ivan pretty much got wise to that one after '95 and Dayton (don't start me on that) and cleverly pre-empted our arrival in Kosovo with a redirection of Russian SFOR troops straight into Kosovo Polje. Could have got messy, but big ups to PoD for averting that one.


Soap box now stowed.....
 
#12
I served in Macedonia, during 99 dealing with the refugees, and I saw most of them were harmless women and children. However, during the generous summer holiday afforded by being a student I decided to visit Eastern Europe this summer (including Beograd, in Serbia - a very, very friendly place, which is well worth a visit).

when I was in Bulgeria, I got talking to a reasonably intelligent local guy. However, when we started talking politics, he told me that Milosovich was only killing the extremists.

Now I feel this is completely rubbish, but was there even a hint of truth in what this guy was saying? Why did he seem to really believe this was the case? The guy owned a bar, but his English was almost native and he was very wel leducated - so I was a little puzzled. Was that what Milosovich was telling people in the East to gain support?

*please forgive the layout - it has been a long week with little sleep and I am taking a break from finishing off an essay due in tomorrow.
 
#13
Sven said:
mushroom said:
Wasn't Kosovo all about diverting press attention fron Clinton, a fat minger and a decent cigar. Or did I get it wrong?
And nothing at all to do with dead Muslims
:roll:
Actually Sven, it was nothing to do with dead Muslims. Did the atrocities in Bosnia in 91-95 teach you nothing? But then you have never seen first hand the horror of the Balkan wars.

Kosovo was all about Bill trying to make friends in the Arab world because he realised that they all hate America. So he would try and help create a little Islamic Republic in the centre of Europe and maybe, just maybe, noxious little ragheads in hot countries would stop trying to kill US citizens and soldiers.

Did it work? Not really.

If you think he did it from some alturistic inclination then please stab yourself in the boll0xs and then take a bath with an electric toaster.
 
#14
Dread, your post edited. It's not the Naafi Bar.
 
#16
Gosh Dread, if PTP edited Your post and THAT still got through, the nI hate to think what You actually wished for me.

Of course it was all about Bill wanting new arab mates, and the governments of Europe just fell in line. The Germans wanted to get into pracitice for their next invasion of the rest of Europe and the rest of NATO tagged along because an attack on one is an.....

YOu seem to be a little confused - was the war to draw the attention of the US public away from Monicas mouth or to sooth the brows of arab statesmen.

Two really, really silly posts
 
#17
Sven - you have no sense of irony.

If I recall rightly the rationale for the very dodgy invasion of Kosovo ( I can't remember a UN mandate on the matter) was that the place was a powder keg which if not resolved could set the whole of the southern Balkans aflame. The excuse given was the Serb treatment of ethnic Albanians.

At the same time the whole business did divert attention from another one of Wild Bills misdemeanors.

Do not confuse cynicism about European/American actions with support for the Serbs (or indeed moslem Kosovars).
 
#18
Sven said:
Gosh Dread, if PTP edited Your post and THAT still got through, the nI hate to think what You actually wished for me.

Of course it was all about Bill wanting new arab mates, and the governments of Europe just fell in line. The Germans wanted to get into pracitice for their next invasion of the rest of Europe and the rest of NATO tagged along because an attack on one is an.....

YOu seem to be a little confused - was the war to draw the attention of the US public away from Monicas mouth or to sooth the brows of arab statesmen.

Two really, really silly posts
Confused? Not me: I am in a very clear mind about what kind of person you are. As for two posts, I only posted a relevant comment once: the other was an aside to PTP. I suspect that he edited my first post because it was untrue: that which I called you has a use, and you have none.

Some people believe that America went into Kosovo to distract the electorate away from the munter Monica, however I do not subscribe to this view (which was given by another person, not me). America's eastern interests were harmed by them doing nothing to help the muslims of Bosnia. Bill thus decided not to wait around for the scum of the EU to decide what to do: after all the French love the Serbs and do almost anything to help them (including betraying NATO pilots to their death).

So where am I confused? (except in my wonderment of how you can breath and walk at the same time)
 
#19
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2007/01/16/kosovoveto.shtml

Belgrade — Russia will block the expected move towards independence for Serbia’s breakaway province Kosovo, the DPA news agency reported on Tuesday quoting Belgrade newspapers.

Reports quoting a Serbian government statement said that the Russian President Vladimir Putin had during a telephone call with Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica promised to veto any initiative in the UN Security Council which Belgrade rejects.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top