93 replies to this topic

[Sinke]

To make my argument regaring American policy valid, I will quote American embassy in Croatia during the Iraq invasion.

"You will pay for not agreeing with America regarding war in Iraq"

This was published in Croatian leading News magazine "Nacional". If you wish, I will search for issue to make even better quote.

[Blood-Pigggy]

Did it ever come to you that Croatia likes using political propaganda too? And did it ever come to you that Croatia likes to lie?

[Stroggy]

Sinke, on Jun 23 2006, 10:37 PM, said:

To make my argument regaring American policy valid, I will quote American embassy in Croatia during the Iraq invasion.

"You will pay for not agreeing with America regarding war in Iraq"

This was published in Croatian leading News magazine "Nacional". If you wish, I will search for issue to make even better quote.

I think I'll have to agree with Blood-Piggy regarding the authenticity of this statement.
Belgium was fiercly against the war but allowed the US to use the harbour at Antwerp to load up their ships with supplies (from bases in Germany) these supplies were often blocked by large groups of protestors hindering trucks and such. The government did not react to this, and neither were there any reports of reactions from the US - let alone a fierce reaction.

[Tulac]

Well he is right about that Croatia got cut out of the US military support program, meaning we lost a sum o money...

[Tom Henrik]

Well, that's kinda logical isn't it?

US Military support Croatia, then when the US go to war, Croatia doesn't want to support them. I'd withdraw my support too...

[Sinke]

Quote

Lawrence G.Rossin, American embassy stationed in Croatia,  interview for "Globus" magazine , date 19.03.2003-

On Tuesday, a few hours after President George W. Bush, gave a dramatic, last ultimatum to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, we spoke to Lawrence Rossin, United States Ambassador to Croatia, who sent a sharp warning to the Croatian Government, which has refused to support the American attack against Iraq

I Am Disappointed With Croatian Government's Decision

by Bisera Lusic

- Because of the military action, Europe is divided, there are Old and New Europe. Do you agree with this statement?
- Absolutely, that's very visible. There are countries in Europe which have shown their decisiveness and willingness to preserve the vitality of the United Nations system, and those which have avoided their commitments. Some countries have positioned themselves in the middle, others have not taken the expected position. The division exists.

Political Courage

- Where is Croatia in all this?
- I am disappointed with the Croatian Government's position. The Croatian Government had an opportunity to strengthen cooperation and partnership with the large coalition of countries, led by the United States. Your Government chose not to be part of that coalition, and has decided to take a low-profile, and that's very disappointing.

- What consequences can we expect where relations between the United States and Croatia are concerned?
- I don't know what they will be, but I believe there will be some. That's inevitable. We are talking about the issue of war and peace here, and your Government has, unfortunately, decided to avoid its responsibility, and play a withdrawn role.

- That's because over 75% of people in this country are against the war in Iraq, and believe that Croatia doesn't have a role to play in it.
- The Croatian Government can make its own decisions and implement them. We asked it in a nice way what their decision was, whether they would support us in our action, and the Government has said that it wouldn't. It's OK, that's your position, and I don't want to discuss the reasons for it. However, there are many countries in Europe whose public opinion is similar to the one in Croatia, take, for example, Great Britain and Spain, and their leaders have decided to hold to principles and have shown their leadership by supporting our coalition.

- And why should partnership with the United States be more important to these politicians than its own people's opinion?
- Because they see value in transatlantic partnership, because they see value in preserving the international order and system, and because they are aware that weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the entire world, and not just to the United States.

- Even if they risked their own positions?
- That's political courage and decisiveness.

Quote

In addition:
Nacional news magazine, issue 517, date: 11.10.2005
-abbriviated-
It appears as though Britain will continue to cause big problems for Croatia on its path to the European Union. This will happen regardless of the fact that the negotiations have officially begun and that the mechanism to stop them is very complicated. Just how furious the British Foreign Office is over the start of negotiations between Croatia and the EU was seen in a commentary published in the London daily, The Times on 5 October. This article clearly shows the position of the British government towards Croatia, the obvious deep dissatisfaction that they were forced to consent to giving Croatia the green light for the start of talks. This article makes it crystal clear that the Foreign Office and Jack Straw, directly or via satellite countries, would have blocked the start of Croatia?s talks was it not for Austria?s threats to block Turkey.

It's hard to live in a small country.

[Blood-Pigggy]

No it's not, I had to live in Rwanda for a bit cause of my dad's military carreer at the time, it was fun.

[a1s]

there's actlualy no contardiction there:
I live in a small country (altthough it's larger than both Croatia and Rwanda) that has two different nationalities living in it (which don't mix much), and it's pretty fun (most other countries I've been to seem somewhat dull by comaprison), yet there are obvious problems associated with it (in my case it just means I have to learn their language, since I don't have to deal with any skin-headed natilaists).

[Japofran]

Sinke, I don't quite know why do you complain. Firstly, I've got to agree with Tom. The Croatian government is free to do as it deems best, but if it doesn't support the US it's just plainly logical that the US stop their previous support of Croatia. I see no offense there, just "if you don't scratch my back then I won't scratch yours".

Secondly, please correct me if I'm wrong, but Croatia owes its very existance to the US. During the War of Yugoslavia Croatia would have been defeated without allied --especially American-- support, which would have resulted at the very least in Croatia's losing the Krajina. I'm not saying that Croatia be indebted to the US because of this and she must support them, it's got nothing to do; I'm only implying that your statement about your small country's having being mistreated by the US has no base in my opinion.

As for admitance in the UE, I wouldn't worry, I'd say there's no obstacle for Croatia there, you'll see.

[taikara]

As much as I realize that people are probably going to say I'm biased, I'm just going to throw in a bit of support for Tanaka's statements.

To me, despite the strangely emboldened text seemingly meant to draw attention to the "offensive" statements made, the article as a whole seems to be a very reasonable statement, given the circumstances.

"Disappointment" is a far cry from some kind of bloodthirsty cry for vengeful retribution. As the US has supported Croatia in the past, it would be disappointing that Croatia would not return the support. It is inevitable that refusal to support another, more economically powerful country would lead to consequences - but as has been mentioned, that's what happens when the back scratching stops. You may not have wanted the US's support as an individual of the country to begin with, but hey, that's the deal your government made with ours. Blame your own official leaders for accepting support in the first place if you don't like being told that your country may have to deal with the consequences of your official leaders refusal to return the support.

And I think that in this case, "support" was more along the lines of a token effort of goodwill, as I'm not really certain that the lack of Croatia's support leaves the future of the US hanging in the balance (as I am pretty sure that our own official leaders are perfectly capable of endangering our future with or without the support of other countries' governments ).

[Juni Ori]

Tai (the last line).

But seriously, I agree, it's very understandable and I'd be disappointed too and give similar comments if I was in such a situation.

Edit: Forgot to mention, I'm also little worried about US growing influence and meddling things, but I'm still not going boycott them or their freeware games, which have clear message, focused to their own citizens. And I still don't see anything bad in military service. Quite the contrary! I still don't understand what's so bad in being patriot or nationalist? And if somebody didn't know it already, I'm both patriot and nationalist, but that doesn't make me (or anyone else) neo-nazi or racist.

[Stroggy]

It's true that people have forgotten that there are two sorts of nationalism, the postive one and the negative one.

Early postive nationalism lead to the creation of independent countries. However, due to the weak democracy of these young countries they soon succumbed to extremes (like fascism).

It is sad that nationalism is all too often portrayed as something that is always evil. People should be proud of their history and their cultural heritage!
For example, itt is a sad fact that the extreme-right party in Belgium has gained support from a large part of the population, simply because they promote more cultural programs; such as less expensive art-museums, return of some classic Belgian paintings from abroad, more classic theatre and operas and other such cultural initiatives.
This, too, is a form of nationalism.

[Sinke]

Tanaka,

Quote

During the War of Yugoslavia Croatia would have been defeated without allied --especially American-- support, which would have resulted at the very least in Croatia's losing the Krajina.

Your claim that Croatia ows existance to US is ridiculous- and I don't think that in insulting way. The fact is that certain Bosnians would beat you up if you would inclinate such thing for Bosnia.  

There was never any military help to Croatia coming from US apart from deployment of Predator scouting units during "Operation Storm". While we thank you for your kind support, to say we own our freedom to US would be silly. These units are crewless aircraft! On the other hand, China gave Serbs much support, umong which is a weapon system capable of detecting and destroying US stealth aircraft.

If you mean SFOR, I must say they were probably the worst part of the conflict. Those people, much of them American, were usually rapists and drunks who didn't do anything constructive for our country or Bosnia. Srebrenica is the best example. If you believe they are "your" troops, I' say take them back home.  

US didn't rise the weapon embargo to Croatia untill the Kosovo crisis when NATO started bombing Belgrade. Dubrovnik was defended with support of international mercenaries- which met more fighting in two days than all Americans deployed on the field in 10 years.

Tanaka

Quote

As for admitance in the UE, I wouldn't worry, I'd say there's no obstacle for Croatia there, you'll see.

No thanks to you, or your country.


To other respected posters,

Now we come to the second part- and we can stop there if you want. Is war in Iraq legal by International Laws of Engagement? If , as Rossin claimed, this is the matter of war and peace, whose side are you on? Do you affirm the war in Iraq? If you claim that Croatia is supposed to scratch the back of US in order to recieve green light for EU- do you agree with the policy of Bush administration?

Rossin's talk is a polite way of dispatching a threat.
He was actually more angry because Croatia didn't sign the threaty of not-transfering American  citizents accused of war crimes to International Courts.
However, because of our decision Germany, France and Austria begun to defend Croatian diplomatical interests, which led to Jack Straw's defeat of sabotaging the EU membership for Croatia.

Taikara

Quote

And I think that in this case, "support" was more along the lines of a token effort of goodwill, as I'm not really certain that the lack of Croatia's support leaves the future of the US hanging in the balance (as I am pretty sure that our own official leaders are perfectly capable of endangering our future with or without the support of other countries' governments  ).

Yes, I believe that. They don't ask their own nation what they think, how would they listen to other people? I mean, the fact that I live in a house two times older than US state isn't a reason why you would show respect?

What to say?
I'm afraid of America. But I would be more afraid of America if I were an American.

[Japofran]

Sinke, on Jun 24 2006, 11:28 AM, said:

Tanaka,
[...]
To other respected posters,

I don't know whether you were implying that you don't respect me, but your answer was indeed harsher than my post. I hope I never have to refrain from saying something for fear of being "beaten up". Anyway you seem to suppose that I'm American, well, look below my avatar--I'm not. Even if that has no importance, there are Americans who share your political views.

I know this is off topic but since Sinke said that my statements about USA's intervention in favour of Croatia were nonsense I feel I'm entitled to respond, but I guess this will be my last word on the painful and off-topic Yugoslav issue. I've searched through the web and in every link I've been able to read about heavy and decisive American involvement in Operation Storm. Here's an example:

Quote

Additionally, the Croatian military campaign received tactical support from NATO. As Croat forces began their attack, U.S. aircraft under NATO command destroyed Serbian radar and anti-aircraft defenses in the region. American EA-6B electronic warfare aircraft patrolled the skies in support of the unfolding offensive, jamming communications between Serb units. But there was also a covert American presence on the ground in support of the Croats. Military Professional Resources Incorporated (MPRI), a private military and intelligence consulting firm based in Virginia, had been hired by Tudjman in early 1995 to upgrade his Soviet-created Ministry of Defense into a modern fighting force. According to MPRI information officer Joseph Allred, the firm exists so that "the U.S. can have influence as part of its national strategy on other nations without employing its own army."

Thanks in large measure to training it received from MPRI, the "ex"-Communist Croatian military, which had previously been dismissed as bumbling and inept, performed its grisly mission in Krajina with unexpected efficiency and professionalism.

Ensuring air superiority is on its own enough for winning any modern war, but the USA did even much more for the Croatian Army.

I can't see how the fact of China's supporting Serbia discards the also true fact of the USA's supporting Croatia. I'm sorry if you simpatize more with other Chinese policies --in Sudan for example--, but it was the USA who saved your behind.

Although I'm not enthusiastic about the EU, I've got nothing against admitance for Croatia since it's a European country. I won't ask you to be more polite even although your Country will be receiving loads of cash out of taxes collected in my country (Spain) and other EU ones--just like my country received similar loads of cash in the past.

[Japofran]

Sinke, I've already said that the whole Western role in the War of Yugoslavia looks like a huge blunder to me. As for the International Court, I don't believe in it and I can understand why America won't subject herself to them. Normal courts in democratic countries prosecute everyone who breaches the law, but the International Court picks which individual it will prosecute, because of political reasons and after he's been previously pointed at by the media. There would be ground to accuse hundreds of senior officials and even heads of state from countries like China, or many Arab and Muslim ones, for instance. But the IC won't bother itself with it, it's funnier to crush some Yugoslav scapegoat, until they find something even more politically profitable, maybe against the US.

You think that the US government is creating paranoia around Islamic terrorism. On the contrary, I think that the jihadi threat isn't being overestimated at all, most times the other way around.