Putin vs Clinton: I told you so

[Pete at Home]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38630152

Here's what can be done with no Clinton at the helm.
Trump is likely to honor its treaty with Serbia that Kosovo would remain Serbian. 

[rightleft22]

The wheels on the bus go round and round
Round and round
Round and round
The wheels on the bus go round and round
And then they all fall off

[D.W.]

Clinton pledged not to honor the treaty and held, in this instance at least, the more Russian aligned position?  I'm a bit fuzzy on the politics of that region.  (and how it relates to our former SoS)

[TheDrake]

Kosovo was recognized by Bush as an independent nation while Rice ran the State department. Greg Delawie is our Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo, and has been for about a year and a half. The article you linked, Pete, makes this plain. I looked at all active Serbian treaties, and I don't see anything that relates to Kosovo. The article you linked mentions nothing about a treaty with Serbia from what I can tell.

What on earth are you talking about?

[Pete at Home]

Kosovo was recognized by Bush as an independent nation while Rice ran the State department. Greg Delawie is our Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo, and has been for about a year and a half. The article you linked, Pete, makes this plain. I looked at all active Serbian treaties, and I don't see anything that relates to Kosovo. The article you linked mentions nothing about a treaty with Serbia from what I can tell.

What on earth are you talking about?

The atreaty Clinton signed to end the war with Serbia.

[Kasandra]

A peek inside the mind of Trump from London Times interview.  Every answer follows the same meandering path and focuses on him at least as much as the subject of the question:

TIMES: Can you understand why eastern Europeans fear Putin and Russia?

TRUMP: Sure. Oh sure, I know that. I mean, I understand what’s going on, I said a long time ago — that Nato had problems. Number one it was obsolete, because it was, you know, designed many, many years ago. Number two — the countries aren’t paying what they’re supposed to pay. I took such heat, when I said Nato was obsolete. It’s obsolete because it wasn’t taking care of terror. I took a lot of heat for two days. And then they started saying Trump is right — and now — it was on the front page of The Wall Street Journal, they have a whole division devoted now to terror, which is good.

And the other thing is the countries aren’t paying their fair share so we’re supposed to protect countries but a lot of these countries aren’t paying what they’re supposed to be paying, which I think is very unfair to the United States. With that being said, Nato is very important to me."

...

TIMES: Do you have any models — are there heroes that you steer by — people you look up to from the past?

TRUMP: Well, I don’t like heroes, I don’t like the concept of heroes, the concept of heroes is never great, but certainly you can respect certain people and certainly there are certain people — but I’ve learnt a lot from my father — my father was a builder in Brooklyn and Queens — he did houses and housing and I learnt a lot about negotiation from my father — although I also think negotiation is a natural trait, I don’t think you can, you either have it or you don’t, you get better at it but basically, the people that I know who are great negotiators or great salesmen or great politicians, it’s very natural, very natural...

I got a letter from somebody, their congressman, they said what you’ve done is amazing because you were never a politician and you beat all the politicians. He said they added it up — when I was three months into the campaign, they added it up — I had three months of experience and the 17 guys I was running against, the Republicans, had 236 years – ya know when you add 20 years and 30 years — so I was three months they were 236 years — so it’s sort of a funny article but I believe it’s like hitting a baseball or being a good golfer — natural ability, to me, is much more important to me than experience and experience is a great thing — I think it’s a great thing — but I learnt a lot from my father in terms of leadership.

[rightleft22]

Love how Trump takes credit for what was already in the works.

[TheDrake]

Sorry, Pete, still can't find it. My search-fu must be broken. I could only find a speech from Clinton that was not in support of Kosovar independence, but no actual terms. Among the questions I would have is whether such an agreement had an exit clause, was broken by the Serbs, and the actual language.

In any event, I support the UN concept of self-determination, whether it is Quebec wishing to secede from Canada or Kosovo wishing to secede from Serbia.

[DonaldD]

What about Montreal seceding from Quebec?  Pointe-aux-Trembles seceding from Montreal?

[Pete at Home]

Sorry, Pete, still can't find it. My search-fu must be broken. I could only find a speech from Clinton that was not in support of Kosovar independence, but no actual terms. Among the questions I would have is whether such an agreement had an exit clause, was broken by the Serbs, and the actual language.

In any event, I support the UN concept of self-determination, whether it is Quebec wishing to secede from Canada or Kosovo wishing to secede from Serbia.

Ah. Then you support Israeli settllements "seceding" from the West Bank?  Because the violence the Albanians used to secure Kosovo exceeds what Israel did in the settlements.

[TheDrake]

What about Montreal seceding from Quebec?  Pointe-aux-Trembles seceding from Montreal?

Obviously, there is an outer limit to credibility and viability. An HOA declaring itself sovereign is more than a little silly. As was Cape Cod, although they were just trying to separate from Massachusetts.

There is an interesting treatment linked below, and I think this is a good guideline. A cursory review of the history of the Kosovo region should rather easily negate the idea that they had internal self-determination.

So long as a state provides a minority group the ability to speak their language, practice their culture in a meaningful way, and effectively participate in the political community, then that group is said to have "internal self-determination." Secession, or "external self-determination," is generally disfavored in diplomatic practice. In the opinion re Secession of Quebec, the Supreme Court of Canada found (at paragraph 123) that "[a] right to external self-determination (which in this case potentially takes the form of the assertion of a right to unilateral secession) arises only in the most extreme cases and, even then, under carefully defined circumstances…" (Emphasis added.)

article

[Pete at Home]

You're ignoring the point that they only achieved their majority recently through violence, ethnic cleansing, and rape, starting in the 1980s.  So by the standard you apply in Kosovo, you should have no problem with any of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank exercising their freedom of determination, etc.

[Pete at Home]

You're ignoring the point that they only achieved their majority recently through violence, ethnic cleansing, and rape, starting in the 1980s.  So by the standard you apply in Kosovo, you should have no problem with any of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank exercising their freedom of determination, etc.

Crickets chirp. 

So... you don't want to address your inconsistency of rejecting that the self determination of Jewish majority in places they've held a majority in since 1967, but saying that the Albanian majority since the 1980s, which they achieved illegally and violently, should give them self-determination? 

[D.W.]

That's the sound of all of us scratching our heads, not crickets.   

[Pete at Home]

I forget, Americans only read American-censored news.  Yeah, the whole reason Milosovic came to power in the first place is that the Albanians in Kosovo were using a campaign of systematic rapes and murders to drive out Serbs and Gypsies from Kosovo.  That's how they became the majority.

[D.W.]

Yes, and?
In tyring to connect your dots. We went from anti Clinton Serbia to Israeli settlements.  What was your point?  What do you believe Trump is going to do or not do in either location? 

What bullet did we dodge exactly?

[Pete at Home]

When did I say we dodged a bullet? I don't think Russia would have invaded Kosovo with a Clinton at the helm.  I'm saying Russia was anti clinton, not pro trump.

[D.W.]

Thanks, that now makes sense to me.  Didn't get that from the initial post.

[TheDrake]

Pete, I didn't respond because now you're just clutching at straws. I read it as - because the parents of these guys did some shady things, they now deserve to be oppressed.

You were never able to show me any international commitments when I asked, which was your original post. So I assume you're just going to try and change the subject, including making a completely inappropriate analogy to West Bank settlements. Those settlements are created by people with no historical or cultural ties to the area unless you want to roll back a fistful of centuries.

It's not valuable to engage with you under the circumstances.

[Pete at Home]

You just changed the rules and the facts, and topped it off with a straw man.

Jews have been living in those areas for centuries, just not in current numbers.  Same with Kosovo. 

Why is it that people manage to adopt such a self righteous and pompous tone when someone fingers their hypocrisy?

"  I read it as - because the parents of these guys did some shady things, they now deserve to be oppressed"

Oppressed meaning not to be able to take what rightfully belongs to your parents' victims?  With the caveat that the word works differently if you are a Jew?

[Pete at Home]

As for the agreement, I told you, it was the bloody peace treaty, the end of the war.  Here's a link http://www.usip.org/files/file/resources/collections/peace_agreements/kosovo_ramb.pdf

[D.W.]

Why is it that people manage to adopt such a self righteous and pompous tone when someone fingers their hypocrisy?

It's interesting what happens when people react to a half formed accusation of "Why is nobody as outraged as I am about X!"  Something you are fond of doing Pete.

[TheDrake]

Thanks, Pete.

This agreement aims to end the violence in Kosovo and facilitate the return of refugees and displaced persons. It also calls for the adoption of a new constitution for Kosovo that respects the territorial integrity of the Former Republic of Yugoslavia while simultaneously establishing the principles of democratic self-government for three years until final status of Kosovo is determined. This agreement was not signed however has been given effect by Security Council Resolution 1244.

Clinton didn't sign it. The US was never a signatory, it was between Kosovo and Serbia, and they never signed it. The text calls for Kosovo self-government, and it was only good for three years pending final Kosovo status. 1244 references autonomy for Kosovo. The second of the below links includes a scan of the document showing that only the Kosovo representative signed the document.

http://peacemaker.un.org/kosovo-rambouilletagreement99
http://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/990123_RambouilletAccord.pdf

[Pete at Home]

Clinton didn't have to sign it to signify agreement.   It's the agreement by which the war ended. 

Are we still at war with Serbia?  Show me an agreement other than this one that ended the war.


Clinton agreed to end the war on condition that Kosovo become autonymous, and the Serbs agreed on condition that Kosovo remain autonomous. That was the agreement. 

[Pete at Home]

Why is it that people manage to adopt such a self righteous and pompous tone when someone fingers their hypocrisy?

It's interesting what happens when people react to a half formed accusation of "Why is nobody as outraged as I am about X!"  Something you are fond of doing Pete.

What am I "outraged" about on this thread, DW? 

[TheDrake]

Your words - "Trump is likely to honor its treaty with Serbia that Kosovo would remain Serbian."

Treaty does not mean the same thing as "signify agreement".

At best, Clinton did not insist on Kosovo independence, but I think it would be easy to show that the Serbs did not comply with the terms of the agreement they never signed.

[D.W.]

I'm still trying to figure that out Pete.  I'll just spectate this one I think.

[Pete at Home]

Your words - "Trump is likely to honor its treaty with Serbia that Kosovo would remain Serbian."

Treaty does not mean the same thing as "signify agreement".

At best, Clinton did not insist on Kosovo independence, but I think it would be easy to show that the Serbs did not comply with the terms of the agreement they never signed.

Clinton insisted on Kosovar independence to the extent of bombing Serbia, its news stations, and a Chinese Embassy that was broadcasting Serbian signals.  He dropped his insistence and conceded to autonomy on the exact terms that Serbia was willing to offer before the war, once he'd milked the war for all the Monica distraction he could get.

Since the entire agreement is premised on the withdrawn threat of US violence, I think it's fair to say our honor is invoked.  You are responding to matters of honor and international trustworthiness with some rather Clintonic technicalities. And you don't even have technicalities in the Israel analogy, just a leftwashed historical revision where Jews entirely quit the West Bank for 2000 years until 1967.

[Pete at Home]

I'm still trying to figure that out Pete.  I'll just spectate this one I think.

I'm not outraged. Not here. It's others who are about to get outraged, as Europe squeals we need to do something in Kosovo, and Trump does nothing.  As he should.

[D.W.]

And as I'm being slow apparently. 
What do you forecast Trump's policy on Israel and settlements being?  And is this another "as he should" situation?

[Pete at Home]

And as I'm being slow apparently. 
What do you forecast Trump's policy on Israel and settlements being?  And is this another "as he should" situation?

I doubt it.  No one does as they should on Jerusalem.  What they should do is the Tom Clancy solution. Evacuate the newer settlements, put a freeze on the older ones, and permanently occupy Jerusalem with an international force. 

I reckon he'll go with whatever his son in law tells him.  My guess is that that will mean erring on the side of Netanyahu.

[TheDrake]

As far as "honor" goes it would seem that threatening to roll back actual treaties like NAFTA is far more damaging to any international reputation for consistency and dependability.

[Pete at Home]

As far as "honor" goes it would seem that threatening to roll back actual treaties like NAFTA is far more damaging to any international reputation for consistency and dependability.

That's an inane comparison.  NAFTA is an as-you-go treaty.  Rolling it back is like checking out of a hotel.  There's no provision or expectation that it's supposed to go on forever.  You cannot equate an end of war agreement fixing national boundaries, with a trade agreement.

With your term "actual treaty," you seem to be under the delusion that honor and international reputation are a function of Clintonic technicalities.

[Pete at Home]

@ Drake,

You just changed the rules and the facts, and topped it off with a straw man.

Jews have been living in those areas for centuries, just not in current numbers.  Same with Kosovo. 

Why is it that people manage to adopt such a self righteous and pompous tone when someone fingers their hypocrisy?

"  I read it as - because the parents of these guys did some shady things, they now deserve to be oppressed"

Oppressed meaning not to be able to take what rightfully belongs to your parents' victims?  With the caveat that the word works differently if you are a Jew?

[TheDrake]

If you see the difference between an actual signed and ratified treaty versus a public statement of support as a technicality, then I don't think we can have a productive conversation about it.

[Pete at Home]

If you see the difference between an actual signed and ratified treaty versus a public statement of support as a technicality, then I don't think we can have a productive conversation about it.

Dodge.  Shameful equivocation of a cessation of hostilities and occupation of a foreign land pursuant to a written agreement, to a mere "public statement of support."  Boo.  Hiss.  Where did you go to Law School?

[TheDrake]

I didn't get a law degree. Here, Clinton was supportive of an agreement to which he was not a party. That agreement was then not signed by the parties involved. Not to mention that the agreement itself had a limited term. You're suggesting not only Clinton is bound to not change that opinion, but that no American president can have a different opinion.

I just don't get your fixation on that point, nor on Kosovo, except - oh wait. Is it because they are the Muslim Menace?

[TheDeamon]

Are we still at war with Serbia?  Show me an agreement other than this one that ended the war.

The last time we declared war was in 1941. So in respect to the military operations in the Balkans, we were never at war with Serbia during the Clinton Administration.

[Pete at Home]

I didn't get a law degree. Here, Clinton was supportive of an agreement to which he was not a party."

Well if you had had as much as first year contracts, you would understand you don't have to be a signatory to be a party.  The whole treaty relies on actions and withheld actions by the United States.

"That agreement was then not signed by the parties involved. Not to mention that the agreement itself had a limited term. You're suggesting not only Clinton is bound to not change that opinion, but that no American president can have a different opinion."

No. I'm saying that Trump will stay out of Serbia's and Russia's way.  And that Clinton would have allied with Germany again to stop them.

"I just don't get your fixation on that point,"

It's clear from your phony attempt that you aren't really trying to "get" what I am saying.

"- oh wait. Is it because they are the Muslim Menace?
[/quote]

No, you big phoney. They are more thteatened by radicals than menacing, and I have posted that, but you didn't care then because no Jews or Christians were getting killed.

Albanians are as moderate as Muslims get.  Their hate crimes against the Serbs and Gypsies were ethnic, not religious. They victimized Muslims of other ethnicities as well. 

It doesn't seem very honest for you to pretend I am casting them as some grand "menace" when I have proposed nothing but leaving them alone.

[Pete at Home]

Are we still at war with Serbia?  Show me an agreement other than this one that ended the war.

The last time we declared war was in 1941. So in respect to the military operations in the Balkans, we were never at war with Serbia during the Clinton Administration.

Yes, and when Mad Albright dropped cluster bombs on Serbian children on Easter Sunday, that wasn't war, just an Easter egg hunt with explosive endings.

[TheDeamon]

Are we still at war with Serbia?  Show me an agreement other than this one that ended the war.

The last time we declared war was in 1941. So in respect to the military operations in the Balkans, we were never at war with Serbia during the Clinton Administration.

Yes, and when Mad Albright dropped cluster bombs on Serbian children on Easter Sunday, that wasn't war, just an Easter egg hunt with explosive endings.

I believe the term they used was "a Police action." ....that happened to involve stealth bombers.

[Pete at Home]

Are we still at war with Serbia?  Show me an agreement other than this one that ended the war.

The last time we declared war was in 1941. So in respect to the military operations in the Balkans, we were never at war with Serbia during the Clinton Administration.

Yes, and when Mad Albright dropped cluster bombs on Serbian children on Easter Sunday, that wasn't war, just an Easter egg hunt with explosive endings.

I believe the term they used was "a Police action." ....that happened to involve stealth bombers.

But such "police actions" are only  authorized through Congress delegating its constitutionally war powers to the president in legislation.  Ergo it's a war, period.  Everyone understands that Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War I and II, and the Kosovo war were all wars, and subject to the domestic and international laws of war, regardless of how it was worded between Congress and the President.

[Pete at Home]

The last time that Congress declared war on ANYONE was during World War II.

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/h_multi_sections_and_teasers/WarDeclarationsbyCongress.htm

I think Daemon was being ironic (given that you recognize that our "policing" Kosovo meant bombing Serbia from very high altitudes with Stealth bombers), but you need to explain the joke to Drake, who's liking indicates that he's latching onto this as another olly olly ox in free get out of thinking card technicality. 

Anything but try to justify the hypocrisy of saying Albanians should get Kosovo because of the majority established by 1980s rape and ethnic cleansing campaigns, while Jewish settlers shouldn't keep settlements their great grandparents took in 1967. 

You know when he starts frothing off that gibber about me viewing Albanians as "Muslim menace" that he's desparate to avoid discussion of facts.

[TheDeamon]

The last time that Congress declared war on ANYONE was during World War II.

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/h_multi_sections_and_teasers/WarDeclarationsbyCongress.htm

I think Daemon was being ironic (given that you recognize that our "policing" Kosovo meant bombing Serbia from very high altitudes with Stealth bombers), but you need to explain the joke to Drake, who's liking indicates that he's latching onto this as another olly olly ox in free get out of thinking card technicality.

Well, I was also making a play on 1984 as well when I said that. I'm pretty sure he detected it as well, which is why it picked up the like. It stands that it wasn't technically "a War" because we never declared one. Even if Congress does award benefits and so on commensurate with it having been one. Much like Congress has done with a number of other "Military Actions" that have happened since 1941.

Which does happen to include at least a couple cease fires ("Korean War" not-so unironically named in this case), or formalized cessation of hostility treaties(Vietnam), or more broad ones such as the one involving Iraq after Desert Storm, although that one was more about Security Council resolutions than any formal treaty.

[TheDrake]

All right Pete, one more try.

1. Nations don't really operate on a system of being beholden to treaties they don't sign, from my myopic point of view. Otherwise we'd be on the ethical hook to live up to Kyoto Protocol among other things. We have a system in place to declare our formal obligations, and apart from that we can pretty much switch it up any time. And even most of those formal agreements have exit clauses. This would have gone a lot differently if you didn't start this by claiming that "Trump is likely to honor its [sic] treaty with Serbia"

2. The fact that there is a back and forth harassment and aggressions historically between the Serbs and Albanians is precisely why Kosovo got autonomy while still part of Yugoslavia, and should be the recognized independent nation that it is today. There were riots in the 80s, mostly over the right to self-determination and autonomy while the rest of Serbia (itself a region of Yugoslavia) was fighting to retain control of the area.

3. The actual article shows deliberate provocation. The act was designed to stir up trouble and to try to take Kosovo back over. I'm not sure what the article was supposed to have to do with US foreign policy, unless what you mean is that we just withdraw NATO forces and let the Russians go all Crimea on Kosovo. Lest we forget, part of that wonderful unsigned document stipulates NATO forces in both Serbia and Kosovo.

4. I apologize for impugning your motives, or misunderstanding your views. I'll pay better attention going forward.

[Pete at Home]

1.  OK; I should have said honoring our terms of peace with Serbia.  The understanding under which we stopped killing each other.  Better?

2.  Systematic rape goes farther than "riots."  Albanians in Kosovo do not have historical claim to the land, and only obtained a majority by violence.  Rewarding that violence and systematic rape makes America responsible for the sort of behavior that precedent inspires.

3. "Take Kosovo back over" presumes that Kosovo is not part of Serbia, which is not international consensus.  Our attack on the Serbs was precisely the provocation that dethroned Yeltzin and put Putin into power.  Russians bide their time to get what they want.  America has no such discipline.  And we have no national interest in Kosovo, as we have in Israel.  Finally, we don't have the moral high ground there.  We collaborated with human traffickers and rapists, the KLA.

4. Apology accepted.  I'll likewise make an effort to deal more carefully and courteously.

[Pete at Home]

Watch the last 1/3 of this Christopher Hitchens video, re Kosovo, if interested in this matter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgSocr2DTic#t=46.011409