Daren,
I also think Chomsky is brilliant, but then again, there are not that many
people out there who think that NATO or the US actually uphold the moral
high ground - hands up all those who did not realise that the US has
supported and is supporting corrupt dictatorships around the world. And
while we all have our hands down, hands up all those who thought Milosevic
was only cleansing terrorists from Kosovo and was not intending to drive
out every last muslim Kosovor.
Daren, your comments about the democratic Serbian parliament and the less
than righteous NATO are very disturbing, and belie a profoundly
conservative and orthodox socialist (excuse the tautology) approach which,
in order to never be seen consorting with the evil mongering NATO, is
prepared to stick with an illusory diplomacy and wait for Serbian democracy
to rise from the ashes like a mythical Phoenix.
And why is Serbian democracy eternally pure while US democracy is forever
impure? Here we enter the popular good versus evil argument of totalitarian
thought. And I do not want to follow you down that path. From my point of
view, I struggle to differentiate the political processes that operate
within any government, military, corporate or criminal enterprises.
So under your plan, what would you say in twelve months time when the UN
special teams are uncovering the mass graves: "What we have here is a human
tragedy".
Is your hatred for the NATO war machine greater than your compassion for
the hundreds of thousands of Kosovor refugees fleeing and the tens of
thousands of Kosovors who lie dead and buried in shallow pits?
Given facts: Milosevic is going to try to drive every Kosovor from Kosovo,
Diplomacy is going to be counter-productive, NATO bombing is going to be
strategically ineffective, If NATO had done nothing, the cleansing would
have been total and permanent... end of story. Its hard to find a neat
solution with this lot, is it not?
On my part, I support ineffective bombing by war mongering hypocrits,
because its better than nothing. I can cope with the contradictions and the
pausity of options, and I'm not seduced into a crude fundamental attack on
world wide superpowers at the expense of human misery.
>From my point of view, I find it incredible that the Serbian population,
who overwhelmingly support Milosevic, sit at home and watch the war on
their TV's in comfort, in their safe, warm and secure world, with
electricity, hot water, gas, etc.
I think the NATO strategy of mainly bombing empty military buidings was a
monumental mistake; where on day thirty plus of the war, they started
temporary nuissance disruptions to the power grid. Wow. Now thats what I
call business.
If in the first twenty-four hours, every road and rail bridge, power
station, water works, gas works, oil refinery, sewerage plant etc., had
been hit, then the Serbians would now still be safe, but at least they
would be eating by candle light, washing from a bowl, and walking instead
of driving. Symbolic and futile? Yes. Definitely.
But at least its less futile than bombing a police station which has been
empty for three months. The strategy might even have slowed the hitherto
unhindered Serbian access into Kosovo - or have I missed something and
there are other ways of slowing Serbian access?
In part, Daren noted:
"... NATO bombing has denied any possible chance the Serbian Democratic
Party had of countering Milosovic. Nationalist fervour in response to the
bombing has underswept the democratic movement there. The article also
denies that just before the onset of bombing on 23 March, the Serbian
Parliament were in the process of deciding that UN peace-keeping troops
could be allowed to enter Kosovo."
What, NATO killed Serbian democracy? Not the very same democracy that gave
birth to Milosevic? What, after a million broken promises over ten years,
the 23 March process was the first real step towards peace which was
snuffed out by NATO? Not the very same parliament that would have
previously passed appropriation bills to fund cleansing in Kosovo, Bosnia,
Croatia, etc., etc? Gosh, naughty naughty NATO.
Daren, your logic of NATO bad, democracy good, is indistinguishable from
the Milosevic logic of Serbia good, Kosovor bad. Beware of logic which is
linear, neat and devoid of contradiction.
I think Foucault was aware of the dangers of linear fundamentalism, and I
think he would have appreciated the complexities and ambiguities behind
such a crisis, as well as the pervasive and invasive nature of the vested
interests involved. And I very much doubt he would have placed faith in the
virgin birth of a new and free Serbian order.
Tony Ralph (at least I tried to put Foucault in, even if only a footnote)
I also think Chomsky is brilliant, but then again, there are not that many
people out there who think that NATO or the US actually uphold the moral
high ground - hands up all those who did not realise that the US has
supported and is supporting corrupt dictatorships around the world. And
while we all have our hands down, hands up all those who thought Milosevic
was only cleansing terrorists from Kosovo and was not intending to drive
out every last muslim Kosovor.
Daren, your comments about the democratic Serbian parliament and the less
than righteous NATO are very disturbing, and belie a profoundly
conservative and orthodox socialist (excuse the tautology) approach which,
in order to never be seen consorting with the evil mongering NATO, is
prepared to stick with an illusory diplomacy and wait for Serbian democracy
to rise from the ashes like a mythical Phoenix.
And why is Serbian democracy eternally pure while US democracy is forever
impure? Here we enter the popular good versus evil argument of totalitarian
thought. And I do not want to follow you down that path. From my point of
view, I struggle to differentiate the political processes that operate
within any government, military, corporate or criminal enterprises.
So under your plan, what would you say in twelve months time when the UN
special teams are uncovering the mass graves: "What we have here is a human
tragedy".
Is your hatred for the NATO war machine greater than your compassion for
the hundreds of thousands of Kosovor refugees fleeing and the tens of
thousands of Kosovors who lie dead and buried in shallow pits?
Given facts: Milosevic is going to try to drive every Kosovor from Kosovo,
Diplomacy is going to be counter-productive, NATO bombing is going to be
strategically ineffective, If NATO had done nothing, the cleansing would
have been total and permanent... end of story. Its hard to find a neat
solution with this lot, is it not?
On my part, I support ineffective bombing by war mongering hypocrits,
because its better than nothing. I can cope with the contradictions and the
pausity of options, and I'm not seduced into a crude fundamental attack on
world wide superpowers at the expense of human misery.
>From my point of view, I find it incredible that the Serbian population,
who overwhelmingly support Milosevic, sit at home and watch the war on
their TV's in comfort, in their safe, warm and secure world, with
electricity, hot water, gas, etc.
I think the NATO strategy of mainly bombing empty military buidings was a
monumental mistake; where on day thirty plus of the war, they started
temporary nuissance disruptions to the power grid. Wow. Now thats what I
call business.
If in the first twenty-four hours, every road and rail bridge, power
station, water works, gas works, oil refinery, sewerage plant etc., had
been hit, then the Serbians would now still be safe, but at least they
would be eating by candle light, washing from a bowl, and walking instead
of driving. Symbolic and futile? Yes. Definitely.
But at least its less futile than bombing a police station which has been
empty for three months. The strategy might even have slowed the hitherto
unhindered Serbian access into Kosovo - or have I missed something and
there are other ways of slowing Serbian access?
In part, Daren noted:
"... NATO bombing has denied any possible chance the Serbian Democratic
Party had of countering Milosovic. Nationalist fervour in response to the
bombing has underswept the democratic movement there. The article also
denies that just before the onset of bombing on 23 March, the Serbian
Parliament were in the process of deciding that UN peace-keeping troops
could be allowed to enter Kosovo."
What, NATO killed Serbian democracy? Not the very same democracy that gave
birth to Milosevic? What, after a million broken promises over ten years,
the 23 March process was the first real step towards peace which was
snuffed out by NATO? Not the very same parliament that would have
previously passed appropriation bills to fund cleansing in Kosovo, Bosnia,
Croatia, etc., etc? Gosh, naughty naughty NATO.
Daren, your logic of NATO bad, democracy good, is indistinguishable from
the Milosevic logic of Serbia good, Kosovor bad. Beware of logic which is
linear, neat and devoid of contradiction.
I think Foucault was aware of the dangers of linear fundamentalism, and I
think he would have appreciated the complexities and ambiguities behind
such a crisis, as well as the pervasive and invasive nature of the vested
interests involved. And I very much doubt he would have placed faith in the
virgin birth of a new and free Serbian order.
Tony Ralph (at least I tried to put Foucault in, even if only a footnote)