US fighters ‘captured’ by Russian forces in Ukraine

[Open Bolt]

What territory did NATO steal?

Kosovo.

What "NATO" territory was the newly acquired lands incorporated into?

It wasn't. It was made into an independent country.

Whether or not the situation in Yugoslavia justified military intervention is open for debate, but I don't think the bombing campaign was about taking territory for NATO. It was to put an end to a civil war.

The bombing campaign was an attempt to pressure Serbia into signing a document that would have allowed NATO to freely violate Serbian sovereignty.

The theft of Kosovo came a few years later.

I don't think Serbia v. Ukraine is a very good comparison.

Why is it OK for NATO to steal territory, but not OK for Russia to steal territory?

Ukraine's intended movement towards European integration was clarified in 2004, maybe earlier. Russia's military intervention to prevent that has been going on for 8 years- the civil war that Russia sparked in 2014 was for that very purpose.

But Russia was already running the propaganda war since 2004, and the original Azovs and Wagner were cousins. Putin had to set the stage, hence all the Nazi stuff. WW2 is a big part of the Russian social consciousness/identity- killing Nazis is always good...

Russia is not trying to intervene in a civil war- Russia is conquering territory of a neighbor state.

NATO was not trying to intervene in any civil war when they stole Kosovo in 2006.

That's very different than NATO bombing Milosevic to the negotiating table (not to excuse that action).

But it's very similar to taking Kosovo from Serbia in 2006.

And of course, If Kosovo is not a country, it's because a referendum on independence is not valid. That same argument has to apply to the LDPR and Crimea.

Right. But since the theft of Kosovo was actually successful, that validates the same sort of theft of Georgian and Ukrainian territory.

 

[Open Bolt]

Not in my opinion.

The fact that the West is hypocritically condemning Russia for doing the same thing that the West does may well be inconvenient for the West, but it remains true despite that inconvenience.

The news articles I saw at the time detailed massacres of male Muslims and gang rapes of females and torture by ethnic Serbs with the Serbian government refusing to take any action to stop it. There were no articles about comparable actions taken against ethnic Serbs by the Muslims.

It sounds like you were listening to fake news. The atrocities committed by the Serbs before NATO's bombing campaign were frustrated security forces taking it out on villagers when they could not find Kosovar terrorists who were hiding out in those villages.

I don't mean to make it sound like the murder of innocent villagers is no big deal, but it was most definitely not an organized campaign of ethnic cleansing, and the atrocities were hardly a one-sided affair.

After months of negotiations with the Serbian government and that government's continued refusal take any action to stop these atrocities did NATO station troops in Kosovo and when the Sebian government continued to support these atrocities by ethnic Serbs in Kosovo the bombing campaign began to force Serbia to stand down.

NATO's bombing campaign was launched when Serbia refused to sign an agreement that would have let NATO grossly violate Serbian sovereignty.

NATO's bombing stopped when NATO stopped gave up trying to force Serbia to sign away their sovereignty, and instead offered a new agreement where NATO peacekeepers would not usurp Serbian sovereignty, which Serbia promptly signed.

NATO stationed troops in Kosovo after this agreement was signed.

The bombing certainly didn't force Serbia to stand down. Serbia only signed when NATO dropped their attempt to usurp Serbian sovereignty.

There is no rational basis for characterizing this effort as "stealing land."

Illegally taking something that doesn't belong to you is properly referred to as "stealing".

Neither NATO nor any NATO member country benefited from this action and NATO does not control any part of Kosovo.

Setting up an independent country on stolen land does not make the land any less stolen.

The Russian action in Ukraine is specifically aimed at stealing Ukrainian land for the benefit of Russia; that is stealing.

Russia is setting up "independent countries" on the land that they are stealing too. So Russia is adhering to NATO precedent.

While NATO's action in Serbia could not be authorized by the UNSC because of Russia's veto, when Russia tabled a resolution to immediately stop the bombing, only three states supported it and the other 12 states voted against it with no abstentions, so while the UNSC was unable to authorized the action because of the Russian veto, it clearly supported it.

Support for doing something bad does not make it become something good.

There is simply no moral equivalence between the NATO action in Yugoslavia to stop the ethnic cleansing of Muslim by ethnic Serbs in Kosovo and Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

NATO's bombing campaign was not to stop ethnic cleansing. It was to try to pressure Serbia to sign an agreement that would have allowed NATO to freely violate Serbian sovereignty.

There was no ethnic cleansing in Kosovo until after the bombing campaign started. The ethnic cleansing in Kosovo was a reaction to NATO's bombing campaign.

 

[toomuchtime_]

The fact that the West is hypocritically condemning Russia for doing the same thing that the West does may well be inconvenient for the West, but it remains true despite that inconvenience.



It sounds like you were listening to fake news. The atrocities committed by the Serbs before NATO's bombing campaign were frustrated security forces taking it out on villagers when they could not find Kosovar terrorists who were hiding out in those villages.

I don't mean to make it sound like the murder of innocent villagers is no big deal, but it was most definitely not an organized campaign of ethnic cleansing, and the atrocities were hardly a one-sided affair.



NATO's bombing campaign was launched when Serbia refused to sign an agreement that would have let NATO grossly violate Serbian sovereignty.

NATO's bombing stopped when NATO stopped gave up trying to force Serbia to sign away their sovereignty, and instead offered a new agreement where NATO peacekeepers would not usurp Serbian sovereignty, which Serbia promptly signed.

NATO stationed troops in Kosovo after this agreement was signed.

The bombing certainly didn't force Serbia to stand down. Serbia only signed when NATO dropped their attempt to usurp Serbian sovereignty.



Illegally taking something that doesn't belong to you is properly referred to as "stealing".



Setting up an independent country on stolen land does not make the land any less stolen.



Russia is setting up "independent countries" on the land that they are stealing too. So Russia is adhering to NATO precedent.



Support for doing something bad does not make it become something good.



NATO's bombing campaign was not to stop ethnic cleansing. It was to try to pressure Serbia to sign an agreement that would have allowed NATO to freely violate Serbian sovereignty.

There was no ethnic cleansing in Kosovo until after the bombing campaign started. The ethnic cleansing in Kosovo was a reaction to NATO's bombing campaign.

You are faithfully representing the Russian view on Kosovo but Russia pretty much stood alone in the world on this issue then just as it stands pretty much alone in the world on its invasion Ukraine now, but unless you are making the argument that Putin would not have invaded Ukraine if NATO had not intervened in Kosovo, the issue is irrelevant to the discussion of the war in Ukraine.

 

[Open Bolt]

You are faithfully representing the Russian view on Kosovo but Russia pretty much stood alone in the world on this issue then just as it stands pretty much alone in the world on its invasion Ukraine now, but unless you are making the argument that Putin would not have invaded Ukraine if NATO had not intervened in Kosovo, the issue is irrelevant to the discussion of the war in Ukraine.

It is impossible to know for sure, but it is at least possible that without the provocation of NATO's horrific mistreatment of Serbia, Russia would not have embarked on the aggressive path that they are on today.

Kosovo is relevant even if Russia was going to invade Ukraine regardless. Because Russia can now use the Kosovo precedent to legitimize their conquests. And the question of whether these Russian conquests are legitimate or not is a relevant line of discussion.

I am actually faithfully representing facts and reality on Kosovo. This happens to match the Russian view because in this one case Russia is actually right.

 

[toomuchtime_]

It is impossible to know for sure, but it is at least possible that without the provocation of NATO's horrific mistreatment of Serbia, Russia would not have embarked on the aggressive path that they are on today.

Kosovo is relevant even if Russia was going to invade Ukraine regardless. Because Russia can now use the Kosovo precedent to legitimize their conquests. And the question of whether these Russian conquests are legitimate or not is a relevant line of discussion.

I am actually faithfully representing facts and reality on Kosovo. This happens to match the Russian view because in this one case Russia is actually right.

You've got a bug up your ass about Kosovo, but we all know, including you, that it had nothing to do with Putin's decision to invade Ukraine.

 

[Open Bolt]

You've got a bug up your ass about Kosovo, but we all know, including you, that it had nothing to do with Putin's decision to invade Ukraine.

Without the ability to rerun history to see how the world turns out after different choices are made, there is no way for anyone to know that.

What we do know, however, is that Putin is merely following the Kosovo precedent when he captures territory from other countries.

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Without the ability to rerun history to see how the world turns out after different choices are made, there is no way for anyone to know that.

What we do know, however, is that Putin is merely following the Kosovo precedent when he captures territory from other countries.

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

I assume you feel some personal connection to the events in Yugoslavia at that because your views on what happened are so different from the rest of the world saw happening that your posts make no sense otherwise.

 

[Open Bolt]

I assume you feel some personal connection to the events in Yugoslavia at that

No. No connection.

I just care about right and wrong.

because your views on what happened are so different from the rest of the world saw happening

I don't think you can speak for the entire world. I'm sure that there are plenty of people in the world who understand that NATO was the aggressor in the 1999 war with Serbia and the subsequent theft of Kosovo.

Not that it matters whether anyone agrees with me. Merely being correct is enough to satisfy me.

that your posts make no sense otherwise.

Maybe consider the possibility that everything that I am saying is true.

Doing so might also aid in understanding Russia better. If you do not understand your adversary then you are likely to misjudge how they will react to your actions, sometimes with tragic consequences.

 

[toomuchtime_]

No. No connection.

I just care about right and wrong.



I don't think you can speak for the entire world. I'm sure that there are plenty of people in the world who understand that NATO was the aggressor in the 1999 war with Serbia and the subsequent theft of Kosovo.

Not that it matters whether anyone agrees with me. Merely being correct is enough to satisfy me.



Maybe consider the possibility that everything that I am saying is true.

Doing so might also aid in understanding Russia better. If you do not understand your adversary then you are likely to misjudge how they will react to your actions, sometimes with tragic consequences.

Again your views on what happened in Kosovo are in stark contrast to what the world believed at that time. Serbia's actions were widely condemned as ethnic cleansing and even genocide and when Russia tabled a resolution at the UNSC to end the bombing, it was defeated by a vote of 12 to 3, meaning the UN considered Serbia's crimes egregious enough to support the bombing campaign. The only parallel between what happened in Kosovo and the invasion of Ukraine is that Serbia's actions were condemned they by nearly the whole world just as Russia's action today are condemned by nearly the whole world.

 

[Open Bolt]

Again your views on what happened in Kosovo are in stark contrast to what the world believed at that time.

I am not convinced that this is true. But if it is true, then the world was wrong.

I often am told that the world believes all sorts of untrue nonsense about the US as well. Perhaps it is advisable to not pay any heed to what the world thinks.

If any part of the world gets in America's way, the US military can eliminate them. Drone strikes are particularly awesome in this regard.

Otherwise who cares. Just ignore and disregard the world. They don't count.

The only parallel between what happened in Kosovo and the invasion of Ukraine is that Serbia's actions were condemned they by nearly the whole world just as Russia's action today are condemned by nearly the whole world.

Not the only parallel. There is also the fact that Russia is strictly following the precedent that NATO set with Kosovo.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

Kosovo.



It wasn't. It was made into an independent country.



The bombing campaign was an attempt to pressure Serbia into signing a document that would have allowed NATO to freely violate Serbian sovereignty.

The theft of Kosovo came a few years later.



Why is it OK for NATO to steal territory, but not OK for Russia to steal territory?



NATO was not trying to intervene in any civil war when they stole Kosovo in 2006.



But it's very similar to taking Kosovo from Serbia in 2006.



Right. But since the theft of Kosovo was actually successful, that validates the same sort of theft of Georgian and Ukrainian territory.

The muzz were killing and raping the Serbs
The West ignored it

Slobodan stood up and said they will not rape you anymore and they bombed him for defending his own people

 

[toomuchtime_]

I am not convinced that this is true. But if it is true, then the world was wrong.

I often am told that the world believes all sorts of untrue nonsense about the US as well. Perhaps it is advisable to not pay any heed to what the world thinks.

If any part of the world gets in America's way, the US military can eliminate them. Drone strikes are particularly awesome in this regard.

Otherwise who cares. Just ignore and disregard the world. They don't count.



Not the only parallel. There is also the fact that Russia is strictly following the precedent that NATO set with Kosovo.

You continue to ignore the facts. The UN supported the bombing campaign and

ICTY Chief Prosecutor Carla Del Ponte delivered her public statement following Milošević's death:

In the indictment which was judicially confirmed in 2001, Milošević was accused of 66 counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo between 1991 and 1999. These crimes affected hundreds of thousands of victims throughout the former Yugoslavia.

Trial of Slobodan Milošević - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You've clearly wandered down a rabbit hole and lost touch with reality. There is no similarity between what happened in Kosovo. The whole world recognized Serbia's heinous crimes and supported the bombing campaign because of them, but no one but Russian propagandists claim such atrocities occurred in Ukraine. This is why the world does not believe Putin's lies about "liberating," which in Russian means imprisoning, the Donbas. The world overwhelmingly supported the bombing campaign and the world overwhelmingly has condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Only in your rabbit hole does there seem to be a corresondence.

 

[Ringo]

 

[Open Bolt]

You continue to ignore the facts.

What facts am I ignoring?

Are these facts relevant?

The UN supported the bombing campaign

Support for doing a bad thing does not make it stop being a bad thing.

ICTY Chief Prosecutor Carla Del Ponte delivered her public statement following Milošević's death:

Crimes in Bosnia have nothing to do with Kosovo.

But since you brought it up, all sides committed atrocities in the Bosnian civil war.

You've clearly wandered down a rabbit hole and lost touch with reality.

Oh? Can you point out anything untrue in anything that I've said??

There is no similarity between what happened in Kosovo.

Sure there is. Theft of territory is theft of territory.

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

The whole world recognized Serbia's heinous crimes and supported the bombing campaign because of them,

When people "recognize" the existence of imaginary crimes, those people are wrong.

but no one but Russian propagandists claim such atrocities occurred in Ukraine. This is why the world does not believe Putin's lies about "liberating," which in Russian means imprisoning, the Donbas.

I too recognize that Russia lies about the nations that they invade. I frequently denounce such lies.

It does strike me that there is yet another parallel here. The KGB's false claims of Ukrainian atrocities do not seem too different from your false claims of Serbian atrocities.

It feels kind of odd that I am actually making posts both for and against Russia. But even bad guys like Russia should be supported when they happen to be right.

The world overwhelmingly supported the bombing campaign and the world overwhelmingly has condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

You keep claiming that the world agrees with you as if that means anything.

Are you aware that appeals to the crowd are logical fallacies?

It doesn't matter now many people you can produce to agree with an untrue statement. It will remain an untrue statement.

Only in your rabbit hole does there seem to be a corresondence.

What you refer to as "my" rabbit hole is the actual real world.

 

[toomuchtime_]

What facts am I ignoring?

Are these facts relevant?



Support for doing a bad thing does not make it stop being a bad thing.



Crimes in Bosnia have nothing to do with Kosovo.

But since you brought it up, all sides committed atrocities in the Bosnian civil war.



Oh? Can you point out anything untrue in anything that I've said??



Sure there is. Theft of territory is theft of territory.

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.



When people "recognize" the existence of imaginary crimes, those people are wrong.



I too recognize that Russia lies about the nations that they invade. I frequently denounce such lies.

It does strike me that there is yet another parallel here. The KGB's false claims of Ukrainian atrocities do not seem too different from your false claims of Serbian atrocities.

It feels kind of odd that I am actually making posts both for and against Russia. But even bad guys like Russia should be supported when they happen to be right.



You keep claiming that the world agrees with you as if that means anything.

Are you aware that appeals to the crowd are logical fallacies?

It doesn't matter now many people you can produce to agree with an untrue statement. It will remain an untrue statement.



What you refer to as "my" rabbit hole is the actual real world.

What facts are you ignoring? Try these:

videos of serbian atrocities in kosovo - Google Search

Serbia's atrocities in Kosovo were well documented by the world press, which is why they were condemned by the UN and why the bombing campaign was supported by the UNSC.
The world press was also present in Ukraine and saw no atrocities to document, so clearly the Russian claim that it was invading Ukraine because of atrocities committed against Russian speaking Ukrainians was merely a pretext for an invasion of Ukraine. That reduces your argument to saying any country can seize land from another country if it first complains about Kosovo, which clearly places you dow a rabbit hole.

 

[Ringo]

well documented by the world press

You made a lot of mistakes in the words Fake News

 

[Open Bolt]

What facts are you ignoring? Try these:

https://www.google.com/search?q=videos+of+serbian+atrocities+in+kosovo&source=hp&uact=5&oq=videos+of+serbian+atrocities+in+kosovo&sclient=gws-wiz

Serbia's atrocities in Kosovo were well documented by the world press, which is why they were condemned by the UN and why the bombing campaign was supported by the UNSC.

Nonsense. Events that took place during NATO's bombing campaign do not count as events that happened before the bombing campaign.

The world press was also present in Ukraine and saw no atrocities to document, so clearly the Russian claim that it was invading Ukraine because of atrocities committed against Russian speaking Ukrainians was merely a pretext for an invasion of Ukraine.

Just like imaginary atrocities in Kosovo were used to justify NATO's aggression against Kosovo.

That reduces your argument to saying any country can seize land from another country if it first complains about Kosovo,

Not at all. There is no need to complain about Kosovo first.

which clearly places you down a rabbit hole.

This thing that you keep calling a rabbit hole is the actual real world.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Nonsense. Events that took place during NATO's bombing campaign do not count as events that happened before the bombing campaign.



Just like imaginary atrocities in Kosovo were used to justify NATO's aggression against Kosovo.



Not at all. There is no need to complain about Kosovo first.



This thing that you keep calling a rabbit hole is the actual real world.

Perhaps it is very real to you, but clearly not to the rest of the world. Even Serbia rejects Putin's lies about why he invaded Ukraine and voted to condemn the invasion.

 

[Open Bolt]

Perhaps it is very real to you, but clearly not to the rest of the world.

If the world chooses to disregard reality, reality will continue regardless.

And appeals to the crowd are still a logical fallacy.

Even Serbia rejects Putin's lies about why he invaded Ukraine and voted to condemn the invasion.

Has that stopped the invasion?

 

[toomuchtime_]

If the world chooses to disregard reality, reality will continue regardless.

And appeals to the crowd are still a logical fallacy.



Has that stopped the invasion?

Different subject. You were arguing that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was legitimate and the whole world was wrong about what happened in Kosovo except you, and I simple pointed out that even Serbia disagrees with you.