How Kosovo Was Turned into Fertile Ground for ISIS | Hacker News Reader

How Kosovo Was Turned into Fertile Ground for ISIS

nytimes.com

25 pointsJerry232 comments

Well thanks to NATO and the western powers. Most Europeans "western contries" are complicit and responsible for this. Anyway, Europe is a bunch of puppets states controlled by the warmongers in Washington. There is no foreign policy in Europe since the end of WWII thanks to the American Establishment of "Peace" (what a joke) and saved us from the freaking comminists. Then we discovered Operation PaperClip where the right wing governent of Italy and CIA made in USA bombed train stations killing women and children and blamed the communists. WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IN YUGOSLAVIA, who really want to learn: http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/17/nato-the-humanitarian...

..."The ‘Kosovo Liberation Army’, which was recognized by the US State Department as a terrorist organization, received British and CIA training and arms.[35] The group received the majority of its funding – and many members – from the Albanian diaspora, Islamist fundamentalist groups, and the international drug trade. The KLA relied on drug trade, assassination, intimidation (of not only Serbs but also ethnic Albanians who opposed them), destruction of Serbian property (namely homes and churches), and other acts of ethnic cleansing of non-Albanians....

fk you US and Western Europe.

http://www.spc.rs/eng/isis_graffiti_monastery_dechani

And the EU is trying hard to make Kosovo enter the EU...

Of course, they're a favorite of the USA to make themselves a stronghold in the Balkans. But they still don't seem to get that Kosovo isn't capable of holding their own country economically. Being part of Serbia had it own benefits too, being on its own is something else.

I wish it was possible to just unite Kosovo with Albania. But that would probably cause just as many problems as it would solve...

The situation is the same in Sweden, with mosques and schools founded by Saudi.

Especially the children are sacrificed in a unlucky and naive mix of belief in cultural diversity and a blind faith in the success of privately funded schools, from the left and right, respectively.

It all started with the misguided bombing of Serbia. And tearing Kosovo from Serbia for no good reason.

I think genocide and mass deportions are a good enough reason

I think you are badly misinformed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_War#Civilians_killed_by... Plus, mass murders and other forms of ethnic cleansing also happened in Croatia

Everything can be pushed or covered up by propaganda, but let's look at official census of Kosovo:

Of course, you failed to mention, or didn't know, that only 50 years before the conflict, the ethnic structure was:

1953: 65% Albanians vs 23% Serbs

In the eve of the 1999 bombing, it was:

1991: 82% Albanians vs 10% Serbs

And after the bombing and separation:

2011: 93% Albanians vs 1.5% Serbs

So, Albanians jumped from 65% to 93% and Serbs virtually disappeared from 23% to 1.5% in just 60 years. So, can you tell me - how's that explained?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Kosovo

Looking at your table, from 1953 to 1991 number of serbs actually grew, it's just that number of albanians grew at a much higher rate, so their % increased. As to what happened in the next 10 years to the serbian population, I don't know, you suggesting that they were deported by the albanians?

Madeleine Albright got played by Kosovars who wanted the US to fight their revolution. What actually happened in Kosovo was grossly exaggerated both in magnitude and severity, wasn't at all one-sided, and in any case wasn't enough to justify NATO involvement on humanitarian grounds.

Bill Clinton needing short victorious war to clean his image because of the Lewinsky affair is better reason too. If the ones you mentioned were good enough - Rwanda would not have happened.

"It all started with bombing" sounds pretty disingenuous in a situation that has been brewing over the last few thousands of years, from Greeks to Romans to medieval period with Byzantine, then the Ottomans, and more recently various Communist and Fascist factions having power, and one thing having dependency on another.

No, it didn't start with the bombing of Serbia, and you could as well blame it for lack of bombing or intervention (after all, the bombing was what actually stopped a mass murder of Muslims.)

But if you want to find the one thing that most recently is destabilizing things, it is funding to salafists.

Isn't any such problem brewing for thousands of years? Mass murder of Muslims is a problematic statement. On one hand, any situation where there is more than a few dozen or a couple hundred deaths could be considered a mass murder, but on the other - which conflict/war doesn't come with that? Not to mention that the noumbers that were reported by CNN were a heavy propaganda. Kosovo conflict was one example of Balkan conflict that did not bring death even close on the scale of other conflict. Now, the finale: during the war, propaganda said 100,000 dead. After the war, the count stopped at 3,000 (the population was roughly under 2 million) [1] And, there are roughly 1,000 missing Serb civilians that were taken by albanian rebels/terrorists and used for organ transplants. [1]http://www.newstatesman.com/node/138456 [2]English wikipedia as the further reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_War

Yes, any ethnic conflict has typically been brewing for thousands of years. Particularly one in the Balkans. Therefore claims that "it all started with" something in 1999 is disingenuous.

I see this as an attempt to justify or belittle the organized ethnically/religiously motivated murders of Muslim men in Kosovo, and then when that was stopped by Western nations, somehow being responsible for starting the radicalization of the said Muslim population.

As said, a larger responsibility lies with the salafists.

THe parent comment looks like classic, cheap propaganda to me -- complete with mostly fabricated organ harvesting accusations, similar to the ones often made against Israel. Regarding that "roughly 1,000 missing Serb civilians that were taken by albanian rebels/terrorists and used for organ transplants", the Wikipedia article referred actually says:

> In July 2014, Clint Williamson, the lead prosecutor with the task force, told a press conference in Brussels that unnamed “senior officials of the former Kosovo Liberation Army” will face indictments for crimes against humanity and other abuses. He said there were “compelling indications” that “a few individuals were killed with the intention of extracting their organs” by KLA fighters, but the allegations that hundreds of prisoners were killed and their organs sold was “totally unsupported”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_theft_in_Kosovo

The civilians are still missing after 17+ years. They were adopted by the terrorists. Whether it can be proven (by whom?) that they ended in that particular yellow house or not is of less importance.

Of course, you failed to mention, or didn't know, that only 50 years before the conflict, the ethnic structure was:

1953: 65% Albanians vs 23% Serbs

In the eve of the 1999 bombing, it was:

1991: 82% Albanians vs 10% Serbs

And after the bombing and separation:

2011: 93% Albanians vs 1.5% Serbs

So, Albanians jumped from 65% to 93% and Serbs virtually disappeared from 23% to 1.5% in just 60 years. So, can you tell me - how's that explained?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Kosovo

Again, quite obviously, what happened between 1953 and 1991 cannot be something that "all started with" bombings in 1999.

None of this is a good explanation for why Muslims are currently being lured by extremist preachers with Middle Eastern funding.

Many Kosovars moved to Albania to escape the war by Serbia. Did the same thing happened with Serbians living in Kosovo?

Definitely. And it did not start from the 1990's Balkans war, it's older than that.

http://www.transconflict.com/2013/05/reasons-and-causes-of-s...

The idea that Serbian emigration from Kosovo was a problem was brought out for the first time by Dobrica Ćosić in 1968, but this was censored by the Communist authorities. In the early 1970s, a number of Kosovo Serb officials raised the issue in Kosovo’s party organs of the province’s growing Albanization and the problems this posed for the non-Albanian population.

Birth rate gap? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Serbia It happens everywhere that Islamic ethnic groups replace others with population explosion.

Birth rates may be somewhat different, but I don't that's so significant. In the case of former Yugoslavian states, what has happened is that ethnic groups, which formerly used to live in mixed areas, have moved away and concentrated each on their own area.

Serbs have moved to Serbia, Croats to Croatia, Muslims have moved out of these. This was result of a mix of fear, actual violent ethnic cleansing by extremists, but also within each population, just a desire to live within one's own ethnic and religious enclave.

I'd love to know what birth rate gap explains a 85% drop in population in 20 years.

And the ethnic cleansing is happening everywhere in Europe now. Muslim enclaves with only tiny amounts of non-muslims are a fact in every Western European city I know about.

> Muslim enclaves with only tiny amounts of non-muslims are a fact in every Western European city I know about.

That's a ridiculous claim.

Here's a list of largest cities in the European Union by population within city limits. This list ranges from cities with population over 8million (London) to 315,000 (Catania).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cities_in_the_...

You have no idea what happens in most of those cities, yet you make this claim anyway.

And you focus on muslims, ignoring the strong tendency of some (but not all) immigrants to live in communities.

When I do it I'm an ex-pat. When they do it they're evil muslim scum, right?

EDIT: You may wish to re-read dang's comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11518006

And here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10897270

That's a article you should read http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/17/nato-the-humanitarian...

Because every population should have the right to make secession. Hold on, wait, not every population, not in Ukraine.

The historians who will try to make sense of Western diplomacy in the late XX / early XXI century will have a hard time. Take the UK: let's bomb Al Assad, he is our worst enemy, and let's support the rebels against Al Assad. Two years later: my god these rebels are islamists, they are our worst enemies. Let's bomb the rebels and support Al Assad against ISIS!

What mathematicians call a random walk...

It's not particularly unique that someone who you see as an ally at one point is an enemy a short while later.

Britain and France were on the brink of declaring war to USSR (then an ally of Nazi Germany) in 1940. Sixteen months later in mid-1941, they were allies with USSR in war against Germany, until 1945. And then the Iron Curtain fell, and just four years later NATO was formed to again counter the threat from USSR.

Such changes are in no way restricted to late 20th century.

> Because every population should have the right to make secession.

I hardly see evidence in the history when such rights were granted without prior terror or occupation of a foreign army. In Europe, multinational countries could live together while the people could maintain their ethnicity.

Nowadays, with the nation states, people has much less freedom in this regard they had prior the national movements of the 19th century.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com