MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Feb 4, 2010 15:14:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hellboy87 on Feb 11, 2010 7:42:50 GMT -5
destroy the serb republic and Bos-Cro confederation....................then you have BOSNIAANNNNNNNNNNSSS!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Feb 11, 2010 9:04:09 GMT -5
lol ^^^ damn it hellboy....have you learnt nothing ? Anyway, same scare tactics from Uncle Sam. Same ppl that created half the problems in the balkans. If the shit hits the fan in the balkans...it should be the balkanites that solve it. Plain and simple...fyrom is a prime example of this failed US policy.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Feb 11, 2010 11:33:37 GMT -5
It looks like someone is brewing the soup but the chefs are not from Balkans (like countless times before).
Will the stupid balkanoids bite again?
|
|
gavrilo
Amicus
Vi ste svi banane
Posts: 840
|
Post by gavrilo on Feb 11, 2010 11:55:31 GMT -5
the morons cannot wait to bite.
|
|
|
Post by EriTopSheqeri on Feb 11, 2010 14:07:34 GMT -5
Yep, Bosnia Serbs are at it again
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Feb 11, 2010 14:31:24 GMT -5
I hope to God another war doesn't happen. Too much at risk for everyone.. too much.
|
|
|
Post by insomniac on Feb 11, 2010 14:39:54 GMT -5
Mig. If another war does happen hypothetically. Which side would be more prepared technically? As far as i remember, last time United Nations imposed an arms embargo in Bosnia.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Feb 11, 2010 17:35:35 GMT -5
^ It depends on the scenario, completely. If a war starts, it depends who starts it. If the Bosniaks do, then its fair game for Croats and Serbs because Croatia and Serbia themselves will get involved, to the benefit of their people, no question about it. If either Croats or Serbs start it, then its fair game for Bosnian Muslims, who can make them out to look like separatists, and it would take a hell of a lot for Croatia or Serbia to get involved. There are endless and limitless scenarios to how it will start or play out.
In a strategic sense, Banja Luka is a little screwed, simply because it can get isolated from the rest of the Serbs (I'm not only talking about the city, but the North-West Rep. Srpska). Eastern Rep. Srpska has a tactical advantage on controlling the entire border with Serbia (hence getting probably ample amounts of arms, money, and manpower - limitless supplies).
To the south however, the Croats have a massive advantage of having nearly 300km of border they can use as supply lines. Its the same scenario as the Serbs in Eastern Rep. Srpska. However on this end, Croats in Central Bosnia and the pockets to the West and North-West are in danger of becoming closed in, isolated, and besieged.
For the entire nation, its a give or take scenario. Everyone has a lot to gain, and a lot to lose. The large gain for Bosnian Muslims would be to take the entire nation through unrestricted warfare, and establishing their own control over the territory of Rep. Srpska and the Croat Majority areas. Their loss would be that Distrikt Brcko, and the Bihac enclave that would be trapped would be lost, and along with the areas Croats and Serbs already inhabit, those would be lost as well. They are at a huge disadvantage, as they are fighting on every single stretch of border they have with anyone. It's like the typical German-Soviet Invasion of Poland scenario. The Croats gain would be massive autonomy, or even independence (Maybe even some gain in territory). The loss would be several Majority Croat enclaves in the North-West and West, and the Croatian Enclaves in Central Bosnia, and the total submission to the Sarajevo Government, not to mention a massive exodus of the Croat People. The Serbs gain would be definite independence, and also territorial acquisitions in the North, to secure a significant economic and land route to North-West Rep. Srpska (Gaining Distrikt Brcko). However, the major loss for them would be the loss of Rep. Srpska, and submission to the Sarajevo Government, not to mention the exodus of the Serb people.
However, for the Bosniaks to gain absolute control of every squared kilometer of BiH, they would need international aid; which this time, doesn't look like it will arrive in such plentiful numbers. It's a hopeless and endless battle, which will not get solved easily at all.
|
|
|
Post by insomniac on Feb 11, 2010 17:47:26 GMT -5
There's also some Bosniaks in Northwest. They seem to be quite detached from the rest.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Feb 11, 2010 22:05:52 GMT -5
|
|
CiKoLa
Amicus
Gotovina Heroj!
Posts: 3,728
|
Post by CiKoLa on Feb 11, 2010 22:17:41 GMT -5
NATO would be the first to jump in and secure the border crossings with Serbia.
Serbia would not react in any way as it would come into direct conflict with NATO (we all know what happened last time).
Croatia is a stone throw away ....
RS would fall before you could say 'Oluja'.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Feb 11, 2010 22:52:34 GMT -5
^ First off, NATO wouldn't risk making this larger, hence they wouldn't jump in. I have no idea where you come in on that, you have no idea how much Bureaucracy they have to go through to have a coordinated opinion JUST to plan such a thing? Either way, I understand you want to "stick it to the Serbs" but it just ain't happening.
Why don't you tell me in detail what you think would happen, and why they would do what they'd do, and I'll tell you why it wouldn't work.
Now, Serbia itself would not be in the conflict. They will supply, no doubt about that. Same goes for Croatia. The next time, if it goes down, will be a Free-For-All.
NATO has too many commitments to be drawn into something so complex, you understand. Conflict of interests. Protect the BiH status quo; and you endanger your relations with your own member of the alliance because you're bombing their people (Croats and Croatia). That is reason alone and enough not to react quick.
I'm sure they have a plan to stop such a thing, but they wouldn't be at any state to do it. First off, Afghanistan (ISAF - Which is a NATO subsidiary), then they have Kosovo to worry about (KFOR/EULEX - EU and NATO subsidiary). Too much manpower and money to muster up for a "Shock action". It would be planned, very well thought out, and it would end in another Dayton.
|
|
CiKoLa
Amicus
Gotovina Heroj!
Posts: 3,728
|
Post by CiKoLa on Feb 12, 2010 0:21:23 GMT -5
First off, NATO wouldn't risk making this larger, hence they wouldn't jump in.Yes your absolutely right .. they'd sit idly by and let another Srebrenica occur. What was i thinking mig.
|
|
|
Post by EriTopSheqeri on Feb 12, 2010 4:14:42 GMT -5
I'm sure they have a plan to stop such a thing, but they wouldn't be at any state to do it. First off, Afghanistan (ISAF - Which is a NATO subsidiary), then they have Kosovo to worry about (KFOR/EULEX - EU and NATO subsidiary). Too much manpower and money to muster up for a "Shock action". It would be planned, very well thought out, and it would end in another Dayton. If you put to everything the same logic you did in this one...putting Afghanistan and Kosovo in the same category ...they are oh so worried about Kosovo they are removing almost all troops and leaving everything in Kosovar Armed Forces hands. Kosovo is no Bosnia, there won't be any conflict there.
|
|
|
Post by EriTopSheqeri on Feb 12, 2010 4:23:39 GMT -5
First off, NATO wouldn't risk making this larger, hence they wouldn't jump in.Yes your absolutely right .. they'd sit idly by and let another Srebrenica occur. What was i thinking mig. No man, there can't be another Srebrenica, technology today is too advanced and information and armies travel way faster than they did in the 90-s. International scene has also changed since the early Bosnian War where post Cold-War-Belin Wall reality was still being shaped. Should the Serbs start anything NATO would send a few thousand troops while RS would lose all privileges (such as veto power) granted to it by Dayton. That one is really suffocating Bosnia.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Feb 12, 2010 13:55:08 GMT -5
I'd be more worried that a war in Bosnia could ignite other wars in the Balkans
|
|
|
Post by leshte on Feb 12, 2010 15:03:49 GMT -5
That could indeed be the case because of the stick it to the other attitude that is prevalent in the Balkans. However with NATO in Kosova, and Croatia and Albania being NATO members I doubt the war would spread in these territories.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Feb 12, 2010 18:27:48 GMT -5
First off, NATO wouldn't risk making this larger, hence they wouldn't jump in.Yes your absolutely right .. they'd sit idly by and let another Srebrenica occur. What was i thinking mig. Err.. Srebrenica occured in the 3rd year of that war (Where it was a stalemate and a half in that nation). Srebrenica was a message, and a political move by RS, not a military action. I don't even know why I bother even explaining when 99% of the people here have no idea what it means to be in total and unrestricted war. I'm sure they have a plan to stop such a thing, but they wouldn't be at any state to do it. First off, Afghanistan (ISAF - Which is a NATO subsidiary), then they have Kosovo to worry about (KFOR/EULEX - EU and NATO subsidiary). Too much manpower and money to muster up for a "Shock action". It would be planned, very well thought out, and it would end in another Dayton. If you put to everything the same logic you did in this one...putting Afghanistan and Kosovo in the same category ...they are oh so worried about Kosovo they are removing almost all troops and leaving everything in Kosovar Armed Forces hands. Kosovo is no Bosnia, there won't be any conflict there. You don't quite understand what I've written, or you just skimmed through it, saw Kosovo and Afghanistan in the same sentence, and decided to answer. I'll ignore the fact that I detect ignorance in that answer, but whatever I'll explain myself. The KFOR/EULEX might be removing troops from Kosovo, yes, but they are doing it gradually. If it wasn't for the close proximity of NATO within the region, they'd have in excess of 60+ thousand stationed there, with heavy equipment on the ground. It's the way it is. Geographic location has a lot to do with it. Kosovo isn't stable dude. If you think that, then just stop responding to my statements in this thread, and that will be that. Kosovo is far from safe, in a regional political sense. The Serbs will never give up, have you not realized that. You might think that just because Independence has been declared, that it's a done deal? It's not. It's just the start of a larger buildup of tensions that will plague that part of the Balkans for the next 4-5 decades, or even more. I was merely using Kosovo as a source of great NATO interest and investment. I wasn't comparing it to Bosnia. Re-read what I wrote, then continue with your argument. First off, NATO wouldn't risk making this larger, hence they wouldn't jump in.Yes your absolutely right .. they'd sit idly by and let another Srebrenica occur. What was i thinking mig. No man, there can't be another Srebrenica, technology today is too advanced and information and armies travel way faster than they did in the 90-s. International scene has also changed since the early Bosnian War where post Cold-War-Belin Wall reality was still being shaped. Should the Serbs start anything NATO would send a few thousand troops while RS would lose all privileges (such as veto power) granted to it by Dayton. That one is really suffocating Bosnia. Technology has nothing to do with this, whatsoever. Why did Darfur happen? Sudan has no natural resources to give, hence nobody gives a shit. If the Balkans weren't in Europe, nobody would give a shit either.
|
|
|
Post by Babylon Enigma on Mar 4, 2010 19:57:07 GMT -5
It looks like someone is brewing the soup but the chefs are not from Balkans (like countless times before). Will the stupid balkanoids bite again? But its easier to just blame Milosevic, just like you blame Germany for WW2. Simple answers that don't really answer anything.
|
|