|
Post by vinjak on Jun 10, 2009 1:29:55 GMT -5
Ok can we please leave Kosovo out of this thread as The question was asked about the constitution and the JNA's role in Slovenia.
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Jun 10, 2009 1:41:12 GMT -5
Vinjak you forgot a crucial fact. The operations in JNA were so "Serb" (as anti-Serbs love to claim) that barely a third of the troops taking part for the JNA were Serb or Montenegrin.
This is the breakdown of the JNA members that were involved, I found this on Wiki.
Albanians, 20% Croats, 15 to 20% Serbs and Montenegrins, 10% Bosniaks, and 8% Slovenes.
Surprising as all hell huh ?
The Slovenian Strategy,
The Slovenian strategy relied on a number of risky gambles. Slovenia could not have resisted the JNA for long had the full weight of the federal army been brought into action, but its leaders had gambled on the JNA leadership's unwillingness to risk mass civilian casualties. In the diplomatic arena, the Slovenian government had gambled that the international community would step in to press the Yugoslavs to desist — a supposition in which they were proved correct.
The Slovenians were also well aware that the Serbian government of Slobodan Milošević was not particularly concerned about Slovenia's independence, given the lack of any significant Serbian minority in the country. On 30 June, Defence Minister General Kadijević suggested to the Yugoslav federal presidency a massive attack on Slovenia to break down the unexpectedly heavy resistance. But the Serb representative, Borisav Jović, shocked the military establishment by declaring that Serbia did not support further military action against Slovenia.Serbia was at this point more concerned with the situation in Croatia, even before the war had ended, JNA troops were already repositioning themselves for the imminent war in Croatia.
|
|
|
Post by SKORIC on Jun 10, 2009 1:51:03 GMT -5
^ You missed out on the Albanian percentage which was 30% Why dont you point out what you agree with and what you dont agree with? Actually out of all the conflicts apart from Slovenia, Serbs were least at fault when it comes to starting the war in Kosovo. Any other country would have reacted the same in a similar situation as Serbia was in 1998. What other path could we choose when KLA were killing our police and civilians? Ill leave it at that since, as Vinjak said, this has nothing to do with Kosovo.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Jun 10, 2009 2:00:10 GMT -5
It was not the Serbs fault, or the Croats, or Slovenes, or Bosnian Muslims (As they were known), or Albanians, or Macedonians... it was just the set of circumstances that were made worse by the irresponsibility of each sides leaders, as well as Yugoslavia's Political Elite. MiG Do you think the political arena influenced the army as well as a result? Meaning that what happened in politics was likely a reflection of what was going to happen to JNA. Also, where there Croat or Bosniak loyalist to what was going on when the wars happened in Bosnia & Croatia? It seems to me that there were mass disertions and JNA by then was entirely ethnic Serb. The JNA has a massive morale loss. When the war in Croatia started, the entire nation (SFRJ) knew it was over, and a new chapter in Balkan history had been opened; which to me is a dark chapter from what I've seen so far. But to answer your question; Just like any other situation, the military reflects the political movements within the nation, and that the JNA's total breakdown was allowed due to the total breakdown in Diplomatic Relations (Within the SFRJ Republics). Had the Army not been so weak and demoralized, then the Ten Day War would've ended, and Yugoslavia would've kept at peace for at least 5-10 more years; or proper and solidified reforms would have taken place to preserve the Federation. MiG while I dont agree with everything you state I agree with a lot of it. Of course as someone looking at it from the opposite side, I believe that at least when it comes to Kosova Serbia has a bigger fault than Albanians; when it comes to starting the conflict. I say that because I believe Serbia chose a completely wrong path when dealing with this issue. Look bro. I know you're Albanian, a Proud Kosovar, and have every right to be, and I am nobody to take that away from you. But the simple fact is that the Kosovo Delegates (The Communist Party of Kosovo) should have proposed this time and again to Tito. Once he died, it was game over. I understand that it was not a very fair/smart thing to take away self-governance and self-education of Albanians within Kosovo; but that happened when Milosevic came to power in the FRJ (Third Yugoslavia). The Serbs did not do anything to the Albanians within the SFRJ, as they had no means or backing from the rest of the Republics. But at the end of the day, within the SFRJ (Like any other nation), the Constitution is the Constitution, and you cannot stray away from it, or its considered Treason, Illegal, and an Act of War. It's not a collective blame on Milosevic. It's just the circumstances that it happened under. I'm pretty sure that, lets say, the Province of Kosovo was Albanian (Republic of Albania, intl. recognized as such) but 90%+ Serb populated, and they tried to pull an independence move; I'm sure you'd be 100% behind your government and international law if it acted as FRJ did. Put yourself in their shoes for one split second, and you'll see that its not that simple from either side.
|
|
|
Post by leshte on Jun 10, 2009 15:09:10 GMT -5
To answer Skoric first. What I don't agree with is that Serbia had plenty of time since the 80's to come up with a better solution; this was a time when independence of Kosova was out of the question not only for Serbia and the former republics but also the international community. Even Albanians where 100% behind Rrugova, a pacifist. Yet you failed to do that. All that was needed was this less than independence more than autonomy crap you say now and bam done deal; issue closed. Instead autonomy is taken away, which was against the constitution as well, and there was more radicalization from Serbia which had the upper hand. This is where I think Serbia started going the wrong path. As for police stations thats was late very very late in the game, about 20 years later; during a conflict millitary is a fair target.
When autonomy was abrogated it was very much by the Serbian hand. No other Republic had any vested interest in doing that. As a matter of fact it was done through threats to the other republic representatives. That day the meeting was in Belgrade and there thousands of angry Serb protesters outside. The threat was that if they don't sign they would let thoseprotesters in. It wasn't as rosy as you painted it. As a matter of fact there is a documentary on this. I will try to find it and post it. What I agree with Migs posts is that after some initial steps things became complicated both on the economic and international level, as well as the leaders of that time not only provoked but left no provocation unanswered. Yet I find it very very strange that as you guys claim JNA was not controlled by Serbia but by the othe Republics yet they bomb their own republics yet not even for a moment they think of bombing Serbia. This logic is very strange and it smells like a lie or a propaganda piece. I mean 30% Albanian you say and 20% Croatian and not even for a moment they don't decide to bomb Belgrade, but go on to Croatia and later Kosova. Something is very strange.
P.S I apologize to Vinjak for continuing with Kosova; but I believe Mig first mentioned it in one of his posts.
|
|
|
Post by SKORIC on Jun 10, 2009 15:26:31 GMT -5
Albs abused their autonomy and were slowly driving Serbs out. You didnt deserve autonomy in the first place. Enough said.
When we're talking about the mixed JNA army we're only talking about the 10 day war in Slovenia. Not the other wars. I think everyone is misunderstanding each other here.
|
|
|
Post by leshte on Jun 10, 2009 15:43:12 GMT -5
Albs abused their autonomy and were slowly driving Serbs out. You didnt deserve autonomy in the first place. Enough said.
Skoric, I am of the opinion that that was also propaganda. That's what the Serbian leaders used to solidify their power. They do the same today. The reason why I say that is because, when Serbia had all the military and police, held all the highest posts in the institutions and social life in Kosova and since Kosova was under their grip then I believe what you state about driving them out is not true. Could Serbs have left? Sure they could have. There were plenty of Albanians leaving too, emigrating in the West. However I believe the Serbs that were leaving; were leaving due to economic conditions. Why live in Kosova when you could move in Serbia and make much much more.
In the second sentence I think lies the key; as to why there was ever a conflict as there are many and I mean many people in Serbia who think like you. Meaning Kosova should not have been autonomous in the first place.
P.S Kosova enetered Jugoslavia as an autonomous entity of Jugoslavia before Serbia entered Jugoslavia. About a month or so but that is very important. I believe that was in the 40's if I am not mistaken. As such Serbia or the Serbian people was in no position to judge whether autonomy was deserved or not.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Jun 10, 2009 15:49:45 GMT -5
Albs abused their autonomy and were slowly driving Serbs out. You didnt deserve autonomy in the first place. Enough said.Albs abusing the autonoym wasn't propaganda. Since the early 80s the predominant attitude in Serbia was 1 republic 1 vote. Slovenia and Croatia opposed this because Kosovo was often the deciding vote in parliament. Slobo being power hungry abondoned the idea of 1 rpeublic 1 vote and put his own people in charge of the federal presidency seat for the provinces <-- something the other republics didn't really fight against. Bulls**t. Kosovo was dominated by Albanians, it is only after Slobo's bureucratic revolution that the Serbs started dominating it. Bulls**t. Kosovo entered Yugoslavia as part of Serbia after WWI. But if your talking of communist Yugoslavia your claims are bulls**t. Their were no Albs present at AVNOJ and the communist recognized the pre-war borders fo the state thus Kosovo was part of the state -- it did not join before Serbia as you claim. What makes this claim absolutely funny and total bullshit. Is the fact that in communist Yu Kosovo became an administrative unit in 1946, the communists were alrteady in control for at least a year. Not only that but they had to repress an Albanian uprising before they did this. So much for Shqips joining.
|
|
|
Post by leshte on Jun 10, 2009 16:15:18 GMT -5
Ok I when I said join I didn't mean by their own free will. I will look into the dates at a later time, I might be mistaken. As for the rest we're talking about when Milosevic was in power. It was pretty quiet before him, in Jugoslvia. That's the period I am talking about when I say Serbia went down the wrong path.
Anyways I don't expect any of the Serbs hereto agree with me over Kosova.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Jun 10, 2009 16:18:24 GMT -5
Ok I when I said join I didn't mean by their own free will. I will look into the dates at a later time, I might be mistaken. As for the rest we're talking about when Milosevic was in power. It was pretty quiet before him, in Jugoslvia. That's the period I am talking about when I say Serbia went down the wrong path. Anyways I don't expect any of the Serbs hereto agree with me over Kosova. Kosovo was never quiet. 80% of the shit in Yugoslavia that happenned before him happened their <-- he rose because of it. Tito had to quell Albs till 1950. They caused shit in 61, 68 and in 81.
|
|
|
Post by leshte on Jun 10, 2009 16:58:27 GMT -5
Slobo rose because of the Serbs not Kosova, you voted for him. Do you notice that from 71 (the new constitution came in) to 81 things were quiet. Thats because only in name Kosova was not a republic (sounds like the more than autonomy less than independence thing you're trying to sell now). Then Slobo changes that drastically; well we know the rest.
P.S According to surviving veterans Tito supposedly made a deal to either let Kosova be a republic after the war or Kosova would join Albania. Thats what I've heard anyway. Once none materialized then of course you'd have discontent until the 1971 constitution. Also keep in mind that there were also discontent and upheavels due to the economic situation Kosova was in, especially compared to the other corners of the federation.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Jun 10, 2009 17:05:11 GMT -5
Slobo rose because of the Serbs not Kosova, you voted for him. Do you notice that from 71 (the new constitution came in) to 81 things were quiet. Thats because only in name Kosova was not a republic (sounds like the more than autonomy less than independence thing you're trying to sell now). Then Slobo changes that drastically; well we know the rest. He rose to power in 1986 and 87. There were no elections. He was a commuinist appointee who caused a sensation in a parlimanet filled with communist appointees. The constiution came in 74. As soon as Tito died the more liberal leaders who replaced him were less prone to use violence and right away in 81 shit happenned. Slobo didn't abolish anything until 89. There was unrest until then, there wasn't any Tito to beat them.
|
|
|
Post by leshte on Jun 10, 2009 17:14:53 GMT -5
Even later in time; Slobo was elected and became an elected leader. Unrest followed due to bad economic situation in the 80's and later on from the Trepca miners. Not always the unrest was due to more autonomy rights. More often than not was due to bad economic situation; later on it turned into protest for more rights, after the autonomy was ablished and Albanian personel was fired from institutions.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Jun 10, 2009 17:19:57 GMT -5
Even later in time; Slobo was elected and became an elected leader. Unrest followed due to bad economic situation in the 80's and later on from the Trepca miners. Not always the unrest was due to more autonomy rights. More often than not was due to bad economic situation; later on it turned into protest for more rights, after the autonomy was ablished and Albanian personel was fired from institutions. Trepca occured before he was elected. Do you even know when he was elected, what share of the vote or what elecgtoral system were used? No you don't. You've clearly indicated tihs. Now stop making bullshit. Shit tarted long before he was elected in flawed American style elections. Albanians were fired not because they were Albanians. But because they refused to take loyalty oaths to the republic <-- the same thing was happenning to Serbs in Croatia. [The regime was being hypocritical when this happenned]
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Jun 10, 2009 17:49:12 GMT -5
Ok since the convo has now moved to Kosovo I am presuming that the Constitution question and the JNA's role in Slovenia has been answered. Even the personel in the JNA at that time has been shown not to be fully Serb as claimed. Also it has been shown where the Tanks rolled in from.
Also from the Jug federal Presidency it was shown here that the Defence minister wanted a massive attack on Slovenia But the Serb representative Borisav Jovic Declared Serbia did not support Military action against Slovenia Serbia was concerned with the events unfolding in Croatia. We also established that the JNA was inefective because since there was no support from Serbia the JNA was only used as an intimidation tool in a stupid attempt to have SLovenia back down and come back to the table.
So now I guess we are moving on to Kosovo.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Jun 11, 2009 0:40:59 GMT -5
^ I guess your guess is as good as my guess; and I guess so, that we are.
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Jun 11, 2009 2:51:43 GMT -5
lololol
I guess it was a bit of a Captain Obvious moment lol
|
|
|
Post by fazlinho on Jun 11, 2009 5:44:50 GMT -5
You Serbs tend to ignore arguments that go against you. Its a repeated pattern. All I said was that the fact that the Constitution did not provide Serbia with the right to send troops and tanks into the other republics is a crucial factor that led to the whole mess that came after it. Not only it went against the constitution but against international law as well, which as I pointed out is very hypocritical (to say the least) when having in mind how much of a staunch defender of international law Serbia claims to be. Where it all started Slovenia The succesion violated article 5 of the constitution, article 5 regulated the state boarders. What it stated was that borders could not be changed without all the republics and autonomous provinces agreeing to the changes. This means that nobody could leave the federation unless everybody in the country was in agreement. The Socialist Yugoslav republics (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Macedonia) did not have the right to secede because the Socialist Yugoslav republics did not belong to the individual Yugoslav peoples. For example, Bosnia was defined by its constitution as an equal state of Serbs, Croats and Muslims and Croatia was a state of Croats and Serbs. If you remember after anoucing its succesion Slovenia erazed all of its minority identitys and pronounced them all Slovenes because of the constitution in an effort to make it legal. The JNA's mandate was to secure borders of Jugoslavia and if you knew the background you would have known that, 75% of Jug federal budget was appropriated by Slovenia when it siezed control of the boarder and customs posts. The Jugoslav Government ordered the JNA to retake control of the state border in Slovenia. Don't know how I missed this thread Article 5 of the constitution I'd like to see where exactly is here the talk about borders. Why the republics had the right for independence: article 1 of the constiution So in the first big "sized" paragraph we see peoples have the right to get independent of Yugoslavia, how do they get that right? Second big sized paragraphs: on the "republical" level, meaning every republic has their institutions that decide and "third big sized paragraph" interact with the other republics, that's how they excercize their rights. The parliament of BiH and Slovenia and Croatia, excercized their constitutional rights sr.wikisource.org/sr-el/%D0%A3%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%B2_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%A4%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B5_%D0%A0%D0%B5%D0%BF%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%88%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B5_(1974)#5_.D0.94.D0.BE.D0.BD.D0.BE.D1.88.D0.B5.D1.9A.D0.B5_.D0.B0.D0.BA.D0.B0.D1.82.D0.B0_.D1.83_.D0.92.D0.B5.D1.9B.D1.83_.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.BF.D1.83.D0.B1.D0.BB.D0.B8.D0.BA.D0.B0_.D0.B8_.D0.BF.D0.BE.D0.BA.D1.80.D0.B0.D1.98.D0.B8.D0.BD.D0.B0_.D0.BD.D0.B0_.D0.BE.D1.81.D0.BD.D0.BE.D0.B2.D1.83_.D1.81.D0.B0.D0.B3.D0.BB.D0.B0.D1.81.D0.BD.D0.BE.D1.81.D1.82.D0.B8_.D1.81.D0.BA.D1.83.D0.BF.D1.88.D1.82.D0.B8.D0.BD.D0.B0_.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.BF.D1.83.D0.B1.D0.BB.D0.B8.D0.BA.D0.B0_.D0.B8_.D0.B0.D1.83.D1.82.D0.BE.D0.BD.D0.BE.D0.BC.D0.BD.D0.B8.D1.85_.D0.BF.D0.BE.D0.BA.D1.80.D0.B0.D1.98.D0.B8.D0.BD.D0.B0
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Jun 11, 2009 13:32:14 GMT -5
^ But it states there that all the people of the nation had to agree to it. And you up sized the font on it.
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Jun 11, 2009 16:34:11 GMT -5
Article 5 of the constitution
What you posted is not article 5 but the 5th part of the introduction of the Constitution.
And of course a will for self determination starts in the republic in question and its people but it does not finish there all of Jugoslavia needs to agree and then a new constitution is drawn up.
Change of border's needs a change of constitution and for that to happen there is an exhausting process in consultation with all the peoples.
and therin lay the problem Bosnia was owned by 3 peoples Croats,Serbs,and Bosnjaks all 3 had to give permission first before it went to the Jug governmet and the processes it had to follow and how a veto was to be handled.
Noone is freakin denying that republics had the right for independence what is debated here is how it was to be done according to the constitution and how it was done in breach of the constitution.
'd like to see where exactly is here the talk about borders.
Ha it is a constitution bro not a few paragraphs in a book it is filled with sections and sub sections and parts galore it aint just a matter of looking in a index. lolol This will get you started and then follow "where's wally" till eventualy you find it.
lolol dont let the numbers fool you these are parts from parts from subsections and subsections of a article number.
Savezno veće:
1) odlučuje o promeni Ustava SFRJ,
2) utvrđuje osnove unutrašnje politike i spoljnu politiku Socijalističke Federativne Republike Jugoslavije,
3) donosi savezne zakone, osim saveznih zakona koje donosi Veće republika i pokrajina, daje autentično tumačenje saveznih zakona koje donosi,
4) utvrđuje politiku izvršavanja saveznih zakona i drugih propisa i opštih akata koje donosi, kao i obaveze saveznih organa u vezi sa izvršavanjem tih propisa i akata,
5) donosi budžet federacije i završni račun federacije,
6) odlučuje o promeni granica Socijalističke Federativne Republike Jugoslavije,
7) odlučuje o ratu i miru,
8) ratifikuje međunarodne ugovore o političkoj i vojnoj saradnji i međunarodne ugovore koji zahtevaju donošenje novih ili menjanje važećih zakona koje ono donosi,
9) utvrđuje osnove organizacije saveznih organa i njihovu nadležnost,
10) pretresa, u okviru svog delokruga, izveštaje Saveznog izvršnog veća i saveznih organa uprave, vrši političku kontrolu nad radom ovih organa i svojim smernicama usmerava njihov rad,
11) pretresa mišljenja i predloge Ustavnog suda Jugoslavije o ostvarivanju zaštite ustavnosti i zakonitosti pred tim sudom,
12) pretresa izveštaje Saveznog suda i saveznog javnog tužioca o primenjivanju saveznih zakona, o opštim problemima pravosuđa i o radu Saveznog suda i saveznog javnog tužioca,
13) pretresa izveštaje, mišljenja i predloge saveznog društvenog pravobranioca samoupravljanja,
14) daje amnestiju za krivična dela određena saveznim zakonom,
15) vrši verifikaciju mandata i odlučuje o mandatno-imunitetskim pitanjima delegata u Veću,
16) donosi poslovnik o svom radu,
17) vrši i druge poslove iz nadležnosti Skupštine SFRJ koji nisu u delokrugu Veća republika i pokrajina ili koje ne vrši ravnopravno sa tim većem.
|
|