DDeBar writes:
> >What should I assume?  Should I adopt the assumption that is opposite
> >to the one you challenge vigorously?  Should I only base my assumptions
> >on what is published on ZNet?
>
> Actually, what I was originally trying to convey was the idea that one
> should not chime in with militarist action based upon assumptions.

You implied that I was chiming in, based on your assumptions, which
were false.  Take your own advice.  You are the one who chimed in
based on false assumptions.

> >Go back to the week, month, six months, or year immediately before the
> >bombing began.  Kosovo was occupied by the same army, police, and
> >paramilitary that were involved in mass, sorry, many killings in the
> >Bosnia war.
>
> Who, at the time, was the legitimate government of Yugoslavia, which was at
> the time, and, under international law, still is, part of said
> Yugoslavia.

...and which is all irrelevant to my decision about whether to
assume they were killing in Kosovo or not killing in Kosovo.

> >They were being commanded by the same leader who
> >commanded them in that war.  Mass graves from that war had been
> >documented.  An armed rebellion had begun in Kosovo and was >building.
>
> I'm curious to know how, exactly, you would treat an armed rebellion in the
> US by indigenous peoples, or African Americans, or working people. Should
> the US government, in such cases, step back and let some "peacekeepers"
> secure the position of the rebellion?

I assume you mean if I were president.  I wouldn't run the country in
a way that made people want to start an armed rebellion.  I also
assume, if I failed so miserably that there was danger of an armed
rebellion forming, I would either be voted out or impeached long
before it came to that.

martin

Martin Smith                    Email: [log in to unmask]
P.O. Box 1034 Bekkajordet       Tel. : +47 330 35700
N-3194 HORTEN, Norway           Fax. : +47 330 35701