4 ms·

This is really playing with fire by the Serbian government, and I don't think I can understand their strategy if it involves trying to force out kfor. I'm also

by 0dayz 3y ago

This is really playing with fire by the Serbian government, and I don't think I can understand their strategy if it involves trying to force out kfor. I'm also very concerned about Bosnia situation where similar nonsense is brewing up. What I find even more laughable is that Serbia could have been the majority player in the region if they weren't just doing imperialism.

xxs 3y ago
For Serbia to be anywhere a remotely important player would need to join the EU - looks at the former Yugoslavia states - Croatia and Slovenia (which Serbia had wars with), they are doing way better. However, if Serbs are to the EU, they would have to fall in-line, so ain't gonna happen (become a player)
- BrandoElFollito 3y ago
  They would have to fall in line until they join. After that it will be one more country to pull the EU in its direction. I am very much pro-European but the way the organization works is not viable. Particularly the requirement to have agreement from everyone on everything is not scalable.
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    "Particularly the requirement to have agreement from everyone on everything is not scalable." So far it mostly works, no? I really do not want the EU to become a unionized state that engages in imperialism. My main problem with the EU is the lack of transparency and democracy.
    - BrandoElFollito 3y ago
      > So far it mostly works, no? Not really. It works in some cases but globally you have laws that are not applied in countries because it is how it works. I am not an economist and would love to see hard numbers about how the EU in its current constitution is better than having the core members alone. I am in France and see that we are a net payer which does not make me happy. Not because we pay, but rather because how countries that receive this money use it.
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        Well, I am in germany and I am already not happy how our own government uses the tax money, despite that it pays also other members who do even worse things. I would change lots of things if I could. But my point was that I don't think the problem of the EU is that it does not have too much centralized power. Still, it mostly works. We have peace within the EU. We can go anywhere and start a new life just like that, that is pretty amazing. Especially if you consider how it was before.
        BrandoElFollito 3y ago
        Yes, there are plenty of good things that happened (especially at the beginning) that are positive to everyone (travel, mobile rates, ...). But look at how the slightest controversial point is vetoed. Sometimes by the Poland/Hungary team, sometimes by France, sometimes by Germany, or Spain, or anybody else. Normally functioning democracies work on majorities. Do you think that your country would work is every citizen would need to agree to some law? It would be the end (like it was, BTW, in Poland at the end of the 18 century because of exactly this way of functioning of their parliament). The other thing is that the money France pays (a net debit, like Germany) goes to countries that are openly anti-EU and prefer to buy South Korean weapons and not EU ones. There is no common direction the EU points to.
        hutzlibu 3y ago
        "Do you think that your country would work is every citizen would need to agree to some law?" I like how switzerland works. If there is no broad support for a new law, then it does not happen. So not everyone has to agree, but yes there must be a broad consensus. I think this can also work on the european level, but of course not, if every small detail has to decided on the top level. Only the questions of europe wide concern should be debated there. There need to be some standards, but not universal standards for everything. I mean, we cannot even decide for Strassbourg or Bruessel for parliamanet..
        BrandoElFollito 3y ago
  - xxs 3y ago
    about scalability, what's the alternative? We already have the bright example of the UK not liking their own [special] deal/fate.
    - BrandoElFollito 3y ago
      Use a majoritarian vote (with some fraction of the EU parliament required to pass the law/decision) - like in other democratic places.
      - xxs 3y ago
        Well that will never work, see the remark about the UK - also it effectively removes any small country from any decision making, and the EU consists of mostly 'small' countries.
  - RetroTechie 3y ago
    "Particularly the requirement to have agreement from everyone on everything is not scalable." Imho that is a feature: the EU's power depends directly on how much its members' noses are in the same direction. Where this breaks down is exactly when it's "majority decides, decision is forced top-down onto member states, even those who didn't agree". EU-wide cooperation (with willing members) is good. Some kind of 'EU superstate' is not.
    - BrandoElFollito 3y ago
      A place where everyone must agree on everything is bound to fail. It has never worked in the history of humanity (which may be an exaggeration and I would be curious to learn about a case that did) The EU is a construction that in average is expected to be profitable to everyone. If you have someone who can veto this just because they can it will not move forward. I am actually surprised that Brexit did not end with side agreements between UK and individual EU countries as it is usually the case.
alephnerd 3y ago
> What I find even more laughable is that Serbia could have been the majority player in the region if they weren't just doing imperialism All the Balkan states (Serbia is Balkan as well) are much smaller, and would end up being economically subsumed by larger neighbors like Greece, Romania, Germany, Italy, Türkiye, and Russia. This is already the case across the Balkans today, and nothing would have changed if Serbia were less belligerent.
- robotomir 3y ago
  Bulgaria and Greece are Balkan countries. How are they much smaller than Serbia?
  - alephnerd 3y ago
    I'd recommend reading my post again. I was saying the former Yugoslav states in the Balkans are much smaller economically and power projection wise than Greece, Russia, Türkiye, Romania, and Germany - all major players within the Balkans economically and politically.
    - brnt 3y ago
      Smaller countries have less weight, sure, what are you saying exactly? Nobody but Yugoslavs (or more precisely Serbs) themselves broke their state down, they were not forced into genocide and break up. Had they chosen not to sperg out, who knows how well Yugoslavia would have done.
    - robotomir 3y ago
      You use Balkan as a synonym for Yugoslav, which is wrong.
- hdjjhhvvhga 3y ago
  Except, maybe, bloodshed? Ask anyone, they would rather be economically dependent on Germany rather than have their land invaded by Serbian troops.
- neovialogistics 3y ago
rasz 3y ago
>I don't think I can understand their strategy When it was obvious in February 2022 russia was about to attack both UK and US quickly packed every single soldier and ran away. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/12/uk-troops-sent-to-help-train-ukrainian-army-to-leave-country-this-weekend https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/12/uk-troops-se... https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/12/pentagon-orders-departure-of-us-troops-in-ukraine.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/12/pentagon-orders-departure-of... The play here is forcing same outcome.
- 0dayz 3y ago
  Ran away to not start WW3, they didn't run away because they were afraid of conflict, since Serbia starting a war with NATO will not drag anyone but Serbia along.

by 0dayz 3y ago

xxs 3y ago

For Serbia to be anywhere a remotely important player would need to join the EU - looks at the former Yugoslavia states - Croatia and Slovenia (which Serbia had wars with), they are doing way better. However, if Serbs are to the EU, they would have to fall in-line, so ain't gonna happen (become a player)

BrandoElFollito 3y ago
They would have to fall in line until they join. After that it will be one more country to pull the EU in its direction. I am very much pro-European but the way the organization works is not viable. Particularly the requirement to have agreement from everyone on everything is not scalable.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  "Particularly the requirement to have agreement from everyone on everything is not scalable." So far it mostly works, no? I really do not want the EU to become a unionized state that engages in imperialism. My main problem with the EU is the lack of transparency and democracy.
  - BrandoElFollito 3y ago
    > So far it mostly works, no? Not really. It works in some cases but globally you have laws that are not applied in countries because it is how it works. I am not an economist and would love to see hard numbers about how the EU in its current constitution is better than having the core members alone. I am in France and see that we are a net payer which does not make me happy. Not because we pay, but rather because how countries that receive this money use it.
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      Well, I am in germany and I am already not happy how our own government uses the tax money, despite that it pays also other members who do even worse things. I would change lots of things if I could. But my point was that I don't think the problem of the EU is that it does not have too much centralized power. Still, it mostly works. We have peace within the EU. We can go anywhere and start a new life just like that, that is pretty amazing. Especially if you consider how it was before.
      - BrandoElFollito 3y ago
        Yes, there are plenty of good things that happened (especially at the beginning) that are positive to everyone (travel, mobile rates, ...). But look at how the slightest controversial point is vetoed. Sometimes by the Poland/Hungary team, sometimes by France, sometimes by Germany, or Spain, or anybody else. Normally functioning democracies work on majorities. Do you think that your country would work is every citizen would need to agree to some law? It would be the end (like it was, BTW, in Poland at the end of the 18 century because of exactly this way of functioning of their parliament). The other thing is that the money France pays (a net debit, like Germany) goes to countries that are openly anti-EU and prefer to buy South Korean weapons and not EU ones. There is no common direction the EU points to.
        hutzlibu 3y ago
        "Do you think that your country would work is every citizen would need to agree to some law?" I like how switzerland works. If there is no broad support for a new law, then it does not happen. So not everyone has to agree, but yes there must be a broad consensus. I think this can also work on the european level, but of course not, if every small detail has to decided on the top level. Only the questions of europe wide concern should be debated there. There need to be some standards, but not universal standards for everything. I mean, we cannot even decide for Strassbourg or Bruessel for parliamanet..
        BrandoElFollito 3y ago
- xxs 3y ago
  about scalability, what's the alternative? We already have the bright example of the UK not liking their own [special] deal/fate.
  - BrandoElFollito 3y ago
    Use a majoritarian vote (with some fraction of the EU parliament required to pass the law/decision) - like in other democratic places.
    - xxs 3y ago
      Well that will never work, see the remark about the UK - also it effectively removes any small country from any decision making, and the EU consists of mostly 'small' countries.
- RetroTechie 3y ago
  "Particularly the requirement to have agreement from everyone on everything is not scalable." Imho that is a feature: the EU's power depends directly on how much its members' noses are in the same direction. Where this breaks down is exactly when it's "majority decides, decision is forced top-down onto member states, even those who didn't agree". EU-wide cooperation (with willing members) is good. Some kind of 'EU superstate' is not.
  - BrandoElFollito 3y ago
    A place where everyone must agree on everything is bound to fail. It has never worked in the history of humanity (which may be an exaggeration and I would be curious to learn about a case that did) The EU is a construction that in average is expected to be profitable to everyone. If you have someone who can veto this just because they can it will not move forward. I am actually surprised that Brexit did not end with side agreements between UK and individual EU countries as it is usually the case.

alephnerd 3y ago

> What I find even more laughable is that Serbia could have been the majority player in the region if they weren't just doing imperialism All the Balkan states (Serbia is Balkan as well) are much smaller, and would end up being economically subsumed by larger neighbors like Greece, Romania, Germany, Italy, Türkiye, and Russia. This is already the case across the Balkans today, and nothing would have changed if Serbia were less belligerent.

robotomir 3y ago
Bulgaria and Greece are Balkan countries. How are they much smaller than Serbia?
- alephnerd 3y ago
  I'd recommend reading my post again. I was saying the former Yugoslav states in the Balkans are much smaller economically and power projection wise than Greece, Russia, Türkiye, Romania, and Germany - all major players within the Balkans economically and politically.
  - brnt 3y ago
    Smaller countries have less weight, sure, what are you saying exactly? Nobody but Yugoslavs (or more precisely Serbs) themselves broke their state down, they were not forced into genocide and break up. Had they chosen not to sperg out, who knows how well Yugoslavia would have done.
  - robotomir 3y ago
    You use Balkan as a synonym for Yugoslav, which is wrong.
hdjjhhvvhga 3y ago
Except, maybe, bloodshed? Ask anyone, they would rather be economically dependent on Germany rather than have their land invaded by Serbian troops.
neovialogistics 3y ago

rasz 3y ago

>I don't think I can understand their strategy When it was obvious in February 2022 russia was about to attack both UK and US quickly packed every single soldier and ran away. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/12/uk-troops-sent-to-help-train-ukrainian-army-to-leave-country-this-weekend https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/12/uk-troops-se... https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/12/pentagon-orders-departure-of-us-troops-in-ukraine.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/12/pentagon-orders-departure-of... The play here is forcing same outcome.

0dayz 3y ago
Ran away to not start WW3, they didn't run away because they were afraid of conflict, since Serbia starting a war with NATO will not drag anyone but Serbia along.