Subject: A letter to the editor re. "Compromise over Kosovo Means Defeat," May 24, 1999

Dear Ned,

It's a good thing that Zbigniew Brzezinski is now merely a hateful anti-Orthodox Christian spigot. For, were he still in some position of power, as he was as Jimmy Carter's national security adviser, this warmonger would be leading the U.S. straight into a WW III inferno. Without even a pause for a careful reflection.

Brzezinski's OpEd piece, "Compromise over Kosovo Means Defeat" (May 24, 1999), is a perfect example of a racist, maximalist arrogance which the self-professed "liberals" display these days. "Only a Kosovo free of armed Serbs..." is an acceptable end result to this warmonger. Never mind that Kosovo is, and has been a part of Serbia, for a better part of the last 1,000 years. Brzezinski thinks it's okay for NATO simply to snatch it away, and hand it over to the Albanians, just as it did in 1995 with huge swaths of Serbian territories in Bosnia and Croatia.

So let's try the following hypothetical scenario, to test the sanity of Brzezinski's ideas. Suppose the Russians decide for geopolitical reasons just as valid as NATO's imperialism, that they want some of today's Polish lands; say the Gdansk and Suwalki regions in the north. This would provide a contiguous Russian-controlled territory between the Russian area of Kaliningrad in the north (now an landlocked "island" between Lithuania and Poland), and the pro-Russian Byelorussia to the east of Poland.

A neat idea, right? From a Russian imperialists' standpoint. And with even more merit than NATO's forceful attempt to move into Kosovo. With an unspoken, but obvious geopolitical agenda - to eventually link up its eastern wing (Turkey) with its western wing (Italy, etc.), along the "Green Interstate," and across the backs of the Serbs who have lived in Kosovo, and who used to live in Croatia and Bosnia, for centuries.

In other words, it would be a blatant Russian land grab to which, I suspect, Brzezinski would be violently opposed? Yet, here he is, advocating exactly the same thing in Kosovo. And worse...

Proving that Brzezinski doesn't give a damn about American lives, either, he is bemoaning NATO's supposedly too careful air campaign. "The painful reality is that the bombing campaign has been conducted as if the human lives at stake should be priced at three different levels," he writes. "The most precious lives are those of the NATO pilots...; next are those of Mr. Milosevic's officials...; least valuable are the lives of the Kosovars (i.e., Kosovo Albanians) themselves..."

So what would Brzezinski like to see happen? Have more Americans killed than the several hundred whom our Draftdodger-in-Chief has already sent to their needless deaths?

(I know... the "yadda, yadda, yadda... lie and deny" Washington and Brussels crowd deny they've suffered any casualties. Except for the two American pilots killed when their Apache helicopter was shot down by the Yugoslav air defenses on May 5. Which "yadda, yadda, yadda... lie and deny" spin masters deny, saying it was a mechanical or pilot error. For a contrary assessment, check out the German "Welt am Sonntag" May 23 edition).

Whether American casualties have been so far in the dozens or in the hundreds may be debatable. What is not debatable is that they will be in the thousands should NATO attempt a land invasion of Kosovo, as the warmongers like Brzezinski are advocating. So that NATO can claim "a Kosovo free of armed Serbs..." as its war booty.

A group of British military experts, under the guise and cover of being OSCE monitors, examined the various possible points of entry for a ground assault from Macedonia - BEFORE the NATO bombing began on Mar. 24, the London Times recently reported. And they concluded that, "an invasion force could be stopped 'by a flock of sheep'," the Times said, as the steep mountain passes along the route "provide an ideal ambush country."

The Yugoslav Army is anything but sheepish, as the downing of the F-117, and of that Apache helicopter proved,  among other NATO casualties - admitted or not by Washington or Brussels.

In other words, it would be "Slaughterhouse Kosovo" for the would-be NATO invaders. Only armchair warriors, like Brzezinski or Tony Blair, not to mention Bill Clinton or Madeleine Albright, who have not spent a day of their lives in a trench, could advocate THAT as a "solution" to the "Kosovo Crisis" which they have manufactured, painting themselves into a corner.

Meanwhile, Brzezinski's racism shone right through his complaints about the supposedly three different levels of human lives (NATO, Milosevic's officials, Albanians). Notice that he never even mentions the thousands of innocent Serb civilians who have been killed by NATO?  Nor the millions of Serbs who are now having to make do without electricity and water? Just as he doesn't bemoan the dogs or the farm animals who were also victims of NATO's war on Serbia.

Pin a "swastika" on Brzezinski. Right next to his "red star." The two symbols go hand-in-hand with his philosophy.

Best regards,

Bob Djurdjevic, Founder, Truth in Media

Also check out... "Does WSJ Dance to Wall St. Bankers' Tunes?",  "Clinton Fiddles While Milosevic Burns",  "Let the Bombing Begin?  Not!" , "What's Good for the Goose..."  and "Journal's Rotten Apples" (Wall Street Journal); and "Stock buybacks: Wall St.'s duping of Main St.", Business Week).