A Place to Stand

First of all, you are completely inaccurate in saying that Franjo Tudjam ethnically cleansed 560,000 Serbs. More than half of Croatian Serbs lived in urban areas unaffected by the Serb rebellion and have remained to live there. Some of them experienced harassment on the personal level but they were certainly not put in concentration camps and gassed as you seem to suggest. They weren’t even systematically oppressed by the state in any way. Even the Serbs from the occupied territories who fled were invited to stay by the Croatian authorities. They fled in an organised fashion orchestrated by their leaders. They were partly indoctrinated by the systematic campaign in the Serbian run media and partly genuinely afraid of the vengeance. They bloody well knew what they’ve done to Croatian population on the occupied territories - there is no comparable crime committed by Croats over Serbs to that committed by Serbs over Croats (Vocinci, Skabrnja, Vukovar) or indeed over Bosnians (Brcko, Srebrenica). A lot of those who fled have seen the mistake they’ve made (and indeed the ‘welcome’ they received in Serbia) are now coming back. They participate in the local and the state government and are even a part of the coalition.

Your comparison of Tudjman’s Croatia with Hitler’s Germany is not only far-stretched but intellectually dishonest. In other words, sir, you are a liar.

With regard to the famous ‘map’ on the serviette, this thing was taken out of context by that bastard English mole ‘Paddy’ Ashdown. I had known Tudjman and was aware of the context of discussion in which Tudjman drew to Ashdown the spheres of influence as he saw them (which is different than state borders). Even so, this exercise was far less sinister than the border-drawing exercise carried out on Yalta where a hundred millions of Eastern Europeans were handed over to the Russian tyranny. Were Churchill and Roosevelt ‘acceptable Nazis’ then? According to your definition, they were.
 

Since you "had known" Tudjman you must be aware of the fact that he said that Croatia had been "purified" of Serbs. Purified does not mean most of there were still there & they aren't.

I accept the claim that the Serb civilians "weren't even systematically oppressed" represents the very highest standard of honesty available from Croatian Nazis.

"Spheres of influence" in another sovereign state can only be enforced by occupying troops. Tudjman's ambitions for lebensrum thus clearly extented to the Moslem areas of Bosnia/Hercegovina.
 

"Since you "had known" Tudjman you must be aware of the fact that he said that Croatia had been "purified" of Serbs. Purified does not mean most of there were still there & they aren't."

You are again taking things out of context. Tudjman made a statement of fact when he said that Serbs were gone from parts of Croatia. Serbs constituted less than 10% of population in 1990 and in 2003 there were slightly below 5% with which means exactly what I’ve said – most of Serbs living in urban areas unaffected by the war are still there. If Croatia was a Nazi state, they’d certainly be gone one way or another. Furthermore, between 50,000 and 60,000 thousands of Serbs returned since the census.


“Serb Occupied territories". Can the Dutch "occupy" Amsterdam?”

Of course not. How could the Germans occupy Austria and Sudetenland (Czech Republic for the uninitiated) in WW2?


May I remind you both that Croatia was an internationally recognised state at the time its armed forces were quelling the rebellion. Would Peter North support Aborigine breakaway territory from which the Aborigine would forcefully expel the Anglo-Saxon intruders and establish their own government? Let’s take matters further, would Peter North support breakaway Lebanese state in Sidney? How for heaven’s sake could Lebanese occupy Brighton-le-Sands??

And another thing, Peter North could at least bother to make a distinction between camps operated by Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats, none of which were under the control of Croatian government.
 

Not less than 10% Dom. 12% plus another 12% describing themselves as Yugoslavs. If only 5% of those are left I think the point proven.

Presumably since all of Croatia was internationally recognised as part of Yugoslavia (indeed no European country was/is even allowed to recognise anything different, you must, being an impsrtial non-racist, be on record as saying the Yugoslav government had the right to ethnicly cleanse all Croats within its borders. I am more humane.