>>>>>No question that how America behaves in this regards affects how the Saudies or Yemenis or anyone else behaves, but what it does affect is America's ability to take the moral high ground.
>>>>
>>>>What high ground? All the contracts with the American American tribes were broken, they were forced off their land (by the Brits, and then by the Republic all the same), the injustice was never rectified. None of the legendary robber barons have been arrested or shot, nor was the loot distributed back to the victims. And then there's the private banks (aka FED) ruling the economy with zero accountability. Should I mention September 11th (1973!), for which there wasn't any apology to the people of Chile, not to mention dismissal of the debts Pinochet piled up... or the Iran/contra affair...
>>>>So... what high ground? The US are always willingly participating in this kind of agenda and readily taking the odium for it. And people keep electing the same party (either side of the same coin) over and over. Just like we deserved Milo[s caron]evi[c acute]. So it goes.
>>>
>>>and yet somehow we keep attracting refugees from failed Balkan societies ...
>>
>>Take that back, sir.
>
>I'm confused. You spend a lot of time criticizing this country and yet you choose to live here. I have no problem with that.

Neither do I. Just like I said years ago, I have come as a friend, want to be a good neighbor, and am telling it as I see it - just like I did with my compatriot friends while I was in Serbia.

The point here is that I wasn't criticizing the people (no more than the Serbs can be criticized for having Milo[s caron]evi[c acute]), not even the country, for doing all that, but rather for allowing itself to be wielded as a tool of the who knows which shady interests. Which happens to more or less any country - mine was so enamored with its idealized past until recently. It's the claim of the 'moral high ground' that somehow doesn't fit.

And the eternal warmonger and justifier of just any military or "surgical" action doesn't have anything better to say, but to pull that same old "so why are you here then". Or should I say that he doesn't even feel any need to find a justification for any of that, he takes it as a given that it's this country that always has to do that, no questions asked.

But that's him. What prompted me to request an apology was the "refugee" and "failed society". I'm not, and it's not. Besides, to gain a status of "failed", any country only needs to be a target of a coordinated surgical action... and then it gets labeled as such, regardless of its actual level of functioning, because those who write history are the victors (i.e. those who own the media). I'm glad that in about his last that I'll ever read, he just proved my point.

> Most transplants I know (and I know a lot from a lot of countries), criticize me for complaining so much. They are constantly telling me that I have it better than 90% of the world and should be appreciative. I have experienced many other societies myself. However, I feel very strongly that it is the criticism that keeps our country on its toes and will lead to constant improvement.

It should, and I hope it will. Against the odds.

>Having written that, I really think that since you are so comfortable dishing out the complaints and negative comments that you should be equally comfortable receiving them. His comment wasn't politically correct and it was a bit rude,

I usually take it once; this time I went native and after two hiatuses allowed a third (I'm not religious and three isn't an important number to me) escapade, or should I say insult, of this kind, gave him a chance to take it back, in case he had a bad hair day or whatever, He didn't take it, so that's the last of him that I read, so what. Big deal.

> but it certainly wasn't outrageous either. Was there anything inaccurate about it or was it just too insulting? Is it okay to point out the failures of this country but not acknowledge that there may have been failed societies in the Balkans? Or do you blame the U.S. entirely for those failures? (The U.S. does share some of the blame for exascerbating the situation)

The definition of "Balkanization" is "little countries and/or groups pitted against each other by maneuvering of great foreign forces". The foreign element is so frequently, and so conveniently forgotten.

As for who to blame, some known players are the Brits, Germans and the Vatican; Americans came later. Still, we won't know for sure until the archives are open, and maybe not even then. We were a testbed for several larger projects; remember, we had a color revolution when it was still black and white, and it's a known fact that its forerunners were funded by the West, and went to courses in Hungary, etc etc. It was known right away by anyone who wanted to know (and had a web connection :), and it is known now. These guys later went to teach the technology to, ahem, leaders of color coded revolutions elsewhere, all inclusive trips paid by you, and possibly even Walter, and me. We went along just because we figured anything will be better than Sloba, and once we reconnect to the world, we should be able to manage on our own, regardless of who is ruling the country. We didn't expect any kind of right guys to form a government, knowing that anyone who was worth their salt were rushed out of politics, or left it disgusted, nauseated or just muddy from all the slinging, but went for it all the same just to get a government which will at least have to think of the next election.

BTW,

#define FailedCountry

if you can.