I had to say, the minute I heard it, it made me think of the two World Wars, it's inescapable.

Anya

I know the region fairly well, as my family is from the Balkans. This tragedy was anticipated in at least one online Serb publication. He (Djindjic) made some promises to the local crimelords, then didn't follow through on them. When they pressed he pushed back. They didn't like being left out in the cold, so, we mourn the loss of another world leader.

There is no likely successor at this point, however former Yugoslav President, Vojislav Kostunica could gain popularity if a general election is held. But they are not great organizers nor "team players."

Yugoslavia's Minister of Police Zoran Zivkovic might be the guy for the premiership. Prior to Djindjic's death he was due to become Serbia's Armed Forces minister.

Another politician with strong prospects is a Serbian deputy prime minister, Nebojsa Covic, from the Democratic Alternative party.

Right now there is a huge political power vacuum, because elections have twice failed to produce a result, and there is no President. Now it has no prime minister either.

Serbia, and Montenegro by extension are in no position to defy the United States and the European Union in the agreed to reforms. The real question is how fast and reliably with the reforms happen.

HPG

This assisination reminds me more of those in Columbia than a coup like assisination.  I could be wrong.

In a poor country like Serbia, money talks better than guns.  Reading the articles, I believe Djindjic's vow to arrest organized criminals involved in sex slavery and other activities was what did him in.  The gangsters want to use him as an example.  War criminals could resist the arrests because they have the guns.  Criminal activities could be hampered by governement actions hence they are more affected by the policy of Djindjic.

In that part of the world, sex slave trade is as powerful as the drug trade in Columbia.

The most compelling reason for believing that JFK was assassinated by organized crime does not rely on "second gunmen" or ballistics evidence or other debatable evidence.  It is the simple fact that JFK's assassin was murdered in full view of many people by a sleazy night club owner who was clearly not acting out of patriotic rage over the death of his fallen President.

Also indisputable:  JFK shared a mistress (Judith Campbell Exner) with mobsters.  As a woman I once knew from New Jersey put it:  "Kennedy was playing footsie with the mob".

There does indeed appear to be some disturbing parallels between the actions of the "proto-Bush" administration in Nov-Dec of 2000 and those of that we're seeing now in their approach to the U.N and Iraq.

For God`s sake…… please get over the election. I recall reading that the L.A. Times, not exactly a conservative paper, researched the voting debacle and determined that Bush won. Listen folks, if you aren`t smart enough to punch a damn hole in a card, or read the name correctly, it`s your fault. When the voting is over and counted and you lose you don`t get a do-over just because you lost. I also remember hearing that in the city of Chicago there were more faulty ballots than in the whole state of Florida. So suck it up and get ready for 6 more years.

I refer you to Paul Krugman's op/ed piece in today's NYTimes, entitled "George W. Queeg". Other's have likened his current obsession with Saddam Hussein to Ahab's with Moby Dick.

Whatever your political (or, indeed, religious) persuasion, W.'s handling of the Iraqi debate in the U.N. has been nothing short of disasterous. It seems pretty clear, despite the Bush administration's protestations, that they're not going to get Security Council approval for a declaration of war against Iraq. Without that approval and if W. still declares war, Tony Blair (W.'s closest international friend) may well be deposed as U.K.'s PM. Welcome to the brave new world of a neo-colonialist, imperialistic American empire. We can be just like the Romans, of whom it was said "They make a desert, and call it peace".

And waiting in the wings, W. will still have to deal with the more important and intractable problems of a nuclear North Korea and Iran.

If your fondest hope is realized and W is re-elected (or from my perspective, elected for the first time), I just hope that the rest of us are still breathing by 2008. At this rate, it doesn't look promising. As we head into 2003 with an unprovoked war looming overhead, gas prices hurtling towards $3/gallon, the 4th year of a crushing bear stock market, almost guaranteed return to recession etc., I for one am not having a good time.

-- Modified on 3/14/2003 9:39:01 PM

I don`t refer to the N.Y. Times. But since you mentioned op-ed pieces take a look at William Safire`s contribution today.
 As far as the United Nations is concerned I will agree that it is a fiasco. Not brought on by any missteps of G.W. but by the body itself. He should have done as Clinton did and bypassed them altogether. I think that when this conflict is all said and done there are going to be many people who will have to admit to the world that they were short sighted and mistaken as to the urgency and the depth of importance with the situation in Iraq. Having said that, I believe Tony Blair will be vindicated for his support of the United States.
I want to ask you these questions. Do you truly believe that Saddam has disarmed as he agreed to do in the cease-fire declaration? As far as I’m concerned we are still at war with Iraq until those agreed upon conditions are met. It puzzles me why so many anti-war protesters wish to trash this country and it’s President knowing full well that it just encourages Saddam to stall and deceive. Do you really think that he can be contained in such a way that he will never be in a position to do us harm? Are you so distrustful of the President that you actually believe he would risk the lives of his service men and women, not to mention the cost in dollars, to help a few friends in the oil business? I guess after eight years of Clinton distrust kind of goes with the territory.
 Its not imperialism that G.W. brings. Its leadership in troubled times. Somebody had to finally take a stand after the events of 9/11. We weren’t safe from radical Islam 25 years ago, we aren’t safe now, and we probably won’t be safe for a long time to come. I for one am grateful to President Bush for his strength of conviction.
 I’d like to give you credit though for admitting that the economy was in trouble long before G.W. took charge. Not to many Bush bashers are willing to say that.

You forgot the part about martial law and getting nuked, which is almost surely coming as W and his cronies surely don't give a fuck about the rest of us.

Ampallang: please check out my link in the post above and let meknow what you think. The resources are generally European mainstream media, something more reliable than, say, Weekly World News. I believe there was massive voter fraud in FL, one alternative news source placed Gore's win at something like 200,000 votes. None of this, including 9/11, was an accident.

The best reason for dealing with Iraq now is exactly what you eluded to regarding North Korea. Do you want to deal with him after he gets a nuke? We are in a position with N.Korea now where we have to pussyfoot around with them because of thier nuke capability. Thank you Bill Clinton. Regarding martial law, nobody wants to see troops in our streets regulating activity and I think it`s foolish to assume that we will. The thing that gets me is that fringe thinkers like you think that somehow we have given up our rights simply because we try to protect ourselves. If I had my way every Middle Easterner in this country on a visa would be looked at. Here`s why. The bad guys are out there. Thier in our country. Thier not going to turn themselves in. If we let them be we will surely suffer. You asked what I thought of your link. I think it`s conspiracy crap. I think it`s the usual blame America first crap that the activists will put on display today in D.C. I think there may be instances where our intellegence comunity failed to connect the dots but if they had acted on some of the info more aggressivly people like you would have been right there screaming about some plotting son of a bitches "civil rights". Face it, there is nothing the adimistration can do to please the hard core self-hating socialist far left in this country so I say.... ignore them.

Word has it that the secret recipie for his Kentucky Fried Chicken was stolen via illegal wiretap!

Never F#ck with the Phone Company, and never call down the evil spirit of Col Sanders.

It is my opinion (and no, I can't prove it) that the number of eligible black voters in Florida who were illegally turned away from the polls exceeds the number of vote that Bush won the state by.  I am referring to the net number of votes that Gore would have gotten from those black voters after subtracting the votes that Bush would have gotten from black voters who were illegally turned away from the polls.  

How do you get away with turning away someone from the polls illegally?  When the black person in question is barely literate, it's an easy matter to say "Gee, I can't seem to find your name on the list".  This has been happening for decades in the South, and continues today.

It`s simple....... if you want to place blame put it on Ralph Nader. He hurt Gore like Ross Perot hurt Bush 41. Don`t forget.... Clinton won without a majority vote.