>Not that I know of. If Buchanan wanted to support Nazis in the Balkans, he
>had better push for an US/NATO intervention there.
>
>Unfortunately, the Balkans (along with Heiti, Somalia, & Rewanda) confused
>_lots_ of leftists. Those who voiced oppositions to the propaganda that
>promoted the break-up of Yugoslavia and the expansion of NATO from the
>beginning were a rather odd assortment of people: Living Marxism, die-hard
>pacifist religious lefties, Buchanan and some other conservatives, some
>(but_by no means_ all) marxists, etc. Lots of 'progressives' (including,
>alas, many feminists) went for 'Serbs are evil rapist ethnic cleansers'
>sentiments & arguments. Unlike Henry, I don't consider 'delightful' the
>spectacle of right-wingers taking a correct position of anti-intervention
>while self-identified lefties taking an opposit tack.
I've noticed a great correlation between people's positions on the former Yugoslavia and their Cold War affinities, with people in & around the CP showing great sympathy towards Serbia and against US/NATO intervention, and social democrats/Third Campists showing great sympathy towards Bosnia and antipathy towards Serbia and US/NATO intervention. The pro-Serbian left always cites the Nazi sympathies of the Croatians during WW II. I was wondering if Pat B. harbored some secret affinity for the Croatian Nazi-symps.
Doug