Karadzic does, but Milosevic was Serbian. He was born in Pozarevac.
2nd generation Mexican born and raised in Grand Rapids, MI will make him an American only technically; his identity will be totally different matter. Similarly, while technically true that he was born and raised in Pozarevac that does not make him a Serb as I use the term in its narrow definition to elaborate my theory. His family origin is Montenegro and everyone down there will tell you Milosevic is Montenegrin. As for distinction of Serbs and Montenegrins, please let’s not start kicking that trash can.
EnSlav-ed, surely? 
I agree with you that Milosevic was Montenegrin, but the comparison with Mexican-Americans is not really apt. In the Balkans, families maintain their nationality FOREVER, regardless of their place of birth. I had students in Bulgaria who were born in Bulgaria and their parents were born in Bulgaria and everyone they were related to was born in Bulgaria - and they were still Turkish. Not Turkish-Bulgarian, just Turks who happened to live in Bulgaria and have Bulgarian citizenship.
Nationality in the Balkans just doesn’t work the way it does in the US.
Quite true in general, especially as to the second, but sometimes it can get weirdly fluid. My father’s side of the family ( through both his parent’s lines ) are all of Croatian Serb descent ( i.e. Serbs from Croatia ). But in that case as little a thing as switching your confession ( say by marrying into a family and converting ) could result in switching ethnicities. There otherwise is not an awful lot to distinguish one from the other, despite fiercely held pride in that tenuously defined ethnic grouping. Serbs and Croats are notoriously hyper-nationalist these days, but in that region it could be surprisingly easy to change tribes.
And of course to pre-rise-of-ethnic-nationalism to everyone outside Croatia ( including the Hapsburg government ) everybody from Croatia was a “Croat” - they simply used the term as a geographic identifier.
The Balkans are an ever-confusing welter of weird ethnic issues.
Out of curiousity, if the name Macedonia is this central to Greek national identity, why didn’t they adopt the name when they broke free from Turkish rule? Call themselves the Kingdom of Makedonia instead of the Kingdom of Ellados and establish a prior claim to the name?
Some of them considered themselves to be Serbs. My ex’s father was from a family that had been in Macedonia for as long as any of them knew, but they had always considered themselves Serbs rather than Macedonians. There’s a similar dynamic with Montenegro - you could have people within a single (nuclear) family where half of them called themselves Montenegrins and the other half Serbs. That’s a good part of the reason why the vote for independence was so close (55-45%). I’d imagine a Montenegrin national identity is probably developing a lot more rapidly since independence, though.
Out of curiosity, where were they from in Macedonia? In eastern Macedonia, the language blends almost into Serbian and I found communicating to be a lot more difficult than it was in Skopje.
I don’t have any insight, I’m just curious because you know I like languages and I find the south Slavic language continuum to be really interesting.
BTW, anecdotally, I worked in an English language summer camp for high school aged kids for a couple weeks in the summer of 2007 in Bulgaria and for some reason a TON of my students were from Montenegro. Montenegro had only been independent for a little over a year at the time and the kids were INSANELY patriotic. When we went on outings they would chant “Cherna Gora Cherna Gora!” just walking around. (Cherna Gora = Serbian for Montenegro.) I have seriously never seen anyone just so fucking excited about their country. But at the same time, they all agreed that their language was Serbian, and they seemed to get on perfectly well with the Serbian kids at the camp.
Serbs in Croatia as a regional group is the perfect example of what I was trying to convey with my little regional theory of people who try too much to be pure while mixed through generations. The way they were manipulated (if you know the story from 1991 until their expulsion) is almost borderline masochism and prime example of never ending story of Balkan - instead of mutual respect for differences and agreement on similarities they went the way of hating the differences and disagreement on similarities.
Little off-topic…
Funny thing, at my office we were discussing multi-cultural state of affairs in Canada and how it is incredible that these same people from Balkans can live in Canada along each other with no problem but transport those same people down there and things go downhill. On top of that, here you still have quite a number of people living their life in Canada while being fully engaged in every day conundrums of Balkan and thus making up very rare bird - respectful and peaceful on the street of Toronto but full of rage on the pages of local discussion forum; something of a modern Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde brought to you by very fast DSL. Further rumination on the subject led me to challenge everyone in the office to come up with a cultural or social custom from their country of origin that is superior or at least equal to what’s currently a custom in Canada (more than half of the people in the office are either recent or 2nd generation immigrants and they exclude Western Europe countries). Well, needless to say no response received yet.
To be honest I have no idea. But it would make sense to be in the part that’s closer to Serbia.
I wonder how long that will last. I suspect they’ll be calling it Montenegrin within a generation, if they aren’t already starting to.
Actually, as has been pointed out already, save for a fringe of addled Tea-Partiers the US would not give a hoot. We got more pressing matters to concern us than centuriesr-old points of pride about a name (that in any case was the Mexicans’ name first, as mentioned). Matter of fact, the US State Department HAS recognized the Republic of Macedonia under its official name, not “Former…” for some years now. The issue seems childish to those who are uninformed about the political implications… and even to some who are informed.
Ah, nationalism… there’s one idea that needs to go into the wastebin mondo pronto…
And even more interesting that most Greeks are more Slavic than not. They just happen to speak a non-Slavic language.
I’d be very interested to hear how they were supposed to prevent FYROM from “getting” the name. It’s not a trademark.
A trademark infringement suit not being an option, presumedly he was suggesting the traditional method when one nation wants to impose its will on another nation - declare war.
I discounted a declaration of war in response to name-stealing as too silly.
ETA: Though it raises the amusing possibility of France and the UK declaring war on the US for stealing flag colors.
Look, if the Duchy of Grand Fenwick can declare war on the U.S. over name-stealing a wine . . .
Slavic is a language group. How can the Greeks be Slavic if the large majority of them speak Greek?
It would do a world of good in ME…
I wouldn’t say that. I consider myself a nationalist, in the sense that my identity is largely derived from the national group I belong to. I suppose that your Puerto Rican nationality also informs your identity as a person. But as any other ideology, it can lead people to do good things, and it can lead people to do bad things.
What he means is that modern Greeks are closely ethnically related to modern Slavs (South Slavs at least). Slavic is an ethno-linguistic group, it can refer both to the languages and to the ethnicities.
Aren’t Romanians also closely related to Slavs, despite them speaking a non-Slavic language?
They did not prevent the name, they also prevented the flag for the new country.
I found this link to be quite informative of how Balkan mind works http://web.mit.edu/hellenic/www/macedonia.html
If it was not so mean spirited and dangerous it would be funny.