A Tribute to our Military

[SivartM]

Forget those other wars... there's a war brewing on this thread now. :\

[bonnie]

No it wasn't the first article I ran across. It was reflecting what I had already read of other accounts.

But you still have offered nothing except to say you are right and all others wrong

[bonnie]

http://www.isg-fi.org.uk/spip.php?article373

Socialist Resistance : SR34 - April 2006

Obituary

Slobodan Milosevic- Butcher of the Balkans

Alan Thornett, Geoff Ryan

Slobodan Milosevic died during his trial at the UN’s International War Crimes Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague. He was 64. He stood accused of war crimes in Bosnia- Herzegovina, Croatia and Kosovo. Whatever the legitimacy of the victors justice represented by the Tribunal, a poor substitute for a true international court, there is no doubt of his guilt. The evidence is overwhelming. He was the butcher of the Balkans. Geoff Ryan and Alan Thornett look at his history in the Balkans.

Milosevic’s role remains controversial on the left; because it involves controversies about the role and nature of Stalinism, the causes of its collapse, and the right of selfdetermination of nations.

It also raises the issue of whether the unity of Yugoslavia could have been preserved and who was principally responsible for its destruction.

The obituary of Milosevic in Socialist Worker (18.3.06) raised such controversies. It makes no significant distinction between the role of Milosevic in the break up of Yugoslavia and that of Franjo Tudjman of Croatia and even Alija Izetbegovic of Bosnia- Herzegovina.

It even makes no distinction between them in terms of war crimes - which in the case of Izetbegovic is scandalous.

Yugoslavia was a federation comprising six Federal Republics: Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia. There were two Autonomous Provinces, Vojvodina (majority Hungarian population) and Kosova (80 per cent Albanian) - both within the Serb Republic.

There was a history of both Serb and Croatian nationalism prior and during the world war two. This declined in the post-war period under Tito (a Croat) to the extent that many people thought of themselves as Yugoslav.

Milosevic came to prominence in the 1980s through the Communist Party ranks in Serbia and learned his politics in the Belgrade bureaucracy in the latter years of Tito’s rule.

He was pivotal in the breakup of Yugoslavia, and carries the principal responsibility for the carnage involved. He orchestrated the resurgence of Greater Serbian nationalism that led to slaughter on a mass scale.

The internal social and economic crisis that brought down Stalinism in the Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, existed in full force in Yugoslavia. This caused tensions between the Republics and forced Yugoslavia into damaging arrangements with the IMF. Milosevic dealt with the crisis like many of his top functionaries by turning to nationalism.

After Tito’s death in 1980, Yugoslavia could only be held together by a guarantee against the rise of Serbia into the dominant position it held in the pre-war period.

This meant strengthening, rather than weakening, the relatively progressive 1974 constitution - which had devolved power and autonomy to the constituent Republics.

Multinational state

It defined Yugoslavia as a multinational state in which no single nationality could claim a majority. This was the basis on which the Federation coexisted.

This coexistence, however, was soon to come under pressure from Serb nationalism. In the spring of 1981, Kosovar Albanian demonstrators in Pristina, campaigning for Kosova to be promoted to the status of a Federal Republic, were savagely attacked by Serbian police.

In 1987, Milosevic, now Serbian party boss and increasingly a nationalist demagogue, addressed a rally of Serbs in Kosova and made his infamous "no one should dare to beat you" speech. He was lauded by the Serbs and came away as de facto Serb president in waiting.

Six months later Milosevic was indeed President of Serbia - and the direction he was taking was unmistakable. In 1989 even the limited autonomy enjoyed by Kosova and Voijvodina as Autonomous Provinces was abolished and they were annexed by Serbia.

The de facto absorption of Montenegro quickly followed. Milosevic had torn up the 1974 constitution and sought to replace it with a highly centralised state dominated by Serbia.

The consequences for the Federation were absolutely clear. The more dominant Serbia became the less other nationalities were prepared to stay within it.

Milosevic now launched his Greater Serbia project - the creation of a common mono-ethnic state for all the Serbs, then spread across the various Republics.

This concept was supported by all political parties in Serbia and could only be achieved by the break-up of Yugoslavia and the annexation of at least a third of Croatia and two thirds of Bosnia-Herzegovina - with the ethnic cleansing of non- Serbs from those territories.

Once Kosova, Voijvodina and Montenegro were swallowed up, resistance to the advance of Greater Serbia project fell to the newly elected governments of Slovenia and Croatia. They tried to negotiate acceptable terms to stay in the Federation; proposing that it take the form of "a free union of democratic states" - proposals which were supported by Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia.

Milosevic rejected this and all subsequent proposals along these lines.

In December 1990 Slovenia voted in a referendum to secede, though it did not act at that stage. Slovenia was increasingly dragging Croatia with it towards independence.

Franjo Tudjman was now President of Croatia. He was a Stalinist bureaucrat turned Croatian nationalist, later to have war crimes on his hands. In March 1991 the Serbs of the Krajina region of Croatia, in what was claimed to be a spontaneous uprising, took over the region and declared it an independent state. The uprising was led by Serb nationalist strongman Milan Babic. They named it the Autonomous Province of Krajina, later Republika Srpska Krajina.

The uprising had the full backing of Milosevic, and it was armed and supported by the Yugoslav National Army (JNA). Federal authority was collapsing and the JNA was already acting under Serbian control.

This was a body-blow to the unity of Yugoslavia and a massive challenge to Croatia - which was split wide open. Tudjman had no army to resist the JNA and sought to stabilise the situation by diplomacy.

In any case he had his own agenda for carving up theregion (i.e. Bosnia- Herzegovina) in favour of a Greater Croatia once he was pushed towards independence. Milosevic and Tudjman concluded that Yugoslavia was now effectively finished, and that three, or more, successor states would eventually emerge. The issue now was how they would each carve out their own ethnic states to the detriment of Bosnia.

European Community (EC) mediator Lord Carrington reported "When I first talked to Presidents Milosevic and Tudjman, it was quite clear that both of them had a solution which was mutually satisfactory, which was that they were going to carve up Bosnia between them".

In April Milosevic recognised the Krajina as a separate state. Ultra-nationalist Bosnian Serb leader, Radovan Karadzic, called for "an armed force of the Serbian People to be set up throughout the Serbs lands of Yugoslavia". He now articulated the Greater Serbian project even more clearly than his mentor Milosevic. Serbian forces were now occupying a quarter of Croatia, and expanding. It was undeclared war, although Tudjman was reluctant to recognise such reality given the military imbalance he faced. On May 3, he belatedly concluded that war was probably unavoidable.

On May 25, Slovenia and Croatia simultaneously declared independence. The EC opposed the declaration - which was Western policy at that stage. Two days later the JNA invaded Slovenia to prevent the implementation of the declaration.

The JNA were forced to abandon the invasion after 10 days by both international pressure and surprisingly strong Slovenian resistance. Ultimately Slovenia could not have defended itself, but Milosevic had limited interest in Slovenia since it had a negligible Serb population.

Ethnic cleansing

In August, Serb forces carried out the first ethnic cleansing of the war in the Krajina village of Kijevo - a pocket of Croat population surrounded by Serb-held territory. Soon after Babic announced that the Krajina Serb paramilitary forces had fused with the JNA.

In early September, the Croatian city of Vukovar (43 per cent Croat and 37 per cent Serb) was shelled by Serbian irregulars with heavyweapons supplied by the JNA. Tudjman responded by laying siege to JNA barracks across Croatia. On September 19, an JNA force, with tanks and heavy weapons, left Belgrade. Within days Vukovar was under siege.

On October 1, the JNA laid siege to the Croatian port of Dubrovnik - 82 per cent Croat and just 6 per cent Serb. Vukovar fell a month later. It was reduced to rubble after weeks of hand-to-hand fighting. Over 500 Croats were killed and nearly 2,000 wounded.

In November, the Bosnian Serbs, led by Radovan Karadzic, voted to secede from Bosnia and found their own state. Serb deputies had already walked out of the Bosnian Parliament and formed their own. Bosnia was now split apart in the way Croatia had been.

By the end of November, Serb forces had achieved most of their objectives. Milosevic now advocated a cease-fire and UN intervention, which would freeze current battle lines to his advantage. Borisav Jovic, Krajina Serb Interior Minister, put it this way: "At this point the war in Croatia was under control in the sense that all the Serb territories were under our control, all, that is except central Slavonia. Slobodan and I decided now was the time to get the UN troops into Croatia to protect the Serbs there. We saw the danger, when Croatia would be recognised, which we realised would happen; the JNA would be regarded as a foreign army invading another country. So we had better get the UN troops in early to protect the Serbs".

Croatia had lost a third of its territory to Serbian forces. There were thousands of dead and half a million Croatian refugees. Early in December, Tudjman visited Bonn to seek EC recognition. A week later Germany announced that if the EC did not recognise Croatia and Slovenia it would do so unilaterally.

Two weeks later Bosnia- Herzegovina and Macedonia decided to seek independence. The only other choice was being a part of Greater Serbia. On January 17 1992, the EC agreed to recognise Croatia and Slovenia but not Bosnia-Herzegovina or Macedonia.

Assault on Bosnia

On March 1 the assault on Bosnia started when Serb paramilitaries erected barricades in Sarajavo, dividing the city. Bosnia was torn apart by Serbian and Croatian forces for three years. Cities were bombed to rubble and their inhabitants starved out. Europe saw its first genocide, since world war two. Bosnian Muslims faced massacre, rape, and terror. In Srebrenica 7,000 Muslim men and boys were killed in the course of a few days. Thousands of Bosnian women were raped as part of a policy of terror. Three quarters of Bosnia?s territory was occupied by either Serbian or Croatian forces.

There are many legitimate criticisms of the Bosnian regime. But it is preposterous to suggest it was no different to those of Milosevic or Tudjman. Bosnia was by far the most multi-ethnic and multi-cultural Yugoslav Republic. Bosnia fought a war of survival in defense of a multiethnic society.

That multi-ethnicity mostly survived throughout the war. There were Serbs and Croats at every level of the Bosnian state and military. 10 per cent of the army were Serb or Croat, and there were 50,000 Serbs and 30,000 Croats in Bosnian Sarajavo throughout the siege.

The war ended in 1995 after Bosnia had at last turned the tide on the battlefield and began take back parts of its territory. Suddenly Milosevic, the architect of the conflict, became the West’s negotiating partner in Dayton Peace Treaty - which he signed on behalf of the Bosnian Serbs who he had drawn into the conflict. A divided Bosnia was turned into a UN protectorate and left to pick up the pieces.

In nearly 5 years of warfare in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia not a single military action had taken place on the soil of Serbia. In all three cases, war had been waged by forces receiving orders from Belgrade, aided by irregulars trained and equipped by the JNA. As a result quarter of a million died, mainly civilians, half a million wounded, and three million made refugees. All ideas of "equal responsibility" for this should be rejected. We should not equate the aggressor with the victim.

Milosevic was the prime mover of these wars, Tudjman was a second string dictator with regional ambitions and plenty of blood on his hands. Izetbegovic was the leader of the principle victim of these wars.

After the Bosnian war finished Milosevic was already developing another - his ethnic war against the Kosova Albanians. During the next four years 350,000 ethnic Albanians were driven out of the country to become refugees.

In 1998 the Kosovan Albanians mounted mass protests against Serbian rule, police troops were sent in to suppress them. In 1999 an escalating refugee crisis was used by NATO to launch an unprecedented bombing campaign against Serbia, which went on for 78 days.

The US dominated Alliance had found a role for itself in the post Soviet era, an opportunity to demonstrate the superiority of it weaponry, and as a means of extending its influence to the East.

In Britain a campaign was launched against the war in the form of The Committee for Peace in the Balkans. The role of Milosevic remained controversial The Committee itself was silent on his role. The SWP strongly opposed the bombing but underplayed Milosevic’s campaign against Kosova. Socialist Action (SA) was influential in the Committee at the time, saw Milosevic as some kind of representative of actually existing socialism and described Serbia as "the chief obstacle to the capitalist break-up of Yugoslavia.

Such politics influenced the shape, and unfortunately the size, of the anti-war mobilisations - since it gave them a strong pro-Serb flavour. Most potential supporters of the movement beyond the ranks of the organised left, started from strongly opposing the ethnic cleansing of the Kosova Albanians, and stayed away once they perceived the pro-Serb bias of the movement - even those who did not see NATO as a solution.

The issue of independence for Kosova, which we advocated as the only lasting solution, was not taken up by the SWP. We argued that there were two wars taking place: one waged by Milosevic against Kosova and another against Serbia by NATO - and we were opposed to both. We called for NATO out of the region and Serbia out of Kosovo. We were part of a coordination within the Committee of those groups supporting this position.

Many on the left (particularly SA but including Tony Benn and other anti-war MPs) insisted that Yugoslavia had been broken up not by Milosevic’s project but by imperialist intervention. They pointed the decision of Germany and the EC to recognise Slovenia and Croatia (the richest Republics) as independent states. Once Slovenia and Croatia had gained independence, they argued, it was "natural" for Serb minorities within Croatia and Bosnia to "rebel" and the scene was set for war.

However, as explained above, German and EC recognition of Croatia and Slovenia came almost a year after the start of war in the region. It came a long time after the invasion of Slovenia and Croatia by Serbian forces: i.e. well after the dye was cast on the unity of Yugoslavia. Imperialism, particularly Germany, did seek to intervene, of course, but this was not decisive.

The bombing of Serbia ended when a compromise was found acceptable to both NATO and Milosevic. Key for Milosevic was that Kosova remained part of Serbia and that the multi-national force moving in to occupy Kosova was under UN (rather than NATO) control.

Previously unacceptable conditions, such as the right of NATO to access to any part of Serbia were dropped. A similar deal could probably have been struck with Milosevic without the bombing. The national rights of the Kosovars were set aside in all this and remain unresolved. Yet again the lesson has not been learned that the problem of the Balkans cannot be resolved without the right of self-determination for all the peoples of the region being respected.

Fittingly Milosevic’s final undoing did not come at the hands of imperialism. In October 2000 a mass uprising of Serbian workers, a general strike, mass demonstrations and the storming of the parliament over a disputed election result, drove him and his corrupt clique from office. Six months later he was arrested and taken to The Hague.

The Hague Tribunal has been selective as to whom it pursues. Radovan Karadzic and his military chief Ratko Mladic never been brought to book for Srebrenica.

Neither have the likes of Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright and General Wesley Clark - who bombarded Serbia for 78 days killing thousands of people - they also go unpunished. The use of depleted uranium and cluster bombs, the targeting of a civilian passenger train, the Chinese embassy and Radio Serbia - killing 16 media workers - seem to be of no consequence in The Hague.

The imperialist war-mongers can rest a bit easier now. Milosevic’s attempt to bring them to Hague as witnesses to expose their crimes has come to an end with his passing.

[bonnie]

To read all...

http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/jaffor/Milosevic150306.htm

Milosevic—the butcher of the Balkans—dies at 64

A.H. Jaffor Ullah

Published on April 02, 2006

Bright and early on March 11, 2006, we learned that the prime architect of genocide in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo, Slobodan Milosevic, passed away in custody while a trail was being conducted by the tribunal at The Hague since 2002. The charges were serious. In a few months time, Milosevic could have received a verdict of guilty for committing crime against humanity. But that did not happen. The ex-president of Serbia was chronically ill with heart ailment and hypertension. His family asked the tribunal to send him to Russia for treatment but the request was declined. Consequently, before a judgment could be handed down to him, he passed away. And along with it, a dark chapter of human history will remain closed at least for the time being.

Why should the world be so concerned with the news of his passing away now that the condemned Serbian politician awaited a trail at The Hague? Lest we forget, Slobodan Milosevic was the villain whose meteoric rise to power in Serbia in late 1980s and early 1990s had changed the course of history of Balkans as Russian Empire in Eastern Europe came crumbling down at that time. Influenced by the rhetoric from Serbian president, Milosevic, Bosnian Serbs planned to massacre Muslims in Srebrenica in 1995. Under the growing world opinion against the Bosnian genocide, the NATO ordered air strikes against Bosnian Serbs; only then did Milosevic join the presidents of Bosnia and Croatia in peace agreement at US-sponsored talks at Dayton, Ohio.

Milosevic was no ordinary Serbian politician. Yugoslavia broke up into 7 smaller nations, namely, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia, when he was at the helm in Belgrade. It was a difficult and turbulent time for the people Balkans. Add to this misery, the genocide against Kosovo’s Albanians and Bosnia’s Muslims. You get the picture—an ugly one. Many political observers at the time thought that Serbians did the killing in Kosovo and Bosnia while Russians tacitly approved the killing. Moscow could have exerted its influence by telling Milosevic to stop the genocide. However, that did not happen. Because of the negligence of the West and Russia many innocent lives were lost in the hands of Serbian soldiers. Should Milosevic be blamed for all the killings? Let the experts speak on the issue.

[bonnie]

EDITORIAL: The Butcher of the Balkans.(Editorial)

Chicago Tribune (Chicago, IL) | March 13, 2006

Mar. 13--The treacherous Balkan wars of the 1990s had no single patron, but only one of that era's leaders earned the nickname "Butcher of the Balkans." Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic exploited ethnic tensions with remarkable efficiency. After his death Saturday in a Dutch prison cell at age 64, a U.S. State Department spokesman neatly summed up Milosevic's life achievements: He said Milosevic "was the principal figure responsible for the violent dismemberment of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, including the outbreak of two horrific wars in Bosnia and Kosovo."

Milosevic ... really sounds like a misunderstood hero to me

[bonnie]

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O126-KosovoCrisis1999.html

Kosovo Crisis (1999). In spring 1999, a major crisis erupted over Kosovo, the southernmost province of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, with the forces of Yugoslavian president Slobodan Milosevic escalating a terrorist campaign to drive out the ethnic Albanian Muslim majority and ensure dominance of the historic region by the Serbian Orthodox Christian minority. When Milosevic had earlier revoked the province's semi‐autonomous status and begun the persecution, ethnic Albanians had protested, then formed a rebel terrorist group, the Kosovo Liberation Army, seeking independence. In early 1999, NATO sponsored talks between Kosovo Albanians and Serbs in Rambouillet, France, but although the Kosovo Albanians grudgingly accepted a proposed settlement for broad autonomy for the province for three years (with possible independence afterwards) and 28,000 NATO troops in Kosovo and Serbia to enforce it, the Serbs rejected it.

Milosevic increased his forces in Kosovo and began mass terrorism of the ethnic Albanian population, killing some inhabitants to frighten the rest and burning entire villages. NATO had already authorized the use of force, and on 23 March 1999, President Bill Clinton declared that military means were necessary to halt the Serbian aggression. The next day, NATO forces began an extensive air assault on targets in Serbia, Montenegro, and Kosovo, the majority of cruise missiles and bombs delivered from American planes and ships. It was the biggest allied military assault in Europe since World War II and NATO's first actual combat, but Serbian forces quickly continued to drive ethnic Albanian refugees—ultimately a million of them—from their homes into neighboring Macedonia, Montenegro, and Albania, as the Kosovo Crisis threatened to spread throughout the Balkans.

In the next ten weeks, NATO waged an escalating air war against military and other targets in Serbia and Kosovo, flying 35,000 missions, including 10,000 in which 23,000 bombs or missiles were dropped. Hampered by bad weather and political fears in the alliance, the air campaign started slowly and ineffectively, but over time, more aggressive bombing and the use of precision‐guided munitions enabled NATO to destroy numerous military targets as well as targets in the urban infrastructure, including ultimately electricity grids and water supplies. NATO estimated that at least 5,000 Yugoslavian soldiers and police were killed (Serbia said 600); in addition, perhaps 1,200 civilians died as a result of mistaken bombings of trains, hospitals, and most prominently, the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. NATO lost only two aircraft, one of them a Stealth fighter, but both American pilots were rescued. By the end of May, a ground offensive along the Kosovo borders by the rebel Kosovo Liberation Army dislodged many Serbian forces out of their hiding places, allowing NATO aircraft to destroy them. The civilian population in the Serbian cities was suffering deprivation from the bombings. Although the British government pressed for a ground attack, political opposition to the war grew within Italy, Greece, and Germany, and the resolve of the NATO alliance showed signs of weakening.

On 3 June 1999, responding to the deteriorating situation and pressed by Russian and Finnish envoys, Milosevic declared that he accepted an international peace plan aimed at ending the Kosovo conflict and allowing the ethnic Albanian refugees to return to what remained of their homes in Kosovo. Under its terms, all of the 40,000 Serbian military and police forces would withdraw rapidly from Kosovo which they did beginning 10 June, following another week of bombing, and some 50,000 foreign troops all under a United Nations flag—many of them, including an estimated 7,000 U.S. forces, from NATO and under NATO command—would move in to police the province. Independence for Kosovo was not part of the new proposal, instead there would be “substantial autonomy” to be decided by the UN Security Council. The sixteen‐member NATO alliance had held together long enough to force Milosevic to let the Kosovar refugees return, but what remained uncertain was the ultimate future of Kosovo as well as the long‐term use of NATO military forces in such wars and peacekeeping operations in the twenty‐first century.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I'm proud of the US Military. My ancestors fought in the American Revolution and in every war since then. And if Avinoam has a problem with patriotism being shown on this forum, then that's his problem.

[bonnie]

I'm proud of the US Military. My ancestors fought in the American Revolution and in every war since then. And if Avinoam has a problem with patriotism being shown on this forum, then that's his problem.

I would think with the very dramatic opening post against the US more could be offered than it is to complex to explain,or that CNN is somehow responsible.

I think most americans are already aware that any war fought is funded by the taxpayer but that seems somehow to be surprising.

I have a great deal of respect for those in the military and what they are asked to give up.

While Iam not a great fan of CNN I guess I would like to see the role CNN had in creating the conflict.

[bonnie]

Yes and that same Adventist who's father spent 2 years in german labor camps and than 5 years in concentration camps is very thankful and greatful for those horrible americans that bombed all the cities in germany to free those Jews who were being tortured by the Nazi's. 6 million jews and many others were killed by Nazi's the American soldiers (HEROES in my book) saved europe and probably the rest of the world because no one else wanted to. I've never said that I agree with all the things the USA, its government has done is on the up and up. But this men and women that go into harms way, from any country that helps to keep the peace, they should be praised for risking there lives for all not just the USA. And if we really want to get down to it, my grandfather who was a soldier for the german army was captured by the russian's and given over to the Yugoslavinians to be held as a pow, was brutely tortured by them. My mom said that after the war he came home with broken bones, etc. He said that compared to the yugoslavains the russians were angels. Why don't we go deeper into the history if you would like?????

pk

I think most rational people understand that no country has always conducted itself to a perfect standard.Irrational people demand the US be the one perfect country.Ridiculing the US because they are not the one country to conduct itself to another countries idea of perfectionism.

[bonnie]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/war_koso.htm

It really doesn't sound like CNN had much to do with this,

NATO bombing:

NATO attacked Yugoslavia with air power in an attempt to force the Yugoslav government to accept the agreement. By early 1999-APR, the goal of NATO appeared to shift to the attaining of full independence for Kosovo. Widespread assaults, ethnic cleansing, rapes and murders of ethnic Albanian civilians by the Serbian army and militia, which had started long before NATO bombing began, accelerated. Hundreds of thousands were forced to flee the province to prevent being exterminated. It probably became impossible for the Muslim population of Kosovo to accept any form of future association with the Yugoslavian government. Full independence was the only feasible ultimate option.

[bonnie]

Did the Serbs commit genocide?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/war_koso.htm

Civilian populations are increasingly being targeted during recent civil wars. However, atrocities must match certain specific criteria before they are considered genocide. The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide as:

"... certain acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such. The proscribed acts include killings, causing serious bodily or mental harm, imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group, forcibly transferring its children to another group, or deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its destruction in whole or in part." 4

Ethnic cleansing in Bosnia during the mid 1990s started as mass expulsions of civilians. It escalated to include internment in concentration camps, mass executions, rapes, etc. There was a clear policy by the Serbs "to exterminate Muslim Bosnians as a group..." 4 Their actions were generally considered to be genocide. There is a general consensus that widespread atrocities were also committed by the Muslims and the Croats (largely Roman Catholic). But the level of their war crimes did not reach genocidal proportions.

There have been allegations that the Serbs were also engaged in genocide in Kosovo before and during the NATO bombing. Media correspondents and human rights investigators conducted large-scale interviews of Kosovar refugees. The data collected show that the Geneva Conventions concerning civilians had been ignored and that extremely serious war crimes were perpetrated by the Yugoslavian army, police and militias. There appeared to be a consensus of human rights investigators that the quantity and type of documented atrocities proved that genocide had been committed by the Yugoslavian government against the ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. This belief was confirmed as the NATO forces occupied Kosovo. Mass graves were located and were systematically examined by forensic specialists. Ethnic Albainians came out of hiding with horrendous stories to tell. In excess of 11,000 murders were reported to authorities. According to a report by the U.N.'s chief prosecutor in Yugoslavia, Carla Del Ponte, on 1999-NOV-10, 2,108 complete corpses and an unknown but large number of incomplete bodies were found.

There certainly were mass crimes against humanity in Kosovo. Whether the situation would qualify for the term "genocide" depends on one's precise definition of the term.

[Overaged]

Quote:

You said "Buildings get blown to pieces and innocent people die in any war." Would you apply the same reasoning for the 9/11 attacks as well?

I did say war,not a mindless attack designed to kill as many innocent people as possible thru cowardly means. These people had no where to hide,no warning.Babies and women as well as men were killed for the sole purpose of instilling as much terror and bloodshed as possible.

Unable to fight military might,they chose innocent people.Many women and babies

Please excuse me for butting in here; but I think that "9-11" should also be classed as war too.

I do appreciate your points re doing the homework and seeing what was involved on all sides in a given conflict. War never looks right, no matter what way we look at it. Sometimes the US is "wrong" sometimes they are not. They have done a lot to serve and protect many other countries besides their own, As a Canadian; I am quite grateful for how they have tried to make the world a better place, including Canada.

It is my suggestion that we could say the same things about any other country in the world, that some of us tend to say about the US. I used to have a Tee Shirt in high school that said: "STOMP OUT VIOLENCE!" Many governments have taken that way too seriously.

[Stan]

Bonnie, no need to show every new poster how toxic you can be.

[bonnie]

Bonnie, no need to show every new poster how toxic you can be.

I'm sorry. I really thought this rude and toxic that began the whole thing.......

Why would you post this on a Christian forum is beyond me. Those 'heroes' have invaded countries, occupied, and murdered on a large scale. Those 'heroes' bombed my country for 3 months in order to support terrorists and the same 'heroes' did nothing when Christian churches and monasteries were burned down and destroyed. These guys are not heroes, they are nothing but a forces of destruction in the service of various neo-colonialist, murdering U.S. administrations.

Maybe it is best to accuse instead of adding historical accounts as it seems you consider those toxic

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I don't think Bonnie was being "toxic" in her posts. She was responding to the very rude remark from someone who obviously has a grudge against the United States. She was giving historical data to contradict the accusations of the poster.

These guys are not heroes, they are nothing but a forces of destruction in the service of various neo-colonialist, murdering U.S. administrations.

That's offensive to me and my country.

[bonnie]

Quote:

Please excuse me for butting in here; but I think that "9-11" should also be classed as war too.

I agree,it was an act of war,but not one we knew we were having.Deliberate attacks on as many innocents as possible is not the typical definition of war tho.

Quote:

I do appreciate your points re doing the homework and seeing what was involved on all sides in a given conflict. War never looks right, no matter what way we look at it. Sometimes the US is "wrong" sometimes they are not. They have done a lot to serve and protect many other countries besides their own, As a Canadian; I am quite grateful for how they have tried to make the world a better place, including Canada.

The US has been wrong at times,sometimes misguided but wrong and I suspect at times those in control have deliberately been wrong for their own aims.

The US is the only country that is held to the standard of perfection.The exception I think may be Israel. Surrounded by nations that have the one wish to exterminate them are also held to that standard of perfection and when the US or Israel fails there is great glee in condemnation

Quote:

It is my suggestion that we could say the same things about any other country in the world, that some of us tend to say about the US. I used to have a Tee Shirt in high school that said: "STOMP OUT VIOLENCE!" Many governments have taken that way too seriously.

The difference from what you say is the US is not allowed to make bad decisions and every other country is.

I always was proud of this country when it went to the aid of others but the last few years I could resent my tax dollar going to those that do nothing but condemn and then hold their hand out for the evil US to come help.

I am not a fan of Obama.But the US should just flat out pull out of Haiti and let those so free to condemn even our aid there take over and do it better.Sadly that would make a lot of innocents pay and bring another round of "Why aren't you doing it better"

[bonnie]

I don't think Bonnie was being "toxic" in her posts. She was responding to the very rude remark from someone who obviously has a grudge against the United States. She was giving historical data to contradict the accusations of the poster.

Originally Posted By: Avinoam

These guys are not heroes, they are nothing but a forces of destruction in the service of various neo-colonialist, murdering U.S. administrations.

That's offensive to me and my country.

Toxic must have a new meaning....... historical data

[Overaged]

My replies are in blue font

quote]It is my suggestion that we could say the same things about any other country in the world' date=' that some of us tend to say about the US. I used to have a Tee Shirt in high school that said: "STOMP OUT VIOLENCE!" Many governments have taken that way too seriously.

The difference from what you say is the US is not allowed to make bad decisions and every other country is.

I always was proud of this country when it went to the aid of others but the last few years I could resent my tax dollar going to those that do nothing but condemn and then hold their hand out for the evil US to come help.

Well; "the evil Canada" assists the USA in many of these ventures. The USA is not the only country "not allowed" to make "bad decisions."

I am not a fan of Obama.But the US should just flat out pull out of Haiti and let those so free to condemn even our aid there take over and do it better.Sadly that would make a lot of innocents pay and bring another round of "Why aren't you doing it better" /quote']

There were people in there helping before the US got there.

[Overaged]

I don't think Bonnie was being "toxic" in her posts. She was responding to the very rude remark from someone who obviously has a grudge against the United States. She was giving historical data to contradict the accusations of the poster.

Originally Posted By: Avinoam

These guys are not heroes, they are nothing but a forces of destruction in the service of various neo-colonialist, murdering U.S. administrations.

That's offensive to me and my country.

I am not so sure that they were "rude remarks." I can certainly understand how you would find some of it "offensive" but if we listen closely to what Avincam has been saying; they are saying that they have some personal experience with something that the US actually did do. This poster's conclusions about the US based on same may or may not be accurate; but it is important to recognize the deep level of pain and suffering such people have gone through. War hurts, and any country involved in war will hurt others. We should recognize this fact with more respect; even if it was our country that did the hurting.

[bonnie]

Quote:

There were people in there helping before the US got there.

The US is the only country I know that was quite freely condemned. There were many from the US there with schools,missions,clinics etc prior to the earthquake

[Overaged]

Quote:

There were people in there helping before the US got there.

The US is the only country I know that was quite freely condemned. There were many from the US there with schools,missions,clinics etc prior to the earthquake

Well your opinion is fair enough. I am just thinking that Canada has been quite freely condemned in this and many other international matters too. We could go on and on with the comparisons; but I think that for the US or it's citizens to go "O poor me" because of criticisms and concerns is a bit of a stretch here.

The poster who spoke of US bombs decimating their city, and US military wreaking havoc with their family, all the pain, the injury, the death, the terrible trappings of war, its not something to just sweep under the rug because of what we call "criticism." There are cases where the US "just war doctrines" are clearly unjust.

I felt badly when the above poster talked about the terrible ordeal they went through. It reminded me of what has happened with some of my family members over in Poland during the war. I find myself wondering if you would be inclined to say the same kinds of things about me should I tell you about my wife's great Grandma who was forced at gunpoint by the Polish military to dig her own grave, with her bare hands, along with 80 others of this small town's women? Would I go down in your books as "freely criticising Poland" for telling that story to the world?

The pain and suffering of the victims of war is real; we cannot make it go away with "the right answer." IMHO

[SivartM]

Is a war just when innocent Christians are hurt?

Only if the US is fighting it. :\

[bonnie]

Quote:

Well your opinion is fair enough. I am just thinking that Canada has been quite freely condemned in this and many other international matters too. We could go on and on with the comparisons; but I think that for the US or it's citizens to go "O poor me" because of criticisms and concerns is a bit of a stretch here.

If I remember right Canada has been quite free in it's anti- american sentiments as well.I am not familiar with condemnation of Canada. Everyone is entitled to their opinion or so most seem to think.The new poster was very direct in his opinion condemning the person posting the tribute to the military and in leveling accusations.Is this where he is the only one that can? He was asked for specifics and refused.

You have defined it as "O poor me". It is more disgust.As Stan rightly pointed out it is the "american taxpayer" that pays.Pays many times with life and resources to the very ones slapping with one hand while holding the other out to get as much as possible.

For me personally,if I have that type of contempt and criticisms of someone I do not lean on them in bad times.I leave them alone and do not want help from those whose values are completely opposed to mine.

Quote:

The poster who spoke of US bombs decimating their city, and US military wreaking havoc with their family, all the pain, the injury, the death, the terrible trappings of war, its not something to just sweep under the rug because of what we call "criticism." There are cases where the US "just war doctrines" are clearly unjust.

The poster provided nothing but condemnation .Asked for specifics he couldn't be bothered.War is not pretty,fun,or glamorous.Far to many innocents lose their lives,homes and everything they hold dear. As for "sweeping under the rug" that was my thoughts on a refusal to offer anything except more accusations. Clearly this region has had numerous long standing problems. Nor do the accounts present a clean,pristine image of the kindness and gentleness of the Serbian people.I would assume there were acts of uncalled for violence by more than one side over the years.What I did find in their behalf was provided by communist and socialist accounts. I don't put a whole lot of faith in anyone with that ideology

Quote:

I felt badly when the above poster talked about the terrible ordeal they went through. It reminded me of what has happened with some of my family members over in Poland during the war. I find myself wondering if you would be inclined to say the same kinds of things about me should I tell you about my wife's great Grandma who was forced at gunpoint by the Polish military to dig her own grave, with her bare hands, along with 80 others of this small town's women? Would I go down in your books as "freely criticising Poland" for telling that story to the world?

If you refused to provide any information on a incident that information was available I would be skeptical.I don't doubt what you say or that people in those times in those countries did just that. War does that. I often wonder if those that could force a fellow human to do that had anything that made them human themselves.

If this was standard behaviour for Poland and that is who they were,there should be more than criticisms

Quote:

The pain and suffering of the victims of war is real; we cannot make it go away with "the right answer." IMHO

Usually in war, for those that are innocent and get caught in the crossfire there is no right answer.Never has been since the wars and battles of the OT.

[bonnie]

Is a war just when innocent Christians are hurt?

Only if the US is fighting it. :\

Is your concern just for innocent christians or any innocent that is hurt or kiled?

Maybe you should go back to OT times and see if those wars fought by the direction of God managed somehow to only kill the bad guys.

[Woody]

It was another war brought to us by those nice folks at CNN and kindly paid for by the American Taxpayers.

I spent a little time there in 92 or 93.

Just my opinion.

I find this to be 'toxic'. JMHO