The Balkan war - Remind me why it pissed a lot of people off

[likesfish]

well after the UN proved to be unable to stop serebenica.
The Serbs were always going to be on the shit list.
Nato stopped it Bosnia
starting the same mayhem up in kosovo well that was'nt going to be allowed.
met a soldier been to Rwanda and the Balkans. " rwanda just another african shit hole blacks killing blacks no surprise there. bosnia looked like it had been a real country once "

 

[frogwoman]

I agree but could the same not be said for the Croatians after what happened in Krajina and also in places like Mostar (i think??) and such?

im not excusing the serbs - far from it - but it doesn't excuse the other sides' behaviour and i find the one sided nature of many of the verdicts in the Hague tribunal completely distgusting - it is blatantly obvious that nasser oric did what he did ffs!

I do agree with part of what you say in that I do think guilt over srebrenica contributed to the decision to bomb serbia 4 years later and also to the lack of concerted opposition to it by the left ...

starting the same mayhem up in kosovo well that was'nt going to be allowed.

funny, we were perfectly happy to allow it when it was Saddam doing it to the Kurds and he was on our side!

 

[HackneyE9]

<without derailing the thread>

And why did NATO bomb the Chinese embassy? I'm presuming it wasn't an accident with the maps, like they claimed.

I remember browsing Chomsky's book on the Balkans war in Housemans, which seemed to suggest it was to prevent post-Tito, post-fall of Berlin Wall/Soviet Empire Yugoslavia offering a socialist role-model to any of the former communist east european countries then undergoing rapid capitalism. (At least, I think that's what he was saying).

 

[Mikey77]

Chomsky, in one of his youtube interviews, quotes a Clinton aid by the name of Strobe Talbott as saying the reason for the NATO attack in 1999 was that Serbia was not carrying out the required political and economic reforms that the US wanted. If you listen to some of Roger Bolton's interviews (the Bush UN diplomat) recently on "Russia Today" he also seems keen not to antagonise Serbs with Kosovan independence. He seems extremely keen that Serbia does what the US wants now it has the Serbs where it wants them.

The Chomsky interview is well worth watching here

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Chomsky, in one of his youtube interviews, quotes a Clinton aid by the name of Strobe Talbott as saying the reason for the NATO attack in 1999 was that Serbia was not carrying out the required political and economic reforms that the US wanted. If you listen to some of Roger Bolton's interviews (the Bush UN diplomat) recently on "Russia Today" he also seems keen not to antagonise Serbs with Kosovan independence. He seems extremely keen that Serbia does what the US wants now it has the Serbs where it wants them.

The Chomsky interview is well worth watching here

Yep, great link thanks. The economic theory is pretty convincing as the real reason to have acted.

 

[frogwoman]

one thing - if you come across anything by a guy called jared israel,treat it with a bit of caution ...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I remember at the time finding it all obscenely complicated, and I strongly suspect (but am not informed enough to demonstrate) that the western propaganda is highly simplistic (e.g. they wibble about Iraq and not being anti-muslim using the BW as an example)

Anyways, I have a new Serb sister in law and the arrest of Karadzic has got me thinking again. I know the likes of Arkan were scum, but I also know the Croatians carried out attrocities that dont get covered nearly as much.

Can someone help me out with a simple 101 on why Blairs first war pissed off a lot of people (especially on the left)

I think it had something to do with 'ethnic cleansing'.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Tx for that Darios

I did know the US were backing their terrorist proteges back round then. They are still doing it in Iraq and Iran, and I know how that relates to the "conspiracy" thread. Its not a theory to say the US is the prime sponsor of global terror and tyranny in the last 60 years.

Oh, you want to know the pc version in which the US are the bad guys? That I can't help you with.

 

[likesfish]

the Chinese embassy was being used by serb forces as a rebro station i.e a booster station for military communications very naughty and therefore makes you a legit target. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/oct/17/balkans
the other thing is only 3 people were killed in the attack so why was the embassy emptied at night possibly the Chinese knew they had put themselves in the firing line?

 

[HackneyE9]

I'm not dismissing it, but that Guardian piece only quotes unnamed NATO intelligence sources, ie MI6, so it's telling you what those people want you to believe. Might be right, might not be.

 

[likesfish]

well they got an official denial from the map makers that the embassy was'nt marked on the map somebody didn't brief the fall guy

 

[frogwoman]

I think it had something to do with 'ethnic cleansing'.

i think the other sides were perfectly capable of that as well johnny. there are about a million refugees in serbia from various conflicts, they didnt exactly come from nowhere

as for being pc, i thought the pc version was one in which one side was the devil incarnate and everyone else was good

 

[dylanredefined]

Where as the reality was one valley muslims being massacred,Next valley
serbs being massacred etc.Europe let Yugoslavia down.Not sure how europe could have responded better in Bosnia ,but, kosovo should have spent more time bombing serb units in kosovo rather than serbia itself .

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

i think the other sides were perfectly capable of that as well johnny. there are about a million refugees in serbia from various conflicts, they didnt exactly come from nowhere

as for being pc, i thought the pc version was one in which one side was the devil incarnate and everyone else was good

That's right: in the pc version, the US is the devil incarnate, everywhere, all the time.

 

[frogwoman]

nobodys said that though have they?



i don't think that pointing out the interests of various powers (including Russia and Greece) in the breakup of yugoslavia is being "PC"

 

[elbows]

Darfur isnt "straightforward" at all.

Yeah I know it isnt really, just that it is certainly presented on the BBC TV news in a very simplified form. I think it took several years before I even heard them acknowledge that the rebels existed.

one thing - if you come across anything by a guy called jared israel,treat it with a bit of caution ...

I seem to remember that name from around the time Milosevic was on trial, think I probably read a few of his articles back then. He seemed to be an apologist for Milosevic at the time, but I never looked into him further - whats the story? I was interested in the Milosevic trial to see if it helped me understand things better, it didnt, and I got sidetracked by the spectacle of seeing it fail utterly as a show trial. Milosevic defending himself and cross-examining witnesses doomed it, along with the death of the judge. I had mixed feelings about the whole thing because I dont like victors justice or show trials, but I did want to see justice done. So I was amused that it went in a direction that meant we couldnt use it for propaganda purposes very well, but I was not pleased with Milosevic being able to use it for propaganda purposes, or the fact he died before justice or injustice could be served.

 

[frogwoman]

he's just quite ridiculously pro serb, and anti-muslim to quite an alarming extent. nothing wrong with alternative points of view but he's got an agenda and is an anti-arab/anti-muslim racist - he also has some fucking odd views on 9/11 as well

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=jared+israel&start=30&sa=N

im not sure what i think about milosevic's trial either. the problem is that other people involved in the whole debacle are never going to have justice done for their victims. nasser oric who was involved in massacreing serb villagers in the run up to srebrenica has just got off with nothing. without justice being seen to be done FOR EVERYONE stuff like this will have no credibility. and kosovos former prime minister got away with the stuff he'd done as well, mainly because most of the witnesses in the case were murdered. In a normal court of law this would be enough to call a retrial.

and of course the fact that he died before justice was done means that a lot of people will never hear the truth about what happened to their relatives who died at the hands of his supporters.

Im not saying its a bad idea to have war crimes courts or anything but there is evidence verdicts aren't impartial and it has definitely not been perfect. and the reporting of it isn't impartial either - there WAS a croatian guy who was sentenced to 25 years but not a peep about this from the media.

and ultimately the only people to gain from it are people such as the very people who would have made up milosevic's supporters ... from a country whose people are incredibly poor and many of whom lost loved ones in the conflict you can imagine how it must look to some of them IMO. and easy for nationalist politicians to gain political capital from it

 

[frogwoman]

Yeah Id guessed it wasnt really, just that it is certainly presented on the BBC TV news in a very simplified form. I think it took several years before I even heard them acknowledge that the rebels existed.

Quite and this allows the likes of Bashir and his supporters to present the whole issue of atrocities committed by the government as "propaganda" because the complexity of the conflict is not portrayed. Very little is actually known about what is happening in Sudan tbh.

 

[frogwoman]

As for his indictement for genocide this means nothing because nobody will do anything about it and his supporters can claim with some justification that the truth about what is going on there is not known.

Countries such as Chad, Ethiopia, Morocco, the US, China and even Israel have got their fingers in that pie on all sides ..

 

[nino_savatte]

That's right: in the pc version, the US is the devil incarnate, everywhere, all the time.

Trust you to come out with this sort of thing.

Some things never change.

 

[nino_savatte]

I think it had something to do with 'ethnic cleansing'.

You mean like the US government handing out smallpox-infected blankets to Indians? Or how about the way in which the Canadian authorities cleared vast areas of land, killing many Indians in the process, to create space for white farmers?

Thanks for diverting the thread, Johnny.

 

[zoltan]

I think it had something to do with 'ethnic cleansing'.

Bit more going on than just than that Johnny

 

[Stoat Boy]

Apologies if what I am going to post seems slightly blase about the break up of Yugoslavia but having spent a fair amount of time in the region I had it explained to me by somebody who really has studied the subject and he claims it was primarily caused by ex-pats, from all parts of FRY, making shed loads of money abroad and then deciding to fund which ever particular brand of nationalist lunatic took their fancy. In particular he mentioned the Canadian and Australian brand of ex-pats as being the worst offenders.

And home made brandy. He told me of an incident very early on in the conflict in which a particular flash point between Serbs and Croatians had been kept just below boiling point. It was in a village and there had been a stand off between Serb milita and the local Croatian Police. It looked like everything was cooling off, having been very tense and that talks had begun to make headway. Then some bright spark decided to dish out bottles of the local rocket fuel ( Plum brandy in this care ) and the rest is history.

Having been in Sarajevo during the war and having seen stark evidence that what we where being told in the West about Bosnia deliberately targeting its own people to elicit sympathy as being complete and utter bollocks I can understand why people question what they were told but I see it as follows.

The Serbs must take the lions share of the blame. They started it, backed by the Army. Then the Croats with those in Hercegovina most of that. Then the Bosnians. I saw the results of their own ethnic cleansing and they had their moments in terms cruelty but in their defence they merely reacted as opposed to starting it although thats no real excuse.

 

[gorski]

The Hague reflects this, almost common-sensically....

 

[Mikey77]

in their defence they merely reacted as opposed to starting it although thats no real excuse.

So you know its indefensible, but you have the gut-wrenching urge to speak in the defense of murderous butchers anyway.

Once mass murder can be contextualised then it can be justified all over the world. The previous poster is right - the Hague does reflect this, which is why it will continue to demonstrate a two-tier justice system, not just to the balkans, but to the rest of the world. It is a political court.

 

[gorski]

Every court is a political court. This is just not enough to be a valid criticism.

 

[Mikey77]

Not for you because you sympathise with the logic above.

Show me the court that prosecutes protestants to a lesser extent than catholics because their heinous murders had a "revenge" logic behind them. Or show me the court that fails to prosecute some sections of society at all for their murderous crimes because those murderers happen to be flavour of the month with the most powerful politicians.

If you can find such a court it will be firmly under the rule of some murderous junta, or despot regime. Any court that is servile to the interests of one small, but wealthy political party would not offer much justice at all. That could be the only worthwhile analogy of a political court that operates by the standards of the Hague. Perhaps I should have said politically motivated to be precise.

 

[gorski]

Show me that Hague isn't prosecuting murderers from Bosnia or Croatia.

Sure, there's less of them but...

 

[Mikey77]

I said to a lesser extent. The ones that have been prosecuted have often received short sentences or been excused on the basis of technicalities such as failing to instruct moujahadin fighters in the rules of war. The Canadians knew Agim Kecu was a butcher, but again he is flavour of the month with the yanks so faces no trial for his murderous sprees against Serbs in Bosnia. Kosovans arrested for war crimes get out on bail because they are flavour of the month with the yanks - it's an ongoing sham.

 

[frogwoman]

And Nasser Oric and Haradinaj got away with it ...

I don't think that the hague is part of a grand conspiracy to enslave serbs or whatever but i do think that it has sometimes - SOMETIMES - become very politicised.

It is an utter disgrace that so many people involved in Ramush Haradinaj's trial were murdered and he STILL got away with it without a retrial!

and this means that decent people such as carla del ponte have a lot of difficulty in carrying out their work.

as i said earlier the reporting of the media plays a part in this as well.