Slobodan Milosevic, RIP.

[orange]|| | ||| 6217|| 8 || 3[/orange] wrote:

Snorrimon wrote:

[orange]|| | ||| 6217|| 8 || 3[/orange] wrote: Shocking news!!!!

Well I'm glad he didn't make it to the trial. I don't know any other modern politician in Europe whose death would be so significant.

Now consider the death of Milan Babic, leader of Serbian Kraina, a few days ago, also, in his cell. It'd look like a perfect conspiracy...

Milosevic was not the right person for the 90s ethnical chaos. He would be good as a regular party functioner. Yet unfortunately the fate threw ihm into archcomplicated, ruthless crisis.

But what about real heroes, Mladko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic? The fate's got a finale for them, too.

He was a monster. Full stop. Fate is blameless...

Snorri xxx

Hardly was he a monster. Rather a stupid and typical politician who always tried to trade and as a result lost everything. Like I said he was not the type of politician able to lead his country. There were a few times when he could stop the accelerating interethnical crisis, but he didn't being ignorant.

On the other hand, who would predict back in the 80's that there could be a war in the middle of Europe again? It seemed impossible and once the wars broke out, who knew the recepee to stop them graciously? ;)

ian stop defending the indefensible. he was the leader. he is responsible. there were wars he started and atrocities. need i mention ethnic cleansing.

he was a monster.

Ronald Kirsch wrote:

[orange]|| | ||| 6217|| 8 || 3[/orange] wrote:

Snorrimon wrote:

[orange]|| | ||| 6217|| 8 || 3[/orange] wrote: Shocking news!!!!

Well I'm glad he didn't make it to the trial. I don't know any other modern politician in Europe whose death would be so significant.

Now consider the death of Milan Babic, leader of Serbian Kraina, a few days ago, also, in his cell. It'd look like a perfect conspiracy...

Milosevic was not the right person for the 90s ethnical chaos. He would be good as a regular party functioner. Yet unfortunately the fate threw ihm into archcomplicated, ruthless crisis.

But what about real heroes, Mladko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic? The fate's got a finale for them, too.

He was a monster. Full stop. Fate is blameless...

Snorri xxx

Hardly was he a monster. Rather a stupid and typical politician who always tried to trade and as a result lost everything. Like I said he was not the type of politician able to lead his country. There were a few times when he could stop the accelerating interethnical crisis, but he didn't being ignorant.

On the other hand, who would predict back in the 80's that there could be a war in the middle of Europe again? It seemed impossible and once the wars broke out, who knew the recepee to stop them graciously? ;)

ian stop defending the indefensible. he was the leader. he is responsible. there were wars he started and atrocities. need i mention ethnic cleansing.

he was a monster.

Spotnick wrote: Here we have something even worst going on.. (sorry NOBabe.. ;) )

Just imagine... a hockey legend just died on the day his number was going to be retired from the team... ouch :(

Pretty local thing.. but very sad I must say...

which hockey player ? btw spotnick who was that top player for maple leafs about 3 years ago,saw him play,amazing,but cant recall his name something like tia something ?

Milosovic always tried something too late. When Tudjman, President of Croatia, offered Milosevic almost entire Bosnia (except Dalmatia) if the latter would recognize Croatian borders, Milosevic refused and demanded the half of Slavonia (North-East of Croatia). After that Milosevic got stuck in Bosnia. Tudjman again negotiated to divide Bosnia between Croatia and Serbia: he even announced Sarajevo a Serbian city. Milosevic again was obstinate and demanded entire Bosnia save for Upper Dalmatia. Meanwhile the war was getting nastier and Milosevic lost Bosnia. Right at the time casus Cosovo sprang up. Instead of accepting one of the first plans to regulate the conflict - with leaving a limited contingent of Serbian police and army in the region, he decided to crush the Alabanians no matter what. As a result, he lost now Kosovo (technically it's still a part of Yugoslavia).

[orange]|| | ||| 6217|| 8 || 3[/orange] wrote: Milosovic always tried something too late. When Tudjman, President of Croatia, offered Milosevic almost entire Bosnia (except Dalmatia) if the latter would recognize Croatian borders, Milosevic refused and demanded the half of Slavonia (North-East of Croatia). After that Milosevic got stuck in Bosnia. Tudjman again negotiated to divide Bosnia between Croatia and Serbia: he even announced Sarajevo a Serbian city. Milosevic again was obstinate and demanded entire Bosnia save for Upper Dalmatia. Meanwhile the war was getting nastier and Milosevic lost Bosnia. Right at the time casus Cosovo sprang up. Instead of accepting one of the first plans to regulate the conflict - with leaving a limited contingent of Serbian police and army in the region, he decided to crush the Alabanians no matter what. As a result, he lost now Kosovo (technically it's still a part of Yugoslavia).

so he was incompetent as a leader. does incompetence negate evil. i don't think so.

so he was an incompetent monster.

AgentWood wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov, Gentleman wrote:

Clockwork C wrote: A great, but terribly flawed anti-imperialist dies in his cell.

At last, the sham trial to justify US imperialist bombings will end.

What a crock of tripe.

actually, comrade, i think those lines were from a bond film. i think it was in the last one. you know: the north korean guy who has face surgery, becomes a british aristocrat, then holds a demonstration of his satellite laser device from his ice palace in iceland as pierce brosnan and halle berry try to save the world?

Sorry, I'm completely unfamiliar with the spy genre.

Milan Babic?

Isn't he an Aston Villa striker too?

Hmm... Juan-Pablo Angel(of Death Josef Mengele) too.

Do Aston Villa fill their front line with genocidal murderers?

Bring back Dion Dublin..

Clockwork C wrote: A great, but terribly flawed anti-imperialist dies in his cell.

At last, the sham trial to justify US imperialist bombings will end.

Presuambly, this comment means you APPROVE of the ethnic cleansing that was carried out on the orders of milosevic. Or the fact that this man lived in palaces while his people starved? Such a great anti imperialist eh? you make me sick.

wait...weren't the 'US imperialist bombings' initially requested by the dutch commander of UN peacekeeping forces after the UN's failure to prevent the massacre at srebrenica?

and wasn't the 'US imperialist bombing' a NATO campaign (whose secretary general at the time was spanish) using the US military and the german luftwaffe (amongst others), who were flying out of italian airfields?

so...all of europe is either just too stupid to think for themselves, blinded by the glory of the greatness of the united states, or scared shitless of potential american retaliation that they have to follow american policy at every turn? i don't think so. france might not have joined the US, britain and others in iraq but the worst that happened to the french was a bit of 'talk to the hand' playground speak. one may be surprised to find that we're not part of some great conspiracy to dominate the world; in fact, many americans are too oblivious to the rest of the world to care (i can't speak for george bush and his desire for world domination, but that's why presidents can only stay in office for eight years).

correct as usual agent. also how did he qualify as an anti-imperialst? by wanting to establish the serbian empire?

Connor, my Bosnian friends would like to have a discussion with you.

BTW, Hitler's birthday is comming up. Wanna celebrate another that stood up up to the imperialist piggs of America?

twist wrote: Connor, my Bosnian friends would like to have a discussion with you.

BTW, Hitler's birthday is comming up. Wanna celebrate another that stood up up to the imperialist piggs of America?

well put sir. i don't often agree with you, but this time you've nailed it.

Good riddance to an evil monster.

Ronald Kirsch wrote: correct as usual agent. also how did he qualify as an anti-imperialst? by wanting to establish the serbian empire?

yes, but what does that matter when you can attempt to score cheap points against the US?

Uncle Liam wrote:

Ronald Kirsch wrote: correct as usual agent. also how did he qualify as an anti-imperialst? by wanting to establish the serbian empire?

yes, but what does that matter when you can attempt to score cheap points against the US?

yes never let the truth get in the way of a cheap point right. some people just have a very distorted view of the world.

One less commie twat around

Oh well;

I did have my tongue in my cheek when I wrote the post (expect many "how could you,etc") - but underneath it all, I hear on these boards, the same old rubbish I hear everywhere else.

Raising questions about the international criminal court doesn’t make me a supporter of ANYBODYS genocide. I’m not psychotic. The UN is a figleaf for imperialist aggression. I think that the fact that the UNSC has a handful of members and a veto on behalf of one deserves question, and has been at the root of a lot more evil than one deranged left-nationalist (and his seriously deranged para-mates). I’d also rate the aggression of the military-industrial complex of the “west” to be much more destructive an effect on the world than, say, “islamo-facism” or whatever gets peoples blood pressure up this decade.

Milosevic was an anti-imperialist. He was my enemies-enemy, but that doesn’t mean he was my friend. He was no Marxist - but he was a very dodgy left-nationalist - and preferable to an outright fascist like Tudman.

Don’t let that stop you all stoning me though! GENOCIDE!!! MASS MURDERER!!! DUTCH COURTS!!! HOW COULD YOU!!!

Try and scratch below the surface NOOLIES. Its good for your teeth.

Toodle doo for now. C

Surely claims that he was a mass-murderer put any arguments about which particular ideology he subscribed to on the back-burner?

Does it really matter what flag you’re waving when you order the massacre innocent of innocent people?

Clockwork C wrote: Oh well;

I did have my tongue in my cheek when I wrote the post (expect many "how could you,etc") - but underneath it all, I hear on these boards, the same old rubbish I hear everywhere else.

Raising questions about the international criminal court doesn’t make me a supporter of ANYBODYS genocide. I’m not psychotic. The UN is a figleaf for imperialist aggression. I think that the fact that the UNSC has a handful of members and a veto on behalf of one deserves question, and has been at the root of a lot more evil than one deranged left-nationalist (and his seriously deranged para-mates). I’d also rate the aggression of the military-industrial complex of the “west” to be much more destructive an effect on the world than, say, “islamo-facism” or whatever gets peoples blood pressure up this decade.

Milosevic was an anti-imperialist. He was my enemies-enemy, but that doesn’t mean he was my friend. He was no Marxist - but he was a very dodgy left-nationalist - and preferable to an outright fascist like Tudman.

Don’t let that stop you all stoning me though! GENOCIDE!!! MASS MURDERER!!! DUTCH COURTS!!! HOW COULD YOU!!!

Try and scratch below the surface NOOLIES. Its good for your teeth.

Toodle doo for now. C

conor,

a) you didn't appear to have your tongue in your cheek (it's hard to do on a message board and get one's point across correctly) and,

b) if you want to raise questions about the ICC, why didn't you simply do so? it's a valid argument. i support the ICC, but that doesn't mean its existence isn't open for debate.

cheap, opportunistic points christine... never miss a chance as you dont know when your next one will come.

Uncle Liam wrote: cheap, opportunistic points christine... never miss a chance as you dont know when your next one will come.

probably not too far in the future, dear liam. but best to at least try and make this into a discussion with merit, don't you think?

No. With the amount of pure fiction that one person has posted its not worth it.

Clockwork C wrote: Oh well;

I did have my tongue in my cheek when I wrote the post (expect many "how could you,etc") - but underneath it all, I hear on these boards, the same old rubbish I hear everywhere else.

Raising questions about the international criminal court doesn’t make me a supporter of ANYBODYS genocide. I’m not psychotic. The UN is a figleaf for imperialist aggression. I think that the fact that the UNSC has a handful of members and a veto on behalf of one deserves question, and has been at the root of a lot more evil than one deranged left-nationalist (and his seriously deranged para-mates). I’d also rate the aggression of the military-industrial complex of the “west” to be much more destructive an effect on the world than, say, “islamo-facism” or whatever gets peoples blood pressure up this decade.

Milosevic was an anti-imperialist. He was my enemies-enemy, but that doesn’t mean he was my friend. He was no Marxist - but he was a very dodgy left-nationalist - and preferable to an outright fascist like Tudman.

Don’t let that stop you all stoning me though! GENOCIDE!!! MASS MURDERER!!! DUTCH COURTS!!! HOW COULD YOU!!!

Try and scratch below the surface NOOLIES. Its good for your teeth.

Toodle doo for now. C

And your comment about the UN is so wrong it isnt even worth bothering to reply.

Clockwork C wrote: I think that the fact that the UNSC has a handful of members and a veto on behalf of one deserves question, and has been at the root of a lot more evil than one deranged left-nationalist (and his seriously deranged para-mates).

i agree that having permanent members of the security council is outdated and a bit oligarchical, but i think it's healthy to have ghana, the DR congo, qatar and tanzania sitting on the same council as the US, britain, etc. and having the same veto power.

and don't forget the 1960s when the non-aligned movement stirred up the UN by standing up to the traditional powers!

The States are still obstinate to recognise ICC (in this case we would have to admit that Americans would also be trialed), but nevertheless are eager to help to bring "right" people to the court, when needed. ;)

But when did Milosevic become a "war crminal"? The International Tribunal on the Former Yugoslavia was formed by UN Security Council back in May 1993. Ironically Milosevic became accused only in May 1999, exactly when Serbia was being bombed, yet back in 1995 he was recognized as a legitimate guarantor of the Dayton Peace Agreement.

[orange]|| | ||| 6217|| 8 || 3[/orange] wrote: But when did Milosevic become a "war crminal"? The International Tribunal on the Former Yugoslavia was formed by UN Security Council back in May 1993. Ironically Milosevic became accused only in May 1999, exactly when Serbia was being bombed, yet back in 1995 he was recognized as a legitimate guarantor of the Dayton Peace Agreement.

good point. i suppose he was considered 'legitimate' in 1995 because he was still the president of serbia (until 1997). also, he was initially indicted for the atrocities committed during the war in kosovo, which didn't begin until 1996. it wasn't until after this that additional charges were added, which dealt with the bosnian conflict.

I'm not getting sucked into another vortex of shite. Read on if you wish, keep your mind closed if you wish:

The best thing I've read on the death of Milo.

The term "subjective bullshit" springs to mind.

And yet your comments have been challenged, so why wont you even attempt to defend them?

And, I thought you werent posting anymore? That lasted long didnt it!

I began watching the BBC's "death of yugoslavia" last night. It scared the piss out of me, beacuse what kicked off there started out looking so much like things I'd seen closer to home. Then proper tanks and artillery started appearing and I realised that we're very lucky folks that our various species of small mind small penis nationalist types (confusingly of course the "unionist" community in NI is just another nationalist movement, but I'll buy anyone a case of champers if they can explain that to one of them without getting shot), have always managed to JUST keep the thinnest of lids on it...what bubbles under the surface here exploded there.

I've not seen it all, but I must say, I tend to agr** w*th L**m based on what i've seen and how it fills in the blanks on what i already knew. And there's no point saying this particular program could be wildly bias...because, remove the subtitles and I can stil tell who the biggest twat is.

Clockwork C wrote: I'm not getting sucked into another vortex of shite. Read on if you wish, keep your mind closed if you wish:

The best thing I've read on the death of Milo.

this is the biggest piece of nonsense i've ever read. i love the line '...the UN tribunal, and behind it, washington..'

the US doesn't even support the international criminal court! it never ratified ICC treaty! anyone who knows anything about international politics would know that. but then again, those who don't like the truth choose to create their own truth.