babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » Karadzic had secret deal with the U.S.

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Karadzic had secret deal with the U.S.
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 04 August 2008 01:52 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Radovan Karadzic, the former Bosnian Serb warlord awaiting trial for genocide, says that high-ranking officials in the 1990s US administration of Bill Clinton want him dead and that it will be impossible for him to receive a fair trial after 12 years on the run ended with his arrest last week, it emerged yesterday.

"No one on earth believes in the possibility of an acquittal," Karadzic argued in a four-page statement which he was prevented from reading to the war crimes tribunal in The Hague on Thursday at a pre-trial hearing. "Others from President Clinton's team ... are in a hurry to see me dead."

Karadzic said that several months after the Bosnian war ended in November 1995, Richard Holbrooke, the US envoy who engineered the peace settlement at Dayton in Ohio, made the genocide suspect an offer.

"The offer was as follows: I must withdraw not only from public but also from party offices and completely disappear from the public arena….

"Holbrooke undertook on behalf of the USA that I would not be tried before this tribunal," Karadzic wrote in the first statement prepared for his defence against 11 counts of genocide and extermination of Bosnia's Muslims as well as crimes against humanity and war crimes. The statement was released yesterday by the tribunal in The Hague.

The allegations of a secret deal between Holbrooke and Karadzic have circulated in the Balkans for years and the American has repeatedly dismissed them contemptuously over the past week while stating that Karadzic is a mass murderer who deserves the death penalty. – Source



quote:
Former Serbian interior ministry official, Vlado Nadezdin, claimed, “I was then chief of cabinet to the Yugoslav Interior Minister Milana Milutinovic and I saw that document. The signatories were Richard Holbrooke and Radovan Karadzic.”

This confirms similar accusations by Florence Hartmann, the former spokeswoman for the Hague Tribunal Chief Prosecutor. She has claimed that in 2004, US forces tipped off Karadzic that he was to be arrested by the Serbian government. Hartman claimed Western leaders wanted to avoid their relations with Karadzic coming to light.

Other revelations suggest a US-Karadzic deal had included conspiring in the capture of Srebrenica, which seems likely given the Muslim town was handed to the Serb Republic at Dayton.Source



quote:
The former Bosnian Serb foreign minister Aleksa Buha told Belgrade Radio he witnessed the agreement. He said the deal was made "in the night between 18 and 19 July 1996".

The former Bosnian foreign minister Mohamed Sacirbey told the Mostar paper Dnevni that he learnt about the deal through the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe's head of mission, the US diplomat Robert Frowick, in the summer of 1996. – Source



Previous thread

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 04 August 2008 01:59 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
From Frustrated Mess's post which was nominated "best of the thread" by M. Spector:

quote:
The law should apply to all equally. Not just the bad guys not on our team but also the bad guys who are on our team - including our own national leaders.

But that is not the case. Our own leaders, and the bad guys who take shelter under our wings, have immunity from justice.


Our first duty is to expose and indict "our own" bad guys - those we elect, those who purport to represent us at home and abroad.

Attacking the others, but not our own, can't qualify as "progressive" in any dictionary.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 04 August 2008 02:21 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Why would the U.S. protect him and then throw him to the wolves? Did he piss off American power brokers?
From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 04 August 2008 02:49 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Karadzic was an ultra nationalist-monarchist. Rightwingers abide by no real pledge of solidarity to one another. There's is the code of pirates: take as much as you can, and give nothing back.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 04 August 2008 03:04 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
Why would the U.S. protect him and then throw him to the wolves? Did he piss off American power brokers?
One theory:
quote:
But 13 years have passed and Holbrooke is long gone. A new situation has allowed a new pro-EU government in Serbia to extradite Karadzic.

As a maverick right-wing extremist, linked to the Serbian opposition, Karadzic can be handed over as a trophy to the EU. The circumstances suggest the West and Belgrade had been waiting so he could be traded at the right time.

However, if the Holbrooke strategy was to cover up the crimes that imperialism and Karadzic were jointly responsible for, the imperialist powers supporting the Hague process want him as a scapegoat — as long as he doesn't say too much."


Another theory:
quote:
Karadzic claimed that the Hague tribunal defied US pressure to drop the case against himself, causing Holbrooke to "switch to Plan B - the liquidation of Radovan Karadzic".
Another theory:
quote:
"Karadzic, indicted for genocide and war crimes, was under US protection until 2000, when the CIA intercepted his telephone conversation that clearly proved he personally chaired a meeting of his old political party," the Belgrade daily Blic quoted a "well-informed US intelligence source" as saying.
"They went crazy realising Karadzic was making a fool of them," it said yesterday. "The US and CIA withdrew [his] informal protection."

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 04 August 2008 03:32 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
More confirmation:
quote:
Mohammad Sacirbey, former Bosnian foreign minster says that US diplomat, Richard Holbrooke made an unambiguous political deal with Serb leader Radavan Karadzic.

Sacirbey pointing out that he has been telling this story for more than a decade now, said the Holbrooke-Karadzic pact called for Karadzic to give up leadership of his political party and to drop out of public life in return for his already existing war crimes indictment being scrapped.

In an exclusive interview with a Press TV correspondent, Sacirbey confirmed that a top US diplomat, Robert Frowick, head of the OSCE mission in Bosnia in 1996 was his source for the information of the Holbrooke-Karadzic deal. Sacirbey described Frowick as an unimpeachable point of reference.



Law prof. Francis Boyle calls for Holbrooke prosecution:
quote:
A US lawyer, Francis Boyle, calls for the prosecution of former US envoy to UN Richard Holbrooke over his complicity with the 'Butcher of Bosnia'.

"In the 1990s, Richard Holbrooke, the then US assistant for Secretary of State has been closely working with Radovan Karadzic, the Bosnian war criminal who stands on trial at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague for massacring 8,000 Muslims in Srebrenica," said Boyle, a Professor of International Law at the University of Illinois.

"All evidence and records at hand indicate that Holbrooke was an accomplice in the genocide," the lawyer told the Azerbaijani Trend News Agency on Friday.


Could this case blow up in the face of the USA?

[ 09 August 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 04 August 2008 03:51 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If Richard Holbrooke was protecting Karadzic while American forces were looking for him, why wasn't Holbrooke fired? Did Clinton know about this?

[ 04 August 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 04 August 2008 06:00 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
My question has been answered, but the answer gives rise to another question:

Why did the U.S. support the Bosnian Serbs?


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 04 August 2008 09:37 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Richard Holbrooke was interviewed on PBS television in 1996 specifically on the subject of the negotiations to get Karadzic out of public office and into hiding. Karadzic was to become "invisible" according to Holbrooke. The transcript is HERE.

His explanation was that the Dayton Accords "did not say that Karadzic had to give up his power in the SDS [Serb Democratic Party of Bosnia] specifically." So the US found it necessary to negotiate a side deal with Karadzic whereby he "will leave political life immediately and permanently, and giving up both of his jobs, No. 1, president of the Serb part of Bosnia, and No. 2, president of the party the SDS, which he created and controls," says Holbrooke.

What did Karadzic get in return for becoming "invisible"? The interviewer never asked Holbrooke that directly. Holbrooke kept saying that the long term goal was to get Karadzic tried for war crimes at The Hague, as provided in the Dayton Accords, but it was clear that if Karadzic was to become "invisible" it would make it very difficult to drag him before the ICTY. Holbrooke tried to present the deal as Karadzic being forced to become invisible under threat of "sanctions" - like the banning of his Party. Still, it's not hard to believe that the negotiations involved an agreement to put Karadzic's arrest on the back burner as long as he remained "invisible."

There is no question that Clinton was aware of the deal. Says Holbrooke: "I did this as a one-time effort at the request of the secretary of state and the White House and Amb. Kornblum. The next step which we are announcing today is that Amb. Kornblum, the Assistant Secretary for European Affairs, will leave for Belgrade this weekend, after stopping in Europe to talk to the Europeans. And he will see President Milosevic again, and he will pursue the next step in this process."

[ 04 August 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 04 August 2008 10:28 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
Why did the U.S. support the Bosnian Serbs?

Karadzic they supported because he is a monarchist, not a communist or socialist. They supported Milosevic in the beginning, because he was for neoLiberal economic voodoo in Yugoslavia. Milosevic actually okay'd NATO intervention.

quote:
In November 1994, Richard Holbrooke – the Clinton Administration's diplomatic envoy to Bosnia – traveled to Zagreb, Croatia, accompanied by Gen. Hayden.[7] During the trip, Holbrooke met with Bosnian Prime Minister Haris Silajdzic. (The record does not reflect whether Hayden attended the meeting.)

Holbrooke reportedly proposed to Silajdzic that the Bosnians accept the arms embargo for the next six months, in exchange for which the U.S. would encourage third-party countries to violate the arms embargo and ship additional military supplies to the Bosnians.

The "black flight" arms shipments to Tuzla began just three months later.[8] Gen. Hayden's intelligence apparatus failed to interdict and purportedly failed even to detect the covert shipments.


U.S. military supported al Qaida and mujahideen in Bosnia:

Canada's Michel Chossudovsky said:

quote:
Ironically, the US Administration's undercover military-intelligence operations in Bosnia have been fully documented by the Republican Party.

Serbian-American editors of Srpska Mreza quote Bosnian-Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic's book, The Islamic Declaration:

quote:
"... Islamic order may be implemented only in countries where Muslims represent the majority of the population. Without this majority, the Islamic order is reduced to authority only (because the other element is lacking - the Islamic society), and may turn into violence. ..."

The alleged country Izetbegovic was likely referring to was Bosnia. Muslims were under 50% of the population of Bosnia at start of the 1990's. Serbs were expelled from Sarajevo, a city they founded over a thousand years ago. Western news journalists and the U.S. even referred to Bosnian-Serbs as "separatists" in their own territory, because they desired to remain a part of the only country they knew, which was Yugoslavia.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 05 August 2008 01:04 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The alleged country Izetbegovic was likely referring to was Bosnia. Muslims were under 50% of the population of Bosnia at start of the 1990's. Serbs were expelled from Sarajevo, a city they founded over a thousand years ago. Western news journalists and the U.S. even referred to Bosnian-Serbs as "separatists" in their own territory, because they desired to remain a part of the only country they knew, which was Yugoslavia.


A majority of Bosnians were serb?


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 05 August 2008 01:12 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
According to the 1991 census, Bosnia and Herzegovina had a population of 4,377,033. Ethnically, 1,902,956 (43.47 per cent) were Bosniak [Muslim], 1,366,104 (31.21 per cent) Serbs, and 760,852 (17.38 per cent) Croats, with 242,682 (5.54 per cent) "Yugoslavs". The remaining 2.38 per cent of the population - numbering 104,439 - consists of various other ethnicities.
- Wikipedia

So there was no ethnic majority in pre-war Bosnia.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 05 August 2008 03:24 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Karadzic they supported because he is a monarchist, not a communist or socialist. They supported Milosevic in the beginning, because he was for neoLiberal economic voodoo in Yugoslavia. Milosevic actually okay'd NATO intervention.


But the man seems to have been a nut case. Surely there were right wing conservatives in all the various ethnic groups who were less messianic and more predictable then Karadzic. Why did they choose him in particular. Didn't their experiences with Saddam teach the American power elite anything?


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 05 August 2008 03:34 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Destroying Bosnia

In 1992, the former Yugoslav republic of Bosnia was constitutionally a republic including Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) — all represented in the government and every level of the state apparatus proportionally. They were inextricably mixed.

A quarter of the land mass of Bosnia, with a quarter of its population, had no ethnic majority at all. In many that did, the “majorities” were tenuous. Major cities contained Serbs, Croats, Muslims, mixed Serb-Croat-Muslims, “Yugoslavs”, “Bosnians”, Jews and others, living in the same apartment blocks and working in the same places.

This coexistence had lasted 800 years, and everywhere were scattered mosques, synagogues, Serbian Orthodox and Croat Catholic churches.

From the outset, Karadzic planned to destroy Bosnia, so rudely based on coexistence between peoples rather than ethnic purity, root and branch and had agreement from his Bosnian Croat chauvinist counterparts.

To do this, the Muslim plurality of the population had to be eliminated, as Karadzic was not shy to say. In a speech to the Bosnian parliament, he warned the Muslims would “disappear from the face of the Earth”.

In 1992, his Chetniks and the now-completely Serb “Yugoslav” army swept across 70% of Bosnia and uprooted, bombed and slaughtered the non-Serb population. While the July 1995 massacre in the east Bosnian town of Srebrenica, where more than 8000 Muslim captives were killed, was the most terrible crime, massacres in all of the Muslim-majority east Bosnia occurred over many months in 1992, alongside massacres elsewhere in Bosnia.

The mixed population of the capital Sarajevo, and dozens of other towns and cities, were besieged and bombed daily.

Officially, 100,000 people were killed, though real numbers may be much higher. Eighty-three percent of civilian victims were Muslims. Millions were driven from their homes.

Nearly 1700 mosques were destroyed, compared to 34 Orthodox churches. The National Library of Bosnia-Herzegovina, with over “a million books, more than a hundred thousand manuscripts and rare books, and centuries of historical records”, according to professor of Islamic Studies Michael Sells, went up in flames. So did the Oriental Institute in Sarajevo, containing 5000 Islamic and Jewish manuscripts from many parts of the Middle East.

This is Karadzic’s legacy.


Is this true, and how much bloodshed was caused by Bosniak and Croat Militias?


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
scooter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5548

posted 08 August 2008 05:59 AM      Profile for scooter     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
Didn't their experiences with Saddam teach the American power elite anything?

One thing I remember learning from the collapse of Yugoslavia was how the European governments seemed content in ignoring the violence and human rights abuses.

From: High River | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 08 August 2008 09:43 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by scooter:

One thing I remember learning from the collapse of Yugoslavia was how the European governments seemed content in ignoring the violence and human rights abuses.

Oh they didn't ignore anything. Several European countries and Britain actually helped the U.S. and NATO to fund and arm criminal groups like KLA and mujahideen, Croats etc.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
BetterRed
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11865

posted 08 August 2008 12:06 PM      Profile for BetterRed     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
From the extensive and unattributed quote above:

quote:
In 1992, his Chetniks and the now-completely Serb “Yugoslav” army swept across 70% of Bosnia and uprooted, bombed and slaughtered the non-Serb population.

That is actually very inaccurate about the Yugoslav army. the federal Yugo army DID NOT participate in any fighting in Bosnia. That is precisely why Milosevic was not receiving a major war crime charge about the Bosnian war.

Those from Serbia who took part were paramilitaries like Arkan's Tigers. The federal Serbs, contrary to ignorant anti-Serb media, didnt have a direct presence.


From: They change the course of history, everyday ppl like you and me | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 08 August 2008 01:06 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:

Oh they didn't ignore anything. Several European countries and Britain actually helped the U.S. and NATO to fund and arm criminal groups like KLA and mujahideen, Croats etc.


Did the Americans provide Karahdzic with money and arms as well, or did he get those from other sources?


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 08 August 2008 11:04 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:

Did the Americans provide Karahdzic with money and arms as well, or did he get those from other sources?


Richard Holbrooke provided right-wing Serb nationalists led by Karadzic with the means to win the war in Bosnia by way of the Dayton Accords. They also catered to other ethnic purists in the former Yugoslavia, like the Croat Tudjman and Bosnian Muslim Izetbegovic.

Michel Collon talks about Leslie Gelb, a U.S. Council on Foreign Relations ultra-fascist and proponent of divide and conquer along ethnic lines in various countries, from former Yugoslavia to Iraq. The world is familiar with this old ideology once known as, "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer" (one people, one empire, one führer) It's western hypocrisy at its finest.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 10 August 2008 10:22 AM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So the Americans didn't provide the Bosnian Serbs with M-16s and plastic explosive?
From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 August 2008 10:50 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
So the Americans didn't provide the Bosnian Serbs with M-16s and plastic explosive?

Bosnian-Serbs didn't really need arming in order to foment civil war and to destabilize the region. The Clinton admin ensured that weapons from around the world were funneled to Izetbegovic's Muslims and Croat forces in the region. The CIA-NSC under Clinton ensured that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and "VEVAK", Iran's intelligence agency and successor to the very brutal U.S.-backed Shah's SAVAK, were present in Bosnia, well-armed and ready for cleansing, purging, pillaging, and slaughter. Imagine what 8500 U.S. peacekeepers in Bosnia at the time might have thought about that.

How we trained al Qa'eda

quote:
Following the Russian withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989 and the collapse of their puppet regime in 1992, the Afghan Mujahideen became less important to the United States; many Arabs, in the words of the journalist James Buchan, were left stranded in Afghanistan ‘with a taste for fighting but no cause’. It was not long before some were provided with a new cause. From 1992 to 1995, the Pentagon assisted with the movement of thousands of Mujahideen and other Islamic elements from Central Asia into Europe, to fight alongside Bosnian Muslims against the Serbs.

The CIA and Democrats keep insisting 9-11 was "blowback", and that they cut ties to militant Islamists after the proxy war in Afghanistan. But Republican Senate Policy Committee has accused the Dems of aiding and abetting al Qaeda (and vice versa) right up to 2001. It's been one long and ongoing Gladio operation to destabilize and wage dirty war around the world. Hypocrisy, lies, and appalling greed is their game.

[ 10 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 10 August 2008 06:22 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Bosnian-Serbs didn't really need arming in order to foment civil war and to destabilize the region. The Clinton admin ensured that weapons from around the world were funneled to Izetbegovic's Muslims and Croat forces in the region. The CIA-NSC under Clinton ensured that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and "VEVAK", Iran's intelligence agency and successor to the very brutal U.S.-backed Shah's SAVAK, were present in Bosnia, well-armed and ready for cleansing, purging, pillaging, and slaughter. Imagine what 8500 U.S. peacekeepers in Bosnia at the time might have thought about that.


So who did arm the Bosnian Serb militias during the conflict. I assume they did at least some killing(though maybe not the majority of it) and in order to do that efficiently they would need guns. now, who funded them and gave them weapons. Please don't change the subject again.

[ 10 August 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 August 2008 06:36 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh I get it now. If you're sinply looking to discover which ethnic group deserves the most blame, then you're barking up the wrong tree. You seem to want answers dropped in your lap so as to pin-point blame on Serbs and only Serbs. This is KAOS not CNN.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 10 August 2008 06:54 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Attacking the others, but not our own, can't qualify as "progressive" in any dictionary.

So, I guess that means it was UNprogressive to attack the white supremacist regime in South Africa or to attack the Pinochet regime in Chile. For that matter, what right have we to lodge any criticism towards the US when we have elected some bad people in Canada.

So, in the end nobody has any right to criticize anyone else - so let's all just close our eyes to what's going on in the world and just stick to our knitting?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 10 August 2008 07:01 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
No, I just want to know who provided arms to Karadzic. I don't know much about the Balkin conflicts. I was 15 when the post Tito break up of Yugoslavia
ended, and 18 when slick Willy decided to blow the shit out of Kosovo. It all seems terribly complex, and I get the feeling, from what I've seen here, that the Bosniak and Croat groups involved in the war were as bloodthirsty as Karadzic's boys. I'm really too uneducated
when it comes to this particular bloodbath
to be honestly partisan. I really
just want to know wheather the Americans armed both the Bosniaks and the Serbs or if they just gave the Bosniaks guns and didn't arm the Serbian mlitias.

[ 10 August 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 10 August 2008 07:11 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It would seem odd for the US to have armed the Serbian militias at a time when NATO and the US were depicting Karadzic and Milosevic as public enemies number one and NATO was bombing the Serbs.

I was under the impression that Russia was the main source of weapons for the Serbs since they were trying to create a sphere of influence in the Slavic Orthodox world.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 August 2008 08:39 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Right. We don't need CNN or Foxy News as long as we have clued-in apologists for the vicious empire with their two cents worth. Canadian Michel Chossudovsky wrote about the civil war and NATO bombing of Yugoslavia:

quote:
According to William Rockler, former prosecutor of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal:

"The [1999] bombing war violates and shreds the basic provisions of the United Nations Charter and other conventions and treaties; the attack on Yugoslavia constitutes the most brazen international aggression since the Nazis attacked Poland to prevent "Polish atrocities" against Germans. The United States has discarded pretensions to international legality and decency, and embarked on a course of raw imperialism run amok."

According to Nuremberg jurisprudence, NATO heads of State and heads of government are responsible for the supreme crime: "the crime against peace."



From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 11 August 2008 07:24 AM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Americans funded Saddam and then nuked his country in the first gulf war. They supported Manuel N. and then shelled Panama City.
They backed Arafat, and then let the IDF destroy his headquarters, his government(such as it was) and the entire West Bank. Just because the yanks support a fachist one minute, it dosen't mean they won't blow him/her up the next.

quote:
It would seem odd for the US to have armed the Serbian militias at a time when NATO and the US were depicting Karadzic and Milosevic as public enemies number one and NATO was bombing the Serbs.

[ 11 August 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 11 August 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 11 August 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 16 August 2008 07:18 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Attempts to bring war crimes suspect and former fugitive Radovan Karadzic to trial were long delayed by the US, France, and England, a spokesperson for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) said in a interview published in Serbian newspaper Blic on Sunday [Aug. 10]. Florence Hartmann accused former US President Bill Clinton and former French President Jacques Chirac of interfering to prevent the arrest of Karadzic, and suggested that the US had only relented when it realized that his freedom was a stumbling block to stability in the region. Hartmann made similar accusations last year in her memoirs, saying that the US and other western countries repeatedly impeded ICTY efforts to arrest Karadzic.

- Source


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca