The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The trial of Generals Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markac : a farce from beginning to end. > Comments

The trial of Generals Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markac : a farce from beginning to end. : Comments

By Mishka Góra, published 28/9/2011

Decisions of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia undermine the integrity of UN processes.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
When someone uses the word 'contemptible' you realise that they HAVE a barrow to push. It may not be ethnic, but it is ideological (somehow). Then I see that the writer writes for Quadrant. Oh...

Anyway, the Serbian nation stuffed up, no doubt, but it was Croatia that led the UNILATERAL independence movement. Compare that to Palestine.

The Yugoslav army (yes, in reality the Serbian army) responded to 'defend' the borders. And of course, the nationalist Serbs dormant memories of WWII were re-ignited.

My point is it takes two to tango. The Serbs and the Croats were at that point in time (post Cold War 1990's)ready for one more fight, so to speak.

The writer's argument is pretty much taken in isolation of the broader picture.

Will she address this? The Serbs may have lost Kosovo but at least that was not overly populated by Serbs, unlike Krajina. Will the Croats cede the Krajina to the Serbs?

So many question's that the writer has failed to address. And she should if she is to make such inflammatory comments about an alleged war criminal.
Posted by Savvas Tzionis, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 8:55:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good lord, I had no idea that there was anyone left on earth who actually believed the UN, or any of it's processes, had any integrity to undermine.

How quaint.
Posted by Hasbeen, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 9:33:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
?

What word would you use given the author, in a fine piece of writing, has actually made her prima facie case?

The ICTY bears a presumption of guilt now.

Unless you just mean to object to freedom of speech when it reflects negatively on a favoured group, if you would be critical provide the kind of substantial evidence the author uses but that supports the ICTY charge. Attempting to impugn a conservative journal is no argument and says more about your deeply held bias. The author in her commitment to justice has given you a good example of how a reasoned argument is constructed. Follow her.

Mrs. Ireland-Gora has persuaded me the ICTY bears the burden of proving that it was not the cause of a travesty.
Posted by Martin Ibn Warriq, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 10:03:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr Tzionis, I object to the mass murder of thousands of people. If you want the broader picture, how about we look at the massacre at Srebrenica, where over 8000 men were rounded up and systematically slaughtered by Serb forces under Ratko Mladic. He then turned his attention to the Bihac enclave, where more than 160000 Bosniaks were suffering under a brutal siege. Generals Gotovina and Markac lifted that siege, preventing Mladic from slaughtering the people of Bihac as he did in Srebrenica. So, yes, I do find it contemptible that someone can be convicted of a crime they actually prevented.

This article is about a particular trial, not about the war in the former Yugoslavia, and (quite apart from the obvious word limitations) I have no obligation to address the broader picture. Indeed, given that the generals weren’t involved in Kosovo I don’t see how that part of the broader picture could even be relevant in a wider discussion.

However, I feel I should correct some of your misapprehensions.

Firstly, there was no “unilateral” independence movement. Under the Yugoslav constitution (as well as historically), all the republics already existed. They were part of a confederation from which they were legally able to leave following democratic referenda in each of these republics. Three decided to leave the confederation; it is also a different situation to Kosovo, which was a semi-autonomous region, not a republic.

The Yugoslav army did not “defend” any borders. At the beginning of the war, it crossed the Danube, the border between the republics of Serbia and Croatia, and decimated the beautiful Baroque city of Vukovar street by street until there was nothing left but rubble. It then took the medical staff and patients from the hospital and slaughtered them, etc..

Many Serbs live in Croatia enjoying full rights as Croatian citizens. Your suggestion that a portion of Croatia should be annexed on the basis of the ethnicity of its population demonstrates your intolerance.

As for Serb memories of WWII, I am flabbergasted that you think that’s any sort of justification for a fight.
Posted by Mishka Gora, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 10:09:48 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How many bodies did they find at Srebrenica?
2400 or so from what I read, mostly Mujahideen who'd been killed defending the town.
http://www.srpska-mreza.com/Bosnia/Srebrenica/index.html
There are two sides to every story, the Serbs allege the murder of 72,000 of their people by the Bosniaks, where's the tribunal investigating those claims?
I don't believe anything that comes from NATO or their puppets, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq,Libya and now the coming war on Pakistan,they lie and lie and lie, yet people still swallow every word.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 10:35:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My intolerance is based on the hypocrisy that abounds in this world. And this article reveals some of that hypocrisy.

If a section of Croatia should not be annexed, then Kosovo should not be annexed (or in this case splintered off). The only reason it attained 'semi-autonomy' back in the day was because of its .... wait for it.... ETHNIC idenity. So what is so different to Krajina?

Or is the loss of the Krajina and Kosovo part of the Serbs punishment? Pity the Croats didn't similiar punishment at the end of WWII.

By the way, you did not address Palestine (the GREATEST hypocrisy).
Posted by Savvas Tzionis, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 10:36:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy