26-08-2002 22:28									#91
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara There is little evidence of an organized terror campaign to drive the Albanians from Kosovo. There is eveidence that irregulars did some of this, however the vast majority of people who fled did so because they were terrified of the bombing, at least according to the refugees themselves at the time.

Read the link I posted above, there's no relationship between the bombing and who left Kosovo. There was indeed an organized terror campaign to drive out Kosovars from their homes, I don't know how much evidence you need (the link again provides some, but I'll look for more). However, I did find a link with some numbers in terms of refugees to neighboring provinces at http://www.disasterrelief.org/Disasters/990420Kosovo10/ As you can see, there were quite fewer refugees going to Serbia then going to Albania and other provinces.


P.S. - A good book to read on this subject is Peter Maas
"Love Thy Neighbor", which while he only talks about the Bosnian campaign, from the stories I've heard here in Kosovo, the same thing went on here as well.

	26-08-2002 22:37									#92
	Full PM-box? Change here!

ok, from this link
http://shr.aaas.org/kosovo/about.html. So you don't have to read through all the evidence, here's just one paragraph

quote: By comparing the estimated numbers of people who left each municipality over time to the times when NATO airstrikes occurred, the AAAS study concludes that only a small fraction of Kosovar Albanians fled Kosova/Kosovo as a direct result of NATO bombing raids. It also concludes that the mass exodus of refugees from Kosova/Kosovo occurred in patterns so regular that they must have been coordinated. In the context of descriptive accounts given by refugees, the most likely explanation for the migration is the implementation of a centrally-organized campaign to clear at least certain regions of ethnic Albanians

	26-08-2002 22:42									#93
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Your link says that the Serbs were attempting to stop the Albanians from leaving. That sounds like the opposite of ethnic cleansing to me.

BTW, Bosnia and Kosovo were too completely different things. Bosnia was fought largely by irregular forces while the anti-terrorism fight in Kosovo was largely by professional forces. Irregulars, when found in Kosovo, were expelled.

So, why was this campaign different? The Serbs had been fighting the KLA for years, and there was no "expuslion" of the population. Why was it different this time? Especially when the world was watching and NATO was preparing to go to war over it?

And I'll need actual proof that there was a terror campaign, not assertions by pro-war and pro-KLA mafia sources.

	26-08-2002 22:43									#94
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Anyway, since many of the refugees actually said they were fleeing the bombing, I'll take their word for it.

	26-08-2002 22:49									#95
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Interesting, the data and the maps show that the people who fled first and in the highest numbers were the people who lived closest to the border . . . I wonder why that could be?

	27-08-2002 01:35									#96
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Here is very interesting think-piece on US foreign policy written in the final year of the Clinton admin. The piece identifies several weaknesses in America's policy, including:

1) multilateralism;
2) the avoidance of civilian casualties; and
3) the avoidance of casualties to US troops.

It explains how our enemies seek to weaken the US by exploiting one or more of the above American weaknesses.

Although it was written prior to 9/11, one can see Saddam exploiting every one of these weaknesses in the current standoff.

Defeating US coercion

	27-08-2002 01:50									#97
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc It's the same request made to the Serbs. I'd be most interested in if you can find a source that says the US is offering to obstruct the tribunal investigating the Yugoslav war.

Hypothetical question. What if the US made that deal with the Bosnian government (and I'm sure they asked for it, they even asked our government. Riiiiiiiight...) and US troops in Bosnia capture Karadzic and Mladic, that means those murderers won't end up in The Hague?

	27-08-2002 01:53									#98
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: But, this does seem like a double-standard, particularly if attrocities like Sebrenicia happen simply because some Dutch commander doesn't want to pick up the phone and ask for help when he is outgunned.

Ned, please get your facts straight for once...

	27-08-2002 02:51									#99
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Hueij quote: But, this does seem like a double-standard, particularly if attrocities like Sebrenicia happen simply because some Dutch commander doesn't want to pick up the phone and ask for help when he is outgunned. Ned, please get your facts straight for once...

Heiij, I'm just playing back arguments made to me why the Dutch commander was justified in turning the citizens of Sebrenicia over to the Serb commander.

One of the arguments was that he was outgunned and could not have put up an effective resistence.

However, the Dutch commander was part of a larger UN operation supported by the US Sixth Fleet and the US Marines. Surely, there was enough UN firepower available to deter the Serbs.

	27-08-2002 03:21									#100
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Whatever the Dutch can be blamed for regarding Srebenica, it's not that they didn't call for air support. They did and it didn't come...

	27-08-2002 03:25									#101
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Your link says that the Serbs were attempting to stop the Albanians from leaving. That sounds like the opposite of ethnic cleansing to me. BTW, Bosnia and Kosovo were too completely different things. Bosnia was fought largely by irregular forces while the anti-terrorism fight in Kosovo was largely by professional forces. Irregulars, when found in Kosovo, were expelled. So, why was this campaign different? The Serbs had been fighting the KLA for years, and there was no "expuslion" of the population. Why was it different this time? Especially when the world was watching and NATO was preparing to go to war over it? And I'll need actual proof that there was a terror campaign, not assertions by pro-war and pro-KLA mafia sources.

American Association for the Advancement of Science a pro-war/pro-KLA source

The Serbs had nothing to worry about from the KLA for years. The KLA was a small splinter group that wanted independence and was It wasn't until the Serbs went in and massacred 80 Albanians (women and children included) in February 1998 in response to killing of Serbian Police Officers that the ranks of the KLA ranks began to swell.

quote: Anyway, since many of the refugees actually said they were fleeing the bombing, I'll take their word for it.

Were are you getting this from. I find this hard to believe without a credible source. Are you saying that you talk to refugees on a regular basis? I haven't spoken to too many former refugees here in Kosovo, but the ones I did speak said they left because there homes were destroyed by Serbians not because they feared US bombings(there was one old man I met who was even paraded around naked in front of Serbian troops), . I would also think that if all those Albanians would hold some sort of grudge against Americans if they forced them to be refugees. Rather Nato Soldiers are greeted as celebrities. While I was on guard in some of the villages, children would spontaneously hand you flowers or even bring food from home. You can't drive down the street without people waving at you and trying to give you high fives. These don't sound like actions of a people driven from their homes by US bombs. In fact, I very much want to come back to Kosovo as a civilian, between the beautiful country-side and a grateful citizenry. The only thing that might stop me is my concern for the plentiful supply of landmines placed by the Serbs along the country (every now and then a soldier loses a foot because of a landmine, even three years afterwards.)

quote: BTW, Bosnia and Kosovo were too completely different things. Bosnia was fought largely by irregular forces while the anti-terrorism fight in Kosovo was largely by professional forces. Irregulars, when found in Kosovo, were expelled

I fail to see how that makes a difference. Irregulars or not, soldiers are still responsible for their actions and generally don't commit crimes if such actions are condemned from above. There was a clear pattern of behavior from Bosnia through Kosovo of killing/raping/pillaging that was planned from above to drive the Muslims out of "greater" Serbia. If this was not the case, then you would hear about soldiers being punished for such actions.

	27-08-2002 03:37									#102
	Inflate your Upload Space

Hueij, He did? Do we know who denied the Dutch commander support, and why? If he did call in for support and was denied it, I fail to see why the Dutch government would resign for any alleged failure by its peacekeeping forces. There was no failure.

	27-08-2002 03:42									#103
	Get a bigger avatar today!

It was the French that denied the support, IIRC.

	27-08-2002 04:15									#104
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc It was the French that denied the support, IIRC.

Why?

I just saw the movie No Man's Land on DVD. In the movie, the English commander does something like this. This commander is portrayed as a pompous ass with a beautiful secretary sitting on his desk during phone calls. He denies a request made by both the Serbs and the Bosnians to rescue wounded solders of both combatants stranded in trench between the two lines. He does this on the ground that there is no cease fire and it would be too dangerous for his own troops! (He actually seems quite annoyed by this interruption of the "conversation" he was having with his secretary.)

An exasperated reporter on the scene report this, along with footage of Chirac visiting Sarajevo, where he agreed with the Serbs that the role of the UN peacekeepers was limited to ensuring that humanitarian aid was delivered.

I suspect that the source of any paralysis by the French was none other than Chirac.

	28-08-2002 02:14									#105
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Hueij Whatever the Dutch can be blamed for regarding Srebenica, it's not that they didn't call for air support. They did and it didn't come...

I would like to add that according to the (independent) NIOD report it wouldn't have mattered AT ALL whether this so-called 'air support' would have been given or not.

With 'air support' as defined by UN rules, it is out of question that the Serbian horde of tanks and infantery, moving in mountainous terrain, could have been seriously damaged.
So this discussion is academic, in the worst sense of the word!

The only person who persisted in suggesting that the 'air support' would have mattered, was Mient-Jan Faber, a rather bloodthirsty peace activist.

	28-08-2002 02:37									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Kroeze, Perhaps. But if US planes and Cobra helo's were involved, the Serbs would not have stood a chance - this based on solely our record in Kosovo, Desert Storm and Afghanistan. I think our air power was very effective when Clinton finally unleashed it in Bosnia.

But, was the French commander unwilling to ask the United States for help. After all, Chirac, a Gaullist, was now in charge in France.

	28-08-2002 02:55									#107
	Put an end to popups!

Uhm, hate to burst your bubble, but the Serbs held out until NATO agreed to their demands. Look at Raboulliet and what the Serbs demanded, what the US demanded, and then the final agreement. Sure, the Serbs contry was wrecked, but they got what they wanted, officially. Once NATO took over Kosovo, they violated the agreement by allowing the KLA to chase all non-Albanians out of the province.

The other main factor in the Serbs agreement to leave Kosovo was that Russia finally threatened to withhold Serbian oil supplies. The Russians were getting embarressed by NATO's stomping all over Yugoslavia's Russian made equipment.

	28-08-2002 04:16									#108
	Inflate your Upload Space

Yeah, but the question is, could the combination of airpower and Dutch peacekeepers on the ground have prevented Sebrenicia? Rather than putting up a fight when air power was denied him, the Dutch commander allowed the Serbs into Sebrenicia. Had massive airpower been dispatched, the Dutch probably would have fought and won. (At least is how the Dutch seem to be protraying the facts.)

	28-08-2002 22:41									#109
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ned Yeah, but the question is, could the combination of airpower and Dutch peacekeepers on the ground have prevented Sebrenicia? Rather than putting up a fight when air power was denied him, the Dutch commander allowed the Serbs into Sebrenicia. Had massive airpower been dispatched, the Dutch probably would have fought and won. (At least is how the Dutch seem to be protraying the facts.)

It would improve the quality of discussion immensely when you would try to read a post twice (or thrice) before you react.

I repeat: "With 'air support' as defined by UN rules....

According to UN rules 'air support' has/had to be proportional.
Nor was it ever considered to be the task of Dutchbat to defend the enclave, their task was to observe.

And according to the same NIOD report Dutchbat's weaponry was completely inadequate to fight the Serbs (or other armed forces on the spot).
The so-called 'safe areas' were NEVER safe, only on paper!

The conclusions of the NIOD report were devastating -for the politicians!

	28-08-2002 22:52									#110
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: And according to the same NIOD report Dutchbat's weaponry was completely inadequate to fight the Serbs (or other armed forces on the spot). The so-called 'safe areas' were NEVER safe, only on paper!

Very true. The UN just didn't allow the firepower necessary to defend anything, or even allow for any humanitarian aid that the Serbs didn't want transported (which meant that the UN had to hand of very hefty bribes to Serbians to let any relief through as they weren't allowed to use force). All in all the UN was about effective in helping Bosnia out in the war as Switzerland was in stopping German aggression in WWII.

	29-08-2002 02:10									#111
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Did the US have anything to do with defining the RULES? I can think that Clinton was trying to learn from the disaster in Somalia by keeping to the food distribution role and staying very clear of combat.

	30-08-2002 00:24									#112
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ned Did the US have anything to do with defining the RULES? I can think that Clinton was trying to learn from the disaster in Somalia by keeping to the food distribution role and staying very clear of combat.

To my knowledge: NO (but I am not 100% sure).
The UN as a rule tries to preserve neutrality as long as possible, nor were most European governments enthusiastic to commit themselves.

Yet I think in the Bosnia crisis the Americans -especially R.Holbrooke- acted in a far more competent and honourable way than the Europeans, I am willing to admit.
And since I am not a friend of the Americans by nature, this is a quite objective assessment, I think.

quote: All in all the UN was about [as] effective in helping Bosnia out in the war as Switzerland was in stopping German aggression in WWII.

I think the shame of the UN was far greater than that of Switzerland! Switzerland pretended to be neutral -though in reality it wasn't- the UN pretended to be willing to protect the Bosnian Muslims....

Truly a bloody shame!

	30-08-2002 06:37									#113
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Did the US have anything to do with defining the RULES?

Um... yes. Considering the US's position in the UN, the rules can't pass without US approval, and we probably wrote it up ourselves.