Serbia debates Srebrenica apology

[jimmy olsen]

If this passes I'll be a bit surprised and impressed. Not good enough, but a definite step in the right direction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8594625.stm

Serbia debates Srebrenica apology

Serbia's parliament is debating a resolution condemning the Srebrenica massacre in 1995 - the worst incident of the Bosnian war.

The text apologises that Serbia did not do more to prevent the tragedy.

The killing of nearly 8,000 Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) was carried out by Bosnian Serb forces - allies of then-Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic.

Meanwhile a Dutch court has rejected an attempt to hold the United Nations responsible for the massacre.

Facing the past

The parliamentary resolution comes after years of denial in Serbia that the Srebrenica massacre even took place, says the BBC's Belgrade correspondent, Mark Lowen.

The pro-Western government in Belgrade now believes this resolution would help paint the country in a new light, he says, showing that it is determined to face its past and aiming for regional reconciliation and EU membership.

The resolution has been criticised by Bosniaks and Muslims in Serbia because it does not describe the massacre as an act of genocide. It has been recognised as such by the courts of the international war crimes tribunal in The Hague.

But Serbian nationalists have rejected the resolution, saying it must also denounce crimes committed by Bosniaks and Croats during the 1992-95 war.

It is thought the resolution has enough support to pass, despite nationalist opposition.

In an attempt to win over the nationalists, the government has promised another future resolution, condemning all crimes in the former Yugoslavia.

Several Bosnian Serbs have been convicted over their role in the Srebrenica massacre, when Bosniak men and boys were taken from their families and shot dead. The town had been designated a UN "safe haven" under the protection of Dutch UN troops.

The wartime leader of the Bosnian Serbs, Radovan Karadzic, is currently on trial in The Hague, while the general accused of masterminding Srebrenica, Ratko Mladic, is still on the run.

Lawyers for the victims' relatives have tried to hold the Dutch government and the UN accountable for failing to stop the massacre.

But on Tuesday The Hague Appeals Court upheld a 2008 lower court ruling affirming UN immunity from prosecution, which it said was essential for it to be able to carry out its duties around the world.

[Warspite]

Give us Mladic.

[Mr.Penguin]

If this passes I'll be a bit surprised and impressed. Not good enough, but a definite step in the right direction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8594625.stm

Isnt it the truth that it will never be "good enough"...

[jimmy olsen]

If this passes I'll be a bit surprised and impressed. Not good enough, but a definite step in the right direction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8594625.stm

Isnt it the truth that it will never be "good enough"...

Well if you look at it like from that moral angle, than yeah, nothing can ever be enough to make up for those killed.

However from a practical angle, if they helped catch and prosecute everyone involved, admitted to and apologized for the genocide, and taught in their public schools that it happened and it was wrong, then that would in my opinion be enough.

[Mr.Penguin]

If this passes I'll be a bit surprised and impressed. Not good enough, but a definite step in the right direction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8594625.stm

Isnt it the truth that it will never be "good enough"...

Well if you look at it like from that moral angle, than yeah, nothing can ever be enough to make up for those killed.

However from a practical angle, if they helped catch and prosecute everyone involved, admitted to and apologized for the genocide, and taught in their public schools that it happened and it was wrong, then that would in my opinion be enough.

What genocide?, killing 8000 men and young boys is mass murder, not genocide...

The word genocide is nothing but a fancy buss word these days, applied to just about any kind of bad effect of war and then milked for political gains...

[jimmy olsen]

If this passes I'll be a bit surprised and impressed. Not good enough, but a definite step in the right direction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8594625.stm

Isnt it the truth that it will never be "good enough"...

Well if you look at it like from that moral angle, than yeah, nothing can ever be enough to make up for those killed.

However from a practical angle, if they helped catch and prosecute everyone involved, admitted to and apologized for the genocide, and taught in their public schools that it happened and it was wrong, then that would in my opinion be enough.

What genocide?, killing 8000 men and young boys is mass murder, not genocide...

The word genocide is nothing but a fancy buss word these days, applied to just about any kind of bad effect of war and then milked for political gains...

If a Communist or Fascist dictatorship has 8,000 political prisoners lined up and shot, that's mass murder.

If Ethnic Group X lines up 8,000 members of Ethnic Group Y and has them shot, that's an act of genocide.

[derspiess]

If a Communist or Fascist dictatorship has 8,000 political prisoners lined up and shot, that's mass murder.

If Ethnic Group X lines up 8,000 members of Ethnic Group Y and has them shot, that's an act of genocide.

Unless Ethnic Group Y is really, really small I think 8,000 is too small a number to qualify for genocide.   

[Mr.Penguin]

If a Communist or Fascist dictatorship has 8,000 political prisoners lined up and shot, that's mass murder.

If Ethnic Group X lines up 8,000 members of Ethnic Group Y and has them shot, that's an act of genocide.

Unless Ethnic Group Y is really, really small I think 8,000 is too small a number to qualify for genocide.

Also the fact that those targeted was mainly of military age, makes it less likely to qualify as genocide...

[Warspite]

If a Communist or Fascist dictatorship has 8,000 political prisoners lined up and shot, that's mass murder.

If Ethnic Group X lines up 8,000 members of Ethnic Group Y and has them shot, that's an act of genocide.

Unless Ethnic Group Y is really, really small I think 8,000 is too small a number to qualify for genocide.

It was part of a comprehensive policy to wipe the Muslims off the map in large swathes of Bosnia.

They were lined up and shot with the deliberate aim of "changing the facts on the ground". The purpose was clear: eliminate an entire ethnic group and all remnants of their culture within a given space.

If that isn't genocide, then I don't know what is.

[Mr.Penguin]

If a Communist or Fascist dictatorship has 8,000 political prisoners lined up and shot, that's mass murder.

If Ethnic Group X lines up 8,000 members of Ethnic Group Y and has them shot, that's an act of genocide.

Unless Ethnic Group Y is really, really small I think 8,000 is too small a number to qualify for genocide.

It was part of a comprehensive policy to wipe the Muslims off the map in large swathes of Bosnia.

They were lined up and shot with the deliberate aim of "changing the facts on the ground". The purpose was clear: eliminate an entire ethnic group and all remnants of their culture within a given space.

If that isn't genocide, then I don't know what is.

Or maybe it was payback from the raids on Serbian villages around Srebrenica, raids that killed between 1600 and 2300 people. Men, women and children, young and old. Several 1000's more was forced to flee over the mountains to Serbia in the middle of winter. payback in the balkans has always been harsh and tenfold...

 

[Warspite]

If a Communist or Fascist dictatorship has 8,000 political prisoners lined up and shot, that's mass murder.

If Ethnic Group X lines up 8,000 members of Ethnic Group Y and has them shot, that's an act of genocide.

Unless Ethnic Group Y is really, really small I think 8,000 is too small a number to qualify for genocide.

It was part of a comprehensive policy to wipe the Muslims off the map in large swathes of Bosnia.

They were lined up and shot with the deliberate aim of "changing the facts on the ground". The purpose was clear: eliminate an entire ethnic group and all remnants of their culture within a given space.

If that isn't genocide, then I don't know what is.

Or maybe it was payback from the raids on Serbian villages around Srebrenica, raids that killed between 1600 and 2300 people. Men, women and children, young and old. Several 1000's more was forced to flee over the mountains to Serbia in the middle of winter. payback in the balkans has always been harsh and tenfold...

Those numbers are greatly inflated and include the usual trick of lumping in hundreds of dead combatants into the total.

The fact is that Srebrenica was the last holdout of the Muslim defenders of eastern Bosnia, who made up a sizeable chunk of the population of that part of the country. By 1995, they were pretty much all holed up in Srebrenica having been expelled from their villages and farms from 1992 onwards. And yet for somehow having the temerity to fight for their homeland against a vastly superior aggressor they invited the genocide upon themselves?

[Mr.Penguin]

Those numbers are greatly inflated and include the usual trick of lumping in hundreds of dead combatants into the total.

The fact is that Srebrenica was the last holdout of the Muslim defenders of eastern Bosnia, who made up a sizeable chunk of the population of that part of the country. By 1995, they were pretty much all holed up in Srebrenica having been expelled from their villages and farms from 1992 onwards. And yet for somehow having the temerity to fight for their homeland against a vastly superior aggressor they invited the genocide upon themselves?

The same could be said for  the Serbs in the area, it wasnt until the middle of 1993 they gained any kind of superiority around Srebrenica... 

[jimmy olsen]

If a Communist or Fascist dictatorship has 8,000 political prisoners lined up and shot, that's mass murder.

If Ethnic Group X lines up 8,000 members of Ethnic Group Y and has them shot, that's an act of genocide.

Unless Ethnic Group Y is really, really small I think 8,000 is too small a number to qualify for genocide.

It was part of a comprehensive policy to wipe the Muslims off the map in large swathes of Bosnia.

They were lined up and shot with the deliberate aim of "changing the facts on the ground". The purpose was clear: eliminate an entire ethnic group and all remnants of their culture within a given space.

If that isn't genocide, then I don't know what is.

Or maybe it was payback from the raids on Serbian villages around Srebrenica, raids that killed between 1600 and 2300 people. Men, women and children, young and old. Several 1000's more was forced to flee over the mountains to Serbia in the middle of winter. payback in the balkans has always been harsh and tenfold...

Even if that was true, motivations don't matter, it's still an act of genocide.

[ulmont]

Even if that was true, motivations don't matter, it's still an act of genocide.

Actually, motivations are totally relevant to whether an act is an act of genocide or not, as genocide requires acts committed with "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."  You are correct that the reason behind that intent is irrelevant, though.

[Neil]

And the victims lost their lunatic lawsuit against the UN.