Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Dowding on October 21, 2001, 02:00:00 PM
-
It seems to me that there was huge opportunity to harness the global outrage over the WTC attacks, by getting a UN mandate backing action in Afghanistan. It could have also included an integrated plan to decide Afghanistan's future after the Taliban have been removed.
This is another flashpoint in which the UN has been bypassed, Kosovo being the last notable example.
So, has the UN become irrelevant?
-
I'm angry with your position on the whole attack and the war. Sorry.
[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: GRUNHERZ ]
-
Ok... anyone else?
-
Very well thought out and reasonable reply Grun. :rolleyes:
LOL.
Jeez, ole Dowd asked a legitimate question.
Is your collar a bit too tight?
Dowding, I'd say the answer is that the US has what it (we? they?) deem a sufficient link to Afghanistan that it was considered an act of war. Much the way Nato took it under Article 5 was it?
I doubt any nation is going to go to the UN _first_ for redress from an act of war.
However, they (we? they?) are obviously trying to involve the UN in the peace and nation-building that will come after.
Pretty deafening non-response on that front, eh? I doubt you could find any government, other than an Islamic one, that would consider the Taliban a "good" government or situation.
You like to address human rights. Taliban has to be one of the worst offenders going.
Yet noone wants to step up and say "We'll go and help nation build".
Once again, where are all those folks that like to criticize? Time to get in the game.
(Before you get your Union Jack all in a wad, I'd say the Brits should be out of the nation-building on this one too. You folks cast your lot with US militarily (and thanks). The Brits won't be welcome either. Time for the "non-aligned" Western Nations to get off their duffs and DO something besides "Batch" for a change.)
Just my .02, of course.
-
The UN is nothing but a bunch of rutabagas banded together for financial interest. Its a damn joke.
UN should have its own standing army from which ALL nations should contribute to. And that army should not answer to ANY nation BUT to the UN council itself.
I believe its in their charter to have it... guess member nations "conveniently" forget stuff. The hypocrisy of it is overwhelming.
-
This wasn't an anti-US post, as much as some might like to think it is. Personally, I'm not against the action, but doubt it will become a precedent for dealing with global terrorism as some would have it.
But the security council contains the states that have condemned the act and would support a mandate to use NATO (in the form of the US and UK) to 'pacify' the Taliban. There then could be UN funded regeneration of Afghanistan, perhaps with a proviso that most of the funding comes from the rich Islamic states.
To me that would be the ideal solution for Afghanistan.
I guess it hinges on whether the attack was considered to be an act of war in any legal sense. Perhaps the definition will have to change to accommodate recent events, because how can you be at war with an ideology whose proponents are spread around the globe with no affiliation to any one state?
Personally I see the UN becoming increasing marginalised in a similar way to the League of Nations.
<edit>
Don't edit your post Grunherz. You wrote:
"Shut the diddly up you commie studmuffingot bastard. It wasn't 7000 UN rutabagas that died, it was 7000 Americans!
Don't write anymore on this subject and diddly off."
Or something very close to that.
</edit>
[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]
-
UN should have its own standing army from which ALL nations should contribute to. And that army should not answer to ANY nation BUT to the UN council itself.
Your problem there is "would it ever act?"
Look how long it took and how many died before anything was really done in Bosnia. Even then, that was a NATO operation (Yah, Boroda.. I agree.. illegal), not a UN op.
It's possible that the UN is too many Chiefs and not enough Indians.
Which leads back to Dowding's question/thought:
because how can you be at war with an ideology whose proponents are spread around the globe with no affiliation to any one state?
In this particular case, the US has found sufficient justification to LINK it to the Taliban and Al-Qaida to "be at war".
In your example, however, it becomes necessary to class terrorists as criminals and thus it becomes a "police action". Unfortunately, no ones police force has the necessary weapons/capability to take these guys on so you end up using military forces.
Sound like Bosnia or anything?
The UN didn't act there.. NATO did...
It's a circle, isn't it?
-
Its quite simple, really. The U.N. is an UTTERLY INEFFECTIVE ORGANIZATION. It has been this way since its creation shortly after the end of WW2. If you want something debated ad nauseam with no real resolution, you go to the U.N. If you want something DONE, you go & do it.
-
Yea...what Ant said. Name ONE time the UN has ever done anything effectivly. They rely on the US for any sort of "enforcement" and finacial support anyway. They're pretty damn useless seeming to me and incompentant.
xBAT
-
Being a UA armed forces member.. The day I have to wear a blue helmut, or arm band, is the day I quit, ar start the process of quiting the USAF. I ahve no faith in the UN. I do have a strong loyalty to my country, the USA.
-
Unfortunately, US acts as if there are no laws written for them. And they usually spit at any laws, even if it is extremely easy to obey them. I doubt that any Security counsil member could veto the UN action against Afghanistan. Nevertheless - our American friends don't even bother to legalise their agression (and de facto it is an agression). It was much easier in 1950 with Soviet representative boycotting the UN session.
And this hypocrites STILL insist that Russians must cease armed struggle in Chechnya and negotiate with Chechen terrorists!
Grunhertz, your caveman anticommunism is amazing. A true example of propaganda, national prejudices and "immigrant syndrome" contradicting with common sence. I suggest you to keep silence, so you can look smarter.
Dowding, you become dangerous because you ask questions. Most of the others simply let Big Brother whistle in their ears.
Again: I support the anti-terrorist operation. But I don't think that key decisions should be left for the people who have obvious problems with logics and common sence. Sometimes it seems to me that US authorities smoke something too much.
BTW, I still expect any proof that Osama is guilty in Sep. 11 tragedy. Every day I feel more and more like US bombs the wrong place.
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
Unfortunately, US acts as if there are no laws written for them. And they usually spit at any laws, even if it is extremely easy to obey them.
What laws do A country have to abide by? And explain why we should not be justified in our retaliation?
Again: I support the anti-terrorist operation. But I don't think that key decisions should be left for the people who have obvious problems with logics and common sence. Sometimes it seems to me that US authorities smoke something too much.
I dont think you do, but your government does, and it isnt neccesarily in the name of stamping out terrorism. I think you are full of it.
-
"BTW, I still expect any proof that Osama is guilty in Sep. 11 tragedy. Every day I feel more and more like US bombs the wrong place."
Sorry, Boroda. Somehow Blair and Powell must have missed your house on the trips to explain the proof to Russia and Pakistan.
It seems the proof was good enough for your Mr. Putin though:
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/10/04/gen.blair.tour.pakistan/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/10/04/gen.blair.tour.pakistan/index.html)
"In Moscow Putin said he was confident that the U.S.-led military action in Afghanistan could be successful.
"We will be able to tell this once the actions become a reality," Putin told a news conference. "But I have no doubt at all that they can be effective.
"The main condition is the joining of efforts of many countries and sincere desire to work together effectively."
Russia has emerged as a key player in the crisis, with Putin expressing strong support for U.S.-led military strikes against Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network and their Afghanistan hosts."
But then Putin must be a tool of the capitalist West now, right? :D
The proof was good enough for Pakistan's leader President Musharraf:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34440,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34440,00.html)
"In Pakistan, President Musharraf, a military leader who seized power from an Islamist civilian government friendly to the Taliban, met with politicians, newspaper editors and Islamic clerics, seeking support for his promise to give "full support" to the United States."
Our action meets all the requirements laid out by International Law and the requirements laid out for a "just war".
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/#1 (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/#1)
"Just war theory can be meaningfully divided into three parts, which in the literature are referred to, for the sake of convenience, in Latin. These parts are: 1) jus ad bellum, which concerns the justice of resorting to war in the first place; 2) jus in bello, which concerns the justice of conduct within war, after it has begun; and 3) jus post bellum, which concerns the justice of peace agreements and the termination phase of war."
Take a look at that site and you'll see the present US action is allowed under "just war", particularly look at teh "jus ad bello" section.
We did and are following the International Laws of War.... whether Boroda approves or not. It may come as a shock to some, but UN approval never was and is not a requirement for a nation-state to go to war.
What we have done is not aggression by the laws of just war and the burden of proof would be on Boroda to write a cogent argument to prove his position. At present, he's merely offering an unsupported opinion.
WRT Chechnya, it is an internal affair of the Russian government. It is a state fighting and killing its own citizens. Hardly the same situation as the US vs Afghanistan. It is perhaps closer to what Iraq did to the Kurds, without the poison gas.
Smoking something too much? Keep your windows open Boroda.... you don't want to OD yourself. :D
-
"WRT Chechnya, it is an internal affair of the Russian government. It is a state fighting and killing its own citizens. Hardly the same situation as the US vs Afghanistan. It is perhaps closer to what Iraq did to the Kurds, without the poison gas"
Huh?..While I would hate to defend anything Boroda posts, you seems to forget the several terrorist attacks in Moscow, carried out by Chechen terrorist, prior to the Russian invasion in Chechnya.
It was on top of the news here in London, anyway.
Daff
[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: Daff ]
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
BTW, I still expect any proof that Osama is guilty in Sep. 11 tragedy. Every day I feel more and more like US bombs the wrong place.
Speaking from 20 years as Airport Police and Airport Fire Fighter...Plus, over 50 Courtroom testimonies...
...Proof is for the CourtRoom. You never revile your evidence before a trial. That would be stupid! Don't matter if just an infraction of the law or a capital offence.
BTW: He will get a fair Trial if he asks for it now. Much more fair that in most countries.
Never lay your cards on the table before your hand is played.
-
BTW, I still expect any proof that Osama is guilty in Sep. 11 tragedy. Every day I feel more and more like US bombs the wrong place.
oh.. you mean other than him coming on TV and taking responsibility and threatening that it will happen again if the US doesent leave..
yea, i didnt believe him either, what would he know anyway :rolleyes:
Furthermore, the Setp11 incident was an attack on the US, it was a threat to the other NATO countries, and a few of them lost people... but it makes sense that the US wants to do the majority of the asskicking. wouldent you??
sure thats not very diplomatic, but hell, its human nature.. you kicke me, im gonna wanna kick you.. not hear someone else kicked you for me...
[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: Wobble ]
-
the u.n. is a great idea in theory - someday when(if) we evolve and stop playing with guns, beating our chests, and mumbling to invisible dieties, the idea of a world government may seem intuitive.
of course the current model of distributing resources and maintaining international rule of law is so darn successful! so long as you are a talented warlord or superpower/pawn of superpower of course...
the u.n. is a promising move in the direction of real equality and justice, but it is very neutered and inferior in it's current incarnation. they are little more than a softly spoken opinion these days.
-
Daff, I'll try to be more clear.
The US v Afghanistan conflict is based on a nation-state (Afghanistan) harboring/aiding/supporting a force which successfully executed act of war against another nation-state. External aggression, in other words.
Ten years ago the republic of Chechnya declared its independence from the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation.
A completely different situation, isn't it? Here you have a Republic in secession from the Federation to which it belongs. So, when terrorists strike (or an act of war is executed), it is Internal not External aggression.
I believe this is a significant difference; Internal vs External.
Further, this from the Council of Europe:
http://stars.coe.fr/ta/TA00/EREC1444.HTM (http://stars.coe.fr/ta/TA00/EREC1444.HTM)
As a member of the Council of Europe, the Russian Federation is obliged to ensure respect of the European Convention on Human Rights as well as the rule of law and democratic principles on the whole of its territory, including Chechnya.
The Assembly recognises the right of the Russian Federation to preserve its territorial integrity, to fight terrorism and crime and to protect its population, including the population of Chechnya and neighbouring republics and regions, from terrorist attacks and acts of banditism. The Assembly confirms its strong condemnation of all acts of terrorism, kidnappings, public executions and human rights violations committed in Chechnya.
Nevertheless, it stresses that the means used to achieve such goals must be in accordance with the international commitments of the Russian Federation and must exclude, in particular, indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force affecting the civilian population.
The Assembly condemns, as totally unacceptable, the current conduct of military operations in Chechnya with its tragic consequences for large numbers of the civil population of this republic. As a result of this indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force, innocent non-combatants in Chechnya are suffering most serious violations of such fundamental human rights as the right to life, the right to liberty and the right to security.
The Russian Federation is thus found to be violating some of her most important obligations under both the European Convention on Human Rights and international humanitarian law, as well as the commitments she entered into upon accession to the Council of Europe.
Note: An overview of the Council of Europe
http://www.coe.int/portal.asp?strScreenType=100&L=E&M =$t/1-1-1-1//portal.asp?L=E&M=$t/1-0-2-2/02/EMB,1,0,2,2,Overview.stm (http://www.coe.int/portal.asp?strScreenType=100&L=E&M=$t/1-1-1-1//portal.asp?L=E&M=$t/1-0-2-2/02/EMB,1,0,2,2,Overview.stm)
A statute built on human rights
Any European state can become a member of the Council of Europe provided it accepts the principle of the rule of law and guarantees human rights and fundamental freedoms to everyone under its jurisdiction.
Aims
The Council of Europe is an intergovernmental organisation which aims:
to protect human rights, pluralist democracy and the rule of law;
to promote awareness and encourage the development of Europe’s cultural identity and diversity ;
to seek solutions to problems facing European society (discrimination against minorities, xenophobia, intolerance, environmental protection, human cloning, Aids, drugs, organised crime, etc.);
to help consolidate democratic stability in Europe by backing political, legislative and constitutional reform.
The Council of Europe should not be confused with the European Union. The two organisations are quite distinct. The 15 European Union states, however, are all members of the Council of Europe.
[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]
-
The USA does not need to be handcuffed by the UN rules. We were attacked and now we fight back. NATO is far stronger and has far more clout then the UN does. Besides the US is growing tired of the UN just look at the amount of back dues we owe already. The US needs no ones permission to defend its self. :cool:
-
A review of the US Constitution does not turn up any exclusion to this nations right to declare and wage war on either an individual, corporation or nation.
Frankly, international law clearly indicates we can wage war over this, none of our own laws preclude it, and historical precedent for a nation to declare hostilities or wage 'war' on individuals and companys is documented.
It would seem it wouldn't matter a whit anyway though. We're gonna do it; an thats THAT.
Dowding, you become dangerous because you ask questions. Most of the others simply let Big Brother whistle in their ears.
Nice affinity you have for the subtle, Boroda. While you kick dirt in the Amercian Governments face for being 'Big Brother' we here in the US, it's lawful voting citizens and therefor by association our governments "Little Brothers"...
..might wish to remind you that our Big Brother beat the livin toejam outta yer Big Brother well enough, long enough and thouroughly enough to finally give your disenfranchised downtrodden and exploited comrade brothers, (and you) a chance to have a fediddlein voice, McDonalds and the Stock Market.
Just in case our history texts don't match. ;)
-
UN back dues?? WHAT back dues?? We don't owe the freeloadin UN jack sh*t. Tell the 'member states' to cough up the cash they still owe US for the war debt first.
And while we're at it, if the delegate bums paid their NYC parking tickets, registration and insurance we could feed afghanistanm for 10 years on the proceeds.
-
Actually Hang it's not "war debt" per se. The UN owes the US far more than the US owes the UN... by a large multiple... for loans to cover "peacekeeping operations" and "humanitarian aid" as I recall.
I researched all that for Dowding once before. It's on the BBS somewhere.
-
This Council of Europe thing is all nice and neat, but it doesn't address the fact that, like Afghanistan, Chechnya is a country run by Islamic extremist terrorists. And unfortunately all the evidence to prove this is primarily Russian.
-
Originally posted by leonid:
This Council of Europe thing is all nice and neat, but it doesn't address the fact that, like Afghanistan, Chechnya is a country run by Islamic extremist terrorists. And unfortunately all the evidence to prove this is primarily Russian.
No, the COE doesn't address that.
The fact that Chechnya may or may not be controlled by Islamic extremists is also immaterial to the question Daff asked, which started this line of discussion.
The US v Afghanistan (Nation-state v Nation-state) is an EXTERNAL conflict because one of these Nation-states "sponsored" an act of war against the other.
The Russian Federation V the rebellious Republic of Chechnya is an INTERNAL conflict because the Federation refuses to allow the Republic to secede. The act of secession is the issue, not the politics or religion of those running the Republic. Had the Islamic extremists NOT tried to secede, would the "Chechen war" have occurred? No, because it would have been an Internal police matter to round up the terrorists, not an all out war. Secession makes the difference.
No outside Nation-State or the UN is going to intervene militarily on behalf of Chechnya. That would rightfully be considered jus ad bellum by the Russian Federation.
Hope that clears that up.
As for the Council of Europe, it's in there to provide a proper context for Boroda's remarks that:
".... Nevertheless - our American friends don't even bother to legalise their agression (and de facto it is an agression)...I don't think that key decisions should be left for the people who have obvious problems with logics and common sence. Sometimes it seems to me that US authorities smoke something too much."
Aggression? LOL. His American friends can't hold a candle to his own government when it comes to aggression.
Problems with logics and common sense? LOL AGAIN. His American friends aren't the ones being hoist on a world petard by the COE and Human Rights Watch for incredible brutality.
Put this in perspective: The COE, of which the Russian Federation is a member, charges the Russian Federation as follows:
"The Assembly condemns, as totally unacceptable, the current conduct of military operations in Chechnya with its tragic consequences for large numbers of the civil population of this republic. As a result of this indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force, innocent non-combatants in Chechnya are suffering most serious violations of such fundamental human rights as the right to life, the right to liberty and the right to security.
Human Rights Watch? Read this whole article and tell me what you think.
http://www.hrw.org/wr2k1/europe/russian.html (http://www.hrw.org/wr2k1/europe/russian.html)
"The year was dominated by Russia's brutal war in Chechnya and fears of an impending crackdown on civil and political rights. Russian soldiers and police committed war crimes and other serious violations of the rules of human rights and humanitarian law in Chechnya....
...After moving into villages and towns left by rebel fighters, Russian forces carried out "mopping up" operations. These operations, meant to check for remaining rebels, frequently turned into rampages during which soldiers and riot police looted and torched homes, detained civilians at random, and raped women. Just three such operations, in Alkhan Yurt, and in the Novye Aldy and Staropromyslovskii districts of Grozny, resulted in the confirmed summary executions of more than 130 civilians. Human Rights Watch received over one hundred more allegations of summary executions, many of which it was unable to verify."
And that's a small % of what they have to say.
How's it going in total?
http://chechnya.jamestown.org/project.htm (http://chechnya.jamestown.org/project.htm)
"The war is also one of the great human tragedies of the post-Communist world. Deaths directly attributable to the fighting may approach 50,000, most of them civilians. Approximately 170,000 Chechens are refugees in camps in Ingushetia, where conditions are life-threatening. An equal or greater number are homeless "internally displaced persons" within Chechnya, and thousands more have fled to Dagestan. Of the nearly 300,000 ethnic Russians in Chechnya in 1991, fewer than 10,000 remain."
All that being said, I'm glad the Russian Federation is "aboard" in the US war against Afghanistan.
I'm hoping this reported friendship between Putin and Bush has some substance and that progress in the national relationship can be made. It even looks like the ABM thing that was going to be the next "end of the world" is going to be resolved; Putin himself intimated as much.
But to take a lashing from Boroda about the US "usually spit at any laws", "defacto it is an aggression" and "obvious problems with logics and common sence"?
No, I don't THINK so. Not with so much truly dirty laundry in his own basket.
[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]
-
Boroda:
I hate communism because it ruined my old country (Jugoslavija) and made my people lazy, dishonest and fearful. Communism is the greatest lie and greatest evil of all time. It has destroyed, both literally and figurativly more lives in the past century than anything else.
I want all people who who support any form of communism, and that includes their studmuffingot leftist socialist pinko anti-capitalist lackeys to eat toejam and die.
No more of your lies!
Dont even go mentioning propaganda to me!
-
Originally posted by Toad:
Yet noone wants to step up and say "We'll go and help nation build".
For what it's worth, Canada, once again, has already commited to peace keeping duties in Afganistan. I've said it before and I'll say it again. 'Peace keeping' was an idea brought to the UN by on of our Prime Ministers, Lester B Pearson. Canada has been committed to the idea ever since. An we have logged more man hours then any other nation doing it. And we have lost military personal performing these duties. I hope that no one on this board would show any disrespect, to the men and women who risk their lives trying thier best to bring peace to our world.
-
I respect more U.N peace keeping forces than cowboys messing around guns blazing.
You need more guts to stand between two armed idiot than to be one yourself.
-
Staga lets hope the UN stay's out of the way on this one. That or send lots of body bags.
-
Yeah, Staga, I've been waiting to hear about the Finns volunteering for Peacekeeping Duties in Afghanistan.
A good choice.
-
Man.
Never have I seen such a bunch of egoistic arrogant loudmouth amazinhunks.
You guys have pissed me off.
Defending the US, sure, you'll do that. All while pissing on the soldiers on the ground of the UN.
Dudes, lemme break this one for ya softly: I have *friends*, people I've diddlyin' grown *up* with, go to a foreign nation to defend peace, and come back wrecked. Some mentally, and some with severe physical injuries.
And you guys have the nerve to piss on them! You guys pride yourself in protecting your own nation, yet do not have the stomach, integrity, guts or courage to acknowledge that there are others out there, making much greater sacrifices.
These young men risk their lives not for their own sake, not for the sake of their country, not for the sake of their countrymen - but for the sake of HUMANS.
And you have the gall to piss on them.
Oh diddly this. This pisses me off. I cannot believe how disappointed I am right now :(
-
Indian, let's put it this way: a policeman does not need to be handcuffed by the laws when he thinks he meets criminal.
Toad. Chechen war is a real tragedy, but all the "human rights watchers" simply forget about ethnic Russians in Chechnya. They also forget that the people whom they call "freedom fighters" are bandits who take maternity houses as hostages, blow up apartment houses full of sleeping innocent people and have fun torturing people, with some journalists from HRW gang videotaping it, saying they "want to make this war more touching".
Current "caucasian war" was not started by Russians. After that bloody surrender in 1996 Chechens were left alone. Noone prevented them from living according to medieval Shariat laws, kidnapping people and slavery. But in Summer, 1999, they invaded Dagestan under the flag of "Jihad", attacking local Moslims. After Russian army kecked them away with the help from local Dagestanian population (that is really unhappy to have such "neighbours") - they started terror acts in Russia...
HRW and other friends of that gangsters don't remember that Chechens kidnapped and simply slaughtered foreigners from Red Cross and other charity organisations. They blame Russians for it. While Chechens like foreign hostages: they usually can pay much more then Russians or Caucasians...
So, Toad, all this rhethorics is a roadkill, invented by a bunch of moral freaks.
After what mr. Powell said about "negotiations with rebels", I can assume that if US will catch Osama - it will be useless to ask you guys help us catch Basayev and other murderers. :(
Grunherz, I always thought that it were stupid nationalistic politicians who ruined your country. And if you call Yugoslavia "communist" country - I wish you could live a few months in USSR. You lived in paradise compared to us. AFAIR - you are from Croatia. Did you leave your country after the "final solution of Serbian problem" in Srpska Krajna?.. I just wonder how this great military operation was covered in Croatian media.
Sorry for personal attack, but if you look at me as at Russian who "supports communists" - then don't be offended when I look at you as at Croat who plays fascist pilot.
Now - back to the UN issue. My point is that such operations must be backed up by UN or any other international organisations as much as poossible. I don't want some trigger-happy politician sending people to death to spoil all the positive effects of the forming union. We have seen enough of political stupidity in the last century, let's not repeat the mistakes.
-
Another link on Chechen problem. Take a look, it is worth it:
www.kavkaz.org (http://www.kavkaz.org)
This brilliant site is stationed in the US. Anyone who believes information from it - please send flowers to kavkaz.org domain registrant:
Movladi Udug, 10 Bird Lane, Orlando, FL 32860 US
-
Santa, I don't think anyone "pissed" on UN peacekeepers.
They do a good job.. when they go.
And that's the point, I think. Getting the UN to actually DO anything is nearly impossible.
My particular point has been stated before.
It's obvious to all that the Taliban government of Afghanistan sux in the human rights area, particularly for women.
They're getting a new government because the Taliban aided and abetted an attack on the US.
So, they need help. This is indeed a function for which the UN is best suited.
We'll need peacekeeper "brains". I personally think the Scandanavian countries are best suited. Long history of good human rights in their government, no major involvement in any conflicts with Islam that have built up "hate". Repected as "neutrals".
We'll need peacekeeper "muscle" because the sniping, shooting and problems will go on until the new government gets established. Best forces for muscle have to come from Islamic states. The only folks that can discipline Muslims are Muslims. Otherwise, it's the old whine about the "infidels keeping the Muslim man DOWN."
The US? We're best suited to kick the living doo-dah out of the Taliban. We're going to do that, however long it takes.
Face it; we're crappy peacemakers because we're the ones that have been the "muscle" for so long. Right or wrong, people don't like you even if you made them do the "right thing" if you had to use force on them. Think the Balkans are going to have warm fuzzies for the US? I don't... but it's relatively peaceful there now and they have a little hope that their kids will grow up.
But we can't make the peace in Afghanistan. It'll never work.
Now I don't think I'm the most brilliant world political observer, so these basic thoughts must have occurred to some at the UN.
So, where's the action? We're holding back the war waiting for the politicians to catch up. Time to MOVE.
No disrespect to the actual men that do "peacekeeping" duties at all. They do good work.
-
"a policeman does not need to be handcuffed by the laws when he thinks he meets criminal."
Boroda, right there is your problem.
I think you're going to find most of the civilized world doesn't agree with that statement.
-
StSanta wrote:
Man.
Never have I seen such a bunch of egoistic arrogant loudmouth amazinhunks.
You guys have pissed me off.
Defending the US, sure, you'll do that. All while pissing on the soldiers on the ground of the UN.
------------------------------------------
I must have missed this, I cant find any reference to your post that people are pissing on UN soldiers. Unless pissing on the UN is the same as pissing on the UN soldiers.
BTW you do know that America has absolutely no people in high ranking position in the UN? The UN recently thought it was funny to disrespect the US by voting them off two important issue committees (human rights and drug trade) and replacing them with known violators of those topics?
It doesn't bother them to continue to ask the USA for more and more money, after all we are the largest single financer of the UN by far. Hell even when we were behind on dues and had to listen to the UN squeak and moan about it we were still the single largest contributor. Maybe we should get 1 vote per state like the EU has 1 vote per member. Please excuse our arrogance for wanting some control over how OUR money is spent or our troops are used.
-
The UN is a joke and does nothing but cost lives. The UN sat back at watched as how many muslims were slaughtered in Bosnia? How many were hacked to death with machette's in Africa while the UN was "worried" about Malosovich.
They kicked us off the human rights commitee, what a joke to see who they let on in our place. They let Syria into the freaking security councel just a week or two after the WTC attack. SYRIA?!?!?!!?!?!?! One of the biggest harborers of terrorists in the world.
I fully expect the UN to throw a wrench in the gears of this war, at the cost of many lives im sure. I'm suprised they haven't already. It wouldn't suprise me if this thing turned into a NATO vs. UN war.
Santa,
This is to the political burocracy that is the UN, not to any troops that serve thier countries through the UN. They'd be better off serving NATO in my opinion, but I'm sure they haven't got much choice on where they get stationed. But the burocratic body that they have to serve just plain sucks. If I were in the military and got assigned to the UN i'd do what ever I had to not to serve under that blue helmet, even if it ment a dishonerable discharge.
They don't stand for freedom or liberty....
-
...Real nice move Dowding, unfortunately your the one who looks bad. The guy obviously edited that out for a reason, most likely a cordial reason. This is proof positive that your here for nothing more than argument..or just to piss off Americans.
Oh please, you are joking right?!!
You want to know why he edited it out? Perhaps because it made him look like a complete idiot. Cordial reason? My arse.
He didn't even have the guts to leave it in there.
Or perhaps you believe I should just allow myself to be called a 'commie studmuffingot bastard'? Well, if you read the thread you'll find I let the insult pass, but the guy acted like an even bigger fool and edited it out.
And you have the gall to blame me for his comments?
Proof positive? I like a discussion/debate - I've got to ask what are you doing here if that is so abhorrant to your sensibilities?
[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]
-
Toad, sorry, another probable misunderstanding. Again, and slowly: I thought that Indian's phrase about "handcuffing by the UN regulations" is ridiculous just as the phrase you quoted.
Countries have to obey international laws and conventions, just like people in the street. In current terms US anti-terrorist actions CAN be defined as "agression". I have no doubt that certain groups or countries WILL use this term. Not very smart to leave such possibilities. And it looks exactly like US keeps it's habbit of doing whatever they want, without any attention to international laws. Laws are for loosers (other countries). :(
-
I fully agree Boroda Jugoslavija was a relative paradise compared to other communist nations, in fact I would say it was an extremly comfortable lifestlye. However, it came at a cost and it was unsustainable. This cost came as a result of attitudes developed during the communist era. Take for example our local hotel. In the past they would simply get government food shipments every summer and all was well. Now they can barely run the place when the local managers have to have responsibilty for it all. Its little practical things like that make me hate communism, how it strips real responsibility and accountability from individuals. Even worse is the whoopee black market that had to pop up in every communist country because of the governments stupid economic policies and restricions.
And yes I agree Jugoslavija was an easy Communist country as Tito was pretty moderate in his Communism and steered a neat course between the East and West. If I hate communiosm from there I cant imagine how much Id hate a more representative iediotic hardline communism elesewhere.
As for me being a Croat who plays as a fascist pilot, well.... All I can say to that is if I started playing AH/sims three or four years ago I would have been a Croat who playes a USN/Marines Corsair pilot, as the F4U was and still is one of my favorite RL fighters.
As for operation "Oluja" we did what was neccesary to free our territory and the operational plan was coordinated and approved by our US Army allies and advisors.
I left, fortunatly, just as the war started. But my mother was nearly decapitaded by a mortar and several of my uncles in Vukovar were "never" seen again after being taken prisoner by Serbian forces who overrran the Hospital. I dont hate serbs or anytinhg, my cousin is Serbian , I do hate the war and goodamn diddlying communist BS that led to it. whoopee communist "Bratstvo i Jedinstvo" that swept over underlaying ethnic tensions for decades.
As for your comments dowding I edited the post very quickly after I put it up because I wrote it in an exterme monent of anger and found it unnaceptable after I calmed down. Take that as you wish.
-
Borada...HELLLOOOO.... you still flying that red flag man? You sound like your smoking crack...the cheap stuff at that.
FACT: THE MAJORITY of the WORLD's NATIONS have okayed the U.S's response. DO you really think that NATO would endorse a gunslinger action that lacked credence?
Do you think that so many nations...INCLUDING your nation would lend support to its former foe w/out reason?
xBAT
-
Grunherz, your POW on "communism" is reasonable and honest. Unlike many people who declare "crusade against communism" you know what you are speaking about. Many people call Jugoslavija "communist county", but don't know, for example, about what kind of regime was in Albania at the same time.
As for Srpska Krajna - what your army have done there is almost exactly what Soviet army have done in Chechnya in Feb, 1944. Now it is called a "horrible crime of Stalin's regime". But the way you describe it almost makes me sick... You guys have a lot of credit from Western countries if you can afford such explainations. You definetly are more equal...
Civil war in Jugoslavja (I use different spelling, in Russian it is spelled Югославия ;) was a stupid nightmare for us. Your country was an ideal for many Russians, many people wished we could have this kind of soft socialism, and we were literally stunned when we saw this war in 1991... Maybe it was the main reason that we didn't have civil war here: even the stupidest politicians saw what can happen. Our countries suffered from the same set of national problems, left from post-WWI times.
Batdog, the only Red flag that I will wave will be the Banner of Victory, that doesn't associate with what you call communism for me. Again, now in caps: I SUPPORT THE ANTI-TERRORIST OPERATION. But some things leave me nervous. Someone's mistake can send all the political/ideological benefits of the current union down the drain.
-
Enough said on the matter, Grunherz. Don't call me a communist or a studmuffingot again, please - I'm neither. It simply makes you look like a complete moron, which, going by your last few posts, would be doing you an injustice.
[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]
-
There can be no action w/out risk. You have to see if the action is worth the risk. Odds are only hindsight will tell you one way or the other.
xBAT
-
I guess im uncomfortable with a strong/controlling UN role in this because of my experiences of watching the UN in our civil war. They just strike me as indecisive, incompetant and impotent. Remember Srebrenica? This UN "safe area" was easily overrun by a serb army while the armed dutch UN bluehelmets stood by doing nothing as the serbs put all men and boys on busses, who were then never seen alive again. I dont see the UN as being decisive or willing to make real sacrifices that will be neccesary. This is not a punitive action this must be treated as a real war, no different than WW2 or anything else. I just dont see the UN being tough or united enough for such a thing. I dont mean to sound callous or harsh but frankly the UN seems more interested in feeding the Taliban than killing it. Does anyone really think the Taliban will just let the UN give food to people now, and not take it for themselves. If you have been following the news lately you see China in particular pushing for a stronger UN role. Our current cozyness with China notwithstanding I still dont honestly belive that China's interests are fully supportive of ours, remember the truly bizzare EP3 incident last year?
Plus honestly what would the UN do? Put sanctions on the Taliban? What could they take away?
This has to be an American thing with all the real support we can get. If anyone disagrees well thats honestly their decision to make.
-
nice quote which I feel is completely appropriate.--
Came across this short passage by John Stewart Mill, which I think is pretty apropos:
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral...feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-
Gentlemen.
The UN is the whole organisation, from the foot soldier to Koffi Annan.
The job as a UN soldier is tough - stationed away from your loved ones, in hostile territory, with very ambigious orders. They're peace *keepers*, not peace *makers*. This is an important differentiation to make.
Aye, the organisation has had major failures - as has the US military. But it has also had many successes - UN troops have been deplyed in many countries and helped preserve a fragile peace.
When you're saying that the UN is worthless, you're also saying that the job done by the soldier on the ground is worthless. It isn't. You're quite right - it's an inefficient machine with too many cooks - but there can be no other way. Pissed because you got voted off? Welcome to a democratic organisation. My personal belief is this happened because of the US refusal to pay what it owns the UN in financial terms, but that's just my take on the back stabbing politics that go on behind the scene.
Just like you elevate yourselves and your armed forces from that sorta Washington thing, I do. These are my pals who've come home with things they'll have to live with forever - in some cases they haven't come home at all. Fighting for a people they do not know, for a people they have no alliance with. For people with such different cultural values that they're almost incompatible.
The UN piss me off immensely too - the Srebenica disaster is a good example. The Balkans in general - I've heard a good deal of stories of how Danish peace keepers have been ordered to hold fire, despite seeing atrocities and having the firepower to stop it.
Still, my heart goes out to the men and women who have the courage to don a blue hat. When I see a UN soldier, I see s atriving for peace, I see hope for human kind - and, as an atheist, I can assure you that that isn't plentiful.
Don't diss the blue helmet, and I won't diss your military. Critizise it all you want, but don't diss it.
<out>
-
Santa..
I sympathize with your strong feelings regarding the UN.. sadly; time and again, the UN has left it's peacekeepers with a mission that cannot be accomplised with the forces allocated to it. Without proper air and armor support, without competent on the scene leadership and with an incredible ROE that is simply not implementable it's a recipie for disaster... for the troops on that noble cause, and for the folks they are supposed to be protecting.
You'll find most US soldiers exceptionally anti-UN because the UN has a long history of abandoning its mission, and its troops, in the field.
A better discussion might be "What can the member nations do to make the UN's Security Council less of a laughing stock to the worlds Criminal Regimes?"
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
Pissed because you got voted off? Welcome to a democratic organisation. My personal belief is this happened because of the US refusal to pay what it owns the UN in financial terms, but that's just my take on the back stabbing politics that go on behind the scene.
<out>
The vote wasn't the thing that got us (me) pissed. It was the countries that took our place. I can't remember the list right now, but it was unimaginable to me that any of them would be on the human rights commitee. What good is an organization if all the evil countries can just out vote the good ones?
I've got lot's of respect for what the soldiers do. They go protect the weak from evil tyrants, that's a good thing. It's just that I and many here in the USA believe that the UN is one of the biggest tyrants of them all. Sure some good has been done, but from what I can remember it was NATO countries doing all the good.
Now if the UN is pissed because the US suposedly ows it money. hmmm what about all the war debts to the USA? How bout all the TRILLIONS of dollars we have forked out over the past 60 yrs around the world? You do know that American citizens work for that money right? Some actually slave for it. For what? to be hated? To have people fly planes into our building and kill our people? From my stand point that makes me want to say diddly the world. Maybe the USA should just sit on the sidelines for the next 1/2 a century and watch the world kill itself or starve to death. Thank God we dont'....
Nothing personal to you santa :) not trying to start a fight. I hope you get the point that I respect the soldiers, just not the organization....
-
Santa:
I dont think highly of the UN soldiers because I dont belive they give a damn to voluntarily risk their lives and actually try defending the people. Im sure you have heard what happend in Srebrenica. The fully armed Dutch bluehelmets just stood by as a Serb army walked into the "safe area", made a selection and took the men/boys away in busses. That makes me distrust the UN soldier, I will forever distrust their value and wilingness to sacrifice their lives in defense of others untill I see it. They have mostly proved useless in africa as well. What should be said of the French or Belgian UN people who just ran away and let 1000s of poeople get slaughtered in the walled UN compound during the Rwanda genocide. Or how about Sierra Leone where 500 UN bluehelmets were taken as hostages by the attacking side. How useless were they? It was only after Nigerian army and South African mercs came in that any peace was restored.
The UN soldier, in my opinion, is nothing but a fancy international rent-a-cop with no devotion to his work. I will hold this opinion until I see or am shown different.
Plus we all know that when the UN is really serious about somethinbg its always the USA military that actually does the greatest part or at least the most significant/difficult role.
With all due respect to those who disagree, I just dont trust them to do their jobs.
Sorry.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
I want all people who who support any form of communism, and that includes their studmuffingot leftist socialist pinko anti-capitalist lackeys to eat toejam and die.
A difference between an optimist and a pessymist in communism.
An optimist:
If the things keep going the way they do now, pretty soon we'll all have to eat our own toejam.
A pessymist:
Yeah, but ther will be enough for everybody?
[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: mietla ]
-
I dont think highly of the UN soldiers because I dont belive they give a damn to voluntarily risk their lives and actually try defending the people.
The UN soldier, in my opinion, is nothing but a fancy international rent-a-cop with no devotion to his work. I will hold this opinion until I see or am shown different.
You hold the American forces in such a high regard, vehemently defend them when criticized yet pour scorn on those from any other country.
I'm sure British forces just loved watching a bunch of barbarians butcher each other before their eyes knowing they were powerless to do anything about it.
I'm sure they've got some outstanding stories to tell their grand-children.
If criticism has to be levelled at any part of the UN, the last place to aim is the troops on the ground. They do an impossible job in impossible circumstances.
I agree with Santa and hold them in the highest possible regard.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
[QB]With all due respect to those who disagree, I just dont trust them to do their jobs.QB]
That's probably because you just don't know wtf you're talking about.
-
As far as only muslims being able to 'handle; muslims. UN Peacekeepers have had successful missions in Egypt, Cyprus and the Golan Heights.
-
I dont trust them, thats a personal opinion its not a metter of fact.
Prove to me that I dont not trust them....
-
why did the UN bluehelmets at Srebrenica just stand around? Why were they not willing to risk putting up opposition to the serb army who just came into the town? Why did they just stand by and let them make a selection of men/boys? why did they let them take these men away on busses?
BTW if you even hint that the UN guys in Srebrenica didnt know what was to happend to these men you just prove my point of their incompetance.
Whatever the reasons, be they high level political or lack of resolve in the bluehelmets the UN armed forces is just an impotent force that has no real use except as fancy rent-a-cops.
And im not going around prasing the US military, I am however saying the obvious truth. The UN cant do squat in any serious manner and must often call on US Military direct intervention.
Once again, I dont trust UN bluehelmets. And the UN politicans even less.
PS. I have nop hatred for the individual UN person or UN soldier. I just dont trust the "bluehelmets" as an overall force.
-
I propose that all members of NATO shall withdraw from the UN immediatly! Lets saee how well the UN fairs without US money. I mean we pay more than half the dues.
[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Hobodog ]
-
Actually I'm all for moving the whole stinking UN out of the USA to Switzerland.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
I dont trust them, thats a personal opinion its not a metter of fact.
Prove to me that I dont not trust them....
I'm not trying to prove that you don't trust them. I'm saying your opion means crap, because you don't know wtf your talking about and your opion is an uniformed one.
-
'The UN soldier, in my opinion, is nothing but a fancy international rent-a-cop with no devotion to his work. I will hold this opinion until I see or am shown different.
"
your observation says more about yourself and your hatreds then it does about those of us who have served the UN.
-
The UN isnot involved in this cause the US wants it to have a chance to succeed. You might as well include the IOC as the UN.
-
Nothing beats a good ice cream sandwich.
dago
-
Originally posted by Dago:
Nothing beats a good ice cream sandwich.
dago
Except for a nice banana split or a large hot fudge sunday! :)
Mav
-
Its interesting how some of from cushy western european and north american countries who have never needed and asked for help and support from the world world community find the UN bluehelmets all nice and heroic.
Have any of you, like Thrawn, ever had the incompetant UN try to "peacekeep in your country?
-
BTW Thrawn if you are so informed please explain to me what exactly happened to your noble UN bluehelmets in Srebrenica? Do you even know what that refers to?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
That makes me distrust the UN soldier, I will forever distrust their value and wilingness to sacrifice their lives in defense of others untill I see it.
Plus we all know that when the UN is really serious about somethinbg its always the USA military that actually does the greatest part or at least the most significant/difficult role.
With all due respect to those who disagree, I just dont trust them to do their jobs.
Sorry.
East Timor.
Let me first say that I agree with, and support the US action against the Taliban, as does most of my countrymen, and my government, we have ground troops, Naval ships, and some F18s involved.
I have a few mates that served with the UN peace keepers in east Timor, and to say that they were inefectual, or unwilling to risk their personal safety to garuntee that of others, is, quite frankly, wrong....to say nothing of insulting.
East Timor is now a comparatively 'free' democratic nation, I sincerely doubt that that would be true today were it not for the presence of the boys in blue berets.
Without the Aussies, Kiwis, Philipinos etc, the Indonesian Army would have made sure no democratic vote was possible.
A UN operation led by the Australian Army....led so effectively that the 'boss' Peter Cosgrove, was asked by none other than Colin Powell, to lecture the US forces on how he did it.
And as for the 'always the USA military that actually does the greatest part or at least the most significant/difficult role.' I believe that to be entirely false, in fact I doubt there were more than a handfull of US servicemen anywehere near E.T.
Dont get me wrong, Im not 'US bashing', I'm just saying that there are, have been, and will continue to be, very successful 'peace keeping' missions by the UN, that hardly involve the US at all.
Ask the average East Timorise Christian, who can now go about their daily lives without fear of being massacred while they pray, whether or not UN peace keepers are ineffectual.
Ask the kids who now have schools, playgrounds, running water and hospitals.
What about the mine clearance teams, UN sponsored, Australian and NZ manned, that have been working in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam for the last 20 odd years, cleaning up the mines left there by a war the world wants to forget? Innefectual? I wouldnt say so....someone other than US GIs getting their hands dirty and risking their lives?? your kidding me.
C'mon guys, there is a whole world out there, and just because CNN doesnt cover it all day, doesnt mean it isnt happening.
<S> Blue
once again, this is not a 'US bash', merely pointing out that in some cases, the UN, and troops from nations outside the US, are the only hope some people have for living a 'normal stable life'
[ 10-23-2001: Message edited by: Bluedog ]
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Its interesting how some of from cushy western european and north american countries who have never needed and asked for help and support from the world world community find the UN bluehelmets all nice and heroic.
Have any of you, like Thrawn, ever had the incompetant UN try to "peacekeep in your country?
No gh. we try to keep the genocide and racial hatred out of our countries by being reasonable law abiding tollerant people. We generally dont try to blame the people that help us. Typical that you blame the UN for attrocities they only wanted to stop. And that Canadian soldiers died to prevent.
Have you ever tried to Peace Keep yourself?
Projecting your self loathing at your inablility to protect your ethnic group/kill the ethnic group you hate onto the UN that was their to help is pretty pathetic. How many lives did the UN save in the balkans...I guess we will never know. But you evidently like to focus on some that they didnt save. Is your brain half emtpy or half full.
-
I didnt blame them for Srebrenica. BTW Im Croatian and Srebrenica was a Bosnian Muslim Town, so its not some thing where I distrust the UN based on racist views like you try to paint me in (shame on you for that). I am angry at the because they did nothing. They did nothing and watched men/boys packed into cattle cars, errr busses, and be driven off never to bee seen again.
As Im sure you dont know this Srebrenica was designated a UN "SAFE AREA" the UN coward bastards actually encouraged refugess to come into this town promising to protect anyone from the serb army. But when the serbs came into the town the UN bluehelmet cowards just stood aside doing nothing. Well not actually nothing, when the UN bluehelmet cowards pissed their pants and began running away in their APCs they ran over women and children who were packed on the roadside.
Explain that you civilized law abiding whatever...
And you know what we in the former Yugoslavia got along just fine ethnically for the most part. As me many of my cousins are serbs, my best friend was a bosnian muslim, some of my neighbors were serbs and we got along fine. In every day life life we got along fine. There was however a bag of old ethnic disputes that were covered up by the communists. This glossing over of real issues by the communists later led to the explosion and is one of the many reasons I hate communism in all its forms.
So dont comment on my country when you dont know anything about it.
Now to your comment about defending your country. Did you know that the UN actually restricted Croatia from taking back 33% of our territory. Yes as late as 1995 33% of Croatia was occupied by serb forces, and there was no UN response to our pleas. In fact they were against us taking our land back. Thankfully in 1995 we, with USA help, joined up with the Bosnians and retook our lands both in Bosnia and Croatia. This combined military, not UN coward bluhelmet action, is what forced Milosevic into negotiations for the famouus Dayton Peace accords, which then ended the war.
The UN bluhelmet cowards are simply glorified rent-a-cops, all they can do is guard food warehouses and sometimes not even that....
-
BTW
Thanks to all Americans and especially any military personell for helping my old country Croatia in 1995. And as an American today I truly love this nation, and hope we win this war in a fine fashion, questinable UN help or no!
-
Guys..the PROBLEM w/the UN peace Keepers are not the indiv troops. The Canadians have a damn fine miltary, as do most of the european participants in such actions. The PROBLEM IS THE USELESS LEADERSHIP of the UN. They string the "Peace Keepers" with so many restrictions they are ineffective.
The UN as a force is pretty much a waste. Its a good place to spout rhetoric and to perhaps accomplish some political goals but as a miltary force it typicaly fails dismly over and over...
xBAT
[ 10-23-2001: Message edited by: batdog ]
-
"Did you know that the UN actually restricted Croatia from taking back 33% of our territory."
If they are such cowards how did they stop you.
One of the things that repeatedly crop up in my talks with buddies that served in the balkans and from memoires is that the peace keepers took too long to learn that the croats were as bad or worse then the serbs.
Looking at your foaming bable is a good testament to that. You seem to respect the butchers that perpetrated the crimes but revile the soldiers that tried to restrict it.
I aggree with you though GH. would have been far better to do nothing an let the animals consume each other. If we cant go in with overwhelming force and totaly occupy the country and solve all its problems then its better to stay out. Not worth it to save and feed thousands if we cant save em all.
-
Grunherz, I am really surprised to hear such things.
Do you really think that Srpska Krajna was "occupied"!?
In this case - I understand why you hate UN so much.
After this - all your anti-UN sententions sound like fairy-tales.
I am really sorry that UN sanctions prevented us from sending some SAMs to Serbia in 1999. But your honorable American "allies" never pay attention to minior issues like UN decisions, and almost openly armed KLA.
-
Pongo dont call people in that country animals thats diddlying sick. The war wasnt some caricature of violence and murder you want to see it as. Its really sad that you have to put it that way, really sad.
And to be honest nobody in that conflict was either a good guy or bad guy at all times. Its a fact that the serbs were the agressors in both Bosnia and Croatia. Its also a fact that Croatia tried to be an agressor against Bosnia, which was really sad. But in the end wqe realized it was senseless to fight each other and was best to fight the common agressor.
As for the UN.....
The UN put lots of political pressure on Croatia and Bosnia not to take back our lands.
This ended in July 11 1995. On this day a serb army walked into the UN "SAFE AREA" of Srebrenica and murdered 8,000 men/boys just as the UN bluehelmet cowards let them.
At that point the UN realized they were useless, immediatly asked for USA Military help. The US Air Force started bombing the serbs and helped our Croatian Military plan operation Oluja which took back the land in Croatia, then moved into Bosnia and helped our allies clear their territory as well in a combined action.
Even the UN admitted it was useless in Bosnia...
Anyway Pongo what do your coward bluhelmet friends tell you of srebrenica......
-
Boroda:
First of all Srpska Krajina:
I consider it to be an occupiation by foreign forces because the srbs there wanted to be be a part of sebia. They immediatly kicked out all the croats and muslims in the area. They put up roadblocks and cut rail lines.
Plus Im sure you know that great big parts of Slavonija in northeastern Croatia were occupied up until even after the 1995 developments.
-
You wanted to send SAMS to Serbia in 1999 kill American airmen???
diddly YOU amazinhunk
GO DIE BY A CHECHEN TERRORIST BLOWING UP YOUR FILTHY COMMUNIST ERA APARTMENT HOUSE
diddly YOU PIECE OF toejam
-
Thank you, my neo-American firend.
It's much easier to kill helpless innocent people who's only guilt is that their homes are in the wrong place, especially with the help of Big Brother who doesn't give a damn about morale and international laws.
Ok, the truth is finaly revealed: our righteous UN-hater is just another little mean nazi.
-
And please, next time you want to say something like you posted above personaly to me - you can use your native language, I undesrtand Serbian good enough.
-
Gh: Walk away and take a break. Cool down.
Ping
-
The Croats were as bad as the Bosnian Muslims who were as bad as the Bosnian Serbs. All committed atrocities at some time in the war. Elements of their respective armed forces acted like animals; frankly, they do not deserve to be upright and breathing.
You wrote:
The US Air Force started bombing the serbs and helped our Croatian Military plan operation Oluja which took back the land in Croatia, then moved into Bosnia and helped our allies clear their territory as well in a combined action.
Firstly, I believe British forces were involved in that action.
Secondly, you paint a convenient picture of the Croats and Bosnians in happy alliance in a glorious struggle against the evil Serbs.
From an article discussing the UN backed War Crimes Tribunbal currently putting away a few monsters:
"A Bosnian Croat, Drazen Erdemovic, was sentenced in 1996 to 10 years after admitting being involved in the Srebrenica massacre."
"The court, which cannot impose the death penalty, has no maximum sentence for crimes against humanity. Its harshest sentence yet was given to a Bosnian Croat general, Timohir Blaskic: 45 years for crimes against humanity."
"The court said Dario Kordic, a leader of the nationalist Croatian Democratic Union and of the Croatian Defense Council, helped plan and organize a campaign to drive Muslims from an area the Croats wanted to join to the newly created state of Croatia. Kordic, 40, was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment."
"The tribunal also convicted Mario Cerkez, 41, a Croat military commander, of war crimes in leading attacks against Muslim villages during the Bosnian war in 1993-94. He received a 15-year sentence."
"The worst of the massacres was in Ahmici on April 16, 1993, when Croatian militiamen stormed into Muslim homes. Entire families were gunned down and houses set ablaze. Survivors of the bullets were burned alive.
Before the attack, 356 Muslims and 87 Croats lived in the village. Immediately afterward, no Muslims remained. Croat homes were left untouched."
You repeatedly call my countrymen cowards for carrying out their national duties. Well, that's roadkill. But I 'll let that pass because I can almost taste the irony.
I'd rather have a few 'cowards' in Great Britain, than the 'tigers' your country produced (see above).
I ask you this - which catergory would you prefer to count as countrymen?
[ 10-23-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]
-
Hey Borada..those the same SAMS you sold to Iraq...rotfl. Yea... the fear could be seen in our eyes then... hey how about those tactics you trained them there Iraqies in..oh..mass surrender. Yep..them t72's where fierce... heh. I'm sorry but those SAMS would of been more cannon fodder.
As far as the US and the UN are concerned I think its time for you to STFU moron. Lets see...how many of your troops have died in UN actions? Huh...? Oh yea... not to damn many. We've put troops on the ground for the UN across the world. It was usaly in response to some diddlyed up mess your moronic communist system brought about to begin with or contributed to anyway. We have shed blood time and time again for the UN... you havent done toejam that I can see.
You call him a Nazie... what exaactly are YOU besides some pathatic Stalinist holdover?
xBAT
P.S. Stalin,Lenin and the rest lost... and so did your sorry bellybutton system. McDonalds and Levis brought your bellybutton down... that in itself is pretty pathatic...ROTFL
-
Dowding, your post is a communist provocation! Croats simply can't be military criminals, while every Serb is guilty just because he's Orthodox!
And I saw such a nice Croatian, dr. Kovach (Smith in English), in the E.R. serial!
;)
-
Batdog, many Soviet servicemen died protecting Korean people from UN forces trying to "bomb them down to stone age". But I think that USA troops in Korea indeed had the most severe losses in all UN operations. I am happy such things are over now.
JFYI: almost every week I hear about Russian or Ukrainian soldiers dieing on the UN or Commonwealth peacekeeping duty. Go tell this to Russian paratroopers who were the first in KFOR. Go tell that to my friend who burned in his Mi-24 in Tajikistan on a peacekeeping duty.
As for Soviet SAMs - ask US pilots who bombed Vietnam. My Uncle scored 4 kills as a targeting officer of an S-75 there.
-
Well..my sympathies lie to your friend and his family.
The Vietnam era and today are very different for the U.S and our approach to SAMs. The type of SAM you exported at the time of Bosnia and/the Gulf was dangerous to be sure... but proved to be ineffective vrs our equipment of this era. Put simply..we owned them.
Anyway..this topic is basicly dead and beaten. To many emotions are flowing...
xBAT
-
StSanta wrote:
Pissed because you got voted off? Welcome to a democratic organisation. My personal belief is this happened because of the US refusal to pay what it owns the UN in financial terms, but that's just my take on the back stabbing politics that go on behind the scene.
--------------------------------------------
which came first the chicken or the egg?
You think that the US was voted off because they don't pay their dues LOL ok, whatever you say.
Could it be that the US didn't pay its dues because in your so called "democratic organization" a bunch of 2nd rate powers and 3rd world dictators were wasting money trying to elevate their stature to something that it wasn't?
They did their best to exclude the USA from any position where they might have a say so in it, but they screamed blue bloody murder when we didn't want to pay for it. I for one will miss senator Helms. That old fart knew a scam when he saw it and had no problem saying so.
Now as far as pissing on UN soldiers.. Some very well may not care for them. As an American I feel they are soldiers doing what they are ordered to do. Good or bad its their job and I support them in their effort. But in doing so I don't have to care for the UN. Its tactics to shrink Americas influence to that of a donor state with no real say in UN operations is pathetic and transparent.
-
"How to Win Friends and Influence People"
Originally posted by Boroda:
As for Soviet SAMs - ask US pilots who bombed Vietnam. My Uncle scored 4 kills as a targeting officer of an S-75 there.
-
Boroda, I don't agree with your opinion on the Balkans. I find it hard to believe you really wish to bring harm to American servicemen over Kosovo.
I also believe you paint the US to be somthing it is not.
Lastly, from my point of view, it seems you echo alot of the communist propaganda from a by-gone time. And it's not because I've been somehow 'conditioned' by an upbringing in a capitalist regime. ;) While I would hate to draw parallels with someone 'seeing the light', maybe one day you will see the West from a different viewpoint.
-
Bluedog wrote:A UN operation led by the Australian Army....led so effectively that the 'boss' Peter Cosgrove, was asked by none other than Colin Powell, to lecture the US forces on how he did it.
--------------------------------------------agreed 100 percent the Aussies did a bang up job <S>.
One point I might make. Wasn't it agreed on at the time that the Aussies were in the best position to take on the duty at hand due to their location and the problem they may or may not had with refugees?
I know no US troops were involved, but I also know we spent a ton of money bailing Indonesia out of their economic problems. That bail out was used as a diplomatic club to beat them over their heads and help bring an end to the conflict.
-
Dowding wrote:
maybe one day you will see the West from a different viewpoint.
------------------------------------
one day they will be a democratic superpower and the west will be their biggest partner.
now stop posting I have work to do !!! :)
-
Dowding, I don't like any nation bombing innocent people "to stone age". And the whole 1999 war against Yugoslavia was organised by the US, to reach it's own goals that had absolutely nothing common with Balkans. In fact it was a war against YOU and the whole Europe.
Do you really think they were worried by "human rights violations" in Yugoslavia? Mr. Brzhesinsky already said that the whole "human rights" issue was invented in 1970s to increase pressure against USSR, and they didn't give a damn about Soviet jews.
Eagler: Yes, my Uncle was there. Maybe it will make you feel better - he was wounded there and sent back to the Union. Anyway, I think that USSR was absolutely right to help Vietnamese against American bombings. You can boast that your taxes were used to kill Soviet soldiers in Afghanistan in 80s, I don't care: this fact is well-known.
/* Edited my POW on American society - not drunk enough to post such things :) */
You will be surprised how people who post here remind me of the Soviet times, the worst sides of life in the USSR. Things must have really changed since 1989 when I visited USA. Come on, follow the Party line, it makes you feel safe and proud.
-
Good GH. you are talking about "us" and "them" as it regards the balkans. Some might have mistaken you for a neutral party.
Sorry the UN didnt fight your war against your enemy for you. Thats not what they where there for. As for who is chicken toejam. Your the one that left your countrymen to be gathered up and killed. The UN are the people that tried to affect a change.
Who is the coward.
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
Eagler: Yes, my Uncle was there. Maybe it will make you feel better - he was wounded there and sent back to the Union. Anyway, I think that USSR was absolutely right to help Vietnamese against American bombings. You can boast that your taxes were used to kill Soviet soldiers in Afghanistan in 80s, I don't care: this fact is well-known.
nope, we have enough new enemies than to rehash the old ones, just thought your statement was in poor taste not knowing if a reader of this board may have had an "uncle" who was shot down over that hell hole...
-
I'm sorry Boroda, but how to you tie-up this 'US war on Europe' with the fact that it was British troops who were the first into Kosovo? Or how it was British aircraft providing CAP in the skies above?
Or are you saying Britain is actually at war with itself? ;)
While the US may not have intervened for the best of reasons in the past, and self-interest will be paramount for any country, if good comes out of it I don't have too many qualms about it.
Do you really think they were worried by "human rights violations" in Yugoslavia?
[/b]
I think NATO intervened because of the tradgedy in the previous civil war. Our country's populations would not allow our leaders to stand by again. It would be an electoral black mark.
The politicians did it for self-interest (on the whole), but the underlying motivation carried through to yield a positive conclusion. Democracy at work, comrade, democracy at work. :)
-
I am really sorry that UN sanctions prevented us from sending some SAMs to Serbia in 1999. But your honorable American "allies" never pay attention to minior issues like UN decisions, and almost openly armed KLA.
Batdog, many Soviet servicemen died protecting Korean people from UN forces trying to "bomb them down to stone age".
As for Soviet SAMs - ask US pilots who bombed Vietnam. My Uncle scored 4 kills as a targeting officer of an S-75 there.
I was; at one time, rather narrow minded in my view of the Soviet Man.
I find myself returning to that view after reading Boroda's commentary.
Screw you; Boroda. In infinite detail; via every orifice, with anatomical precison and extreme personal prejudice. Repeatedly.
Loser.
-
yeah, screw you - quit picking on grunherz
-
Listen Croatians and Bosnians fighting each other is the stupidest thing we ever did. I think one of the saddest symbolic things is when we blew up the old ottoman style bridge in mostar. That was absolutly stupid.
I never said the Croatians were 100% good guys,if you wanna say that point it out where I did.
However the Croatians and Bosnians are better and more Justified than Serbs. WE DID NO GO INVADING SERBIA. The serbs sent in the JNA when we declared independance. The local Serbs in Krajina took over the whole area. BTW if you know what Croatia looks like , a kind of horizontal V shape like "<" the krajina region is right at the angle. When the local Serbs took this area over and kicked everyone else out they essentially cut the country in half. This was unnaceptable.
Now will you guys who support the UN so much plese explain what you guys let happend in Srebrenica.
Just do it explain why the UN bluehelmets just let the serbs murder 8000 unarmed men/boys as the UN watched... Why did they let the serbs load them into busses?
As for you Pongo. You say I want the UN to fight for "my side".
All I want the UN to do is what it promised to do. Protect innocent people. Why did the UN not protect the thoudsands on innocent people in the UN DECLARED SAFE AREA of Srebrenica?
PONGO dont dare to post in this thread again without adressing the UNs pitiful inaction in srebrenica, I know you just wanna avoid it and gloss it over.
Boroda.... You are proud of your family killing Americans......
And now you call me a nazi for no reason.. Go to hell.
-
BTW Dowding you are right the RAF did participate in the 1995 air attacks. I and millions in Croatia and Bosnia thank your country for that.
I would like to adress another point. I think my distrust of the UN "bluehelmet" cowards is directed at the UN force. Not at the individuals. I honestly dont think the UN has enough backbone and iniative to do anything. Thats why they always have to call in a real military force for anyhing but the Un rent-a-cop warehous guard duties. Aside from that I think the "bluhelmets" are pretty impotent, though they seem to be pouplar as hostages and human shields by use of the warring parties.
-
Reposted, Grunherz, since you haven't answered my other points:
You repeatedly call my countrymen cowards for carrying out their national duties. Well, that's roadkill. But I 'll let that pass because I can almost taste the irony.
I'd rather have a few 'cowards' in Great Britain, than the 'tigers' your country produced (see above).
I ask you this - which catergory would you prefer to count as countrymen?
[ 10-23-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]
-
Dowding, he answered you.
-
Really?
It seems to me he first acknowledged that the Croats weren't '100% good'. Then he yet again effectively blamed the actions of some of his countrymen (documented) on people who absolutely were in the worst position in the world, following orders impossible to carry out. They were there in an effort to help.
An interesting account of the Dutch infantry stationed at the town:
"The Serbs, alert to every nuance in Zagreb, knew what was about to happen too. They applied pressure. On 1 June, they demanded that the Dutch pull back from an outlying observation post commanding a strategic road. The Dutch refused. Two days later, the Serbs attacked and the Dutch retreated. The pattern had been set. By early June, the morale of DutchBat inside Srebrenica was abysmal. The leader of DutchBat, Lt-Col Ton Karremans, was close to nervous collapse; his troops were uneasy, bored, sick of the Muslim gangsters who ruled much of the town under the sight of the Serb guns. Far from being on the side of the underdog Muslims they were there to protect, many in DutchBat appeared to become victims of 'Stockholm syndrome', where the kidnapped come to sympathize, then empathize, with the kidnappers.
As June gave way to early July, the Serbs nibbled at more of the enclave, never launching a full attack, never killing any Dutch, never triggering Nato's tripwire. The only Dutch soldier to die was not killed by a Serb. As the Dutch retreated from the Serbs on 7 July, they passed through a Bosnian army roadblock. The Muslim militia, enraged that the Dutch were giving up their land without a fight, lobbed a grenade, killing Private Raviv Van Renssen, a Dutch trooper. From then on, the Muslims were the more dangerous enemy for the Dutch. When the Serbs next closed in on a Dutch observation post, the UN troops chose to surrender to them."
BTW, when Srebenica was set-up as a safe-haven one of the requirements was 35,000 troops.
It got 7,000 Dutch, French and British.
At the end there were 3,500 Dutch troops. What happened was a disgrace to the Dutch Army, but how could they succeed in those circumstances?
At the start of this thread, grunherz, you were adamantly that the UN troops were cowards. Forgive me if I'm in error, but your position has changed significantly.
[ 10-23-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]
-
GH
Your part of the problem bud.
I could just picture you carring an AK and tossing grenades into a UN line house with your drunk Croat tiger buddies.
-
Yea Pongo. Thats right. :rolleyes:
Anyway Dowding your post proves my point exactly.
You cant trust the UN to do what it says.
They blast around SAFE AREA this and SAFE AREA that, drawing in thousands of refugees and then letting them get slaughtered.
I dont trust them, sorry.
BTW Dowding did I not make it perfectly clear that the Croatians and Bosnians werent perfect little happy angels during war? perhaps you missed that.
PS Pongo I see that you take this discussion as a game and an oppritunity to make fun of me for your own personal reasons, but please understand the war is very real to me. I lost family, my mother was nearly decapitated by a mortar that landed in the yard also destroying a bench swing that my father built by hand, my childhood home was more or less destryed, my childhood town near Vukovar was pretty much blown up and my whole life was disruped because of even If I was in the USA since just before the war.
Also for future reference in your insult posts, take careful note of this:
GRUNHERZ does not hate Serbs and Muslims. Many of my close relatives and neighbors are/were serbs. Many of my friends and my best friend was Muslim.
GRUNHERZ hates the war and wishes it never happened because of reasons stated above.
GRUNHERZ obviously stated that Croatins werent all innocent non war-crime commiting people.
GRUNHERZ thinks all Croatians indicted on war charges should be turned over to the Hague. Our nation must move forward and stop protecting these criminals due to political influence.
OK! Many of my messages in this thread are very angry, but Im passionate in my distrust of the weak UN forces and think they should play a minimal role in the actual US war. Maybe after the war the UN can come in and rent-a-cop afghan aid food warehouses.
-
Originally posted by Krusher:
One point I might make. Wasn't it agreed on at the time that the Aussies were in the best position to take on the duty at hand due to their location and the problem they may or may not had with refugees?
I know no US troops were involved, but I also know we spent a ton of money bailing Indonesia out of their economic problems. That bail out was used as a diplomatic club to beat them over their heads and help bring an end to the conflict.
Yep, our proximity to the area in question no doubt was one of the main reasons Australian forces 'led' the operation.
I in no way intended to belittle the efforts of the US military, merely to give an example of a UN operation, and a quite successful one,where all the 'dirty work' was NOT done by US ground forces.
I have no doubt whatsoever that the US assisted at least financially, and actually my statement about 'no more than a handfull of US servicemen' may be a bit off the mark, I think the USAF was involved in the airlifting of medical supplies/food/building materials into the country in a fairly big way, Im not certain on that....but all those Hercs and Galaxies had to come from somewhere.
As far as that goes, I think I recall that when the Indos were looking like getting a little bit *too* aggressive, a US fleet with accompaniing Marines just *happened* to decide to hold excersises with the RAN off North Queensland......nothin' like havin' a badarse mate in your corner flexing the old muscles to keep potential foes at bay :)
http://www.defence.gov.au/army/asnce/index.htm (http://www.defence.gov.au/army/asnce/index.htm)
if your interested in finding out more.
<S> Blue
[ 10-23-2001: Message edited by: Bluedog ]
-
Pongo
Has been a UN peace keeper and thinks your a piece of toejam that is part of the problem. Honestly dont care what your cousin did to your mother. The whole place was a hell hole and now its a bit better. The UN peace keepers that were killed by your country men trying to protect and feed people like your mother that were being killed by people like you and your cousin are grateful for you thanks.
Preach hate brother GH.
Sit in your new country, call the men from arround the world that tried to help while your ran cowards.
You think that conflict wasnt real for the Peace Keepers and NATO troops involved. In a million of your pathetic lives you wouldnt be able to pay the debt back that you and your country owe the world for trying to help.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Boroda:
I hate communism because it ruined my old country (Jugoslavija) and made my people lazy, dishonest and fearful. Communism is the greatest lie and greatest evil of all time. It has destroyed, both literally and figurativly more lives in the past century than anything else.
I want all people who who support any form of communism, and that includes their studmuffingot leftist socialist pinko anti-capitalist lackeys to eat toejam and die.
No more of your lies!
Dont even go mentioning propaganda to me!
Let me understand the logic here....
Under communism, number of ethnics group lived in relative coexistance, where even you could have friends and neibours who were from differenct background....
Freedom came, and everyone overethere is trying to kill one another for their own god or because of other guy's god, and this is a fault of communism ?
Being from communist country, having seen what you've seen ( and mind you, by communist standards you boys had it easy ), you seem to display the usual "past complex". All wrongdoings and faults are there because of the communism. People are lazy ? Communism!! People are ignorant ? Communism!! People are violent towards others ? Communism !! 10 years after the "fall of communism" things haven't improved one bit, who's fault it is ? Communism !!
Get real. Poles, Russians, Chroats, Romenians, Bulgars and all the other ex-commie nations found out on last 10 years that we've earned the toejamhole that we live in.
Out freely elected goverments proved that communists were amatur thiefs by comparison.
People are as poor as they were, if not worst.
Are they no longer lazy ? Yeah.. right..
As far as i can tell, communism was prabably the best thing that could have ever happend to such a f____d up region as Balkans. People down there need a big boot on their necks to stop them from killing each other.
-
Where were you a UN peace keeper Pongo?
-
Cypress
-
<S!> Blue..
Yep.. been watching the Indonesia thing with a worried eye. Another powderkeg. And that was a kick-ss job you guys did in East Timor. If that part of the world comes apart while the U.S. is up to its eyeballs draining the mid-east swamp, we're gonna need yer croc hunters to hold the Indonesia situation together....
Sleeping with the largest population of fanatical extremist moslems on the planet in yer proverbial front yard, literally sitting on your trade routes, has got to be sobering in the current world political climate.. to say the least.
Thanks, mates; NZ and Australias support is needed, and appreciated by at least this confused Yank. <S!>
-
I dont need CNN! I got it all right here!!
Cool!
:)
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
OK! Many of my messages in this thread are very angry, but Im passionate in my distrust of the weak UN forces and think they should play a minimal role in the actual US war. Maybe after the war the UN can come in and rent-a-cop afghan aid food warehouses.
Ok, so which side should've the UN fought on then?
The Serbs? , or wait maybe the Croats, or the Bosnians??
Or perhaps instead of trying to protect people they should've just closed up the border and let them just slaughter each other till the victors were just left.
The problem with the UN in the Balkans is that you have to be neutral, and when you step in to take actions against injustice...where does that stop? In the end everyone may have started shooting at the blue helmets. The British, Canadians, Germans, Dutch, New Zealanders etc etc have done a brillant job in that region and need not your loathsome opinion. If one person is saved from your Balkans nightmare, then the UN Peacekeeper is more worthy than any insult you may hurl.
Bluey already illustrated a situtation where the UN Peacekeepers took charge and took control, and that was East Timor. Despite the loss of New Zealand, and Australian military lives. There thrives a strong and democratic country.
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Skyrats/files/4RAR.jpg)
4RAR , ASNCE-EM, UNTAET
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Skyrats/files/ETHerc.jpg)
NZBatt4, UNTAET
Tronsky
[ 10-24-2001: Message edited by: -tronski- ]
-
Once again....notice the in the pictures above... no heavy weapons. They are equiped w/personal weps only.
The UN guys are basicly screwed when you send them into a situation like Bosnia. They are out numbered and out gunned plus they have some clerk setting the "rules of engagement" and such.
When they send them into a situation like Bosina they should of quite simply armed them to the teeth... then the various miltia's and such would of thought twice about breaking the "safe" zones. I pity any soldier, being an ex-grunt myself, that has to do a job w/out the support needed.
xBAT
-
Dowding, one correction: Russian troops were the first to enter Kosovo, not British. Brits were the first NATO troops there.
BTW, NATO did it's best to prevent Russians from joining the KFOR. We don't even have a special zone, Russian troops are spread all over Kosovo.
Hangtime and others: my Uncle was performing his military duty, and he was a SAM officer. My military specialty is an S-200 SAM technical division officer. IMNSHO - SAM crews are always on the right side. They fight for their lifes, and for the lifes of the people they cover. SAMs are ALWAYS a defencive weapon.
I am waiting for someone to justify the bombings of Vietnam. Go tell me that Vietnamese are nothing compared to American airmen, who always protect Freedom and Democracy.
-
SAM crews are always on the right side. They fight for their lifes, and for the lifes of the people they cover. SAMs are ALWAYS a defencive weapon.
Really?? Arn't they pulling the parts of that airliner outta the Black sea still?? You know, Commisar Pavlov; the one shot down by the 'defensive' SAM ?
I do hope you manage to make it down to Southern Iraq sometime soon. Those SAM crews are obviously in need of some 'defensive' assistance. Perhaps you could help.
-
Originally posted by batdog:
Once again....notice the in the pictures above... no heavy weapons. They are equiped w/personal weps only.
xBAT
That's inductively biases. I can't see hvy weapons in 2 pictures, therefore there were no hvy weapons? Poor logic.
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
Go tell me that Vietnamese are nothing compared to American airmen, who always protect Freedom and Democracy.
Consider it said! Add to that any commie "advisors" in the area.
I get it - your "uncle" was doing his duty but the American Airmen were not ... if it weren't for the politics of that war the VC and their "advisors" would have been toast. You owe the peaceniks alot, they saved ur uncle's arse...
[ 10-24-2001: Message edited by: Eagler ]
-
Hangtime, the Russian Tu-154 was shot down by the SAM complex I was trained for...
The S-200 is a SAM with the longest rage, 250+ km. In USSR the only place S-200 crews were trained with real launches was Priozersk (Sary-Shagan), a test ground in the middle of Kazakh steppes. My Uncle lived there for about 20 years. Every test launch was made with all possible measures to avoid such accidents. And noone could ever think of test-launches in the areas with heavy air traffic like Black Sea.
The whole accident was an incredible combination of stupidity and bad luck. It shows that Ukrainian air defence is, hmm... amateur :(
From the point of view of SAM crews in Southern Iraq - they are always under attack. Any hostile plane crossing the targeting range of a SAM has only one mission: to destroy a targeting station. SAMs are ALWAYS the first targets. That guys in Southern Iraq must be really nervous, always expecting a missile attack and not allowed to protect themseves.
-
Eagler, american airmen were performing their duty, and I take my hat off in respect for their bravery and professional skills.
But I don't think it's a good idea to use carpet bombings against civilian population.
Or do you think that Vietnamese were happy to be bombed "to stone age"?
If you start a war - don't be surprised that there are always some people who fight back. You bombed Yugoslavia for moderate police actions against Moslim gangsters, I suggest you to bomb Russia for Chechnya. Heh, you'll not? Guess why?
-
I get your point too. If there were no Soviet aid to Vietnam - the whole country would have been toast. It's much easier to burn down villages from 30000ft when they can't strike back. I find it quite reasonable.
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
Dowding, one correction: Russian troops were the first to enter Kosovo, not British. Brits were the first NATO troops there.
BTW, NATO did it's best to prevent Russians from joining the KFOR. We don't even have a special zone, Russian troops are spread all over Kosovo.
Nato had a good point with trying to deny the Russian army a place in KFOR. The russians couldn't guarantee their neutrality, and therefore weren't effective 'peacekeepers'. The Russian's were scoring political points off Nato over the Kosovo, and their sudden rush into the region was only a political stunt because they feared losing face when unable to cast any infuence over Nato. It was a fact that the serbs welcomed Russian soldiers because they considered Russia allies.
Unlike the British, American, German and French troops following.
Tronsky
-
Then why did they let Russian and Ukrainian peacekeeping troops into Bosnia?
BTW, looks like NATO troops in Kosovo are really neutral when it comes to slaughtering Serbs and blowing up Orthodox churches that are 800 years old. Even Turks were not so neutral.
It was a good idea to substitute UN decision with NATO, regardless to the fact that bombings of Yugoslavia contradicted with NATO regulations...
-
BTW, looks like NATO troops in Kosovo are really neutral when it comes to slaughtering Serbs and blowing up Orthodox churches that are 800 years old. Even Turks were not so neutral.
Post your sources.
Specifically, I want evidence of British involvement in 'slaughtering serbs'. Unless you mean the Serbian paramilitary forces who were busy torturing, raping and cleansing. Frankly, they deserved nothing less.
Notice how they ran away from the spearhead British force, like the 'thugs with guns' they were proved to be. Your average paramilitary has no bottle, you see? Unless he's beating his chest and pushing unarmed women and children around.
NATO was there to show the lessons of the past had being learnt and also set things up to bring the protagonists to the discussion table. Stability was the aim.
The Russians were there for PR reasons alone. I do hope Russia can move on from the Cold War and I don't see how the world would be a worse place for her joining NATO.
Lastly, I've said it before in this thread; a repeat of Bosnia could not be allowed to happen in Kosovo - it would have damaged the reputations of our politicians in the public eye.
-
I can see why the russians would want to be in Nato, I cant see why Nato would want them. Why would you introduce a country that still has strong nationalist feelings and a huge chip on thier shoulder into a defensive alliegance? Im still seeing alot of posts here that indicate a mind set that would not be helpful to Nato.
-
Perhaps Pongo. But why are Turkey in NATO? Questionable human rights record and a bit of 'odd man out' all round.
But they give us more reach into the Middle East and provide us with another Muslim ally. By having them in the alliance we can apply more pressure to calm the Greek-Turkey conflict.
A similar approach could be taken to Russia in a mutual support arrangement. Perhaps not now, but in a couple of decased time?
-
Not the slightest smidge of nationalist fervour. Nor the capability to express it if they had. I aggree they are an interesting member for nato but looking at who nato was formed to contain you can see the advantage to nato having Turkey on side.
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
BTW, looks like NATO troops in Kosovo are really neutral when it comes to slaughtering Serbs and blowing up Orthodox churches that are 800 years old. Even Turks were not so neutral.
Ahhhh....crap, I don't believe for a second that Nato sholdiers slaughtered Serbs, or blew up Churches, unless your refering to the air campaign. Even then I don't belive Nato would've deliberately hit such politically dangerous targets.
I worked with a Serb, and according to 'serb' radio/news even here in Australia, Nato was losing hundreds of aircraft, raping Nuns, burning bibles (orthodox of course),..F-15's killing the petdog from 20k etc etc. A biased attitude can often soak up such ridiculous propaganda.
Tronsky
[ 10-24-2001: Message edited by: -tronski- ]
-
I am Croatian so feel free to disregard this comment as biased or unfair if you find it so.
The serbs do really have an historical "inferiority" complex of sorts just like their Russian big brothers. Thats why they lie, exaggerate and boast so much when they are in touble, or really just most of the time.
-
Well, well, misunderstanding again.
I didn't mean NATO troops slaughtering Serbs. I meant that they are neutral enough to let Kosovo turn into something like Chechnya. Remember how they tried to disarm KLA? Naive... And that strange "cannabis harvest" in Macedonia... I don't think NATO officials are that stupid to think Albanians will give up all weapons. Planned 3500 barrels is much less then they have.
-
[cut]http://www.stileproject.com/diplomacy.swf [paste]
[ 10-25-2001: Message edited by: Rooster ]
-
And that strange "cannabis harvest" in Macedonia...
????? WTF?
Was it any good?
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
Well, well, misunderstanding again.
I didn't mean NATO troops slaughtering Serbs. I meant that they are neutral enough to let Kosovo turn into something like Chechnya. Remember how they tried to disarm KLA? Naive... And that strange "cannabis harvest" in Macedonia... I don't think NATO officials are that stupid to think Albanians will give up all weapons. Planned 3500 barrels is much less then they have.
riiiighht
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Skyrats/files/ET%20Dili%20LSaver.jpg)
Tronsky