Radovan Karadzic arrested!!!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VRKwaJ1mSQM&feature=related Part 1. Look for yourselves what kind of tactics are employed.

How is it Radovan's fault that the seperatists from Srebrenica brought civilians to fight through enemy territory using them as human shields resulting in some 2,000 (Not 8,000 which were never found) dead. Mind you 2,000 from both sides.

Originally posted by Carpathian Wolf How is it Radovan's fault that the seperatists from Srebrenica brought civilians to fight through enemy territory using them as human shields resulting in some 2,000 (Not 8,000 which were never found) dead. Mind you 2,000 from both sides.   http://www.srebrenica-report.com/numbers.htm   You could very well be the best damned lawyer in the universe but if you don't have the facts straight you aren't going to get a correct result. I tried explaining that to Clea Koff when we spoke, but it seemed to fly over her head and i was astonished how she did not know some very basic things concerning Srebrenica. I don't think she had ever heard of Naser Oric before I mentioned him to her.

Originally posted by Seko Originally posted by Cezar Radovan Karadzic is another case of a person who stands no chance for afair trial. The fact is that no jury or judge would dare to not condemn him if the available evidence(s) presents reasonable doubt. The man has been portrayed as a monster and there is no chance to change this picture. No matter how correct would be the trial the media will turn it into a revenge process. The man is guilty before being judged. Starting with Nuremburg all trials concerning "crimes against humanity" were nothing but propaganda performances. Some may seek the satisfaction of seeing the "really bad guy" paying for his evil deeds. Some may think that sentencing a public extremist figure will quiet down the people and maybe will stop other individuals to turn into such leaders. The point is that things don't work that way. Saddam is dead and there's no peace in Iraq.   That's as convoluted a conclusion I have seen here on AE in a while.

Maybe you know something I don't. The point is that every now and then (whenever the politicians feel the need) a "public enemy/war criminal/monster" is thrown into the public eye. The media takes the story the people buy it and there's no chance for that guy to face a fair trial. How come so many criminals spawn?

First off, no matter what you or I think, he was a wanted man. His arrest will lead to a UN trial for his crimes (not only for his orders in Srebrenica and Sarajevo against the Bosnians but for holding hostage UN peacekeepers). Unless you don't believe in due process your defense and partiality is not a brand of justice that is generally practiced in the modern world.

 No matter what I believe it is clear that you already "know" that he is a criminal. Try to think of the matter from his side. He might think that he's innocent of wr crimes or genocide. He might be right or not. Is there a chance that the tribunal will not condemn him based on reasonable doubt?[/quote]

Originally posted by Carpathian Wolf Yugoslavia and Russia having friendly relations pre Soviet Union era and post Soviet Union. Yugoslavia was Russia's foot step into europe, its way of influence over europe and the only mass sure source of oil which is stable, as opposed to the general cluster mess that the middle east is.

Originally posted by Carpathian Wolf But what war crimes did he commit really? Let's stick to Sarajevo and Srebrenica.   The first was a city held by islamic extremists. Why do i call them as such? Because that is what Alija was. He wasn't elected, he forced Abdic, a moderate out. Abdic's muslims and Serbs fought side by side against the western backed Alija regime. The UN documents many times where the Bosniaks (Alija's) mortared their own people in an attempt to gain sympathy.   Next we have Srebrenica, who's numbers of dead are highly inflated. Slobodna Bosna even states that Srebrenica was used as a staging point of attacks by Naser Oric in an attempt to get the Serbs to attack. The Serbs sent in a force of 200 men with a couple of tanks. Because of the high command leaving Srebrenica behind, the lower ranked men retreated. they took civilians with them in an attempt to go to Tuzla. The land inbetween was Serb held and the two military forces met and fought. The Bosniaks had civilians with them effectivly using them as human shields.   http://www.srebrenica-report.com/   This is a very good website and i'm glad it was posted. Very clean and to the point.

His crime is that he was Head of State of a separatist entity under which horrifying crimes conducted, and which are his responsibility. Same why Yugoslavian President was on trial at the ICTY. Same why Croatian President Franjo Tudjman and Bosnian-Herzegovinian President Alija Izetbegovic were supposed to be on trial. Same reason why Serbian President Milan Milutinovic is currently on trial. And same reason why Montenegrin President Momir Bulatovic was never called/isn't at the ICTY on trial.

Two other factors for Serbs:

1. The principle of victor's justice, it is only expectable that Serbs get the hardest punishments and that Bosniacs and Albanians practically go free, even if the cases are at least remotely similar, and that is a reality; a best effect probably why no Slovene was ever persecuted (despite that brutal massacre of Yugoslav People's Army's unarmed youth as well as several other incidents). Another evident reason for this is while only a number of CroatIANS were indicted, a huge number of the Bosnian Croats were

2. Serbs(+Montenegrins) were indeed in conflict with Albanians, Bosnian Muslims and Croats. Therefore, if only SerbIANS and Albanians are counted, therefore by each war (Croatian, Bosnian, Kosovar), a different picture is created. The Croats too have a bit high number of ICTY indictees - and that is because they were involved in the wars in Croatia and Bosnia.

3. Now this is a plain coincidence - Serbs/Montenegrins, if we turn a blind eye on Slobodan Milosevic who died after more than 5 years of detainment, have simply had longer and healthier lives, whereas the Croats have had a most unfortunate coincidence that their bad guys were simply too old, or died earlier of illness, including the most bad ones - President Franjo Tudjman, Minister of Interior Gojko Susak, Croatian Army leader Janko Bobetko, Croatian Army Chief of Staff Zvonimir Cervenko, and even the Bosnian Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic. It is just the way it is, and if all of these people were alive, a different image would've been. However, nothing can be done to change this.

4. Last and of course not least, some of the most bloodthirsty monsters were precisely mainly ethnic Serbs

Originally posted by Carpathian Wolf How is it Radovan's fault that the seperatists from Srebrenica brought civilians to fight through enemy territory using them as human shields resulting in some 2,000 (Not 8,000 which were never found) dead. Mind you 2,000 from both sides.   http://www.srebrenica-report.com/numbers.htm   You could very well be the best damned lawyer in the universe but if you don't have the facts straight you aren't going to get a correct result. I tried explaining that to Clea Koff when we spoke, but it seemed to fly over her head and i was astonished how she did not know some very basic things concerning Srebrenica. I don't think she had ever heard of Naser Oric before I mentioned him to her.

First of all, your approach is very insulting and bad. Those are not "separatists".

Second of all, you are referring to exhumed bodies. There are for now more than 2,000 discovered, identified and buried bodies. I'm not going over into the victim number controversies, but the number of the dead simply must be far larger than that.

Originally posted by Sparten Finally theres the little matter of Serbrenecia. Under SC resolution 819 it was a safe area where the combatants were not allowed to conduct operations. So even if Karadzic was an angel and did nothing, the very action of entering the town was a breach of international law.

Not necessarily. There were other cases where aggressors on internationally-protected territory were acquitted.

Originally posted by Yugoslav Originally posted by Sparten Finally theres the little matter of Serbrenecia. Under SC resolution 819 it was a safe area where the combatants were not allowed to conduct operations. So even if Karadzic was an angel and did nothing, the very action of entering the town was a breach of international law. Not necessarily. There were other cases where aggressors on internationally-protected territory were acquitted.

"