News   Aug 23, 2024
 1.2K     0 
News   Aug 23, 2024
 1.9K     4 
News   Aug 23, 2024
 551     0 

Milosevic is Dead!

M

Mislav

Guest
Well the man tried to be the Hitler of the 90s but instead was taken alive and then found dead in his cell.

Source: news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060...MlJVRPUCUl

LONDON (Reuters) - Foes of Slobodan Milosevic said on Saturday the unexpected death in prison of the man they blamed for the bloodshed in the Balkans in the 1990s meant justice had been cheated.
ADVERTISEMENT

"The death of Slobodan Milosevic, a few weeks before the completion of his trial, will prevent justice to be done in his case," said Carla del Ponte, chief prosecutor at the
United Nations war crimes tribunal in
The Hague.

"However, the crimes for which he was accused, including genocide, cannot be left unpunished."

The U.N. tribunal said Milosevic, 64, had been found dead in his cell in the Dutch city, shortly before his four-year-old trial for genocide and crimes against humanity during the violent break-up of old Yugoslavia was expected to conclude.

Milosevic -- once branded the "butcher of the Balkans" -- was widely seen in the West as the main culprit in Europe's worst conflicts since World War Two, which killed tens of thousands of people and uprooted millions from their homes.

"What's important is that the region, and particularly the people in Serbia, now draw a line across Milosevic's past and his life, which was a malign influence ... ," British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said.

But Russia, a traditional ally of Serbia, rued the court's rejection last month of a request by Milosevic to travel to Russia for specialist treatment for his worsening health. He had suffered a heart condition and high blood pressure.

"Unfortunately, despite our guarantees, the tribunal did not agree to give Slobodan Milosevic a chance to undergo treatment in Russia," the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement.

REGRET

There was widespread regret that Milosevic died before receiving the court's verdict.

"It is unfortunate and in many aspects unsatisfactory, given the countless victims of the Balkan wars, that justice now will not be able to run its course,"
NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said in a statement.

Former Balkan envoy David Owen said "justice in a way has been cheated."

Milosevic was charged with 66 counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in complex indictments covering bloody conflicts in Bosnia, Croatia and
Kosovo as Yugoslavia imploded in the 1990s. He had declined to enter a plea.

"It's a pity that Milosevic did not live through the trial and get his deserved sentence," the office of Croatian President Stjepan Mesic said in a statement.

Bosnian Muslim leader Sulejman Tihic, whose country is still struggling to recover from the 1992-95 war that killed at least 100,000 people, took a similar line.

"Because of the victims, truth and justice, it would have been better if he lived to the end of the trial," Tihic said.

In Kosovo, there was shock and dismay among the ethnic Albanian majority that Milosevic died before a verdict had been reached.

"In the end, he went very easily. The people didn't see him get what he deserved," said Arsim Gerxhaliu, a forensics expert who has exhumed hundreds of bodies since the 1998-99 war.

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who was secretary-general of NATO during the alliance's 1999 bombing campaign against Milosevic's Serbia over its repression of Kosovo's Albanians, said he had mixed feelings.

"In this moment my thoughts go to the many persons he made suffer -- some are still alive, some are dead," Solana said.

Serbia and Montenegro Foreign Minister Vuk Draskovic, who says Milosevic's security services twice tried to kill him, said he should have faced justice in his home country.

"Milosevic organized many, many assassinations of people of my party, of people of my family," he said.

Milosevic's Socialist Party, reduced to a shadow of its former self after its leader was toppled in a popular uprising in 2000, said he had been "systematically killed" in the Hague court -- a line echoed by his brother Borislav.

"It's a big loss for Serbia and for the Socialist Party," said Ivica Dacic, who heads its main board.

Borislav Milosevic, who lives in Russia, told Interfax news agency: "All responsibility for his death lies on the International Tribunal for former Yugoslavia."
 
Milosevic was no Hitler. Hitler militarily invaded most of Europe, was responsible for 25-30 million dead civilians and allied soldiers.
 
^ you might say, Milosevic was not as bad as Hitler - mind you that is lowering the bar pretty far.

also Serbia's longstanding ties with Russia relate to thier shared belief in Orothodox Christianity.
 
anagrams are ****ing spooky:



'Slobodan milosevic'


anagrams to


'Slavic blood is on me.'
 
Abeja:

Milosevic was no Hitler. Hitler militarily invaded most of Europe, was responsible for 25-30 million dead civilians and allied soldiers.

So, the severity of crimes against humanity, i.e. ethnic cleansing, is a sliding scale based on the number of bodies?

AoD
 
I'd say there is more than a quantitative difference. Nazi Germany set up an entire industrial infrastructure for transporting and killing an entire nation of millions.

Suggesting that something similar occured in Yugoslavia is ludicrous. Ethnic cleansing and mass killings (which occured on all sides to varying degrees, by the way) were a byproduct of an attempt to re-draw borders and claim territory, not an end in itself.
 
boiler:

Isn't that exactly how Hitler started? Re-draw borders and claim territories? If only they're that sophisticated in the Balkans - they aren't, thankfully, but make no mistake, they're certainly systematic in their undertaking. In the final analysis, an entire people was reduced to nothing but meat.

And certainly, no one is suggesting those who advocated these policies on the other side should get away free.

AoD
 
Certainly, one can argue the slaughtering in the Balkans have been organized, pre-meditated, and takes place under nationalistic fervour with minimal opposition within the home countries.

There is a difference between innocents being caught in the crossfire and innocents being killed en masse as part of a plan. That certainly wasn't true in most modern wars.

I can certainly agree with all of the above points.

While comparison to some aspects of the Second World War (ethnic hatred, dehumanization, mass murder) is definitely apt, simply calling Milosevic "the new Hitler" implies an identity between the two which I think over-simplifies the picture to the point of falsehood.

While Hitler was a maniac driven by a messianic vision of himself and the wish to create a world which conforms to insane ideals he had concocted, Milosevic was nothing but an amoral apparatchik whose only desire was power. Make no mistake: he was not a communist, and he was not a nationalist. He was a power-hungry manipulator without a shred of consciousness, and everything he did, or failed to do, was in the function of his personal gain.

The war in the Balkans was a new situation that we can learn something from, and saying that it all happened because Milosevic was Hitler recycles a cast we are already familiar with and which we will learn nothing new from and which is, in the end, inaccurate in many respects.

It sounds to much like an attempt to make everything "bad vs. good", "white vs. black" which hurts my ears. I am not trying to relativise Milosevic's crimes, which are enormous and despicable. I just object to using historical cliches to describe new situations, especially when doing so blinds us to more subtle nuances of history.
 
boiler:

Oh that I completely agree with - re: the nature of Hitler vs. Milosevic. My comparison has to do with the general values and the nature of the crime, not as a comparator between the historical context.

AoD
 
Yes, but Hitler didn't go down as one of the greatest monsters in history for occupying territories and waging war, but for slaughtering the European Jews and millions of other innocent people, in an organized and pre-meditated fashion which was supported by the entire German wartime industry.

Almost every war starts with attempts to re-draw borders and results in innocents being killed. It's not a very strong argument to bring the Nazis in for comparison and claim that "that's how Hitler started".

I'm not denying that mass killings of people because of their ethnicity took place in the Balkan wars - but to compare this with Hitler's folly I think does a disservice to the memory of his victims and to history.
 
boiler:

but for slaughtering the European Jews and millions of other innocent people, in an organized and pre-meditated fashion which was supported by the entire German wartime industry.

Certainly, one can argue the slaughtering in the Balkans have been organized, pre-meditated, and takes place under nationalistic fervour with minimal opposition within the home countries.

Almost every war starts with attempts to re-draw borders and results in innocents being killed. It's not a very strong argument to bring the Nazis in for comparison and claim that "that's how Hitler started".

There is a difference between innocents being caught in the crossfire and innocents being killed en masse as part of a plan. That certainly wasn't true in most modern wars.

but to compare this with Hitler's folly I think does a disservice to the memory of his victims and to history.

On the other hand, I think it is in service to the memories of Hitler's victims that one compares the acts perpetuated in the Balkans with other events in history whereby humanity is similiarly reduced to nothing just because of one's ethnicity. Comparison on the basis of numbers, and the "we suffered more than you did" which such a stance implies is to do a disservice to all the victims of ethnic cleansing no matter where they are.

AoD
 
What follows from my decoupling of Milosevic from Hitler is that the quantitative differences between their crimes are not only due to the Balkans' lack of "sophistication", but also due to crucial differences in motives.
 
whats the Russian relation with Milosevic?

Milosevic's family lives as exiles in Moscow.

If you ask political scientist Samuel Huntington, Orthodox Russia is the co-civilizationist of Milosevic's Orthodox Serbia. Morover, Russia is the core state of Eastern Orthodox civilization, and would theoretically be Milosevic's protector against Western (and its proxy Croatian) and Muslim (and its proxy Bosnian) interests. While Russia might have some sympathy for Milosevic, they didn't really do much to help him in the end.
 

Back
Top