>> "A few thousand" sounds like you're trying to trivialize Kosovo <<
i'm not going to waste my time going through all of this again. if you and rdb are stupid enough to believe all the propaganda fed to you by the liberal elite media and propagandist, terrorist, war criminals such as nato, albright, clinton, and blair--then be my guest. i'm not going to waste my whole night posting 10 different links like i have before only to see you kosovo experts quietly fade away when i expose the truth.
here is but one example from a reputable london publication.
Serb killings 'exaggerated' by west
Claims of up to 100,000 ethnic Albanians massacred in Kosovo revised to under 3,000 as exhumations near end
guardian.co.uk
"The point is did we successfully pre-empt or not," Mark Laity, the acting Nato spokesman, said last night. "I think the evidence shows we did. We would rather be criticised for overestimating the numbers who died than for failing to pre-empt."
...........................................................
When Yugoslav forces withdrew from Kosovo in June last year, Nato spokesmen estimated that the Serbs had killed at least 10,000 civilians. While the bombing was under way William Cohen, the US defence secretary, announced that 100,000 Kosovo Albanian men of military age were missing after being taken from columns of families being deported to Albania and Macedonia. "They may have been murdered," he said.
.........................................................................
"The final number of bodies uncovered will be less than 10,000 and probably more accurately determined as between two and three thousand," Paul Risley, the Hague tribunal's press spokesman, said yesterday.
...........................................................................................................................
The exhumation of less than 3,000 bodies is sure to add fuel to those who say Nato's intervention against Yugoslavia was not "humanitarian" and that it had other motives such as maintaining its credibility in a post-cold war world. Others say Nato's air strikes revealed a grotesque double standard since western governments did nothing when hundreds of thousands were being massacred in Rwanda.
>> I freely admit I'm no foreign policy expert but surely there had to be other factors than just the raw populations involved. <<
why don't you haul war criminals like clinton, albright, and blair in front of a war crimes tribunal and ask them what their motives were.
>> But again, what's the difference to you? Isn't your stance that we shouldn't bother evaluating which case is a better use of our resources, and either take them all on (if we can), or ignore them all? <<
like i said, the hypocrisy shown by our despicable former president clinton is a prime reason why the world doesn't look favorably upon us. the world sees a bunch of hypocrites and we wonder why people dance in the streets when terrorists slaughter our people. if we are going to act self-righteous and intervene throughout the world on behalf of human rights we need to do it properly. do it right or don't do it at all. of course i believe we shouldn't get involved at all unless there is a direct national interest at stake, but i definitely don't believe we should go waging illegal wars to stop exaggerated claims of ethnic cleansing in one part of the world while ignoring a million people being slaughtered in another part of the world. we shouldn't slaughter a couple thousand inncoent women and children because we want to stop one man--slobodan milosevic. it reeks of hypocrisy and exposes our leaders true intentions. hegemony and imperialism, not freedom, liberty, and justice. |
