You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #42: What was honorable about it? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-26-03 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #16
42. What was honorable about it?
What is honorable about bombing hospitals, power grids, trains and killing civilians to steal their country's resources?

What is honorable about making your pilots fly so high that they can't distinguish any targets and end up committing war crimes with which they have to live for the rest of their lives? Or deliberately cutting off fuel, food and energy from the civilians of Belgrade in the dead of winter?

There was nothing honorable about it at all.

The French Connection

The first time President Chirac of France realized how fast and far the air campaign had moved from its original, modest size was when he watched the Yugoslav Interior Ministry erupt into a fireball on April 3, day 11 of the war.

"Paris was pretty shocked," a French diplomat recalled. Chirac requested an urgent telephone call with Clinton to discuss the strategy being pursued by Gen. Wesley K. Clark, the supreme allied commander in Europe.


That day, Chirac told Clinton he wanted a say, along with the American president and the British prime minister, in all crucial decisions about the war. Clinton told Chirac the target approval process was already too slow. He agreed to include the Frenchman but proposed that they agree in advance on the kinds of airstrikes over which each leader would reserve a veto.

Chirac asked to review any targets in Montenegro, a small republic of Yugoslavia that had remained democratic and was trying to stay out of the war. Blair wanted a veto over all targets to be struck by B-52 bombers taking off from British soil. And all three leaders wanted to review targets that might cause high casualties or affect a large number of civilians, such as the electrical grid, telephone system and buildings in downtown Belgrade.


Aug 20, 1999 The Guardian UK: 'Nato chiefs ordered the bombing of non-military targets throughout Yugoslavia despite opposition from allied governments, the organization's top general has admitted. In the clearest evidence yet that the military planners overrode their political masters, General Wesley Clark, the supreme allied commander, will reveal tonight how he worked out which governments wanted to push harder, which ones were nervous. He adds pointedly: I didn't always defer to those who wanted targets withheld.',2763,203167,00...

Washing His Hands

Feb 7, 2002 The Colorado Springs Independent Newsweekly:

'Dual-use targets aren't prohibited by international law, Clark said. What's prohibited are purely civilian targets or humanitarian targets. So if a road is used by the military and civilians, the road's a target. If electricity is used by the military and civilians, the electricity's a target. Under such an interpretation, most target restrictions implied by the Geneva Conventions would be thrown out the window, critics have said'.


"Contrary to the beliefs of our war planners, unrestricted air bombing is barred under international law," wrote Walter Rockler, an attorney who prosecuted Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg, in a May 23, 1999 Chicago Tribune op-ed criticizing the war. "Bombing the 'infrastructure' of a country -- waterworks, electricity plants, bridges, factories, television and radio locations -- is not an attack limited to legitimate military objectives."

Published on Wednesday, June 7, 2000 in the Independent / UK
Amnesty International:
NATO Deliberately Attacked Civilians In Serbia
by Robert Fisk

Only five days after NATO was "exonerated" by the International War Crimes Tribunal for its killing of civilians in Yugoslavia last year, Amnesty International today publishes a blistering attack on the Alliance, accusing it of committing serious violations of the rules of war, unlawful killings and in the case of the bombing of Serbia's television headquarters a war crime.
The 65-page Amnesty report details a number of mass killings of civilians in NATO raids and states that "civilian deaths could have been significantly reduced if NATO forces had fully adhered to the rules of war.

Amnesty records that NATO aircraft flew 10,484 strike missions over Serbia and that Serbian statistics of civilian deaths in NATO raids range from 400-600 up to 1,500. It specifically condemns NATO for an attack on a bridge at Varvarin on 30 May last year, which killed at least 11 civilians. "NATO forces failed to suspend their attack after it was evident that they had struck civilians," Amnesty says.

The report says NATO repeatedly gave priority to pilots' safety at the cost of civilian lives. In several investigations of civilian deaths, Amnesty quotes from reports in The Independent, including an investigation into the bombing of a hospital at Surdulica on 31 May. The Independent disclosed in November that Serb soldiers were sheltering on the ground floor of the hospital when it was bombed but that all the casualties were civilian refugees living on the upper floors.

Amnesty says: "If NATO intentionally bombed the hospital complex because it believed it was housing soldiers, it may well have violated the laws of war. According to Article 50(3) of Protocol 1, 'the presence within the civilian population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilians does not deprive the population of its civilian character'.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Wes Clark meets with war criminal. sfecap  Dec-26-03 12:08 PM   #0 
  - I just spoke out agiant an anti Dean flame bait thread  Tom Rinaldo   Dec-26-03 12:10 PM   #1 
  - I hear ya Tom  maddezmom   Dec-26-03 12:12 PM   #4 
  - link please  November 2004   Dec-26-03 12:10 PM   #2 
  - From a British Paper on Clark's Presidential Aspirations.  Tinoire   Dec-26-03 12:15 PM   #9 
  - That is out and out absurd  dsc   Dec-26-03 12:11 PM   #3 
  - Absurd?  sfecap   Dec-26-03 12:27 PM   #22 
     - Yes, absurd.  Padraig18   Dec-26-03 12:29 PM   #23 
        - Gee, they look pretty friendly.  sfecap   Dec-26-03 12:58 PM   #34 
           - It's still a lame non-issue.  Padraig18   Dec-26-03 01:44 PM   #44 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-26-03 12:12 PM   #5 
  - This falme bait doesn't help Gov. Dean at all!  Padraig18   Dec-26-03 12:12 PM   #6 
  - Maybe he was "keeping his enemies closer"?  AP   Dec-26-03 12:13 PM   #7 
  - Clark served honorably in Kosovo  edzontar   Dec-26-03 12:20 PM   #16 
     - What was honorable about it?  Tinoire   Dec-26-03 01:31 PM   #42 
        - It's amazing to me that Bill Clinton had to conduct himself  AP   Dec-26-03 01:41 PM   #43 
        - That dichotomy has struck me too  Tinoire   Dec-26-03 02:21 PM   #51 
        - I fail to see this being Clark's fault  dsc   Dec-26-03 03:33 PM   #55 
  - No context--this is just scandalous flame-bait.  edzontar   Dec-26-03 12:13 PM   #8 
  - force = last resort  meow mix   Dec-26-03 12:15 PM   #10 
  - Moderator  Tom Rinaldo   Dec-26-03 12:15 PM   #11 
  - it gets posted atleast 3 or 4 times a week n/t  maddezmom   Dec-26-03 12:17 PM   #13 
  - many things here are considered up for debate, infact all things  batman   Dec-26-03 12:18 PM   #14 
  - Not in this case...  Donna Zen   Dec-26-03 01:25 PM   #40 
  - Tom you know there is a double standard. . .  wndycty   Dec-26-03 12:24 PM   #19 
  - I think this is one of the most unifying posts today!  Jim4Wes   Dec-26-03 12:16 PM   #12 
  - We may support different candidates, but...  Padraig18   Dec-26-03 12:19 PM   #15 
  - Indeed!!!  edzontar   Dec-26-03 12:20 PM   #17 
  - in a non-inflammatory way...  OrAnarch   Dec-26-03 12:20 PM   #18 
     - Playing devils advocate then  Jim4Wes   Dec-26-03 12:33 PM   #27 
     - I know you will not like this answer,  OrAnarch   Dec-26-03 12:42 PM   #30 
        - I accept that  Jim4Wes   Dec-26-03 12:52 PM   #33 
           - Absolutely.  OrAnarch   Dec-26-03 01:48 PM   #45 
              - I didn't say you couldn't  Jim4Wes   Dec-26-03 02:05 PM   #47 
     - The war against Yugoslavia was all about oil- just like Iraq  Tinoire   Dec-26-03 01:10 PM   #37 
     - I admit I didn't read all of that  Jim4Wes   Dec-26-03 01:16 PM   #38 
     - They were there  Tinoire   Dec-26-03 02:09 PM   #48 
     - Thanks...  OrAnarch   Dec-26-03 03:30 PM   #54 
     - Does this mean you support ethic cleansing?  Donna Zen   Dec-26-03 01:27 PM   #41 
        - Most definately,  OrAnarch   Dec-26-03 03:26 PM   #53 
  - well the rethugs would use this snapshot so clark supporters should  batman   Dec-26-03 12:26 PM   #20 
  - That is true  Tom Rinaldo   Dec-26-03 12:51 PM   #32 
  - note the absence of the 4th grade response, "POOP"  John_H   Dec-26-03 12:27 PM   #21 
  - also note, the title to thread was changed to "meets"  maddezmom   Dec-26-03 12:31 PM   #25 
     - You are correct. n/t  Padraig18   Dec-26-03 12:35 PM   #29 
  - Clark's leadership and his ability to admit a mistake  floridaguy   Dec-26-03 12:29 PM   #24 
  - "Wes Clark meets with war criminal."  Jerseycoa   Dec-26-03 12:32 PM   #26 
  - Clark was on "meet the press"  devrc243   Dec-26-03 12:35 PM   #28 
  - oops  imhotep   Dec-26-03 12:47 PM   #31 
  - So you believe Clark is a war criminal?  November 2004   Dec-26-03 01:01 PM   #35 
  - How useful...  onehandle   Dec-26-03 01:07 PM   #36 
  - ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ  Kahuna   Dec-26-03 01:22 PM   #39 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-26-03 02:02 PM   #46 
  - That would be number 9...  eileen_d   Dec-26-03 02:15 PM   #49 
  - Clark should make his list of "pygmies" and "axis of evil" leaders so  oasis   Dec-26-03 02:18 PM   #50 
  - Is this fair? Probably not.  hedda_foil   Dec-26-03 03:23 PM   #52 
  - accepting matching funds  Jim4Wes   Dec-26-03 03:42 PM   #56 
  - Yawn ... more flame bait .....  SayitAintSo   Dec-26-03 03:47 PM   #57 
  - Locking........  Moderator   Dec-26-03 04:46 PM   #58 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC