The major theme discussed by the video is not only the cruelty of NATO murdering civilians but also that no one in NATO was held accountable.
One example: A NATO general lied about a civilian passenger train being, using a doctored video. Even though this was discovered the general retired with honors and even ran for president.
As NATO's power continues to grow with Finland and Sweden we need to understand that they are both the most powerful alliance in the history of the world and have no accountability for their actions.
That aside: Can anyone answer why NATO decided to use military force in Yugoslavia? What was in if for them? The welfare of civilians can't be the case given how many NATO killed.
15 Jul 23
@vivify saidObviously, Western leaders bombed civilians because of their emphatic, humanitarian concern for the human rights of all the members of mankind.
[youtube]NMvQS-vIjGE[/youtube]
The major theme discussed by the video is not only the cruelty of NATO murdering civilians but also that no one in NATO was held accountable.
One example: A NATO general lied about a civilian passenger train being, using a doctored video. Even though this was discovered the general retired with honors and even ran for president.
As ...[text shortened]... a? What was in if for them? The welfare of civilians can't be the case given how many NATO killed.
I kid. Yugoslavia/Serbia was a Russian ally and NATO adopted an aggressive stance against Russia and its allies following the fall of the Soviet Union. Intervention in Yugoslavia's civil wars was a part of that strategy.
15 Jul 23
@no1marauder saidThat makes perfect sense.
Yugoslavia/Serbia was a Russian ally and NATO adopted an aggressive stance against Russia and its allies following the fall of the Soviet Union. Intervention in Yugoslavia's civil wars was a part of that strategy.
Thank you.
15 Jul 23
@vivify saidKosovo was a hub for the transport of heroin. To protect that hub of heroin transport the ethnic Albanians (Muslims) had to be protected and stealing Kosovo away from Serbia was the way to do that. NATO protected the heroin trade.
[youtube]NMvQS-vIjGE[/youtube]
The major theme discussed by the video is not only the cruelty of NATO murdering civilians but also that no one in NATO was held accountable.
One example: A NATO general lied about a civilian passenger train being, using a doctored video. Even though this was discovered the general retired with honors and even ran for president.
As ...[text shortened]... a? What was in if for them? The welfare of civilians can't be the case given how many NATO killed.
The very same reasons applied to Afghanistan. The Taliban suppressed opium production there. The USA reversed that to protect the heroin industry. The very same people who made a lot of money in the opium trade (John Kerry's family from the Forbes side) are involved in the heroin trade.
The western empire is deep in the heroin business.
15 Jul 23
@no1marauder saidYeah simples
Obviously, Western leaders bombed civilians because of their emphatic, humanitarian concern for the human rights of all the members of mankind.
I kid. Yugoslavia/Serbia was a Russian ally and NATO adopted an aggressive stance against Russia and its allies following the fall of the Soviet Union. Intervention in Yugoslavia's civil wars was a part of that strategy.
But then there is this
“ By the end of the war, the Yugoslavs had killed 1,500[37] to 2,131 combatants.[38] 10,317 civilians were killed or missing, with 85% of those being Kosovar Albanian and some 848,000 were expelled from Kosovo.[39] The NATO bombing killed about 1,000 members of the Yugoslav security forces in addition to between 489 and 528 civilians.
If life was simple, life would be simple.
@kevcvs57 saidI'm not a "whataboutism" type of guy, but there have been far deadlier civil wars that Western countries and NATO have expressed no interest in intervening in (such as the one in Yemen).
Yeah simples
But then there is this
“ By the end of the war, the Yugoslavs had killed 1,500[37] to 2,131 combatants.[38] 10,317 civilians were killed or missing, with 85% of those being Kosovar Albanian and some 848,000 were expelled from Kosovo.[39] The NATO bombing killed about 1,000 members of the Yugoslav security forces in addition to between 489 and 528 civilians.
If life was simple, life would be simple.
So why that one remains a relevant question.
16 Jul 23
1 edit
@vivify saidThere are many reasons NATO disregarded the Chinese and Russian vetos at the security council vote.
[youtube]NMvQS-vIjGE[/youtube]
The major theme discussed by the video is not only the cruelty of NATO murdering civilians but also that no one in NATO was held accountable.
One example: A NATO general lied about a civilian passenger train being, using a doctored video. Even though this was discovered the general retired with honors and even ran for president.
As ...[text shortened]... a? What was in if for them? The welfare of civilians can't be the case given how many NATO killed.
Everything ranging from a humanitarian intervention, to geo-political manouvering, from a need to help displaced people (it really was a nasty war) to undermining Russia.
Take your pick.
Everything about the Yugoslavic wars is complicated and disgusting. From the racism to the raping, to mass murders of civilians, to international interests being played out.
And although I have 0 respect for NATO and think it should be disbanded (should have been disbanded after the Warsaw pact was disbanded), the players in Kroatia, Serbia and everywhere else in that region, are such disgusting pigs, I really can’t single NATO out as a force for evil in that conflict.
The total disregard for civilians and morality is so blatant and horrifying, it boggles the mind. Sort of like the Ruwandan genocide.
Un-fukking-believable and disgusting. In our bloody life times.
In the words of a November 1997 statement issued by Interpol, the international police agency, "Kosovo Albanians hold the largest share of the heroin market in Switzerland, in Austria, in Belgium, in Germany, in Hungary, in the Czech Republic, in Norway and in Sweden."
https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/KLA-Linked-To-Enormous-Heroin-Trade-Police-2932516.php
Like Abe Lincoln Milosevic was just trying to preserve the union. NATO chose to protect the heroin trade instead of letting it falter. Then NATO chose to protect the opium production in Afghanistan. You can either notice the pattern or ignore it. NATO always sides with the drug trade when it falters somewhere.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/jan/09/how-the-heroin-trade-explains-the-us-uk-failure-in-afghanistan
Or you could fool yourself into thinking this is a mere series of huge failures by the most powerful military in the world.
16 Jul 23
1 edit
@no1marauder saidStop talking like an idiot it’s a direct correlation because that’s exactly the situation that the bombing campaign was meant to stop
I'm not a "whataboutism" type of guy, but there have been far deadlier civil wars that Western countries and NATO have expressed no interest in intervening in (such as the one in Yemen).
So why that one remains a relevant question.
Just accept you’re a racist who believes that Christian Serbian lives are worth so much more than Albanian / Kosovo. Muslim lives and move on.
16 Jul 23
2 edits
@kevcvs57 saidSeriously, GFY.
Stop talking like an idiot it’s a direct correlation because that’s exactly the situation that the bombing campaign was meant to stop
Just accept you’re a racist who believes that Christian Serbian lives are worth so much more than Albanian / Kosovo. Muslim lives and move on.
That you are such a brainwashed child that you believe Western leaders are primarily motivated by humanitarian concerns doesn't justify such a ridiculous, hysterical post.
The wars in the Balkans should have been resolved respecting the basic human right of self-determination, not by insisting that one side "win" and the other "lose". NATO remains there 30 years later enforcing territorial divisions that make little sense.
@no1marauder saidActually, just one more question: why do you think NATO invaded Libya?
Obviously, Western leaders bombed civilians because of their emphatic, humanitarian concern for the human rights of all the members of mankind.
I kid. Yugoslavia/Serbia was a Russian ally and NATO adopted an aggressive stance against Russia and its allies following the fall of the Soviet Union. Intervention in Yugoslavia's civil wars was a part of that strategy.
I get that Gaddafi was allies with Putin; but was that fact alone really enough for them to go through such lengths for a regime change?
16 Jul 23
@vivify saidA target of opportunity; there was already a civil war brewing and intervention in support of the rebels (almost entirely through the use of airpower) was a cheap way to effect regime change.
Actually, just one more question: why do you think NATO invaded Libya?
I get that Gaddafi was allies with Putin; but was that fact alone really enough for them to go through such lengths for a regime change?
Not sure how much the regime's ties to Russia played a part in that decision making; the West had been at odds with Gaddafi for over 40 years.
16 Jul 23
1 edit
@no1marauder saidGFY you disingenuous partisan hack
Seriously, GFY.
That you are such a brainwashed child that you believe Western leaders are primarily motivated by humanitarian concerns doesn't justify such a ridiculous, hysterical post.
The wars in the Balkans should have been resolved respecting the basic human right of self-determination, not by insisting that one side "win" and the other "lose". NATO remains there 30 years later enforcing territorial divisions that make little sense.
NATO had every right to intervene in order to stop a genocidal war waged by Serbian forces and pro Serbian forces and defend Europe from the spread of the conflict
Your BS 1960s Cold War anti western BS explanation of the Balkan conflict and its eventual resolution by NATO is a disgusting display of my side right or wrong all because of your knee jerk hatred for NATO.
For NATO not to have done something to intervene on the side of the undeniable victim in the heart of its territory would have been reprehensible, but your right the Kremlin would have loved their Slavic cousins to carry on the slaughter in the Balkan’s 😢