I must say, it's very hard to disagree with you. Because in so many ways you are right. Personally, I have never made any illusions about the complete impartiality (and honesty)of such institutions, about the double standards, hypocrisy that is a common thing in international politics, even from a judicial point of view.
Had there been real justice, and intent to bring all sort of war criminals before a court, those of the last decade and those dating back to WW2, and post WW2, then you should have had both people like Arafat, Gadafi, Sharon, high UN officials that were in Bosnia, certain NATO people, some American politicians, some Slovenian (Mitja Ribicic, for post WW2 outerjudicial executions) and a bunch of people from all over the world with blood on their hands. All that is very true. And I am afraid that justice will never get all of them, even though they would deserve it.
posted on 11/05/2001 8:20:52 AM PST
The major bummer about the whole thing is that there was a pretty good chance that there wouldn't have been a war in Bosnia in the first place if outside powers hadn't had their finger in the pie (USA-Izetbegovic-Lisbon Agreement (amongst others
)). If you look at balkan history, they certainly had their own reasons for a big punch up, but on every occaison, the major powers have chosen sides and manipulated the situation to their own benefit - in one way, it's proof that history does
repeat itself - the more people that get involved, the more likely the sh*t will hit the fan. Very depressing really.
posted on 11/05/2001 2:24:57 PM PST
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson