' “In order to increase the fear among Serbs, they were being kidnapped on a relatively regular basis,” he told the court. '
(of course most of the abductees were never seen again).
' “These attacks... were similar to what went on throughout this campaign, where Albanians who were seen to be siding with the Serb administration were taken out and their businesses either bombed and they themselves murdered,” Crosland told judges. '
And how did Blair, Albright and Clinton tried to stop these terrorists? By joining in their war effort!
KLA apologists consider the Serb response to these terrorists disproportionate. But the good Mr. Crosland shuts them up too:
' By June, Crosland said, the KLA controlled some 35 per cent of Kosovo and was in fact able to launch operations in some 65 per cent of the territory, '
Wow! To anyone with common sense (and honesty), this sounds like by June 1998 these terrorists had become a formidable and quite effective military force poised for a complete takeover of Kosovo (and whatever this would imply for the remaining Serb population and ethnic Albanian loyalists). How would any state respond if not by a military campaign that will inevitably lead to civilian cadualties, as the U.S. has learnt the hard way in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq? If we lighheartedly hold the whole Serbian leadership responsible for "command responsibility" in civilian casualties in Kosovo, how can we honestly avoid holding the whole U.S. leadership for unquestionably higher civilian casualties and destruction in Iraq?
bump
Oh, we didn't forget you too, Hoplite, someone has to defend the KLA.
The KLA terrorists have their fans here on Free Republic.
No comparison. In Kosovo, the Serbs deliberately targeted the civilian population. In Iraq, it is the policy and practice of the United States to avoid civilian casualties. If you read post 3 above, the links lead to Crosland's earlier testimony at the Milosevic trial. He describes in detail the Serbian attacks against civilians.
bttp