15th anniversary of Srebenica massacre
 

post title says it all

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10589614.stm

Another day of shame for UN blue helmets.

Day of shame for the Dutch military as well.

Lessons to be learned:

1. Think about your rules of engagement at least twice.

2. Don't send a military expedition corps without the ability to project superior firepower.

3. In military matters, never accept to depend on the good willingness of your opponent.


4. Pick your side wisely.

lol :lol:

Anyway, they're IMHO much too often trying to blame it all on the Dutch military. As if we were the ones who did all the killing.
We may have not exactly acted valiantly, but we can't be blamed for the killings as we didn't kill anyone.

By not stepping in when it should have done that - to hell with the UN - the dutch military, which was in place, contributed to the massacre becoming a reality.

If one were in place although one was not potent to defend that position, that rates as a mistake of the Dutch, and the UN. If you accept - no matter your motives and considerations - to play the part of the guardian- you guard. Period. If you are not willing or not capable to do that, do not claim that role for yourself.

I think the whole Western policy in that era and in that part of the world was seriously misled and distorted.

the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
skybird is right, being able and not doing anything is the same as handing the AK's to the serbs yourself.

one of my co-workers, a bosnian... the germans would say gastarbeiter... was a survivor of Srebrenica. Couldnt speak for 5 years. we dont know how he survived. we were just given strict instructions not to ask any questions so we dont upset him or anything

To a former coworker; I remember.

That is not my point.

My point is that the West, NATO and the UN, and the Dutch, brought themselves into a position where they probably could have done nothing indeed.

Either you go in in force, or you don't. Either you give the troops you send the means they need to enforce their objectives, or you do not send them at all, and thus do not make any claims at all. Symbolism is no compensation for lacking ability.

Whether or not the Dutch could have achieved something by symbollically making a stand and challeniging the Serbs, forcing them to commit the massacre only at the price of opening fire at the UN blue helmets, is something different. Morally, as UN blue helmets, they would have had the moral obligation to do right that. Militarily, it was stupid to run the mission in a way where one depended on symbolical gestures.

I hate symbolical gestures. I hate them in politics. In military issues. In economis, in ecologics. I hate symbolical gestures for what they are: stupid meaningless idiotic pathetic theatralic symbolic gestures posturing without having a substance in themselves.

Remember that scene from the first Indiana Jones movie where Indy faces that sabre-swinging man, just draws his pistol and shoots him down? That'S how I think about pathos, boasting and symbolics: shooting it down, and moving on and not wasting any more thought on this nonsense.

Lessons to be learned again:

1) Never send the UN to do the job of a professional fighting force.
2) Refer to rule 1 next time something like this happens.

OK, also agree with this point

Just make someone like Teddy Roosevelt as secretary general, Kim Jong Il would be pissing his brown and red pants

How about R. Lee Ermey? He'd scare the daylights out of anybody. :D

x2 :yep::yep:

-The president of iran has the stage: we will not bow to international pressure...
-WHATS YOUR MAJOR MALLFUNCTION NUMBNUTS !!!!!!!
-I am so s-s-s-orry mr s-s-s-secretary general, I meant to say we open borders, allow inspectors and we shutdown all nuclear programs

I wonder why? I think it's his eyebrows! :hmmm:

Definitely the eyebrows. :yep: