Zep 0 #1 March 11, 2006 Slobodan Milosevic has died in his prison cell. for many he was a hero for some he was a criminal History will decide who's right. Gone fishing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkins121 0 #2 March 11, 2006 i cracked up when I heard he had a knife sticking out of his skull.. Die fucker... Die. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydiveStMarys 0 #3 March 11, 2006 What news paper were you reading??? Quote: "Milosevic, who suffered chronic heart ailments and high blood pressure, apparently died of natural causes and was found in his bed, the U.N. tribunal said, without giving an exact time of death." BobbiA miracle is not defined by an event. A miracle is defined by gratitude. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ScottishJohn 25 #4 March 11, 2006 Quote i cracked up when I heard he had a knife sticking out of his skull. Where did you here this ? Quote from rom BBC news "he was found dead in his cell on Saturday morning and that although the cause was not yet clear, there was no indication of suicide." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4796470.stm No mention of any weapon used. It's a shame he died before he was tried. John---------------------------------------------------------------------- If you think my attitude stinks you should smell my fingers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #5 March 11, 2006 QuoteSlobodan Milosevic has died in his prison cell. Didn't another one of his group who was either on trial or waiting for trial "suicide" a few weeks ago? I quote suicide because that's what I recall; and if so, the two deaths of prominent war criminals might want to be investigated a bit more in depth... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #6 March 11, 2006 Quotefor many he was a hero for some he was a criminal So for MANY of us, he was a hero? But only for SOME (approx 10,000 dead Albanians) he's a criminal. Interesting use of words there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #7 March 11, 2006 were they truly Albanians?...were they Albanian citizens?...or were they Muslim seperatists that wanted to take awya part of a soveriegn nation?... I can see both sides easily I also know that after the Kosovo operation led by the UN that the "ethnic albanians" went on an unchecked ethnic clensing of their own just as they had done in the past to claim Kosovo a Serbian state as their own. The Serbians went way, way over the line The "Ethnic Albanians were wrong to start with" what can be learned from all this?... Violence is wrong and illegal immigrants should never try and take away a sovereign nations land it's nearly as if Arizona was taken over by illegal immigrants, who then went on a murder spree and tried to take Arizona as their own country. Then the US Troops tried to evict them. Vigilantes went on an ethnic cleansing spree, and then NATO forces bombed the US for trying to take their own state back. Fucked up all the way around huh? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #8 March 11, 2006 Ok fine, just take out "Albanian" and replace w/ "innocent people." Either way, Milosevic was responsible for the deaths of thousands of people. So I still fail to see how "most" of us think he's a hero, while only "some" (10 grand or more) thinks he's a criminal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkins121 0 #9 March 11, 2006 QuoteQuote i cracked up when I heard he had a knife sticking out of his skull. Where did you here this ? Quote from rom BBC news "he was found dead in his cell on Saturday morning and that although the cause was not yet clear, there was no indication of suicide." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4796470.stm No mention of any weapon used. It's a shame he died before he was tried. John heard it from a third party before I read the story.. Thanks for the info Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #10 March 11, 2006 QuoteI quote suicide because that's what I recall; and if so, the two deaths of prominent war criminals might want to be investigated a bit more in depth... Milosovic has been very ill for quite some time, and I don't think anyone involved with the tribunal would have wanted him dead before he could be sentanced.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #11 March 11, 2006 QuoteFucked up all the way around huh? That it is ... or should I say was, since that part of the world seems to have calmed down. Or is it just a case of other parts of the world heating up. Also for what it's worth, I work with several Serbs and they seem to be good people. But it's no surpise that the ordinary citizen can be a good person while their leaders are anything but. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #12 March 11, 2006 Guess Clinton can stand down now. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2103241;search_string=Clinton%20Milosevic;#2103241 ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zep 0 #13 March 11, 2006 My choice of words, read into it what you will, In this day an age thier is no such thing as innocents. Gone fishing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
outrager 6 #14 March 11, 2006 QuoteOk fine, just take out "Albanian" and replace w/ "innocent people." Either way, Milosevic was responsible for the deaths of thousands of people. So I still fail to see how "most" of us think he's a hero, while only "some" (10 grand or more) thinks he's a criminal. Surprisingly, i agree with everything warpedskydiver have said here Now, substitute "Albanians" with "muslim extremists" or "terrorists", whichever sounds better. For a full picture, substitute Milosevic with Bush, and Kosovo with Iraq - you'll get an idea. Both presidents have caused deaths of many thousands of innocent (and guilty) muslims while advancing the interests of their countries. Both are considered heros by some people, and criminals by others. On the numbers: i know a few hundred million people who consider Milosevic a hero (do you need a hint here?). On the other hand, millions of muslims consider him a criminal. Funny enough, both groups consider Bush a criminal. bsbd! Yuri. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #15 March 11, 2006 QuoteOn the numbers: i know a few hundred million people who consider Milosevic a hero (do you need a hint here?). On the other hand, millions of muslims consider him a criminal. Some reactions to Milosevic's life (and death) here: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/03/11/milosevic.reacts/ These few quotes seem to be parted along party and family lines. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 1 #16 March 11, 2006 QuoteQuoteOk fine, just take out "Albanian" and replace w/ "innocent people." Either way, Milosevic was responsible for the deaths of thousands of people. So I still fail to see how "most" of us think he's a hero, while only "some" (10 grand or more) thinks he's a criminal. Surprisingly, i agree with everything warpedskydiver have said here Now, substitute "Albanians" with "muslim extremists" or "terrorists", whichever sounds better. For a full picture, substitute Milosevic with Bush, and Kosovo with Iraq - you'll get an idea. Both presidents have caused deaths of many thousands of innocent (and guilty) muslims while advancing the interests of their countries. Both are considered heros by some people, and criminals by others. Maybe you should read about a little thing called ethnic cleansing before you get too serious with your parallels between Bush and Milosevic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #17 March 11, 2006 QuoteMaybe you should read about a little thing called ethnic cleansing before you get too serious with your parallels between Bush and Milosevic. If you had to choose between the two, then yes Milosevic did authorize some really bad behavior by his followers and is the worse of the two. But GWB is no angel. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
outrager 6 #18 March 11, 2006 QuoteMaybe you should read about a little thing called ethnic cleansing before you get too serious with your parallels between Bush and Milosevic. I know quite a bit about it. Do not forget that Albanians did exactly the same to Serbs, both sides in that conflict are equally bad. When you pick a side, you help one to cleanse another. Regarding Bush (and Clinton, for that matter - this isn't a partisan issue): what matters is they caused many thousands of innocent people to be killed, same as Milosevic. It absolutely does not make any difference for those people if they died from "ethnic cleansing" or "liberation". I hate when people are killed "for their own good". It adds an insult to an injury. At the very least be honest when you destroy a country to advance your own interests there. bsbd! Yuri. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 1 #19 March 12, 2006 QuoteQuoteMaybe you should read about a little thing called ethnic cleansing before you get too serious with your parallels between Bush and Milosevic. I know quite a bit about it. Do not forget that Albanians did exactly the same to Serbs, both sides in that conflict are equally bad. When you pick a side, you help one to cleanse another. Regarding Bush (and Clinton, for that matter - this isn't a partisan issue): what matters is they caused many thousands of innocent people to be killed, same as Milosevic. It absolutely does not make any difference for those people if they died from "ethnic cleansing" or "liberation". So can we assume that in your opinion, the bombing of Berlin in WW2 by the allies (where many thousands of innocent people were killed) was just as morally reprehensible as the ethnic cleansing of the Jews in the same war, or the wholesale slaughter of Armenians by the Turks? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #20 March 12, 2006 QuoteIt's a shame he died before he was tried. No, he saved the world a lot of grief. Just look at all the crap we're having to put up with for Sadam Hussein's trial. I wish Sadam would die of natural causes in prison and end the misery. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
outrager 6 #21 March 12, 2006 QuoteSo can we assume that in your opinion, the bombing of Berlin in WW2 by the allies (where many thousands of innocent people were killed) was just as morally reprehensible as the ethnic cleansing of the Jews in the same war, or the wholesale slaughter of Armenians by the Turks? Yes. Killing thousands of civilians is equally reprehensible no matter how you want to gift-wrap it. Another good example that often comes up here: nuking many thousands of japanese civilians to save the lives of many thousands of american soldiers. Either a horrible crime or a smart military move - generally depending on a nationality of a poster. You have to take sides here... because it clearly appears that morals depend on which side you take. bsbd! Yuri. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 1 #22 March 12, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo can we assume that in your opinion, the bombing of Berlin in WW2 by the allies (where many thousands of innocent people were killed) was just as morally reprehensible as the ethnic cleansing of the Jews in the same war, or the wholesale slaughter of Armenians by the Turks? Yes. Killing thousands of civilians is equally reprehensible no matter how you want to gift-wrap it. The only way to avoid that would have been to never go to war against Germany at all. Is that what you're advocating? Quote You have to take sides here... because it clearly appears that morals depend on which side you take. I agree. And if you choose not to go to war when humanity itself is under attack, you're taking sides with those who seek to destroy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
outrager 6 #23 March 12, 2006 QuoteI agree. And if you choose not to go to war when humanity itself is under attack, you're taking sides with those who seek to destroy it. What i say is none of these wars were/are fought for humanitarian reasons. Not Yugoslavia, not Iraq, not WW2. Nations go to war to advance their own interests, not to "save people". However, they rarely admit it directly. Instead they shamelessly cite "humanitarian" reasons in PR efforts to justify the war. Sometimes it creates peculiar situations. Same "freedom fighters" aka "terrorists" have migated from Afganistan to Kosovo to Iraq and back to Afganistan, in the process being supported, then hunted, then supported and then hunted again by US - as current interest dictated. bsbd! Yuri. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 1 #24 March 12, 2006 QuoteQuoteI agree. And if you choose not to go to war when humanity itself is under attack, you're taking sides with those who seek to destroy it. What i say is none of these wars were/are fought for humanitarian reasons. Not Yugoslavia, not Iraq, not WW2 I see. Well I admit there has been a lot of hypocrisy displayed on many sides to justify your sentiments. But whether or not WW2 was actually fought for humanitarian reasons, you still haven't answered whether some wars should be fought for humanitarian reasons. When Germany was invading all of Europe and killing millions in concentration camps, would you really have just stood on the sidelines? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
outrager 6 #25 March 12, 2006 QuoteI see. Well I admit there has been a lot of hypocrisy displayed on many sides to justify your sentiments. But whether or not WW2 was actually fought for humanitarian reasons, you still haven't answered whether some wars should be fought for humanitarian reasons. When Germany was invading all of Europe and killing millions in concentration camps, would you really have just stood on the sidelines? Some wars should be fought for humanitarian reasons but this has not happened yet, and probably will not any time soon. I'm not sure what exactly are you asking in the second part. Of course i would defend my country if it were attacked. However if you imply that US entered WW2 to save millions in concentration camps, you are wrong. bsbd! Yuri. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
