Wasn't Milosevic a war criminal on trial at the Hague when he died?
And he was cleared recently of the charges against him. He's dead, but they didn't give up trying to paint him as a Serb hitler.
However, the Court did find that Milošević and others in Serbia had committed a breach of the Genocide Convention by failing to prevent the genocide from occurring and for not cooperating with the ICTY in punishing the perpetrators of the genocide, in particular General Ratko Mladić, and for violating its obligation to comply with the provisional measures ordered by the Court.[10][11]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slobodan_Milo%C5%A1evi%C4%87So, he was a war criminal
Didn't he aid and abet the ethnic cleansing and slaughter of thousands of Croats and Bosnians in previous conflicts in the former Yugoslavian republic just before the Kosovo conflict?
No one could produce a single order sent by Milosevic to Serb fighters in Croatia or Bosnia.
As noted above, he was in the position to, but chose not to, prevent or help prevent the ethnic cleansing in both Croatia and Bosnia. In other words, he did aid, or at least, abet in the ethnic cleansing.
Wasn't he using strident, ethnically-based, jingoistic language and policy promoting Serbs over Albanians in Kosovo, the same language he used in the previous conflicts?
Milosevic was a socialist dedicated to a multi-ethnic Yugoslavia, as the ICTY acknowledges.
The ICTY acknowledged no such thing. They mere dismissed the charges against him for lack of sufficient proof. As for being dedicated to a multi-ethnic Yugoslavia, that proposition is only true if you accept a Yugoslavia where Serbs were in a dominant position (i.e., a Serbian empire).
Language that led to conflicts where thousands of innocent civilians died?
Neither the Nationalist Serb conflict in Croatia and Bosnia, nor the Kosova conflict were created by the Yugoslav government.
Your reply does not address my comment and as discussed above Milosevic and other people within Serbia if not aided, absolutely abetted the nationalist Serb conflict in Croatia and Bosnia.
The US doesn't get props for siding with terrorists in Kosova.
In Kosovo, the U.S. fought the Terrorists and sided with the Freedom Fighters. It was Serbia who was raining down terror on the ethnic Albanians living in that province.
Seriously now, the term "terrorist" is too broad a label, and as my reply to you demonstrates, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Maybe choose another term, or actually describe the crimes you claim the individuals/governments are committing.
As for props, the U.S. helped avoid another prolonged Bosnian-like conflict with their intervention in Kosovo -- and yes, they deserve props for this.
And you're saying the the U.S. should have stood by and given Milosevic a free hand in Kosovo?
Are you saying that the US should side with nationalist terrorists who start wars? Because that's what the KLA was.
I disagree about who started that war. I am not interested in debating this point with you, but I don't accept your claim.
It is unclear where Obama directly supported terrorists. I read the link you posted earlier -- I don't come away with the indication that Obama supported terrorists (presumably you are referring to Al Qaeda in Iraq).
The memo identifies AQI as one of the opposition groups, and identifies that the west (NATO) supports it.
First off, the memo does not indicate that the West supported AQI, but only the opposition. AQI is part of the opposition but NOT all of it. So, it is entirely possible for the West to supports the parts of the opposition not involving AQI.
Do you have any evidence that the West materially supported AQI itself?
There is lots of evidence that the U.S. discriminated amongst the opposition groups as to who to support. Moreover, the U.S. initially provided only non-lethal support to the opposition.
Your memo does not indicate that Obama directly supported terrorists.
Edited 8/6/2016 01:42:31
