Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Help--Was Kosovo and Bosnia santioned by the UN?
10/01/04 | self

Posted on 10/01/2004 1:10:20 PM PDT by Sybeck1

I am having a debate with a lib on another board that these two police actions weren't UN approved. He said they were. Any knowledge of this? Thanks


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: Sybeck1

Bill Clinton acted UNILATERALY, and bombed the wrong side, almost starting a war with Russia in the proccess.
It was later, after Clark bombed civilian refugees, that the UN took over the peace keeping, which is a combination of Nato and UN (German and France) commands.

Strange that there were no cries of "UNILATERAL" from Kerry and his loony left followers at that time.

The truth of Bosnia is that Al-Quada was operating in the area back then, and Clinton was completely blind to it.
The Serbs were wrongly blamed as being the agressors, While the opposite is true, the Abanians (Muslims) were continuing the genocide of the Serbs, something that was started during Hitlers reign of terror, with Al Hussaini, Arafats uncle, commanding a waffen SS division, which slaughtered over 100,000 Serbian orthadox Christians, and about 1 million Jews in the area.
It was another example of Democrat ignorance of history, and of liberal media covering it up.
Even back then, we heard it was nothing more but an 'ethnic clash'.

This 'ethnic clash' goes back to 1912, when the Serbs finally, after 200 years of occupation, drove the Muslims (ottoman empire remnants) out. The Abanian Uprizing during the balkan war, was nothing more than a muslim uprizing which we see all over the world.


21 posted on 10/01/2004 1:42:43 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

NO. It was an NATO operation.


22 posted on 10/01/2004 1:49:07 PM PDT by COURAGE (A charter member of the Grim FReeper Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Not only was the bombing of Serbian civilians Not sanctioned by the United Nations, but it was an illegal action in violation of international law.

Bombing of Serbia Violated the UN Charter:

NATO is considered by the UN to be a "regional arrangement." The UN's policy on military intervention by "regional arrangements" is contained in within UN Article 53, which states: "no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council, with the exception of measures against any enemy state..."

Considering that Clinton and his Jewish Cabal never had the explicit backing of the UN, there never was any authorization on behalf of the Security Council thus making the intervention a violation of the UN Charter and international law.

Bombing of Serbia Violated the NATO Charter:

NATO justifies it's actions under its Article 4, which states: "The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened." However no member of NATO was EVER threatened by Milosevic!

Bombing of Serbia Violated the Vienna Convention:

The treaties signed by Serbia are void because the signatories were forced to sign them. Article 52 of the U.N Convention on the Law of Treaties at Vienna (the Vienna Convention) states: "A treaty is void if its conclusion has been procured by the threat or use of force in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations."

Clintoons illegal bombing of Serbia slaughtered more civilians than Milosevic EVER did!

LEARN THE TRUTH AND HELP FREE SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC:http://www.icdsm.org/


23 posted on 10/01/2004 1:50:41 PM PDT by Luciferius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: COURAGE

Clinton acted unilateraly. Only later did Nato become involved. Don't you remember the big row Russia had with Clinton bombing the orthadox Christians? The russians knew what was going on, Clinton didn't. Bush Knows, and thats why he was able to establish good relations with Russia.


24 posted on 10/01/2004 1:53:18 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Another big goof up of the Clinton era was when he toppled a legit, pro American democratic Government in Haiti, and stuck that lunatic Aristole back in. The CIA told Clinton the Guy was a nut, but Clinton had other idea's i gues, a little bit of Greed, and an interest in Voodoo.


25 posted on 10/01/2004 1:56:00 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Strange that there were no cries of "UNILATERAL" from Kerry and his loony left followers at that time.

Even the violently anti-war politician Minnesota Sentator Paul Wellstone voted for this War for Peace.

26 posted on 10/01/2004 2:03:43 PM PDT by DrDavid (I'd Rather Not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Anyways, After Clinton put in troops, nato members joined in shortly after, even the Canadians, who flew more bombing sorties than the Americans ironicly. This goes to show that the Canadian liberals will follow the American liberals, but not the American Republicans, with the exception of Afgahnistan.


27 posted on 10/01/2004 2:05:27 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
I was living in England at the time. Europe was begging President Bush (41) to come and help out to prevent a new European war. President Bush refused, repeatedly. I think he truely understood what was happening and didn't want the US to have any part of it.

Then Clinton was elected. The rest, as they say, is history.

28 posted on 10/01/2004 2:06:17 PM PDT by DrDavid (I'd Rather Not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrDavid

I wonder if this indicates the amount of Islamic money going into the Democrat pockets? It sure looks that way.


29 posted on 10/01/2004 2:08:14 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: gilliam; Trueblackman

How many mass graves have been discovered? What sort of proof is there of genocide? Does anyone have any empirical facts? I've been wondering this for some time now.


30 posted on 10/01/2004 2:08:16 PM PDT by ThomasMore (Pax et bonum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ThomasMore
Tuesday, 23 July, 2002, 22:35 GMT 23:35 UK
Mass grave found near Srebrenica
Members of the International Commission on Missing Persons in Bosnia inspect body remains found in the mass grave
The grave may contain 100 bodies
Forensic experts in Bosnia have discovered a mass grave in the north-east of the country, close to the site of the Srebrenica massacre in 1995.

It is thought the grave contains the bodies of Bosnian Muslims killed by Bosnian Serb forces after they captured Srebrenica.

Scene of the massacre
Thousands of Muslims were killed in Srebrenica during the war
So far the remains of some 15 people have been found, but Murat Hurtic, an official from the Muslim Commission for Missing Persons, said: "We have reason to believe that the grave contains over 100 bodies.

The rest here

Are there any others? Was there really genocide?

31 posted on 10/01/2004 2:14:14 PM PDT by ThomasMore (Pax et bonum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: gilliam; Destro
Yeah right, genocide. They still can't make that charge stick to Slobo 5 years later. Serbs were fighting islamofacists long before we ever started to.

There's a ton of stuff in the archives. Ping Destro for you. Heres a read only thread I had just found for something else.Super-Terrorist Osama bin Laden Seeks Refuge With Albanians in Kosovo

32 posted on 10/01/2004 2:16:14 PM PDT by MadelineZapeezda (CBS: Less than a generation away from insignificancy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

NO. As I remember it the UN was not brought in until after the war was over. This was a NATO action approved by the NATO military and civilian council.


33 posted on 10/01/2004 2:19:05 PM PDT by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Clinton didn't even bother with the UN; the Russians were sure to veto any resolution.

Neither was the war in the U.S. national interest. There was no threat to us, either imminent or gathering, to justify the mission.


34 posted on 10/01/2004 2:21:53 PM PDT by kevao (John Kerry doesn't speak for me; neither does John Kerry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

No the ywerent. The bombing of Yugoslavia to the Serbs from killing the Kosovars wasnt sanctioned by teh UN. Reason: Russian would have vetoed it.


35 posted on 10/01/2004 2:23:25 PM PDT by OhGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
I agree that Clinton bombed the wrong side, but I also fault Bush for not reversing The US siding with the Muslim side.

"The truth of Bosnia is that Al-Quaeda was operating in the area back then, and Clinton was completely blind to it."

Actually Clinton and his goons: Mad-lin All-dumb, Eagelberger, et al all new that the Muslim fanatics from Iran, and Saudi Arabia were shipping arms under our nose. The blockade was supposed to prevent arms from reaching that area to reduce the violence, but Clinton chose to let the Muslim side get Arms and jihadists. As a matter of fact, Bosnia awarded Bin Laden an honorary citizenship for his effort to foment Islamic hate against the Christians. It is unconscionable to think that Bush did not reverse such stupidity, specially after 9/11! The US, and Europe were all lathered up about the "genocide" in Kosovo, and choose to ignore the slaughter of millions of Christian Sudanese by their Arab Muslim government.

36 posted on 10/01/2004 2:24:21 PM PDT by philosofy123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MadelineZapeezda

TMuslims in Bosnia are the same as muslims in any other part of the world. they attack, then claim the victim.

It's the Croatians who are well armed, and picking off the serbs, who now number less than 100,000. The Croatians are backed by Iran, Osama and his goons. The Slave trade, and thats a sex slave, woman trade, drugs, arms smuggling, is rampant in the region. All Islam.
Recently the Croatians attacked Srbia again, burning 1200 year old Orthadox Churches, turning some into garbage dumps, public toilets. None of this ever gets to Lefty media.
There are some news sites around, Goto Jihad watch and look in the archives, this was widely discussed a few months ago there.

I spend 2 tours there, I know whats really going on there.
It's another powder keg ready to blow, except it's the croatians who are going to wipe out the Serbs to the last, thanks to Clinton. They will be largely extinct if that happens, and another part of Christian history will be lost forever.


37 posted on 10/01/2004 2:25:53 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
Help--Was Kosovo and Bosnia santioned by the UN?

Sort of.
IIRC, UN troops from Denmark helped with the logistics of loading some of the
victims onto buses for their "final trip".

Hey, with a track record like Kofi looking over Rwanda, when you want death and mayhem,
call in the blue helmets!!!

(BUT, I will still humbly salute some of the blue helmets who DISOBEYED UN orders
to save some people in Rwanda, as well as some of the UNARMED UN troops who stopped
massacres with nothing but calm talk. This was documented in PBS's FrontLine
"Ghosts of Rwanda" special.)
38 posted on 10/01/2004 2:27:56 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1



". . . when President Clinton went into Kosovo,
he didn't have Security Council authorization."

Hillary Rodham Clinton

(Sept. 15, 2000, Meet the Press)





Click here to check out my web site dedicated to exposing Hillary.

Lots of facts and quotes about the president-wannabe at the John F. Kerry Timeline.


39 posted on 10/01/2004 2:29:50 PM PDT by christie (John F. Kerry Timeline - http://www.archive-news.net/Kerry/JK_timeline.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philosofy123

Actually, in a round about way, he did slow things down. He stopped alot of the smuggling by going into Afghanistan, and stopping Iran from getting their funding and supplies through, and putting Osama's guys on the run.
It's still a powder Keg though.
Did you ever wonder why Clark, after he went to testify, suddenly quit the nomination race and shut right up?
Something smells in Denmark.


40 posted on 10/01/2004 2:32:11 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson