Posted on 10/12/2002 6:00:54 AM PDT by kosta50
Me too! But the leadership in Belgrade did not think so. Although they were eligible to come the RSK to help in case of an attack, according to the agreement in 1992. Not sure how the agreement was called. As I said, it depends on the definition of 'our territory'. The territory we are talking about was lost by Austria-Hungary in 1918 to Serbia. Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia in 1914 and lost that war. A good example is Romania. Look at Romania's borders in 1914 and in 1918. Is someone calling Romania nowadays 'Greater Romania'?(except some Hungarians) Why the BS about a 'Greater Serbia' then? Croatia's claim to that territory in 1991, although she had no physical controll over it, had no foundation in any context with the last two World Wars and is absolutely grotesque and even historically criminal in regard of the genocide against serbs during WWII.
Also, you know what I think of the Hague. I would much prefer the EU say to Croatia: try the culprit(s)responsible for Medak fairly in the Croatian court system or risk losing EU ties. After all, Croatia CHOSE to pursue membership in the EU.
He is also responsible for not prosecuting those who behaved irresponsibly under his command, who allegedly violated his orders, etc. The smoking gun is in the fact that neither the Croatian state nor the commander, Gen. Bobetko, prosecuted those involved in the murder of the Medak Pocket. To the contrary, they call it carrying out of their "constitutional duty." Executing POWs and civilians is their constitutional duty?
The truth is, in Croatia there is so much rabid nationalism that no one dares prosecute anyone for having done anything in the name of defending the Homland.
We could always call on Manifest Destiny, and Providence, and so on, and make it "justified," right? As we do God's work, expanding by Providential Will, we can put all Kosovo's Albanians, Rashka's Muslims, and Voyvodina's Hungarians into reservations, can't we?
There is a lot of denial on all sides, Tropoljac, and I knew you would come up with this "defense." Whatever excuses the Serbs may be making -- they are not working. It's obvious: the Hague is full of accused Serbs.
Second, I don't ever remember Serbs suggesting that killing POWs and civilians was fulfilling "constitutional" duty. They may have come up with some other "brilliant" excuse, but constitution was not one of them.
The principle of being in command, which means being in control, is the same no matter whose side you look at. There are only two possibilities in this particular case, and it's this case that's the subject of this post (you are more than free to bring up other cases involving Serb or Muslim, or Albanian, etc. alleged crimes on another post) and these possibilities are: (a) Bobetko sanctioned war crimes, verbally or in writing or (b) lost control over those under his command. In either possibility, there is cupability.
This is compounded by the fact that neither Bobetko, as a commanding officer, nor the Croatian state prosecuted those suspected of committing this act of fulfilling their "constitutional" duty, which can be construed only one way: they condoned it. And the vast majority of the Croatian public apparently still does, hence the incredible pressure on the President from all parties in the Sabor to reject the Indictment.
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.