“Vukovar verdict harms Croatia’s lawsuit against Serbia”

Victor have you read the notes with the judgement? I suspect not.

Your problem and hundreds of similar currently slightly hysterical Croats at the moment (I have been following the Croatian reaction in the Croatian media) is that you want that moment - that moment that vindicates the belief that Serbia was 100 percent responsible for the wars and that Croatia was zero percent responsible. Croatian agression against Bosnia is also completely forgotten here.

That moment will never come because it isnt the truth. And for as long as you are searching for that vindication you will continue to feel the pain as the evidence mounts up against the Croatian official view.

The hysteria has gone to fever pitch and I dare not think what the reaction will be if Gotovina and company are found guilty. Seriously if that happened today in Croatia I think there would be a riot.
Years of propoganda of how Croatia was a totally innocent victim (with honourable exceptions from Feral and from jounralists like Hedl) have taken their toll and most people there believe this story. No wonder people are so upset every time this view is contradicted.

What I fail to understand is why verdicts that go 'against' the conventional viewpoint of a given society (in this case Croatia) are not seen as a chance to reflect or re-examine past views held. Instead they are used as an opportunity to set off a wave of hysteria exploited by the media which relishes the opportunities to sell more newspapers. And just as the peoples of the Balkans have shown in the past they fall again for manipulation through emotional reaction.

For sure make rational points about the how the prosecution didnt do the job properly - pointing out where and how, but Mrksic and company cannot be condemned to life imprisonment only because you want Serbia to be guilty of waging war.

One reasonable way to go about minimising future outpourings of discontent would be to urge the Croatian government to drop the case of charging Serbia with genocide - which they will lose and will cause another outburst.

However, in this atmosphere, I'd be surprised if rational thinking will be seen through.

I'd say victor that you should be putting an calming voice forward in Croatia on this not joining the 'lynch them' brigade.

«Former army officer Mile Mrkšić was handed a 20-year prison term, while Veselin Šljivančanin five years for his role in the 1991 murder of 260 Croatian prisoners at Ovčara farm near Vukovar. »A


Who agrees with such a judgment? It takes years to listen to all the arguments and, at the end, there are so many versions of the same facts, that the judges are lost in a sea of contradictions. This is not justice. Justice is much more simple. Most of the Serbs officers participated, delieberately and knowingly, in a joint criminal enterprise, and this massacre at Ovcara is one among many, and all the participants should be sentenced for life in prison.

I had thought Croatia had decided to drop the suit after Bosnia lost. Besides, census records show the Serb population in Croatia ethnically cleansed (and perhaps genocided) not the Croats. The fact that they lost Croat soldiers and police in the middle of the fighting is part of war.

The ratio of Croat civilians/collateral damage to armed forces is much, much lower than the Serb civilian to their forces ratio.

I am still waiting for Serbia to sue Croatia not only for "storm" but for WW2 of which we have a VERY strong case against, we expect a profound apology and massive reparations.

«Victor I take it from your comment that you agree with me that Serbia did not committ genocide against Croatia».

Don't forget that during three (3) months, the Serb forces pounded the City of Vukovar to ruins... and the first thing the army did, after they enter the city was to remove 300 patients and POW from an hospital and gun them down!

How do you call this?

The intention to commit a genocide in Croatia was just as clear as in Bosnia. It was performed by the same «joint criminal enterprise».

Do you agree?

The definition of genocide is clear, any part of a people killed with the intent or knowledge of doing so... therefore genocide occurs often. Sure, vukovar was genocide, and just about any place where more than one person killed was a genocide. Ridiculous I know, but that's how Srebrenica is a genocide. If we had some brains we'd all be able to conclude that the only place that resembles genocide since ww2 in the former yugoslavia is the serbs of Kosovo, being cleansed out and attacked.

Lazar I think you misinterpreted the definition of genocide.

No, genocide is the most serious of war crimes and requires in advance planning, intent and deliberate co-ordination in order to destroy the whole or part of a given group. Its not enough for example for a senior officer to get a machine gun and kill a hundred prisoners all of the same race / ethnic group although that would be a very serious war crime.

But in any case your sentiment is correct. War crimes for example go on in almost every war mankind has ever fought.

bganon, genocide is very loosely defined by the UN. We all know that genocide did not occur in yugoslavia in the 1990s... that's just ridiculous, but we have to use the UN standards so that we can understand how srebrenica as well as all other battles in the former YU were genocide. It's ridiculous, but that's what we should be doing, if we are to accept the ruling of srebrenica.

«We all know that genocide did not occur in yugoslavia in the 1990s... that's just ridiculous...»

Even the officials in the Srpska R acknowledge that a genocide happened at Srebrenica.

I will remind that a genocide does not equate with the 1 million figure. In Ruanda, it started with a few Tutsis and degenerated rapidly. In Bosnia, during the summer of 1992, more that 50 000 Bosniaks were killed, and NATO intervened to stop it.

A genocide was on its way in Bosnia, and NATO stopped it.

Victor I take it from your comment that you agree with me that Serbia did not committ genocide against Croatia.

You know you would not choke if you said such a thing openly! Whats the problem?

Lazar the UN may interpret the word genocide loosely but in practice the courts do not and it is their definition that is binding on world history so to speak

I am still waiting for the Croat gov. to sue the Serbs for the Blieburg massacre which was well covered up by Serb partizans after WW2. It's a pity this will never happen as we currently have a president who wishes that a Partizan-lead YU was still in existence.

«Former army officer Mile Mrkšić was handed a 20-year prison term, while Veselin Šljivančanin five years for his role in the 1991 murder of 260 Croatian prisoners at Ovčara farm near Vukovar. »A


Who agrees with such a judgment? It takes years to listen to all the arguments and, at the end, there are so many versions of the same facts, that the judges are lost in a sea of contradictions. This is not justice. Justice is much more simple. Most of the Serbs officers participated, delieberately and knowingly, in a joint criminal enterprise, and this massacre at Ovcara is one among many, and all the participants should be sentenced for life in prison.

Victor have you read the notes with the judgement? I suspect not.

Your problem and hundreds of similar currently slightly hysterical Croats at the moment (I have been following the Croatian reaction in the Croatian media) is that you want that moment - that moment that vindicates the belief that Serbia was 100 percent responsible for the wars and that Croatia was zero percent responsible. Croatian agression against Bosnia is also completely forgotten here.

That moment will never come because it isnt the truth. And for as long as you are searching for that vindication you will continue to feel the pain as the evidence mounts up against the Croatian official view.

The hysteria has gone to fever pitch and I dare not think what the reaction will be if Gotovina and company are found guilty. Seriously if that happened today in Croatia I think there would be a riot.
Years of propoganda of how Croatia was a totally innocent victim (with honourable exceptions from Feral and from jounralists like Hedl) have taken their toll and most people there believe this story. No wonder people are so upset every time this view is contradicted.

What I fail to understand is why verdicts that go 'against' the conventional viewpoint of a given society (in this case Croatia) are not seen as a chance to reflect or re-examine past views held. Instead they are used as an opportunity to set off a wave of hysteria exploited by the media which relishes the opportunities to sell more newspapers. And just as the peoples of the Balkans have shown in the past they fall again for manipulation through emotional reaction.

For sure make rational points about the how the prosecution didnt do the job properly - pointing out where and how, but Mrksic and company cannot be condemned to life imprisonment only because you want Serbia to be guilty of waging war.

One reasonable way to go about minimising future outpourings of discontent would be to urge the Croatian government to drop the case of charging Serbia with genocide - which they will lose and will cause another outburst.

However, in this atmosphere, I'd be surprised if rational thinking will be seen through.

I'd say victor that you should be putting an calming voice forward in Croatia on this not joining the 'lynch them' brigade.

I had thought Croatia had decided to drop the suit after Bosnia lost. Besides, census records show the Serb population in Croatia ethnically cleansed (and perhaps genocided) not the Croats. The fact that they lost Croat soldiers and police in the middle of the fighting is part of war.

The ratio of Croat civilians/collateral damage to armed forces is much, much lower than the Serb civilian to their forces ratio.

I am still waiting for Serbia to sue Croatia not only for "storm" but for WW2 of which we have a VERY strong case against, we expect a profound apology and massive reparations.

The definition of genocide is clear, any part of a people killed with the intent or knowledge of doing so... therefore genocide occurs often. Sure, vukovar was genocide, and just about any place where more than one person killed was a genocide. Ridiculous I know, but that's how Srebrenica is a genocide. If we had some brains we'd all be able to conclude that the only place that resembles genocide since ww2 in the former yugoslavia is the serbs of Kosovo, being cleansed out and attacked.

Lazar I think you misinterpreted the definition of genocide.

No, genocide is the most serious of war crimes and requires in advance planning, intent and deliberate co-ordination in order to destroy the whole or part of a given group. Its not enough for example for a senior officer to get a machine gun and kill a hundred prisoners all of the same race / ethnic group although that would be a very serious war crime.

But in any case your sentiment is correct. War crimes for example go on in almost every war mankind has ever fought.

bganon, genocide is very loosely defined by the UN. We all know that genocide did not occur in yugoslavia in the 1990s... that's just ridiculous, but we have to use the UN standards so that we can understand how srebrenica as well as all other battles in the former YU were genocide. It's ridiculous, but that's what we should be doing, if we are to accept the ruling of srebrenica.

«We all know that genocide did not occur in yugoslavia in the 1990s... that's just ridiculous...»

Even the officials in the Srpska R acknowledge that a genocide happened at Srebrenica.

I will remind that a genocide does not equate with the 1 million figure. In Ruanda, it started with a few Tutsis and degenerated rapidly. In Bosnia, during the summer of 1992, more that 50 000 Bosniaks were killed, and NATO intervened to stop it.

A genocide was on its way in Bosnia, and NATO stopped it.

Victor I take it from your comment that you agree with me that Serbia did not committ genocide against Croatia.

You know you would not choke if you said such a thing openly! Whats the problem?

Lazar the UN may interpret the word genocide loosely but in practice the courts do not and it is their definition that is binding on world history so to speak

«Victor I take it from your comment that you agree with me that Serbia did not committ genocide against Croatia».

Don't forget that during three (3) months, the Serb forces pounded the City of Vukovar to ruins... and the first thing the army did, after they enter the city was to remove 300 patients and POW from an hospital and gun them down!

How do you call this?

The intention to commit a genocide in Croatia was just as clear as in Bosnia. It was performed by the same «joint criminal enterprise».

Do you agree?

I am still waiting for the Croat gov. to sue the Serbs for the Blieburg massacre which was well covered up by Serb partizans after WW2. It's a pity this will never happen as we currently have a president who wishes that a Partizan-lead YU was still in existence.