Arms embargoes

[Charles Anthony]

Actually those comments made by Retired Maj Gen Lewis MacKenzie were taken from a E-mail that the Maj Hess-von Kruedener ( the CDN that was killed) Had wrote to the CBC, whom was on the ground in fact he had been on the ground for over 9 months , so he may have known what he was talking about.

Yes. That is why I said that I would rather read the original email and not MacKenzie's interpretation.

I understand that the general public can not be privy to all of the information. MacKenzie's statement are still an interpretation.

Maintaining an arms embargo when there is a desparity in arms makes you complicit with the crimes and the results of the war.

Not letting people freely defend themselves is evil.

Again they did not run away, and did what they could for those civilians "funny you don't mention those that they did mange to save, nor do you mention the Medak pocket where Canadian troops directly engage croat forces engaged in enthic cleansing.

While maintaining an arms embargo, the UN was part of the problem in a grave manner.

Why because he went on tour and explained to people that the serbs were not the only group to commit war crimes. That he went on record and stated the truth. That makes him unbiased, untrustworthy.

You crack me up, read the link. and show me exactly where you get all this.

No. Because he went RIGHT AFTER his duty and said he DID NOT know who was paying him. Hmmm..... I do not trust people who SAY they do not know who is paying them particularly when other people can easily find out.

The UN was drastically under manned ,operating under retarded ROE, and regulations, that tied both hands of every sodier over there ...when your under manned over worked you don't go and spread your forces even thinner in a active combat zone full of drunken Yugoslavians with automatic wpns.So yes there was a problem was there not.

I understand that the UN could not do everything. At the same time, I do not trust the UN was neutral.

Why not lift the arms embargo and let people defend themselves? We would not do the same if it was in our country, would we?

How is your tax dollars funding Gen Mackenzie, just a few posts ago it was funded by the serbs so which is it ?

When he was in the UN, my taxes funded him. If he comments on his actions in the UN, it is fair game.

Canada was not at war with any Balkan nation.

Canadian soldiers fighting in a foreign land (that did not declare war against Canada) are foreign mercenaries paid by Canadian tax-payers for somebody else's interests.

[Army Guy]

Charles Anthony:

Thanks for moving this topic , i believe it really needs it's own space.

Yes. That is why I said that I would rather read the original email and not MacKenzie's interpretation.

I understand that the general public can not be privy to all of the information. MacKenzie's statement are still an interpretation

Yes it is based on a interpretation, one that was based on private conversations with the maj as they talked regularily, one based on experiance, The gen had been on serveral UN mission during his carear. So he's interputation is pretty acurate.

Maintaining an arms embargo when there is a desparity in arms makes you complicit with the crimes and the results of the war.

Not letting people freely defend themselves is evil.

I'm not following your logic here, Yes there was an arms embargo, But enforcing it was next to impossiable, due to the lack of personal. Your making it sound like Muslim and croat forces were running around with old wwI hunting rifles, when everyone knows that is not true.

All one has to do is take alook at the numbers of wpns that were handed in by all citizens to be destroyed in a cash for arms Nato deal. Or better yet, all one has to do is be there during the new years eve celabrations and watch the tracer fire across the sky and that was in 2003.

The arms embargo did little to stem the flow of arms coming to both the Muslims from Arab countries, and Croats coming in from the west and soviets.

The years that the UN was there, the entire country was in total caus, fighting was every where, and the UN did little to stop it, in fact they were concentrating on relief operations not stopping the fighting which could not be stopped without a modern army with all the toys. So explain to me just how the UN and the embargo kept any one from defending themselfs.

My Webpage( muslim forces)

Muslim Hvy arty

While maintaining an arms embargo, the UN was part of the problem in a grave manner.

we've already covered the embargo unless you can give me proof that it did have an effect. as for the UN being part of the problem, your right it was, they had there hands tied by the host groups( Serbs, Croats, Muslims) before they got there, to suit there own needs and goals...

I'll explain, before UN excepted the task all sides in the conflict had to agree on the Size of the UN force and what it could be composed of IE NO tanks, No attack helos, not motars, etc...basically mech lt inf was the heaviest military group allowed.

In other words to satisfy world opinon they allowed the UN in, But lightly armed so they could be quickly and easily pushed aside, leaving all sides to carry on with there plans so nothing really changed...except now they had a scape goat to blame things on...

No. Because he went RIGHT AFTER his duty and said he DID NOT know who was paying him. Hmmm..... I do not trust people who SAY they do not know who is paying them particularly when other people can easily find out

The piont he went Right after he retired is a mout one, really he retired and found work, work that was related to his experiance and expertise, are you saying you find fault with that, This was his opertunity for him to explain what was wrong with the mission and UN operations publically as HE COULD NOT when he was serving.

The Link i provided you explains that, HE later explains who was paying him to the public. His speaking tour was to explain to those that wanted to hear it, The Myth that not only did most of the world leaders hold but most of the world "that most if not all the war crimes committed in that conflict were committed by the serbs." He clearly pionted the finger at all sides including the serbs, he was setting the record right.

The only ones that made a big deal out of it where the croats and muslims, as now alot of people, knew thier hands now had blood on them as well.

It was in benifitical to the serbs to pay him to do that, He spoke the truth and did not speak favourily towards any one side. How could you find a fault with that. unless you can prove that what was said was in fact BS. Do you have such proof...because 5 mins in google i can find tons of crimes that the muslims and croats have been charged with and found guilty of in an inter-national court of law...that is not counting the ones that got away with it.

I understand that the UN could not do everything. At the same time, I do not trust the UN was neutral.

I don't think you do understand, the UN at one piont was just providing relief, not peacekeeping as there was no peace to keep. UN personal were routinly held hostage for money, wpns, etc...they were often hyjack for wpns ,vehs etc...they were thrown in to a conflict to soon, with to little equipment and pers, with rules of engagement that only allowed a soldier to observe...

For someone who has been trained in warfare, that has good morals, and values it tears them apart to watch and not being able to act..."just like those dutch soldiers" they wanted to bring the fight to the serbs ,they were willing to die fighting , they were willing to kick ass or die trying but where held back by the UN and thier chain of command...And now they are remember as cowards...

The UN was as neutral as you can get, it's soldiers as neutral as they could be. I'm not going to defend every UN soldier, but i will comment on my experiances and will say it is extremily difficult to remain neutral when you've seen brutal senseless acts done to the elderly, women and children for no apparent reason other than to terrorise the population....

So in your regards to you pionting your finger and blaming the UN for any of the problems in Bosinia , i would remind you that even with all the problems and inaction the UN is to be blamed for, Nothing and i mean nothing the UN has done or is being blame for, could compare to the acts commited by the Muslim, croat, and serb forces.

When he was in the UN, my taxes funded him. If he comments on his actions in the UN, it is fair game.

Yes he is fair game, but you have made unfounded comments which are not comments, but slander. you've yet proven to all of us that they are true. Just offered your opinion , which like arseholes everyone has one and carrys no wieght to your argument.

Canada was not at war with any Balkan nation.

Canadian soldiers fighting in a foreign land (that did not declare war against Canada) are foreign mercenaries paid by Canadian tax-payers for somebody else's interests.

Been called alot of things but never a merc, going by your logic our entire military since WWII have been involved in merc operations. still going by your logic Canada would have had to declare war on all of bosnia forces in order to bring peace....makes since to me...i think i've said this before but this logic deserves it ...."Your Talking OUT your ASS Again"

Are you croat or Muslim bosnian ?

[Charles Anthony]

Are you croat or Muslim bosnian ?

Neither.

I am a fool who believes military propaganda and lets history repeat itself.

[Army Guy]

Charles Anthony:

Neither.

I am a fool who believes military propaganda and lets history repeat itself.

There is always two sides of the story , whether you want to hear it or not, as for history repeating itself, it has been doing just that ever since man picked up a club...we are creatures of habit and we have a habit of killing each other.