> NATO claims to have good information that 4,600 people have so far
>been killed by the Serbs in Kosovo. With all due skepticism to that
>figure I am utterly convinced that the final figure will be inordinately
>higher. Even so it's a lot more than even the Serbs claim NATO has
>killed.
Arguing about who has killed more people is a bit silly really. Both sides
have killed large numbers of people without concern for the long term or
wider consequences. We don't know how many - you can't really trust either
side (or their media) on this or any other aspect of the crisis.
Does Neil really believe that NATO's intervention will bring peace to this
region? Did he believe that the Dayton Accord would?
Milosevic could have been stopped earlier by negotiation - has Neil read
the joke of an agreement (Rambouillet) that was the basis of previous
negotiations? If not, I suggest he does; he might realise then that
Milosevic probably felt he had very few options (this does not however
excuse Serbian atrocities...)
Opposing this war is not about supporting Milosevic, it is about opposing
the worldwide imposition of unnaccountable military and economic power on
other parts of the world by the USA and its 'allies'.
The arms manufacturers, car-makers and chemical industries in the west are
rubbing their hands at the prospect of rebuilding (ie: taking over) the
Yugoslav economy after the war is over.
This action by NATO will not bring lasting peace, has hastened and
intensified Serbian repression both in Kosov@ and inside Serbia, and it has
no democratic or legal basis. Period.
David.
David Wood
PhD Student ('The Rural Peace Dividend')
Department of Agricultural Economics and Food Marketing
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 7RU
0191 222 5305
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|