Croatian general convicted of war crimes

The Serbs have been kicked as the bad boy of the 90's for too long.

All sides did bad things, but only the Serbs get penalized for it.

But it is only the latest round in a very long conflict.

Agreed. That lingering racist/religious Ustache sentiment in Croatia is some seriously poisonous stuff.

The Croatians ran their own death camp in World War 2 at where they killed over 600,000 Serbs and Jews. It's hard to believe but the truth of it is that the Croats were even more dementedly vicious about what they were doing there than the Nazis were at Auschwitz or Treblinka. The Germans usually killed people outright just to get them out of the way as fast as possible. The Croats at Jasesovic like playing games with their victims, even with the Serbian or Jewish children, like hacking them to death with axes or slowly cutting their heads off with forestry saws.

In true Holocaust-denier mode, the Croats still claim they didn't do anything and that they're all just innocent victims themselves of Communism. The Serbs genuinely deserve a lot of blame for what they did in Bosnia back in the 1990's, and for what they were going to do in Kosovo later on. Going by the pattern the Croats set back in the 1940's though it's easy to see where all the hatred the Serbs have for their enemies came from.

It's funny in a way(not haw haw in any way shape or form), how the Germans remarked on the virulent antisemitism they found in the slavic nations....it actually shocked them.

The level of hate in that part of the world is truly remarkable. That part of Eastern Europe/Slavic Areas are not a happy place and it has been that way for centuries.

Hopefully this conviction will help break that cycle.

That kind of malicious hate has been passed with mothers milk for generations. Shit that happened 300 yrs ago may as well have happened yesterday, and with what they did to each other is going to stay fresh for decades.

hmm, our next op after Afghan and Libya going to be back in the Balkans, or you wanna put money we're gonna end up somewhere else in Africa?

Wherever it is it'll be wearing blue hats and driving unoffensive white vehicles with ROE's so hopelessly ineffective to be essentially worthless...again. The handwringing commentariat demands such.

Aw, c'mon. I think Afghanistan has changed our mindset quite a bit. I think it might be more that we shouldn't get involved at all unless our interests are really at stake. Look at the US - they're certainly not wanting to get their fingers burnt again. Good for Obama for not doing another cowboy number.

Andy, I think it just hardened peoples opinion. The 180 in Afghanistan will be perceived as a victory by the traditional UN peacekeeper camp and by the other side as another drawn out battle with little chance of robust long term political will and support.

I'm guessing any support to an African mission will be limited to UNMO's and strictly support elements. The second an image of a Canadian combat soldier shooting an African hits the media it'll be curtains to the ruling party and they know it.

I'm with you on the getting involved bit. Only in our national interest or stay out.

Well, I used to be one of those handwringing types - supported the idea of peacekeeping missions and that that was our international role. And you've gotta admit, at one time our soldiers did quite a good job of it, and I think had some successes. But Astan hardened me into not wanting to see a bunch of Canadians killed in what seemed like a futile endeavor. I supported NATO going in initially. One of our allies was attacked and we should have gone in there to help him get the bad guys. But, when Bush decided to cut and run to Iraq, and that bullshit of hiring mercenaries to find Bin Laden (who likely took money from him to not find him) and then the mission turned into nation building and if you were against that you weren't patriotic (Taliban Jack) and so forth, it really made me very reluctant to support anything that doesn't really involve us and has no clear objective.

People say our soldiers do a good job peacekeeping, but they are only singing a chorus fed to them by the media. How many people in this country really know what peacekeeping is or was over the past 50 years? Honestly, I don't even know, and I'm supposed to be one of those guys that does it. What stories I've been told by the older members of my regiment of what peacekeeping was, all of whom came from said peacekeeper days, and what the media sells it to be to the public are two very different things.

peace sometimes has to be made(imposed) before it can be maintained.

I wouldn't have put you in the hand wringers camp for supporting UN missions, your support of the deployment to Astan contradicts that, IMO. I was (and still am) perfectly fine with the reason we went into Afghanistan (UN/NATO/Chptr 5 etc). Unfortunately the later on political bafflegab, posturing and inability of the government to maintain focus harmed the mission irreparably.

One of the most offensive things I've seen is those bumper stickers that say "If you don't support the troops feel free to stand in front of them". I don't know where to even start on that shit.

I hope at the very least that the last 10 years have made it perfectly clear to the buffoons in Ottawa, if it's in our national interest, state it and then go big, hit hard, and don't let anything soften the blow. If not then stay out.

C_M, the dinosaurs are correct. The media had no clue.

Yep, it isn't all unicorns and glitter and the fool that thinks so is just that: a fool.