Dutch state liable over 300 Srebrenica deaths A Dutch court rules that the Netherlands bears responsibility for some of the 7,000 deaths of Bosnian Muslim men and boys in Srebrenica in 1995.Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
Bloody dumb, dumb, dumb.
They didn't have the man power or the gun power to prevent this from happening. They were not allowed to do what they wanted to do.
A few of my friends were there. I knew them before they went, and seen them when they came back. The have never been the same since and some are REALLY fucked up.
This is another kick in the nuts for these guys. They went there to HELP.
Dutchbat Commander Thom Karremans, having a drink with Serbian war criminal Ratko Mladic after agreeing to hand over the Bosniaks they were supposed to be defending.
Last estimate I saw over 8,000 died, including 300 or so that were behind Dutchbat before Karremans made his dirty deal with Mladic.
The stench will never wash off him.
Dutchbat Commander Thom Karremans, having a drink with Serbian war criminal Ratko Mladic after agreeing to hand over the Bosniaks they were supposed to be defending.
Because when all else fails you can always .
Kind of difficult not to "collaborate" when you're wildly under-armed compared to the belligerents surrounding you and specifically ordered by some assholes in New York to not even defend yourself, much less make the effort to save the locals around you. As with Karremans, so too with Dallaire in Rwanda. What happened in those places is entirely on the shoulders of the scum in the UN offices, not on the soldiers that they sent over there for their goddamn touchy-feely photo ops. Attempting peace keeping in the middle of an active war zone is a ridiculous joke.
Sorry, not buying it. We were out-gunned and manned in Medak and forced ourselves between the two forces.
I won't even comment on what I think of Dallaire.
Kind of difficult not to "collaborate" when you're wildly under-armed compared to the belligerents and specifically ordered by some assholes in New York to not even defend yourself, much less make the effort to save the locals around. As with Karremans, so too with Dallaire in Rwanda. What happened in those places is entirely on the shoulders of the scum in the UN offices, not on the soldiers that they sent over there for their goddamn touchy-feely photo ops.
The UN screwed the pooch on both Rwanda and Bosnia. The difference was Dallaire didn't hand any Tutsis over to radical Hutus to be slaughtered AFAIK.
Sorry, not buying it. We were out-gunned and manned in Medak and forced ourselves between the two forces.
The Croats definitely knew who the Canadians were after they were stopped in their tracks.
Not sure why everyone tried to deny that it occurred afterward.
Kind of difficult not to "collaborate" when you're wildly under-armed compared to the belligerents and specifically ordered by some assholes in New York to not even defend yourself, much less make the effort to save the locals around. As with Karremans, so too with Dallaire in Rwanda. What happened in those places is entirely on the shoulders of the scum in the UN offices, not on the soldiers that they sent over there for their goddamn touchy-feely photo ops.
The UN screwed the pooch on both Rwanda and Bosnia. The difference was Dallaire didn't hand any Tutsis over to radical Hutus to be slaughtered AFAIK.
Nor did he attempt to protect members of his own force.
Sorry, not buying it. We were out-gunned and manned in Medak and forced ourselves between the two forces.
The Croats definitely knew who the Canadians were after they were stopped in their tracks.
Not sure why everyone tried to deny that it occurred afterward.
Because the idea was that Canada was strictly a "peacekeeping nation". Inflicting casualties on bad people was considered wrong. Even on our first tour in Afghanistan, the Canadian military treated our snipers like pariahs while the Americans held them up as heroes.
Kind of difficult not to "collaborate" when you're wildly under-armed compared to the belligerents and specifically ordered by some assholes in New York to not even defend yourself, much less make the effort to save the locals around. As with Karremans, so too with Dallaire in Rwanda. What happened in those places is entirely on the shoulders of the scum in the UN offices, not on the soldiers that they sent over there for their goddamn touchy-feely photo ops.
The UN screwed the pooch on both Rwanda and Bosnia. The difference was Dallaire didn't hand any Tutsis over to radical Hutus to be slaughtered AFAIK.
Nor did he attempt to protect members of his own force.
The soldiers that were guarding the Rwandan Prime Minister?
Kind of difficult not to "collaborate" when you're wildly under-armed compared to the belligerents surrounding you and specifically ordered by some assholes in New York to not even defend yourself, much less make the effort to save the locals around you. As with Karremans, so too with Dallaire in Rwanda. What happened in those places is entirely on the shoulders of the scum in the UN offices, not on the soldiers that they sent over there for their goddamn touchy-feely photo ops. Attempting peace keeping in the middle of an active war zone is a ridiculous joke.
If I'm charged with protecting 800 innocent people then I'm killing f*cking to protect them and I'd die trying if needed. You give me a company of Marines and I'd have fried Ratko's rectum on a spit.
At the very least I'd forced the SOB to attack me so he'd have to fight a war against people who know how.
Even on our first tour in Afghanistan, the Canadian military treated our snipers like pariahs while the Americans held them up as heroes.
Straight up. There's a number of your guys whose money is worthless in any USMC officers' club.
Kind of difficult not to "collaborate" when you're wildly under-armed compared to the belligerents surrounding you and specifically ordered by some assholes in New York to not even defend yourself, much less make the effort to save the locals around you. As with Karremans, so too with Dallaire in Rwanda. What happened in those places is entirely on the shoulders of the scum in the UN offices, not on the soldiers that they sent over there for their goddamn touchy-feely photo ops. Attempting peace keeping in the middle of an active war zone is a ridiculous joke.
If I'm charged with protecting 800 innocent people then I'm killing f*cking to protect them and I'd die trying if needed. You give me a company of Marines and I'd have fried Ratko's rectum on a spit.
At the very least I'd forced the SOB to attack me so he'd have to fight a war against people who know how.
You also didn't have an anti-military rat back home like Jean Chretien who totally deferred everything in the Canadian deployments to Bosnia/Rwanda to the UN. This is why I always supported the US for staying out of anything that would have put the UN in command over American troops or support personnel in any manner. When the chain of command goes back to New York City and those icky assholes in their office by the Hudson River to be debated on endlessly as not to offend bastards like the Russians, it's guaranteed that the guys who get to wear the blue berets are of the lowest consideration and the most likely to get screwed.
BTW, you don't have to look any farther than Chretien and his lifelong Liberal animosity towards the Canadian military as to understand why Canadians in Afghanistan weren't allowed to accept any recognitions from the other Coalition members. That's the unfortunate way Chretien's mind works and our guys got short changed as a result of it.