I can see now why I didn't share your recollection. Your citation was to a question from me to the poster who started the thread:As I seem to remember the deliberate targetting of a civilian market in Sarajevo by persons unknown was not considered a war crime by the moderators of this forum, despite it being accepted as a war crime by the Hague and indeed forming part of an indictment. So the standard of war crimes is very high here.
My question to batu doesn't support your claim ("the deliberate targetting of a civilian market in Sarajevo by persons unknown was not considered a war crime by the moderators of this forum"). In the first place, it's a question, not a statement. In the second place, the post leaves the question open as to whether the shelling was deliberate or not, as well as the question of whether the incidents of shelling involved the same military units and commanders. In the third place, the Hague indictment isn't mentioned in batu's post ("despite it being accepted as a war crime by the Hague and indeed forming part of an indictment"). In the fourth place, while the indictment sets forth those elements which make the shelling a war crime -- it charges one individual (Galic) with carrying on a deliberate campaign involving multiple incidents, over a 44 month period of time -- none of those underlying facts or allegations appear in batu's post.batu -- What is supposed to be the war crime?
I refer specifically to these allegations in the indictment:
4. (a) For forty-four months, the Sarajevo Romanija Corps implemented a military strategy which used shelling and sniping to kill, maim, wound and terrorise the civilian inhabitants of Sarajevo. The shelling and sniping killed and wounded thousands of civilians of both sexes and all ages, including children and the elderly.
The indictment of General Galic10. STANISLAV GALIC bears individual criminal responsibility for planning, instigating, ordering, committing, or otherwise aiding and abetting, in the planning, preparation or execution of the campaign of shelling and sniping against the civilian population of Sarajevo and the acts set forth below by the forces and persons under his command, pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Statute of the Tribunal.
http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/engli ... 90326e.htm
You also said:
As described by batu at http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 794#813794 , it wasn't clearly a war crime. Neither the pattern of deliberate shelling and sniping detailed in the indictment, nor the specific command responsibility, nor the indictment itself, were mentioned. That's why I moved the thread. Furthermore, the call of the question raised by batu didn't involve war crimes either, but NATO intervention in Bosnia:The moderators made the decision that the Markale massacre was not a war crime or at least not unambigously a war crime and moved it.
I don't think that an impartial reader would draw any conclusions at all about war crimes from batu's post, my question about it or my having moved the thread, much less that "the standard of war crimes is very high here. [in the H&WC section of the forum]"In my view the Western poicy in this war was clearly biased. Their mediation and peackeeping was onesided and ineffective. It didn't stop any massacres and it was biased and the final Dayton accords only froze the conflict, but not solved it.
I would appreciate constructive remarks and I am not interested in putting all blame on any side.