Can A Nation Be Held Responsible For Crimes Against Humanity?

   Today's question from Al Jazeera concerns crime against humanity.

Monday, 26 February 2007

In a landmark ruling, the International Court of Justice has said that the 1995 massacre of nearly 8,000 Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica was genocide, but that Serbia, as a nation,was not responsible. Send us your views.

          * * * *                                                                                It is interesting that this occurred after the U.S. got involved. If the U.S. government has not committed genocide, then the act probably cannot be done. The U.S. has used its military, influence, and money to dominate most of the world. Some people get rich off this chaos, at a safe distance of course. The first objective is keeping the U.S. dollar as the currency for oil. This forces other nations to give the U.S. interest free loans which can be used for (1) the war on drugs in the U.S., (2) the war on drugs that has been exported abroad, (3) the supposed war on terrorism to divide, conquer and rule the World, (4) maintaining U.S. dollars as the oil currency, (5) Paying the Industrial War Complex, and (6) keeping the right politicians in office. This is about money. Bosnian was just collateral damage.

Jack, Houston, USA

          * * * *

This is utter drivel, of course Serbia as a country is responsible for this massacre, how can it not be. Why are karadic and miladic the two main players of this horror war still at large, who is shielding them and why.It should not take mor than ten years to bring them to justice or preferrably get rid of them for good. To me the so called 'world court' wants to get its act together, in its present form it is useless. This ruling is an insult to the poor people who died and their greiving families.

Roberto, Girvan, United Kingdom

          * * * *

After all 650,000 victims are far more than 8,000 victims so we could speak about a genocide also as a result of the Iraqi occupation!

Tomppa, Nr Helsinki, Finland

          * * * *

Nagasaki and Hiroshima were genocides, horrible horrible crimes against humanity, and the people were dancing in the streets of New York as millions were dying. That's genocide and please don't post any rubbish about that kind of genocide being the only way to end a war. If the US had to pay that kind of price, we would never hear the end of it. Let's consider how many lives have been taken in the aftermath of 9/11, and how many innocent Iraqis have paid with their lives to satisfy some kind of insane US agenda.

Evie, Montreal, Canada

          * * * *

Saddam had this many executed and buried in mass graves on many occasions. Killed this many in one day with mustard gas. Yet most comments on this site praise him as a hero. I guess it's ok for the killing to go on, as long as the muslims are doing it against each other or against the Christians or Jews (or Hindus, or Buddhists, etc).

LeotheIsaurian, Detroit, USA

          * * * *

Serbians/Serbia would not be held responsible for genocide (8,000 Muslims) because all who were killed were Muslims, so what...Do you think anyone will be held responsible for the (present) killing of Muslims elsewhere too? I have my doubts.

Sohail Gill, , Pakistan

 

Technorati tags: Bosnia, Muslims, Serbians, Genocide, U.S., Iraqis