NATO

[iDemo]

Britansku nuklearnu podmornicu HMS Ambush (Zaseda) iznenadio trgovački brod u Mediteranu. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/20/nuclear-powered-royal-navy-submarine-involved-in-collision

Mora da je imao nečujnu™ elisu... 

[namenski]

To se dogadja, nista spektakularno, pa je tako pocetkom sedamdesetih SFRJ lepo zaradila 75 miliona $, ondasnjih, kad je americka SSBN izronila izmedju Brodospasovog tegljaca i tegljenog broda i prekinula tegalj da bi zatim zaronila i zbrisala.

Ne dovoljno brzo da joj ne bi bio zapisan registarski broj

[vathra]

Имаш скорији случај са америчком подморницом кад су дали уваженом госту да је провоза, а он при израњању ударио у јапански рибарски брод и потопио га, при чему је неколико рибара погинуло.

 

ПС да није превелика цифра за одштету, ако су само прекинули тегаљ?

[namenski]

Имаш скорији случај са америчком подморницом кад су дали уваженом госту да је провоза, а он при израњању ударио у јапански рибарски брод и потопио га, при чему је неколико рибара погинуло.

 

ПС да није превелика цифра за одштету, ако су само прекинули тегаљ?

I meni se cini, pisem po secanju, ali mislim da sam brojku zapamtio, sudjenj, Hag, onaj pravi, zalbe, taj rad...

[iDemo]

I meni se cini, pisem po secanju, ali mislim da sam brojku zapamtio, sudjenj, Hag, onaj pravi, zalbe, taj rad...

E, Brodospas je (bio) ozbiljna firma. K'o i SFRJ... A ne ovo/e danas... 

[bigvlada]

USAF jet makes emergency landing in Russia – and everyone stays calm

 

 

 

 

 

 

Despite landing in an airfield that is not normally used as a point of exit under the Open Skies Treaty, the countries handled the bomber’s emergency landing well, according to the Pentagon.

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2016/0731/USAF-jet-makes-emergency-landing-in-Russia-and-everyone-stays-calm

[iDemo]

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/354362-slobodan-milosevic-exonerated-us-nato/

 

You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to see a pattern here.

[hazard]

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/354362-slobodan-milosevic-exonerated-us-nato/

 

 

The ICTY’s exoneration of the late Slobodan Milosevic, the former President of Yugoslavia, for war crimes committed in the Bosnia war, proves again we should take NATO claims regarding its ’official enemies’ not with a pinch of salt, but a huge lorry load.

 

O cemu ovaj prica? Kakav "exonoration"? Zar sudjenje nije prekinuto Milosevicevom smrcu?

[Radoye]

O cemu ovaj prica? Kakav "exonoration"? Zar sudjenje nije prekinuto Milosevicevom smrcu?

 

Ja nisam ni citao dalje od toga.

[Prospero]

Ima deo u Karadžićevoj presudi koji kaže da nije dokazano da je Milošević bio deo ZZP-a, tj nije dokazano u tom predmetu (in this case), ne znam koliko se tužilaštvo trudilo oko toga:
 
 

3460. With regard to the evidence presented in this case in relation to Slobodan Milošević and his
membership in the JCE*, the Chamber recalls that he shared and endorsed the political objective of
the Accused and the Bosnian Serb leadership to preserve Yugoslavia and to prevent the separation
or independence of BiH and co-operated closely with the Accused during this time. The Chamber
also recalls that Milošević provided assistance in the form of personnel, provisions, and arms to the
Bosnian Serbs during the conflict.11026 However, based on the evidence before the Chamber
regarding the diverging interests that emerged between the Bosnian Serb and Serbian leaderships
during the conflict and in particular, Milošević’s repeated criticism and disapproval of the policies
and decisions made by the Accused and the Bosnian Serb leadership,11027 the Chamber is not
satisfied that there was sufficient evidence presented in this case to find that Slobodan Milošević
agreed with the common plan.

*[JCE je zajednički zločinački poduhvat]

Edited August 3, 2016 by Prospero

[hazard]

Nisam ni ja odma, ali zapravo je trebalo

 

Evo o cemu se radi - delova presude Karadzicu:

 

 

The ICTY’s conclusion, that one of the most demonized figures of the modern era was innocent of the most heinous crimes he was accused of, really should have made headlines across the world. But it hasn‘t. Even the ICTY buried it, deep in its 2,590 page verdict in the trial of Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic who was convicted in March of genocide (at Srebrenica), war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

There was no official announcement or press conference regarding Milosevic‘s exoneration. We’ve got journalist and researcher Andy Wilcoxson to thank for flagging it up for us.

 

Not only was Milosevic not responsible for ethnic cleansing which took place in Bosnia, he actually spoke out against it. The ICTY noted Milosevic’s “repeated criticism and disapproval of the policies made by the Accused (Karadzic) and the Bosnian Serb leadership.” Milosevic, a man for whom all forms of racism were anathema, insisted that all ethnicities must be protected.

 

Posto nisam mogao da citam dalje ovog bljutavog Milosevicevog apologetu i njegove price o tome kako je Sloba bio dete cveca, otisao sam na linkovani tekst ovog drugog tipa...

 

 

The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague has determined that the late Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic was not responsible for war crimes committed during the 1992-95 Bosnian war.

 

In a stunning ruling, the trial chamber that convicted former Bosnian-Serb president Radovan Karadzic of war crimes and sentenced him to 40 years in prison, unanimously concluded that Slobodan Milosevic was not part of a “joint criminal enterprise” to victimize Muslims and Croats during the Bosnian war.

 

The March 24th Karadzic judgment states that “the Chamber is not satisfied that there was sufficient evidence presented in this case to find that Slobodan Milosevic agreed with the common plan” to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb claimed territory.

 

The Karadzic trial chamber found that “the relationship between Milosevic and the Accused had deteriorated beginning in 1992; by 1994, they no longer agreed on a course of action to be taken. Furthermore, beginning as early as March 1992, there was apparent discord between the Accused and Milosevic in meetings with international representatives, during which Milosevic and other Serbian leaders openly criticised Bosnian Serb leaders of committing ‘crimes against humanity’ and ‘ethnic cleansing’ and the war for their own purposes.”

 

The judges noted that Slobodan Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic both favored the preservation of Yugoslavia and that Milosevic was initially supportive, but that their views diverged over time. The judgment states that “from 1990 and into mid-1991, the political objective of the Accused and the Bosnian Serb leadership was to preserve Yugoslavia and to prevent the separation or independence of BiH, which would result in a separation of Bosnian Serbs from Serbia; the Chamber notes that Slobodan Milosevic endorsed this objective and spoke against the independence of BiH.”

 

The Chamber found that “the declaration of sovereignty by the SRBiH Assembly in the absence of the Bosnian Serb delegates on 15 October 1991, escalated the situation,”but that Milosevic was not on board with the establishment of Republika Srpska in response. The judgment says that “Slobodan Milosevic was attempting to take a more cautious approach”

 

The judgment states that in intercepted communications with Radovan Karadzic, “Milosevic questioned whether it was wise to use ‘an illegitimate act in response to another illegitimate act’ and questioned the legality of forming a Bosnian Serb Assembly.” The judges also found that “Slobodan Milosevic expressed his reservations about how a Bosnian Serb Assembly could exclude the Muslims who were ‘for Yugoslavia’.”

 

The judgment notes that in meetings with Serb and Bosnian Serb officials “Slobodan Milosevic stated that ‘[a]ll members of other nations and ethnicities must be protected’ and that ‘[t]he national interest of the Serbs is not discrimination’.” Also that “Milosevic further declared that crime needed to be fought decisively.”

 

The trial chamber notes that “In private meetings, Milosevic was extremely angry at the Bosnian Serb leadership for rejecting the Vance-Owen Plan and he cursed the Accused.”They also found that “Milosevic tried to reason with the Bosnian Serbs saying that he understood their concerns, but that it was most important to end the war.”

 

The judgment states that “Milosevic also questioned whether the world would accept that the Bosnian Serbs who represented only one third of the population of BiH would get more than 50% of the territory and he encouraged a political agreement.”

 

At a meeting of the Supreme Defense Council the judgment says that “Milosevic told the Bosnian Serb leadership that they were not entitled to have more than half the territory in BiH, stating that: ‘there is no way that more than that could belong to us! Because, we represent one third of the population. […] We are not entitled to in excess of half of the territory – you must not snatch away something that belongs to someone else! […] How can you imagine two thirds of the population being crammed into 30% of the territory, while 50% is too little for you?! Is it humane, is it fair?!’”

 

 

Eto, Sloba veliki humanista...

 

Samo sto ja ne vidim sta je tu toliko "stunning". MSP je vec u slucaju genocida u Srebrenici presudio da je jedina krivica Srbije bila ta sto nije uradila dovoljno da ga spreci, ali da ne postoji nikakav dokaz da ga je podrzala, planirala, i tako dalje. Jako bi bilo neobicno da je ICTY sad udario kontru tome - kao sto MSP nije udario kontru ICTY-u, koji je vec pre toga okarakterisao Srebrenicu kao genocid. Nema sanse da ce dva haska suda da se potiru. Postovace presedane ovog drugog, i dopunjavace se, nikako obrnuto.

[Prospero]

US moves nuclear weapons from Turkey to Romania

Home | Global Europe | News

 

By Georgi Gotev, Joel Schalit | EurActiv.com

7:05 (updated: 10:25)

 

US nuclear weapons are stationed throughout Europe.

[Amanda Slater/Flickr]

 

 

EXCLUSIVE/ Two independent sources told EurActiv.com that the US has started transferring nuclear weapons stationed in Turkey to Romania, against the background of worsening relations between Washington and Ankara .

According to one of the sources, the transfer has been very challenging in technical and political terms.

“It’s not easy to move 20+ nukes,” said the source, on conditions of anonymity.

According to a recent report by the Simson Center, since the Cold War, some 50 US tactical nuclear weapons have been stationed at Turkey’s Incirlik air base, approximately 100 kilometres from the Syrian border.

During the failed coup in Turkey in July, Incirlik’s power was cut, and the Turkish government prohibited US aircraft from flying in or out. Eventually, the base commander was arrested and implicated in the coup. Whether the US could have maintained control of the weapons in the event of a protracted civil conflict in Turkey is an unanswerable question, the report says.

Another source told EurActiv.com that the US-Turkey relations had deteriorated so much following the coup that Washington no longer trusted Ankara to host the weapons. The American weapons are being moved to the Deveselu air base in Romania, the source said. Deveselu, near the city of Caracal, is the new home of the US missile shield, which has infuriated Russia.

 

Romania was an ally of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, but it never hosted nuclear weapons during that period. Stationing tactical US nuclear weapons close to Russia’s borders is likely to infuriate Russia and lead to an escalation. The stationing of Russian nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 was the closest the Cold War came to escalating into a full-scale nuclear war.

EurActiv has asked the US State Department, and the Turkish and the Romanian foreign ministries, to comment. American and Turkish officials both promised to answer. After several hours, the State Department said the issue should be referred to the Department of Defense. EurActiv will publish the DoD reaction as soon as it is received.

In the meantime, NATO sent EurActiv a diplomatically worded comment which implies that allies must make sure that US nuclear weapons deployed in Europe remain “safe”.

“On your question, please check the Communiqué of the NATO Warsaw Summit (published on 9 July 2016), paragraph 53: “NATO’s nuclear deterrence posture also relies, in part, on United States’ nuclear weapons forward-deployed in Europe and on capabilities and infrastructure provided by Allies concerned. These Allies will ensure that all components of NATO’s nuclear deterrent remain safe, secure, and effective,” a NATO spokesperson wrote to EurActiv.

The NATO summit took place a few days before the failed coup in Turkey. At that time, the risks for the US nukes in Incirlik were related to the proximity of the war in Syria and the multiple terrorist attacks that have taken place in Turkey in recent months. For some of the attacks, Ankara blamed Islamic State, and for others the PKK, the Kurdish military organisation that appears on the EU and US terrorist lists.

Strong denial by Romania

The Romanian foreign ministry strongly denied the information that the country has become home of US nukes. “In response to your request, Romanian MFA firmly dismisses the information you referred to,”  a spokesperson wrote.

According to practice dating from the Cold War, leaked information regarding the presence of US nuclear weapons on European soil has never been officially confirmed. It is, however, public knowledge that Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and Italy host US nuclear weapons.

After the failed putsch, relations between Washington and Ankara are at their worst since Turkey joined NATO in 1952. Ankara believes the US government supports the Turkish US-exiled cleric Fethullah Gülen, whom it accuses of having masterminded the failed coup. Turkey is demanding Gülen’s extradition, and the issue is expected to take center stage when US Vice President Joe Biden visits Turkey on 24 August.

Arthur H. Hughes, a retired US ambassador, wrote in EurActiv yesterday (17 August) that Gülen has indeed received considerable assistance from the CIA.

 

Russia has capitalised on the stained US-Turkey relations and there are fears in Western capitals that NATO-member Turkey could draw even closer to Moscow – with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan bluntly making it clear he feels let down by the United States and the European Union.

 

[Tribun_Populi]

E milina.

[Takeshi]

pa da ih primaknu iranu.

[Desmond Bojčinski]

Donacije protivgradnih raketa Topol M humanitarnom centru u Nisu mogu da pocnu, ako vec nisu.

Edited August 18, 2016 by desboj