You think they didn’t?
Warning shots were fired before the enclave fell.
A ‘last stand’ was decided on but fell apart when the requested (and promised) air support failed to materialize and the Serbs simply regained the attack, bypassing the outposts.
They did position themselves between Serbs and Muslims.
My smiling friend, I’m having real trouble understanding what you are saying.
I going to go ahead and say “yes”. There are plenty of historical incidents where a small, lightly armed force defended against a superior opponent - the Alamo, Lexington & Concord, Rorkes Drift, Wake Island, Warsaw Ghetto uprising, Ia Drang Valley, “Black Hawk Down”, etc. Even when the smaller force was defeated, the battle served a larger purpose in delaying the enemy or providing inspiration.
So basically they pussed out.
Yes, I said “Bihac” when I meant “Medak.” Everyone else knew what I was referring to; why didn’t you? Other than that my depiction of the event was 100% accurate.
Well, if you want to complain that way, kindly take it to the Pit. In here, however, I’ll have to strenously - but politely - point out that that depiction is absolutely correct. The people making up the Croatin and Serb “Armies,” such as they were, were not professional soldiers, but were primarily sociopaths, rapists and thugs in the employ of gangsters and kleptocrats. And that goes double for their Bosnian puppets like the BSA. It’s not because they were brave and noble men that they directed the great majority of their efforts on killing and terrorizing civilians, driving defenseless women and children from their homes in the name of ethnic purity, and raping little girls. When actually faced with professional soldiers - such as in the MEDAK pocket, got it right this time - they were chopped up and ended up running away. Don’t like it? Sorry, but that’s the fact, Jack.
Well, since you are calling me a ‘sociopath, rapist, and thug’, shouldn’t you have put that in The Pit?
**
Oh good Lord. Another yahoo who read a AI or HRW article or two, and thinks they have the vaguest clue of what actually went on. I would go on, but I think that I will spend some quality time, reminiscing about the good ol’ days, raping and plundering until I could rape and plunder (and ethnically cleanse!) no more.
Your call, pal, but I’m not going to flinch from telling the truth. I’m telling the truth, and yes, as a disclaimer, I did have a professional stake in the goings-on there.
Oh, now I am dying to know. What was your ‘professional stake’ in the goings-on there? Merc with the IB? Advisor with SRC? Were you with some sort of ‘humanitarian’ group?
I would love to know what your stake was ‘there’.
Ah, well, you see that is the key thing. What they did beforehand was nullified by the cowerdice they showed then. That, I feel is where they decided to take the easy way out. Were there any justice in the world the Commanders should have to dig individual graves for every one who died.
Brutus, I think I’ve mentioned before I was in the Canadian Forces at the time and was involved with UNPROFOR. Hence the disclaimer. (No, I was not personally at Medak, so it wasn’t THAT immediate an interest.) Beyond that I don’t have any interest in telling you my life’s story.
I hope this doesn’t seem like one of the dumbest questions of all time, but, in a ‘protection force’ situation, are the UN troops expected to act as a deterrent which can call on further forces if required (ie don’t attack us, or we’ll hold you off until reinforcements or airpower arrive) or are they expected to fight to (all?) their death(s) to protect the people whose security they’re charged with?
Well, Brutus I do believe RickJay was unaware of your fine service in the service of war criminals.
You know what? I’ve never heard members of the UN forces or NATO forces, Euro or Americans, who described the Balkan “armies” in anything but the same glowing terms as RickJay. Guess the rest of the world just doesn’t quite understand local standards.
Yes they were only supposed to be a deterrent. The politicians thought a blue helmet would be enough. They were taken totally by surprise that the Serbs weren’t deterred one bit and started to take UNPROFOR soldiers as hostages. They hadn’t counted on serious action at all. If they had been ready for something like that, there would have been better plans and communication and better equiped troops.
Which is exactly my point, why I blame the politicians, they should have known. Or at least have been prepared.
I
The reason I asked is that this quote (above) from RickJay really disturbs me.
If it’s the opinion he holds, fine, he’s entitled to it…but I’d like to know whether he expects (ie expected those Dutch troops) UN forces to fight to the death when necessary?
I hope the UN is taking soldiers from the bravest most altruistic armies on earth, because otherwise, IMO, it’s totally unrealistic.
Well, Andy, that’s an interesting question.
I’m personally of the belief they should have offered significant resistance. They did not. “Fight to the death” implies that they would not retreat if they found the situation untenable, which isn’t realistic - if you aren’t doing any good at all, no point in dying to do it. But my argument, and my assessment of the fighting skill of Serb “forces,” such as they were, is that the Dutch had a legitimate reason to believe the Serbs could be dissuaded by force, based on the fact that in every case where any substantial resistance was offered against the varied “armies” and gangs of Serb/Croat/Bosnian forces, they folded up like a cheap lawn chair. I’ve no doubt the Dutch likely would have taken CASUALTIES, given the odds, but I don’t think they would have died to a man.
Would I have stood and fought? I like to hope so, but I’m not sure. It’s a dreadfully hard position to be in, especially when your command is dithering and confused. It was a dreadful crisis and I’m certainly not going to say the Dutch men are war criminals by omission or anything like that. For that matter, I’m not blaming the individual soldiers on the ground; Private Van Ooostersoccer can hardly be held personally responsible to the level of criminal negligence, given the circumstances. But my honest assessment is that the right thing for a soldier to do in that situation was to protect the civilians by force. Given the command confusion and dithering, they should have defaulted to what was morally right AND what constituted the central and overall purpose and mission of UNPROFOR - preventing the slaughter of the people of Bosnia-Hercegovina.
And to the credit of the Dutch, they didn’t sweep this under the carpet. They faced up to it and confronted the issue. It was a national outrage and caused a government to fall.
A very sad story.
Putting the military tactics aside, this is all that concerned me, in that I felt you were suggesting cowardice in the individual soldiers was the reason for the collective failure. With that put to rest, I’ll step back out of GD 
Can’t be a deterrent if everyone knows you aren’t supposed to fight.
Been reading about the massacre lately and therefore bumping this 10 year old thread. I do wonder why there were no action taken against the Dutch command. The Dutch CO was promoted after the incident.
Surrendering is one thing, herding the peep into trucks for ease of massacre is something else.
Well, the British, and others, delivered Cossacks, and others, to Our Gallant Ally, and others, with rifle butts, even as women killed themselves to avoid transport.
So, the Dutch were allied to the Serbs and had previously agreed to hand the Bosniaks over to the Serbs…yeah got it. Thats why the CO was promoted.
All too often political leaders want their cake and eat it.
They want to be seen to do something, to show that they care, so they send in armed forces, but then hamstring them by surrounding them with restrictions just in case they actually act as armed forces.
If you send in the military, then let them act as military.
And don’t apologise about their actions afterwards if they’re fulfilling the mission.
It sends the wrong message to the bad guys.
As in other theatres, yes we’re invading your country to stop evil, oh sorry if we actually killed anyone or caused some destruction, how can you ever forgive us, heres some money.
What do you mean you hate our guts !
Hey, Claverhouse, I’m seriously interested in finding what is referenced by this: can you give a cite? I’m guessing something to do w/WW2?
Thx,
hh