Reply #83: Sorry, but this is a ridiculous article [View All]

[SpikeTss]

with totally exaggerated and wrong numbers.

You really shouldn't post articles which have been proven wrong.
Instead read this article, which is more up to date and unbiased:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=8613

Operation Allied Force was not a moral venture. It was, however, carried out in the name of an humanitarian action on behalf of the Kosovo Albanians, and it won support in the NATO-bloc countries by a widespread belief in the authenticity of its moral goals. But such goals are contradicted by the nature of states and the kinds of forces that determine state policy; by the compelling evidence of other, non-humanitarian ends shaping NATO policy; by the character of the leadership of the dominant NATO powers; and by the actual results of the war.

...

NATO's "humanitarian war" against Yugoslavia was damaging to human rights, human welfare, and most of the objectives claimed by the war-makers. The 78-day bombing campaign greatly intensified an already ugly civil war that had produced between 1,800 and 2,000 dead on all sides--most of them ethnic Albanians—prior to the start of the bombing (Dientsbier, 2000a: Par. 42; Chomsky, 2000: 104). This war had been largely brought under control by an agreement signed by the six member Contact Group and Belgrade in October, 1998, thus allowing many of the 300,000 refugees from the first round of fighting to return home (OSCE, 1999a). This relatively stable situation held throughout the fall and winter months through the end of the Rambouillet process (March 18, 1999), the OSCE's withdrawal of its Kosovo Verification Mission, and the onset of NATO's war.