NATO killed 10 civilians, 17 severely injured [+18]

As The Washington Post admitted in a series of articles Sep. 19-21, 1999, NATO  and US generals purposely ordered civilian targets bombed in an attempt to demoralize the civilian population.

Names of civilinas (Serbs) killed on Varvarin bridge during NATO aggression  )

col·lat·er·al
col·lat·er·al (ke-làt¹er-el) adjective
Abbr. collat., coll.
1. Situated or running side by side; parallel.
2. Of a secondary nature; subordinate: collateral target damage from a bombing run.
A question: If Civilians death was secondary, what was the primary target?

On a clear Sunday, 30 May 1999, shortly after 1 p.m., a bridge crossing the Velika Morava river in Varvarin was struck by laser-guided bombs fired by one or two low-flying NATO F-16 warplanes conducting attack operations in the Kosovo war.

The two planes involved were US F-16 fighter jets

The area around the bridge was filled with hundreds of people celebrating an Orthodox holiday [TRINITY] in and around the nearby church, a market place and a fairground. No precautions against air attacks had been taken, as the town is far from Kosovo (approx. 200 km), the aged and narrow bridge was considered insignificant and no military installations were to be found within a radius of 20 km. 

The alliance described the bridge as a "designated and legitimate target",
adding it was "unable to confirm the Serbian report of casualties,
but never intentionally targets civilians". 

Ten civilians were killed and 17 severely injured, some with permanent disabilities, in two attack waves a few minutes apart. Most of the casualties occurred in the second wave, when people had rushed to the bridge to help those wounded in the initial wave.

To this date, NATO has refused to release further details of the airstrike – specifically the nationality of the attacking planes. In a public statement made by NATO spokesman Jamie Shea on 31 May 1999, he declared the Varvarin bridge a legitimate military target.

No explanations or other statements have been issued by NATO since then.

Sixteen-year-old Sanja Milenković, brilliant mathematics student, killed on Varvarin bridge during NATO aggression

The airstrike gave rise to a lawsuit against the German government (one of the NATO countries involved in the conflict). The case was decided against the Serbian plaintiffs, but it is under appeal to Germany's highest court.

The Bridge in Varvarin after NATO  "humanitarian intervention"

BBC report

Nato issued a statement on Sunday, confirming four planes had attacked the bridge over the Velika Morava river at Varvarin. All "precision-guided ordnance" had hit the target, it said.
The alliance described the bridge as a "designated and legitimate target", adding it was "unable to confirm the Serbian report of casualties, but never intentionally targets civilians". [Really?]

Photo is confirmation or no?!?  
+18

Serbia: Marinkovic Zoran one of civilian killed by NATO

I HAVE ONLY ONE QUESTION, FOR NATO'S PEACEMAKERS?

WHY YOU KILLING US?

and why always on Ortodox Holiday? 

[Flash back]




Humanitarian Hypocrisy

Professor Robert Hayden, 

Director, Center for Russian & East European Studies,

University of Pittsburgh

In October 1998 NATO faced a dilemma:⁽¹⁾  while its member states were threatening air attacks⁽²⁾ against Yugoslavia[ Serbia]  in response to Yugoslav attacks on Kosovo Albanians, they also recognized that Kosovo is clearly within the sovereign territory of Yugoslavia [Serbia]. 

On March 24, 1999, NATO resolved this dilemma by committing the first unprovoked, opposed military aggression in Europe since Soviet troops invaded Hungary in 1956. The attacks were clearly contrary to international law and to the UN charter.⁽³⁾ 

The aggression took the form of intensive bombing of the Yugoslav [Serbian] "infrastructure," the first such massive use of air attacks in Europe since World War II. 
As of May 23, after 60 days of bombing, NATO had mounted 7,000 air attacks on more than 500 targets, with munitions alone costing about $20 million per day. While Yugoslav [Serbian] military casualty figures in the first 60 days of the attacks were estimated at being "in the hundreds," NATO had in that time killed as many as 1500 civilians.⁽⁴⁾ 

Further, in the third week of May NATO began to commit textbook war crimes, aimed at depriving the civilian population of Serbia of water and electrical power, and explicitly not aimed at military forces in Kosovo.⁽⁵⁾

Czech President Vaclav Havel has characterized NATO's war as one in which the alliance has "acted out of respect for human rights" and said that it is probably the first war that has been waged "in the name of principles and values."

 He also said that even though NATO acted with no authority from the UN Security Council, this violation of the UN Charter does not constitute an act of aggression or disrespect for international law, but "happened, on the contrary, out of respect for the law, for a law that ranks higher than the law which protects the sovereignty of states": human rights.⁽⁶⁾

 Yet the war supposedly in defense of human rights has produced war crimes by NATO, and a civilian casualty rate that is at least three time higher than the casualty rate of the "intolerable" violations of human rights that NATO was supposedly acting to correct. 

This article argues that this perversion of humanitarianism is the logical result of NATO's action, and that humanitarian catastrophes are likely to be inevitable when the excuse of "humanitarian intervention" is used to justify aggression.

The Asserted Justifications for the NATO Attacks

"To Prevent a Humanitarian Disaster"