Islam views on Prisoners of War

Finally, PRECIOUS: SERBIAN journalist reports from Vukovar, Croatia, town occupied by serbian troops at beginning of the war...

For those that would rather read it later, here's link:

http://www.scc.rutgers.edu/serbian_digest/match.cfm?urlfile=http://www.scc.rutgers.edu/serbian_digest/216/T216-4.HTM&qquery=vukovar#hit

Now, story...

Vukovar - Tale of Blood
by Jovan Dulovic

VREME's reporter Jovan Dulovic was in Vukovar in November four years ago. These are his notes from that trip.

Vukovar, November 13, 1991, 17:30

Seselj and his entourage arrived. There is no real frontline here. The part of Vukovar I'm in is mainly Serb populated and has suffered very little destruction. Only locals, territorial defence men, know which streets to use to get close to the center. But even that isn't safe. Snipers are active all the time. Seselj called a meeting with JNA and territorial defence commanders and volunteers. He is in a camouflage uniform with a submachine gun on his chest. His stone faced body guards are trying to note any potential danger. It's all actually funny. Seselj and the officers and the other commanders with beards, royal army insignia and bayonets. All standing at attention and saluting him.

"We are all one army," Seselj said. "But whose?" Captain Sasa Bojkovski asked. Seselj ignored the question and continued. "No plundering, alcohol or incidents..." I can see he trusts his volunteers who handed him those lies. It's dangerous to go out into the streets at night because everyone is drunk and shooting. One night Seselj's men went drinking and threw a whole case of hand grenades out of the window.

"Your fighters are excellent," a Lt. Colonel said. "They're not my men, we're all one army," Seselj replied and continued: "This war is a great test for the Serbs because whoever gets through it wins. We have a lot of traitors so don't let your men desert unpunished. Lies are being spread about the army, traitor parties are at work. We just arrested Canak who was inciting the Hungarians in Vojvodina." Everyone listens to him carefully. Major Veselin Sljivancanin, Captain Miroslav Radic and a few more officers. Seselj speaks in half truths and explains "We accepted the concept of a Yugoslav army, not a Serb army. That's so there's no legal basis for foreign powers to interfere because this is the federal army fighting against rebel Croatians." He ends with a message: "No Ustashi can leave Vukovar alive." To most of the volunteers and para-militaries every Croat is Ustashi. I'm afraid no one is going to be able to stop them.

That evening at 18:35, Bojkovski told me that some 20 soldiers left a street they captured and that they would have to fight for it all over again. Territorial defence commander Stanko Vujanovic also complained: "We are the first to go in and capture an area, followed by others who look into every cellar and attic to see if any Ustashi are left. But they only look to see what they're going to take from the houses. They're actually a mob." "They're great cleaners," Bojkovski interrupts. "They looked into every drawer and closet."



November 14 1991, 4:30

Two bombs fell from the sky tonight just 100 meters from the house I'm in. We spent the night in the basement. Sljivancanin said Croatian light planes dropped two boilers filled with explosives which does not sound convincing because I was awake all the time and didn't hear anything except Toma Peternek snoring. Later a missile crewman told us our soldiers launched missiles at Vukovar but missed.

I'm completely confused about some units, I don't see who's in command, who obeys who. Everything is done under agreement. In one company for example, there are very few JNA soldiers and a lot of volunteers and territorials and other scum. So who can order a group of semi-drunk volunteers with blood in their eyes and guns in their hands to do anything? I saw them abusing two JNA officers the other day. They almost killed them. No one is accountable for murder here and they attack only when everyone agrees. Alcohol is obligatory. It's more than certain, at least in regard to units in the Nova Street, that their only motive for being there is robbery. There have been killings over plunder.



November 20 1991, 11:30

Horror! Hundreds of women, children, sick, wounded and the elderly are leaving Vukovar hospital. There's a scent of death and rot in the air. Across the street from the hospital are some 100 dead civilians. The bodies of the wounded who died in hospital. They dragged them out at night. Reporters hound the 10 or so nuns carrying new born babies. The nuns refused to say a word. Major Sljivancanin used the opportunity to play warrior. Two days ago he took us to a part of town where hundreds of local people left their cellars for the first time in three months. Sljivancanin stood in front of foreign reporters and used his radio to call the Croat commander of Vukovar Mile Dedakovic to a duel. First a cup of coffee before they grab their weapons. This time he held a speech in front of the hospital: "Gentlemen, we are trying to help our people and stop the killing." He didn't allow doctors from the International Red Cross into the hospital even though they had permits. "There are about 100 people in the hospital who aren't sick or wounded and they're heavily armed," Sljivancanin told the doctors. They insisted but he wouldn't allow them in. "This is a war zone and anyone can die if they don't follow the rules. We want to help everyone," Sljivancanin shouted but few listened.



November 21 1991, 8:00

Something fierce happened last night. Almost everyone is talking about the mass shooting of captured Croats and wounded from the hospital. "We killed them from seven in the evening to one in the morning on Ovcar and Petrova Gora," a big bearded man from Smederevo said over his morning coffee. "On the day of my patron saint, Archangel Gabriel. You should have heard them beg and cry and claim that they didn't shoot or kill anyone."

Dragica from Novi Sad was much more descriptive. But she told me she was worried because everyone in the firing squads on Ovcar was bragging about it. The bodies were buried with bulldozers. The killers carefully plundered their victims' bodies: rings, chains, watches. Everyone says Sljivancanin killed several prisoners to see how his new Ak-47 worked. Captain Miroslav Radic and the other company commanders agreed that a big mistake had been made, that the prisoners should have been killed with more discretion. "I didn't have enough of my own men to do this and I had to bring in drunken volunteers. Now they'll blab and this won't come out good," a territorial defence company commander said. Interestingly, none of them fear a trial but all are afraid of Croat revenge. Actually, many of them told me they weren't sure the Croats won't come back one day.

Yeah. A clear way to die. I mean, aside from every other form of evil, there's always unsafe group sex with the local street gangs and hard drugs. You plan on doing any of that today to show the world how sincere you are about "not resisting evil"?

shorter version:

Seselj and his entourage arrived. There is no real frontline here. The part of Vukovar I'm in is mainly Serb populated and has suffered very little destruction

He ends with a message: "No Ustashi can leave Vukovar alive." To most of the volunteers and para-militaries every Croat is Ustashi. I'm afraid no one is going to be able to stop them.

In one company for example, there are very few JNA soldiers and a lot of volunteers and territorials and other scum. So who can order a group of semi-drunk volunteers with blood in their eyes and guns in their hands to do anything? I saw them abusing two JNA officers the other day. They almost killed them. No one is accountable for murder here and they attack only when everyone agrees. Alcohol is obligatory. It's more than certain, at least in regard to units in the Nova Street, that their only motive for being there is robbery. There have been killings over plunder

Horror! Hundreds of women, children, sick, wounded and the elderly are leaving Vukovar hospital. There's a scent of death and rot in the air. Across the street from the hospital are some 100 dead civilians

Something fierce happened last night. Almost everyone is talking about the mass shooting of captured Croats and wounded from the hospital. "We killed them from seven in the evening to one in the morning on Ovcar and Petrova Gora," a big bearded man from Smederevo said over his morning coffee. "On the day of my patron saint, Archangel Gabriel. You should have heard them beg and cry and claim that they didn't shoot or kill anyone."

Dragica from Novi Sad was much more descriptive. But she told me she was worried because everyone in the firing squads on Ovcar was bragging about it. The bodies were buried with bulldozers. The killers carefully plundered their victims' bodies: rings, chains, watches. Everyone says Sljivancanin killed several prisoners to see how his new Ak-47 worked

I will point out that Christianity resulted in death for Christ, and for his followers.

If you want to reject Christianity, do so. But the message and life of Jesus are pretty clear. Saying that things are worse now than in the Roman occupied times of Christ and the early church is ridiculous.

The interesting question you raise is that living a Christian life (according to the words and example of Christ) is possible or desireable.

That is for each person to decide, but to me this is the unique part of Christianity. Take away love for enemies and forgiveness in the face of brutality and difficulty and what do you have?

If I may make an interesting comparison (to get back on target).

Ahmad's original post said that according to his faith in Islam, he must always treat people with dignity and respect.

Swolf said that according to his/her faith in Christianity, brutality is sometimes justified or even necessary.

I am not going to make a judgement about which religion is better. But I certainly prefer the view of morality that Ahmad presented.

Survival. Why?

I mean, you can love and forgive your enemies WHILE protecting yourself; it's not as if it were a logical contradiction or anything.

That's not a really good statement of my position. The position is that following the model of returning good for evil is a good thing WHEN it can be done in such a way as not to merely produce a complete triumph of evil.

Moreover individual lives are one thing, but I can guarantee you that if a 100,000 man Hun army had appeared on the border intent on razing the entire middle East to the ground and Pontius Pilate had told Jesus he needed every available hand on the wall with bows and arrows, that (on the wall with a bow) is where Christ would have been.

how on Earth you can guarantee that?

Damn it man, you are not Serb after all.
You are Mel Gibson.
I still consider most of your opinions, well, I'll rather not use word....
But despite that I have to tell you that I loved you in Mad Max, Forever Young, Braveheart...
You are quite good actor.

(With apologies to others for this tangent. But this is too ridiculous too pass up.)

Swolf, do you know anything about your religion?

Jesus was Jewish. Pontius Pilate was Roman. Pilate was the enemy. He was a brutal Roman governor.

The Romans did send a huge army that burnt the Middle East to the ground, and because of this army the Jews were subjugated. Most of the Jews were wanting to overthrow the Roman governer (as reported in the Bible and other sources).

If you read the gospels, many of Jesus' followers wanted Jesus to lead a rebellion against Pilate. Jesus accepted his brutal torture and death instead.

Pilate was the villian in the story. He not only crucified Jesus, but he is responsible for similar brutal murders of thousands of Jews as recorded by Josephus and other contemporary historians.

The idea that Jesus would take up arms to defend Pilate, the Roman tyrant who was brutally subjugating and murdering his people ,is ridiculous. This is like saying if Jesus was Iraqi, he would have taken up his AK47 to defend Saddam.

I would suggest you read the Bible if you want to know more about Christianity.

Or watch Jesus Christ Superstar.

Or like saying if Jesus was Iraqi, he would have taken up his AK47 to defend Bush and his troops.
Sorry, but I had too
I know what you meant and I totally respect your views and strong stands, even when we disagree.

Too long. I think Bible in pictures for kids would be enough.
But, after all it's topic about refuting Christianity. Maybe it should be refuted in a way that Jesus is Roman?

The term "Pax Roman" was real, and did not mean brutal subjugation.

Moreover the Romans were being used in the story you read in the Gospels. The pharisees and other Jim and Tammy Fay Bakers of the day had simply threatened to make the province ungovornable if Pilate did not rid them of Jesus and one assumes this was mainly for heaving the moneychangers out the temple and similar acts. There is simply no way in which Romans could have given a rat's rear end about moneychangers being thrown out the Jewish temple.

Take a good drink, some crisps and sit down, and I'll ensure you: the movie won't take long. :wink: ...But did Judas really had to be black, while everyone else was white? I bet they didn't want to link being black with being a traitor/evil, but I would really have enjoyed it if Jesus had been black and Judas had been white :wink:

well it all works Rick as long as Jesus, Judas or God is not Alanis Morrisette.

This can mean: 1. You hate being "Ironic", rather want to be sarcastic. 2. You love South Park. "Blame Canada" "We already apologized for Bryan Adams". And now I bet they have to apologize for Alanis too :wink:

No, haven't you seen that movie where Alanis Morrisette plays God? "Dogma" is croatian title, I don't know what is in original. Kevin Smith's movie with Ben Affleck and Matt Damon if I recall correctly as Bartleby and Loki, an angels trying to get back to Heaven.

But I LOVE South Park

and I love Canada too but am not accepting any apologies for Bryan Adams. Harm is already done.

Pax Romana it is then (I don't know what you call the brutal subjugation then).

But, let's just say that George Bush is the Pontius Pilate of today. Maybe we can agree on that it leave it there?

-----
"Bwing me .... Wodewick!"

In other words, you're claiming that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Franklyn Roosevelt, and every American president and every American soldier who has ever been involved in any American war has been acting in an unchristian or antichristian manner because they should not have resisted evil, and that George W. Bush is a moral equivalent to Pontius Pilate for wanting to liberate the 30 million people of Iraq from one of the worst tyrannies of the last century?

Forgive me if I have difficulty seeing the logic of all that.


Nobody is buying leftist claims that simply citing a British intel claim of an African uranium connection amounts to any sort of a big lie on the part of George W Bush, or that toxic levels of cyanide and mustard agents found in the major rivers of Iraq are leftover from weapons programs of Hammurabi and Nebachanezzer.

There was ample reason to believe that Saddam Hussein had his hands in the anthrax attacks which followed 9/11, in the Oklahoma City bombing, in the original bombing of the trade towers, and in several other kinds of BS over the last ten years. Hussein was the one paying the families of suicide bombers in the middle East, and wsa running a school for hijackers with mockup airliners.

The basic American notion of a presumption of innocence is not meaningful or useful in cases like that of Saddam Hussein. Even the Japanese had the decency to have their own markings on their aircraft at Pearl Harbor; Nobody had to guess who did it. Saddam Hussein, on the other hand, is like the kid in school who was always standing around snickering when things went bad, but who could never be shown to have had a hand in anything directly. At some point, guys would start to kick that guy's butt periodically on general principles. Likewise, in the case of Saddam Hussein, the reasonable assumption is that he's guilty unless he somehow or other manages to prove himself innocent and, obviously, that did not happen.



In taking Hussein out, Bush and Blair have achieved a number of major objectives, any one of which would have justified the effort.

The most major is probably that they have created the opportunity for Arab democracies by creating one example of such or soon-to-be example of such in the midst of the dictatorships. A number of the best analyses available indicate that the total lack of democracy or responsible government in the Arab world is the most major problem in the middle East.

They have eliminated the threat to Saudi Arabia sa well as any need to keep US troops in Saudi Arabia.

They have eliminated major parts of the terrorist network threat to the United States and to our allies.

They have eliminated a major source of funding for terrorism worldwide.

They have significantly creating the situation for putting Iraqi oil back on the market.

They have freed 20 million people from one of the worst despotisms of the last century.

They have put the fear of God into several of the remaining outlaw regimes in the world, most notably North Korea and have taken Libya straight out of the terorism business. We may have actually just averted a disasterous war in Korea by the example of Hussein. Guys like the "beloved leader" in North Korea don't give a rat's ass what happens to their people, but when they see the ruling family and leadership echelon of a place just like theirs targeted and taken out without the people being harmed at all, it gets their attention.

In baseball, you call something like that a "Grand Slam".