Thread by @ParrotChecker

From Michael Parenti's "To Kill A Nation," published 20 years ago. Excerpts:

#NATO's war crimes, a great reminder of how the West acts and how it either memory-holes items or completely rewrites history. Starting off with the legal basis, he writes:

Since diplomacy was virtually blocked and rendered a media item only (see my other thread, linked below), there was no way for #Serbia to avoid a war.

Now, the morality aspect of bombing (mainly) civilians plays out. The "unintended" lie materializes.

Back then (we are talking 1999 here), at least some reporters pointed out the aspects of international law and the role of the International Court of Justice (#ICJ) and International Criminal Tribunal (now #ICC) in all of this. The answer is surprising, in some sense.

Regarding the conduct of war by #NATO, there would be plenty of things to judge, if those mentioned legal institutions came into play.

Surely, one would argue, no #NATO commander had civilian casualties in mind when just trying to win a war against Evil itself™.

Or maybe some of the commanders actually said what the aim was. Even "double tapping" wasn't invented by terrorists, but by NATO.

Some law professors tried to get a case going in regard to war crimes committed by Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Tony Blair, Jean Chretien, etc. As you can tell, they've failed, but the reasons remain interesting even today, where e.g. Tony Blair is still on the high horse.

If you wonder how it all started and how diplomacy was basically ruled out, read on here: