Jump to content

Talk:Legitimacy of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Changed my edit

[edit]

Somebody has changed what I have edited and changed what I wrote after I have shown legitimate proof that it was an illegal attack even the UN says it is and it has been changed without any legitimate sources by Pincrete which has also left no note explaining why it was changed. He has simply changed it to fit what he believes in. I have not added my sources again like last time as you have clearly not read through it as I have quite literally quoted what is written. 2003:FB:9707:9E00:CE8A:1826:9005:4F51 (talk) 16:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have shown legitimate proof that it was an illegal attack even the UN says it is and it has been changed without any legitimate sources by Pincrete which has also left no note explaining why it was changed, As your post and my edit reason make clear, what you are doing is attempting to 'prove' that the bombing was illegal. That is called 'original reasearch' here and isn't what we do. What we do do is document the arguments that have been made by reliable expert sources about whether it was illegal. Insofar as I have an opinion, the bombing was at least of very dubious legality, as were the actions it was intended to stop, but neither my opinion or yours is worth a fig here. Pincrete (talk) 17:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are right our opinions don't offer any answers and i have reread the wikipedia article and it does offer both sides of the picture, so for my edit i apologise. I would like to add though, as i am not sure where to add this in the document, that NATO did also break the Vienna Convention and the Geneva conventions rules of war by bombing Serbian civilian structures such as hospitals, the Serbian Radio and Television Stations and trains is against the Vienna convention. Furthermore, depleted uranium (DU) ammunition was used which goes against Geneva Conventions and the Environmental Protection. Hope it helps and again sorry for before. 2003:FB:9707:9E00:6D64:CD20:10CD:638C (talk) 22:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]