Video after the “Read More”. Absolutely nothing unusual from the Sri Lankan Army. And that’s what’s unusual. As for the International Community, they did nothing unusual either, in their own way.
embedded by Embedded Video
YouTube Direkt
The shadow story of the LTTE defeat was how both sides handled the International Community. This video was released by the UN on May 11, 2009. What were the International diplomats aiming for at that late date? The video below preceded the UN trip whose fate is described in the video link above.
YouTube Direkt
Contribute to the Tip Jar or Make a $5 Subscription
The Questions will always remain:
Where was the PEACE PROCESS?
—
As Civil War Ends in Sri Lanka, New Divisions Arise in New York
And as so often happens in New York’s immigrant communities, the ties among Sri Lankans have kept ethnic conflicts in check. The Sri Lankan immigrant community — estimated at about 5,000 in New York City and 9,000 in New York State, New Jersey and Connecticut — has for 30 years, for example, held joint Tamil-Sinhalese New Year’s celebrations in April. They have played joint cricket games at August picnics sponsored by the Sri Lanka Association of New York, which has carefully rotated its presidency between the Sinhalese and other Sri Lankan ethnic groups, including Burghers and Tamils, as well as Sri Lankan Muslims, according to a past president, Pushpa R. Jagoda.
“We are so happy that there is peace in the country,” said Mrs. Jagoda, a Sinhalese who directs a Montessori school in New Rochelle. “We just hope people can move on and help the refugees and help the families that suffered from this terrible war that has been lingering on in our little island.”
The task now is to find a way to talk together about the politics of peace, said Ahilan Kadirgamar, a spokesman for the Sri Lanka Democracy Forum, which has been critical of the Tamil separatists and the government.
—
But for now, Dr. Harin will continue to refrain from talking politics at his favorite restaurant.
“I’ve known Sanjay for many years,” he said, using a nickname for the restaurateur. “I take my friends there. I value his friendship and I know he’s a good, decent man.” And, he added, recalling rice curries, fried fish and Sri Lankan desserts, “He’s a very good cook.”
Best line from the first video: “They have been positively identified as dead.”
The war was fought like wars are fought and ya know what? somebody lost and the war is over.
Why America cannot fight wars as they should be fought and win is due to PC and the moral high ground which if not dumped now will be the place America meets it’s Little Big Horn.
“What were the International diplomats aiming for at that late date? ”
Frequent Flier Miles.
War is a peace process. When somebody wins a war peace breaks out. When nobody wins, nobody has peace.
Sweden is the perfect example of why wars go on for years, decades without being won or lost by either side. thousands more die than would have died during an all out fight.
This is why Sweden will soon be swedestan and swedes will be full of shi’ite.
Good riddance to Prabhakaran, the late and unlamented leader of the LTTE. At least there was a non-PC addled force–namely a reinvigorated and rearmed Sri Lankan military–that was finally able to give him and his ilk the fate that they so richly deserved. Now that the terrorist Prabhakaran is finally at room temperature, the world is a better place.
Too bad the Israelis lack the cojones to render unto Hamas in a similar fashion.
Barry,
I fear you are describing not too distant USofA.
As the video said, the Sri Lankan army had full political support for the operation, so it quickly succeeded.
As Mencius Moldbug says, there is no asymmetrical warfare. If there is it ends quickly with the defeat on the weaker side. What we call asymmetrical warfare actually means one side is militarily weak but has supporters on the other side that restrain it from using full force. In this case the LTTE had foreign diplomats restraining the Sri Lankan army.
Jean-Francois Revel talked about the sophistry of the term “sovereignity.” The concept of sovereignity was used to justify any action that a government (communist of course) took toward its own people. There was “human rights” for anti-communist regimes, “sovereignity” for communist regimes.
This sophistry needs to come to an end. Anyone who enables a hostile force, terrorist, subversive, guerrilla, or otherwise, by arguing for “human rights” or something similar, is actively supporting that force. People who want actual constitutional government and actual human rights need to have the resolve to stand up to lawfare and diplofare.
OT but indicative that the sheep may be stirring
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_lawmakers__expenses_12
After 3 centuries the British Parliament have forced out a Speaker. May American find some backbone also.
Civilian casualties! civilian casualties! civilian casualties!
A contributor here at the BC once posted, brilliantly – and I can only paraphrase, – that ‘civilians’ are the key to keeping a guerrilla-type war going. They provide infrastructure to keep their forces supplied. They are then, by default, participants in the war.
Starling: – Exactly. LMAO
The diplomats all wring their hands
With faces of dismay
And cry Sri-Lanka army bands
Should never fight that way
Killing those who fight you now
Is hardly ever done
Have not they heard we’ve taken vow
That wars should not be won?
And now they’ve gone and killed them all
The leaders and their friends
And cast upon the peace a pall
With tidy tied-up ends
For who can they negotiate
The peace terms with when they
Have put them in a death-like state
Not even we can stay
How could Sri-Lanka fight a war
Without our firm consent
Don’t they know that we are for
The conflict permanent?
Sri Lanka must have seen the writing on the wall. Israel is a good example of what was in store for them if they didn’t crush the Tamils.
Israel should now look to Sri Lanka to see how it is done with a different benefactor.
Remember that the Indian government isn’t carrying any torch for the LTTE, ever since they assassinated Rajiv Gandhi. The LTTE have had support from their ethnic kin in Tamil Nadu, but never from the centre (Delhi). I’d be interested to know what the Indians make of the increase in Chinese influence in their own backyard, however. Perhaps it’s a case of letting the superpowers wipe out the pests, both in Sri Lanka and in Pakistan.
And maybe it’s just that my ears are becoming accustomed to monotone American, but I found both of those anchors very difficult to understand…easy on those hi-tones, guys.
I don’t even need to look at the videos before commenting. Steadfast leadership and ignoring the UN and international “peace” industry is how they put an end to 25 years of misery and death.
If say, NYC were nuked tomorrow, most Americans would support an immediate surrender. Since fighting would deprive them of power, and their real enemy is the “Straight White guy.”
The Sri Lankans are not divided that way, as the West mostly is (this includes Israel). Most Westerners would rather millions of their fellow Westerners/nationals get nuked out of existence than fight against an enemy that seeks to nuke them.
It’s why you see Queers for Palestine, why women’s groups support Hamas, why women and gays and Blacks and Hispanics in general support Jihadists, oppose Israel’s existence wish the former success in wiping out the latter, and would celebrate another attack in the same manner they did 9/11. Their real enemy is the average White guy they’d have to share power with.
Which I think was the real message of WWI and WWII, how the average person in the West, particularly the US and Britain, mattered the most and the celebrated elites, from the Left, mattered the least.
NYC gone AND we get to fight Islamofacists? Talk about a win-win.
The PC approach to the reality of war is to forego the hard work of definitive outcomes and to lazily redefine the argument as moot. The petulant child can not postpone the gratification of being the bet taker in the conflict. One that takes a little off the top. This never ending cascade of incomplete conflicts will coalesce like the subprime bubble into one massive conflagration.
Did anyone here watch “Jericho”?. NYC can get bent (or nuked, whatever), we here in Texas would fight…whoever it takes.
2. starling:
“”Best line from the first video: “They have been positively identified as dead.””
Second best line; “..the political machinery was robustly behind the military operation…”. Pretty much explains it all.
I find it interesting that the break-through is attributed to co-opting one of the Tamils to provide intel.
16. whiskey:
“If say, NYC were nuked tomorrow, most Americans would support an immediate surrender. ”
I think that if NYC got nuked there would not be enough Dems left to carry the state, that would swing the balance to the Repubs. We would fight. LA, Hollywood and San Fran might secede (who would care?) but the rest of the country would stand up.
This is how wars are fought. Absolutely true. But, in most cases, when an army does this, there is a larger neighboring country or countries that are supported by the world community that threatens to annihilate the army if it continues. India had helped prevent this kind of victory in Sri Lanka for the last 25 years.
Sadly, when we put our Marines on trial every time a bullet flies in the wrong direction in the midst of a fire fight, we prevent our soldiers from doing whatever little we allow them to do. Worst yet, is that these young men are tried by a Jury which has no idea what they are dealing with.
Anyone who has been in a war will tell you it is scary stuff. Bravery is not the lack of fear – that would be lunacy. Bravery is overcoming fear and doing the right thing. When bullets are flying by the millions and bombs exploding everywhere, death is omnipresent. Soldiers revert to their primal survival instinct. That is why extensive training is crucial. It injects all that knowledge deep down into the primal reflexive state. Those who do not get that do not survive long.
If it looks like a threat, you have about a tenth of a second to kill it or it may kill you. Sometimes you have an oops. But, when every oops becomes a jail sentence, soldiers get demoralized and become much less effective. We really need to change those rules.
On the other hand, some wars simply cannot be won this way. When we won WWII, Germany, Italy and Japan were still there. The people picked up the peaces of their lives and decided it was not worth it.
If (I wish I could say when) we defeat the radicals in Iraq, Iraq will still be there and the Iraqis will hopefully do what the Germans, etc did.
In other cases, the fight is an existential one. A war lost like this means a people will no longer exist. The Israeli-Palestinian war is a glaring example. Unless there is a complete genocide that kills everyone and all those connected to them, the war will have to end up at the negotiating table at sometime. Why not start there and spare the lives of many from both sides.
The principle we are talking about applies both ways. What if the Moslems decide to ignore the UN and the world community and attack Israel? Sure Israel can do a lot of damage. But, what if they are willing to sacrifice “a few cities” as Ahmadinijad stated and a few million people to do it. Would it be accepted? Would the Israelis give up on Israel and move somewhere else?
Doubtful. They will continue to fight until the last breath. If needed, they will revert to the guerrilla tactics they employed against the British be to insure their survival.
Hamas is a late comer to the fight. Past organizations have been defeated and dispersed. But, since the issue of existence remained, other organizations took their place.
And, each was more radical than the one before it.
It is scary to think that Al-Qaida is now declaring Hamas a softy. Hamas is not radical enough for their taste. They say the same about Hizbullah also. They cannot believe that they actually accept to live with other Lebanese.
Radical action begets more radical action and imagination is the only limit.
Something to consider when the conflict is about the existence of a people.
These conflicts can only end in one of two ways. Complete genocide and/or displacement to a far away land. Or, a negotiated settlement that both sides can live with.
Cadmus