Makes you wonder about the uselessness and silliness of the UN trial.

No doubt that he was a bloody despot, but I don't feel any joy over his death. It's just distasteful.

Whenever a tyrant dies, that is a good day, Pavel. He brought misery to millions across the Balkans and ruin upon his own nation. If there is a hell, may he rot in it.

The sneaky sod, escaping justice at the last! It's not good news because he hadn't been convicted so his defenders can use that fact to rehabilitate him as a misunderstood Serbian patriot, second coming of Tito etc.

Pinter can't be too long for this world. I'll drink to that, when that boring old scumbag finally shuffles off his mortal coil and fills Stalin's Valhalla with interminable pauses.

And to make matters worse Milosovic had requested treatment for his dicky ticker in Moscow, but was refused and it looks like it was his heart that did for him in the end. Almost makes him a martyr.

Two deaths in less than a month, in the same U.N. prison. Are the Red Cross or Amnesty International going to do an investigation, or maybe the super sleuths at the Lancet?

If it had been Guantanamo, they would now be shouting their stupid heads off. And yes! I agree, good riddance.

A whole new form of international "justice": outlive the bastards.

He died of natural causes; boredom. But good riddance regardless of how he went.

I'm just glad the theiving, murdering bastard is dead. Any Serb (or anyone else for any reason) who wants to try to paint him as a martyr can sincerely go to hell.

I'm one of those who doesn't get the "revenge" element in "justice." Nothing the UN could punish him with would have ever made him feel any remorse for what he did, nor would it be physically possible to inflict on him all the pain he (ordered) inflicted on others.

The important thing for me in an arrest and incarceration is that the killer is off the streets - unable to harm any more innocents. This killer now meets that description permanently, so it's a happy day as far as I'm concerned.

I agree with the good riddance Milosovic sentiment. Really all we are accomplishing over there is sitting on the lid while the pot simmers. See "Balkans: One Step Closer to War in Kosovo", at http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/balkans/articles/20060311.aspx
There are a million Milosvics over there.

Although this body of opinion is very interesting...

Hard not to crack a smile when one has to listen to Jack Straw describe Milosovic as a 'malign influence'.

There are those who would happily place Straw and his master in exactly the same dock. Which is why this whole 'international law' business is, as the Amercians so pithily say, a complete crock.

Nothing the UN could punish him with would have ever made him feel any remorse for what he did ...

Given the UN's behaviour regarding the citizens of Srebrenica I find it strangely apt that Milosevic should die in a UN 'Safe Area'. We just need Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić to join him in a UN execution centre International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia detention area to make the complete set.

Ha-Ha, you died in prison.

He wasn't actually convicted of anything but that doesn't seem to slow down the condemnation. So I assume you were all there, and know something the court doesn't know? When the chief prosecutor admits they had to drop the genocide charges because of a lack of evidence, you know there are problems.

"Nothing the UN could punish him with would have ever made him feel any remorse for what he did, nor would it be physically possible to inflict on him all the pain he (ordered) inflicted on others."

All the more reason, then, to exterminate him like the bug he was.

Oh, and Fiona: please feel free to explain how the leader of a country would NOT know about these camps(Link), run by his army and militia groups.

Genocidal bastard. I hope he died in agony.

Didn't he help to solve the muslim problem?Weren't we on the wrong side in that war? If I am right about the first bit -(and I haven't done my homework so shoot me down) we need him over her to sort out our muslim problem -and don't tell me we ain't got one - big time.

Kim, asserting that there are camps and putting red dots on a map isn't the same thing as producing evidence. And apparently the Hague thought the same thing because they dropped the charges. Again, do you know something they didn't know? Or is PBS (where you linked) the ultimate authority, so no trial is needed?

Fiona, by that mentality neither was Adolf Hitler convicted of anything although somehow I might find it difficult to like him. As for 'evidence', how many bodies do you need to see?

Can you also please show us where the UN dropped any charges against Milosevic? I am aware that some charges against his son were dropped, in return for his testifying against his father in The Hague, but as at yesterday morning the
indictment against Milosevic stood in its original format (an abridged version is available at the BBC for those not wishing to reading umpteen pages of UN script).

I repeat the point that has been made on here time and time again, that we should not make any attempt to tolerate the intolerable and Slobodan Milosevic just about defines the word 'intolerable'.

Julian, allow me to restate a bit more carefully: he was kidnapped and extradited to face charges of genocide, and none of these charges were made, to quote Carla del Ponte the head prosecutor, "Because there is no evidence for it."
The court then ignored the law regarding extradition and charged him with something else instead.
And over the next few years, Del Ponte, with unlimited funding and support, sympathetic judges had suffered nothing but defeat at the hands of Milosevic, who had no money or support and was handling his own defence. So something is wrong with this scenario.

To be honest, I think there were probably good reasons to charge him, but it should have been done in Yugoslavia for whatever crimes he may have committed in Yugoslavia, not in an international kangaroo court. And finally, an indictment is not a conviction: the presumption of innocence still stands until the conviction is handed down.

"And over the next few years, Del Ponte, with unlimited funding and support, sympathetic judges had suffered nothing but defeat at the hands of Milosevic, who had no money or support and was handling his own defence. So something is wrong with this scenario."

You've obviously never known any true sociopaths. He was a remarkably gifted one so I wasn't even very surprised that he could verbally outmaneuver a mere prosecutor who's bound by prinicples of law.

Look up the history, that when the rest of Eastern Europe was shaking off communist restrictions he was busy looting his country and turning it into a shithole of war and repression. He wasn't the only one, but he was the bastard who decided to use hardcore Balkan nationalism as a road to power and it cost many thousands of human lives. Get over your admiration of his debating skills.

I agree that he should have been tried in (any part of) former Yugoslavia. Ideally however he should have been summarily executied the moment he fell from power and hung from a street lamp in Belgrade with his psychotic wife next to him and so ended up like Mussolini.

For extra style points "sic semper tyranis" should have been writen on his forehead with a marker pen just before the end. He no more "deserved" a trial that Adolf Hitler or Stalin would have deserved one and as Serbia paid as much of a price for his behaviour as any other part of fortmer Yugoslavia, some Serbian rough justice would have been the perfect end but alas it was not to be. Anyway, dying in a jail cell does not really suit the delusional self image of most tyrants so I guess it was a happy ending after all.

"...hardcore Balkan nationalism ..."

There is plenty of that, in all countries involved.

Without saying a word in defence of Milosevic, seems to me he wasn't the only monster or the only nationalist out there or the only one responsible for the Balkan mess, which has a long and venerable history.

Just trying to put things in proportion....

Tuscan Tony posted a link, which proved to be a BBC site, asking for comments on Milosovitch's death. When I looked at it 1500 comments were listed, pro & con, so clearly the subject arouses much interest.
Curiously, it appeared that the "anti" comments were in a similar vein to Perry de Haviland, that is, intemperate, whereas the "pro" comments were in general quite reasoned. Some mentioned the relative positions of Croatia and Serbia in WW2 (Croatians pro Germany, Serbians pro Allies aka British until quite late in the war).

People who are 'reasoned' in defence of a tyrant are in no way admirable.

...and what possible relevence does the political line up in World War II have to the Balkans in 1991? The notion that because the Ustasa were fascists therefore HDZ are fascists is drivel. Franjo Tudjman, whilst no model of moral rectitude, was not the leader of a fascist party (Dobroslav Paraga was Croatia's real fascist would-be leader in 1991 and his party was the HSP, not the HDZ).

"without saying a word in defence of Milosevic, seems to me he wasn't the only monster or the only nationalist out there or the only one responsible for the Balkan mess, which has a long and venerable history."

But Milosevic was the filthy SOB who let the destructive genie of nationalism out of the bottle. So he (and those Serbs who supported/support him) get the majority of the blame. For that, if nothing else, he richly deserves every bit of condemnation (with plenty left over for the lesser lights).

"People who are 'reasoned' in defence of a tyrant are in no way admirable."

An impressive instance of begging the question. Every day barristers give reasoned defences of rapists and murderers, but I do not consider defence lawyers less admirable because of it. Equally, the cogent, reasoned defence given in a trial in no way lessens the evil done by someone guilty of murder, any more than the reasoned prosection than sends an innocent man to jail makes him more evil.

I do not know, or greatly care, how much Slobodan actually had control or knowledge of what his army did. I find war crimes and international law to be, err, rather quaint concepts. His trial has been a farce, and any court that takes 4 years to try one person and still doesn't reach a conclusion is generally not to be trusted in my opinion.

Slobo is a hero to his people and a pariah to his enemies. So it is with any violent warmonger and leader. I would guess his conduct of war is much nastier than say the US's, but much nicer than say the DR Congo's, and perhaps about the same as Russia.

I do wish people would get over the idea that killing civilians is some aberation. It is the normal course of war. It is the purpose of war, and it is what most wars are about. Only in the west, and in the last 150 odd years have we decided it's more fun to let the soldiers fight it out. That is a luxury of countries that can afford professional armies. Everywhere else it's grab your rifle and machete and get them before they get you.

michael farris writes:

"But Milosevic was the filthy SOB who let the destructive genie of nationalism out of the bottle. So he (and those Serbs who supported/support him) get the majority of the blame"

Forgive me while I yawn. When I see the forces of 'International Law' (sic) showing the same relentless zeal in hauling African, Middle Eastern and Asian dictators before their courts of self-importance, I might be impressed.

Until then, however hateful Milosovic might have been, I'll continue to find highly selective show trials in the Hague no more palatable than the ones Stalin organised in Moscow.

I suppose it's worth adding that the bristling outrage at Milosovic from some puffed-up MSM commentators contrasts strangely with their silence about others, equally as hateful.

Pinochet = evil vicious fascist dictator!
Castro = errr... can we get back to you on that?

He spent 5 years in prison during
his trial.
Anyone kept in prison long enough, unconvicted, will die eventually, jailed.
This kangaroo pervercity, now an established custom in the Kangaroo community, should
bother the Europeans.

Slobo is a hero to his people and a pariah to his enemies.

'His people'? I know Serbs who curse the day he was born. The 'defenders' I was referring to were not his lawyers but rather his apologists. As far as I am conserned they can go hang from the next lamp post that was suggested for Milosovic.

"...bristling outrage at Milosovic from some puffed-up MSM commentators contrasts strangely with their ...

Perry,

GCooper just called you "puffed up MSM commentator" !

Personally I could not care a tinker's cuss that he spent 4 years on trial, it's just gladdening to know that this deeply unpleasant man is dead. As for the 'why should we try him when we're not trying anyone else' argument, what should we do with him then? Should we leave him alone with the loot he filched from his own people, simply because Putin's actions in Chechnya make him a worse warcriminal (although certainly not as bad as is made out in the MSM), let alone the rulers of Rwanda and West African hellholes such as Sierra Leone? Will this tolerance extend to Mladic or to Karadic as or when they are captured, or is it different since they were directly involved - akin to Adolf Hitler ordering genocide while Eichmann and Heydrich actually carried it out?

I'm afraid that all we are seeing is the usual Western handwringing and the withered bleating of "something must be done, but please don't violate his rights" in dealing with animals like Milosevic; thankfully these same people were not given voice in 1946, since perhaps the Nuremberg or Tokyo tribunals would not have happened. Far better that this man died incarcerated and without his family, friends and fortune closeby than was allowed to disappear into obscurity in the manner of Jean-Bedel Bocassa, Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier and a clutch of dictators since then.

Far better that this man died incarcerated and without his family, friends and fortune closeby than was allowed to disappear into obscurity in the manner of Jean-Bedel Bocassa, Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier and a clutch of dictators since then.

Damn right!

Jacob writes:

"Perry,

GCooper just called you "puffed up MSM commentator" !"

Now, now, Jacob. I doubt even Mr. de Havilland's worst enemy would say he had much in common with John Simpson...

When the chief prosecutor admits they had to drop the genocide charges because of a lack of evidence, you know there are problems.

WTF?

Thank goodness that lot isn't handling Saddam's trial.