Well, I've read the conclusions. The report concludes that the number of victims is "not 8000". This is the most important conclusion. One imporant conclusion is that there should have been burrial sites. Apparently, there has been a lot of exhumation and reburial, and this was confirmed by ICTY on several occasions. So, counting graves is no accurate way to establish casualties. Along the road from Srebrenica to Tuzla, there are still a number of human remains, widely distributed and often in very inaccessible terrain. Over the course of the time, bodies came to be spread even more widely, due to a number of factors. Even in the case of the more accessible mass graves, the process of establishing the number of victims was seriously impeded by the fact that many bodies had been exhumed and moved elsewhere in the period following the executions. In the terminology adopted by the Tribunal, they had been shifted from the larger 'primary' graves to the smaller 'secondary' graves. Thus, the first had been opened, and remains had become mixed up. Exerpt from NIOD report Srebrenica, Part IV Chapter 2.2 I agree that the total number is probably "not 8000". From what I have read, the numbers must be somewhere between 2500 conservative and 7000 max. Of all the research conducted, I believe the following is rather interesting; Over the course of the ensuing years, the International Red Cross published four different versions of its list of missing persons. The final version appeared in July 1998 and lists 7421 missing persons for Srebrenica alone, from a total 19,403 for Bosnia as a whole. Of this number, the fate of only 85 is known for certain: 22 are still alive and 63 are deceased. The list produced by Physicians for Human Rights includes fewer missing persons, its total being 7269. This is because the organization only registered missing persons around Tuzla and Sarajevo, not elsewhere in Bosnia. The conclusion that Brunborg and Urdal drew was that neither list was necessarily any better than the other. Each had strong points and weak points. Taken together, they offered more reliable information. They then compared the lists with the electoral rolls for 1997 and 1998 and with the census of 1991. Nine persons proved to have been erroneously listed as missing. The ICRC's investigations found a further six of the listed people to be still alive. Eventually, the researchers were able to draw up a consolidated list of at least 7475 persons who were either known to be dead or whose current whereabouts were unknown. Brunborg and Urdal also considered the age groups of the missing persons. In the case of the males, there were 76 under the age of 16 and 629 over the age of 60. There therefore remained 6727 men between the age of 16 and 59. Forty-eight women were listed as missing, 26 of whom were over the age of 60. Exerpt from NIOD report Srebrenica, Part IV Chapter 2.2 This comes eerily close to the 6000 people captured, reported by the Serbian Colonel, a few posts earlier. I have to agree that this is "not 8000". Also note that this is also exclusively males, consistent with the genocide as it has been reported. The report also talks about the retreat of the ABiH. I understand that this was a tactical decision made by Bosnian Muslim leaders. Personally, I don't doubt that this is indeed a horrible tactic - especially in retrospect. But by no means does that mean the Serbs were right to have their way with the inhabitants. I also read that a good part of the militia was either captured or didn't make it to the "safe zone" anyway. There is also a lot of talk of inflation. Any official involved will admit to this. However, inflation can mean a lot of things. I've read reports stating 8-12.000 people. That bracket is, beyond any doubt, inflated. 6000 to 8000 is also inflation. Problem is; inflation as such is rarely specified to what part of the number is indeed inflated. But that doesn't mean that genocide didn't occur.