The roots of the conflict stretched back 800 years, as I mentioned at the beginning of the thread.  It;s very difficult to get people to give up their traditional hatreds. The whole area has this miserable little man who would be king thing going..with every tom dick and harry claiming that the next guy in line pisses upriver from where they drink and wash their clothes. Perpetual batshit victimhood driving real victimizers. One side of a street fighting the other side..burning each others houses down in turn in the middle of the night. Piles of diapers and booby trapped shelters in the mountains from people running into the hills or being driven there. Kids moving land mine markers for fun and profit.

Beautiful place though, just gorgeous fields and thickets. Dirts real easy to sleep in. Girls were pretty, too.

(June 10, 2018 at 11:39 pm)Khemikal Wrote:

(June 10, 2018 at 10:36 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: Even the sons of the Khan fought with each other.

Regular sunnis and shias, weren;t they.  

The mongols overcame their enemies because they had superior training, tactics, and organization.  It;s not magic, wars aren;t won or lost through some sort of karmic debt or curse.  Let;s at least try not to be silly.

Nobody mentioned magic. But I mentioned what was known and famous about Mongol victories:

1-They are always outnumbered.
2-The enemy forces usually despise their small numbers and march like idiots towards the Mongol deadly archers.
3-The enemy kills Mongol messengers in a move full of ego and despise.

If the skinny guy kicked your ass, think. You're doing something wrong, or maybe God cursed you..showed you a message or something? don't be so full of yourself for a change, and let the glories of the past centuries blind your sight.

The Mongols destroyed the ego of the world and humiliated feared armies with mere small numbers.

---

(June 10, 2018 at 11:56 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote:

(June 10, 2018 at 9:33 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: I stressed a section from Clinton's statement that I think points strongly to the cultural problem some European white communities have with Islam and Muslims. The political goals of the Serb leaders are understandable, but to murder Muslims in specific on a scale this big requires years for the grudge and the hate to be ready.

That's because you are very biased and you want to see only what you want to see and you are very keen on playing a victim. Like Clinton said there was war in Croatia before that, where whole Christian cities were destroyed and people killed by same politics and people that killed Muslims later on, but you just don't give a shit about that.

What was carried against Muslims was an "ethnic cleansing". The victims weren't civilian casualties of a civil war; they were just like the German Jews who got ethnically cleansed by the German Nazi regime.

The random killing of "people from a certain ethnic group" for the sake of "cleaning the area from their existence" is called "ethnic cleansing":

Quote:ethnic cleansing
noun
noun: ethnic cleansing

1. the mass expulsion or killing of members of one ethnic or religious group in an area by those of another.
   

(June 11, 2018 at 1:38 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: What was carried against Muslims was an "ethnic cleansing". The victims weren't civilian casualties of a civil war; they were just like the German Jews who got ethnically cleansed by the German Nazi regime.

The random killing of "people from a certain ethnic group" for the sake of "cleaning the area from their existence" is called "ethnic cleansing":

What Civil War are you talking about? You again failed to read what Bill Clinton wrote:

Quote:They were supportive of Milosevic’s desire to turn as much of Yugoslavia as he could hold on to, including Bosnia, into a Greater Serbia.

Serbs were trying to make a Big Serbia out of Yugoslavia so they invaded Croatia and Bosnia. They killed Muslims in Srebrenica not because they were Muslims but because they weren't Serbs, just like they did to many other non-Serbs before and after.

(June 12, 2018 at 3:56 am)Fake Messiah Wrote:

(June 11, 2018 at 1:38 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: What was carried against Muslims was an "ethnic cleansing". The victims weren't civilian casualties of a civil war; they were just like the German Jews who got ethnically cleansed by the German Nazi regime.

The random killing of "people from a certain ethnic group" for the sake of "cleaning the area from their existence" is called "ethnic cleansing":

What Civil War are you talking about? You again failed to read what Bill Clinton wrote:

Quote:They were supportive of Milosevic’s desire to turn as much of Yugoslavia as he could hold on to, including Bosnia, into a Greater Serbia.

Serbs were trying to make a Big Serbia out of Yugoslavia so they invaded Croatia and Bosnia. They killed Muslims in Srebrenica not because they were Muslims but because they weren't Serbs, just like they did to many other non-Serbs before and after.

I understand exactly what the conflict was, I was telling you that "the fallen Muslim civilians" were lined up and killed  just because they were "a part of a certain ethnic group"; i.e they were ethnically cleansed.

You, on the other hand, are trying your best to picture this as if it was a "normal conflict with civilian casualties".

(June 12, 2018 at 4:39 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: I was telling you that "the fallen Muslim civilians" were lined up and killed  just because they were "a part of a certain ethnic group"; i.e they were ethnically cleansed.

You, on the other hand, are trying your best to picture this as if it was a "normal conflict with civilian casualties".

There is nothing normal about war. Serbian armies were roaming around trying to make Greater Serbia and came upon Srebrenica and other towns where people, because of the embargo, did not have weapons to defend themselves. While, as Clinton writes, in other parts of Bosnia there was a better situation because Croats and Muslims had some weapons to defend themselves despite the embargo:

Bill Clinton Wrote:By July, the fighting was in full swing again, with the Bosnian government forces making some gains in the middle of the country. Instead of trying to regain the lost territory, General Mladic decided to attack three isolated Muslim towns in eastern Bosnia, Srebrenica, Zepa, and Gorazde. The towns were filled with Muslim refugees from nearby areas, and though they had been declared UN safe areas, they were protected by only a small number of UN troops. Mladic wanted to take the three towns so that all of eastern Bosnia would be controlled by the Serbs, and he was convinced that, as long as he held UN peacekeepers hostage, the UN would not allow NATO to bomb in retaliation.

On July 10, the Serbs took Srebrenica. By the end of the month they had also taken Zepa, and refugees who escaped from Srebrenica had begun to tell the world of the horrifying slaughter of Muslims there by Mladic’s troops. Thousands of men and boys were gathered in a soccer field and murdered en masse. Thousands more were trying to escape through the heavily wooded hills.

Its arms embargo had kept the Bosnian government from achieving military parity with the Serbs. The peacekeepers could protect the Bosnian Muslims and Croatians only as long as the Serbs believed NATO would punish their aggression. Now the hostage-taking had erased that fear and given the Serbs a free hand in eastern Bosnia. The situation was slightly better in central and western Bosnia, because the Croatians and Muslims had been able to obtain some arms despite the UN embargo.

(June 12, 2018 at 6:37 am)Fake Messiah Wrote:

(June 12, 2018 at 4:39 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: I was telling you that "the fallen Muslim civilians" were lined up and killed  just because they were "a part of a certain ethnic group"; i.e they were ethnically cleansed.

You, on the other hand, are trying your best to picture this as if it was a "normal conflict with civilian casualties".

There is nothing normal about war. Serbian armies were roaming around trying to make Greater Serbia and came upon Srebrenica and other towns where people, because of the embargo, did not have weapons to defend themselves. While, as Clinton writes, in other parts of Bosnia there was a better situation because Croats and Muslims had some weapons to defend themselves despite the embargo:

Bill Clinton Wrote:By July, the fighting was in full swing again, with the Bosnian government forces making some gains in the middle of the country. Instead of trying to regain the lost territory, General Mladic decided to attack three isolated Muslim towns in eastern Bosnia, Srebrenica, Zepa, and Gorazde. The towns were filled with Muslim refugees from nearby areas, and though they had been declared UN safe areas, they were protected by only a small number of UN troops. Mladic wanted to take the three towns so that all of eastern Bosnia would be controlled by the Serbs, and he was convinced that, as long as he held UN peacekeepers hostage, the UN would not allow NATO to bomb in retaliation.

On July 10, the Serbs took Srebrenica. By the end of the month they had also taken Zepa, and refugees who escaped from Srebrenica had begun to tell the world of the horrifying slaughter of Muslims there by Mladic’s troops. Thousands of men and boys were gathered in a soccer field and murdered en masse. Thousands more were trying to escape through the heavily wooded hills.

Its arms embargo had kept the Bosnian government from achieving military parity with the Serbs. The peacekeepers could protect the Bosnian Muslims and Croatians only as long as the Serbs believed NATO would punish their aggression. Now the hostage-taking had erased that fear and given the Serbs a free hand in eastern Bosnia. The situation was slightly better in central and western Bosnia, because the Croatians and Muslims had been able to obtain some arms despite the UN embargo.

Of course there is more than one type of wars: a normal war and a "weird war".

1)A normal war is a conflict that involves people killing people to "achieve certain political goals". The normal war can end with the enemies turning friends.

2)Then, there is the "weird war". It is more of a slaughterhouse where pools of blood being spilled, and insane historical psychological problem being cloaked with populism and mad historical hatred and grudge from the killer towards the victim.

Many wars are a mixture of the two above categories.

An evil politician is the one who uses the second to achieve the first. In Bosnia, the second was used by the Serbs to achieve the first.

Back in the day, Hitler also used the second to achieve the first.

Achieve the political goal that you can't achieve by a normal war, through waging a "weird war" that involves extreme actions like massacring a whole race of people. Or 8000 of it, at least?

You;re confusing your narratives.  Do you think they were targeted for their race or their religion......?

(June 12, 2018 at 8:44 pm)Khemikal Wrote: You;re confusing your narratives.  Do you think they were targeted for their race or their religion......?

*Religion, in this case.

I thinks it;s interesting that you think that.

---

Out of curiosity, who told you this...or are you sort of inferring it from the fact that some of the massacred and displaced peoples in the region happened to be muslims?

(June 12, 2018 at 8:52 pm)Khemikal Wrote: I thinks it;s interesting that you think that.

---

Out of curiosity, who told you this...or are you sort of inferring it from the fact that some of the massacred and displaced peoples in the region happened to be muslims?

This is a reply; not an investigation.
Go google what I say and conclude the result by yourself, then compare to what I say. It's not me who is being told what to say; for the record