Who do you beleive was to blame for the 1992-95 Balkan "civil war"?

Who should pay more for the war in Bosnia?

  • The Serbs!

    Votes: 6 35.3%

  • The Bosniaks!

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Both sides should be equally blamed so the tensions can truly begin to mend!

    Votes: 11 64.7%
  • Total voters
    17
wrath1

wrath1

Banned
I need some of your feedback guys and gals.

I've been catching hell from some of my readers from my blog, http://johnanderson75.blogspot.com about me taking sides in the never ending conflict of the Serbs vs. the Bosniaks.

I've done my best to remain neutral in all this mess but I feel my attempt at this is futile.

Being that I have extensive experience living with the Serb population inside Bosnia I can't help but sympathize with them to a degree.

Now when I say this I mean no disrespect to any Bosniak out there. I am simply trying to get a point across to the world that the current trend of blaming all of Serbia and her people will only lead towards another war sooner than later.

Whom I am speaking for here are the average, ordinary Serb civilians, villagers living their lives the best they know.

It's these very civilians who matter the most in my mind. Of course the Bosniak civilians are just as important on this issue but, being that I really haven't any real experience living in the "Federation" I simply can't speak for them.

I'm an American but I feel the way the "western" media and the rest of the world have demonized the entire Serb population because of the acts of individual soldiers in a crazy war really isn't helping matters much.

I have seen first hand the hatred still there among the Serbs and Bosniaks. Yes, in the 10 years since the war has ended things have gotten a bit better for both sides but, the distrust and suspicion is still strong enough that if another war were to break out both side's civilians would kill the other's sides civilians.

All I'm asking here is your opinion of the so called "Civil War" between the Bosnian Serbs and Bosniaks. Who started the war, who should be blamed for it and who should share the most responsibility in the aftermath?

I for one believe both sides should be equally blamed and some kind of program set in place to get the respective civilians from both sides to realize their neighbor really isn't the enemy.

Thanks,

John
 
Last edited:
I was there. The breakup of the Soviet Union was to blame for the power grab in the Balkan region. That, and there was no defineable leader. It was bound to happen. Granted, the split between Czech and Slovakia was very peaceful, but down there, there are way to many cultural issues.
 
Hi there wrath1

In my opinion everyone that was involved in the war were to blame for it. With Slobodan Milosevic, his milita, and their vision of a "cleansed" Kosovo that didn't help when he was killing inoccent Croatians and Muslims, but neither did the U.S. and NATO airstrikes that killed the inoccent Serbian civilians. I understand that there is still lots of hate between the people of Serbia and Croatia , along with many other countries in the Former Republic of Yugoslavia. So I think what the Serbian people under Sloboda Milosevic did was was a horrible crime against humanity and thats why he is standing trial for his actions, and I hope that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia does their job and deals with him. But the U.S. and NATO forces should not get away with the airstrikes that killed Serb civilians that had nothing to do with it. (and just for the record I am not against the Peacekeepers that did their duty in the Balkans, I respect them greatly). There will always be hate no matter where you are in the world. So in my final opinion the SERBIAN MILITA UNDER SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC started it NOT THE SERBIAN CIVILIANS. hope this helps you.

Cameron Bjornson:camo:
 
Considering the history of the two groups, this last blood letting was destined to happen. The responsibility for enormity of the blood letting this go around rests firmly with the UN. The Main purpose of the UN is to stop things like this before they get out of hand, but as usual they were a day late and a dollar short. Please don't read this as me placing blame on the Peacekeepers, they did the best they could considering their rules of engagement, and the politics that were going on at the time.
 
Team Infidel said:
The breakup of the Soviet Union was to blame for the power grab in the Balkan region. Granted, the split between Czech and Slovakia was very peaceful, but down there, there are way to many cultural issues.
Click to expand...

Yougoslavia did not have thight connections to Moscow and has always been standing at a distance to the Soviet Union, read Cominform and Informbiro. They developed their own way to socialism and criticized both eastern bloc and NATO nations and formed the Non-Aligned Movement in 1961.

After Titos death in 1980 ethnic tensions grew in Yougoslavia, and Serbian nationalism was promoted in response to the weak Serbian position in the federation. Slobodan Milošević played on this and ended up alienating the other ethnic groups in the federation. Whilest on the same time in Slovenia and Croatia the political climate changed towards democracy and economic liberalisation whilst Serbia and Montenegro voted for a federal unity.

June 25, 1991, Slovenia and Croatia declared independence from Yugoslavia. In Slovenia, the Yugoslav People's Army decided to take action (the ten day war) marking the beginning of the bloody wars.
 
The Serbian Milosovech government instigated a plan to conquer the entire region and racially pacify it through genocide carried out by the tiger squad.

Nothing 50/50 there, all goes to one side.
 
A war has one or more sides, still true in this case, you cant blame one side for a war, if one side attacks the other without the other side doing anything its not a war, its an invation or genoside.
 
I have never been to the Balkans, but in my previous life I lived in 4 now independent states of the former USSR and visited 9 others(out of 15).
And there I have withnessed the similar processes - in Georgia, Azerbajan, Central Asia, Moldova, etc.
I believe that the reasons for this bloodshed are many, but the main one - was the way how these federations(USSR and Jugoslavia) have been organized. Their components - republics, - were built along ethnic/religional borders. This, in turn, has led to the creation of their local elites or nomenclaturas. While the central power was strong and exersized a full contol over everything, these local princes had to be loyal. However, they could manage their personnel rosters for their republican and local governments, feed nationalistic intellectuals, etc.
As soon as the Center weakened, these people decided to break with the Union and get EVERYTHING!
Another experience from my life there - everybody is convinced it is his/her nation/region/ethnic group who brings the most to the "Union table". And everybody else are just consumers, but not the producers. So, this disbalance has to be fixed by seccesion and the "good people" will thrive.
Everybody, but the Serbs wanted out. But it doesn't exuse them for their brutal attempts to keep the status quo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top