if their aim was to exterminate all the men. then there would be no ‘pure’ bosnian family line.
and the women and children woudl have to evacuate the area.
leaving it to be occupied by serbs.
which is what happened in srebrenica.

and other towns and villages across bosnia.
and you also say ‘systematic’
isn’t seperating the men systematic.

i will still class it as genocide.
but you are free to class it as to whatever you want.

and also i would liek to stress maybe bosnjaks did commit small atrosicities. but most of them were by the muslim fighters coming in.
i am sure they wouldn’t kill innocent serbs.

but i have heard the muhadjedeen.used to butcher some serbs. that is different.
because most came because they wanted to kill something, no matter what it was.
they did help us in some sence. but i don’t count them as one of us.
as we wouldn’t perform the horrible thigns they did.

The events that occurred in Bosnia’s civil war amount to ethnic cleansing. Horrible atrocities were committed by all sides, and we can say that the Srebrenica massacre was especially brutal because of the sheer number of people killed at one time – even though many more died in some places but over a longer period of time.

I am not saying that what happened in the war was nothing and that it shouldn’t be condemned. It should by all means, but it doesn’t amount to genocide.

Massacres and ethnic cleansing were committed by all three sides, but genocide is not one of them. Srebrenica comes close, but the women and children were separated and bussed away, which does not show intent that the aim was to exterminate a whole religious, cultural, or ethnic group.

Sorry to get continue the off subject discussion but I felt like it was worth addressing.

The definition of genocide as I understand it doesnt apply to sheer number of people. It applies to the intention to murder all or part of a so called group.

So called, because I dont believe in different groups. We are all members of the human race after all.

‘milosevic did want to get rid of the bosnian people out of yugoslavia’

Not strictly true, actually he initially tried to keep Bosnia within Yugoslavia. Of course that would have been a kind of Srboslavia so I’ve never really blamed Bosnian Muslums and Bosnian Croats for walking out. The moment the Slovenes (were allowed to) left Yugoslavia was doomed.

no she also states that if it was genocide he would have to go after the whole muslim population.
1. NO
who in their right mind with a country like serbia and montenergro would go after a whole religion?
that is a stupid suggeston. and to me it seem’s like she is the one in denial.
anyway apart from that useless article. i agree with everything lee has said.

from being a topic going from how bosnia will survive in the future, people have turned it into a topic accusing someone who IS NOT a nationalist. to a nationalist. with no substantial evidence. some crap about nazi.
but no evidence of that. only talk.
or maybe something they dreamt up.

and also challenging the genocide in bosnia.

anybody affected by a genocide in bosnia will tell you this.
my father has been to those concentration camps. he was in various ones for 2 years. including the notorius omarksa one.
he tells me lot’s of stories of how people got tortured. they made them sing cetnik song’s and if you didn’t they would beat you or kill you.

etc.
theres more worse stuff i could say. but i don’t want to i think you get the idea.

my father obviously did not get killed. but many others did.

all these mass graves are being found. i think over 200 in total.
the burying and reburying of people.
so that was an accident?

aleks, it seems to me liek you are half denying the serb involvement in the bosnian war.

if we don’t accept what happened, and move on. then we won;t move on.
that is maybe why the nationalist parties in serbia win. because nobody will own upto the fact that serbia did commit genoicde and did all these horrible things.

and
if you do not call that genocide then i do not know how many people you have to kill in such a bad way. to make it genocide.

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/2824/

“No Rwanda nor Croatia (under the Ustaša). You’re not convincing anyone.”

So, if a list isn’t complete, then the existence of the list itself–even as an indicative outline–is without merit?

Well said, I fully agree. Those who destroyed Yugoslavia are all nationalists, no matter how much they claim they want a “united, multi-ethnic Bosnia.”

Chris: I think the point is that under the right circumstances, Silajdzic is exactly the kind of person to support a lose confed solution. Again, a telling lack of evidence for his nationalism is presented.

If Dodik is just a localist – why the emphasis on a referendum on secession?

Anyway – I wil leave it at that. The thread has lost its way from the original issue.

LOL! I’m impressed with your list. No Rwanda nor Croatia (under the Ustaša). You’re not convincing anyone. “Genocide” is a term that is now sliced like a sausage to fit any political need, i.e. ‘incitement to genocide’ (an ICTY favorite) which substantially lowers the bar for it to be ‘proved’, not to mention how the ICTY judges redefined ‘genocide’ in the Krajsnik case.
As long as you’ve got friends, no need to worry about it. Now if you have powerful enemies,anything is possible. Take for example Sudan in which the west has no economic or political leverage, but China does. If that is ‘genocide’, then the british policy of rounding up the families of boer guerrillas and putting them in insanitary camps where hunger and disease ravaged them, then its ‘fair game’. It seems like everyone wants to join the ‘genocide club’ these days if they want to be taken seriously or as a way to deflect genuine criticism or argument as ‘denial’.

Re Silajdzic, he, like Izetbegovic (1990 reprint of his famous Islamska Deklaracija) have a vision of a unified Bosnia under the control of the SDA. At the time, the inner cadre of nazi collaborators like Izetbegovic, Cengic (and others with a dark past) or relatives thereof . It really inspires trust doesn’t it. The Croats and the Serbs would have been happy with Fikret Abdic who unfortunately trusted Alija, who didn’t keep his promise.

That wont be a popular test for (nationalist) supporters of independence movements!