How Bosnian Muslims view Christians 20 years after Srebrenica massacre

[Delta4Embassy]

How Bosnian Muslims view Christians 20 years after Srebrenica massacre

"This weekend marks 20 years since the Srebrenica massacre – the killing of 7,000-8,000 Muslim men and boys by Bosnian Serb forces in a Bosnian town that had been designated a United Nations safe haven.

The worst atrocity to take place in Europe since World War II occurred during a brutal three-year war following the breakup of the former Yugoslavia. The war was fought largely along ethno-religious lines, among predominantly Orthodox Christian Serbs, Muslim Bosniaks and Catholic Croats."

 

[Steven_R]

I read an article one time called "Give War A Chance" (Edward Luttwak, Foreign Affairs. Here's a link to a pdf of the article: https://peacelearner.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/edward-luttwak-give-war-a-chance1.pdf )

Anyway, the thesis of the article is that war solves things sometimes. These little brush wars the west always seems to try to put out just keeps the issues smoldering or festering until they end up becoming a problem, the west intervenes, rise, repeat. So it may be in the best interest of everyone to simply let these things happen and only step in if it looks like it may grow into something larger.

Obviously tensions between the Muslims and Bonsian Serbs didn't just disappear and NATO forces were there for over a decade (remember when Clinton said he expected US forced to be home by Christmas?), so as ugly as letting a little ethnic cleansing is, is it maybe the lesser of two evils if it stops a conflict in its tracks?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I read an article one time called "Give War A Chance" (Edward Luttwak, Foreign Affairs. Here's a link to a pdf of the article: https://peacelearner.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/edward-luttwak-give-war-a-chance1.pdf )

Anyway, the thesis of the article is that war solves things sometimes. These little brush wars the west always seems to try to put out just keeps the issues smoldering or festering until they end up becoming a problem, the west intervenes, rise, repeat. So it may be in the best interest of everyone to simply let these things happen and only step in if it looks like it may grow into something larger.

Obviously tensions between the Muslims and Bonsian Serbs didn't just disappear and NATO forces were there for over a decade (remember when Clinton said he expected US forced to be home by Christmas?), so as ugly as letting a little ethnic cleansing is, is it maybe the lesser of two evils if it stops a conflict in its tracks?

Every war is begun by those who don't end up fighting it. And every war is ended by those same people. War has no point or value or redeeming aspect since the ones who pushed for it didn't fight it. If we had any sense we'd outlaw war and make the politicians who declare them the ones who fight them. Put em all in a big cage match to the death.

 

[tyroneweaver]

I read an article one time called "Give War A Chance" (Edward Luttwak, Foreign Affairs. Here's a link to a pdf of the article: https://peacelearner.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/edward-luttwak-give-war-a-chance1.pdf )

Anyway, the thesis of the article is that war solves things sometimes. These little brush wars the west always seems to try to put out just keeps the issues smoldering or festering until they end up becoming a problem, the west intervenes, rise, repeat. So it may be in the best interest of everyone to simply let these things happen and only step in if it looks like it may grow into something larger.

Obviously tensions between the Muslims and Bonsian Serbs didn't just disappear and NATO forces were there for over a decade (remember when Clinton said he expected US forced to be home by Christmas?), so as ugly as letting a little ethnic cleansing is, is it maybe the lesser of two evils if it stops a conflict in its tracks?

yup, another muslim conflict we got into where we supported the wrong side.

 

[Steven_R]

I read an article one time called "Give War A Chance" (Edward Luttwak, Foreign Affairs. Here's a link to a pdf of the article: https://peacelearner.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/edward-luttwak-give-war-a-chance1.pdf )

Anyway, the thesis of the article is that war solves things sometimes. These little brush wars the west always seems to try to put out just keeps the issues smoldering or festering until they end up becoming a problem, the west intervenes, rise, repeat. So it may be in the best interest of everyone to simply let these things happen and only step in if it looks like it may grow into something larger.

Obviously tensions between the Muslims and Bonsian Serbs didn't just disappear and NATO forces were there for over a decade (remember when Clinton said he expected US forced to be home by Christmas?), so as ugly as letting a little ethnic cleansing is, is it maybe the lesser of two evils if it stops a conflict in its tracks?

Every war is begun by those who don't end up fighting it. And every war is ended by those same people. War has no point or value or redeeming aspect since the ones who pushed for it didn't fight it. If we had any sense we'd outlaw war and make the politicians who declare them the ones who fight them. Put em all in a big cage match to the death.

Yeah, but that's never going to happen, so what's the best approach to stuff like Bosnia? Just jump right in with both feet and let the grievances fester and become generational or tell the parties to do what they want, but keep it internal or else?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I read an article one time called "Give War A Chance" (Edward Luttwak, Foreign Affairs. Here's a link to a pdf of the article: https://peacelearner.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/edward-luttwak-give-war-a-chance1.pdf )

Anyway, the thesis of the article is that war solves things sometimes. These little brush wars the west always seems to try to put out just keeps the issues smoldering or festering until they end up becoming a problem, the west intervenes, rise, repeat. So it may be in the best interest of everyone to simply let these things happen and only step in if it looks like it may grow into something larger.

Obviously tensions between the Muslims and Bonsian Serbs didn't just disappear and NATO forces were there for over a decade (remember when Clinton said he expected US forced to be home by Christmas?), so as ugly as letting a little ethnic cleansing is, is it maybe the lesser of two evils if it stops a conflict in its tracks?

Every war is begun by those who don't end up fighting it. And every war is ended by those same people. War has no point or value or redeeming aspect since the ones who pushed for it didn't fight it. If we had any sense we'd outlaw war and make the politicians who declare them the ones who fight them. Put em all in a big cage match to the death.

Yeah, but that's never going to happen, so what's the best approach to stuff like Bosnia? Just jump right in with both feet and let the grievances fester and become generational or tell the parties to do what they want, but keep it internal or else?

It's a big world. If war comes to your home and you don't wanna fight it, leave. No shortage of places to go.

 

[Thunderbird]

How Bosnian Muslims view Christians 20 years after Srebrenica massacre

"This weekend marks 20 years since the Srebrenica massacre – the killing of 7,000-8,000 Muslim men and boys by Bosnian Serb forces in a Bosnian town that had been designated a United Nations safe haven.

The worst atrocity to take place in Europe since World War II occurred during a brutal three-year war following the breakup of the former Yugoslavia. The war was fought largely along ethno-religious lines, among predominantly Orthodox Christian Serbs, Muslim Bosniaks and Catholic Croats."

Milosevic, like many of his followers, was an atheist. This was, for the most part, atheist on Muslim violence.

Milosevic buried in quiet ceremony in his hometown

 

[Steven_R]

I read an article one time called "Give War A Chance" (Edward Luttwak, Foreign Affairs. Here's a link to a pdf of the article: https://peacelearner.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/edward-luttwak-give-war-a-chance1.pdf )

Anyway, the thesis of the article is that war solves things sometimes. These little brush wars the west always seems to try to put out just keeps the issues smoldering or festering until they end up becoming a problem, the west intervenes, rise, repeat. So it may be in the best interest of everyone to simply let these things happen and only step in if it looks like it may grow into something larger.

Obviously tensions between the Muslims and Bonsian Serbs didn't just disappear and NATO forces were there for over a decade (remember when Clinton said he expected US forced to be home by Christmas?), so as ugly as letting a little ethnic cleansing is, is it maybe the lesser of two evils if it stops a conflict in its tracks?

Every war is begun by those who don't end up fighting it. And every war is ended by those same people. War has no point or value or redeeming aspect since the ones who pushed for it didn't fight it. If we had any sense we'd outlaw war and make the politicians who declare them the ones who fight them. Put em all in a big cage match to the death.

Yeah, but that's never going to happen, so what's the best approach to stuff like Bosnia? Just jump right in with both feet and let the grievances fester and become generational or tell the parties to do what they want, but keep it internal or else?

It's a big world. If war comes to your home and you don't wanna fight it, leave. No shortage of places to go.

Not always, but even if it were true it sidesteps the question of is it somehow less of an evil to let brush wars and local massacres do their thing and end a problem OR intervene and let the local issues just keep festering?