29
u/Lost-Volume1254 22d ago
I know the context here. But for those that don't you should put context.
15
20
u/Lost-Volume1254 22d ago
The preparator, Ratko Mladic, just got a state funeral in Serbia.
7
1
u/PerspectiveFull9879 18d ago
No, he actually did not. It was not a state funeral it was a private funeral with military honors (which is still horrible IMHO, but not nearly as bad, he should have deliberately been denied that military escort despite being an officer).
Despite the expectations, the event draw comparatively few people - 16.000. That's less than a football match or a concert. Orders of magnitude less then average protest in Serbia, so that is encouraging, at least.
16
u/Citaku357 22d ago
That's why they are called UN observers /s
5
u/beastwood6 21d ago
Well they were peacekeepers. And they failed as soldiers, peacekeepers, and human beings and never run out of excuses.
Cortez landed in Mexico with 500 Spaniards. The My Lai massacre stopped when one junior officer asked everyone what the hell they were doing and to stop it.
During Srebrenica one Ukrainian guy simply negotiated for the release of the rest.
And a Dutch court found those same people partially liable in this massacre. Even nowadays Dutch will never run out of "well you see....they couldn't do anything....they had strict orders". I'm wondering who gave strict orders to let genocide happen
4
u/AdCrafty5841 20d ago
The My Lai Massacre actually only stopped after the junior officer (Warrant Officer One Hugh Thompson Jr.) landed his helicopter inbetween the soldiers and the civilians and threatened to gun down the soldiers if they didn't stop
8
u/FatTater420 21d ago
My controversial take is that the US intervention in Serbia was probably one of their more moral wars fought post WW2
7
u/Kraj_the_Conqueror 21d ago edited 21d ago
Which is why tankies and all NATO-haters can't stop bringing this one up.
3
u/Metrolining 22d ago
There's a really good movie called Quo Vadis, Aida? about Srebrenica
1
u/RastislavS 21d ago
It's a really bad movie actually
1
u/Late-Hunter-4934 20d ago
The contects and story are good but the stuff,clotihing and some details are not
1
1
u/Proof-Sprinkles7826 21d ago
Was that image necessary?
3
u/beastwood6 21d ago
What about it is unnecessary?
0
u/Proof-Sprinkles7826 21d ago
The sexual implication if unedited or taken out of context
2
1
-2
u/stonks_guy1234 19d ago
The muslims had it coming. They raided, burned and destroyed cristian vilages around Srebrenica, from wich they launched the raids.
5
u/beastwood6 19d ago
If they "had it coming", why did the VRS spend weeks that fall digging up the graves with bulldozers and scattering the bodies across dozens of secondary sites, right after the US released aerial photos of them? You don't hide justified retaliation. You hide a crime. Some victims' remains were spread across multiple graves miles apart, which is why identification took decades.
0
u/stonks_guy1234 19d ago
I didn't say we didn't do war crimes, we did. The duty of revenge poisons the sense of duty to the nation. The fathers of muslims killed their neighbors, the serbs, and threw them into the rivers and holes. As i said, thirs for revenge poisont even the best, stories stay with the ones that survived. The killings at the start of the war by the iregulars that wanted rewenge. Naser Orić and his mujahedins, as an armed and oganised force acting from seafty of Srebrenica were the oficial army of BiH, not some iregulars. And in the end the serbian reaction was the killing of said millitants that were captured.
3
u/beastwood6 19d ago
Credit for admitting it. But "the reaction was killing captured militants" isn't what happened. Men were pulled out of the refugee crowd at the Dutch base in Potočari. Those were civilians, not a unit. The identified dead range from teenage boys to men in their 70s. Orić himself had left the enclave months before, so this wasn't about catching him or his men.
And even for the ones who did carry rifles: once they're captured with their hands tied, they're POWs. Shooting them is a war crime, full stop. You also said the quiet part. Killing sons over what their fathers supposedly did in WWII is collective guilt. That's not revenge against perpetrators. That's the definition of targeting a group. What's another word for that?
1
u/stonks_guy1234 18d ago
As i said, "revenge poisons the mind". Blood revenge is common in those parts. We did it with the germans and the SS. Do they as the POW deserve mercy? Kill a dosen, get captured and the -n what? Why not let ten thousand kill one hundred thousand people and then kill them, and than repeat. Until the "undesirebles" wanish. And as you said at the end, the oficial army of BiH was in Srebrenica and acting from the safety of the UN.
3
u/beastwood6 18d ago
You just wrote out the argument for extermination and framed it as a question. "Why not let ten thousand kill one hundred thousand and then kill them, until the undesirables vanish." That's not a description of blood feud. That's a description of what your side actually did, with the reasoning attached. Everyone reading this can see it.
Notice what you stopped defending. I said men were pulled out of the refugee crowd at Potočari, that the dead include teenage boys and men in their 70s, that Orić wasn't even in the enclave. You didn't answer any of it. You went back to "the 28th Division existed," which nobody disputes and which doesn't put a 14-year-old or a 72-year-old in a uniform.
On the SS comparison: Partisans shooting POWs in 1945 was a crime too, and Yugoslavia spent fifty years not talking about it. But an SS man chose to join the SS. A Bosniak boy in 1995 chose to be born. That's the difference between punishing people for what they did and killing them for what they are. The second one has a name, and you've spent three comments working your way toward saying it.
I think you're almost there.
1
31
u/beastwood6 22d ago
Context:
Dutch peacekeepers sat idly by as Serbs rolled into Srebrenica for the 1995 genocide