Replies

>>>>Sorry, I don't understand.. Are you saying the Serbs didn't commit the murders/massacre? That the massacre never happened? No mass graves were found? <<<<<<

War is hell. All deaths in war are regretabble, of civilians and soldiers alike. That is why The Nuremberg Trial has convicted Nazis for CRIME AGAINST PEACE as their ultimate crime. The fact rarely if ever mention by multi-culti supporters of Jihhadists is that Bosnian Muslims extremists have started Bosnian Civil War with the ritual killing on a Christian wedding, held at Orthodox Christmas, January 1992.

Killing an enemy soldier in battle is not murder neither it is massacre nor it is a war crime. War crime is an activity that violates Geneva Convention and The Hague Conventions of Laws and Customs of War on Land

In civil wars those rules are hard to enforce.

An example. A column consisting of armed and non-armed soldiers and male civilians attempts to break out from encirclement refusing to surrender. Armed ones prevent non-armed from surrendering. Gun Battle continues and most of the retreating men are killed. How would you described it? War casualty? Manslaughter? Killing ? Murder? Homicide? War Crime? Gendocide?

I have deliberately left out the ethnicity/religious affiliation.

I do not deny the fact that some Serbs have commited war crimes during Bosnian Civil War. ALL individuals guilty of war crimes ON ALL THREE SIDES (Bosnian Muslims, Croats, Serbs) should be punished. This will not bring victims back to life but may prevent similar crimes in the future. Administering one sidedness instread of justice will only make bad things worse and prevent reconcilliation.

The real issue with ICTY is something else -distorted view to depict events in Srebrenica as Genocide, which it was not and accuse Serbs as a people for being genocidal nation. This is an act of the ultimate Holocaust revisionism aimed at whitewashing Genocide in Bosnia in WWII when more than half amillion Serbs, Jews and Gypsies were savagely exterminated by Croatian and Bosnian Muslim Nazis.(events described by liberals as "irrelevant" and 'ancient history' although some perpetrators are still alive).

Srebrenica was not a genocide. To use the parlance of liberal media and liberal supporters of Islamists, it was "understandable revenge".

You were sounding great at this point:

I do not deny the fact that some Serbs have commited war crimes during Bosnian Civil War. ALL individuals guilty of war crimes ON ALL THREE SIDES (Bosnian Muslims, Croats, Serbs) should be punished.

But then you reverted to form.

Srebrenica was not a genocide. To use the parlance of liberal media and liberal supporters of Islamists, it was "understandable revenge".

I agree with some of what you say.
Specifically, that it was a civil war, and all sides bear some blame.

However, your link title concerning the wedding states January, when the actual date, according to links I read, was in March.
Mis-stating the date weakens your argument.
It doesn't completely discount it, but it weakens it.

Additionally, your contention that Srebrenica was not genocide due to the excuse of "understandable revenge" completely destroys any previous arguments you may have made.
You completely lost any respect for your arguments with your last 2 paragraphs.

I direct you (and others) to the Srebinica timeline of events.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/675945.stm

I understood that the balkans would become a bloodbath as soon as the first declarations of sovereignty were made.
Serbians must accept their part in those atrocities, and stop making excuses.