Replies

JCB,

Izetbegovic never expected JNA to help him against the serbs. That's why croats and muslims were defecting JNA. JNA was attacked in Sarajevo and Tuzla because of that. JNA was ideologicaly yugoslavian, as serbs, not islamist like Alija. Just because bosnian muslims were unprepared to wage war against serbs, doesn't mean they didn't start the war. Serbian soldiers were amazed that muslims were using "line-tactics". Instead of sticking to truce agreement, they form several lines, but only first line having arms. So, when a guy from the first line gets killed, the guy from the second line hops in, taking arms, screaming "Allahu aqbar!" and attacking.

Izetbegovic decided to push war because he thaught he'll receive help from the west (and he did) against "commie agresor serbs". That explains his later behavior.

You can't accuse people they live in 1942, especialy not in former Yugoslavia, because once an islamic fundamentalist guy that was in nazi muslim youth came on power in bosnia, or pro-fascist ustashe guy came on power in croatia, who could possibly blame serbs for their collective memory coming up front???

Yeah, Serbs were not majority in Bihac, but they were supported by great part of muslims from that area to fight islamist Izetbegovic's 5th corp. under Atif Dudakovic.
Serbs were not majority in eastern Bosnia in Visegrad and Zvornik, but muslims there were arming themselves, and even , if you remember, one of them was threatening to blow the dam in the air, Shaban Muratovic. But, you can't speak just about towns, since rural areas were full of serbs. Serbs were mainly rural population, due to Turkish rule. So, that's why they claimed about 70% of Bosnia. Based on their personal properties.

JNA didn't become Bosnian Serb Army. It's not true. Members of JNA from Bosnia and Krajina just came back to their home towns becoming part of Bosnian Serb Army. Yes, Bosnian Serb Army was receiving money from Serbia, but so were muslims receiving money from Saudi Arabia, iran, Turkey, and Croats from Roman catholic Church. So, what's your point?

parts of western serbia were bombed from bosnian muslim side in several occasions, so? And it's not true serbians were shelling over drina, because they couldn't afford to be portrayed as agressors, and why would they do it - bosnian serbs were fuly capable to do it themselves.

How can you compare serbia and croatia in "agression" on bosnia? Croatians had whole combat units in bosnia (from Shibenik, Split, Drnish), while serbians were sending supplies, and volunteers TO BE UNDER BOSNIAN SERB COMMAND. And that's not the same.

You can not expect me to say that serbs were wrong to secure themselves once they were sure what was going to happen? Why there was Sjekovac in the first place? Why murder in the middle of Sarajevo? Why attacking Pofalici and other serb parts of sarajevo? Why Kupres??? Like Sijekovac was in Iran, and not in Bosnia. PLN was arming muslims all over bosnia, why? And it was going on all the way from mid summer 1991. Why did muslims even form "poorly armed militia in Bjeljina"? Wasn't that part of Yugoslavia, back then? Wasn't JNA our army?

Again, Bihac was attacked both by Serbs and muslims against 5th corp. under command of islamic militants of Atif Dudakovic. Now tell me, why did serbs pullout from Bihac, once they came in the center of the city? My best friends mom was there to witness that, and it made no sense.

I don't see rapings have anything to do with millitary conflicts. If there were rapings in Zvornik as you claim (sounds like echo of 1992 anti-serb propaganda), why is that important now? I could speak about serbian women from Tuzla and Sarajevo, or may 1992 around srebrenica slkaughters of serbs, but I thaught we were speaking about conflict escalation?

Serbs were securing their territories and lines of communication in 1992. being superior in arms, they didn't want to take anything more then their territories. They didn't even take Bihac and they could. But they took Brcko so they could "breathe". They took parts of eastern bosnia to secure communication with herzegovina. But why they had to go to war in the first place? Because they couldn't trust muslims after what took place in sarajevo, sijekovac, and sarajevo again. Kupres also. For if they didn't do it, we would be talking now about 1992 slaughter of serbs in many more places.

JCB said "Justification for war comes BEFORE you fight, not after."

Justification of serbian struggle wasn't about presence of mujaheedins, but because of bosnian muslims and croats breeching both Yugoslavian and Bosnian Constitutions, harming serbian rights and security. That was what led to serbian claims they have no obligation to be part of bosnia dominated by croats and muslims. Serbs took arms to defend their constitutional rights. Muslims and croats were heavily under influence of brave struggle against serbs in WW1 and WW2, so were serbs. Muslims didn't just receive money from arab countries and iran, they were receiving cultural and religious influence. Serbs found themselves in their millitary traditions. It all went by those lines. I have never heard anyone in serbia or in republic of Srpska to claim that "everything would be fine just if there were no mujaheedins coming to bosnia". We had them already there, our muslim relatives.

JCB - "The tale of the Lisbon agreement is a good one - if only the Croats hadn't rejected the deal before the Muslims. It offered the Serbs only 44% of Bosnia wihtout linking up the territory as Serb leaders envisioned. All that was agreed on at the Lisbon talks was a general framework for the carving up of Bosnia and not the actual demarcation lines. "

You didn't answer my question. besides not being true croats rejected the plan. It was alija Izetbegovic, muslim leader that first accepted it, before rejecting it. There was no war before that, so failing to act on that Plan was clear entrance in war. in hell. Say, why did serbs accept such plan, if they were trying to occupy all bosnia after their agression???

JCB - "One killed at a wedding is hardly a Muslim offensive."
Could be, if there was police action to capture the murderers whole Sarajevo knew, as well as bosnian muslim officials from izetbegovic's party. Did that happen? What was serbian reaction after that? Barricades in Sarajevo? What happened then? SDS (serbian party) leadership along with police was trying to persuade people to calm down and wait for police action, but it was all going under pressure of illegal bosnian referendum about independance. It was the sign of the whole atmosphere of lack of trust and hatred, not some usual case of murder. But you couldn't understand this trough anti-serb medias. trough media reports at all!

Why was JNA attacked by muslims in Sarajevo and Tuzla (but in other places, like in Hercegovina, western) ??? Could you tell me something more about "...Bosnian government call on the Serb-led JNA to help them ..." ??? When, how? Why did muslims leave the army? Like Sefer Halilovic for example?

hahahahahaha... I realy wonder if you're lying all of us that you're not muslim. You said "Your quotes from Muslim magazines (if true) sound sorta like the paper thrown together by Serb intellectuals in the 80s that called for a return of Serb dominance to Yugoslavia which caused much of the tensions later seen."

First of all, you have source I was quoting about. Second - DID YOU EVER READ THE DOCUMENT OF SERBIAN ACADEMY CALLED "THE MEMORANDUM" BY YOURSELF, AND NOT BY INTERPRETATION OF MUSLIM AND CROAT PROPAGANDA? What is it in "Memorandum" that reminds you on writings of "Novi Vox"??? This is one of the shiniest examples of anti-serbian bias in your posts. You didn't even read the "Memorandum" but you have to make a balance. I would be very surprised if you're not from yugoslavia!
But I can't check this.

I have said this few lines before, muslims were all in "independant bosnia" story based on "Islamic declaration", and great return of islamic practicing in bosnia. They were unarmed and if you remember Karadzic in bosnian assembly speaking "YOU ARE DRIVING THIS COUNTRY INTO CHAOS, IT IS NOT GOOD WHAT ARE YOU DOING, YOU SHOULD BE AWARE THAT MUSLIM PEOPLE IS NOT IN POSITION TO DEFEND ITSELF." It was notorious serb leader Karadzic almost beging bosnian muslims not to breech the constitution.

Let me turn the question around. Why were serbs so easily slaughtered in Sijekovac, Kupres, Pofalici, Srebrenica region? And before that, in croatia, in Vukovar (before the JNA attack!), in western slavonia, in Sisak in Pakracka Poljana, in Gospic???

If you say serbs commited worse and larger number of crimes during the wars, could we speak about this? let's go this way. From the start of the war, I'll say one crime against serbs, and you come with one crime serbs did. So, we'll go like this untill the end of the war. Ok?

Just let me ask you this. Compare your opinion that "All sides committed crimes in the Balkans (Serbs more than others) and all sides shoulder some blame. " with actions of international community during the war, when serbs were blamed for everything, and muslim s and croats portrayed as innocent victims. What has happened JCB? How come, after all those years of antiserbian propaganda, you say "All sides committed crimes in the Balkans (Serbs more than others) and all sides shoulder some blame."??? WHy UN didn't put croatia under international sanctions for agression on bosnia? for ethnic cleansing in central bosnia??? Wait for few yours more, you'll realise that this I'm speaking isn't "denial of obvious", or "justification of unjustifiable", but facts.

Heh, the sooner you realise it's not the truth and morale and justice that guide great powers in their actions, but pure selfish interests (I recommend you to read G. Schwarzenberger's "Power Politics"), you'll realise how it's possible to breech the international law and claim you're doing good thing, how to lie about serbian agression and concentration camps, how to claim Izetbegovic is moderate pro-western, and nazi tudjman's croatia is democratic and tolerant.

One more thing. Before JNA whithdrowal from Bosnia, JNA was on it's own territory, ie. Yugoslavia, and people like bosnian muslims and croats taking arms claiming independance from Yugoslavia were nothing more then rebels. Moreover, they were attacking JNA, claiming it's occupation force! So, it's not serbs fault they had the same enemy as JNA (before pulling out), because both JNA and Serbs were in favour of Yugoslavia. Remember yugoslavia, UN member, officialy recognised by UN, USA, Germany, France as sovereign, independant state???

Comparing Serbs and Jews and Holocaust... JCB "...yeah and the Jews just took over Berlin and executed 3,000 Germans to prevent another Belsen." Well, the paralel would be truthful if Germans invaded Palestine, opressing jews for centuries, including commiting genocide, renaming Jerusalem into Berlin. So, bosnian story is happening in serbian land, which makes your comparison very, sorry to say, stupid.

Yeah, it's not WW2 anymore, but for people in bosnia, WW2 wasn't finished in 1945. Serbian victims were starting in 1989. to come up from pitfalls they were thrown into by fathers and grandfathers of people denouncing genocide over serbs, praising Handjzar SS division... etc.

Again you and your "balancing". in 1994 serbia put up sanctions on "warmongering" (as called in Milosevic medias) bosnian serbs. Watching calmly serbian defeats in Krajina and western bosnia. Why did bosnian serbs need support from serbia in 1993 attack on srebrenica? They were better armed and equiped. You're trying to balance the whole issue, but I ask again, why there were no sanctions for croatia?

I salute you, though, because sometimes it seems to me you're realy interested in what's (was) going on here, but it's just that it's obvious you're having hard time to recognise that it is possible for someone stronger (like serbs in the 1992 were) not to be responsible for start of the war, nor for the greatest amount of evil doings commited in it. Once you realise that, like before during history of the balkans, great powers and their interests are very, very important to understand most of our conflicts here.

I think something like this:

According to the first population census in 1879, of the 1,158,164 strong population, Orthodox Serbs accounted for a relative majority: 496,485 (42.88 percent, while in 1910, of the 1,898,044 inhabitants, the Serbs once again represented the most numerous part of the population - 825,918 (43.49 percent). Despite migrations (over 40,000 of them had emigrated by 1914) the Serbs were, due to their high birth rate, with the agrarian population accounting for 87.92 percent, a population in constant demographic expansion. According to Austro-Hungarian sources, the Serbs dominated Bosnia and Herzegovina not only in the demographic, but also in the economic sense (in the small but growing capitalist sector), although the Muslims were still more numerous in the towns. At the beginning of the 20th century, out of the 19 millionaires in Sarajevo, 17 were Serbs. The number of Muslims, due to their slightly lower birth rate and large-scale emigration to Turkey, kept dropping: the authorities feared that, in time, the Orthodox Serbs would totally prevail in Bosnia. To prevent this, the authorities constantly kept settling new people, mostly Roman Catholics, for the needs of their economy and the bureaucratic and police apparatus. The Croats, considered as a Habsburgtreu nation were quietly but systematically settled in those regions: around 230,000 people, mostly Roman Catholics and predominantly Croats, came to live in Bosnia and Herzegovina by 1914. In 1910, there were 124,591 people living in Bosnia-Heregovina who did not have Bosnian citizenship, and by 1914 around 180,000 people had been settled in regions bordering on Serbia. Around 140,000 people, mostly Serbs and Bosnian Muslims, were stimulated, by various means, to emigrate.

Instead of the Serbo-Croat language, the official language became "Bosnian", the Cyrillic script used by the Serbs and Muslims kept being systematically pushed out, and Serbian elementary schools had to face numerous problems in their work. The Austro-Hungarian ideology about a separate Bosnian nation was propagated by richly subsidized newspapers, with the intention of reviving Bosnian individuality ("Sarajevski list", the official "Bosnische Post", the Muslim "Bosnjak"). It was strictly forbidden to bring any Serbian newspapers printed in Montenegro, Vojvodina, Dalmatia or Serbia into Bosnia; Kallay even banned his own book "The History of the Serbian Nation", because in it the Serbs were described in a much too positive way.

For the purpose of strengthening Catholic influence, in 1881, Jesuits were brought to Bosnia. They were considered more aggressive in proselytist action than the local Franciscans who, over the previous decades, closely cooperated with the domestic Serbs and the governments in Belgrade. The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Sarajevo, Josip Stadtler, was especially ardent in sowing the seed of discord between the Serbs and the Croats, and between the Serbs and the Muslims. Numerous books and brochures containing insulting names for Orthodox Serbs were frequently printed and the persecution on a national and religious basis often verged on open racism.

There soon emerged out of the Muslim intelligentsia, a movement of young Muslims rallied around the society and magazine "Gajret", which after several years started to cherish Serbian national sentiment, referring to their common origin with the Serbs. Poets like Osman Djikic and Avdo Karabegovic represented the leaders of an important group of Muslim-Serbs. Only several Muslim intellectuals, like Safvet-beg Basagic, advocated the theory of a Croat origin of the Bosnian Muslims.

As for Croatia,

Another Hungarian aristocrat, Khuen Hedervary, who administered Croatia-Slavonia (1883-1903), skilfully took advantage of the Croat open intolerance of the Serbs, which had gradually acquired a social dimension. Being more organized and enterprising in economic affairs, the Serbs had a disproportionately important position in trade, industry and banking.

The Serbs in Croatia-Slavonia and Krajina were considered to be an enterprising nation, skilful in trade and banking affairs, unlike the Croats whose intelligentsia, from landholders to the bureaucratic stratum, was mostly involved in agriculture and administrative affairs. Also, the Serbs in Vojna Krajina were free peasants who, instead of fulfilling feudal obligations, did military service, unlike the Croatian peasantry which found it difficult to discard the mentality of feudal subjugation.

Along with the strengthening of the economic power of the Serbs in Croatia, the Serbian population also grew. At the beginning of the 20th century, in Croatia (with Slavonia and Krajina) there lived 708,993 Serbs, compared to 467,247 Serbs who lived throughout Hungary. Around 1900 among Serbs Zagreb took over the position of economic supremacy from Novi Sad, capital of Vojvodina, becoming the Serbs' main centre in Austria-Hungary. The foundation of the craftsmen's society "Privrednik" ("Entrepreneur"), then "the Alliance of Serbian Farmers' co-operative societies (or zadrugas)" in 1897, and finally the "Serbian Bank" in 1895, was the economic expression of the prestige of Zagreb as the Serbs' new national centre.