Senate The Politics of Genocide

Vivec I appreciate this topic is something that people have realised their casually ignorant, borderline stupid opinions on have been shown up as vacuous and insipid. If you cannot do a basic level of research and contribute, perhaps its best to sit there and pretend you're clever and underhanded but in your head rather than on forums.

I would like to hear what Ewok Poet has to say about Srebenecia. You may have an opinion on it, but we'll never know because you're just being annoying now.

 

Based on your treatment of people with opinions you disagree with, why would I want to give my opinion on the off change you disagree with it? You realize no one here likes interacting with you. right?

 

I think the mods here need to create a new rule just for you two: an abstain from responding rule that bans any interaction and recognition.

 

Restraining order, if you will.

 

There's an opinion, and there's hasty assembled posts that have all the skill of throwing a dart at a dart board in the dark. I still don't fully agree with Lost or Jello, but I've heard them out and reconsidered things based on their inputs. How does that work?

Tell you what; on the assumption that respect is earned, not handed out, search all posts from you with the word "genocide" in them and tell me if you see anything that deserved to be taken seriously?

And, after that, why don't you tell me what you think about Srebenecia and I'll be a picture of sweetness in reply.

 

Srebrenica*

I see many people have trouble spelling that word...srebrn would be the adjective from srebro, so...yeah, there is worse. The above at least has vowels and not the vowel-R only.

Anyway, at the danger of being treated as a person to be disagreed with everywhere, why not, I accept?

My mind is still a fustercluck after watching a documentary on Operation Storm earlier today and switching from RTS to HRT and seeing tensions grow on both sides, while failing at the obvious - people used as pawns in the operation, over 250K of them, were betrayed by pretty much everybody.

As far as definition of a genocide is considered, I think it was not one; but it most definitely was a massacre and people who try to deny it or celebrate it (all of their "celebrations" were banned, unlike the above) are nothing but disgusting right-wingers. People responsible for Srebrenica are war criminals without any doubt; but so is pretty much everybody who was involved in the 1990s wars. I wanted to take part in the victim acknowledging protest where seven thousand people were to lie down in front of the parliament, but that was banned, too. The city just cannot afford another huge mess, after the 2010 attempt at Pride caused hooligans to thrash most of the centre and - just like all true supporters of family values do - steal expensive clothes and gadgets from shops.

I have nothing against the veto per sé, because the idea of everybody in this country, including those who were not born yet, those who were kids like me and those who never voted for the regime responsible for it in anyway being labelled as war criminals would be a bit too much. At least that's what I understand would have happened. And based on this thread, while what hapepned in Rwanda *was* an attempt to swipe a whole ethnic group off the face of Earth, this wasn't that.

Now, the fact that we probably owe something to Russia politically for that is what worries me. I am generally annoyed by the common assumption that we were in the eastern bloc (Tito's Yugoslavia famously rejected Russians in 1947 and had two plans for invasion - one if NATO invades and one if Russia and their eastern bloc alies invade), that we're basically the same people as them just because our last names and alphabets are vaguely similar and we both celebrate Christian holidays thirteen days later.

I assume you know that above, but many people don't, to the point where somebody asked me about the war in Ukraine and if I was safe. Like, thanks for the question, but that's more than one thousand km away.

On the other hand, Russia itself committed genocides, which aren't recognised as such, just like the examples mentioned here regarding native Americans weren't. What is Holodomor? A genocide.

This post was a mess, because I think faster than I write, but I hope it made some sense.

 

Please, come on man... nobody has to do anything to "earn" anything from you here. Get over yourself. He can post wherever he wants. Sure, you don't have to respond, but you have no place or right to make any such demands of him.

You having a bad day? It seems like you are. Need to talk about it or get something off your chest?

 

No, I follow.

I think the Eastern Bloc point is probably well made, but since the Balkans war Russia has stood firmly in Serbia's corner over the whole matter. Which means, as you said, Russia is probably owed a favour or two.

You mentioned something about the current generation not being responsible. That's a sentiment that pops up in Australia, previously in opposition to apologising to the indigenous population for mistreatment in general and currently against calling what happened to the Stolen Generation a genocide. I've heard it articulated often, and I understand it. Is the feeling that a resolution condemning the events of Srebenica as genocide perceived as tarring modern day Serbs with the same brush?

(Sorry on misspelling, it's early here and I'm typing quickly).

I do want to touch on the point about Rwanda, but maybe after we get a sense of what the feeling on the ground would have been had the resolution passed has been addressed.

Oh! And I'm glad you're safe from the Ukraine fighting. Being caught int he crossfire as stray bullets cover a time zone would be annoying.

 

Serbia, Ukraine and Russia are in three different time zones. That was a clever joke.

But yeah, a stray bullet from Ukraine will end up having killed more Europeans than WWII, more than any war ever...slowly and painfully; so there is a meaning to those words lost somewhere in '86.

Could you inform me about what you call Stolen Generation over there before I respond? We use a similar term loosely for many generations, but this is something I know nothing about.

 

Sure.

From around 1905 to about 1965, the Federal government, as well as the various states, adopted a policy of removing indigenous children from their families and transferring custody of those children to white families. The intent was to breed the indigenous race out of existence, by having them marry into white families. The Chief Protector of Aborigines in Western Australia said this in 1930:

"One factor, however, seems clear; atavism is not in evidence so far as colour is concerned. Eliminate in future the full-blood and the white and one common blend will remain. Eliminate the full blood and permit the white admixture and eventually the race will become white"

Under Article 2(e) of the United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), Genocide is an act committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, any racial or national group by forcibly transferring children from that group to another group.

 

Okay, I think the dust has settled, and enough time has passed for me to now address this....

 

So if someone went around murdering all the gingers, they'd basically just get a slap on the wrist, right?

 

And a statue built to them.

 

Isn't that a M.I.A. music video? A creepy one at it...


Ender Sai - Thanks for the explanation. In the meantime, there are rumours of what could eventually twist the entire thing around: Vučić and Nikolić may be going their separate ways soon. That may result in finding out who is the one who asked help from Russia and who now owes them a favour.

Most people go by the original definition of genocide that appeared more than once in this thread and then it touches all the other complex issues - no Croat ever being sentenced for anything, the game big guys with ex-YU muslims being the complete opposites of satanising them pretty much everywhere else in the world after the Arab Spring turned the way it did, et cetera. Basically, a canon of worms.

And I think the sentiment would be quite different if the event had involved the whole of BiH (yikes, god forbid) or had any similarities to anything that was previously called a genocide. We do not celebrate anything that happened in any of the 1990s wars, so I think we're pretty good at admitting what we have done and facing it.

 

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwo...native-student-disagrees-gets-expelled-course

A Cal State Sacramento University Professor who allegedly told his United States History class he did not like the term ‘genocide’ in relation to Native Americans in history, told a Native American student who disagreed with him that she was disenrolled and expelled from his course.

So, dredging this frozen war back to the front page, a professor expelled a Native American student for disagreeing with the professor's assertion that there was no Native American genocide. One of the things about college is having your views challenged. But if a professor is unable to have his views challenged without throwing a fit, then we really have a problem.

 

Wow... I don't even know what to say.

 

yeah **** that guy

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/12/spain-leftist-columbus-day-celebrations

Mayor of Barcelona called what happened to Native Americans a genocide; Family and Acquaintances worry Ender Sai planning counter-attack.

 

A left wing mayor lamented an historic parade, oh my gosh.

What's more shocking is a leftist complaining about spending public money, Vivec.

 

I love how Americans confuse being angry about their past with action for their future.

What an utterly useless society you've crafted for yourselves.

 

I'm not confusing anything.

 

Genocide is bad

Discussion over.

 

Basically the American way is "I'm deeply outraged about this [from the comfort of my armchair]!"

OK, but will you do anything about it?

"No! But someone, i am sure, will!"