This is far from any argument I was trying to make at all. Reread my post again and please let me know if it is not clear. I will try to clarify anything you need.
Interesting. I thought you and I agreed about the misleading connotations of 'genocide' yet you continue to use the term as before. I suppose its because of Cikola and some of your other peers on here. It seems that all of your posts are reactionary. In other words you merely emulate some of those other forum users you mentioned to get a reaction to a reaction.
Sure if you see things only through Serbian goggles. But this was my point all along. I am imploring any one of you to see beyond your ethnic rock and observe the world as it actually is. Where your ethnic group is just one of many and no more saintly or evil than others. Recognize that a few bad seeds do not contaminate a whole batch. Do a little critical thinking and you will see that I mean this for all 'champions' of their respective ethnic groups, not just Serbs , Croats , etc.
The initiation of violence, especially organized violence , is wrong no matter what you call it. I couldn't agree more. May I ask were you part of the Serbian exodus out of Croatia?
Yes , I agree the initiation of violence, especially organized violence , is wrong. But naturally I extend this to all of mankind. In my eyes it is not o.k. for one group of people to be violent and o.k. for the other.
I think this is the first time I've ever read that you admitted any sort of wrong behavior from 'your side' ( or the side you chose to take up). I understand you are not alone in your way of thinking. Far be it from any of your counterparts from other 'groups' or nationalities to ever do the same. I only implore you to think critically for a moment. Had your parents been Croatian or Albanian, what are the chances that you would be just as excited to defend Croatian or Albanian interests in the same way you do 'Serbdom?' I'm gonna go with high chance , probably 100%. Just think about that and what it means.
Interesting so doesn't this undermine any of today's purity claims from either side?
So? What does that have to do with people today? In antiquity there was no mention of Serbs, Albanians , Croats , etc anywhere in the area. Only Greeks and Illyrians were mentioned. Shall we sumbit all the land to a Greater Greece or New Illyria today? They were there first after all. Wouldn't it also be cool to do away with Christianity and Islam and revert back to paganism since it was there first?
'One simple logic' is redundant. There really isn't any polylogism, at least that true. There is just logic, that's it. As for the rest of your post, of course not. If you read anything I said before ( I implore you to really read instead of just browse over) then clearly you would see that I don't think the majority should ever suppress a minority. In fact, I think words like 'majority' and 'minority' are misleading and meant to divide people merely for the consolidation of power of whoever is in charge of the ruling organization.
Who cares how long they lived there? I mean really. This argument is really funny to me because all that's really being debated is which ethnic group will hold power in the government. Its not even really about the 'rights' of anyone. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with a group of people wanting to separate from another group of people, or an individual wanting to separate from a group and being allowed to take their property as well. The minute their liberty and property are confiscated by the state , any state, then it becomes a condition of slavery. Who wants to live in slavery? Any law that upholds this barbarism is promotes wrong doing.
Then those Serbs in Kosovo ought to be allowed to separate from their oppressive state with their property in tact. I would challenge the laws preventing them from doing so.
I beg the differ. Your absolutism about independence for your favored group in one area and your opposition to independence against another group in another area. In both cases you are siding with the same group but on different sides of the spectrum. Again , if you were born into another group chances are high that your opinions would be exactly the same only difference being in favor of a different group. I'm afraid your nationalism and bravado is that shallow.
As a means for understanding the past , of course. As a means to dictate the future and settle the present? Of course not. Do you really think is sane to pull out some centuries old history to settle modern living conditions? History is often taken into over-consideration and too often used as justification for modern violence. It's a devious tool.
That's not what I'm saying at all. Why would I justify an Albanian or anyone going into your house and taking your property against your will? Maybe you mean this as some kind of poor analogy for Kosovo. You are off the mark ,sir. Unless you actually own some property in Kosovo, none of it is yours. I highly doubt you personally own all of Kosovo. lol. Where do you get off thinking you ought to have a say in determining the future of residents in some far off land ( I take it you probably don't even live in Europe) that have farmed , toiled , and worked on that land most or all of their lives? Wait let me guess. Maybe you think the people living there , not part of your ethnic group ( or maybe even in your ethnic group) somehow owe you taxes and should respect your rules simply because you were born into your ethnic group? Mrs mali. LOL. That's insane.
Of course not. Obviously if the farmer making the robbery claim can produce evidence that it was in fact robbed ( not sold or abandoned) then he should have his property returned to him, probably with interest. Nationality has nothing to with it nor should it determine the morality of the action. Don't you agree?
If its your land , why not? I mean if you can't, then is it really yours? Do any private individuals really own anything or are they really just 'leasing' it from other individuals that have guns (i.e. the governments)? Wouldn't this really be a form of communism then?
Why should any sane person or person with any sense of morality support the latter?
That would be wonderful , would it not? Actually the end result is that you wouldn't have any countries, just people living their lives in many communities. Countries/states always start wars and world wars , not individuals with something to lose. For example, something a little closer to 'home' for you? How many people living in America or any NATO country would seriously support military action in Serbia/Kosovo if they were individually billed for its expenses on a weekly or monthly basis? What if people could actually see the true costs the states incur? I can tell you one thing, there would be no such funding for those actions.
This is one of the many tragedies of war. I would say that if you were really concerned about how deplorable it is that a person lose their home as a result of violence, then nationality should have nothing to do with it. So many people in that area of the world have lost their homes due to violence , mostly state violence. You ought to speak on behalf of all those people , Serb and non-Serb. Take action, start a volunteer organization. The answer isn't more violence, its less.
Croatian. I already said this.
No , I said you are all biased. Please read what I actually write instead of just skimming over. If you do not understand please ask me to clarify.
I disagree. Half the things I said you probably didn't even bother to read. It's probably TL;DR so I don't blame you or you simply didn't understand. I am not having a debate with you at any rate , just a discussion.