|
Post by Novus Dis on Jul 19, 2008 20:06:53 GMT -5
Are you really that dense that you don't see a connection to morale in an army and conscription? A volunteer force is much more likely to be motivated, engaged and effective than people forced into a conflict. Morale and Mandatory Service has everything to do with how an army is. Send a guy to the front lines who's scared s**tless and doesn't really want to be there, against someone who's a professional soldier, and is there to defend what he believes in, and see who'll win. Ever read the Sun Tzu's "The Art of War"? Maybe then when you read it, you will begin to understand the weight between tactics, morale, loyalty, and human sacrifice on the battlefield. Until you read that book, don't even fathom about saying anything else military-wise, and stick to the propagandist thoughts of Seselj. I will try and explain it to you so you guys can understand the simple prospect of conscription and morale. Army service is mandatory. A person must go regardless of how he/she feels lest they be found and sent to prison. If a person wants to join then all the better but they will be conscripted nonetheless so their feelings about joining doesn't effect how many people there are in the army. Now concerning Srebrenica refugees, they would have been drafted because army service is mandatory. Perhaps you don't know what mandatory or conscription means, if not then get a dictionary.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Jul 19, 2008 21:47:33 GMT -5
Are you really that dense that you don't see a connection to morale in an army and conscription? A volunteer force is much more likely to be motivated, engaged and effective than people forced into a conflict. Morale and Mandatory Service has everything to do with how an army is. Send a guy to the front lines who's scared s**tless and doesn't really want to be there, against someone who's a professional soldier, and is there to defend what he believes in, and see who'll win. Ever read the Sun Tzu's "The Art of War"? Maybe then when you read it, you will begin to understand the weight between tactics, morale, loyalty, and human sacrifice on the battlefield. Until you read that book, don't even fathom about saying anything else military-wise, and stick to the propagandist thoughts of Seselj. I will try and explain it to you so you guys can understand the simple prospect of conscription and morale. Army service is mandatory. A person must go regardless of how he/she feels lest they be found and sent to prison. If a person wants to join then all the better but they will be conscripted nonetheless so their feelings about joining doesn't effect how many people there are in the army. Now concerning Srebrenica refugees, they would have been drafted because army service is mandatory. Perhaps you don't know what mandatory or conscription means, if not then get a dictionary. See, what you didn't get is that I never disagreed with you on the mandatory service, and how it was implemented. I disagreed with you on the part that where if an army is conscripted (unwillfully, but they have to fight anyways since its mandatory), they will lack morale. Most people couldn't give a fuck about the war, since pissing in the wind and getting rations for your family were more important things at the time. That's what you don't understand. You're stuck on an issue that wasn't even brought up.
|
|
|
Post by Novus Dis on Jul 19, 2008 22:00:00 GMT -5
See, what you didn't get is that I never disagreed with you on the mandatory service, and how it was implemented. I disagreed with you on the part that where if an army is conscripted (unwillfully, but they have to fight anyways since its mandatory), they will lack morale. Most people couldn't give a f**k about the war, since pissing in the wind and getting rations for your family were more important things at the time. That's what you don't understand. You're stuck on an issue that wasn't even brought up. I give up trying to explain to you what mandatory army service is since you believe everyone had a choice which is bullshit. Believe what you want.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Jul 19, 2008 22:05:05 GMT -5
^ Dude, I never even argued that point. Mandatory means you have to. But that's a whole different story on choice and Rationalist Theory and the Conceptionalist theory. It's all good man, argue away.
|
|
|
Post by markosijekira on Jul 19, 2008 22:55:36 GMT -5
"So let me get this straight, some here loved Yugoslavia but then didn't want to go and fight for them or do their service? Don't you think that's a little cowardice? " Err who are you referring too? Mig and I were too young to serve in the JNA, and I received my call up from the Croatian Army not JNA in 98. And Zvone was talking about a movie i think. Did I miss a post? Now had I received my call up from the JNA in 91/92, I would have deserted, gone AWOL, I could never fight my own people, Croats, Serbs, Bosniaks... never
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Jul 20, 2008 0:04:13 GMT -5
^ See, he doesn't get that.
|
|
|
Post by Novus Dis on Jul 20, 2008 3:26:06 GMT -5
Things we have learnt from this thread: MiG believes the Muslims would have deserted from the Muslim army if "morale" got too low.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jul 20, 2008 3:32:12 GMT -5
^I also learned you are really stupid, wait I learned that a while ago oops!
|
|
|
Post by Novus Dis on Jul 20, 2008 3:50:56 GMT -5
^I also learned you are really stupid, wait I learned that a while ago oops! You should get so edgy, your boyfriend will get mad.
|
|
|
Post by theblackswans on Jul 20, 2008 9:44:21 GMT -5
^^^So let me get this straight, some here loved Yugoslavia but then didn't want to go and fight for them or do their service? Don't you think that's a little cowardice? I think thats a little rough, how many people fled the wars in Yugoslavia in the 1990's? It was a lot to ask of the people to defend the state(s) when most of the states were unable to provide or protect the people. A lot of people from all sides fled the fighting or refused to return to Yugoslavia for a lot of reasons. It was an ugly time and a lot of people were settling scores over old beefs real or percieved. I don't blame anyone who left during the 1990's.
|
|
|
Post by theblackswans on Jul 20, 2008 9:49:02 GMT -5
^I also learned you are really stupid, wait I learned that a while ago oops! You should get so edgy, your boyfriend will get mad. How did you become a moderator, is it because they want equal treatment for retards? You are one of the most dense people I have ever dealt with in my life.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Jul 20, 2008 14:23:40 GMT -5
Things we have learnt from this thread: MiG believes the Muslims would have deserted from the Muslim army if "morale" got too low. Did I say that. No, I never said that. Quote me as to those exact words please. What I said is that Morale has a lot to do with desertations, and the way an army fights/advances on the ground/air/sea. You don't listen. You're so fucking closed minded, and because of that, you just don't fucking read. Like I told you. Learn the basics of the battlefield, and then come back and talk. Until then, have a fun time, it's interesting.
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Jul 20, 2008 17:39:28 GMT -5
Now had I received my call up from the JNA in 91/92, I would have deserted, gone AWOL, I could never fight my own people, Croats, Serbs, Bosniaks... never
A lot felt that way, This is where Propaganda became useful on all sides and sadly some of that propaganda is still being used today Governments on all sides needed people to hate each other in order to fight and considering our history and outside influence it was easy.
|
|
Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jul 20, 2008 18:17:39 GMT -5
^I hardly think anyone needed propaganda once Serbs shelled Vukovar.
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Jul 20, 2008 18:39:00 GMT -5
Yeah they did
|
|
Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jul 20, 2008 18:52:30 GMT -5
Like what?
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Jul 20, 2008 21:20:17 GMT -5
People loved what Yugoslavia WAS, not the Serboslavia and s**thole it became in the late 80's and under Milosevic. The Yugoslavia they loved died long before the actual break up. Tito died, Yugoslavia died.
And once again, you seem to not realize alot of people just WINGED everything at the beggining. Armed Serb militias popped up, your people start dying, you start firing back it's not rocklet science right away.
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Jul 20, 2008 21:24:27 GMT -5
I hardly think anyone needed propaganda once Serbs shelled Vukovar.
My post was meant to be before the Vukovar siege.
Like what?
You seriosly did not see or hear the garbage "the Pizza King" (Susak) was spewing forth ? and then taking away the Serbs right to ellect there own Mayors and to recruit there own police. This was broadcast on tv side by side with the unveiling of the new Croat police uniform that had the Sahovnica badge everything was designed to cause a rebellion and play on peoples fears of the past.
Which started road barriers put in place to keep the police out and to protect against an attack it was a passive action unlike what was planned by the chopper full of special forces that the JNA jets turned back the Serbs had every reason to be warry.
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Jul 20, 2008 21:49:33 GMT -5
People loved what Yugoslavia WAS, Not all and the economic mess your pointing to had nothing to do with Milosevic it was a direct consequence of the west deliberatly cutting all aid and funding to Jugoslavia you should read the what the CIA repoted would happen if aid and funding where cut. It was allowed to happen in an effort to destroy Jugoslavia had nothing to do with Serboslavia as you call it that story is a Seljak version and simplistic to say the least. Funding to States would only resume if Governments where elected that the US wanted. And once again, you seem to not realize alot of people just WINGED everything at the beggining.Nothing was winged it was all a carfuly planned series of events.
|
|
Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jul 20, 2008 22:00:23 GMT -5
In 1989, amendments to the Serbian constitution were enacted, by virtue of which Serbia became a single unitarian state with central authority applying to the entire territory. De facto the autonomy of Hungarians and Albanians was abolished by the abolition of the autonomous status of Vojvodina and Kosovo, and the federal constitution of 1974 was thus abrogated. On 28 June 1989, in a speech in Kosovo, Slobodan Milosevic declared that any opposition to this vision of a new order in Yugoslavia would be crushed by force of arms. On 29 September 1989 a new constitution was approved and the federal constitution of Serbian 1974 was finally buried. In the formal legal sense, by its new constitution, Serbia dealt a fatal blow to the Yugoslav federation.
It was through this violent, unilateral change to the 1974 constitution by Serbia that Yugoslavia ceased to exist and not because of secession by Slovenia and Croatia; a Serbian argument that has been accepted by some people in the West.
As Croatia and Slovenia prepared to declare their independence, both Europe and the United States began a flurry of diplomacy. On June 22 and 23, 1991, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe stated their support for the territorial integrity of Yugoslavia and the EC foreign ministers (including Germany) voted unanimously not to recognize Slovenia and Croatia if they seceded unilaterally.
U.S. Secretary of State James Baker visited Belgrade on June 21, for one day, listened to all sides, then declared that the United States opposed the breakup of the country and also opposed the use of force to hold the country together.
|
|