“80,000 people executed after World War II”

[maki]

Jugoslavija was the the best country in the world. A lot of you guys writing sh1t about it never lived in it so use really should stfu. Its unfortunate things turned out the way they did because we are no better off - live 10 times worse.

[Novus Dis]

Jun 12, 2009 4:48:13 GMT -5 SKORIC said:

^ He was king for 2 weeks before WW2 lol so it wasnt the best under him. You're probably thinking of his father?

The Monarchy in general. Personally I think Petar (i.e. the father of Yugoslavia) was the best modern King we've had.

Jun 12, 2009 13:52:08 GMT -5 MiG said:

Under the King ehh.. so the Croats would strive more and more for self-determination and autonomy (Cvetkovic-Macek Sprazum), and eventually, a drive for independence. You're right actually, not a bad idea.

If Yugoslavia still existed and I was loyal to Yugoslavia then I'd consider the opinion of "the Croats" as irrelevant as the opinion of the Shqiptars, the Muslims or any other naturally anti-Yugoslav group. If they don't consider themselves Yugoslavs then they can piss off. Placating these savages has never worked and never will.

The maxim of "never give in to terrorism because it encourages more acts of terror" can also be applied to the traitors who want political autonomy.

And remember that Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia or another other pseudo-state created by Tito has never been Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia was always Serbia. Yugoslavia and Serbia are interchangeable. If you have ever garnered loyalties toward Yugoslavia or the idea of Yugoslavia then you've garnered loyalties for Serbia.

[MiG]

If Yugoslavia still existed and I was loyal to Yugoslavia then I'd consider the opinion of "the Croats" as irrelevant as the opinion of the Shqiptars, the Muslims or any other naturally anti-Yugoslav group. If they don't consider themselves Yugoslavs then they can piss off. Placating these savages has never worked and never will.

Right, of course. But you cannot change the will of the people, and in the modern day and age, this does wonders if the will of the people is strong enough. Banovina Hrvatska would have got its independence, eventually, had the status quo of Yugoslavia not been changed. I don't understand why you can't fathom that, but I understand that its only fair to say that you've got one hell of an imagination. Yugoslavia was to be "Ravnopravna za Sve Narode i Narodnosti", and for that to work, people like you would have to be imprisoned for Political Crimes.

The maxim of "never give in to terrorism because it encourages more acts of terror" can also be applied to the traitors who want political autonomy.

Which Croats achieved, through peaceful means, without guns. And the Serb Dominated parliament had to give in. Tell me, why is that? And while we're at it, maybe you need to read about Stjepan Radic.

And remember that Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia or another other pseudo-state created by Tito has never been Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia was always Serbia. Yugoslavia and Serbia are interchangeable. If you have ever garnered loyalties toward Yugoslavia or the idea of Yugoslavia then you've garnered loyalties for Serbia.

Sure, pseudo-states created by Tito. Then you have it in history books that the name Hrvatska existed before Srbija. But sure, pseudo-states. Yugoslavia was what it was, for as long as it was, and because it was like it was, it was respected for what it was and what it stood for. But a punk-ass kid like you wouldn't know shit about ethnic tolerance.

This is why Yugoslavia broke up. Because of people like yourself (Not just from the Serb side, but from all sides). You have to manifest something that is meant to be a unifying factor by the will of the people, into something that is by the will of one people. No wonder nobody takes you seriously, you're so fucked out of your brains, I wonder how you find your car in the parking lot.. that is if you're mature enough to drive.

[Trazi Vise]

maki, and alot of people who did LIVE there write s**t about it, because shock horror it was s**t for many.

MiG, you are wrong. It fell because of internal issues. Money. Greed. Nothing to do with the people you are accusing. They were sucked into it, then realising there was nothing to be sucked into and quite literally it sucked. Sucked, sucked, sucked. Full stop! :-)

[Novus Dis]

Jun 12, 2009 21:54:21 GMT -5 MiG said:

Right, of course. But you cannot change the will of the people, and in the modern day and age, this does wonders if the will of the people is strong enough. Banovina Hrvatska would have got its independence, eventually, had the status quo of Yugoslavia not been changed. I don't understand why you can't fathom that, but I understand that its only fair to say that you've got one hell of an imagination. Yugoslavia was to be "Ravnopravna za Sve Narode i Narodnosti", and for that to work, people like you would have to be imprisoned for Political Crimes.

The "will of the people" is irrelevant. Do you know why? Because "the people" don't give a damn about Croatia or Yugoslavia. They only care about being fed when they are hungry, clothed when they are naked, treated when they are sick and educated when they are ignorant. Everything else is superficial.

Jun 12, 2009 21:54:21 GMT -5 MiG said:

Which Croats achieved, through peaceful means, without guns. And the Serb Dominated parliament had to give in. Tell me, why is that? And while we're at it, maybe you need to read about Stjepan Radic.

The end result is the same: The weakening of Yugoslavia. It doesn't matter how it is achieved. All that matters is that it is stopped.

Jun 12, 2009 21:54:21 GMT -5 MiG said:

Sure, pseudo-states created by Tito. Then you have it in history books that the name Hrvatska existed before Srbija. But sure, pseudo-states. Yugoslavia was what it was, for as long as it was, and because it was like it was, it was respected for what it was and what it stood for. But a punk-ass kid like you wouldn't know s**t about ethnic tolerance.

Are you denying that the borders of the current borders of the "Republic of Croatia" weren't outlined/drawn by Tito and his cronies?

Jun 12, 2009 21:54:21 GMT -5 MiG said:

This is why Yugoslavia broke up. Because of people like yourself (Not just from the Serb side, but from all sides). You have to manifest something that is meant to be a unifying factor by the will of the people, into something that is by the will of one people. No wonder nobody takes you seriously, you're so f**ked out of your brains, I wonder how you find your car in the parking lot.. that is if you're mature enough to drive.

No, it broke up because of people like you. People who thought that being a Yugoslav meant embracing their non-Yugoslav heritage. People who considered themselves to be a Croat first and a Yugoslav second.

[MiG]

The "will of the people" is irrelevant. Do you know why? Because "the people" don't give a damn about Croatia or Yugoslavia. They only care about being fed when they are hungry, clothed when they are naked, treated when they are sick and educated when they are ignorant. Everything else is superficial.

I disagree. You couldn't be more wrong. How do you explain the latest wars?.. But even greater, how do you explain the creation of the Soviet Union. Rats ass it doesn't. It's the only thing (the major glue) that keeps a nation together. What a stupid statement that was.

The end result is the same: The weakening of Yugoslavia. It doesn't matter how it is achieved. All that matters is that it is stopped.

The only way that Yugoslavia gets weaker, is by rhetorical nationalistic sentiments such as yours (Yugoslavia is Serbia and Serbia is Yugoslavia).. if that is true, then Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, and Macedonians don't belong in it, and will obviously begin to part ways. (As it happened)

Are you denying that the borders of the current borders of the "Republic of Croatia" weren't outlined/drawn by Tito and his cronies?

Did I say that? You specifically stated, and I quote; "And remember that Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia or another other pseudo-state created by Tito has never been Yugoslavia.". You never once, not even a fraction of it, did you mention ANYTHING about borders. You stated the names of the Republics in question, which in turn you challenged their name, which is their history (Of course, how else do you get a name).

So don't try and backhand yourself out of it dude, when you don't even know left from right anymore. Have some fucking balls and admit you're wrong.

No, it broke up because of people like you. People who thought that being a Yugoslav meant embracing their non-Yugoslav heritage. People who considered themselves to be a Croat first and a Yugoslav second.

So what's wrong with that? As I distinctly remember, the Socijalistička Federativna Republika Jugoslavija was a Federation of 6 member states. Each Republic had its own shit to run, and had its own people. Yugoslav's aren't a people, they're a group of people. You stating that it should be the King that runs the nation (A Serbian Monarch), implies to me right now that you want a Serb Ruled, and Serb Dominated, Yugoslavia, and that other people's interests don't matter, and come second hand.

Well in a Federation, it doesn't work like that. Maybe I should give you a full, and detailed, explanation of what a Federal Government is, and what a Federal State is. Do you maybe compare the Russian Federation to the Yugoslav Federation? Even if you do, you still fail to impress me with the simple fact that you're being a bigot and a hypocrite on the very fact that you embrace Yugoslavism, but yet think that Yugoslavia = Serbia, and Serbia = Yugoslavia. If you look at the Russian Federal System, you will see that it has its own separate Republics, Okrugs, Autonomus Oblasts, etc etc. It's how it works in such a nation that holds many nationalities, that no matter how small, they are still respected.

You state that in order to have a strong Yugoslavia, the people "must" consider themselves Yugoslavs above anything else; But then I don't see you supporting a Unified Bosnia. Besides, even with the King in Power, the Croats still began moving towards autonomy to preserve self-identity and culture, and you outright, completely would deny us anything like that; But then I see your stance of Republika Srpska in BiH, and you wouldn't give up an inch of it for the Republic of BiH not to be so divided... and then above, and I quote this, you stated "The "will of the people" is irrelevant. Do you know why? Because "the people" don't give a damn about Croatia or Yugoslavia. They only care about being fed when they are hungry, clothed when they are naked, treated when they are sick and educated when they are ignorant. Everything else is superficial."

So then, what the fuck is all that about?

[Ja Ona i Pivo]

mig brate, nemoj se vise ni obracati njemu, vidis da je degen prve klase. Ima iskustva o Jugoslaviji kao ja o africi. Ljencuga obicna koja nema "vremena" da se nauci svoj jezik.

[Novus Dis]

Jun 13, 2009 12:33:10 GMT -5 MiG said:

I disagree. You couldn't be more wrong. How do you explain the latest wars?.. But even greater, how do you explain the creation of the Soviet Union. Rats ass it doesn't. It's the only thing (the major glue) that keeps a nation together. What a stupid statement that was.

The only way that Yugoslavia gets weaker, is by rhetorical nationalistic sentiments such as yours (Yugoslavia is Serbia and Serbia is Yugoslavia).. if that is true, then Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, and Macedonians don't belong in it, and will obviously begin to part ways. (As it happened)

If I remember correctly, Yugoslavia didn't start to fall apart until the "bills came due" and no "Socialist Republic" was willing to pay them. Panem et circenses, my friend. Panem et circenses.

Jun 13, 2009 12:33:10 GMT -5 MiG said:

Did I say that? You specifically stated, and I quote; "And remember that Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia or another other pseudo-state created by Tito has never been Yugoslavia.". You never once, not even a fraction of it, did you mention ANYTHING about borders. You stated the names of the Republics in question, which in turn you challenged their name, which is their history (Of course, how else do you get a name).

So don't try and backhand yourself out of it dude, when you don't even know left from right anymore. Have some f**king balls and admit you're wrong.

You know exactly what I meant. Don't feign idiocy.

Jun 13, 2009 12:33:10 GMT -5 MiG said:

So what's wrong with that? As I distinctly remember, the Socijalistička Federativna Republika Jugoslavija was a Federation of 6 member states. Each Republic had its own s**t to run, and had its own people. Yugoslav's aren't a people, they're a group of people. You stating that it should be the King that runs the nation (A Serbian Monarch), implies to me right now that you want a Serb Ruled, and Serb Dominated, Yugoslavia, and that other people's interests don't matter, and come second hand.

Well in a Federation, it doesn't work like that. Maybe I should give you a full, and detailed, explanation of what a Federal Government is, and what a Federal State is. Do you maybe compare the Russian Federation to the Yugoslav Federation? Even if you do, you still fail to impress me with the simple fact that you're being a bigot and a hypocrite on the very fact that you embrace Yugoslavism, but yet think that Yugoslavia = Serbia, and Serbia = Yugoslavia. If you look at the Russian Federal System, you will see that it has its own separate Republics, Okrugs, Autonomus Oblasts, etc etc. It's how it works in such a nation that holds many nationalities, that no matter how small, they are still respected.

A Serb dominated Yugoslavia? Serbs made up more than half the population in both Yugoslavias. Of course they're going to "dominate" Yugoslavia. Jeez.

Yugoslavia fell apart from the inside because of this so-called Federation. Did it fall apart during the Monarchy? No. Why? Because Yugoslavia was strong during the Monarchy and the Federation was only created in order to weaken Yugoslavia so it could be easily divided among Tito's heirs after he died. Which is what happened, by the way.

Serbians were the ones who created Yugoslavia. They were the first Yugoslavs. They are the ones who first ruled it. They are the ones who bled the most for it. They are the ones who forgave their Slovene and Croat enemies and built a country with them. Yugoslavia is Serbia in every sense of the word. Even now, Serbia is more like Yugoslavia than any of the other pseudo-states. And what do Slovens, Croats and Muslims think of Yugoslavia? Why nothing. As soon as they can, they desert the Yugoslav army en masse. They did it during the 1940s and again during the 1990s. That's because their anti-Yugoslav identities weren't suppressed as they should have been.

And why should savages be placated with autonomy? Did placating Shqiptar leaders ensure that they wouldn't start slaughtering non-Shqiptars and take a big chunk out of Yugoslavia? No. Did placating Croat leaders ensure that they wouldn't start slaughtering Serbs and clamouring for independence? No. The only way to deal with savages is with savagery. That's how Yugoslav patriots should have dealt with the traitors during the 1990s.

Jun 13, 2009 12:33:10 GMT -5 MiG said:

You state that in order to have a strong Yugoslavia, the people "must" consider themselves Yugoslavs above anything else; But then I don't see you supporting a Unified Bosnia. Besides, even with the King in Power, the Croats still began moving towards autonomy to preserve self-identity and culture, and you outright, completely would deny us anything like that; But then I see your stance of Republika Srpska in BiH, and you wouldn't give up an inch of it for the Republic of BiH not to be so divided... and then above, and I quote this, you stated "The "will of the people" is irrelevant. Do you know why? Because "the people" don't give a damn about Croatia or Yugoslavia. They only care about being fed when they are hungry, clothed when they are naked, treated when they are sick and educated when they are ignorant. Everything else is superficial."

So then, what the f**k is all that about?

Unified Bosnia? You mean a Bosnia whose capital is a city settled by Turks? No, thankyou. I prefer to remain a true Bosnian without a state rather than a pseudo-Bosnian with a state.

[Kralj Vatra]

Its weird how some of you ppl think that Yugoslavs were alone in the universe and Yugoslavia fell because of "internal" issues, greed, etc...
It fell, because that was the 1st and partially successful project of the 3rd Reich. When the two Germanies united, your country was falling apart,
doesn't that ring any bells? When Serbs were literally sleeping in their yugoslav heaven, the roman catholic priests and
the mulas had some real hate fests in their churches/mosques... My wife told me that in the 80s, little croat kids in Zadar were telling her she was Serb
because of the "politika" in cyrilic that her parents were reading, while she always considered herself yugoslav.

MIG, (1st off, i am talking to you friendly, frankly with no sign of hostility)
"EIther way, Yugoslavia would have been a lot better off as a Democratic nation, with a Multi-Party System. A Confederacy or a Federal Government would have been a lot better, as everyone would voice their opinion, and aid from the west would have been constant. There are so many things that could have happened, but didn't; and because of that, we are paying for it today, and tomorrow. "

You understand what a "democratic" Yugoslavia would mean?
Either a Yugoslavia, where all major industries would be sold to Germans
(is that you mean by "aid from the west would be constant"?), or a totally disarmed Yugoslavia with
no heavy industry.
In other words, there could be, by no means, an independent strong Yugoslavia with a democracy.
I dont believe in Democracy as a panacea that would cure any possible illness of social life.
For some societies democracy *is* the illness.

PS
The cultural production, the industrial production of your former country was
so inconceivably huge by balkan standards,
(today i was looking at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SFR_Yugoslav_pop_and_rock_scene and freaked out)
that the western propaganda
had to do overtime to throw sand and mud and dirt as much as she can
in order to hide the obvious.

[MiG]

If I remember correctly, Yugoslavia didn't start to fall apart until the "bills came due" and no "Socialist Republic" was willing to pay them. Panem et circenses, my friend. Panem et circenses.

If you should remember correctly, is that we didn't even start talking about any "due bills". From what you should remember, if you have read the history of SFRJ, is that even in that one, the Croatian People still had a movement for autonomy and more rights concerning culture, language, and identity. Read about the Croatian Spring.

Since we're on the topics of paying bills. Tell me, why should have SR Slovenia and SR Croatia spend most of their money investing in shit holes like Kosovo? Why wasn't economic autonomy given when shit hit the fan? I don't really know, nor do I care, about the thought process of the leadership within the SFRJ; but the simple fact is that a nation and its people will only go so far as to give and not receive.

You know exactly what I meant. Don't feign idiocy.

And why should I interpret. You certainly don't do it, so neither will I. Zaboli me kurac.

A Serb dominated Yugoslavia? Serbs made up more than half the population in both Yugoslavias. Of course they're going to "dominate" Yugoslavia. Jeez.

44% is not half. Just because you have the numbers, does that really mean that you can do shit however you want, wherever you want. You state this like its a given, so why do you ridicule and fight the Albanians on the Kosovo issue. If numbers tell it all, why not just let Kosovo go?

Yugoslavia fell apart from the inside because of this so-called Federation. Did it fall apart during the Monarchy? No. Why? Because Yugoslavia was strong during the Monarchy and the Federation was only created in order to weaken Yugoslavia so it could be easily divided among Tito's heirs after he died. Which is what happened, by the way.

So you consider Yugoslavia to be strong under a rule of an Iron Fist? Under the Monarchy, how many communists, nationalists, and just innocent people were imprisoned, put to death? Yeah, the monarchy was so damn good for everyone... as much as Tito's Yugoslavia was. At least Tito's Yugoslavia had a dick's worth of balance. So quit being a damn hypocrite.

The Federation fell apart because of nationalists, like yourself. Not just from the Serb side, but from all sides; not just because of Every Non-Serb group within the Yugoslav Federation. Shit, some propaganda machine your brain is.

Serbians were the ones who created Yugoslavia. They were the first Yugoslavs. They are the ones who first ruled it. They are the ones who bled the most for it. They are the ones who forgave their Slovene and Croat enemies and built a country with them. Yugoslavia is Serbia in every sense of the word. Even now, Serbia is more like Yugoslavia than any of the other pseudo-states. And what do Slovens, Croats and Muslims think of Yugoslavia? Why nothing. As soon as they can, they desert the Yugoslav army en masse. They did it during the 1940s and again during the 1990s. That's because their anti-Yugoslav identities weren't suppressed as they should have been.

I'm not even going to comment on that, since it sounded so fucking stupid. Nice revision of history you did there. I wonder, who manifested your brain into what it is now?

The Slovenes, Croats, and Muslims left the "Yugoslav" Army because over time, it was becoming increasingly segregated. Maybe you should actually READ some history, instead if dwelling on old wives tales.

And why should savages be placated with autonomy? Did placating Shqiptar leaders ensure that they wouldn't start slaughtering non-Shqiptars and take a big chunk out of Yugoslavia? No. Did placating Croat leaders ensure that they wouldn't start slaughtering Serbs and clamouring for independence? No. The only way to deal with savages is with savagery. That's how Yugoslav patriots should have dealt with the traitors during the 1990s.

Savages? The only savages are your kind, with a fucked up way of thinking as you display right there. The "savages" you speak of moved abroad, away from Yugoslavia, and when Tito died, began the process of supporting nationalists. You don't even know your mother tongue, so I don't even know why you're fighting about it the way you are. You're a tool.

And please, what Yugoslav Patriots were there really? Name some, some that could have changed the outcome of everything. Please, I implore you.

Unified Bosnia? You mean a Bosnia whose capital is a city settled by Turks? No, thankyou. I prefer to remain a true Bosnian without a state rather than a pseudo-Bosnian with a state.

Then by your way of thinking Yugoslavia is a pseudo-state and the people of it were victims of Forced Unity. Please don't even bother answering in there anymore, because every time you do, with every post that passes by, you're looking like more and more of an idiot; and mind you the only person that might stand your blabbering is poor Pyrros. Why? Because he's sympathetic to the Serb People, and unfortunately for him, you aren't it.

[fazlinho]

If you have ever garnered loyalties toward Yugoslavia or the idea of Yugoslavia then you've garnered loyalties for Serbia.

new sig for this week

[insomniac]

Serbians were the ones who created Yugoslavia. They were the first Yugoslavs. They are the ones who first ruled it. They are the ones who bled the most for it. They are the ones who forgave their Slovene and Croat enemies and built a country with them. Yugoslavia is Serbia in every sense of the word. Even now, Serbia is more like Yugoslavia than any of the other pseudo-states.


Wasn't Tito, the one who held Yugoslavia together, a Croat?

[Ja Ona i Pivo]

Jun 14, 2009 21:30:36 GMT -5 @insomniac said:

Wasn't Tito, the one who held Yugoslavia together, a Croat?

Yea one man held it together and everyone else was against Yugoslavia. They couldnt beat tito he was to strong, wtf

[Lib-Fier]

Yugoslavia and Serbia are interchangeable. If you have ever garnered loyalties toward Yugoslavia or the idea of Yugoslavia then you've garnered loyalties for Serbia

thus, serbia being primaly and willfully responsable for the massacres unleashed upon innocent people, 'bout time someone owned up.

[MiG]

Jun 15, 2009 7:51:26 GMT -5 Ja Ona i Pivo said:

Jun 14, 2009 21:30:36 GMT -5 @insomniac said:

Wasn't Tito, the one who held Yugoslavia together, a Croat?

Yea one man held it together and everyone else was against Yugoslavia. They couldnt beat tito he was to strong, wtf

The will of the people. Tito, was that will, and so was his idea.

BTW, love the name bro.

[Novus Dis]

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

If you should remember correctly, is that we didn't even start talking about any "due bills". From what you should remember, if you have read the history of SFRJ, is that even in that one, the Croatian People still had a movement for autonomy and more rights concerning culture, language, and identity. Read about the Croatian Spring.

Exactly. They didn't even consider themselves Yugoslavs. Why? Because Yugoslav authorities were always either too soft or anti-Yugoslav themselves.

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

Since we're on the topics of paying bills. Tell me, why should have SR Slovenia and SR Croatia spend most of their money investing in s**t holes like Kosovo? Why wasn't economic autonomy given when s**t hit the fan? I don't really know, nor do I care, about the thought process of the leadership within the SFRJ; but the simple fact is that a nation and its people will only go so far as to give and not receive.

Why were there lines separating Slovenia, Croatia and Kosovo in the first place?

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

44% is not half. Just because you have the numbers, does that really mean that you can do s**t however you want, wherever you want. You state this like its a given, so why do you ridicule and fight the Albanians on the Kosovo issue. If numbers tell it all, why not just let Kosovo go?

Except Serbs were legally in Yugoslavia whereas the vast majority of Shqiptars weren't/aren't.

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

So you consider Yugoslavia to be strong under a rule of an Iron Fist? Under the Monarchy, how many communists, nationalists, and just innocent people were imprisoned, put to death?

Who said anything about putting people to death? Only if they arm themselves should they be put to death. Imprisonment of violent extremists isn't so farfetched. Perhaps to a violent extremist such as yourself, it might be.

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

Yeah, the monarchy was so damn good for everyone... as much as Tito's Yugoslavia was. At least Tito's Yugoslavia had a dick's worth of balance. So quit being a damn hypocrite.

Balance? If by balance you mean it was divided then yes. And no, Tito was only ever tough on people who he taught opposed his rule and not on people who opposed Yugoslavia. He divided Yugoslavia into six pseudo-states for goodness sakes! That's without taking into account how anti-Yugoslav he was during the 1920s, 1930s and early 1940s.

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

The Federation fell apart because of nationalists, like yourself. Not just from the Serb side, but from all sides; not just because of Every Non-Serb group within the Yugoslav Federation. s**t, some propaganda machine your brain is.

You're an idiot. If there were more Yugoslav Nationalists like me (and less ethnic separatists like you) then Yugoslavia would still be functioning today. It is because of guys like me that Yugoslavia managed to stay together as long as it did. It is because of fiends, idiots, crooks and hypocrites like you that it fell apart.

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

The Slovenes, Croats, and Muslims left the "Yugoslav" Army because over time, it was becoming increasingly segregated. Maybe you should actually READ some history, instead if dwelling on old wives tales.

Segregated how? Soldiers (regardless of their ethnicity) all ate the same food and slept in the same bunks. They had the same weapons and fired the same bullets. They all got the same training. And in many cases (like with Mladic and soldiers under his command for example) officers would be given the same treatment as non-commissioned solders.

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

Savages? The only savages are your kind, with a f**ked up way of thinking as you display right there. The "savages" you speak of moved abroad, away from Yugoslavia, and when Tito died, began the process of supporting nationalists. You don't even know your mother tongue, so I don't even know why you're fighting about it the way you are. You're a tool.

Go bang your head against the wall again, savage. Maybe you'll shift your brain back into place.

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

And please, what Yugoslav Patriots were there really? Name some, some that could have changed the outcome of everything. Please, I implore you.

During the wars of the 1990s? If I remember correctly, the leaders and people of RSK and RSB wished to stay within Yugoslavia. Too bad they weren't given help from the rump of Yugoslavia otherwise they could have put the savages down relatively quickly.

Jun 14, 2009 14:40:28 GMT -5 MiG said:

Then by your way of thinking Yugoslavia is a pseudo-state and the people of it were victims of Forced Unity. Please don't even bother answering in there anymore, because every time you do, with every post that passes by, you're looking like more and more of an idiot; and mind you the only person that might stand your blabbering is poor Pyrros. Why? Because he's sympathetic to the Serb People, and unfortunately for him, you aren't it.

I'm against unity. For there to be unity, there needs to be separate groups. I am against separate groups. I am for a single Yugoslavia, indivisible by law or war.

[MiG]

^ It's like talking to a Propaganda machine, or Joseph Goebbels. Either way, I'm not even going to waste my time, as you have (And I have proved, time and again) constantly contradicted yourself. I hope you're a proud Yugoslav, or should I say Zadnji Bosanac, or should I say Prvi "Srpskanik".. or should I say proud Serb. Hell, I don't even know anymore; do you?

[Novus Dis]

You're delusion, MIG. First you think that I'm someone other than Deucaon. Second you think that I've contradicted myself and that you've proved it. For the first I say that Zadnji Bosanac and Prvi Srpskanik are (largely satirical) titles. For the second I can say that I have neither contradicted myself nor do you have the brain power to prove that I have had I done so.

[Ja Ona i Pivo]

Jun 15, 2009 15:05:51 GMT -5 MiG said:

Jun 15, 2009 7:51:26 GMT -5 Ja Ona i Pivo said:

Yea one man held it together and everyone else was against Yugoslavia. They couldnt beat tito he was to strong, wtf

The will of the people. Tito, was that will, and so was his idea.



BTW, love the name bro.

hehe thnx man

[MiG]

Jun 15, 2009 17:34:41 GMT -5 Novus Dis said:

You're delusion, MIG. First you think that I'm someone other than Deucaon. Second you think that I've contradicted myself and that you've proved it. For the first I say that Zadnji Bosanac and Prvi Srpskanik are (largely satirical) titles. For the second I can say that I have neither contradicted myself nor do you have the brain power to prove that I have had I done so.

Yeh. Of course. Keep telling yourself that.