English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

forgive my ignorance but i havent really heard all the facts/reasons and want to know.

2006-09-02 02:26:09 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

olayinka some interesting comments made esp.regarding dictators, you could have a point there.

2006-09-03 06:31:27 · update #1

10 answers

Redrobin, this is the way some see it.....
I will try and simplify the hell out of it..but its gonna be hard.
Yugoslavia had its own automotive industry - its own pharmaceutical industry, it had a thriving weapons industry not to mention the food industry etc etc. It was basically self contained in a way that if all the other countries were wiped out, it would survive. Well that doesnt go well with the new world order lead by a couple of megalomaniacs. You have to owe, you have to be dependent -- you need to have plugs that can be pulled . So the campaign to fragment and stirr up differences between the 6 republics was under way. As soon as one even had a notion about separating or having self rule, the US and Germany, Britain, were eagerly nodding acceptance to the fact that they would validate and acknowledge and honour the new states. It just added fuel to the powderkeg. Also, and this is the thing.... when a territory or province or republic wants to separate from lets say the 'mother country' because of certain differences, you can try and separate according to the lines drawn on some map, or you separate according to actual lines of those differences. As an example: Lets say Quebec wants to separate from Canada. There is the map border line between Quebec and Ontario. In reality this border line is vague when you consider there is a whack of french speaking ppl on the Ontario side of the line and English speaking ppl just over the Quebec side. So during separation it is these ppl who are caught in the middle, having lived there for generations and it is those who did most of the fighting.- not wanting to be uprooted. Then the warmongers verbology comes into play like " oh ethnic cleansing or remember
weapons of mass destruction lol" It wasn't like that at all and some of the answers here I really wanted to record for posterity but had trouble spooling toilet paper through my epson printer.
I have to mention one point about this Albanian cesspool.
Picture a corner of your backyard (your property) your country and there is a gang of drug-dealers sitting back , occupying it clearly tresspassing, clearly illigal alliens, spilled over on your land and using snipers to keep you away, then they say 'nope, this is our area now and we want to be self governed and you respect our borders(on your land!?). You try to do something bout this domestic issue and you get bombed for 78 days straight. Justice -- maybe later in a poetic sense because those same "insurgents", those same criminals that Yugoslavia/Serbia was trying to control, were the same ones that tipped over the World Slave Center and there is proof on that my friend. Check Osama's passports. Hm go figure..........

2006-09-02 03:25:04 · answer #1 · answered by Magnus 2 · 1 0

The Yugoslav wars were a series of violent conflicts in the territory of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia that took place between 1991 and 2001. They comprised two sets of successive wars affecting all of the six former Yugoslav republics.

The wars were characterised by bitter ethnic conflicts between the peoples of the former Yugoslavia. The conflict had its roots in various underlying political, economic and cultural problems as well as ethnic and religious tensions.

The Yugoslav wars ended with much of the former Yugoslavia reduced to poverty, massive economic disruption and persistent instability across the territories where the worst fighting occurred. The wars were the bloodiest conflicts on European soil since the end of World War II. They were also the first conflicts since World War II to have been formally judged genocidal in character and many key individual participants were subsequently charged with war crimes.

2006-09-02 02:34:12 · answer #2 · answered by ? 5 · 0 1

You aren't going to get this as a one line answer in the Internet. The causes of that war go WAY back... pre WW2... and it's basis was religious... Muslims against Catholics.

If you want to really know the reasons, then you need to go to a library and get a thing called a BOOK... but it's a hard one to research because the religious theme is usually ignored even though it's part of the reason the muslims now want to kill off the rest of the world... There are a lot of very hard feelings about this war... especially on the muslim side.

2006-09-02 02:31:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I like rimrocka's answer except that yugoslavia did not split after Tito's death. The split started after the fall of the iron curtain.
The moral of Tito's death manifests itself in Iraq today. Sadam Husein too was a dictator who had different tribes under him and kept them in good order. Shiite and Sunnis lived side by side. with sadam deposed we now have sectarian violence that the whole world can see but American administration is denying it!
Sometimes it takes a dictator to wield a country togetherso sometimes it may not be a bad word after all.

2006-09-02 03:26:41 · answer #4 · answered by olayinka o 3 · 0 0

im glad you asked!

Yugoslavia was a country ruled by dictator, marshal tito. It was consistant of many ethnic races (serbs, bosnians, kosovans, croatians etc).

When marshal tito died, the ethnic tribes wanted to split. The serbs and croats believed the bosnian muslims and kosovans to be inferior to them and began a campaign of "ethnic cleansing". Thousands of innocent bosnians and kosovans were murdered in cold blood by serbs and croats. The most famous of these genocides is the srebenitca massacre in which 8000 muslims were killed.

After these attrocities NATO stepped in and bombed the croats and serbs till they gave up. Serbia still refuses to surrender one of their wartime generals who is allegedly responsible for genocide to the UN.

2006-09-02 02:31:11 · answer #5 · answered by rimrocka 3 · 1 0

Billy Bob Clinton tried the usual appeasement until forced to act.

2006-09-02 02:28:56 · answer #6 · answered by Colorado 5 · 0 0

Power struggle + nationalism, following the death of Tito.

2006-09-02 02:31:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It was all about what end of a boiled egg you should remove when eating it......

2006-09-02 02:34:13 · answer #8 · answered by st_john_gumby 2 · 0 0

which one?

2006-09-02 02:28:05 · answer #9 · answered by S H I R A Z 3 · 0 0

It was all about Ethnic cleansing .

2006-09-02 04:54:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers