Sarajevo assassin was defending his country - president

What a idiot! You don't assassinate a world leader! And besides, archduke Ferdinand was not in Serbia, and was not threatening Serbia! Or maybe, the Serb nation sees the Balkans in its entirety as belonging to the Serbs & should be called Serbia only? Keep dreaming!!!

While in Belgrade, Radmanović also conferred with Nikolić, and the two official said they were "satisfied with the very good relations between Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina - in particular between Serbia and Republika Srpska (RS), pursuant to the Agreement on Special Relations - and expressed the wish that those relations be enhanced further to improve the quality of life for the citizens of both countries."


For your info Tomo aka Undertaker,
RS is not a country , but only entity. If you believe that RS is a country, can you tell us which country has opened an embassy in Banja Luka???

Blessed are the poors in spirit...stupidity will not change even if it comes from the mouth of a high ranking person.

More Serbophobia and anti-Serb bigotry from Ian, UK. But hey, it's always nice to hear what you think Yugoslavism is or anything about the Balkans. I mean you're only a fringe lunatic in the UK that strongly believes in the surrender of your own nations' sovereignty for the EUSSR, how could I NOT take you seriously?

In a sense, you want to implement "Yugoslavism" on the entire EU- an artificially composed superstate. Let's just hope your Yugoslavia doesn't end up like ours. Although seeing as your nation had a lot to do with instigating the conflicts in the 90s, it really would be poetic justice, wouldn't it?
(Ari Gold, 17 September 2014 00:55)

My comment wasn't anti-Serb, it was anti-nationalist. I hate nationalism!

But the nationalist in you has to try and twist what I've said because that is the best you can come up with. It is like some sort of defence mechanism. "I don't like what Ian has said so I'm going to say it is Anti-Serb". A pathetic tactic from a pathetic person.

"Let's just hope your Yugoslavia doesn't end up like ours"

What do you mean "ours"? You're a Westerner and don't you forget it.

Under John Major, my country had a policy of being neutral in the break-up of Yugoslavia.

Ari, go back to your bed room and watch your cute propaganda films by Boris Malagurski.

What a idiot! You don't assassinate a world leader! And besides, archduke Ferdinand was not in Serbia, and was not threatening Serbia! Or maybe, the Serb nation sees the Balkans in its entirety as belonging to the Serbs & should be called Serbia only? Keep dreaming!!!
(Rocky, 15 September 2014 21:00)
==============================
You're the idiot here.
Nobody from Serbia had any part in it. It was a group made up of Serbs, Croats and Muslims and just because it was a Serb who ultimately fired the shot doesn't mean Serbia had anything to do with it or was in the process of creating Greater Serbia.
How on earth do you link the two?
Rocky, you are just a big mouth who spews venom at any opportunity without thinking.
You are so lucky that us Serbs give you a platform. B92 is after all a Serbian news site.
Why do you like mouthing off here? Wouldn't you find a more inviting place by way of Albanian media or are you tired of posting there because there is nobody there to needle? They are all in agreement with you.

To "Rocky":
Archduke Ferdinand was NOT a world leader but the heir to the Hapsburg throne in Austra-Hungary. He held no significant power in his country, let alone on the world stage. He did, however, represent a country which had, in defiance of international law, annexed Bosnia-Herzegovina and was representing these occupiers when he visited Sarajevo.

To "The (so-called) Truth": Note that the reference to the RS is placed in a subordinate clause... Nikolić was referring to Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as a whole when he was referring to his wish for improving relations between the two contries.

Kosovo president: "Killing of Serbs is an act of defending the country."

Would you like to hear such a statement, Mr Nicolic?

What a shame for whole Serbia, such a president. He better kept his mouth shut.

The sad thing of course is Princip wasn't even a Serbian nationalist, but a Yugoslav one. He was one of the many Serbs who fell for the naivety of Yugoslavia, the same idea that cost Serbs dearly as time went on.
(Ari Gold, 16 September 2014 16:23)

Here I agree with you. Serbs, with their greed to create a great Serbia wanted to unite all Slavs under Yugoslavia to be ruled by Serbs. But they shot themselves on the foot and the rest is history...

defending his country my behind! he was a murderer, full stop. he did not strike a blow for the oppressed, he stood for South Slavic imperialism, which was quite popular at the time. The movement itself was of course influenced mostly by Serbian expansionists like Apis, who viewed South Slavism as a substitute for Serbain dominance. Of course, we got to see how much the Southern Slavs really loved one another in the early 90's but that's another thing. come to look back now, the Slavs who lived under Habsburg rule, had far better lives than the entity that followed it.

Sure, Serbs wanted to dominate you all so much that they chose to follow a Croat and support his presidency till he died.
Do you even think for a minute about what you say before you say it?
(Peggy, 17 September 2014 23:03)

Who was the Croat that Serbs were following in 1918 when Yugoslavia was created, dear?

I don't dispute that Gavrilo Princip and Young Bosnia wanted to defend the Serb/ Yugoslav nation however assassinating Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the wrong way of going about it.

Ferdinand was the biggest anti-war figure amongst the Austro-Hungarian elite. On 1 February 1913, Ferdinand wrote to Berchtold, the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister, giving his reasons to avoid war with Serbia. Ferdinand was also known for clashing with Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf (Chief of the General Staff of the Austro-Hungarian Armed Forces) in defence of Serbia.

Ferdinand believed in giving autonomy to the Slavic peoples of Austria-Hungary, he said that the Slavs should be "given a comfortable, fair and good life". Ferdinand didn't trust the Hungarian half of the dual Monarchy, he wanted to re-organise Austria-Hungary into a supranational federation.

Franz Ferdinand was Serbia's biggest ally in Austria-Hungary, I don't see how assassinating a man who was opposed to war with Serbia can be seen as defending the Serb/ Yugoslav nation, especially as his death ironically led to war with Serbia.

Kosovo president: "Killing of Serbs is an act of defending the country."

Would you like to hear such a statement, Mr Nicolic?

What a shame for whole Serbia, such a president. He better kept his mouth shut.
(Comm. Parrisson, 16 September 2014 12:48)

Gavrilo Princip murdered a political leader who was representative of the occupation of Southern Slavs by Austro-Hungary. Albanians who murder Serbs murder unarmed, isolated civilians and then carve out their organs for the black market.

Princip didn't murder any civilians. He took out someone who was trumping around on land that didn't belong to him and pretending to be the legitimate ruler of this land. Archie got what he deserved.

The sad thing of course is Princip wasn't even a Serbian nationalist, but a Yugoslav one. He was one of the many Serbs who fell for the naivety of Yugoslavia, the same idea that cost Serbs dearly as time went on. And yet only Serbs today are appreciative of his sacrifice for freedom because it was the Bosnian Muslims that actually supported occupation.

They supported the "K und K", proud of their servitude in the same way they are proud of their servitude to the Ottomans. Sickening. I on the other hand value freedom. Fighting for freedom is a cornerstone of Serbian identity. Something Serbia's neighbours simply cannot relate to.

Ari.... you're an American, FFS.... It's so strange to read about you dissing "failed multiculturalism" when you live and are from a multicultural society. What's up, some kind of strange cognitive dissonance?
(Danilo, 17 September 2014 23:08)

No in the U.S. there is no multiculturalism. When you come here, you are allowed to practice your religion and culture but you must be integrated into the rest of society. There is sharia law on some streets in Europe because the extremist EU central planners have allowed for this to take root in their own nation-states.

I am a Serbian living in the United States. You, Danilo Jurisich, are born in Canada but chose on your own free will to relocate to Serbia just so you can smear the country you live in on the internet... as if the rest of the Balkans is somehow doing so much better. If however you do prefer other nations, by all means relocate somewhere else perhaps in Zagreb.

(Ian, UK, 16 September 2014 11:31)


A stable Austro-Hungarian empire with a high level of autonomy for it's regions was the BIGGEST threat to proponents of a greater Serbian or Yugoslav state.

As such, they went after exactly the right person - the one who wanted to give more rights and autonomy to Serbs within the Autro-Hungarian empire. Destroy a symbol of foreign rule, plus also the person who was most interested in making that rule the friendliest and engaged as possible, thereby diminishing reasons for unrest within the A-H empire

Gavrilo Princip murdered a political leader who was representative of the occupation of Southern Slavs by Austro-Hungary. Albanians who murder Serbs murder unarmed, isolated civilians and then carve out their organs for the black market.

Princip didn't murder any civilians. He took out someone who was trumping around on land that didn't belong to him and pretending to be the legitimate ruler of this land. Archie got what he deserved.

The sad thing of course is Princip wasn't even a Serbian nationalist, but a Yugoslav one. He was one of the many Serbs who fell for the naivety of Yugoslavia, the same idea that cost Serbs dearly as time went on. And yet only Serbs today are appreciative of his sacrifice for freedom because it was the Bosnian Muslims that actually supported occupation.

They supported the "K und K", proud of their servitude in the same way they are proud of their servitude to the Ottomans. Sickening. I on the other hand value freedom. Fighting for freedom is a cornerstone of Serbian identity. Something Serbia's neighbours simply cannot relate to.
(Ari Gold, 16 September 2014 16:23)

Yugoslavism is the highest form of Serbian Nationalism. Its goal is to unite all South Slavs under Serb rule with the deliberate false perception that Yugoslavism serve the needs/ interests of all nations.

Yugoslavism is the highest form of Serbian Nationalism. Its goal is to unite all South Slavs under Serb rule with the deliberate false perception that Yugoslavism serve the needs/ interests of all nations.
(Ian, UK, 16 September 2014 19:15)

More Serbophobia and anti-Serb bigotry from Ian, UK. But hey, it's always nice to hear what you think Yugoslavism is or anything about the Balkans. I mean you're only a fringe lunatic in the UK that strongly believes in the surrender of your own nations' sovereignty for the EUSSR, how could I NOT take you seriously?

In a sense, you want to implement "Yugoslavism" on the entire EU- an artificially composed superstate. Let's just hope your Yugoslavia doesn't end up like ours. Although seeing as your nation had a lot to do with instigating the conflicts in the 90s, it really would be poetic justice, wouldn't it?

Ari, go back to your bed room and watch your cute propaganda films by Boris Malagurski.
(Ian, UK, 17 September 2014 10:39)

HAHA, Malagurski is a joke. I liked his Kosovo documentary, but he is a neo-Titoist/Yugoslavist. He pins ALL of the breakup of Yugoslavia on the West, but I don't. I see it as a project that never had a chance in hell of being sustained in the long term given the Croat Ustasha genocide on Serbs in WWII. It was simply stupid to try again after that happened, and yes Serbs got what they deserved for being so naive and inclusive while the rest simply used Serbia until it was time.

However it's no doubt that your government at least nudged the process along because it was in your gov'ts interest for there to be war in the Balkans. I don't know if Scotland will break away, but I'd love to see the Balkanisation of one of the countries that initiated the Balkanisation of the Balkans.

If Scotland doesn't leave, one thing is for sure, the UK is going to leave the EUSSR which I know drives you insane. So much instability in Europe, regions trying to break away from nation states, nation states trying to breakaway from the central planners in Brussels, radical Islamists literally living amongst you because your failed multi multiculturalism plan...

Some would say it's poetic justice in a way

From Ian: "Under John Major, my country had a policy of being neutral in the break-up of Yugoslavia."

Then why did your country under John Major, prematurely recognize Slovenia & Croatia, thereby breaking the Yugoslav constitution? Doesn't sound like neutrality to me. Actions differ from policy and it's actions that matter. Fact is, the UK needed support to leave the EMS and agreed to the premature recognition to appease Germany in return for their support on leaving the EMS. And you were a history major? You don't even know the history of your own continent. Maybe you can get a refund on some of the tuition mommy & daddy paid for your sub par education.

From Danilo: "Ari.... you're an American, FFS.... It's so strange to read about you dissing "failed multiculturalism" when you live and are from a multicultural society. What's up, some kind of strange cognitive dissonance?"

Danilo - You're making an apples to oranges comparison. In the first Yugoslavia people were forced to live together. Freedom of speech wasn't allowed and Tito ruled with an iron fist. When Tito died it unraveled and war was the result. In B-H today, none of the three ethnic groups like each other, and at least 2 of the 3 want to dissolve the entity. But the international community is forcing the majority, against their will, to live in a unified country. In the US, the different ethnic groups came here voluntarily. Big difference. Come on, you're smart enough to figure that out, aren't you?

(Ari Gold, 17 September 2014 17:27)

Ari.... you're an American, FFS.... It's so strange to read about you dissing "failed multiculturalism" when you live and are from a multicultural society. What's up, some kind of strange cognitive dissonance?

From Ian: "The UK eventually recognised Croatia on 15 January 1992. I can't see how that can be considered "premature". SFR Yugoslavia and its constitution had practically ceased to exist by then."

Yugoslavia was still a functioning country and a member of the UN. To recognize a secessionist republic, knowing that it will lead to civil war, is choosing sides. This is common sense, of which it seems, you are in short supply. International law as well as the laws of a sovereign nation were violated. Now get back to studying.

Here I agree with you. Serbs, with their greed to create a great Serbia wanted to unite all Slavs under Yugoslavia to be ruled by Serbs. But they shot themselves on the foot and the rest is history...
(icj1, 17 September 2014 02:42)
============================
Sure, Serbs wanted to dominate you all so much that they chose to follow a Croat and support his presidency till he died.
Do you even think for a minute about what you say before you say it?

Then why did your country under John Major, prematurely recognize Slovenia & Croatia, thereby breaking the Yugoslav constitution? Doesn't sound like neutrality to me. Actions differ from policy and it's actions that matter. Fact is, the UK needed support to leave the EMS and agreed to the premature recognition to appease Germany in return for their support on leaving the EMS. And you were a history major? You don't even know the history of your own continent. Maybe you can get a refund on some of the tuition mommy & daddy paid for your sub par education.
(njegos, 17 September 2014 17:34)

Here is some history for you. The UK (with France) initially drafted a resolution to the UN requesting that no country recognise Croatia or Slovenia, the UK and France tried to prevent Germany from recognising Croatia. Germany was originally going to recognise Croatia in early September 1991. The UK and all of the EEC agreed to recognise Croatia after Croatia agreed to make alterations to their Constitution in December 1991. The UK eventually recognised Croatia on 15 January 1992. I can't see how that can be considered "premature". SFR Yugoslavia and its constitution had practically ceased to exist by then.

Out of interest, when do you consider the apropiate time to recognise Croatia?

And if you must known, Student Finance England paid for my tuition and I'm in the process of paying back that low intrest loan. It is extremely rare for someone to pay for their tuition up front.

No in the U.S. there is no multiculturalism. When you come here, you are allowed to practice your religion and culture but you must be integrated into the rest of society.
(Ari Gold, 18 September 2014 17:19)

So which part is true? "there is no multiculturalism" or "you are allowed to practice your religion and culture" ?!

Well for starters Serbs didn't have to opt to follow Tito. They could've continued to follow the king so your argument is dead.
In 1918 Serbs didn't force anyone to be part of Yugoslavia. Croatians willingly went into that union. Nobody was forced into anything so don't start with this Greater Serbia rubbish. Are you saying that everyone was so stupid as not to see the big trick?
(Peggy, 18 September 2014 13:23)

Yes, indeed, proving my point that Serbs, with their greed to create a great Serbia wanted to unite all Slavs under Yugoslavia to be ruled by Serbs. But they shot themselves on the foot and the rest is history...

So which part is true? "there is no multiculturalism" or "you are allowed to practice your religion and culture" ?!
(icj1, 19 September 2014 03:06)

In Western Europe, the multiculturalism project that has been managed by the EU since the 1990s has resulted in communities coming over from the Muslim world and establishing sharia law in certain neighbourhoods where they make up the overwhelming majority. What I am saying is not a shock because even the Führer herself Angela Merkel said that multiculturalism has failed.

In the U.S. we do not have this kind of thing. As an individual you are allowed to adhere to whatever culture or religion you wish, but you can not try to bring with you a system of values that trump the American way of life.

In the EU today, governments look away when members of the Muslim community practice polygamy and female genital mutilation. This is because they are cowards and consumed by political correctness to take a stand, even if they as elected officials are obligated.

This doesn't exist in the U.S. and it would never fly here.

Who was the Croat that Serbs were following in 1918 when Yugoslavia was created, dear?
(icj1, 18 September 2014 05:20)
==============================
Well for starters Serbs didn't have to opt to follow Tito. They could've continued to follow the king so your argument is dead.
In 1918 Serbs didn't force anyone to be part of Yugoslavia. Croatians willingly went into that union. Nobody was forced into anything so don't start with this Greater Serbia rubbish. Are you saying that everyone was so stupid as not to see the big trick?

Ari.... you're an American, FFS.... It's so strange to read about you dissing "failed multiculturalism" when you live and are from a multicultural society. What's up, some kind of strange cognitive dissonance?
(Danilo, 17 September 2014 23:08)

Well, America is big Danilo. Based on what they show on TV, I am of the impression it is not the same everywhere. If our Ari Gold was so lucky as to end up in, say, South Dakota, or certain parts of Texas or places where they still fly the flag of the Union and marry their cousins, then it would be hard for him to know what multiculturalism or indeed America is.

What a idiot! You don't assassinate a world leader! And besides, archduke Ferdinand was not in Serbia, and was not threatening Serbia! Or maybe, the Serb nation sees the Balkans in its entirety as belonging to the Serbs & should be called Serbia only? Keep dreaming!!!

While in Belgrade, Radmanović also conferred with Nikolić, and the two official said they were "satisfied with the very good relations between Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina - in particular between Serbia and Republika Srpska (RS), pursuant to the Agreement on Special Relations - and expressed the wish that those relations be enhanced further to improve the quality of life for the citizens of both countries."


For your info Tomo aka Undertaker,
RS is not a country , but only entity. If you believe that RS is a country, can you tell us which country has opened an embassy in Banja Luka???

Blessed are the poors in spirit...stupidity will not change even if it comes from the mouth of a high ranking person.

What a idiot! You don't assassinate a world leader! And besides, archduke Ferdinand was not in Serbia, and was not threatening Serbia! Or maybe, the Serb nation sees the Balkans in its entirety as belonging to the Serbs & should be called Serbia only? Keep dreaming!!!
(Rocky, 15 September 2014 21:00)
==============================
You're the idiot here.
Nobody from Serbia had any part in it. It was a group made up of Serbs, Croats and Muslims and just because it was a Serb who ultimately fired the shot doesn't mean Serbia had anything to do with it or was in the process of creating Greater Serbia.
How on earth do you link the two?
Rocky, you are just a big mouth who spews venom at any opportunity without thinking.
You are so lucky that us Serbs give you a platform. B92 is after all a Serbian news site.
Why do you like mouthing off here? Wouldn't you find a more inviting place by way of Albanian media or are you tired of posting there because there is nobody there to needle? They are all in agreement with you.

Yugoslavism is the highest form of Serbian Nationalism. Its goal is to unite all South Slavs under Serb rule with the deliberate false perception that Yugoslavism serve the needs/ interests of all nations.
(Ian, UK, 16 September 2014 19:15)

More Serbophobia and anti-Serb bigotry from Ian, UK. But hey, it's always nice to hear what you think Yugoslavism is or anything about the Balkans. I mean you're only a fringe lunatic in the UK that strongly believes in the surrender of your own nations' sovereignty for the EUSSR, how could I NOT take you seriously?

In a sense, you want to implement "Yugoslavism" on the entire EU- an artificially composed superstate. Let's just hope your Yugoslavia doesn't end up like ours. Although seeing as your nation had a lot to do with instigating the conflicts in the 90s, it really would be poetic justice, wouldn't it?

To "Rocky":
Archduke Ferdinand was NOT a world leader but the heir to the Hapsburg throne in Austra-Hungary. He held no significant power in his country, let alone on the world stage. He did, however, represent a country which had, in defiance of international law, annexed Bosnia-Herzegovina and was representing these occupiers when he visited Sarajevo.

To "The (so-called) Truth": Note that the reference to the RS is placed in a subordinate clause... Nikolić was referring to Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as a whole when he was referring to his wish for improving relations between the two contries.

Kosovo president: "Killing of Serbs is an act of defending the country."

Would you like to hear such a statement, Mr Nicolic?

What a shame for whole Serbia, such a president. He better kept his mouth shut.
(Comm. Parrisson, 16 September 2014 12:48)

Gavrilo Princip murdered a political leader who was representative of the occupation of Southern Slavs by Austro-Hungary. Albanians who murder Serbs murder unarmed, isolated civilians and then carve out their organs for the black market.

Princip didn't murder any civilians. He took out someone who was trumping around on land that didn't belong to him and pretending to be the legitimate ruler of this land. Archie got what he deserved.

The sad thing of course is Princip wasn't even a Serbian nationalist, but a Yugoslav one. He was one of the many Serbs who fell for the naivety of Yugoslavia, the same idea that cost Serbs dearly as time went on. And yet only Serbs today are appreciative of his sacrifice for freedom because it was the Bosnian Muslims that actually supported occupation.

They supported the "K und K", proud of their servitude in the same way they are proud of their servitude to the Ottomans. Sickening. I on the other hand value freedom. Fighting for freedom is a cornerstone of Serbian identity. Something Serbia's neighbours simply cannot relate to.

Ari.... you're an American, FFS.... It's so strange to read about you dissing "failed multiculturalism" when you live and are from a multicultural society. What's up, some kind of strange cognitive dissonance?
(Danilo, 17 September 2014 23:08)

No in the U.S. there is no multiculturalism. When you come here, you are allowed to practice your religion and culture but you must be integrated into the rest of society. There is sharia law on some streets in Europe because the extremist EU central planners have allowed for this to take root in their own nation-states.

I am a Serbian living in the United States. You, Danilo Jurisich, are born in Canada but chose on your own free will to relocate to Serbia just so you can smear the country you live in on the internet... as if the rest of the Balkans is somehow doing so much better. If however you do prefer other nations, by all means relocate somewhere else perhaps in Zagreb.

Kosovo president: "Killing of Serbs is an act of defending the country."

Would you like to hear such a statement, Mr Nicolic?

What a shame for whole Serbia, such a president. He better kept his mouth shut.

More Serbophobia and anti-Serb bigotry from Ian, UK. But hey, it's always nice to hear what you think Yugoslavism is or anything about the Balkans. I mean you're only a fringe lunatic in the UK that strongly believes in the surrender of your own nations' sovereignty for the EUSSR, how could I NOT take you seriously?

In a sense, you want to implement "Yugoslavism" on the entire EU- an artificially composed superstate. Let's just hope your Yugoslavia doesn't end up like ours. Although seeing as your nation had a lot to do with instigating the conflicts in the 90s, it really would be poetic justice, wouldn't it?
(Ari Gold, 17 September 2014 00:55)

My comment wasn't anti-Serb, it was anti-nationalist. I hate nationalism!

But the nationalist in you has to try and twist what I've said because that is the best you can come up with. It is like some sort of defence mechanism. "I don't like what Ian has said so I'm going to say it is Anti-Serb". A pathetic tactic from a pathetic person.

"Let's just hope your Yugoslavia doesn't end up like ours"

What do you mean "ours"? You're a Westerner and don't you forget it.

Under John Major, my country had a policy of being neutral in the break-up of Yugoslavia.

Ari, go back to your bed room and watch your cute propaganda films by Boris Malagurski.

defending his country my behind! he was a murderer, full stop. he did not strike a blow for the oppressed, he stood for South Slavic imperialism, which was quite popular at the time. The movement itself was of course influenced mostly by Serbian expansionists like Apis, who viewed South Slavism as a substitute for Serbain dominance. Of course, we got to see how much the Southern Slavs really loved one another in the early 90's but that's another thing. come to look back now, the Slavs who lived under Habsburg rule, had far better lives than the entity that followed it.

Who was the Croat that Serbs were following in 1918 when Yugoslavia was created, dear?
(icj1, 18 September 2014 05:20)
==============================
Well for starters Serbs didn't have to opt to follow Tito. They could've continued to follow the king so your argument is dead.
In 1918 Serbs didn't force anyone to be part of Yugoslavia. Croatians willingly went into that union. Nobody was forced into anything so don't start with this Greater Serbia rubbish. Are you saying that everyone was so stupid as not to see the big trick?

I don't dispute that Gavrilo Princip and Young Bosnia wanted to defend the Serb/ Yugoslav nation however assassinating Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the wrong way of going about it.

Ferdinand was the biggest anti-war figure amongst the Austro-Hungarian elite. On 1 February 1913, Ferdinand wrote to Berchtold, the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister, giving his reasons to avoid war with Serbia. Ferdinand was also known for clashing with Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf (Chief of the General Staff of the Austro-Hungarian Armed Forces) in defence of Serbia.

Ferdinand believed in giving autonomy to the Slavic peoples of Austria-Hungary, he said that the Slavs should be "given a comfortable, fair and good life". Ferdinand didn't trust the Hungarian half of the dual Monarchy, he wanted to re-organise Austria-Hungary into a supranational federation.

Franz Ferdinand was Serbia's biggest ally in Austria-Hungary, I don't see how assassinating a man who was opposed to war with Serbia can be seen as defending the Serb/ Yugoslav nation, especially as his death ironically led to war with Serbia.

Gavrilo Princip murdered a political leader who was representative of the occupation of Southern Slavs by Austro-Hungary. Albanians who murder Serbs murder unarmed, isolated civilians and then carve out their organs for the black market.

Princip didn't murder any civilians. He took out someone who was trumping around on land that didn't belong to him and pretending to be the legitimate ruler of this land. Archie got what he deserved.

The sad thing of course is Princip wasn't even a Serbian nationalist, but a Yugoslav one. He was one of the many Serbs who fell for the naivety of Yugoslavia, the same idea that cost Serbs dearly as time went on. And yet only Serbs today are appreciative of his sacrifice for freedom because it was the Bosnian Muslims that actually supported occupation.

They supported the "K und K", proud of their servitude in the same way they are proud of their servitude to the Ottomans. Sickening. I on the other hand value freedom. Fighting for freedom is a cornerstone of Serbian identity. Something Serbia's neighbours simply cannot relate to.
(Ari Gold, 16 September 2014 16:23)

Yugoslavism is the highest form of Serbian Nationalism. Its goal is to unite all South Slavs under Serb rule with the deliberate false perception that Yugoslavism serve the needs/ interests of all nations.

Ari, go back to your bed room and watch your cute propaganda films by Boris Malagurski.
(Ian, UK, 17 September 2014 10:39)

HAHA, Malagurski is a joke. I liked his Kosovo documentary, but he is a neo-Titoist/Yugoslavist. He pins ALL of the breakup of Yugoslavia on the West, but I don't. I see it as a project that never had a chance in hell of being sustained in the long term given the Croat Ustasha genocide on Serbs in WWII. It was simply stupid to try again after that happened, and yes Serbs got what they deserved for being so naive and inclusive while the rest simply used Serbia until it was time.

However it's no doubt that your government at least nudged the process along because it was in your gov'ts interest for there to be war in the Balkans. I don't know if Scotland will break away, but I'd love to see the Balkanisation of one of the countries that initiated the Balkanisation of the Balkans.

If Scotland doesn't leave, one thing is for sure, the UK is going to leave the EUSSR which I know drives you insane. So much instability in Europe, regions trying to break away from nation states, nation states trying to breakaway from the central planners in Brussels, radical Islamists literally living amongst you because your failed multi multiculturalism plan...

Some would say it's poetic justice in a way

Here I agree with you. Serbs, with their greed to create a great Serbia wanted to unite all Slavs under Yugoslavia to be ruled by Serbs. But they shot themselves on the foot and the rest is history...
(icj1, 17 September 2014 02:42)
============================
Sure, Serbs wanted to dominate you all so much that they chose to follow a Croat and support his presidency till he died.
Do you even think for a minute about what you say before you say it?

(Ian, UK, 16 September 2014 11:31)


A stable Austro-Hungarian empire with a high level of autonomy for it's regions was the BIGGEST threat to proponents of a greater Serbian or Yugoslav state.

As such, they went after exactly the right person - the one who wanted to give more rights and autonomy to Serbs within the Autro-Hungarian empire. Destroy a symbol of foreign rule, plus also the person who was most interested in making that rule the friendliest and engaged as possible, thereby diminishing reasons for unrest within the A-H empire

Then why did your country under John Major, prematurely recognize Slovenia & Croatia, thereby breaking the Yugoslav constitution? Doesn't sound like neutrality to me. Actions differ from policy and it's actions that matter. Fact is, the UK needed support to leave the EMS and agreed to the premature recognition to appease Germany in return for their support on leaving the EMS. And you were a history major? You don't even know the history of your own continent. Maybe you can get a refund on some of the tuition mommy & daddy paid for your sub par education.
(njegos, 17 September 2014 17:34)

Here is some history for you. The UK (with France) initially drafted a resolution to the UN requesting that no country recognise Croatia or Slovenia, the UK and France tried to prevent Germany from recognising Croatia. Germany was originally going to recognise Croatia in early September 1991. The UK and all of the EEC agreed to recognise Croatia after Croatia agreed to make alterations to their Constitution in December 1991. The UK eventually recognised Croatia on 15 January 1992. I can't see how that can be considered "premature". SFR Yugoslavia and its constitution had practically ceased to exist by then.

Out of interest, when do you consider the apropiate time to recognise Croatia?

And if you must known, Student Finance England paid for my tuition and I'm in the process of paying back that low intrest loan. It is extremely rare for someone to pay for their tuition up front.

From Ian: "The UK eventually recognised Croatia on 15 January 1992. I can't see how that can be considered "premature". SFR Yugoslavia and its constitution had practically ceased to exist by then."

Yugoslavia was still a functioning country and a member of the UN. To recognize a secessionist republic, knowing that it will lead to civil war, is choosing sides. This is common sense, of which it seems, you are in short supply. International law as well as the laws of a sovereign nation were violated. Now get back to studying.

From Ian: "Under John Major, my country had a policy of being neutral in the break-up of Yugoslavia."

Then why did your country under John Major, prematurely recognize Slovenia & Croatia, thereby breaking the Yugoslav constitution? Doesn't sound like neutrality to me. Actions differ from policy and it's actions that matter. Fact is, the UK needed support to leave the EMS and agreed to the premature recognition to appease Germany in return for their support on leaving the EMS. And you were a history major? You don't even know the history of your own continent. Maybe you can get a refund on some of the tuition mommy & daddy paid for your sub par education.

(Ari Gold, 17 September 2014 17:27)

Ari.... you're an American, FFS.... It's so strange to read about you dissing "failed multiculturalism" when you live and are from a multicultural society. What's up, some kind of strange cognitive dissonance?

The sad thing of course is Princip wasn't even a Serbian nationalist, but a Yugoslav one. He was one of the many Serbs who fell for the naivety of Yugoslavia, the same idea that cost Serbs dearly as time went on.
(Ari Gold, 16 September 2014 16:23)

Here I agree with you. Serbs, with their greed to create a great Serbia wanted to unite all Slavs under Yugoslavia to be ruled by Serbs. But they shot themselves on the foot and the rest is history...

From Danilo: "Ari.... you're an American, FFS.... It's so strange to read about you dissing "failed multiculturalism" when you live and are from a multicultural society. What's up, some kind of strange cognitive dissonance?"

Danilo - You're making an apples to oranges comparison. In the first Yugoslavia people were forced to live together. Freedom of speech wasn't allowed and Tito ruled with an iron fist. When Tito died it unraveled and war was the result. In B-H today, none of the three ethnic groups like each other, and at least 2 of the 3 want to dissolve the entity. But the international community is forcing the majority, against their will, to live in a unified country. In the US, the different ethnic groups came here voluntarily. Big difference. Come on, you're smart enough to figure that out, aren't you?

No in the U.S. there is no multiculturalism. When you come here, you are allowed to practice your religion and culture but you must be integrated into the rest of society.
(Ari Gold, 18 September 2014 17:19)

So which part is true? "there is no multiculturalism" or "you are allowed to practice your religion and culture" ?!

Well for starters Serbs didn't have to opt to follow Tito. They could've continued to follow the king so your argument is dead.
In 1918 Serbs didn't force anyone to be part of Yugoslavia. Croatians willingly went into that union. Nobody was forced into anything so don't start with this Greater Serbia rubbish. Are you saying that everyone was so stupid as not to see the big trick?
(Peggy, 18 September 2014 13:23)

Yes, indeed, proving my point that Serbs, with their greed to create a great Serbia wanted to unite all Slavs under Yugoslavia to be ruled by Serbs. But they shot themselves on the foot and the rest is history...

Sure, Serbs wanted to dominate you all so much that they chose to follow a Croat and support his presidency till he died.
Do you even think for a minute about what you say before you say it?
(Peggy, 17 September 2014 23:03)

Who was the Croat that Serbs were following in 1918 when Yugoslavia was created, dear?

So which part is true? "there is no multiculturalism" or "you are allowed to practice your religion and culture" ?!
(icj1, 19 September 2014 03:06)

In Western Europe, the multiculturalism project that has been managed by the EU since the 1990s has resulted in communities coming over from the Muslim world and establishing sharia law in certain neighbourhoods where they make up the overwhelming majority. What I am saying is not a shock because even the Führer herself Angela Merkel said that multiculturalism has failed.

In the U.S. we do not have this kind of thing. As an individual you are allowed to adhere to whatever culture or religion you wish, but you can not try to bring with you a system of values that trump the American way of life.

In the EU today, governments look away when members of the Muslim community practice polygamy and female genital mutilation. This is because they are cowards and consumed by political correctness to take a stand, even if they as elected officials are obligated.

This doesn't exist in the U.S. and it would never fly here.

Ari.... you're an American, FFS.... It's so strange to read about you dissing "failed multiculturalism" when you live and are from a multicultural society. What's up, some kind of strange cognitive dissonance?
(Danilo, 17 September 2014 23:08)

Well, America is big Danilo. Based on what they show on TV, I am of the impression it is not the same everywhere. If our Ari Gold was so lucky as to end up in, say, South Dakota, or certain parts of Texas or places where they still fly the flag of the Union and marry their cousins, then it would be hard for him to know what multiculturalism or indeed America is.