NationStates Jolt Archive


So what's better, Bosnia '94 or Iraq '06?

Tactical Grace
20-05-2006, 15:53
Interesting comparison in some of the UK papers today. Do you think Iraq is safer or less safe, less violent or more violent, than Bosnia at the peak of its civil war?

And does the government of national unity (ie - a few city blocks in Baghdad) mean anything, all things considered?
Yootopia
20-05-2006, 15:58
Bosnia was worse off. By far. The two things are quite different though, it's like saying "what do you prefer to drink, lager or custard?".
Megaloria
20-05-2006, 16:44
I don't know, I don't really follow soccer.
Strasse II
20-05-2006, 16:46
America should have minded its own damn business in both of these situations.
The Atlantian islands
20-05-2006, 16:49
This is stupid...they are different situations which both presented different problems. As your kind would say, not everything is in black and white.

This thread loses.

*starts digging a grave for thread*
Yootopia
20-05-2006, 16:51
This is stupid...they are different situations which both presented different problems. As your kind would say, not everything is in black and white.

This thread loses.

*starts digging a grave for thread*

I'll chip in with my mattock.
Greater Alemannia
20-05-2006, 16:52
Bosnia had more clear cut line of allegiances, though.
Yootopia
20-05-2006, 16:54
Bosnia had more clear cut line of allegiances, though.

Urmm not really.

And one's ethnic cleansing, one's a conventional ground war, which then changed to a guerrilla war after about five minutes.

Two very different things.
Greater Alemannia
20-05-2006, 17:09
Urmm not really.

And one's ethnic cleansing, one's a conventional ground war, which then changed to a guerrilla war after about five minutes.

Two very different things.

I'm pretty sure that there was also a war in Bosnia.

And it was, by my understanding, Serbs against muslims and seperatists, although there were certainly exceptions.
New Callixtina
20-05-2006, 17:13
America should have minded its own damn business in both of these situations.

I agree. And I also agree that these situations are totally different and being handled by two different administrations, so not a fair or educated comparison.
Yootopia
20-05-2006, 17:16
I'm pretty sure that there was also a war in Bosnia.

And it was, by my understanding, Serbs against muslims and seperatists, although there were certainly exceptions.

Indeed, after the ethnic cleansing there was a war, but it was a different kind of war entirely, purpotrated by people who had different reasons, in a different place, against other different people.

Lager and custard comparison.
Tactical Grace
20-05-2006, 17:33
I'm not talking about political or tactical comparisons. :rolleyes:

I'm talking about the impact on life there. You know, things like the chances of being killed by a mortar round the next time you go to the market. Who had it worse?
Mikesburg
20-05-2006, 17:53
I'm not talking about political or tactical comparisons. :rolleyes:

I'm talking about the impact on life there. You know, things like the chances of being killed by a mortar round the next time you go to the market. Who had it worse?

I'd have to say that the situation in Bosnia was far worse. You'll just find a lot of people refusing to acknowledge the debate due to the unpopularity of the Iraq War.
Snakastan
20-05-2006, 19:56
America should have minded its own damn business in both of these situations.
So it is ok that the United States didn't come to the aid of Rwanda as well?
Aren't there circumstances when it is appropriate for other nations to step in when a country is terrorizing its own people or its neighbors?
Desperate Measures
20-05-2006, 20:03
I'd have to say that the situation in Bosnia was far worse. You'll just find a lot of people refusing to acknowledge the debate due to the unpopularity of the Iraq War.
Acknowledges myself in this statement. But in the grand sceme of things I realize that it doesn't really matter on this little thread in General.
The Infinite Dunes
20-05-2006, 20:05
Interesting comparison in some of the UK papers today. Do you think Iraq is safer or less safe, less violent or more violent, than Bosnia at the peak of its civil war?

And does the government of national unity (ie - a few city blocks in Baghdad) mean anything, all things considered?Which papers? I'll probably read the article if you tell me.
Dinaverg
20-05-2006, 20:07
Wow..How often do you get to see an even split poll on NS?
The Infinite Dunes
20-05-2006, 20:09
Wow..How often do you get to see an even split poll on NS?At the beginning of every poll? :eek:
Dinaverg
20-05-2006, 20:12
At the beginning of every poll? :eek:

Well, assuming you looked at it without voting, not quite. One of the zeroes is actually slightly bigger.
The Infinite Dunes
20-05-2006, 20:15
Well, assuming you looked at it without voting, not quite. One of the zeroes is actually slightly bigger.That's a ridiculous statement. It would be like the phrase 'First among equals'... oh wait... that's used at the highest level of British Government. :(
Ceia
20-05-2006, 20:19
So it is ok that the United States didn't come to the aid of Rwanda as well?
Aren't there circumstances when it is appropriate for other nations to step in when a country is terrorizing its own people or its neighbors?

There are. But no country is obligated to intervene in another, and when countries do intervene the motive is rarely what those countries' leaders state it is. Anyway, the only country that should have intervened in Rwanda is Belgium. They were the colonial power. They created the Hutu/Tutsi division.
Dinaverg
20-05-2006, 20:19
That's a ridiculous statement. It would be like the phrase 'First among equals'... oh wait... that's used at the highest level of British Government. :(

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Or something like that, yes?
The Infinite Dunes
20-05-2006, 20:25
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Or something like that, yes?I thought the orwell quote was 'Four legs good, two legs better'. I presume you're refering to Orwell with the whole animals and equality. I should really read that book again. It's been some time since I last did.
Tactical Grace
20-05-2006, 20:45
Which papers? I'll probably read the article if you tell me.
Today's Independent.
The Infinite Dunes
20-05-2006, 23:43
Hmm... I hate to judge the conflicts in terms of civilian deaths, it justs seems so inhumane, but the number of deaths in the Bosnian war dwarfs that of Iraq, especially with regards to population.
Saipea
21-05-2006, 01:04
This is one of those times when I think a "don't know" option would be good.
Boonytopia
21-05-2006, 06:56
I think the situation in Bosnia at its peak was worse for its population, but I think Bosnia's medium to long term outlook is/was better than Iraq's.
DesignatedMarksman
21-05-2006, 07:20
Bosnia is better because it's OVER.

Other than that, Iraq is better.
Not bad
21-05-2006, 07:24
I don't know, I don't really follow soccer.


Dang it! I was going to say that!:gundge:
Yootopia
21-05-2006, 09:59
Quality of life was/is shitty in both, but Bosnia was worse overall. We'll just have to see in five years' time what happens with Iraq...