Examples of wars with no real "good side" and "bad side"

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

That is another topic, you manipulator, and it has nothing to do with what we are discussing.

And in any case what a funny you are bringing to light the topic of the Republican families children, when it is very well known the case of thousands of them being sent to Russia by the Republican government



Still better than accusing others (in this case your countryman Franco) of things that you can not prove.


So your theory is the next: When Spain suffered an international blockade was a poor country thanks to Franco (obviating the fact that the only guilty of this was the international community!!)... and when such blockade finished and Spain started to play in the same conditions than the fuckin rest of world, and became a prosperous country, it was thanks to USA...

SORRY BUT HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA





How many times do you need that I repeat that I dont consider Spanish to lefties to that you understand it, my little Galician witch?

There you have it. CV approves the murder of Spanish women and children by Moorish troops sent by Franco.

You cant argue with a hysteric and I suspect the reason why you never took a 23andme test is you worry you may find relatives who you wouldn't have thought were relatives. A few hundred thousand infants kidnapped by the Catholic Church and Franco regime does make one wonder about the probability that your grandparents aren't your biological grandparents but a 23andme test would put your mind at ease... or not.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

If you attack others for no reason whatsoever, don't cry if you're served with a taste of your own medicine, retard.

I think attacking an institution that ruined the lives of thousands because they protected criminals among them. I also have no issue attacking defenders of this criminal organization. Once an organization protect criminals in its organization it becomes a criminal organization.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

Frank probably always dreamed of getting molested but noone touched him, thats where his eternal hate and fanatic hate against christianity comes from.

I think the catholic expirience he deserves would be the holy inqusition.

But nevermind, he gotta learn spanish soon and will live under millions of catholics that will tell him to behave himself

I take it you have given up on providing context to God wanting infants skulls crushed.

I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find another Protestant blog that you won't read but post anyway.

You're a very good Catholic boy. I can tell from your spiteful posts Jesus is clearly in your heart.

[Teutone]

I take it you have given up on providing context to God wanting infants skulls crushed.

I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find another Protestant blog that you won't read but post anyway.

You're a very good Catholic boy. I can tell from your spiteful posts Jesus is clearly in your heart.

The context was given by that post no matter if catholic or not

No Christian takes the old testament literally, its more of a jew thing

Basic teaching of every christian branch

Old Testament was relevant till the messiah arrived, the messiah jesus arrived and every of his teachings that colide with the old testament are superseded, many of the teaching of Jesus especially towards killing infants which was a historical context and superseded by the new teachings in the new testament, havent you learned anything about basic christianity? You can attack a jew with the Old Testament but not a Christian, a Christian follows Christ and the New Testament first and foremost, the Old Testament is relevant for understanding of the origins and in matters that dont colide with the new testament teachings. Are you worth the answer? Thinking back no, you are an hateful atheist soul that has no idea of a context.

If you take the old testament literally and dont think in a historical context you are basically a jehova witness.

What the blog said about the historical context is 100% right, the guy is a professor, you asked for a context, I gave you a source with historical context.

Now take a world map and try to memorize where spain is located, little american.

[Cristiano viejo]

There you have it. CV approves the murder of Spanish women and children by Moorish troops sent by Franco.

Again, it is you who considers these lefties as Spanish.
And in any case, I dont approve these murders, you LITTLE GALICIAN MANIPULATOR, I have said I dont consider them Spanish, that is all.

[Teutone]

Again, it is you who considers these lefties as Spanish.
And in any case, I dont approve these murders, you LITTLE GALICIAN MANIPULATOR, I have said I dont consider them Spanish, that is all.

Look how hateful and unreasonable he is

He would be the first who exceute nuns and priests and burn churches, no wonder he has a sympathy with the republicans, he just has no balls to tell his real intentions

[Longbowman]

1) Actually I mixed Latin with Latin, jus in bello/jus ad bellum.

2) A bridge is a legitimate target. J2 was the bridge was clear (we assume) so he had the go-ahead to strike. Either J2 was faulty or (his argument) the train came on as the strike was launched. Don't know, wasn't there, neither was the court. But his argument if true is solid. There are those who say it wasn't but that is not in question.

3) I have never changed any element of any story, please quote where I have.

4) Even if you were to break a treaty that wouldn't necessarily be a violation of jus ad bellum. Say you signed a treaty to never ever ever invade x without the support of y and x suddenly invades your clay but y doesn't give approval. Ethically you're still good to go - the accepted definition of 'legal authority' is 'sovereign state actor[s],' from which the UN's authority derives. Article 56 is about supranational powers which NATO constitutes but treaty breaking doesn't contravene jus ad bellum.

[Anthony PV]

I think attacking an institution that ruined the lives of thousands because they protected criminals among them. I also have no issue attacking defenders of this criminal organization. Once an organization protect criminals in its organization it becomes a criminal organization.

So, you're also defending a criminal organization. Since I doubt there exists any institution on Earth with a perfectly clean record.

[HELLBANIAN]

(2) Balkan Wars 1991-99

The truth is that the Western media and politicians frequently overstated Serb atrocities, while downplaying or even totally ignoring Muslim and Croat ones. It was a war between several mutually hostile ethnic groups, and the plan for a "Greater Serbia" was only one albeit important part of it. Milosevic and Tudjman were pretty much of the same mold. Large scale rape, murder and ethnic cleansing were perpetrated by all sides in the conflict. Indeed, the US assisted Croatia in 1995 through Operation Storm, which resulted in the ethnic cleansing of several thousands of Bosnian Serbs, as well as helping put the KLA into power in Kosovo, who promptly targeted Serbs and Gypsies.

[st.

Bosnian War:

The most striking fact to emerge from the study is that 83.33% of civilian deaths in the Bosnian war were Muslims (Bosniaks). In total, 33,070 Muslim civilians were killed, as against 4,075 Serb civilians, 2,163 Croat civilians and 376 civilians of other nationalities. Muslims were the only one of the three principal Bosnian nationalities who suffered higher civilian than military casualties. Thus, 51.64% of the Muslim dead were civilians, as against 27.77% of the Croat dead and 16.36% of the Serb dead.

The RDC has not compiled data on whocarried outthe killing. Nevertheless, it is indicative that in both absolute and proportional terms, more Serb civilians were killed in the Sarajevo region than in any of the other six regions of Bosnia-Hercegovina that the study considered. Thus, in the Sarajevo region, 1,091 Serb civilians and 2,927 Serb soldiers were killed.We can compare thisto the region of Podrinje,in one part of whichNaser Oric, a Bosnian commander frequently singled out as particularly guilty of war-crimes against Serb civilians, was active. In Podrinje,a total of 849 Serb civilians and 4,711 Serb soldiers were killed. Muslim, Serb and Croat civilian casualties in Sarajevo all peaked in the same year – 1992 – and fell in subsequent years. Civilian casualties were highest in Sarajevo in the early stages of the war, the spring and summer of 1992. Due allowance must be taken for the Serb civilians killed by Bosnian Army or Croat soldiers, in particular by rogue commanders such as Musan Topalovic-Caco, but the conclusion is inescapable: thesingle largest killerof Serb civilians during the war was the Serbsiege of Sarajevo.

Taking into account all those Serb civilians killed by Serb forces in Sarajevo and elsewhere (such as in theTuzla massacreof 25 May 1995), as well as those killed by Croat forces, then the number of Serb civilianskilled by Bosnian Muslims during the whole of the Bosnian war across the whole of Bosnia cannot have been very different from the number of American civilianskilled by fundamentalist Muslims on the single day of 11 September 2001. Which should serve as a salutary lesson for thosewho liketo equate the moderate Muslims of Bosnia with the fundamentalists of al-Qa’ida. The relatively low Serb civilian death-toll in the Bosnian war is testimony to the fact that, while the Bosnian Army was sometimes guilty of war crimes, itdid not pursue a policy of deliberately targeting Serb or Croat civilians.

3. Where were the epicentres of the mass killings ?The RDC’s figures confirm that the most intense phase of the mass killings was the spring and summer of 1992, and that the epicentres of these mass killings were the Podrinje region – broadly speaking East Bosnia – and the Prijedor municipality in north-west Bosnia (we are leaving aside, for the moment, the special cases of the Srebrenica massacre and the siege of Sarajevo). Podrinje accounted for nearly thirty per cent of all Bosnian fatalities, followed by the Sarajevo region, with just over fifteen per cent. In Podrinje, 94.83% of civilian casualties were Muslims. The killings here peaked in the period April-September and particularly May-June 1992. Podrinje was the region adjacent to Serbia; not only were all Bosnian Serb forces formally under ‘Yugoslav’ (i.e. Belgrade’s) military command until 19 May 1992, but units from Serbia werecentrally involvedin the killing in this region: notably, the Uzice Corps of the Yugoslav People’s Army, based in Serbia’s city of Uzice, and the paramilitary forces of Zeljko Raznatovic-Arkan and Vojislav Seselj. The RDC’s figures therefore corroborate the fact that Milosevic’s Serbia spearheaded the programme of mass killings in Bosnia.

https://greatersurbiton.wordpress.co...-dead-tell-us/


Regarding Kosovo, majority of the victims there were Albanians , it's only logical since majority of the area was Albanian.


In Croatia the killings were more even. Thousands of Serb civilians were killed and few thousand more Croats but Serbs were a minority in that country yet killed more Croats than the Croats killed Serbs despite the Croats were the majority.

Of course all sides had victims

[StonyArabia]

Most wars don't but the Anglo-American war clearly had evil.