nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
13,818
edits
Changes
→[[Genocide]]
This seems a fairly straightforward issue to me. I have seen no definition of genocide outside of this site's article that requires that genocide be carried out by a government. The UN has not defined genocide this way, and the State Department states explicitly that genocide occurred in Bosnia. [http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2868.htm] Based on these facts, I think the definition in the article should be corrected, and the Srebrenica massacre should be reinserted as an example of genocide. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 21:45, 13 December 2007 (EST)
This seems a fairly straightforward issue to me. I have seen no definition of genocide outside of this site's article that requires that genocide be carried out by a government. The UN has not defined genocide this way, and the State Department states explicitly that genocide occurred in Bosnia. [http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2868.htm] Based on these facts, I think the definition in the article should be corrected, and the Srebrenica massacre should be reinserted as an example of genocide. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 21:45, 13 December 2007 (EST)
: I've been asked to comment, although this is not something that I have an opinion on. According to my Macquarie Dictionary, Genocide is "extermination of a national or racial group as a planned move". I'll add that legal definitions (as mentioned above) can differ from everyday definitions, and following the links through to the source shows that genocide is defined as it is "For the purpose of this Statute", i.e. it may not correspond exactly with other statutes, other administrations, or everyday use. This does not mean, however, that that legal definition should be totally ignored; it's still one to consider. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:34, 14 December 2007 (EST)
: I've been asked to comment, although this is not something that I have an opinion on. According to my Macquarie Dictionary, Genocide is "extermination of a national or racial group as a planned move". I'll add that legal definitions (as mentioned above) can differ from everyday definitions, and following the links through to the source shows that genocide is defined as it is "For the purpose of this Statute", i.e. it may not correspond exactly with other statutes, other administrations, or everyday use. This does not mean, however, that that legal definition should be totally ignored; it's still one to consider. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:34, 14 December 2007 (EST)
: SSchultz, I'm skeptical. The [[UN]] and [[Clinton Administration]] wanted to send "peacekeepers" there, and calling something [[genocide]] is good P.R. to stir up the public. Civil war is not genocide.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:53, 13 December 2007 (EST)
::No, Civil War is not genocide, but the calculated collection and slaughter of 8000 Men and Boys simply because they were Bosnian Muslims is genocide. These were civilian non combatants. Moreover, regardless of what the Clinton administration wanted to do, the Bush State Department states that genocide occurred. Please read the included link (SSchultz)
::: Genocide is something more than mass murder, and connotes millions, not thousands. There must be a motivation, and it is ethnic rather than religious.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:15, 13 December 2007 (EST)
::::First if you think 8000 people is just plain old mass murder and not genocide, then why does the US recognize it as genocide? Also, I have never seen ethnicity listed as a requirement for genocide. What is your source for this?. The UN defines it as "...acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group..." [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 22:21, 13 December 2007 (EST)
:::::I tend to have similar concerns to the points that Andy has raised. When the original term genocide was created to refer to the Jewish Holocaust, was the term really meant to be used for regional atrocities? Just because it has been voted on in modern times doesn't necessarily make it so. Small changes in politics could make the Palestinian claim that the Israelis are committing genocide against them pass under the current definitions as well. In the recent shooting where the shooter wrote that he wished to kill as many Christians as possible, we would have to include that as genocide too as it was an attempt to wipe out a group would we not? The treatment of surrending Germans in Stalingrad, the German crackdown on the Warsaw uprising, the Dresden bombings -- all genocide. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 01:35, 14 December 2007 (EST)
Non UN definitions include "The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group" which would imply it's not the numbers, but an attempt to wipe out a group. As for the Bosnian Muslims, were they trying to wipe out all Bosnians? Obviously they weren't trying to wipe out all Muslims. So it's sketchy. That being said, since the Bush administration says it is genocide, I'm more inclined in that direction, but it's iffy either way. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:23, 13 December 2007 (EST)
:Bosnians are predominantly Muslim, so the Bosnian Serbs were almost certainly attempting to murder a significant number of Bosnian Muslims. Keep in mind that even before the massacre at Srebrenica the Bosnian Serbs had the city under siege and refused to allow even relief convoys through. They starved the populace so that when they entered in force there would be little resistance and committing the massacre would be easier. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 22:30, 13 December 2007 (EST)
:: [[Christians]] v. [[Muslims]] strikes me as religious conflict or civil war, not [[genocide]]. The numbers are only slightly bigger than the casualties for [[9/11]]. Was that [[genocide]]? [[9/11]] was mass murder, but I haven't heard people describe it as [[genocide]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:54, 13 December 2007 (EST)
:::No need for a red herring, Andy, you can just come out and say that you're a genocide denier. I really have very little to say to a man who denies genocide. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 00:13, 14 December 2007 (EST)
:::: This should be discussed on the [[talk:Genocide|Genocide talk page]], not here. I'm more inclined to go along with your definition, SSchultz, but Andy is not claiming that these things didn't happen, the argument is simply about whether they are classified as Genocide or not. So calling Andy a "genocide denier" is out of line. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:08, 14 December 2007 (EST)