this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2026
21 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

54555 readers
854 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

This is ass-backwards.

As usual, the US and its allies wanted to destabilize Yugoslavia for the purposes of regime change or Balkanization, and as usual it found a group to foment, supply, train, and fund: a minority separatist movement among Muslims within Yugoslavia and across the border in Albania.

The imperialists weren’t on anyone’s side but their own, and the only outcome they cared about was replacing the government with ones that were subservient and/or weak.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 0 points 49 minutes ago

The Serbs enacting laws favoring themselves after the death of Tito did a great job of spreading those ethnic tensions as well. Sure NATO loves doing divide and conquer but it's not a one-sided affair there.

And it in no way explains why NATO would block arms to the Bosnians while the Serbs had plenty of weapons leading to the one-sided massacres. Nor why they would reward the Serbs for doing genocide afterwards.