Wars where the good guys lost

July 4th.

Yugoslavia's collapse was always going to happen, the genocide on the other hand was clearly preventable

t. buttmad mudslime

>US
>good guys
heh. maybe good goys but that's about it.

I mean, I imagine the greater concern for most NATO countries was standing by and allowing another genocide to happen in the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide, which saw a lot of western countries being criticized for not stepping in and stopping it. It makes sense when you see it through the lens of the time. On top of that, without Tito, Yugoslavia was bound to collapse eventually. At leas this way, the west had some say in how the pieces landed.

That’s a day, not a war, retard. Besides, I’m sure it took a few weeks for the news to be relayed to King George III.

United Nations, EU, Hague, NPOs and all of the other international organizations and pseudo-justice groups are so fucking deep in their utilitarian asses it's beyond any measure
Consider fucking Rwanda. According to charter of the UN the international community is obliged for action against any genocidal act. Until this fucking day, NONE of the UN documents ever considers the massacres in Rwanda as genocide, as hundreds of thousands perish under blows of machete. The denial is fucking real
But whoppity-fucking-do, few Bosniak fucks die in swoop against fucking insurgents and it's suddenly genocide
If there ever was a fucking massive principle slip in NATO policy similar to Warsaw's Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia in 68, it is Jugo for sure

>minority ethnic groups resist blatant genocide in Jungleville
>hurr dis is da jooz fault

Attached: nazi_soyak_3.jpg (1243x650, 271K)

You mean the same international community that wants guns banned and are actively working on taking away our rights and flood us with third-worlders?
Yeah we should definitely support those guys.

The inaction over Rwanda and the subsequent criticism of those international organizations is precisely the reason why the response to Bosnia was so aggressive. People were pissed that no one did anything to stop one atrocity, so when another one happened, the whole international community was ready to get involved.

I mean, genocide is one of the few things you can do as a ruler that is pretty much universally considered to be objectively bad. Regardless of how you feel about it, most westerners, and resultantly their elected representatives, hold this view.

I would say there was no good side in that one. It was mainly a fight between maintaining the Czarist government which had lost a lot of support over the past decade. Or placing faith in communism, a new system which ended up being more oppressive and eventually as ruinous. At least the Russians got a brief bit of reprieve under the Bolsheviks with them withdrawing Russia from World War 1.

Article 2 of the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide:
Genocide is any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
-killing members of the group;
-causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
-deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
-imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
-forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Are we not being genocided? It's time to clean the filth.

>minority ethnic groups
You mean the khmers?
>resist blatant genocide in Jungleville
You mean the khmers tried to take back the lost Khmer Empire land?

The American Civil War

Attached: confederate-states-of-america-flag-painting 2.jpg (1200x859, 336K)

Considering all of those acts carry the precursor of intent, and refer to the actions of a state or regime, no. The Mexican family that moved in next door to you does not count as genocide. Sorry.

We didn't attempt ethnic cleansing of a group that includes families unrelated to the perpetrators after our people got beheaded stop trying to justify the fact idiot politicians abused their power during a time of war

>Undeveloped agrarian economy
>Entire economic system underpinned by slavery
>Population dominated by a few white Europeans with a vast African underclass
An independent Confederacy would end up as a slightly whiter Brazil.

Serbs are retards, they could have easily allied with the Croats to remove Bosnia but muh Greater Yugoslavia meant they had to fight everyone in their former failed state to assert dominance, and lost.

But they are moved there with support and funding of state actors. Migration is one of the most common forms of genocide.

Probably less whiter since they planned expand further south

No one is forcing whites to leave their land in the US, and there are no policies in place to limit the birth rates of whites. Allowing immigrants into the country isn’t genocide. It’s not necessarily smart, especially when those immigrants are uneducated and become strains on the welfare system, but it’s pretty clearly different than forced ethnic cleansing.

Yeah, the whole Golden Circle idea or whatever it was called is sorta interesting. Funnily enough, the idea survived long enough for some former confederates to flee the US post-1865 and start communities in the then pro-slavery Brazil. To this day, there’s at least one village that still practices traditional southern customs and wears confederate uniforms for festivals.

Jow Forums, a 100% white ethnostate isn't the be-all and end-all of life.
Many men of different origins fought for the Confederacy and earned their right to feast upon the fruits of the cause.

Confederacy = Liberty, freedom, and the right to govern yourself.
Union = Federal overreach to the worst degree, Jow Forums's worst nightmare.

>Nobody is forcing
But they make it a lot harder to live in some areas and much easier for the immigrants to live in those areas. Preferential treatment and placement is the mildest form of it. Was used by the Germans to germanify Poland.

Genocide doesn't have to be "Cut down the tall trees" it's simply removing a people from a place by any means.

You would really let your disdain for the Ruskies get in the way of pushing muslims the fuck out of Europe? Sure they're backward, but at least Russia is a somewhat Christian nation.

Oh wankstain
If UN'd be so fucking zealous suddenly to fight even the slightest signs of potential act of genocide, they'd have to be bombing the shit out of half of Africa, Caucasus, Levant, Central America, Burma ...
Albania, Bosna and Kosovo are just major entryways for drugs, especially Afghani heroin, guns and generally criminal activity "products", while the action taken by the faggot international community, aka the West, was merely to dab on crumbled Ruskie sphere of influence and get some of local the shit under sort of own control
All of the other shit like the criminal tribunal and medialization is merely just veil for the power struggle and who'll get to rip most of and take the best advantage of the actual situation
I'm fucking sick of this clandestine, subversive shit. Can't we just go back to normal wars?

When that freedom includes owning other people, you’re probably not going to garner much mainstream sympathy. On top of that, if southerners weren't fucking lazy and decided to staff their own farms, race relations in the US never would have been such a big issue.

>half your population is literal slaves
>"defending liberty"

Not sure why you’re so mad. That’s literally what Bosnia was. Western countries had been recently criticized by their citizens for allowing a major atrocity to happen, so of course they’re going to make a big show of stepping in when the next one inevitably starts. It’s not their fault the Serbs decided to start a genocide in fucking Europe of all places at the height of international awareness for that sort of thing.

The Confederacy was clearly formed by higher class southerners who wished to keep slavery and where willing to draft and use poor non slave owning farmers to further those goals who where manipulated under the impression the north was invading to assert more control since the majority of battles where in the South

And that's why fewer people take these claims seriously. You take a serious term like "genocide" and try to water it down and distribute a diluted version while claiming it still has the same potency.
Is anyone being executed for being a part of a certain group? Are they being forced into ghettos or camps with the intention of preventing their growth or working them to death? Are they being pushed out of their homes using force and threats of violence? No. Then it's not genocide.

The Second Industrial Revolution was around the corner and their freedom was soon to be given to them at a natural pace.
It required weening, education, and time in order for the transition to go smoothly, something the Union colossally messed up.
Not to mention that many slaves were slated to be freed upon completion of their service to the CSA.

Well yeah we could've and should've stopped numerous other genocides but the fact they fail on numerous other occasions doesn't justify the Bosnian genocides

Cambodia had a genocide that was stopped by the Vietnamese. The UN's response was to have the Vietnamese relinquish power to the genocidal government. The UN is a joke

But by definition it is you faggot. Again as ascribed by the UN it can simply be: making it harder for a group of people to live in a place.

What do you want me to call it: Spicification?

War in Croatia happened first, and Serbs were winning early on so there was no reason for them to ally anyone at that point.

Srebrenica was a genocide just because NATO needed to justify an intervention

>UN declares a safe zone for Bosniaks in town of Srebrenica
>No one bothers to demilitarize the zone, allowing Bosniak forces to launch attacks against neighboring Serb towns from it
>Bosniaks raid surrounding towns killing bunch of Serbian civilians in the process, mostly women and children
>Serb commander Ratko Mladic overruns Srebrenica
>Bosniak men of fighting age get shot for participating in the raids
>Bosniak women and children get loaded onto buses and safely gtfo
>UN observer Philliph Corwin estimated that the number of muslims killed in Srebrenica was no larger than the number of Serbs killed in the villages around it

Except Vietnam put that genocidal government in power in the first place, and they were themselves in the process of a genocide and ethnic oppression.

If that’s not the most revisionist bullshit history I’ve ever seen, I don’t know what is. I agree that abolition of slavery would’ve been inevitable in the South, but the southerners were certainly not planning on it.

That’s literally not what the UN definition says. Idiots like you make it harder for me to live on this Earth, but I’m not claiming some guy misinterpreting international law on the internet is committing genocide by annoying me.

And how is this any different from today?
Desert oil wars, naive high school kids resigned to the desert, and nothing but sand for decades, all under the pretense of defending freedom.
And all the while our pockets are steadily drained via inane taxes, all for a war machine and top brass skimming.

I'm sure many loyalists during George Washington's era felt the same way as you.
"Those poor manipulated fools."

>The consolidation of the states into one vast empire, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of ruin which has overwhelmed all that preceded it.

There is no natural pace for freedom and slavery has been in question well since the beginning of America our founding fathers where divided on the subject we had a chance to abolish earlier but didn't other countries already abolished slavery well before the time the civil war started

This
So close to sexts of truth

>but the southerners were certainly not planning on it
And neither did the North.
I'm sure those freemen were quite grateful for their forty acres and a mule.

The UN, contrary to popular belief, is not meant to be the world police. So long as it continues to serve as a means to facilitate communication and discussion between nations, it’s serving its purpose.

>Mass killing
>Forceful eviction
>Sterilisation
>Making it harder to live or breed

So why does it have "peace keeping" forces.

>There is no natural pace for freedom and slavery
I agree.

>since the beginning of America our founding fathers where divided on the subject
Also agreed.
For too long they dragged their feet and walked on eggshells around the topic.
They could have ended it long before it began and they certainly knew something was coming
We may hold them in high reverence, but we can't forget that they were still only human.

Because when a bunch of nations agree to stop a certain atrocity, the UN provides a natural vehicle for international cooperation.

>I saw a brown person, this is literally genocide!

Attached: soyjak_mad_4.png (1080x1020, 475K)

they where fighting for a group that wished to preserve slavery I didn't say that still doesn't go on in some forms today if anything the example you provided shows how the south was just a bunch of hypocrites

To be fair, the South was already a hotbed for British loyalists who thought they were aristocrats, so any moves against slavery in the early days of the independence movement would’ve likely led to them failing.

Sometimes there's just necessary sacrifice when it comes to securing your dreams and sovereignty.
It's never a clean road to go down.

At the end of the day both sides were hypocrites, and the lesser evil is entirely subjective despite my obvious feelings.

Based vietcong

Attached: 1555182398197.jpg (1119x616, 51K)

Vietnam gets tossed around geopolitically so fucking often. It looks like they’re gonna end up in the US sphere of influence against China in the near future. It’s gonna be weird hearing reports of US troops visiting Da Nang and shit again.

Your stupidity is making it harder for me to live. Cease your genocide at once or I will have the blue helmets sent upon you.

The Real Reason the South Seceded by Donald Livingston

youtube.com/watch?v=8S96iQYL0bw

Wait who fought who? What?

Obligatory Civil War

Attached: 1554972040569.png (799x800, 157K)

Green (Champa) and purple (Khmer) team up and beta uprising

Attached: Vietnam1832.gif (425x666, 8K)

As a monarchist at heart, I'd take tsarists over commies every single day.

>Strawman
>image id straight off a discount archive site

Attached: 1537547733873.png (470x316, 32K)

the left can't meme

surprised nobody metioned it yet
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodesian_Bush_War

One day you’ll grow out of that starry eyed phase induced by a high school understanding of politics and you’ll think how innocent you were when you thought “genocide” had anything to do with the intervention

>makes an absolutely retarded post
>t-the left can't meme
absolute cope

change my mind

Attached: holabunga.png (386x426, 21K)

This.
Also
>Put Dutchbat in an indefensible location
>Know Serbs are coming, don't give them support
>Actively deny air support
>Locals turn against Dutchbat and even kill a soldier by throwing a grenade in his APC
>Blame Dutchbat for massacre
UN is the literal cancer that kills everything it touches.

Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if in a situation where the south doesn't get brutally fucked by the north, they'd still face the eventual problem of slave revolts or potentially a communist revolution based on the severe wealth inequality in the south. From what I understand even contemporary Southerners felt the war was for the rich

not the guy you were replying to just here to tell you that your memes are shit

daily reminder finland lost the winter war

lmao seethe

Ah well, still got the pyrrhic loss

I think it's called pyrrhic victory, user.

No the Soviets got the victory at a high cost, therefore the Finns got a pyrrhic loss

I think a certain line in Gods and Generals spelled it out pretty realistically:
>Slavery will eventually die of natural causes, but the breakup of the Union will inaugurate wars of a hundred generations in America, only to repeat the bloody history of Europe.
For a time it would have been good, but it would have inevitably lead to further balkanization and war for God knows how long.
However at the the same time I can't help but feel that America could have used such "pruning" and division to its benefit in order to develop a stronger culture(s), closer bonds with other countries within its borders, and experience a sort of brotherhood that Europe has/had.
As of right now this country is like a single child living in an empty mcmansion, surrounded by two neighbors that they don't really care for.

I've always personally felt that the US killed its own greatest ally during the Civil War, the only one we could have truly trusted in the long run.

Attached: Johnny Reb & Billy Yank.jpg (960x1240, 811K)

Ww2

Attached: IMG_4800.jpg (392x1024, 78K)

I don't think it works in both ways but whatever suits you man.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_defeat_theory

Ain't it a shame our best chance at a good Ally in our hemisphere was just us the rebelled against ourselves? That should speak volumes on how good Canada and Mexico are as neighbors and allies

Huh, didn't know the phrase was already in use.

post guns w timestamp

Attached: 1558539006158.png (700x1007, 801K)

You can just say you're retarded, user, we'd understand.

See

By the time the civil war kicked off the czar was long deposed. Kerensky and the provisional government had power. Russia was on the way to becoming something akin to a federal republic when the real fighting started.

>Jow Forums nigger asks Jow Forumsommandos to post guns
>doesn't own any itself
lmao I've seen your "arsenal" threads before and you niggers are pitiful. kys

Attached: 15485351547.jpg (546x700, 136K)

Correct on other countries abolishing slavery earlier.

Attached: 5a757a1a-5015-4df1-b19f-c93d31c5bcb2.png (1280x650, 304K)

The whites were liberal republicans

Attached: 1496442263032.jpg (600x600, 62K)

>Great Northern War
Mainly between Sweden under Charles XII and Russia under Peter the Great. Lot of other nations involved but they didn't do much. Russia is getting its ass kicked until Charles overextended his forces and they got wrecked at Poltova. Russia eventually wins making them a great power in Europe and the rest is history.
>WW1
Shitshow on a massive scale, Serbia, Austria and Russia were to blame. Germany dindu nuffin. Allies going balls to the wall at Versailles caused WW2.
>Russian Civil War
Fuck communism. Also the Czars children dindu nuffin.
>Great Patriotic War
Germany was unironically the good guy on the eastern front of WW2. Again fuck communism.
>Rhodesian Bush War
No explanation needed

Monarchy is the most natural, historical and successful form of government. But yeah, i'm definitely retarded.