Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Who Wrecked the Balkans


Persia

Recommended Posts

To continue in DNA revue tone…

Indigenous Peoples in Croatia

Illyrian 34 %

Slav 20 %

Celtic 18 %

Teuton 12 %

Phoenician 8 %

Hellenic People 8 %

Indigenous Peoples in Serbia & Montenegro

Slav 30 %

Illyrian 21 %

Teuton 18 %

Celtic 14 %

Phoenician 9 %

Hellenic People 6 %

Vikings 2 %

And… wait for it…

Indigenous Peoples in Bosnia-Herzegovina

Illyrian 40 %

Teuton 20 %

Celtic 15 %

Slav 15 %

Hunnians 6 %

Thracians 4 %

We have an Illyrian winner!

But some historians know better.

:lol:

Helen, I was taking much interest in your claim and found out on various sites that your claim is correct about the Bosnian DNA. I was not aware of that which means that me claiming that Bosnians were a seperate tribe of slavs coming to the Balkans is WRONG. I have to admit that.

However, those researches put a new light on the origin of Bosnians. According to that a very small percantage of Bosnians (including bosnian Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks)have a slavic gen or just a small amount of it. Furthermore it seems that Bosnians are more likely to be indigous people of this area who interbreeded with the new arrivees rather then being descended from the new arrivees, the Slaves, as it was portreit (please let me know about the right spelling)all the years.

DNA is fascinating. Let's some of us, me and you know who, know that we are both wrong. Interesting twist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Big Bad Voodoo

    56

  • Helen of Annoy

    43

  • odas

    26

  • Spark Plug

    15

Helen, I was taking much interest in your claim and found out on various sites that your claim is correct about the Bosnian DNA. I was not aware of that which means that me claiming that Bosnians were a seperate tribe of slavs coming to the Balkans is WRONG. I have to admit that.

However, those researches put a new light on the origin of Bosnians. According to that a very small percantage of Bosnians (including bosnian Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks)have a slavic gen or just a small amount of it. Furthermore it seems that Bosnians are more likely to be indigous people of this area who interbreeded with the new arrivees rather then being descended from the new arrivees, the Slaves, as it was portreit (please let me know about the right spelling)all the years.

DNA is fascinating. Let's some of us, me and you know who, know that we are both wrong. Interesting twist.

Oxford says its portait (noun) and to portray (verb). It's obviously French word that nested itself just fine in English language.

All those chic French words in English language, and what have we contributed? Paprika. It's not even our word. It's Hungarian. Or Balkanization. Great. Serve us right.

On topic.

That’s what I concluded, there were native tribes that didn’t vanish but mixed with newcomers. Which is completely logical. Why Slavic language prevailed, thus giving Slavic identity to the mixture, we can’t know but we can guess it was the warrior mentality of the newcomers. Maybe. Maybe it was simply chic to speak Slavic language back then, like it’s a must to speak English today. Those who don’t speak it slip occasional English word into their sentences, just to appear cool.

Anyway, it’s rather obvious that in Bosnia this indigenous/newcomer ratio was even more in favour of indigenous population, or that natives had stronger social structure there so newcomers were not entering the population with such ease as in the neighbourhood. That would indicate a state if I may speculate a bit.

However it was in the ancient times, recently Bosnia was one of six Socialist Republics that made the ex-Yu (Socijalistička Federativna Republika Jugoslavija). If it was imaginary construct populated with Croats and Serbs, commies would not bother to make it a republic.

Bosnia in former SFRJ is huge topic itself, I'm stoping here just because I can't plaster whole book here at once.

That tattoo issue from few pages back, that’s Celtic custom, not Slavic. Another hint on non-Slavic origin. Since Ottomans were not fond of crosses it turned out to be useful to keep tattooing girls so I had a chance to meet an older woman who had such tattoos.

“Do you find them strange?” she asked me and continued “I find them beautiful, but that’s not what you’d need. These are different times.”

I tend to learn history from grandmothers. That history never fails.

There’s more. Back in 19th century there was Ilirski pokret (Illyrian movement). It was panslavistic and initiators believed that Illyrians were another Slavic tribe (Jan Kollar, Slovak).

There was a lot of confusion and contradictory interpretations but people were generally far more positive towards the Illyrian term and obvious presence of Illyrians in these lands, whether they were Slavic or not. They looked for something to homogenize their nations that faced Germanization (Magyarization too in Croatia).

Exclusively Slavic terms prevailed recently (historically speaking recently), when Russia expanded into USSR and was given its own sphere of influence in Eastern Europe after WWI. It completely went to extreme after WWII and lasted up to literally last few years. Ideology was gone, but it takes time for science to admit its own mistakes. History is especially tough because it always comes with politics. And we know what politics is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Helen, I was taking much interest in your claim and found out on various sites that your claim is correct about the Bosnian DNA. I was not aware of that which means that me claiming that Bosnians were a seperate tribe of slavs coming to the Balkans is WRONG. I have to admit that.

However, those researches put a new light on the origin of Bosnians. According to that a very small percantage of Bosnians (including bosnian Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks)have a slavic gen or just a small amount of it. Furthermore it seems that Bosnians are more likely to be indigous people of this area who interbreeded with the new arrivees rather then being descended from the new arrivees, the Slaves, as it was portreit (please let me know about the right spelling)all the years.

DNA is fascinating. Let's some of us, me and you know who, know that we are both wrong. Interesting twist.

I live in England so I now what celtic and germanic peoples look like.

Having met some Croatians they could pass for Germans or Celts so they obviously have Celtic and Germanic dna in them. I cant say I believe that about the Greeks or Serbs. Maybe these people were once like the Germanics and Celts but its obvious from how Greeks and Serbs look these days that if any remains it will be very small. Many dont even look European at all they could pass for people from Persia, Pakistan and India.

I always thought that was down to the Jihad into South Eastern Europe during the Middle Ages which is the true starting point for all conflicts in that region that continue until today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live in England so I now what celtic and germanic peoples look like.

Having met some Croatians they could pass for Germans or Celts so they obviously have Celtic and Germanic dna in them. I cant say I believe that about the Greeks or Serbs. Maybe these people were once like the Germanics and Celts but its obvious from how Greeks and Serbs look these days that if any remains it will be very small. Many dont even look European at all they could pass for people from Persia, Pakistan and India.

I always thought that was down to the Jihad into South Eastern Europe during the Middle Ages which is the true starting point for all conflicts in that region that continue until today.

There are plenty of blond people in Serbia, just like there are black haired and olive-skinned folks in South Croatia... it’s so very relative and so very mixed.

Besides, not every carrier of certain passport is really of that nationality. There are so many pickpocketing Gypsy people in Italy with Croatian passports :lol: I kid you not, they found the small illegal printing business in one illegal Gypsy camp in Italy, they specialized Croatian passports.

It’s also amazing how little genetic trace was left by Turks. Though Turks are epically mixed nation, they’d bring slaves, soldiers and craftsmen from all over their Ottoman empire and that’s why we have left more trace in their DNA than they have left in ours.

I have this freakish ability to guess someone’s origin just by glancing at that person, but it’s like a parlour trick, I can’t tell how I do that but it includes physiognomy, clothing style, behaviour, body language. My husband jokingly calls me Gestapo when I say: “Look, here comes Czech family, wanna bet they’re Czech?” and we hear they actually speak Czech when they come closer.

So I can spot Bosnian in a crowd, but I can’t say if he or she is Bosnian Muslim, Bosnian Serb or Bosnian Croat until they speak. My Gestapo instinct tells me they share a lot.

(Gestapo is mentioned here only in humorous context! Think of ‘Alo ‘Alo, not skinheads.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To continue in DNA revue tone…

Indigenous Peoples in Croatia

Illyrian 34 %

Slav 20 %

Celtic 18 %

Teuton 12 %

Phoenician 8 %

Hellenic People 8 %

Indigenous Peoples in Serbia & Montenegro

Slav 30 %

Illyrian 21 %

Teuton 18 %

Celtic 14 %

Phoenician 9 %

Hellenic People 6 %

Vikings 2 %

And… wait for it…

Indigenous Peoples in Bosnia-Herzegovina

Illyrian 40 %

Teuton 20 %

Celtic 15 %

Slav 15 %

Hunnians 6 %

Thracians 4 %

We have an Illyrian winner!

But some historians know better.

:lol:

Can you give us specific genteics studies that show each group as a specific haplogroup or subgrooup separated from all the others?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you give us specific genteics studies that show each group as a specific haplogroup or subgrooup separated from all the others?

I'm sorry, but I honestly don't understand your question.

I guess you're asking for the source? Since the data I posted is a number of groups with percentage of particular ancestry and that percentage was determined by the presence of specific haplogroups? And groups are by default separated from other groups, otherwise they wouldn't be groups, right?

Or you want to know which haplogroup is linked to which ethnicity?

Why do you ask me that, why don't you google it? Just type "haplogroups" and there you go, thousands of links will be there for you.

Once more, this thread is about the fall of ex-Yugoslavia.

The genetic research was mentioned in the context of national identities and given as additional argument, though unnecessary one, since the right on self-determination cannot be taken away from sovereign country and Bosnia is sovereign country. If typical Bosnian genome was showing any other ancestry ratio, they still would have equal right to call themselves nation and have their country.

There are people, for example, born and raised in Africa, who came to my country to attend university and decided to stay. Some of them feel Croat now and regardless of their haplogroup, Y or mtDNA, it's their damn right to feel any way they like.

Genetics is about to become great help in solving historic dilemmas but it doesn't trump human rights or laws.

I kindly suggest you start another thread and have fun with genetics as much as you like.

Edited by Helen of Annoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are plenty of blond people in Serbia, just like there are black haired and olive-skinned folks in South Croatia... it’s so very relative and so very mixed.

Besides, not every carrier of certain passport is really of that nationality. There are so many pickpocketing Gypsy people in Italy with Croatian passports :lol: I kid you not, they found the small illegal printing business in one illegal Gypsy camp in Italy, they specialized Croatian passports.

It’s also amazing how little genetic trace was left by Turks. Though Turks are epically mixed nation, they’d bring slaves, soldiers and craftsmen from all over their Ottoman empire and that’s why we have left more trace in their DNA than they have left in ours.

I have this freakish ability to guess someone’s origin just by glancing at that person, but it’s like a parlour trick, I can’t tell how I do that but it includes physiognomy, clothing style, behaviour, body language. My husband jokingly calls me Gestapo when I say: “Look, here comes Czech family, wanna bet they’re Czech?” and we hear they actually speak Czech when they come closer.

So I can spot Bosnian in a crowd, but I can’t say if he or she is Bosnian Muslim, Bosnian Serb or Bosnian Croat until they speak. My Gestapo instinct tells me they share a lot.

(Gestapo is mentioned here only in humorous context! Think of ‘Alo ‘Alo, not skinheads.)

Haha then maybe I should come work with you at Gestapo headquarters because I can do it too.

I'm not so good at telling differances between Slovanians, Croatians, Austrians etc but I'm good at it on my side of Europe lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Helen of Annoy

Im well aware in which context was mentioned it. I will open new thread if I feel that way. Just want to tell that list isnt right. In good faith.

As I said earlier my knowledge about genetics isnt big. So in search of truth I ask my dear friend for advice. With his help here is answer.

Far as I understand ,you are right , there shouldnt be that groups in your list. That list is wrong.

Genetics is not that specific.

For examle in your list are Phoenicians. Phoenicians are haplogroup J2. How can you tell difference between Phoenicians from other Levantine and Mesopotamian groups who were also J2? You cant.

Right?

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Helen of Annoy

Im well aware in which context was mentioned it. I will open new thread if I feel that way. Just want to tell that list isnt right. In good faith.

As I said earlier my knowledge about genetics isnt big. So in search of truth I ask my dear friend for advice. With his help here is answer.

Far as I understand ,you are right , there shouldnt be that groups in your list. That list is wrong.

Genetics is not that specific.

For examle in your list are Phoenicians. Phoenicians are haplogroup J2. How can you tell difference between Phoenicians from other Levantine and Mesopotamian groups who were also J2? You cant.

Right?

I'm sorry but I dont consider Greeks, Serbs or even Italians to be European.

The people living in those areas may have been once but their present populations arent the true originals. Only a little European blood remains in them.

Edited by Spark Plug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Helen of Annoy

Im well aware in which context was mentioned it. I will open new thread if I feel that way. Just want to tell that list isnt right. In good faith.

As I said earlier my knowledge about genetics isnt big. So in search of truth I ask my dear friend for advice. With his help here is answer.

Far as I understand ,you are right , there shouldnt be that groups in your list. That list is wrong.

Genetics is not that specific.

For examle in your list are Phoenicians. Phoenicians are haplogroup J2. How can you tell difference between Phoenicians from other Levantine and Mesopotamian groups who were also J2? You cant.

Right?

I guess they considered sub-lineages too, of both Y and mtDNA.

Funny you mention Phoenicians in particular, since they have their J1b mtDNA haplogroup, though it pops out in other places, like some mysterious anomaly.

Whatever they did, I’m telling you for the second time (third if we count posts before Saru showed up and cleaned the thread a bit) this thread is not about me, genetics, Bogumils, or anything else, it’s about the fall of ex-Yugoslavia.

It’s perfectly fine to mention anything even remotely connected to the topic, but it is not fine, decent or fair to derail any thread.

If you haven’t noticed, this is what you persistently do.

I had a lot of patience with you, but it is running out. Would you please think about what you’re doing here? If you do already know, then at least have courtesy to openly present your true intentions.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I dont consider Greeks, Serbs or even Italians to be European.

The people living in those areas may have been once but their present populations arent the true originals. Only a little European blood remains in them.

Ah, blood... I can guarantee for myself who I slept with, but can I guarantee that for each and every of my grandmothers, great-grandmothers and so on?

It’s the culture people chose to belong to that should count. What's the blood worth if someone behaves like an ape?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

List is wrong.

Both Slavs and Illyrians, due their areas of inhabitation, have groups of Y Chromosome I2 amongst their ranks. There is no cut-and-dried separation between them, genetically.

Cheers. :tu:

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, blood... I can guarantee for myself who I slept with, but can I guarantee that for each and every of my grandmothers, great-grandmothers and so on?

It’s the culture people chose to belong to that should count. What's the blood worth if someone behaves like an ape?

But when the blood changed in Rome and Greece they stopped being great civilizations.

Differant people = differant culture = differant civilization.

Your blood is important because its who you are. Ideals change but who you are never does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

List is wrong.

Both Slavs and Illyrians, due their areas of inhabitation, have groups of Y Chromosome I2 amongst their ranks. There is no cut-and-dried separation between them, genetically.

Cheers. :tu:

Even if it was, what would that change?

By the way, my patience has run out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But when the blood changed in Rome and Greece they stopped being great civilizations.

Differant people = differant culture = differant civilization.

Your blood is important because its who you are. Ideals change but who you are never does.

And to swerve us back on topic, different cultures were stuck together in ex-Yugoslavia, that’s why it couldn’t last.

Maybe it could, if people were progressing at least by the same rate. But they didn’t. Backward became more backward, progressive became impaired by forced backwardness.

Politics then, as it is still today for some political options, support and even idealize backwardness as role model for a nation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Odas

If you want to talk again about Bosniaks origin you are welcome. PM or whatever.

Just want to say that I didnt want to be malicious.

See you around on another threads. Be careful from where you get info and take care.

In the end we are all Africans. :w00t:

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to swerve us back on topic, different cultures were stuck together in ex-Yugoslavia, that’s why it couldn’t last.

Maybe it could, if people were progressing at least by the same rate. But they didn’t. Backward became more backward, progressive became impaired by forced backwardness.

Politics then, as it is still today for some political options, support and even idealize backwardness as role model for a nation.

England, Scotland and Wales have stuck together for centuries but the blood differance is far less with us.

Its not culture which has helped us to stay together because we each have retained our own identities. Despite the good old days of us English going up north to sort the skirt wearing Scots out we all secretly like each other on our island and most want to stay together.

I dont know what happen in Yugo perhaps the like was never there to begin with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

England, Scotland and Wales have stuck together for centuries but the blood differance is far less with us.

Its not culture which has helped us to stay together because we each have retained our own identities. Despite the good old days of us English going up north to sort the skirt wearing Scots out we all secretly like each other on our island and most want to stay together.

I dont know what happen in Yugo perhaps the like was never there to begin with?

Your island is an island, that’s probably a part of your secret for long and successful union.

Ex-Yu territories are smack middle between East and West Europe and it actually shows. Yugoslavia was declaratively federative, but it had very strong, very aggressive and very centralized repressive apparatus. In other words, milicija (equivalent of police) was less worried about thieves, they were constantly eavesdropping around, looking for excuse to beat the crap out of non-Serbs. Serbs were given priority when applying for police, military or any government service.

People from Slovenia and Croatia had their eyes riveted to the West, while Serbs were obsessed with their big Russian brother. I’m generalizing here, of course there were and there are people who don’t fit into stereotypes.

The point is, Yugoslavia was held together by force, not by choice.

When Russia lost its influence (that used to give boost to communist regime in ex-Yu), and East Europe started to shake their paws off, it was evident the breakdown is near. It could have dragged on for few more years, but Milosevic sped the process up with his “događanje naroda” (happening of the people). They’d pack few hundred rabid Serbian ultra-nationalists in buses and drive them to selected places where they would hold rallies. The main point was scaring non-Serbs back into obedience with such fine arguments like: “We will cut your throats with rusty table spoons.” Sounds illogical, they meant that cutting your throat with a knife is too quick and painless. Deciphering average chetnik (Serbian chauvinist paramilitary) sentence takes a lot of imagination. That’s the culture difference issue I was talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your island is an island, that’s probably a part of your secret for long and successful union.

Ex-Yu territories are smack middle between East and West Europe and it actually shows. Yugoslavia was declaratively federative, but it had very strong, very aggressive and very centralized repressive apparatus. In other words, milicija (equivalent of police) was less worried about thieves, they were constantly eavesdropping around, looking for excuse to beat the crap out of non-Serbs. Serbs were given priority when applying for police, military or any government service.

People from Slovenia and Croatia had their eyes riveted to the West, while Serbs were obsessed with their big Russian brother. I’m generalizing here, of course there were and there are people who don’t fit into stereotypes.

The point is, Yugoslavia was held together by force, not by choice.

When Russia lost its influence (that used to give boost to communist regime in ex-Yu), and East Europe started to shake their paws off, it was evident the breakdown is near. It could have dragged on for few more years, but Milosevic sped the process up with his “događanje naroda” (happening of the people). They’d pack few hundred rabid Serbian ultra-nationalists in buses and drive them to selected places where they would hold rallies. The main point was scaring non-Serbs back into obedience with such fine arguments like: “We will cut your throats with rusty table spoons.” Sounds illogical, they meant that cutting your throat with a knife is too quick and painless. Deciphering average chetnik (Serbian chauvinist paramilitary) sentence takes a lot of imagination. That’s the culture difference issue I was talking about.

In Britain we dont have a militia going around doing things like that.

We dont need it either. If anything the Scots do better out of our arrangement then the English do and most Scots would dread not being a part of the UK.

The only time we hate each other is when England faces Scotland at football lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Britain we dont have a militia going around doing things like that.

We dont need it either. If anything the Scots do better out of our arrangement then the English do and most Scots would dread not being a part of the UK.

The only time we hate each other is when England faces Scotland at football lol.

Oh, I know you dont.

Neither do us anymore. You see, ex-Yu was a socialist state, it was in its constitution, and police was called Milicija because police are repressive forces of a state and socialist society cant have that. Theoretically, Milicija was from the people for the people, supervised and directed by the people.

Lollable but true.

The reality was exactly the opposite of that.

When ex-Yu broke, most countries that used to be Yugoslavian Socialist Republics became independent and had no default socialism in their constitutions anymore. Therefore the Milicija was gone and now we have normal Policija (Police, obviously) like any-sane-one else.

Im glad to hear theres no actual hatred in the UK apart from football. Football is special case over here too, there are completely normal folks that turn into screaming maniacs when it comes to football.

Its like Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde, the potion is common beer and you can tell Dr.Jekyll is about to transform into Mr.Hyde when he wraps himself in a flag and starts singing stadium tunes off key.

Now, dont get me wrong, Im not trying to say it is the case with UK, I just have to mention that I was sure back in 1990 that people are beyond getting violent about national issues. I was aware of nationalisms, psychopathy, stupidity, dangerous politics, dangerous army seized by ultra-nationalists in Serbia... still I believed in common sense of an average person.

I was wrong.

I can say with great pride and satisfaction that I had many Serbian friends and only one of them one! chose to leave and join chetniks (Serbian paramilitary).

But that was my circle of people, not entirely relevant. In some areas you could hardly find one Serb that wasnt hypnotized with Milosevic, ready to fire at his neighbours just because Milosevic told him he can do it. For laughs and domination.

The point is, just because national tensions are not fully visible sometimes it doesnt mean they are not there.

On the brighter side, just because there could be national tensions, it doesnt mean they will ever escalate into open conflict. It depends on current politics. Which is not entirely good news.

Edited by Helen of Annoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But when the blood changed in Rome and Greece they stopped being great civilizations.

Differant people = differant culture = differant civilization.

Your blood is important because its who you are. Ideals change but who you are never does.

Rome and Greece stopped being great civilizations because of unproportional expensions not because of the change of Blood.

Like any other great civilisations, and it happens today and it will happen in the future, Rome could not keep up with the Lands they were holding. Economicly and politicly.

The end of Rome started within Rome due to the fact that Rome could not pay their soldiers anymore, they were not able to support their citizens because of all the wars they fought.

Take the US and the EU for example now. High debts in both Unions. This can go only for so long, untill it starts crumbling unless the politcians do a positive political and economical adjustment.

I do not want to say that Yugoslavija was a great civilisation but it was not so bad in the begining and especialy during the late sixties up untill the early 80'. People lived a very good life. Coincidently, that was the time we started to acumulate the highest debt. Once the money went out, the blame game started. More money was asked from the republics to support the mainly serbian controled government. This was unbareble. And then came Milosevic with his national agenda and the rest is history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im glad to hear theres no actual hatred in the UK apart from football. Football is special case over here too, there are completely normal folks that turn into screaming maniacs when it comes to football.

Its like Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde, the potion is common beer and you can tell Dr.Jekyll is about to transform into Mr.Hyde when he wraps himself in a flag and starts singing stadium tunes off key.

Now, dont get me wrong, Im not trying to say it is the case with UK, I just have to mention that I was sure back in 1990 that people are beyond getting violent about national issues. I was aware of nationalisms, psychopathy, stupidity, dangerous politics, dangerous army seized by ultra-nationalists in Serbia... still I believed in common sense of an average person.

I was wrong.

I can say with great pride and satisfaction that I had many Serbian friends and only one of them one! chose to leave and join chetniks (Serbian paramilitary).

But that was my circle of people, not entirely relevant. In some areas you could hardly find one Serb that wasnt hypnotized with Milosevic, ready to fire at his neighbours just because Milosevic told him he can do it. For laughs and domination.

The point is, just because national tensions are not fully visible sometimes it doesnt mean they are not there.

On the brighter side, just because there could be national tensions, it doesnt mean they will ever escalate into open conflict. It depends on current politics. Which is not entirely good news.

I understand what militia and paramilitary are but in the UK we just have Police and army.

In England our football fans are the best rioters in the world when they get going lol. If its the World Cup and Scotland are there dont be surprised to find the English and Scottish holigans teaming up with each other haha. England and Scotland are very close and except a few odd ones here and there we are like we are married (only its Scotland wearing the skirts haha).

I think the peoples that made Yugoslavia were too differant which is why you had civil war.

Edited by Spark Plug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rome and Greece stopped being great civilizations because of unproportional expensions not because of the change of Blood.

Like any other great civilisations, and it happens today and it will happen in the future, Rome could not keep up with the Lands they were holding. Economicly and politicly.

The end of Rome started within Rome due to the fact that Rome could not pay their soldiers anymore, they were not able to support their citizens because of all the wars they fought.

Take the US and the EU for example now. High debts in both Unions. This can go only for so long, untill it starts crumbling unless the politcians do a positive political and economical adjustment.

I do not want to say that Yugoslavija was a great civilisation but it was not so bad in the begining and especialy during the late sixties up untill the early 80'. People lived a very good life. Coincidently, that was the time we started to acumulate the highest debt. Once the money went out, the blame game started. More money was asked from the republics to support the mainly serbian controled government. This was unbareble. And then came Milosevic with his national agenda and the rest is history.

Every Empire has its ups and downs but total collapse came for Rome after its people changed. It never recovered because the people were no longer Roman in race only in culture.

The same happened to Eygpt. That used to be a great negroid civilization but once the Arab peoples took over no more pyramids or obelisks got built. Same in Greece, same in Babylon (Iraq+Summer).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand what militia and paramilitary are but in the UK we just have Police and army.

I know you understand, I just wanted to clear up that society model was changed and none of ex-Yu states is organized in the way ex-Yu was.

The transition from socialist regime into capitalism with democracy was literally overnight (in Croatia and Slovenia) and it didn’t go that smooth as you might expect. Actually, the transition (pretvorba) is dirty word in Croatia today, since small circle of people on top of chronically ruling party seized most of country’s economy... and ruined it completely.

Was that stupidity or deliberate depreciation of a whole country, I still have doubts about that.

In England our football fans are the best rioters in the world when they get going lol. If its the World Cup and Scotland are there dont be surprised to find the English and Scottish holigans teaming up with each other haha. England and Scotland are very close and except a few odd ones here and there we are like we are married (only its Scotland wearing the skirts haha).

That sounds nice. So nice I don't want to burst your bubble. :D

After all, that's your country so you know far better than me what's the situation there.

I think the peoples that made Yugoslavia were too differant which is why you had civil war.

In a way, yes, it was the differences.

Ex-Yu broke and west will join the west again, east will probably remain with the east, and Bosnia is stuck in between as usual. God help us all this time, for a change.

It was possible to make those differences disappear over time, but the power structures in ex-Yu were not interested in real unity or real cooperation. They persistently glorified Serbian historical and political myths, they abandoned the early socialist Yugoslavia ideas (that worked, mind you!) and instead of development most of income was spent on huge military machine and its insane projects (like huge underground military complexes).

Ex-Yu had some remarkable achievements, it literally rose from the ruins after WWII and it pulled many areas out of 18th century right into the 1950s. It went so fast we still retell the anecdotes about people who moved into government flats and thought toilet is a well and stuff like that.

Early 1970s were the time when everything started to go downhill and no one was surprised when whole rusty, poorly maintained construction fell down in early 1990s, but rare people were ready to such mindless violence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a way, yes, it was the differences.

Ex-Yu broke and west will join the west again, east will probably remain with the east, and Bosnia is stuck in between as usual. God help us all this time, for a change.

It was possible to make those differences disappear over time, but the power structures in ex-Yu were not interested in real unity or real cooperation. They persistently glorified Serbian historical and political myths, they abandoned the early socialist Yugoslavia ideas (that worked, mind you!) and instead of development most of income was spent on huge military machine and its insane projects (like huge underground military complexes).

Ex-Yu had some remarkable achievements, it literally rose from the ruins after WWII and it pulled many areas out of 18th century right into the 1950s. It went so fast we still retell the anecdotes about people who moved into government flats and thought toilet is a well and stuff like that.

Early 1970s were the time when everything started to go downhill and no one was surprised when whole rusty, poorly maintained construction fell down in early 1990s, but rare people were ready to such mindless violence.

I understand. Maybe if all the countrie that made Yugo were treated as equals you'd still be together. It sounds like the Serbs thought they were your masters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.