Not many has died, but they have all left and have no hope to ever return to their homes. Contrast that to Balkans where a lot of people already returned to their homes, and way more could return if the hatred could be held in check, to which "humanitarian bombardments" history is a huge deterrent.
I'm not talking about defence of Russia, or Serbia, because they needn't one. The USA/NATO need to defend their involvement in civil wars to help one of the sides which make these civil wars worse every single time, as well as making at least one side even more bitter and preventing normalization of affairs for longer.
I, for one, do not want to ever hear any more moral judgements from you. You have no moral basis to have them.
Right now, the US is backing up an ethnic cleansing agent that is IDF, while placing high hopes on ethnic cleansing as a way to resolve the conflict.
I would be very glad to remove my comments if you remove the whole branch of your accusations, which are wildly out of place.
It is difficult to all sides of the conflict to return to their homes while being dead.
This is why fuel should not be put in the fire of ethnic civil wars. By encouraging your party of preference to score a win you encourage the other party to stiffen their resistance, leading to massive casualties and no resolution. Because the only actual resolution would involve sides talking and making concessions, and you didn't want your preferred party to do that, because you decided they are right all around and so should just get what they want, in full.
What happened in Bosnia with Dayton agreements could still happen, just earlier and with way fewer deaths.
By your own admission, "not many has died" [sic] in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. This contrasts with the tens of thousands of Bosniaks who literally died because they were massacred by Serbs.
That's a civil war. People die on all sides and lose their homes. In Nagorno-Karabakh, the Armenian population was so sure of its upcoming fate that it packed its bags and left as one, in about two weeks period.
Bosniaks just considered it's better to risk death but keep their homes. Serbs who lived there also did the same choice. The peace talks should have started immediately.
I have exactly zero faith in any accusations coming in from US/NATO because that's Jack the Ripper handing out traffic tickets scenario. So let's pretend I didn't hear about "blah blah massacred blah blah", and you didn't post that. That, and you are trying to pass a list of news report at eleven as a list of document war crimes in the other thread.
I'm not talking about defence of Russia, or Serbia, because they needn't one. The USA/NATO need to defend their involvement in civil wars to help one of the sides which make these civil wars worse every single time, as well as making at least one side even more bitter and preventing normalization of affairs for longer.
I, for one, do not want to ever hear any more moral judgements from you. You have no moral basis to have them.
Right now, the US is backing up an ethnic cleansing agent that is IDF, while placing high hopes on ethnic cleansing as a way to resolve the conflict.
I would be very glad to remove my comments if you remove the whole branch of your accusations, which are wildly out of place.