Readit NewsDeleted Comment
I don't need Wikipedia to tell me anything about Bosnian War, but people here need sources. You coming in and saying Wikipedia is not a reliable source without citing anything makes you uninformed at best.
Ethnic cleansing occurred during the Bosnian War (1992–95) as large numbers of Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks) and Bosnian Croats were forced to flee their homes or were expelled by the Army of Republika Srpska and Serb paramilitaries.[6][7][8][9] Bosniaks and Bosnian Serbs had also been forced to flee or were expelled by Bosnian Croat forces, though on a restricted scale and in lesser numbers. The UN Security Council Final Report (1994) states while Bosniaks also engaged in "grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of international humanitarian law", they "have not engaged in "systematic ethnic cleansing"".[10] According to the report, "there is no factual basis for arguing that there is a 'moral equivalence' between the warring factions".[10]
One only has to look at an article in different languages, clearly authored by different sets of people. For example, if you look up "Kosovo", the English version states "Kosovo ... is a country in Southeast Europe with partial diplomatic recognition" whereas the one in Serbian states (which I will translate):
"Република Косово је званични назив једнострано проглашене државе на територији Републике Србије, противно Уставу Србије.[5] Према Резолуцији 1244 Савета безбедности УН цела територија Косова и Метохије, правно гледано, налази се у саставу Србије док не буде постигнуто коначно решење"
translated as:
"Kosovo is a formal name for a one-sidedly declared country on the territory of Republic of Serbia, to the objection of Serbia. According to the resolution 1244 from the Security Council of the UN, the entire territory of Kosovo and Metohija, in terms of the law, belongs to Serbia until a final resolution is reached."
Wikipedia is essentially a he-said/she-said website on politically charged matters, and I really wish people would stop treating it as the source of truth.
I forget the term for this, but it’s the same as me stating I like pancakes and you coming at me saying I hate waffles, when I wasn’t talking about waffles at any point. Those types of arguments are insane and I won’t engage with them. I wasn’t saying those things, I’m not defending against your claims that I did.
So yes, the line was very obvious because these are events that happen in real life, risk that you say you wanted to eliminate by absolutely playing it safe: "_anything_, there is no such thing as excessive 'playing it safe'"
I can only assume that your original comment was reactionary and hyperbolic, but then got upset over where that kind of hyperbole lead in the past.
This comment was meant for the normal folks who spend a lot of time in our vehicles and are willing to accept a level of risk that comes along with having some sense of comfort.