I notice also serbian nationalist rhetoric tends to focus on either exaggerated numbers for jasenovac or trying to argue that Srebrenica was just killing soldiers.
These are two of the weakest arguments to use. Proving not insignificant bosniak participation in the ustase is a much stronger argument.
@maverickflyer95 https://t.co/Q3KURQEzjg
https://t.co/MIJh6mRAOU
It is weird to me how little Bosniak nationalism has been put on the fire for its crimes.
They don't even need to say 'it was based' instead it's just 'it never happened'
Here's one example
"Did atatürk support the armenian genocide"
Just this alone will create some of the worst discourse imaginable.
And that third image still doesn't disprove my point. Just as well it was a bad solution to a very possible problem. Which is to say endless awful discourse over Atatürk and the armenian genocide especially it getting *heated and aggressive*.(aggressive was an exact word used). Not too tall a leap to imagine that aggression including endless spam of armenian genocide memes.
If it's endless and unending - especially if the posters are especially insane in finding ways around rules and not giving a shit - it is not surprising that at some point a mod will make a decision that goes too far after endless shit.
The controversial discussion it even brings up is about him and the armenian genocide - and it seems you can't even understand the fact that it's not about him and the armenian genocide. It is about the endless toxic discussion over him and the armenian genocide.
The second image even makes it clear it isn't about him personally. The second image even specifically clarifies it is about Ataturk/Armenian genocide arguments.
Not irrelevant when it shows there's others who know there's a trend.
And it's not an assumption - I just know there are arguments over him and the armenian genocide. You can't deny this.
And that second screenshot specifically mentions it as an explosively controversial issue they want to avoid.