These sites may help you. Note especially the legal international definition for genocide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_Genocide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slobodan_Milo%C5%A1evi%C4%87
I need to write a for and against argument on the following:
FOR arguments that Milosevic should go to war
&
AGAINST arguments that Milosevic not be bought to the ICC
Background Info:
Milosevic was the president of Serbia and sided with them to go against non Serbians. He did what was known as ethnic cleansing which was directed a mostly Muslims who lived there at the time.
ICC-International Criminal Court
This organisation take on leader who have committed crimes against humanity and war...which is what Milosevic did.
I have already done the arguments opposite the ones I have already asked by I am struggling on the arguments that are above. please help!!!
7 answers
Wikipedia is way to technical
did you know that majority of the information on any topic on Wikipedia is edited so someone's point of view?
also it doesn't give me for and against arguments that I asked for...it gave me the arguments why he is bad...
did you know that majority of the information on any topic on Wikipedia is edited so someone's point of view?
also it doesn't give me for and against arguments that I asked for...it gave me the arguments why he is bad...
Obviously, you haven't read either article very carefully. Three minutes is insufficient.
Check the links at the end of each article for further references. Also you can research the origins of the Bosnian/Serb disputes.
Check the links at the end of each article for further references. Also you can research the origins of the Bosnian/Serb disputes.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html
as I matter of fact I did read it but I just thought I'd let you know before I did
Wait until you get to high school....... Wikipedia isn't acceptable as a stable reference source for serious reports
as I said it's edited...you can try for yourself...
I don't really want to go a debate about this but I am really cluless on my homework which IS the initial idea of this website
as I said it's edited...you can try for yourself...
I don't really want to go a debate about this but I am really cluless on my homework which IS the initial idea of this website
Wikipedia isn't acceptable as a stable reference source for serious reports
No kidding? Who told you that? Have you read academic papers comparing Wiki to encyclopedias, or professional publications? I suspect not.
Now your point on articles reflect points of view. No kidding. Have you ever ready any article that did not do that? Lord, look at your textbooks as an example. The educated person reads critically, and notes those biases, and asks question and looks for answers to those questions. In my opinion, and experience, Wiki is one of the finest world wide general reference systems in the world today. And again, in any wiki article, the cited references are noted for anyone to explore themselves.
No kidding? Who told you that? Have you read academic papers comparing Wiki to encyclopedias, or professional publications? I suspect not.
Now your point on articles reflect points of view. No kidding. Have you ever ready any article that did not do that? Lord, look at your textbooks as an example. The educated person reads critically, and notes those biases, and asks question and looks for answers to those questions. In my opinion, and experience, Wiki is one of the finest world wide general reference systems in the world today. And again, in any wiki article, the cited references are noted for anyone to explore themselves.
1 answer