Dali je Gavrilo Princip terorista?

automatizovani:
Kad je ubistvo vladara bio terorizam? Meni krivo sto slobu nismo obesili na vreme.
Није тероризам. Него - злочин.

Али, у принципу (макијавелистички) - то је неминовни део историјских збивања. За који се, у том смислу гледано, не може рећи ни да је "лош" ни да је "добар".
 
zavisi od toga sta smatramo za ispravnu definiciju terorizma.
Najuopstenije svaka nezakonita i nasilna akcija usmerena na izazivanje straha i podrivanje poretka, a koja ima politicke ciljeve, bi mogla da se shvati kao terorizam.
Dakle, verovatno bi mogli da prihvatimo da sa danasnjeg stanovista, Princip moze da bude okarakterisan kao terorista.
 
Salvantis:
zavisi od toga sta smatramo za ispravnu definiciju terorizma.
Najuopstenije svaka nezakonita i nasilna akcija usmerena na izazivanje straha i podrivanje poretka, a koja ima politicke ciljeve, bi mogla da se shvati kao terorizam.
Dakle, verovatno bi mogli da prihvatimo da sa danasnjeg stanovista, Princip moze da bude okarakterisan kao terorista.
Дакле, у још ширем тумачењу, и Милош Обилић (то јест онај који је убио Мурата, ко год заправо био).

А и Његош би тако могао бити оптужен за подстрекивање геноцида.

(каквих је лудих покушаја, мислим и било)
 
Interesantan clanak o Sarajevskom Atentatu..
Rusi stoje iza atentata..
Atentat je dosao ranije-trebalo je da Rusija udje u rat kasnije-jer nije bila spremna..

As will be seen in greater detail below, the seeds of war between Russia, Germany, and Austria-Hungary were planted in the mid-1880s. By the time of the Bosnian crisis of 1908-09, they had bloomed into armed skirmishing between proxy armies. The first round of this contest for the Balkans was a humiliating slap-down of Russia's south Slavic allies, Bulgaria and Serbia, by Turkish forces backed by Austria-Hungary and Germany. This did not long deter the ambitions of the southern trans-Slavs. In March 1912 a secret treaty was signed between Bulgaria and Serbia, stipulating that in the event of a war with Turkey, the Czar would mediate any disagreement between the two over the contested territory of Turkish Macedonia. When French President Poincare learned of the pact five months later, he exclaimed to the Russian Foreign Minister, "To tell you the truth, it is a convention for war. Moreover, the treaty contains the germ not only of a war against Turkey, but of a war against Austria"(E. Taylor (1963): 193-4). Such a war, as he knew, would inevitably involve Russia, and its ally of convenience, France, against Germany.

The first Balkan war erupted in October of that year, which spread to include a Serbo-Bulgarian coalition with Greece and Montenegro. The victors soon fell to fighting among themselves over captured Turkish land, at which point the Austrians, as announced, interceded on the side of the Turks, threatening direct military action to block Serbia's annexation of the newly-independent Albania, established under Austrian protection. The success of Russia's allies in the Balkans then prompted Germany to send military advisors to reorganize the Turkish Army. The Czar, sensing a threat to Russian access to the Black Sea through the Dardanelles straits, convened an imperial crown council in St. Petersburg on February 21, 1914, which concluded that the "historic aims" of the Russian Empire could be had only by way of a general European War. The Czar's war council, however, found that it would be at least two to three years before adequate war preparations could be made, and prescribed a course of diplomatic moderation until Russia was ready to move on Austria-Hungary and Germany. (See, A.J.P.Taylor, (1954) 509).

In apparent disregard of the Czar's policy of caution, the Czar's Ambassador to Belgrade, N. H. de Hartwig, and his military attaches, Colonel Victor Artamanov and Captain Alexander Werchovski, moved forward with an aggressive strategy of provocation. These three officials funneled arms and money to the Serbian "Black Hand" terrorist organization, also known as Union or Death. The direct liaison for Russian aid to the Serbian terrorists was Colonel Dragutin Dimitrijevic, code-name "Apis", head of the military intelligence section of the Serbian Army.

In Edmond Taylor's account, Captain Werchovski is identified as the Russian intelligence operations officer who controlled Dimiitrijevic's Black Hand organization during the crucial weeks leading up to the assassination. His superior, Colonel Artmananov, claims to have been on a prolonged vacation in Switzerland starting in June, while it is thought that Ambassador Hartwig may not have known the details of the murder plot in advance. Furthermore, the assassination proceeded despite the foreknowledge of the Serbian government. Altogether, it is certain that the assassination was not the isolated doing of a single gunman, or even of a small circle of young Serbian fanatics. According to Taylor:

The Serbian government, that is Apis' enemy, Prime Minister Pasic, learned of the assassination plot through a secret informer planted inside the Black Hand, and actually took official steps to block its execution. . . The warning could not expose the role of the Black Hand or give any details that would enable the Austrians to arrest the killers before they could strike – otherwise Pasic and the Serbian Minister would have been signing their own death warrants. Accidentally or not, the Serbian Minister (in Vienna) sabotaged Belgrade's instructions, by the vague and bumbling way in which he delivered the warning . . . Austrian red tape and schlamperei did the rest . . ." (Taylor, E., Ibid., p. 200)

For his own part in the crime, Dimitrijevic was executed later in 1914 before a Serbian Army firing squad later. Artmananov survived both World Wars and retired in Yugoslavia. Werchovski, remarkably, went on to be War Minister in Kerensky's government, and eventually to a high command in the Red Army.
 
Gavrilov Princip

archer5selr6.gif
 
Norma Kampl:
Дакле, у још ширем тумачењу, и Милош Обилић (то јест онај који је убио Мурата, ко год заправо био).

А и Његош би тако могао бити оптужен за подстрекивање геноцида.

(каквих је лудих покушаја, мислим и било)
Pa nije isto kada se vodi srednjovekovna bitka pa neko bude ubijen ili kao u Njegosevom slucaju kada ratuje jedna zemlja protiv druge i kada drzavljanin jedne drzave ubije u atentatu legalnog predstavnika vlasti u mirnodopskim okolnostima .
 
Salvantis:
zavisi od toga sta smatramo za ispravnu definiciju terorizma.
Najuopstenije svaka nezakonita i nasilna akcija usmerena na izazivanje straha i podrivanje poretka, a koja ima politicke ciljeve, bi mogla da se shvati kao terorizam.
Dakle, verovatno bi mogli da prihvatimo da sa danasnjeg stanovista, Princip moze da bude okarakterisan kao terorista.

To je tacno, ali mislim da ne bi mogli tako da ga okarekterisemo ako znamo da je Bosna tada bila okupirana, ako znamo kako je okupirana i prikljucena Austrougarskoj.
 
Norma Kampl:
Дакле, у још ширем тумачењу, и Милош Обилић (то јест онај који је убио Мурата, ко год заправо био).

А и Његош би тако могао бити оптужен за подстрекивање геноцида.

(каквих је лудих покушаја, мислим и било)
Tesko je primeniti danasnje kriterijume i definicije na nesto od pre 600. godina (a slazem se i na ono od pre gotovo sto).
Opet kad vec spominjemo, Milos je ubio Murata u toku bitke, sto je ipak ogromna razlika (mada i tu ima milion i jedna prica i ne postoji prava i opsteprihvacena verzija, cak ni da li je postojao).

A Njegos bi naravno mogao biti optuzen za "podstrekivanje genocida i govor mrznje", danas bi ga odmah poslali u Hag ;)
 
svetolik trpkovic:
Bosnu su Austrijanci izveli iz srednjeg veka izgradili pruge ,puteve,poste ,fabrike,skole,najlepse gradjavine u Sarajevu i Banja Luci ,ukinuli Turski feudalni sistem , tako da je ta "okupacija " bila prilicno blagorodna za Bosance
Ово за путеве, пруге и школе је тачно.

Али је окупација стварна, без наводника.
И учињена из геополитичкостратешких интереса А-У.
 
svetolik trpkovic:
Bosnu su Austrijanci izveli iz srednjeg veka izgradili pruge ,puteve,poste ,fabrike,skole,najlepse gradjavine u Sarajevu i Banja Luci ,ukinuli Turski feudalni sistem , tako da je ta "okupacija " bila prilicno blagorodna za Bosance


Pa? Mislis da se ne bi narod sam "izveo" iz srednjeg veka. Pogledati Srbiju posle oslobadjanja od Turaka, ali i posle prvog i drugog ustanka. Mozda ne bi tako brzo, a mozda bi i brze...ali bi bili slobodni i svoji.
 
svetolik trpkovic:
Bosnu su Austrijanci izveli iz srednjeg veka izgradili pruge ,puteve,poste ,fabrike,skole,najlepse gradjavine u Sarajevu i Banja Luci ,ukinuli Turski feudalni sistem , tako da je ta "okupacija " bila prilicno blagorodna za Bosance
Tipican prokolonijalni stav o tome kako okupacija i kolonijalizam, u stvari donosi civilizaciju i progres "zaostalim i primitivnim divljacima".
Kao da si citirao becke novine iz tog perioda :roll:
 

Back
Top