Oh my god, the selective service system sent me a registration letter

[sapphi_snake]

pizzahut451 said:

1st.he wasn't a terrorist. He was an assasin from ''Black Hand'' a group of Bosnian Serbs (Bosnia had majority of serbian people back than) who wanted to seperate from Austor-Hungarian Bosnia and join to Serbia.

2.Serbia had absolutely nothing to do with the assasination. They even warned Archduke Franz Ferdinand of possible assasination attempts.

3.When Austria gave Serbia an ultimatum, Serbia accepted evrry single condition except one, which would allow Austrian soldeirs to be in charge of Serbia, to do whatever they want in another contry,without any consequences. That condidion was equal to invasion, and no country could have ever accepted it. Most of leaders in Vienna even said that ''great diplomatic succsess was achived and there is no need for war'' But Austrial decleard war anyway, mostly because of pressure coming from Germany but also because of  their desire to destroy Kingdom of Serbia and influence of Serbs in Bosnia.

While i agree that WW1 was led mostly due to nationalisam, imperialisam, militarism,in-tolerance and alliances, Austrian-Serbian conflict isnt the case.

1. That's the exact definition of a terrorist. Separatist groups are terrorists.

2. Iraq also had nothing to do with september 11, but that didn't stop the US from invading, did it?

3. I agree with that argument, but that whole situation was used as a pretext to start a World War.