To think that 45 year old British citizen should know what I'm talking about.....

[Bekindtoyourknees]

when I mention the wars in Slovenia, Bosnia, Croatia etc?

His excuse: 'I wasn't there, so why should I know about them?'

I thought there was nothing left to shock me at work, seems I was wrong

At the risk of exposing my own ignorance.... did you mean Slovenia, or Serbia, OP?

I suppose I think that there should be an automatic level of knowledge of conflicts/politics etc from one's own lifetime and region (hence I would assume that someone in their early 30s like me, from the UK, would automatically know about UK/European affairs from the 1980s onwards). I would also assume a further level of knowledge going back over the course of the 20th century, since there is an abundance of material (TV, radio, books, newspapers, magazines) covering such events.

I would also hope that other key conflicts (WW2, WW1) spanning the past century would be known and understood.

Obviously the geopolitical context varies depending on one's origins. So, I'd expect someone French to have great knowledge, for example, of 20th century conflicts in South East Asia, since many of the countries there were former French colonies. Similarly, I'd expect someone British to know more about partition and the de-colonisation of India, since it was part of the Empire.

I can understand a lack of knowledge about events going back hundreds of years, simply because the lack of sources (in particular film or TV footage) can make something seem less 'real'. Conversely, WW1 and WW2 seemed very "real" to me as my grandparents/parents lived through these events and told me many stories about them.

I don't seek out information about war. I read books but not about war or history because with the little time I have to read, I choose topics that interest me more first. I don't listen to radio 4 and I don't read newspapers regularly. We all choose to spend our time differently. I don't spend mine reading about war or world news I guess.

It depends on what you want people to know.

Phrases started knocking about such as "bad day in Bosnia", "it's like living in Beruit", so I'm surprised that someone could miss the whole thing.

I think that it was the first time that PTS was discussed sensibly and thoroughly in the media, as well.

I ignored the 9/11 attack, my DH was in High Dependency and I had my children to deal with, he later passed away.

I'm in my 40's, all these things start to merge, tbh, all that changes is the date.

There are Death Camps in Africa, on a par with Nazi Camps and there was a restaurant found to be serving Human meat, which looked like there had been hunting games set up. But that wasn't covered everywhere.

I don't think that having a vote does necessarily mean that you have to be well informed on world wide events, unless you vote for racist reasons, then you realise that UKIP etc are lying.

I think overviews are useful as to why/how genocide happened, to prevent it, where we can, such as control of the media etc, but not details.

I find people that research in depth these situations, yet don't help family members that are struggling here and now, odder.

I pick up the pieces in my family, I am educated to the level I think is enough, I did study History and helped my Teens with their GCSE's, as well as knowing people who were in
the Camps and Hitler Youth. My background is Native American and we had our own genocide takes to tell.

I am largely ignoring the News coverage of the Ukraine/Russia conflict, I need to destress whenever possible.

IMO that isn't ignorance, it's self preservation.

I don't particularly seek out information about war Anonymai, unless it is a conflict that I find interesting.

My AIBU was whether it is normal for someone of my age to be completely oblivious to a European war that only ended relatively recently and in which we (through NATO) were involved.

Why would you expect particular knowledge of these, freckled?

they force you to take history up to x level where you cover a select number of topics, then it's up to you. It interests you, fair enough. It doesn't interest other people to the same degree.

What do you force yourself to do that isn't of interest to you?

Are you as knowledgeable about agricultural management, palliative care and astronomy? Do you speak all the roman languages and chinese and Urdu?

It's important someone knows about palliative care but not everyone.

"At the risk of exposing my own ignorance.... did you mean Slovenia, or Serbia, OP?"

Slovenia had a Ten Day War

Serbia, which OP did not mention, was one of the main protagonists (and Russia backed).

bekind, I was responding to something further up thread, not your original AIBU.

H surfs about on the other news channels on Sky and I am amazed how much we dont hear about on our mainstream news, I knew there were rumblings in Egypt well before our channels became interested (I do appreciate they all have their own bias)

It has slowly dawned on me that we seem to have delveloped a very narrow band of countries which are newsworthy and of interest to us now. Europe , US, anywhere that has gas or oil (tick)

We are slowly becoming as blinkered as the US regarding what is happening in other countries.

I didn't mention Kosovo either, that why I put etc

It's not a radical concept to think that you ought to be at least dimly aware of a major war, lasting over three years, that happened in your own continent when you were an adult in your mid-20s.

Come on, surely none of you is seriously suggesting that? The OP isn't arguing that her colleague should be able to write a thesis on the issues involved, just that he shouldn't be "completely unaware". That's not exactly a high bar, is it?

Anonymai

"When London was awarded the Olympics, I was pleased but someone I work with said "god diabolo why do you care, we don't live in London"

Not an unreasonable comment if (a) one doesn't have any interest in sport and (b) doesn't have any interest in London?

Billy - I'd expect knowledge of these things - not necessarily in-depth knowledge - because they've happened in most of our lifetimes and in the past century. I suppose I also assume that a level of historical knowledge is more important than, say, agricultural management, because history is crucial to understanding the present.

I am very aware of the FRY conflict - but then I was there in 1994 and again in 1996 so I should be. What I saw and what I was a part of has shaped the rest of my life. The after effects were far reaching.

However, I am not surprised at how little other people know. A lot of what happened, a lot of the more horrific and 'newsworthy' items were not told. There was very little coverage, not like today, and that is not necessarily a bad thing.

I will admit, that if it wasn't for my experiences then I wouldn't necessarily know anything much about it - I was 22 years old the first time I went, in the midst of life, having a good time, fearless and lasting forever - the news was not important to me then, I was important, my life was important, my own little bubble.

I could see and perfectly understand why someone in their 20s would not be interested in a conflict going on in a country they had no attachment to. It doesn't make him a bad person - what he was then is unlikely to be what he is now.

I picked 1994 (date when conflict in the former Yugoslavia was at its height) just to see what the other memorable news stories of the year were.

Would you expect a 45 year old (now, then a 25 year old) to know that there were wars there, in Chechnya and in Rwanda? That Nelson Mandela became president and RSA rejoined the Commonwealth? The Fred and Rose West murders? That OJ Simpson fled the police? The Channel Tunnel opened? The Lorena Bobbit trial?

Now, I might not have been able to pin the right year to those, but I certainly remember them all.

These things are also crucial in their way.

It's not crucial for everyone to know about the balkans because not everyone needs to 'understand the present' on that (geopolitical?) level.

No more crucial than it is for everyone to understand agricultural management.

I disagree. I think a conflict that spawns a genocide is something everyone needs to know about.

I can recall all of the events mentioned but i would have to guess the hears and would probably be out by 5/10 in most cases.

But it's overload now. Used to shake my head when my SIL said she never watched the news or read a newspaper. No interest in any kind of world or even more local affairs. But she lived alone and said it depressed her watching horrible report after horrible report on her own with no one to turn and talk to about it.

We have sensory overload now with 24 hour news, live feeds etc. it's just too much often. Years ago folk only heard the odd big news event - not that some woman in Outer Mongolia got ripped off in a scam and had to sell a child. It's just all too much and I think folk now just want to shut down rather than engage.

Whether or not knowing about the Balkans is crucial, an adult living in the UK at the time should have noticed that there was a war going on, surely? It was constantly on the front pages of the newspapers (even if you didn't read them, you'd have to walk past them every time you went into a newsagent or supermarket); it was the lead story on the news much of the time (even if you didn't watch it, you'd get the "later on the news at whenever, [description of headline]". There were hard-hitting stories about genocide and ethnic cleansing; there were softer human-interest stories about journalists smuggling children out of the war zone. There were Hollywood movies (serious pieces and big action movies) made about it. This went on for several years (and then there were the war crimes issues that dragged on for years more).

I disagree. I think a conflict that spawns a genocide is something everyone needs to know about.

Why? What is everyone going to do with that knowledge?

But what does understanding the present mean?

I suspect I wouldn't know 90% of the Uk/European affairs that you could talk bout Freckled, I might be aware of their name, but I doubt I would know any of the details. On what you've previously posted, that should mean I don't understand the present, but how does one understand the present, and how do we know if I do or don't?

Also I think a lot of this knowledge is down to approach. When I was a child, my parents weren't very educated in subjects like history and weren't very academic (immigrant parents and poor schools), but were absolutely passionate about certain issues; socialism, unions, tolerance, music, art. I'm sure I could have learnt a lot about those subjects through history or political events but thats not how I was taught so to me no they don't seem that essential. In our house, certain topics like wars, and most specifically WW2 & the Holocaust were banned, because my some of my family survived the holocaust but many didn't and my mum, had very vivid nightmares about it all. So, for me, knowledge of such horrible subjects isn't even considered beneficial aside from all the other opinions on whether it is actually interesting or not.

Why? What is everyone going to do with that knowledge?

Realise that genocide isn't something that happens to other people in other places or other times. This was close to home, twenty years ago. Neighbours turned on each other. It can happen all too easily once groups within society become labelled as "other" and ill-feeling is stirred up against them. It can happen under our noses when we are all sitting around smugly congratulating ourselves on how much we've learned from the Holocaust and how obviously it could never happen again in Europe. It can happen to people like us, if we aren't vigilant.

That's a fairly important lesson to learn, I'd say.