Talk:Bosanska Krajina

History of Bosnia and Herzegovina written in Wikipedia is full of lies and false information. I do not understand where this serves to hide the truth? All nations should know the truth about Bosnia and Herzegovina, not my or another person's truth, but the factual truth, one that is not written on these pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.164.201.53 (talk) 09:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Ethnic cleansing; anti-Serb sentiment

I actually lived in the region during the conflict and am of mixed ethnic background. I find it hilarious that people that have had nothing to do with the conflict take it upon themselves to "correct" a legitimate wiki page with cited sources, with their stories rooted in hatred and prejudice. The orthodox-catholics that lived in the region were not made to leave their homes and as a mater of fact many chose to stay and fight the JNA forces. However the orthodox-catholics that left before the conflict all had weapons stashed in and around their homes. Many of the Yugoslavian men were forced to come and fight the Bosnians or face imprisonment so it is not right to blame all of serbian people indeed but at the same time no one forced those soldiers to shoot flak at children, to air raid schools, rape women and children and shell funerals all of which I was a victim and a witness to at 7 years old. The JNA forces actually ran over convoys of their own civilians when they were forced to retreat. And no orthodox-catholics were forced to leave any of the newly liberated cities they simply choose to leave and not be under Bosnian rule. You talk of Serbian persecution in WWII in Jasenovac. My great grandfather was in that camp for two years and then Goli Otok for 5years. Anyone who didnt agree with Tito or the Partisan forces was imprisoned no matter the ethnicity, nationality or religion and this is where your confusion comes in. Anyone from Serbia no matter the ethnicity or religious background is a Serbian. Anyone from Bosnia no matter the ethnicity or religion is Bosnian, starting to make sense? The Yugoslav National Army was controlled by the Serbian government so yes the Serbian government is responsible for the ethnic cleansing and its people for allowing it to happen no matter their religion or ethnicity. Anyone from RS is a Bosnian since that is a republic of the Bosnia and Herzegovina federation. The fact that you dont live there tells me that you lived in Austria or Germany during the conflict and might feel a little inferior for that. We that felt it hated it and never want it to happen again no matter what we are and our once great country was destroyed for foreign interest due to ignorance spread around by people like you.Read some books,if you werent there get over it doesn't make less of anything no matter what your religion, only in American do we still hate eachother. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.51.114.21 (talk) 23:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

     The above post is a load of personal opinion charged with political and nationalist orientation. Persecution of people after the war by Tito and the government were grossly exaggerated by any stretch of imagination. And ideological blindness prevents the involved, and their descendants, to accept that 99% of those "persecuted" were people who were on the nazist side in the first place anyway. The problem also got more complex when the new government decided to accept large numbers of "deserters" from chetniks and ustashas at the end of the WWII in a gesture of goodwill, yet these infiltrators managed to reach positions where they committed many atrocities that gave the government and the President a bad wrap. This is confirmed in he above comment:

"My great grandfather was in that camp (Jasenovac) for two years and then Goli Otok for 5years. " I bet you that the same people who threw his grandfather in Jasenovac, later sent him to Goli Otok. Many people were poltrons and infiltrated enemies whose only purpose in life was to destroy communists. Torturing and murdering people was what they knew best, and so that's what they did. Some had risen to the very top. to the Parliament and the government from where they tried to create "Hrvatsko proljece", ("croatian" spring), so-alled Novosadska deklaracija in Srbija, etc.

And the people were at the receiving end of these traitors. Sadly, the people are generally not very bright, especially in mass, so they fell for it and started blaming "communists" for everything.

Now they have received what they deserved. Freedom from everything. Dignity and decent life included. Twenty years after the "freedom came", the individual "states" are in absolute economic destruction. It has NEVER been this bad under Tito. In an interview to a bulgarian TV station some years ago, older Albanians in Kosovo were expressing sadness fro Jugoslavija and the good old times when people respected each other.

In the meantime, in Hrvatska people do not even remember any more when did they receive the salary last time. They only remember that it was years ago... Work and no money> Almost like a communism! Except that in communism you would walk into a supermarket and take what you need... In capitalist "democracy" you do that and go to prison for theft.

I said that I will not come to this talk page again, but I have to answer some claims here. I will not discuss here any more history of RS, but, Joy, just look this again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosanska_Krajina See what is written there: "The numbers are still not determined but it is estimated that anywhere between 10,000 and 30,000 Bosnians were executed as part of the ethnic cleansing campaign of the Bosnian Serbs". The person who wrote this (I will not name this person) accused the whole Serbian nation (not only responsible individuals) for ethnic cleansing against "Bosnians" (What ever "Bosnians" are in this case). Yet, the same person didn’t wanted to say that Serbs were ethnically cleansed from parts of Bosanska Krajina (And many Serbs were executed too). We know that Serbs were majority in Bosanski Petrovac, Drvar, Bosansko Grahovo, Glamoc and Kupres. It is obvious that Serbs were ethnically cleansed from that parts of Bosanska Krajina, but somebody didn’t wanted to mention this. And you claim that these articles are not anti-Serb. Ok, you don’t have to trust me, I do not live in RS, but ask some Serb who live in RS and he will tell you are these articles anti-Serb or not. And I will not write article about history of Serbs in BIH/RS (If somebody else want to write this article, he is free to do that). My intention only was to write an early history of RS, but I can`t work with people who have political attitude. RS is mainly populated with Serbs and I regard every attempt to delete history of Serbs from early history of RS as attack on these Serbs. For example, you will never see me to write anything about Serb history in Kosovo page of wikipedia, because Kosovo is mainly populated with Albanians (And you will also never see me to delete history of Albanians there). Unlike some people, I am tolerant towards other nations, but I have zero tolerance towards certain political attitudes. User:PANONIAN

There is a stetement in this article which notes that a great number of Bosanska Krajina inhabitants were killed in Jasenovac concentration camp during WWII. If one follows that article one could find that they were predominantly Serbs and no one could deny it.Dado

Actually, there is no mention in the article that killed individuals were predominantly Serbs. User:PANONIAN

Number between 10000 and 30000 is the number of missing people from this region and as in the case of Srebrenica it is a fair statement that these people may have been killed given that the region was also the place of concentration camps during Bosnian War. Some 500 corpses that were found in mass graves in Bosanska Krajina are being identified as we speak and additional 450 are awaiting identification. ICTY is also currently investigating a potential genocide in this region. There are maybe few sentences that may need to be slightly revised but the article as a whole is far from not being neutral and factually correct.Dado

My objection was that Serb people were accused for ethnic cleansing instead of the RS authorities. User:PANONIAN

Continued personal attacks and attempts to discredit my contributions to Wikipedia as political propaganda are pure non-sense.Dado

I do not continue to attack you personally, my objections simply referred about neutrality of your views. User:PANONIAN

I am not an anti-Serb nor do I have an anti-Serb agenda. On the other hand I have a feeling that there is reasoning among some that if articles are not presenting a pure Serb nationalistic propaganda than they must be anti-Serb.I know many Serbs who would widely object to such reasoning including people who live in RS.Dado

Do you even know how Serbian propaganda looks like? If I were a Serbian propagandist, I would speak something like this: "All of Bosnia is Serbian land and there is no Bosniaks and Croats in Bosnia, because they are actually islamised and catholicised Serbs". That is how Serbian propaganda looks like. But, did you see me wrote this? You didn’t. User:PANONIAN

Finally if you present information in this article that are factualy correct and proven and not based on assumptions, half truths and widely believed legends I will have no problems with you edits --Dado 04:47, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I would like to do that, but I do not know from where to start (to much errors in it). User:PANONIAN

I have made a correction to indicate that the ethnic cleansing was commited by RS. I made a statement in original version on this article that majority of people killed at Jasenovac were Serbs however it was removed by other users since there is a whole other article that talks specifically about Jasenovac. I had an unfortunate fate in my life to personaly experience a full range of unprovoked Serbian nationalistic propaganda from mild insinuations to outright threats. I don't need to be lectured on that issue.--Dado 21:43, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Culture

The brutal history of Bosanska Krajina may be a reason for a specific nature of its people that pride themselves on toughness and rebelliousness towards other parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina and especially Sarajevo. However, their position towards Sarajevo is more like a sibling rivalry rather than one of disdain and revolt. On top of that the people who live in Bosanska Krajina share a dislike of Bosnjaks from Eastern Bosnia due to a difference in culture and class rivalries which originated due to the Turkish rule of Bosnia.

This is more of a hearsay, most likely describes how Sarajevo and East Bosnians see Krajina people. The rivalry is more due to policies of Sarajevo, Belgrade or Austria and investment into other parts of Bosnia neglecting the Krajina region. I would like to hear more from other Krajisnici about this. Strjela —Preceding comment was added at 16:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Cazinska krajina

The western part of Bosanska Krajina is better known historically as Cazinska Krajina (Cazinska krajina) than Bihaćka Krajina. I can cite sources to back up my claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mujanovic (talk • contribs) 19:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Turkish Croatia

User:PRODUCER decided to merge and redirect these two, but the not all content was merged. There is a lot of content left over there, mostly related to medieval demographics - someone needs to check whether the old text is useful and accurate enough for inclusion here. I skimmed over it, some of it isn't controversial, but some of it may be. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:03, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

See also Talk:Turkish Croatia... --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I've gone through the remainder of that text and sadly a lot of it seems to be straight copy&paste from Noel Malcolm's book (that is properly referenced here now). There's an anonymous user engaged in a revert war, undoing the redirect. Since the bulk of the spirit of the old content is now merged, and the rest is questionable (WP:COPYVIO), I recommend we protect that redirect as a counter-vandalism measure, and purge all history that has the copyvio. Anyone? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 22:16, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Krajina does NOT translate to a frontier in english

Whoever wrote that nonsense needs to learn serbo-croatian much, much better. The word "krajina" draws its root from the word "kraj", which means "an area". In the context "krajina" translates to a "big area", or a "large area" by the suffix "ina". Similar example could be "nož" (knife). Augmentative would be "nožina" or "nožetina", both meaning a big knife. Or, "ljudina" derivative of the word "ljudi" ( a mass noun meaning "people"), but in this context it means a "great man", or "THE man" with the suffix "ina" added to the root "ljud-". Interesting thing with serbo-croatian is that it is extremely flexible and rich language where a word can have many different meanings in a variety of contexts. In this example "ljud" is not a valid word, yet it does have a perfectly understandable meaning of "one man". Adding the suffix "-ina" creates a new valid word.

The word for "frontier" is "granica". Foreigners often confuse the word "kraj" meaning because it also means "end", hence some may think it has something to do with a "frontier", a frontier being an area where the "world as we know it" ends and an unknown land begins. However, that is not the case as the word "kraj" has a definitive meaning as "end" of something with no continuation after it. Proper translation would be "the end" in English.

The differentiation of the two meanings (the end and area) lies in the accent on the letter "a" in the word "kraj". If pronounced with a prolonged and downwards tone, it means "end". If it is pronounced as a short and rising "a", the word means "area".

There are many other areas of Jugoslav territory where the "krajina" was used. These oher "krajinas" are Bela Krajina in Slovenija (notice the word "bela" - white - in ekavian. Slovenian langage and Hrvatski kajkavian, which is merely a mild dialectal variant of Slovenian language and is the language of the majority of people in Hrvatska; are ekavian in their nature, just as today's official serbo-croatian spoken in Srbija), Bosanska Krajina, Cazinska Krajina and so on.

The only "frontiers" were Srpska Krajina and Bosanska Krajina, where Serbian population made majority and were serving as soldiers defending the border between Habsburgs and Ottomans. As Serbs lived on both sides of the border, the "frontier" term would only be meaningful to Austrians in Wienna. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.20.174.164 (talk) 10:18, 17 March 2012 (UTC)