Jump to content

Talk:Yugoslav Wars

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BalkanWalker (talk | contribs) at 18:02, 2 August 2010 (→YES). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

rename

I was a participant in these various conflicts. I've often heard them called "The Balkan Wars." This is the first place I've seen them referred to as the "Yugoslav Wars." It doesn't mean this is incorrect but it should be put forward here for anyone doing research. Gingermint (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

.

Alas, I fear that the term Balkan Wars already lends its name to two wars fought between 1912 and 1913 in the region. These wars have been called The Third Balkan War but it has never really caught on. I'll be honest with you, this linkage of events on this article are very much a case of Original Research. Admittedly, DIREKTOR trimmed it by removing the wars concerning the Albanians from 1996 onward but there is still no connection between the Ten Day War fought between Slovene rebels and a rump JNA comprising units from Serbia and Montenegro only, and the war between Bosnian Croats and Muslims 1993 time. At the same time, the events are in some small way tied and so this article is in many ways necessary as it tells the story of an entire region forming a relatively small part of the world and its transitions over only a few years. Yugoslav Wars does suffice. Evlekis (talk) 22:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The three conflicts remaining are most certainly interconnected. The minor Ten-Day War is very much linked to the Croatian War of Independence that followed soon after. "Third Balkan War" is just silly. The wars in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia have very little in common with the wars between Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, and Serbia ninety years earlier, taking place in a completely different geographical and historical setting. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 23:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The battles which took place in Slovenia and northern Croatia (eg. Slavonija) were most definitely wars fought on central European ground. That what was fought on the Balkan was on the fine edge of the Balkan and linked to that across the conventional line. Balkan War in any shape cannot identify the chapters of this article. Evlekis (talk) 10:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SFRY & JNA?

I know Wikipedia encourages you to "Be Bold". But since this is a sensitive topic, I figured it would be better to ask first before editing:

  • Should the SFRY and/or the JNA be added to Belligerents? The SFRY existed de jure until 1992 (although as a severely crippled state), and remnants of the JNA fought in the Ten-Day War and early stages of Croatian War of Independence. Was their involvement too small to warrant a mention on the main article and should only be listed in the individual articles, or should they be mentioned here as well? Any thoughts? Ding Chavez (talk) 13:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly the JNA, but I think its pretty much covered by FR Yugoslavia's entry. The infoboxes depict the last state of affairs, and the JNA is included in FR Yugoslavia... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 14:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes just be aware that the JNA involvement in Slovenia (and needless to say early stages in Croatia) did by this time only comprise units from Serbia and Montenegro. Macedonia and Bosnia had long withdrawn their internal citizens from national military activity, as had Croatia and Slovenia (eg. military staff living on Croatian soil were recalled from Kosovo as early as 1990). The JNA dissolved in various stages. Evlekis (talk) 18:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which wars were part of breakup?

Since dissolution of Yugoslavia is breakup of its constitutional Republics, only conflicts up to Dayton agreement can be considered as part of it.

After Dayton all ex-Yu republics became a new nations.

Conflicts in Macedonia and Kosovo are of different nature, and they are inside new Republics, so no longer apply to breakup of Yugoslavia (their goal is not relared to Yugoslavia in any way)

e.g. Conflict in Kosovo is a result of different series of events as explained here, that are much longlasting then Yugoslavia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian%E2%80%93Albanian_conflict —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.105.5.56 (talk) 23:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is very complicated. The Southern Serbian conflict was directly a spin-off from the Kosovo war. The Kosovo problems were the first to emerge in the former SFRY. The incidents within Kosovo dated back to the beginning of the Yugoslav Wars but then resurfaced after the Dayton accords. Either way, with the existence of a Yugoslav entity (FRY) with Belgrade as its capital, the two wars (in Serbia) involving ethnic Albanians are probably best billed as Yugoslav Wars. The stumbling block is Macedonia. Here, a government recognised for over nine years previously, had found itself at war with internal rebels representing a significant minority in the country. So whilst there was no conflict between Macedonia and the Belgrade authorities, the Macedonian security forces were at war with a faction which had links to both Southern Serbia and Kosovo conflicts. In 2002, after the war ended in Macedonia, there was an emergency period in Greece with Greek security forces on stand-by amid reports of clashes in the Epirus region. This did not take off, but there could very possibly one day be a conflict between Albanians and Greeks in Greece itself. It would be part of the same Albanian project as that in former Yugloslav regions, but can never be a Yugoslav War. This is a sticky point and it is a tall order predicting where to draw the line. Evlekis (talk) 12:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also think the Kosovo War and the Macedonian/Albanian conflicts should not be listed as "Yugoslav Wars". What have they to do with SFR Yugoslavia? (conflicts and political unrest in Kosovo may have played a part in causing the other wars, but this is very removed from the Kosovo War.) --DIREKTOR (TALK) 12:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My very point. If we don't demarcate this chapter in history, it could potentially spread to Greek government vs ethnic Albanians and then to Cypriot Greeks vs Turks and so on until the whole world is affected. Evlekis (talk) 13:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I don't know about that. There is no particular need to invent categories to sort Kosovo War, Southern Serbia conflict, Macedonia conflict. What is clear, however, is that they have little or nothing to do with the country that fell apart a decade before they took place. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 16:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Intro lede

Can users please stop reverting the intro lede. We need to be honest and not play this article like Kosova in the hands of the Serb nationalists. You can't deny that the Yugoslav Wars started out and were characterized by Milosevic's attempt to create Greater Serbia. Take that out, you could still have had Yugoslavia today. Crackajack Mac (talk) 21:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

↑↑↑ Human rights I can´t remember what, sockpuppet.↑↑↑ FkpCascais (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crackajack Mac has been blocked indef. as a sock of highly WP:DE user Human Rights Believer --Tadija (talk) 12:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo War, part of Yugoslav Wars (or not)

This article proves that Kosovo War was part of Yugoslav Wars. kedadial 18:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree with Kedadi on this issue. The Kosovo crisis (precedent of the war) started during the SFR Yugoslavia period, the same crisis was re-birth again, just after the Dayton agreements (it was never "dead", just overshadowed by conflicts in Croatia and Bosnia), the main actors were mainly the same as from the Yugoslav period (Milosevic, Rugova, and even UÇK´s many members were active long time before the 90s...), and the conflict involved a country called "Yugoslavia" (even if a different one, FRy). Also, the conflict affected directly other ex-Yugoslav countries in the region and many were used as bases or logistics support for NATO, as Macedonia, Bosnia and Croatia (beside Albania), or Montenegro, as part of the FRY. I also support the inclusion of the internal Macedonian-Albanian conflict, and the separation from other regional conflicts can be donne by the fact that all this conflicts begin during, or just after the break up of the SFRY, and are located inside the territory of the same former Yugoslavia, while other related (or not that much) conflicts didn´t. Of course, this is just an opinion... FkpCascais (talk) 20:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, from NATO perspective, their operations begin during 1995 in Bosnia (intelligence, much earlier), and the Kosovo conflict was just an intensified continuation of it... FkpCascais (talk) 21:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Personal views and monologues aside, what needs to be established is the position of the professional community. We need to see what the majority of the published scholars have written: Yugoslav Wars (and synonymous terms) 1991-1995, or Yugoslav Wars (and synonymous terms) 1991-2001. I'm hoping for Wiki professionalism and impartiality, not a "contest". Lets all just list sources on this subject and write up a note on how does each approach the matter (yes, even if one doesn't like it). This is the only way to avoid the stupid forum-like discussions where people voice how they "feel" on the issue, as its a pretty abstract subject (plus, this way we'll avoid the obvious danger of this discussion getting clogged by utter nonsense). --DIREKTOR (TALK) 01:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's the thin end of the wedge. The Kosovo problems date back not to the beginning the Yugoslav wars but to forgotten times buried in prehistory. Either way, if the Kosovo crisis counts as a Yugoslav War then so do does the Preševo Valley war, and even the Macedonian conflict sees some form of continuity for one of the belligerents. At the same time, there is no relation between the Macedonian conflict and the Ten Day War (with the minute exception that Macedonia was still part of the JNA when the Ten Day War happened). That said, even since the Macedonian conflcit ended, there have been a number of minor battles and military operations to restore control over parts or simply uproot anti-governmental activity. Like Israel's modern-day problems stemming from World War II (1939-45), the scenario is never ending unless we draw the line. I'm neutral here, but in favour of a concensus. User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 09:47, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@direktor - You can´t really talk normally, do you? You can´t have one comment without your favourite words: "non-sence" and "stupid". Those words pretty much describe your interventions... Learn some education, or go kick some rocks in your village... Imb*bdcj!

@Evlekis, it´s really hard to talk without having this pseudo-direktor throwing insults and showing his complexes everywhere. I really dont care, I have other things to do. I´m out. FkpCascais (talk) 12:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

None of the above refers to you personally, speaking of "complexes", I made that clear by spacing my post away from yours as well as by indentation. I'm speaking out of previous experience from discussions elsewhere - you seem to lack some background on this issue.
To Evlekis et alii: I apologize if I'm only able to post sporadically on this subject. I'm much too busy lately (too many rocks to kick at the hospital, I'm afraid :). be careful though, people without a college degree don't seem to be welcome... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 19:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian-dominated congress voted down Slovenian proposals

from the lead: the Serbian-dominated congress voted down Slovenian proposals for an end to the one-party system and for economic reform. That is actually an opposite to what the source says. Must be reworked. --windyhead (talk) 19:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's actually true. How is it "opposite", what does the source say? --DIREKTOR (TALK) 12:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why didn't you rephrase it? Can we see the exact source you refer to for ways that we can correct it if need be? User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 13:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

have no good rephrase for this moment. The source is the paragraph reference itself - [1] - The congress voted for an end to the one-party system --windyhead (talk) 13:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh you were referring to the abolition of the one-party system? Yes that part is indeed incorrect. I'll rephrase... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 14:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Windyhead. I have for the moment restored the version revised by DIREKTOR for the following reasons: I believe you are discussing the BBC heap compiled by Kate Adie. I accept that she is not an academic source and that her writing was selective and not wholly reflective of Slobodan Milošević: meaning, she was pandering to the prejudice of the typical "BBC freak", that means the lover of BBC1, BBC News 24 and similar institutions (she presents Radio 4's From Our Own Correspondent and listeners of Radio 4 or BBC World Service are of a higher intellectual capacity and are not as malleable as readers of that page). The point is that she was potraying the Idi Amin-style Slobodan Milošević, the Augusto Pinochet-style Milošević, the person with all the BBC design specs that simple readers love to hate. She did this by ignoring all related aspects and by not acknowledging Milošević's circumstances or any of his colleagues or opponents or their activities. If a Wikipedian produced the same information, it would be instantly removed for its open bias. However, it has been written, and is available on the BBC website, and BBC information qualifies as "reliable" on Wikipedia and we don't have a choice but to accept it. It does say "Serb dominated" for whatever that is taken to mean. The other thing that you have to consider is, if BBC is not reliable, what is? They have contributed to anti-Croatian propaganda as well, especially when they were compiling their essays to discredit Ante Gotovina. But the only news sources where one would find an alternative picture is HTV (Croatian television), and as things are, BBC and similar networks have the upper hand on this website. User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 14:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What are your arguments about? It does say "Serb dominated" is false. --windyhead (talk) 15:27, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh ffs, it was indeed Serb-dominated since after the anti-bureaucratic Revolution Serbian party chief Slobodan Milošević controlled the majority of the votes. That is one of the most basic pieces of information, well known and undoubtedly correct. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 17:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the source doesn't mention that, neither the wikipedia article should. --windyhead (talk) 17:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Its not a controversial point, its a basic fact, and it also follows from the text itself. Its not something to debate or dispute.
The congress was dominated by the League of Communists of Serbia, led by Milošević, who controlled the majority of the votes and blocked almost all proposals from the opposing two party branches - thus ruining the largest, militarily most potent, diplomatically most influential, and economically most significant country of the Balkans peninsula :). --DIREKTOR (TALK) 22:21, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of Kosovo war

There is only one reference to the Kosovo War and it doesn't mention the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.110.175 (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo War 1998-1999 should be mentioned because it was a part of a wider process of the disintegration of Yugoslavia. Here are some sources that Kosovo War was part of Yugoslav Wars:

--Mladifilozof (talk) 17:38, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Partiality

This article is very partial--Stebunik (talk) 23:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Kosovo war is part of the much larger Serbian-Albanian conflict, which is much older than the Yugoslav Wars, started long before the 1990s, and is still not fully resolved. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 23:55, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vote: Is Kosovo War part of Yugoslav Wars?

Let's settle this matter once and for all. Many have voiced their disagreement and opposition to remove Kosovo War from Yugoslav Wars, and I'm one of them. So a vote would be the best way to settle this issue. My argument, besides the fact that it is a part of Yugoslav Wars in virtually every other language on wikipedia, is that even the ICTY included it in its jurisdiction: the three Milosevic charges (wars in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo) were united into one single indictment [2]. This clearly shows that you can not look at Kosovo War as being apart from Yugoslav Wars, but as part of the whole conflict.

There were also many other excellent observations for this argument used in previous discussions. Now, User:DIREKTOR seems like an intelligent person and his argument is that Kosovo was part of the Serbian-Albanian conflict instead. However, I think he made a small misconception in his conclusion in this case. Namely, according to that deduction, Serbian occupation of Albania in 1912 was then not part of the First Balkan War. But obviously, it was. You also have the First Sino-Japanese War and the Second Sino-Japanese War, which are both part of the Sino-Japanese conflict. Yet, the second one is also considered part of World War II, and not apart from it. So I would suggest for Kosovo War to be part of Serbian-Albanian conflict AND Yugoslav Wars. I do not understand why it can or should not be part of both. Either category is not exclusive.

So, let's vote. Is Kosovo War part of Yugoslav Wars?--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 16:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. WP:NOTDEMOCRACY, what would be the point? People are not going to agree simply because you manage to swing enough votes here. The idea that the Kosovo War in 2000 somehow contributed to the dissolution of Yugoslavia is farcical at best, and a purely (Kosovar) Albanian concept. It is a minority view in the scientific community. Yugoslavia broke-up in 1992.
The Yugoslav Wars are conflicts surrounding the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1943-1992). Yugoslavia broke-up, starting the Yugoslav Wars, which lasted up to 1995. The Kosovo War started as late as 2001 according to some researchers, no less than ten years after SFR Yugoslavia disintegrated and after six years of peace had already passed after the Yugoslav Wars were concluded. The point is that the Kosovo War has nothing to do with Yugoslavia, but is instead an internal conflict within the Republic of Serbia. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 16:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Small correction regarding Kosovo War, 1998-1999. Cheers. — Kedaditalk 17:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes well as I said I'm sure every single Albanian user on this wiki is likely to "vote" yes here regardless of the facts, I just do not see how anyone could possibly think that these sort of "votes" will change the article in any way - WP:NOTDEMOCRACY. Don't let me stop you though... :) --DIREKTOR (TALK) 17:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's not like there was never a case of different opinions discussed to reach a consensus over a matter on wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_moves): You have, for example, the Golden hamster debate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Golden_hamster#Requested_Move_July_2010) or the White Rabbit debate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:White_Rabbit#Requested_move), all of which can serve as the example how wiki users support or oppose some issues in the article.

"The idea that the Kosovo War in 2000 somehow contributed to the dissolution of Yugoslavia is farcical at best, and a purely (Kosovar) Albanian concept. It is a minority view in the scientific community. Yugoslavia broke-up in 1992."

Now that you mention the issue of majority and minority of scientific community, the notion that Kosovo War is not part of Yugoslav Wars is a minority view in the scientific community. Do I even need to again point to the majority of the scientific community that views it as part of Yugoslav Wars? ([3], [4], [5], [6], [7]). Dr. Craig Nation perfectly summed it up when he commented: "Everything started with Kosovo and everything will finish with Kosovo" ([8], page 223). By removing Kosovo, you remove the final conclusion to the whole conflict.

"The Yugoslav Wars are conflicts surrounding the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1943-1992). Yugoslavia broke-up, starting the Yugoslav Wars, which lasted up to 1995. The Kosovo War started as late as 2001 according to some researchers, no less than ten years after SFR Yugoslavia disintegrated and after six years of peace had already passed after the Yugoslav Wars were concluded".

Almost impossible that the Kosovo War started in 2001, and we both know it. The fact that you even place it that late makes me seriously question your expertise about the issue. Serbs even place the start of the war in 1996 when the KLA started to operate ([9]). Also - not that Yugoslav Wars are somehow magically only limited to Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and not to Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - but in September 1991, a referendum on independence for Kosovo was organized. The referendum achieved a reported 90% turnout among the province's Albanians, and a 98% vote—nearly a million votes in all—which approved the creation of an independent Republic of Kosovo. Ergo, Kosovo also broke up from the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1991, around the same time as Croatia and Slovenia. The war was just a delayed reaction. The only difference is that Yugoslav forces managed to hush up the independence movement for a couple of years, but not for long. Also, in 1999, Kosovo was de facto taken away from Yugoslavia. Kosovo's declaration of independence was just a formality 9 years later (This shows that it was the final nail in the coffin of the Yugoslav state. The break-up came in at least two stages (1991-1992 and 1999-2003). After it, Yugoslavia barely held for a few years until 2003, when it collapsed as a political union called the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro. In 2006, even that collapsed).

Again, why can the Kosovo War simply not be a part of both Serbian-Albanian conflict AND Yugoslav Wars?--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 16:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it can, of course, it just isn't. The few authors who do perhaps consider it as such are a notable minority. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 20:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DIREKTOR, there is something called Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. When you claim something, I can not just simply take your word for it because "it just isn't so". That's just arbitrarily. If someone would simply claim that Zeppo Marx is not a member of the Marx brothers and remove him from the article about them, he or she should better have a very good source for it. So please, present us here with the majority of sources that Kosovo War is only and exclusively part of the Serbian-Albanian conflict, which started way back in 1912. Feel free to post as many sources as you wish.--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 15:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"This is pointless vote. WP:NOTDEMOCRACY You cannot outvote fact that Yugoslavia broke up in 1992. I reject this false vote."
Once again, this is not about the Yugoslav break-up, but about the Yugoslav Wars. They are not synonymous. And I once again point out to Wikipedia:No original research, i.e., you need reliable sources when you claim something. Numerous sources were given that it is part of the Yugoslav Wars, none yet that it is a seperate part of Serb-Albanian conflict. One definition of Yugoslav Wars that I found was: "The Yugoslav wars were a series of violent conflicts in the territory of the former Yugoslavia that went on in the 1990s. They comprised two series of successive wars affecting all of the six former Yugoslav republics"[10].--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 15:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


YES

--Enric Naval (talk) 04:00, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, Kosovo was part of the Yugoslav Wars. As far as we know, the international press, writers and scholars classify the 1998-1999 Kosovo War as the last of the Yugoslav Wars, which culminated with the direct intervention of NATO led by Bill Clinton against Milosevic’s Serbia, resulting in the pullout of Serb forces from Kosovo and the subsequent overthrow of Milosevic in 2000, ending the cycle of wars that began wen Slovenia and Croatia decided to separate from Yugoslavia in mid-1991.--BalkanWalker (talk) 18:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NO

This is pointless vote. WP:NOTDEMOCRACY You cannot outvote fact that Yugoslavia broke up in 1992. I reject this false vote. --Tadijaspeaks 18:23, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Yugoslav_Wars&oldid=376793894"