Talk:Chetniks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Relevent quote pertaining to chetniks[edit]

During World War II, Mile Budak .

(June 30, 1941), Stevan Moljević (a lawyer from Banja Luka who was also an ideologue of the Chetniks), published a booklet with the title "On Our State and Its Borders". Moljević asserted:

"One must take advantage of the war conditions and at a suitable moment seize the territory marked on the map, cleanse [očistiti] it before anybody notices and with strong battalions occupy the key places (...) and the territory surrounding these cities, freed of non-Serb elements. The guilty must be promptly punished and the others deported – the Croats to (significantly amputated) Croatia, the Muslims to Turkey or perhaps Albania – while the vacated territory is settled with Serb refugees now located in Serbia."[1][unreliable source?][2][3]


This quote is relevant to this page in describing ulterior motives.

References[edit]

  1. ^ "The Moljevic Memorandum". Retrieved 13 November 2014. 
  2. ^ Nicholas A. Robins, Adam Jones (2009), Genocides by the oppressed: subaltern genocide in theory and practice, Indiana University Press, ISBN 978-0-253-22077-6, p. 106
  3. ^ Steven L. Jacobs, Confronting genocide: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, pp. 158–159, Lexington Books, 2009

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chetniks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:59, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Velkonija 2003 reference?[edit]

There are two references to "Velkonija 2003". I assume that's supposed to be "Velikonja 2003", but I wanted to make sure. ~barakokula31 (talk) 23:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I imagine you're right. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed it now. There are also footnotes referencing "Tanner 2001" and "Popović, Lolić & Latas 1988", but the works aren't listed in the references. ~barakokula31 (talk) 23:55, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Churchill's own words[edit]

Can someone ppplease check what Churchill says about Chetniks in his book "The Second World War: The One-Volume Abridgement" it is on chapter IX. FkpCascais (talk) 18:36, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Lede needs work . . .[edit]

The English is a little clumsy. It also tries to put forward an "anti-Axis" notion that is a muddy interpretation of the truth, at best. I know there are several Balkan editors with their own nationalist POV at work on these articles . . . IMO they shouldn't be allowed to edit the article, it just results in battleground arguments on the TP. I strongly suggest non-involved editors from elsewhere rewrite this particular lede to give it the proper slant on what historians have agreed was the most representative description of this group.

@HammerFilmFan: And what would the proper slant be? State sources, and formulate the stance. I agree though that parts of the intro try to downplay collaboration. The MacDonald quote is oddly out of place and seems alone in it's stance. But it is important to be neutral.108.54.93.183 (talk) 20:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
The MacDonald quote is selective and gives the impression he is saying something he is not. Cherrypicked quotes are always a problem on these articles. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:17, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Why is it allowed to remain if it is misleading? 108.54.93.183 (talk) 03:16, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
In a nutshell, this has been a highly contested article in the past, so it has got a bit coatracky. Just look at the archives of this talk page. I haven't touched it in years because editing it inevitably piques the interest of the POV warriors, and the lead at least currently reflects the general thrust of the academic literature. I've moved that sentence within the lead, because it is really there in contrast to Ramet's views on the issue of why the Chetniks collaborated with the Axis. Apologies for the oversimplification, but Ramet basically says they collaborated to create a Greater Serbia, and MacDonald says it is misleading to state they collaborated in order to carry out genocide against non-Serbs. Those things are not mutually exclusive, and are related to some extent. They are about the purpose of Chetnik collaboration rather than whether it occurred, if you know what I mean. It probably needs to be there for balance, although MacDonald's might be a minority opinion on the subject. There should probably also be some representation of the "anti-communist" justification for collaboration too, but we have to be careful to get the balance right and not have the article come across as a coatrack of apologies for Chetnik collaboration. What is really needed is a rewrite of the whole article using quality academic sources, then rewrite the lead as a proper summary of the article. But my aversion to drama is too strong for that at present. I'll also say that I have argued for a split of this article, with the DM Chetniks being the primary topic (and the subject of this article) and all the other types of Chetniks being listed on a dab page with their own articles linked from there. There has been opposition to that in the past, and until we get to that point, I'm not sure I would be interested in tackling it. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Huh, so basically, the MacDonal quote, from how I interpret it, is not actually saying that the Chetniks weren't collaborators, nor is it saying the Chetniks didn't commit genocide against the Croats and the Muslims, but rather that the reasoning for collaboration was not on behalf of comitting enocide but for other reasons. Such a weird way to put it, as at first it makes one think neither genocide nor collaboration happened. Perhaps the motive of whoever shoehorned the quote in was to whitewash that then? Then again I learn to take articles like this with a grain of salt and look deaper into the sources. Though most readers will take the articles as absolute testament as Wikipedia is the go to for quick learning. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 09:59, 25 May 2017 (UTC)