Talk:Bosnian War/Archive 1 and Talk:Ground Equipment Facility J-33: Difference between pages

(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
Dado~enwiki (talk | contribs)
 
m Add SFBAProject tag.
 
Line 1:
{{SFBAProject
==Casualty Number==
| class=stub
Hi, this is my first edit ever, so if I do something wrong feel free to correct it.
| importance=
I hereby state that the Casualty Number in this article is customized and different from the original source. In the original source (to which the wikipedia article links - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1291965/posts) the number of Serbian civilian casualties is estimated 16,700 instead of 1,973 in the wikipedia article. This gives a rather different view of the war. I hope someone will edit this, because I'm afraid I mess up the whole article when I try to modify something :P
| explanation=
- Maarten, the Netherlands
| peer-review=
| old-peer-review=
| small=
| auto=no
}} Add SFBAProject tag. [[User:ConradPino|Conrad T. Pino]] 07:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 
==Multi-Function Station==
MVAFS was a multi-function station: a [[Semi Automatic Ground Environment|SAGE]] long range radar site operated by the 666th Radar Squadron (host squadron)<ref name="ref_mil_museum">{{cite web
|url = http://www.militarymuseum.org/MillValleyAFS.html
|title = Mill Valley Air Force Station
|accessdate = 2007-07-18
|publisher = [[California State Military Museum]]
}}</ref>; an AN/FSS-7 [[SLBM]] detection radar site operated by Detachment 3 14th Missile Warning Squadron<ref name="ref_mil_museum" />; a [[Project Nike|Nike]] missile air defense control site (San Francisco Defense Area Site SF-90DC<ref name="ref_mil_museum" /><ref name="ref_missile_sites">{{cite web
|url = http://ed-thelen.org/loc-c.html#SF-90DC
|title = Locations of Former NIKE MISSILE SITES (text)
|accessdate = 2007-07-18
|publisher = Ed Thelen
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url = http://www.nps.gov/goga/historyculture/cold-war.htm
|title = GGNRA - Cold War Era, 1952-1974
|accessdate = 2007-07-18
|publisher = [[National Park Service]]
}}</ref>) operated by the Army Air Defense Command Post for the 40th Artillery Brigade from 1959 until June 1971 and the 13th Air Defense Artillery Group from July 1971 to August 1974<ref name="ref_mil_museum" />; a [[Federal Aviation Administration]] (FAA) Joint Surveillance System (JSS) Facility J-33<ref name="ref_missile_sites" /><ref>{{cite web
|url = http://nas-architecture.faa.gov/nas/___location/location_data.cfm?fid=11342
|title = MILL VALLEY LRR SURVEILLANCE [QMV]
|accessdate = 2007-07-18
|publisher = [[Federal Aviation Administration]]
}}</ref>
. I served at MVAFS from 1972 to 1974 and personally witnessed these functions. More to follow later. [[User:ConradPino|Conrad T. Pino]] 08:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 
==References==
 
{{reflist}}
There were many plays with numbers and one that is presented in the article is most recent one by Research and Documentation Center in Sarajevo. I don't know where other numbers come from. --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 00:42, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 
 
 
Ah. But then the numbers of the ICTY-research are mixed up with the ones of the Research and Documentation Center in Sarajevo. Should this be corrected like this, according to the given source:
 
Research done by the International Criminal Tribunal in 2004 determined a more precise number of 102,000 deaths and estimated the following breakdown: 55,261 were civilians and 47,360 were soldiers. Of the civilians, 16,700 were Bosnian Serbs while 38,000 were Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. Of the soldiers, 14,000 were Bosnian Serbs and 6,000 were Bosnian Croats.
And can someone give a link to the Research and Documentation Center-research?
 
here's the link, it's both in Serbo-Croat and Eng:
 
http://www.idc.org.ba/ ----[[User:24.2.242.93|24.2.242.93]] 07:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 
{{cleanup taskforce notice|Bosnian War}}
 
==NPOV==
 
This article is just a confusing collection of feelings. The part describing Milosevic's rise is leading, and it completely minimizes the participation of the Croatian leadership. It also fully neglects the Bosniak involvement, as if their politicians weren't in the country at the time.
 
The inaccuracies are staggering. OK, so the Bosnian Serbs did not bombard Sarajevo. They used heavy artillery. This is irrelevant from the point of view of the victims of course, however, it's just not true. Then, there were shellings of other towns in Bosnia, such as the Serb shelling of Tuzla, the Croat shelling of Zenica, Bosanska Gradiska, the Muslim shelling of Doboj, Brcko, Modrica, the shellings of Mostar between Bosniaks and Croats.
 
Where is the source of 40,000 rapes in Bosnia? Furthermore, one sentence says 200,000 dead, another says 100,000. Make up your mind!
 
Try just to list the facts: this happened then, and this person did this. The whole "Greater Serbia"/"Greater Croatia"/"Islamic Bosnia" is just a set of hypotheses.
 
Proabably the worst Wikipedia article, plagued with agendas! --[[User:67.172.1.76|67.172.1.76]] 21:10, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 
 
I do agree that article is inconclusive as it was a first step in what should be a translation of the same article from Bosnian Wikipedia. Hardly that is as bad as you are portraying it to be --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 03:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 
Well, the table says that warring parties were SEM, CRO, and BiH. That's, to say the least, questionable. There is no doubt, judging from the trials in the Hague, that SEM and CRO both assisted their fellow Serbs and Croats, however, it's questionable whether they were warring parties themselves. If, hypothetically, Saudi Arabia or Al-Ka'ida assisted the Bosniaks, was it their war then? Also, Fikret Abdics Bosniak enclave has been supported by the Serbs, so should't that go on the SEM side? It's all very iffy.
 
Then, the whole "Greater Serbia" agenda has not been proved by any court, so it's questionable whether it's a solid argument for the beginning of the war. Also, the revival of the Ustashe terminology and personalities in Croatia has been ommitted, while it's particularly important to Bosanska Krajina areas that have been affected by it the most, and where the memory of it still lives. What about Amb. Kutilliero's plan?
 
Where does the figure of 200,000 dead comes, from Haris Silajdzic (I heard him say that to Larry King)? Mr. Silajdzic is not a source for the number of victims, he is a politician, and politicians do not tend to be very good sources. Furthermore, where does the figure of 40,000 raped women come from? There is very little evidence about rapes in Bosnia at this point, at least in numbers. There are indications and estimates, but those are just that, estimates. The author of "Grbavica", Ms. Jasmila Zbanic, stated that there were 20,000 raped women. It's questionable even where that information comes from. Please cite those sources. Those are very important things. 20,000 women is a huge number, and they deserve to be mentioned -- but accusing someone of raping 20,000 women is a huge deal so playing with these numbers is serious.
 
This is why I fear that this is about agendas. Serbs get on and edit to their liking, and Bosniaks tend to stick to their stories. Bottom line, it's fair to list the events at this point, and to leave the reasons and analyses to for a later date.
 
That's my ten cents. --[[User:24.2.242.93|24.2.242.93]] 01:49, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 
 
I guess changing the title to "Sides in Conflict" may be better also given that UNPROFOR was not really a military force although it had a large impact on the course of the war. I am not sure either what to do with Abdics troops except that they were in fact separatist movement and one that sustained itself on opportunism so I don't know if contributing it to any side would be correct.
Number of 200,000 has been repeated at least 200,000 times by various agencies from UN to Commision for missing persons in BiH. It is so common that it may not even need a source (or pick one). As for rapes, I agree that this subject needs to be researched thouroughly. I did not add the number but if you think that 20,000 is more realistic you are welcome to change it (that's until more precise source is found).
I am not familiar with "Kutilliero plan" and Ustasha terminology that you are refering to but than again as I said before the article is far from being complete. Those are my comments for now --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 06:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 
::Well, as the intro says: it's not clear whether it's an international conflict. So far, as it has been established, it is not. Therefore, listing Serbia and Croatia as official sides in the conflict is not viable. All the judgments of international tribunals (i.e. the Hague) see the war as simply "conflict" in Bosnia -- they refrain from calling it international or aggression. It is in the interest of todays political elites in Bosnia to label it aggression or civil war -- however, for the purposes of an entry in an encyclopedia -- it's a conflict that took place in a territory. There is evidence of the presence of Croatia's military (in Bosanski Brod, in 1992, in Western Bosnia and Herz, in 1995; it has been ascertained through the witnessing of Pres. Mesic at the Hague etc.), and Serbia's paramilitary (without official presence of the Yugoslav Army and Serbian police), and the various routes of financing -- of both HVO and VRS. However, there have been finances pouring into Bosnia from Iran and Saudi Arabia for weaponry for the Government forces. This all doesn't really make it an international conflict. Primarily there was no declaration of war, etc. So there is obviously documented presence, but it's incorrect to place SEM and CRO as sides in the war!
 
::The fact that CRO and FRY were at the Hague is because the Serbian and Croatian leaders authorized them to represent them there. This was by no means a recognition that they took part in the war. That would be a political suicide for Messrs. Tudjman and Milosevic. --[[User:24.2.242.93|24.2.242.93]] 07:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 
Also the intention of the table was to clarify significant allegencies between groups and serve as a quick reference to many terms that are (or would be) noted in the article and not necessarily to depict sides in a classic war. I don't think that citation will be necessary once the article is complete. --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 06:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 
::This is what I found online about the Cutiliero's Plan (I hereby correct the spelling!):
 
The Economist, December 9, 1995 Letters
 
Editor,
 
In your article on Bosnia (November 25th), you say that in February 1992 before the war had started, Lord Carrington and I "drafted a constitution that would have turned the country into a confederation of Swiss-style cantons. The Muslims refused to accept what they considered to be the disintegration of Bosnia." Not quite.
 
After several rounds of talks out "priciples for future constitutional arrangements for Bosnia and Hercegovina" were agreed by the three parties (Muslim, Serb and Croat) in Sarajevo on March 18th as the basis for future negotiations. These continued, maps and all, until the summer, when the Muslims reneged on the agreement. Had they not done so, the Bosnian question might have been settled earlier, with less loss of (mainly Muslim) life and land. To be fair, President Izetbegovic and his aides were encouraged to scupper that deal and to fight for a unitary Bosnian state by well-meaning outsiders who thought they knew better.
 
Jose Cutiliero Secretary-general Western European Union Brussels
 
There is significantly more information online. --[[User:24.2.242.93|24.2.242.93]] 07:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 
ICTY has the jurisdiction over individuals not states so they cannot claim either that the war was an agression nor the civil war. You have stated some claims that Croatian military was on the BiH ground which is probably true and which would make this an international conflict. However you are conviniently disregarding numerous facts that Serbian regular troops were also in BiH under the pseudonim Army of Republika Srpska. It is fact that all military personel by being a member of VRS was also a member of Army of Yugoslavia. This has been proven beyond any doubt. On top of all that it is absolutely unrealistic to claim that Serbia had no involvement in the conflict and were the primary reason for conflict. There is a ton of facts and proof of this. There were even cases at the BiH - Serbia border in Zvornik and Visegrad where shelling was taking place from Serbian side of the border into BiH.
 
Now even if you put all this to the side a mere fact that NATO intervened in the war for the first time in its history makes the conflict international. I have stated several times that the table serves to state relevant sides not necessarily who was the agressor and who was the defender.
 
Also your edits are portraying the war as being a civil war which is inherently untrue. There is a ton of documentation to defeat this theory and you know it. On a more personal level for example I have two Serbian members of my extended family that fought for the Army of BiH. I know personally at least 5 other cases where Serbs were on the side of Army of BiH and I am sure that these are not exceptions. Jovan Divijak was a Serb and one of the head generals of the Army of BiH in Sarajevo.--[[User:Dado|Dado]] 15:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 
== Casualty numbers ==
 
How is that we have a precise casualty estimate done by a Bosnian Muslim commission (headed by Mirsad Tokaca), accepted by the ICTY and a foreign Norwegian organization which surveyed the whole process yet the first paragraph of this article claims a twice as a big a casualty number? How can 102,000 deaths be 200,000, according to what sort of megalomanic estimation? That goes against mathematics and rounding off, 102 is closer to 100 than it is to 200.
 
 
I don't know if you noticed by numbers from Research and Documentation Center that you are refering to are included in the article. However, even Mirsad Tokaca, who I know personally and respect, has stated that his numbers are not conclusive nor official. It makes only sense to include all other numbers as well until conclusive reasearch is conducted.--[[User:Dado|Dado]] 02:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 
: I don't care if you are Mirsad Tokaca, there is no way that the final number of deaths can be 200,000, that would mean that the absolute error of the estimation of 102,000 deaths is 96%. That is impossible, he would not publish his findings, besides this is a quote of Mirsad Tokaca: '"I don't like to make premature estimates. But it will be over 100,000, and ''surely under 200,000''. Our list only includes persons killed as an action of war, not those who died of indirect reasons of war," says Tokaca who cannot give enough praise to the support of the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.'
 
: Besides a Norwegian commision is actually the source of the 102,000 figure. I apologize, Mirsad Tokaca merely confirmed that figure independently.
 
Where did I say that I disagree with you regarding Tokaca's research. Personally I hope he is rights. However, other numbers and numerous other research has been done that has concluded that casualties may had been close and over 200,000. I am not taking a position here as you are but only trying to note all relevant numbers still used by many sources. Also you are comming across very agressivelly. I would ask you to cool off first.
--[[User:Dado|Dado]] 18:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC).
 
Dado, please list other research when you talk about it. The fact that so many people mentioned the number is hear-say. It was also in their interest to say so! Never forget political games. --[[User:24.2.242.93|24.2.242.93]] 07:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 
== NATO Bombing? ==
Where is the details of the NATO bombing campaign that ended with occupational forces that are their to this day? [[User:Tbeatty|Tbeatty]] 19:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 
 
[[Operation Deliberate Force]]. Feel free to add it. The article needs to be expanded anyway --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 00:31, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 
The article claims 40,000 were raped but does not provide a source for that claim. And even if there is a source for it, I still don't think this claim should be in the article because there is no way to prove someone was raped. I mean many women might lie and say they were raped when they weren't, in order to make the other side look bad. [[User:Doctor Robotnik|Doctor Robotnik]] 20:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 
::Absolutely ludicrous. You can surely have ways to estimate how many people were raped. --[[User:24.2.242.93|24.2.242.93]] 07:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 
I will leave it to a woman to answer this sexist remark. Other than that, no comment. --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 23:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 
==Here we go again==
 
I would ask user Panonian to refrain from provocations and accusations that my edits on this article are fascist.
 
Table depicts official sides in the war: Bosnia and Herzegovina including institutions under its command or influence, Serbia and Montenegro as co-signers of the Dayton Peace agreement and institutions under its command or influence, Croatia as co-signer of the Dayton Peace agreement and institutions under its command or influence. It further states NATO since they conducted bombing during the war and exerted considerable force in the conflict and UNPROFOR since it played a role inseveral occasion including the Srebrenica massacre.
 
Panonian your changes are considerable and I ask you to explain them. Until than I am returning the original version. --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 04:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
The table is based on the ridiculous claims of the fascist SDA party, thus that is why I called it fascist. I do not say that you are a fascist, but that you use information from fascist sources. Serbia-Montenegro was not a side in YOUR war, thus that version of table is totally ridiculous and wrong. It was a CIVIL war between 3 peoples of the country. Furthermore, Serbia-Montenegro was formed in 2003, thus we cannot speak about it in 1992-1995. Its predecessor, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, only supported one of the sides in the war, but it was not directly involved in it. Milošević did not signed the Dayton agreement in the name of FRY, but in the name of the Republika Srpska. It is a big difference. Also, NATO and UNPROFOR simply were not sides in the war, thus you cannot mention them in such content. [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="green">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 13:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
 
:::The table is based on ICTY judgements, BBC documentary "The Death of Yugoslavia" and statements of Serbs that are aware of it from Belgrade (Natasa Kandic, Srjda Popovic, Sonja Biserko etc.). I know that many of you are not ready to face the truth. This is not BK television. And this is not Vatican-American-Islamic conspiracy against Serbs.--[[User:Emir Arven|Emir Arven]] 13:25, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 
BBC Documentary is not a scientific or legal source --[[User:24.2.242.93|24.2.242.93]] 07:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
----
A truth? There is no truth here, but only stupid example of [[Bosniak nationalism]] and fascism. Please try to prove that FRY was a side in YOUR war. [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="green">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 13:29, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
 
:::You are the one who made up that article. First, you called it Unitary Islamic Bosnia. Now, you talk as Smilja Avramov, silly old lady from Belgrade that is aware that Serbia is going to lose Bosnia v. Serbia genocide case but was not ready to tell you.--[[User:Emir Arven|Emir Arven]] 13:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
That is not proof that FRY was a side in war... [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="green">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 13:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
:::This is a proof. [http://www.un.org/icty/galic/trialc/judgement/index.htm Stanislav Galic judgement]. A quote: "On 2 May 1992, a major JNA (Yugoslav army) attack on the centre of Sarajevo occurred while President Izetbegovic was in Lisbon for negotiations. That day, Tarik Kupusovic, a member of the town council, witnessed tanks approaching from Lukavica, a neighbourhood in the southern part of Sarajevo, and opening fire on the Presidency building. Fire was returned from those buildings. Forces loyal to the BiH Presidency prevented the JNA from storming the Presidency, but only barely. “After that the town was exposed to very heavy shelling. A couple of days later the Bascarsija, the centre of old Sarajevo, was set alight, the national and university libraries, the railway station, the post office and many key buildings in town were heavily shelled and destroyed. […] This started already on the 2nd or 3rd of May and went on for several weeks, with interruptions, went [on] every day or every other day we experienced shocks. Zetra was destroyed, the Olympic Sports Hall, […] the railway station had gone, […] many apartments buildings had burned or several floors of those buildings and several apartments. […] The buildings that I mentioned are scattered all over town, so one could not identify a particular part of town being targeted, except for the buildings themselves, that were symbols of the town and were essential for its functioning, like the post office, the railway stations, the Zetra sports hall, and similar such facilities."--
 
::On May 2 1992 JNA was still in their own country, as B&H was recognised four days later! --[[User:24.2.242.93|24.2.242.93]] 07:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 
[[User:Emir Arven|Emir Arven]] 13:43, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
That is only a proof that you have no idea about what you speak here. JNA was army of SFRY, not of FRY. [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="green">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 13:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
:::There is explanation in the table about JNA as well as in the judgemenet. JNA was controled from Belgrade, not from Sarajevo. --[[User:Emir Arven|Emir Arven]] 13:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
:::Slobodan Milosevic, president of Serbia, was the one that represented Serbs in the war, peace talks etc. He signed the Deyton agreement. --[[User:Emir Arven|Emir Arven]] 13:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
The point is that Republika Srpska was a side in the war, not FRY. Even if FRY gave some military support to RS in the beginning of the war, that still does not mean that it was one of the main sides in it. FRY later even imposed sanctions on Republika Srpska because its leaders did not accepted one of the peace plans. It is they who were main side in the war, not FRY. I will not revert now because of 3RR, but I will after 24 hours. [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="green">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 13:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
It is absolutelly reidiculous to claim that FRY or SCG (Same country regardless of name) had nothing to do in the war. The table is not implying that SCG made an aggression or genocide or any other crime. It merely states all relevant sides in the war. SCG had at least as much play in the war as UNPROFOR and NATO. At the very least economic sanctions were imposed on SCG for their involvement in the war. In addition the amount of evidence that talks about involvement of FRY (SCG) and its citizans in the war is overwhealmming and I am sure you do not want to open that can of worms. I would ask you one more time to watch your conduct (ie. naming other's claims as fascist)--[[User:Dado|Dado]] 16:23, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
 
I totally support this claim: SFRJ (a. k. a. FRJ a. k. a. SCG) was openly at war against [[Croatia]] and [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]] in [[1991]]-[[1992]], but continued to fight (even though not officially) getting involved on the Serbian side until [[1995]] and (although berely) got involved in the Croatian Civil War (supporting the Serbian sides). It's a fact. --[[User:HolyRomanEmperor|HolyRomanEmperor]] 16:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 
It's like someone would say ''The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics wasn't a side in the Korrean War.'' --[[User:HolyRomanEmperor|HolyRomanEmperor]] 16:29, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 
:::Just to clarify that the war in Croatia was not Civil War as Serbs want to present here, but aggression conducted by Serbia and its leader Slobodan Milosevic. Remember [[Battle of Vukovar|Vukovar]] and Serb attack on [[Dubrovnik]]? It is all verified in [[ICTY]].--[[User:Emir Arven|Emir Arven]] 20:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 
:::Serb leader in Croatia, [[Milan Babić]] admitted at the Hague that Serbia controled Serbs in Croatia and conducted aggression.--[[User:Emir Arven|Emir Arven]] 20:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 
[[User:Dado said]]: ''In addition the amount of evidence that talks about involvement of FRY (SCG) and its citizans in the war is overwhealmming and I am sure you do not want to open that can of worms.'' - So is at [[Talk:Mehmed-paša_Sokolović]] - but it isn't accepted nevertheless. :D --[[User:HolyRomanEmperor|HolyRomanEmperor]] 16:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 
----
I think the question on the other article was if the source was credible or not. I don't see the relevance here as I have not yet presented source and as you point out it may not be necessary at all. It is just like pointing out to a big pink elefant in the room. --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 16:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
----
The point here is that FRY is listed as one of the main sides in the war, and it was not the case. If the FRY military supported Republika Srpska that does not mean that FRY was a main side in the war. For you all: if you claim that FRY was a main side in the war, then please try to explain why FRY imposed sanctions on Republika Srpska. I have a good memory and I remember that FRY imposed sanctions on Republika Srpska because leadership of RS rejected one of the peace plans. Thus, when these sanctions were in power, FRY even did not supported RS (as it did in the beginning). Both, FRY and Croatia only supported sides in the war, but they where not sides. [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="green">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 02:26, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
----
As I said, I have good memory, and here is the confirmation for it:
* http://www.serbianunity.net/culture/library/karadzic/ljudskeglave.html
 
Quote: "...To je jos jedna velika laz koja je plasirana o Radovanu '''1994. godine, kada je Slobodan Milosevic uveo sankcije na sankcije Republici Srpskoj'''...."
 
* http://www.nin.co.yu/arhiva/2445/2.html
 
Quote: "...'''Zatim, kad je Jugoslavija uvela sankcije Republici Srpskoj'''..."
 
So, it is quite obvious that RS was main side in the war, and that after these sanctions RS was involved in war with no support from FRY. [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="green">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 03:04, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
----
The point (if you can really prove) that SCG imposed sanctions on RS makes no difference as to involvement of SCG in the conflict. Similar conflicts within government of Bosnia and Herzegovina were also very common. However, all sides stayed firmly to their original objectives during the war. Such position may have changed since but we are considering the timeframe of the war only. Following is an excerb from a book by Ed Vulliamy "Bosnia The Secret war"
 
"Between October, 1994, and July, 1995, international border monitors observed the following in transit from Serbia into Bosnia:
* tanks 512
* armored vehicles 506
* heavy mortars 120
* heavy artillery pieces 130
* rocket batteries 48
* laser-guided missiles 33
* ammunition trucks 368
* artillery ammunition trucks 14
* gallons of fuel 1.9 million
 
Source: Ed Vulliamy, "Bosnia: The Secret War," The Guardian (United Kingdom), February 29, 1996. Since only approximately 135 monitors were assigned to patrol only 48 crossing points along Bosnia's 375-mile border with Serbia-Montenegro, Vulliamy called the arms and materiel that they personally observed "the tip of the iceberg."
 
Add to this the fact that most of the military personel was on the VJ payroll and that there was well evident (if not official) command structure leading to the top of the SCG government that controled operations and politics of Bosnian Serbs and ultimatelly represented Bosnian Serbs at Dayton. In the Richard Holbrook's book "To end the war" it is remarkable to notice the fact of the amount of power that Milosevic held over Bosnian Serb government and could do pretty much whatever he wanted.
 
Again this is a nobrainer issue and hardly deserves further explaination. --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 03:18, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
----
And before you read too much into Serbian Unity Congeress web site you may want to look into this [http://www.freeserbia.net/Documents/Lobby.html] --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 03:22, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
----
----
"The point (if you can really prove) that SCG imposed sanctions on RS"
 
All right, here is English source too:
* http://archive.tol.cz/BalkanPeace/Chronology/Chron.V02N06.html
 
Quote: "...'''The rump Yugoslav government votes to lift sanctions against the Republika Srpska (on 27 February 1996!!!)'''"
 
What proof you need more? More links? No problem just ask for them. It is clear that between 1994 and 1996 RS was under sanctions imposed by FRY, thus it is also clear that its involvement in war during this time was not supported by FRY. As for this weapon trade, RS was de facto independent state in that time, and it was not uncommonly that such trade between two states is performed (there was also such trade between RS and other sides involved in war (Bosniaks and Croats), this prove nothing). [[User:PANONIAN|<font color="blue">'''PANONIAN'''</font>]] [[User talk:PANONIAN|<font color="green">'''(talk)'''</font>]] 03:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
----
Did you read everything I said or are you just dismissing it because it does not suit your point. It is irrelevant if SCG imposed sanctions on RS. One dispute does not absolve them from evidence that prooves beyond any doubt that SCG was a side in this war --[[User:Dado|Dado]] 03:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 
----
I think that dates might be a solution to your problem. Determine the period in which FRY was involved in the conflict (1992-1994?) and note in the article. --[[User:HolyRomanEmperor|HolyRomanEmperor]] 22:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 
[[User:Dado said]]: ''I think the question on the other article was if the source was credible or not.'' Imamoviches book is credible, but makes unlcear and really scetchy claims and when the fact that it is presented through a nationalistic site taints more on its name. However, it is also contradicting to what the rest of the world claims, I'm afraid. --[[User:HolyRomanEmperor|HolyRomanEmperor]] 22:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 
Also, I too think that FRY cannot be considered as a '''''main''''' side in the ''after'' the breaking 1992. --[[User:HolyRomanEmperor|HolyRomanEmperor]] 22:52, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 
----
 
In Israeli-Arab War 0f 1973 US mass supplied Israel with arms and USSR did the same for the Arabs. They also negotiated the peace, but they were NOT active participants of the war. US performed lend-lease to UK and USSR before Pearl Harbor and that did not make it a combatant. If you like I can provide you with dozens of similar examples. Conclusion I leave to you.
 
Veljko Stevanovich 11. 3. 2006. 18:17 UTC+1
 
----
 
Ok people, how many times should we get over this subject? What do you think u can salve? You can only make people to h8 1another even more. And for what?? can you make a change? It was a war. Political, cultural and religious war. And NOT a civil war ("what's so civil about war anyway?"). I'm from (ex)SFRJ and if you ask me.. i don't hate anyone, until he/she tries to hurt me. That war could be avoided, but it wasn't. The name WAR says it all... 2 or more sides fighting each other.. here that - 2 SIDES FIGHTING.. not 1 side killing everybody. So leave it behind. All sides killed, all sides did genocide. Leave it be. You can only make it worse. And i hope that people that DIDN'T feel all of that wouldn't comment any more. You haven't been there, you haven't seen it all.. so DON'T judge.
 
Slobodan 12.03.2006. (somewhere in SFRJ)
 
----
 
 
I believe that if Croatia and Bosnia have the right to sue serbia and montenegro over genocide, than serbia and montenegro has the right to sue them. I.E operation oluja, ethnic cleansing of serbs from srpska krajina and bosnia. - Lazar Stevanovich