Talk:Serbia/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Serbia. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

POLL: Introduction for Republic of Macedonia article

Hello! Given ongoing discussions and recent edit warring – and with the hope of resolving this issue – you might be interested in a poll currently underway to decide the rendition of the lead for the Republic of Macedonia article. Please weigh in! Bitola | talk | 01:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[[Talk:Kosovo under UN administration

Kosovo is under UN administration and Serbia has neither legal nor factual control over it. Kosovo should be covered blue in the map (the UN color) not to misslead the public. It shouldn't be light pink like other states around. Blue is the best as it signifies that there is a connection with Serbia, but at the same time it points out that there is UN presence.

Most of these arguments had had absolutely nothing to do with the article's purpose, which was Serbia and its basic background (historic, geoografic and other data). These political arguments should be resettled to some other article's discussion topic (such as WWI, WWII, Kosovo and Kosovo war, just to name a few). [1]- this is the official Census that was carried out back in 2002 which shows exact official population figures for the country's inhabited places. The Serbia page is beeing constantly revised (population-wise), when it comes to the country's largest cities. Last time this happened showed that Belgrade had had only 1,1 million people (!!!) which is quite redicilous taking that Belgrade became a city of million back in the 1960's. In 1991 the population top was 1,800,000 however many have moved out since due to economic collapse and wars, so the OFFICIAL population (check!) dropped to 1,576,890. However taking that the country hosts more than 700,000 refugees out of which most live in Belgrade's suburbs and are not registered, number of people is considered to fluctuate between 1,9 and 2,1 million. Please check out the Census 2002 for more info. NeroN_BG

For NeroN BG: Please do not delete the talk page content again. I agree that content of this page could be archived, but not deleted. As for population of Belgrade, problem with that is that population figures founded in different sources show population number for different areas: historical Belgrade (excluding Zemun and New Belgrade), present-day urban Belgrade (including Zemun and New Belgrade), and entire administrative area of the Belgrade City District. If you say that during the 1960's Belgrade had million inhabitants you should know about which of these 3 Belgrade areas you speak. PANONIAN (talk) 15:30, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Last changes

For the Ukrainian language, see this:

http://www.vojvodina.sr.gov.yu/Engleski/vojvodina.htm

Quote; "The Statute of AP Vojvodina stipilates that the official languages, besides Serbian, are Hungarian, Slovak, Rumanian, Ruthenian and Croatian." So, Ukrainian is not official regional language according to this official site.

For the first results from 2002 census, see this:

http://www.szs.sv.gov.yu/Popis/PrviRez.pdf

For the final results from 2002 census (a corrected figure from first results, thus more accurate) see this:

http://webrzs.statserb.sr.gov.yu/axd/Zip/SN31.pdf

The last numbers posted for city population figures are these final results. PANONIAN (talk) 16:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Now, since the previous PDF document show only final 2002 census results for municipalities, here is one which show results for settlements. However, only part of this document is here (if somebody want the entire document he should to buy the CD with that document in the Republic Statistical Office in Belgrade, like I did):

http://webrzs.statserb.sr.gov.yu/axd/Zip/NEP1.pdf

Here is the population of Belgrade (according to that document):

Voždovac municipality (urban Belgrade) = 132,747
Vračar municipality (urban Belgrade) = 58,386
Zvezdara municipality (urban Belgrade) = 132,621
Zemun municipality (urban Belgrade) = 145,751
Novi Beograd municipality (urban Belgrade) = 217,773
Palilula municipality (urban Belgrade) = 103,261
Rakovica municipality (urban Belgrade) = 99,000
Savski Venac municipality (urban Belgrade) = 42,505
Stari Grad municipality (urban Belgrade) = 55,543
Čukarica municipality (urban Belgrade) = 132,055
Urban Belgrade (excluding other settlements in the municipalities) total = 1,119,642

PANONIAN (talk) 17:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

As for Kosovo, this is the best site where population of the cities of Kosovo could be seen:

http://www.world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?x=&men=gcis&lng=en&dat=32&srt=npan&col=aohdq&geo=-244

Our Wikipedia article use previous estimation of this web site from 2002, which is not shown there any more. PANONIAN (talk) 17:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't see Kosova listed there, Panonian. Thanks for the link. Ilir pz 21:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

My friend Kosovos city are Serbans Citys yes. Way is no serbien goverment ther?

See the Hipis seit:

Serbian Goverment

The Ende, Malo morgen --Hipi Zhdripi 01:29, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Everybody,who doesn´t accept UNMIK , but is writing for kosovo, is just making propaganda. it has nothing to do with english language. With people like that, i don t need to have a discussion. If you are able to accept UNMIK, than we can have a discussion.

First of all : UNMIK ! What does it mean ? UNMIK stands for United Nation Mission in KOSOVO. In Kosovo ! There are no words for Serbian teritory or things like that. If you would be so nice, to have a look to the homepage from UNMIK, you can see yourself : there are no words for Kosovo in serbian territory . They are just writing " ...in the war-ravaged province [2] of Kosovo... " Than you can read this :

perform basic civilian administrative functions;
promote the establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo;
facilitate a political process to determine Kosovo's future status;
coordinate humanitarian and disaster relief of all international agencies;
support the reconstruction of key infrastructure;
maintain civil law and order;
promote human rights; and
assure the safe and unimpeded return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes in Kosovo.

That means, Kosovo doesn t have a status( it s war - ravaged ! ). It s just a province, administrated by UNMIK,and nothing else. It doesn t belong to any other state or country. UNMIK is there to help the kosovars to decide for their future.Every other offical reference, like offical serbian - or offical albanian reference, is just propaganda. From that point of knowledge, our discussion is, like I would say Serbia or Albania is a province in China. All articles with the subject " Kosovo ", which have to do with information or references BEFORE the 10. june 1999 belongs to the article " History of Kosovo ". In an other case, I ll delete it , because i took it like propaganda and not like neutral information for Wikipedia. People in this discussion, who don t accept UNMIK, aren t neutral. They are living in an own dreamworld, what has nothing to do with reallity and they are using the Wikipedia for their own propaganda.

If somebody think, that I m wrong, please show me. But please argue with informations from an OFFICIAL document, accepted from UNMIK and not with an dokument from national offical propaganda informations. We can have a disskussion with facts from UNMIK, not with the past. Wikipedia stands for knowledge and shouldn t have to become a place for national propaganda, no matter if it s serbian or albanian propaganda. In other case serbian and albanian people will ravage it, like they ve ravaged Kosovo.--Hipi Zhdripi 21:01, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You should fix Serbian coat of arm

Done. --Khoikhoi 23:16, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Contrvers user

Population – Total (2002) (not including data for Kosovo and Metohia Province) – Density

7.498.001

126.83/km²

Oficel name of Kosovo is not Kosovo. You must user in English mape. Take a look to the Soc. Rep. Fed. of Yogoslavia. Kosovo is not a Subdivison is a elemt of the state Yogoslavia. The presiden of Yogoslavia it was a Albaner representin kosovo.--172.173.56.105 02:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

In year 2006 the name Serbia is mening the green feeld. New York City is not a same with New York State--Vete 02:34, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

File:Serbia04.png

Kosovo

The Kosovo parliament is not in the Serbian parlament see: National Assembly of Serbia--Vete 02:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Hwo is representin the kosovar in National ...

Nobody becase they don belong to Serbia--Vete 02:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Bourding

Is not bording to Albania but to Kosovo. See the Mape.

Pleace dont rev.

Pleace dont removie the {{POV}}. This articel unter this name is wrong. We most ha to artikels one about the "littel Serbia" and the "Great Serbia". Litel serbia is maining the word Serbia how the english user andrerstand and the Word "Great Serbia" is the SR of Serbia with thre elements "littel Serbia (mala or kratka Serbia), Vojvodina and Kosovo. The thre have a differen parliaments and make together the national parliament of Grat Serbia. They hawe the teritorial army (MUP Serbie, MUP Vojvodina and TM Kosovo) . They have thre Court Laws with seeats in Belgrad, Novi Sad and Pristina. All this thre parlament must make the national asembla of Great Serbia. Milosevi has destroid the asembla of Great Serbia now we have only to Kosovo Court Laws and the New Serbia Court Law in Belgrad. For thet take a look of maps.

Pleace dont rev. till you dont have a argumet that is not true. We mos desait wat is mainig the word Serbia, Serbia als Litel Serbia, New Serbia or we disaid to do like in Wien. To place Kosovos articel unter the UN mandat and in the articel Serbia to put a notice this artike is about the New Serbia.

The war in Serbia after the Kosovo War it was ther and is wery importen becose the UN has maket the res. abuit that. About the ctys in south serbia. The citis of Preseva, bujanoc and Medvedje. And the nomber of the albaniens in serbia we must put ther. They live ther and they are importen element in south serbia bordien to Bonsteel (US Base). It is the key of the bakan war. In the northen of this territori it was the war Serbian-Kosovar (UÇKMB) and in south Macedonian-albanians from Macedonia , war.

Hipi Zhdripi˘s arguments: http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N01/298/89/PDF/N0129889.pdf?OpenElement Welcoming the steps taken by the Government of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to consolidate a multiethnic society within its borders, and expressing its full support for the further development of this process, Also welcoming the plan put forward by the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to resolve peacefully the crisis in certain municipalities in southern Serbia (Preseva, Bujanoc ect, after Kosovo War it was war in this citys and i Macedonia), and expressing encouragement for the implementation of political and economic reforms designed to reintegrate the ethnic Albanian population as full members of civil society,

Welcoming international efforts, including those of the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo, the International security presence in Kosovo (KFOR), the European Union, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in cooperation with the Governments of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and other States, to prevent the escalation of ethnic tensions in the area,

For the user of central Serbia

Wat is that. I can not anderstend is a provinc, teritory or wat ? All the articel is confius. Is this Serbia or Great Serbia o centarl Serbia? --Hipi Zhdripi 19:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

It is exactly what it says. The central part of Serbia. It seems like you have a guilty conscience. However, I hope I have answered your question. --Krytan 03:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Politics

Hier is no word abaut the Vojvodina and Kosovo? A supose that this secsion it mus be unter the articel "Littel Serbia". Hier it must bee Kosovo and Vojvodina if you dont wont that the Kosovo to be representit unter the UN flag.--Hipi Zhdripi 19:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

How are we supposed to give an intelligent answer when we don't understand you??? Duja 19:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Duja, do not waste your time with him. The guy is a bit bitter for getting banned for 3RR reverts and sockpuppetry. He has been dirrupting several other articles and templates already and recently threatened with taking "his war" onto other Serbia articles. Don't feed trolls. Not worth the effort indeed! Asterion 20:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

You dont have to give me an intelligent answer, you must see the Image is talkin better then I.--Hipi Zhdripi 20:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

We most put in this articel {{otheruses}} and make "Great Serbia or samthing ells, but how is now, has no sence--Hipi Zhdripi 20:15, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

The War after the Kosovo war

This it must be part of the aricel "Litel Serbia"--Hipi Zhdripi 20:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry; please don't get insulted, but I do not understand your English. :( --HolyRomanEmperor 21:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I dont know so gut nglish but they in this page they know english. See http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=689

Well, I understand something, but not all, you should improve your English. This article is about present day Republic of Serbia. Another article you proposing would be one about "Socialist Republic of Serbia" as it was the name of one of the republics of SFRY. I do not see why such article should not be written. As for these 2 maps, they should stay here until the final status of Kosovo is defined, and then we will remove them if Kosovo is declared independent (just wait few more months, ok?). As for the current status of Kosovo, since you said that Kosovo is a province, every province is part of something, so if it is not part of something then it would be named simply "territory" but certainly not province. As I said, wait few months, and then we will discuss this. PANONIAN (talk) 01:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, isn't it pretty obvious that Kosovo will become independent... I'm extremely sad because of that, but it will be so. This has been planned since Tito died, maybe even before that. The West wants Kosovo for the raw materials, and the Albanians, unlike the Serbs, want to privatize everything and practically give Westerners anything they want... Sure, we can wait a few more months, but that'll just make the agony longer... It's better just not to mention Kosovo at all, the whole world is watching how we're losing our holy land... This is going to continue untill Serbia = Beogradski pasaluk. --ςerbiana ♫ 05:11, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Involvement of the Republic of Serbia in the wars in Bosnia and Croatia

Involvement of the various state organs and institutions of the Republic of Serbia in the wars in Bosnia and Croatia 1991-95 is a fact well-known to anyone with more than superficial knowledge of those wars. The institutions concerned were, among others, Ministry of Internal Affairs, State Security Service, Ministry of Finance, Public Accounting Service (SDK), Territorial Defence of Serbia etc. Omitting it completely from this article makes it incomplete and POV. --Elephantus 20:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I generally agree (maybe not necessarily with the wording of your last edit – lazy to search for it in the moment though). I suggest that you re-copy it here on the talk page first, as it's, erm, sensitive. Duja 20:29, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

You mean:

Despite remaining relatively peaceful itself until 1998, Serbia participated in the wars in neighbouring Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina by arming, supporting and directing Serbian troops which fought in the two countries.

I find a problem with "directing". It's unclear whether it refers to all of those or just some. While I don't dispute that Belgrade had influence to war plans of accross-Drina Serbs, personally, I don't think they ordered e.g. Srebrenica massacre.

Also, "Serbian" can be confusing in this context. Is "Serb" gramatically acceptable? Duja 20:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Likeways, a little rephrasel is needed, though. --HolyRomanEmperor 20:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

The main problem here is whether really the "various state organs and institutions of the Republic of Serbia" or just a individuals who lead these institutions were involved in civil wars in neighbouring countries. Since Serbia was not in the official state of war during that time, the participation of Serbia in any war was against the Serbian law. Thus, if people who lead state institutions abused power and broke Serbian law that does not mean that state of Serbia was involved in these wars, but these individuals. Thus, this is wrong article to write about their connections with wars. PANONIAN (talk) 02:38, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

The question of illegality or legality of Serbia's actions is of secondary importance here. Too many people and structures were involved in this to label it simply as an afternoon criminal hobby. It was pretty much a state policy, although a covert one (as state-sponsored terrorism often is). As for the Srebrenica massacre it was (unlike, say, the shelling of Zagreb) too complex an operation, logistically and in terms of political responsibility for it to go ahead without Belgrade's prior approval. It might not have been initiated there, but it would have been highly unlikely to proceed without some sort of blessing from Belgrade. --Elephantus 08:22, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Please spare us the version of history written by fascist HDZ political party which is currently on power in Croatia. They invented story that Serbia attacked Croatia only to find excuse for 300,000 Serbs who were expelled from Croatia. The current sentence in the article is NPOV and I expect that you do not change it any more or post ridiculous references. PANONIAN (talk) 14:26, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

"Part of its leadership" is clearly an understatement. AFAIK "Serbian leadership", better described as Serbian government, i.e. in this case Serbia itself, was throughout the 1990's made up of Socialist Party of Serbia (party of Milosevic) which was from time to time in coalition with Serbian Radical Party (led by Vojislav Seselj). There was no significant opposition within the government to Serbia's participation in the wars in Bosnia and Croatia. --Elephantus 11:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there was no such opposition because SERBIA DID NOT PARTICIPATED IN THESE WARS. Or do I have to draw that for you? It was JNA (Yugoslav Peoples Army) which was in war with Croatian separatists. Later when that army left from Croatia it armed lokal Serbs instead to left them with no arms to Croatian fascists slaughter them all. The story about "Greater Serbia" is simply stupid because the only political party in Serbia that supported Greater Serbia was Serbian Radical Party, and this party was in power only during Kosovo war in 1999. PANONIAN (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

By the way, Elephantus, did you know that Serbian Radical Party criticized Serbian government during these wars that it does not want to help to Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia? I have good memory and I remember these things no matter what Franjo Tuđman said in his speech in Croatia. PANONIAN (talk) 16:12, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Population

To PANONIAN: According to your own proposed link, as well as mine, it shows that Belgrade has a population of 1,576,124, out of which city proper has 1,281,801 (NOT 1,119,642, don't know where u got that from), and the rest of the city has 294,323, rising the figure to 1,576,124. Of course New Belgrade and Zemun are counted as well, because modern Belgrade is, as you know, city that has united with Zemun back in 1931, and with New Belgrade upon its foundation in 1948. In close future, next 20-30 years it is generally expected that city of Pancevo will also join the conurbation. These are all, of course, official numbers, which count both Belgrade's temporary and constant residents. The problem is that tens of thousands of refugees live unregistered and are not subject to official Census, as well as the dwellers who move in the city in thousands looking for work. It is estimated that out of 700,000 refugees that Serbia has recieved during the '90s about one half settled in Belgrade, many of whom have registered but yet many still expect further advancement in their housing status (Kosovo and Croatia refugees). Municipalities such as Kaludjerica, Batajnica and Surcin alone count for 200,000 people, most of them refugees, in houses that are not even legalized nor there are any signs that it will happen in near future...so when you say 1,119,642... most of the people would just laugh. Belgrade region, which surpasses the city limits, counts for 1,717,988 people but it's generally accepted that Belgrade houses near 2 million residents. It is an estimation based on both official Census and the data on refugees and workhopefulls. Official website states that Belgrade officialy has 1,6 mio people but 2 million is a more likely figure. You know it yourself that in countries such as ours numbers cannot reflect the situation precisely, except maybe in Vojvodina, which was less hit by refugee-wave and depopulation than the rest of Serbia. User:NeroN_BG

The number of 1,281,801 is not a population of urban Belgrade. It is a population of all urban settlements in Belgrade City District counted together, including Belgrade, Surčin, Lazarevac, Mladenovac, etc. (All settlements marked with letter "G", meaning "grad" or "gradsko naselje"). The population of Belgrade is only a population of these parts of the document where is written "Beograd-deo". So, if you calculate all numbers from "Beograd-deo" lines you will have a population of 1,119,642. Also, refugees were subject of official census (I know that because I worked for statistics in the time of census). PANONIAN (talk) 16:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

1,281,801 is indeed a population of urban Belgrade, which can easily be checked on the Census. If I was to choose between believing the government-approved/sponsered official data or some weird calculations conducted by a complete anonymous, I'm afraid I would pick the first option even though I don't find it accurate either (since the margin of error in Belgrade, population-wise, is much greater than in other European cities taking the circumstances and thus cannot be approached to in the same way). Anyways, please use official info; Wikipedia is about supporting official data, not our own calculations. Sure refugees are subject to official census, but only those who are registered. 100,000 refugees live in temporary shelters througout Serbia and the rest are waiting for final resolution. It is true that most of the refugees from Croatia and Kosovo (Bosnia on a smaller scale) have found their new homes in Serbia/Belgrade but many are "on hold", waiting for their status to be resolved (only about a quarter have gained SCG citizenship so far). Official number of refugees has dropped from circa 750,000 in 1999, to 600,000 in 2003 to about 483,000 in 2005, many of whom are currently expatriates. Only a minority of the displaced today holds a SCG passport, while the rest are, until the moment their status is resolved, considered as temporary citizens. Urban municipality (City) of Belgrade has a population of 1,576,124: it is divided into its urban and suburban parts, out of which 10 are urban and 7 suburban. Urban part of the municipality contains 1,281,801 and the suburban parts add up another 294,323 inhabitants to the city. However Belgrade region contains areas adjacent to the urban municipality that are officialy not subject to Census since they do not belong to neither of the 2 levels of hierarchy Belgrade's territory is arranged by; these areas add up further rise in the city's population. User:NeroN_BG

Did you just read what I wrote? Check that PDF document again. What you will read there? Do you will read there that 1,281,801 is a population of urban Belgrade. No, you will not!!!

You will read this:

Grad Beograd 1,576,124
Gradska 1,281,801
Ostala 294,323

"Gradska" means "Gradska naselja" and "Ostala" means "Ostala naselja". Did you noticed the word "naselja" instead of "naselje", thus that mean that there are more than one of them. It is population of all settlements marked with letter "g" (grad) in that document. "Grad" is not Belgrade but every settlement with town/city status. So, what I use here IS OFFICIAL info, but problem is that you do not know how to interpretate that info. The anonymous user posted this number first, and then I calculated that number too, and gained the same figure of 1,119,642 as he did. If you want go to Republic Statistical Office in Belgrade and buy CD with full document (It is only 200 dinars) and calculate numbers for yourself. Also, I know that Belgrade is divided into urban and sub-urban, but these numbers do not show that. Number of 1,281,801 is not a number of urban Belgrade, but a number of urban Belgrade towns from sub-urban part of Belgrade. PANONIAN (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Not it!!! http://www.un.org/Depts/dhl/da/kosovo/koso_sc1.htm . In south of teritory of the littel Serbia are Albanians (In border with US, English and French Sekror) in citys like Presevo, Bujanoc and Medvedja. Ther was war and the Serbian Goverment has maket a agreement for Language, schoolo and religion with Albanians (see the UN rez about the South Serbia and north Macedonia). In this articel they are not present but they must bee preseant becose ther is kulturel autonomy.--Hipi Zhdripi 14:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Correctly use of names and definitions

A

Law of Yougoslawia / RS Serbia = Serbia SAP Kosovo SAP Vojvodian; under the RS of Serbia flag; (1992)
Law of UN // Serbia (Serbia SAP Vojvodiana)under serbian flag - Kosovo UN flag (up 1999)
Law of Milosevic Serbia // Serbia with subdivision under serbian flag - (1992-1999)// i dosen exist Provinc of Kosovo or samthing like this
Serbian Goverment Propaganda// Serbia Provice Vojvodina Province Kosovo i Metohija; Serbian flag (up 2000)//: Hier is Kosovo subdivision that is not acceptit from UN

A1

SAP of Kosovo ist paralel a part of SFR of Yogoslavia and the pat of SR of Serbia.
Kosovo is a Provinc in Balkan.
Kosovo is a hard of Serbia and is not a Provice see: Serbiens districts (Kosovo is subdivision)
Kosovo is administretit fro UN and is a Serbians Provinc

In wikipedia in this time (2006) is.

B for Serbia

Law of UN/ Serbia (Serbia SAP Vojvodiana) under serbian flag - Kosovo UN flag (up 1999)

B for Kosovo

Serbian Goverment Propaganda/ Serbia Provice Vojvodina Province Kosovo i Metohija; Serbian flag (up 2000)

Not it!!! Is not the same, RS of Serbia = Rep. Serbia. No body dont in UN dont accept this. The Serbian Govermet is saying that Kosovo is part of Rep. of Serbia but the Kosovars have maked referendum wich is legetim. Argument see: http://www.srbija.sr.gov.yu/?change_lang=en A PLAN FOR THE POLITICAL SOLUTION TO THE SITUATION IN KOSOVO AND METOHIJA--Hipi Zhdripi 02:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

--Hipi Zhdripi 02:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

So, what you suggest that we change in Serbia article? PANONIAN (talk) 02:48, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

We must finde the global view of all this. We can represant this region unter one Law but not mixed.

SFR of Yugpslawien legitime Law
UN Law
RS of Serbia under Milosevic// The articel about Kosovo must be Kosovo als division of Serbia//Kosovo Provice dont exist
Serbian Goverment Propaganda// Is confus (see Kosovo, malo Kosovo...) they dont know wat they are doing. That is no importen but importen is that the Rep. of Serbia is not a member of the UN is only a member of the Ser. and. Mon. bount (only the new name of Yougoslavia in wich Kosovo is baisic elements, one of (8)-4 ) See Constucional of the SFR of Yugoslavia. Not it!! new state of SM is temporaly (5 year). See the Referendum in Montenegro.

You can make wat you want but his is not gut for neutrality in Wikipedia becose in one seid we presant the Serbia withat Kosovo and the ather sied Kosovo under the Serbia. This is Confuse. Is beter to present in one Law even that from Milosevic is better that in Wikipedia, is more clear.--Hipi Zhdripi 03:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Hipi Zhdripi: You still did not said what you want to change in this article. I told you that current status of Kosovo is confusing and that we cannot do much regarding this. We should wait to see what will happen with the state union of Serbia-Montenegro, what will be the results of Montenegrin referendum and what will be final status of Kosovo, and then and only then we could have good and correct articles about Serbia, Kosovo and Montenegro. Until then, we have what we have. PANONIAN (talk) 16:02, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Popaganda

Only for Propaganda about Kosovo since he Wikipedia is was Open you presentin Serbia als a region. You present the Montenegro nation als Serb Nation. The Montenegro Language als Serbian language. You are destroing youu country only to make troubel in Balkan. The Kosovars is goin to drop the Serb-Russian from Serbia. The best argumet I have findit is this:

Ho w longer the serbs make ware in Kosovo (till:Revision as of 23:08, 13 April 2006)

NO COMMENT Till 13 April 2006 it was Serbia dreamening and now they want to administred Kosovo in Wikipedia.

I was the user who created this map and converted the info box into a country box and not a specially designed region box. I am an American with German and Scottish ancestry and am in no way a Serbian nationalist or Albanian-hater. I was simply redesigning the pages of the two autonomous republics of Serbia and Montenegro, both of which will probably be seperate countries within the next two months. While my opinion on the question of Kosovo is just that, my private opinion, it is doubtful that Kosovo will become an independent country anytime soon, if ever. Were it to look like Kosovo were to become indepedent relatively soon, I would most likely design a map and country box for it. Until then, Kosovo should be shown as a part of Serbia, even with its levels of autonomy. Somalia doesn't even have a government to control the entire country, and it is still shown as a united country on its map. -Helmandsare 18 April 2006, 17:10 UTC

You should wait a little with posting these maps into Serbia and Montenegro articles because it is not quite clear what will be the results of Montenegrin referendum. By the established rules of this referendum there should be at least 55% of voters that support independence if that referendum is to be recognized as valid. It is not certain whether that percent of voters will vote for independence (If 54% of voters vote for independence instead of 55% the referendum will not be valid). So, just wait that things happen first, and then change the maps. PANONIAN (talk) 23:01, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I had a pretty good idea that those would be changed back pretty quickly, and I'm cool with that. Though if Montengro does break away, all I have to do now is just go back in the history and copy and paste the new box. Oh, and from what I hear, there's some debate about that 55% for independence clause. If it gains above 50% but not 55%, Montenegro will probably still declare its independence, but its up in the air as to who will recognize it, especially the EU, which insisted on that number because its not crazy about Montenegrin independence (probably because it would be easier to deal with one country's accension to the EU rather than two). -Helmandsare 19 April 2006, 17:00 UTC

You have a point, PANONIAN

You said, "This IS NOT an article abot Yugoslav Army or about Yugoslavia, but about SERBIA". I agree with this. Whether User:Elephantus does, is a different matter. Kind regards, Asterion 15:14, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Asterion, the problem is that Croatian government lead by hard-nationalist HDZ party constantly spread propaganda that Serbia attacked Croatia during the 90s. How can somebody now to explain to ordinary Croatian citizen that Serbia did not had its own army and that Croatian separatist government in fact was in war with Yugoslav Peoples Army, the army of the country from which they wanted to separate. PANONIAN (talk) 15:52, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I understand, you may want to have a look at Borovo Selo raid. The article could benefit from a whole revamp. It is incredibly biased as it stands, plus there seem to be a campaign going on to remove any mention of the war crimes committed of the MUP/HDZ militias. Regards, Asterion 16:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I do not have time to work on that article. I mostly work on the articles related to regions and cities in Serbia-Montenegro, and also cleaning bad faith edits from these articles. I do not like to work on the articles related to Yugoslav wars at all, because most of them (if not all) are biased and because these wars are now past. There are lot of people here on Wikipedia who are still frustrated with these wars, but I mostly like to write about Serbia as it is now in 2006. So, what I want to achieve here is that articles about political and geographical regions are not contaminated with war frustrations. The articles related to Yugoslav wars are all contaminated with these frustrations and there is no much help for them. PANONIAN (talk) 16:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I am well aware of the Serbian attempts to portray Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) as an "independent" force in the conflict when it was in fact under the control of the government of Serbia. That's why I chose to include only those references in which Serbia's direct involvement in the wars in Bosnia and Croatia is mentioned, not JNA. As for the Serbian Radicals' complaints that Serbian government wasn't doing enough to help Serbs in Bosnia and Croatia, it appears now that they were without foundation, as the Serbian government was actually doing everything it could to help them, including arms shipments, paying army officers, training death squads etc. --Elephantus 16:44, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, what I am aware is that Croatian nationalists for a long time trying to put all blame for war on Serbs and to diminish their own guilt. The one who know something about political structure of Yugoslavia and command chain of the Yugoslav army would never say that "Yugoslav People's Army was under the control of the government of Serbia". That simply was not possible. Only the police was under control of the Serbian government, but not the army (even now in 2006 the army is not under control of the Serbian government). The war in Croatia in 1991 was a war between Yugoslavia (sovereign recognized country) and its separatist republic of Croatia (still not internationally recognized in that time). The JNA was army of Yugoslavia and in that time four republics were still part of that Yugoslavia: Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia. So, if you claim that somebody attacked Croatia, then these four republics attacked it together, not Serbia only. As for your references, we can discuss all of them one by one. Please post here some of your links and quote exact sentence that prove that government of Serbia had control over everything. PANONIAN (talk) 21:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Panonia but every body know that it was Serbia. The JFA i twas under the serbiand goverment they haved three votes. (Serbia Kosovo Vojvodina)

Actually, it were 4 votes: Serbia Vojvodina Kosovo Montenegro. However, it still was a political and military structure of Yugoslavia (not of Serbia) about what we talk here. PANONIAN (talk) 23:32, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

This is you meastek. After the Milosevic destroit the parliamen in Prishtina and Novi Sad it was only 2. You are sayin that the Kosovo (judical) have maked war agains the Croatia, Serbia (see the war in South Serbia) and himself. That is absurd and dont have a sence, see in you paragraf political structur. During this time Kosovo it was not the political structur ewen a provinc it was a district of Serbia see Districts of Serbia that is wrong it is twise Kosovo. About this is to hard to finde a agument beacose the Serbian Gouverment have censur about that. --Hipi Zhdripi 02:57, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

To make a gut articel you must see in wich time the Belgrad Parliament have taket with force the power ower Prishtinas Parliamnet (Not it!! This it was "de jur" the deth of Yugoslavia and Yug. Vol. Army, because the Federal Law is saying that the parliament is a part of Federation and have a right to "VETO". Eche parliament in Federation it was autonom with the Court and Teritorayl Army and it was prasented in Federation). After the Milosevic has taket the power ower the Teritorayl Army of Kosovo he hawe maket Ware in the name of the two parliament Belgrad and Podgurica.(Not it!! the Yug. Vol. Army it was independet from the Republics and Federation they war under the Suprem komandan of this Army, I dont know wich Admiral as in this time and wat he prasent ther Serbia, Montenegro or Yugoslavian Law because the Federation it was deth and the Law it was acceptet from UN. They are importen think wich make to understend the articel) --Hipi Zhdripi 03:15, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I beg this person with lowsy English skills to leave a signature following its "arguments" so that we know who we're confronting. Kosovo was more or less independent from Serbia during Communist era; Kosovo "province" could put a veto on any decision made by Belgrade/"Serbia proper", as well as Vojvodina. Kosovo's administration within SFR Yugoslavia was entirely ethnic Albanian. In fact, Albanians had a far greater impact on their development and mere existence in Kosovo than they have ever had in their own country, Albania, which is a fair explanation for the demographic explosion among Albanians in Kosovo. Kosovo was an Albanian Uthopia, especially after Tito came to power, at one point even promising unification of Albania and Kosovo within SFRY. Serbs have became a second-class citizens in their own country far before the conflicts of the '90s, only that they were stupid enough to take it for decades before Kosovo erupted in violence (targeting Serb minority, later Albanians, then again Serbs till this day). Serbian tragedy is that they believed they could live happily with their "brother nations" while everybody else was pretty much against it and worked against them; we turned a deff ear and blind eye on bad things while actually all we should have done was protecting our own people far earlier in the past. Yugoslavia should have never existed as such. Also, about the JNA issue...JNA became increasingly serbianized during the late 80s, early 90s, and was by the end of that time 80 % Serb-controlled (comparing to a 40% share in overall Yugoslav population). However Yugoslavia was a sovereign state back in 1991 unlike its seccesionist republics and JNA had an obligation to protect lacked protection; also the JNA withdrew under pressure of international community, showing how cooperative it was in preventing further violence in Former Yugo. Army of RS and RSK were not conducted from Belgrade and there is no way to fight that fact; also paramilitary organisations such as Skorpioni were guerilla fighters who in fact are to blame for many crimes JNA is blamed on. Their leaders have later governed mafia and Belgrade's underground and represented a class for itself in Serbia till 2000. User:NeroN_BG

That is not importen hier. Hier is importen the destroing of the parliament of Prishtina. And the veto right of this parliament in Federation. Secend You dont have document in wich is "Kosovo" is a part of "Serbia". You are imagen thate. You are intepretin the dokument in wich kosovo, serbia and Vojvodina has maked a federal republik called Soc. Rep Serbia. After the Milosevic destroid the parlament in Pristina with force (tanks, Mig and paramilitary force) this Republic it was deth. Till the UN force came ther and restoried the parliament wich now must diesed wat they wont do do in the future. Dont forgetit the under the prishtinas parliament it was the teritorial army of Kosovo. Yugoslavia it was the Ex-Yugoslavia and not Yugoslavia. This ex-Y didt have a mandat in UN.--Hipi Zhdripi 21:43, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, here it is (all excerpts are from the CIJ's (Coalition for International Justice) reports of testimonies of witnesses at the trial of Slobodan Milosevic at the ICTY):

http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=430&tribunalID=1

Testimony of Milan Milanovic, former Deputy Defense Minister of SBWS (Slavonia, Baranja and Western Srijem, one of the Serb-occupied areas of Croatia 1991-95):

Around the same time, Radovan Stojicic (“Badza”) was sent from a special anti-terrorist unit in the Serbian Ministry of the Interior (MUP) to organize and head the SBWS Territorial Defense (TO). When Prosecutor Hildegard Urtz-Retzlaff asked Mr. Milanovic whether Badza was a volunteer, he replied, “I think he did not come as a volunteer." When she asked why, the witness who became close friends with Badza said, "Because he never said he had come as a volunteer. And on the ground that our understanding was that he had been sent by official authorities of Serbia."

As he often does, Milosevic provided the opening for the witness to clarify and add to his direct testimony. On cross examination, Mr. Milanovic asserted, “Not for a moment was it my understanding he was there as a volunteer.” Not only did he get weapons, equipment, and his salary from Serbia. On completion of his task, he was appointed Assistant Minister of Internal Affairs in Serbia. Of the15 men he brought with him, 10 worked for the Serbian State Security Service (DB).

...

The witness told the Court he believed Mr. Stojicic was close to the Accused (Milosevic, my remark), who addressed him familiarly as Badza. Mr. Milanovic was present during telephone calls between the two and, on one occasion, listened in when Badza put Milosevic on the speaker phone. The occasion was a complaint from Mr. Milanovic over General Momcilo Perisic’s withdrawal of Yugoslav Army (VJ) forces from the border region. Milosevic had Badza wait while he called “Momcilo.” The two overheard Milosevic say to Perisic, “It’s not for you to think. Just return the troops to where they were.” The VJ returned to the border.

http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=280&tribunalID=1

Testimony of B-129 (protected witness), former secretary in the offices of Zeljko Raznatovic-Arkan:

The witness, who saw and spoke with Arkan on a regular basis from 1993 until the Tigers were "disbanded," testified that "Arkan would always say that without orders from the DB [Serbian State Security] the Tigers were not deployed anywhere." She described a chain of command from Arkan to Franko Simatovic ("Frenki") and on up to Jovica Stanisic, head of the Serbian DB -- and reportedly Milosevic's right hand man. During operations, Arkan's men took their orders from DB commanders. Referring to conversations with Arkan's secretary with whom she shared an office, the witness testified, "She always said Frenki was in charge of the unit for Special Operations and he could decide about certain things but without the approval of Stanisic he could not make a decision." She stopped short of identifying a direct link to Milosevic, though it challenges credulity to believe the President of Serbia did not know what his secret police were doing.

...

In clear and unequivocal language, the former secretary described an inter-twined relationship between Arkan and the DB, which included regular telephone and radio contact, as well as exchange of soldiers. She identified the voices of Arkan and Legija (Milorad Ulemek who later headed the Tigers and the Red Berets) on an intercepted telephone conversation played in court, where they refer to the "Stinkers," code name of the DB, concerning a joint operation in which they are involved.

...

B-129 also testified about the financial and material support the DB provided to the Tigers. She described how, during one operation in Banja Luka, Arkan handed her 3 to 4 million German Marks to pay the salaries of his men. The money, he said, came from the DB. B-129 also told about transporting uniforms and pistols to the Tigers' training center at Erdut (in Croatia, my remark), a regular procedure during "operations."

http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=237&tribunalID=1

Testimony of Dragan Vasiljkovic, aka "Captain Dragan", one of the commanders of Serb paramilitaries in Croatia

His testimony also showed that the SDB was involved in the Krajina fighting in a major way. He claimed that only four people were controlling actions in the Krajina throughout the war: Franko Simatovic, Dragan Filipovic, Milan Radonjic and Jovica Stanisic. All were members of the SDB, with Stanisic at the top and, allegedly, at Milosevic's right hand. On one occasion, Stanisic came to the Krajina and congratulated Captain Dragan on the success of his training. Later, in Belgrade he gave him a pistol in recognition of a successful military operation re-taking Glina from Croat forces.

http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=468&tribunalID=1

Testimony of Miroslav Deronjic, a Serb, former civilian head of the War Staff in Srebrenica

Deronjic then revealed the extensive involvement of the Serbian State Security Service and its special Red Beret unit in the region. As early as April 1991, Predrag Spasojevic from Serbian State Security came to the region to set up and train small groups that would be the nucleus of the first paramilitaries in Bratunac. Spasojevic had good contacts with the military and the JNA, according to the witness.

...

In June, with Serb civilian delegations from municipalities throughout the region, he was called to a meeting of the Territorial Defense, where Franko Simatovic [aka, Frenki], head of the Serbian DB special operations unit (known as the "Red Berets"), addressed them. Frenki explained that he came with orders from "the highest level of military, political, and state circles of Republika Srpska and Serbia." The Serbian DB would set up a series of training camps in all the municipalities, with instructors from the special units of the SDB. The local civil authorities were to secure facilities and provide logistical support.

...

The directive to establish local paramilitary units headed by Serbian DB was carried out. The instructors from Serbia, with their trainees, also participated in combat operations in Bosnia. In addition, Deronjic learned that the instructors were paid by the Serbian Minister of the Interior and that special weapons (with night vision, infrared rays, etc.) were supplied to them from Serbia.

http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=174&tribunalID=1

Testimony of C-020 (protected witness), former member of Arkan's Super Tigers, an elite Serb paramilitary group

Though Serbian forces were prohibited from fighting in Bosnia under a UN mandate, witness C-020 testified that the Super Tigers were trained in Serbia and transported across the border to Bosnia. Colonel Legija, C-020's direct commander subordinated to Franko Simatovic (aka Frenkie), head of the special operations unit of the State Security Division of the Serbian MUP, gave strict instructions that they were not to wear insignia or to identify the unit they belonged to. If they were forced to, they could tell "their people" they were members of the Special Police from Serbia. They were to say nothing to anyone else.

...

Further implicating official Serbia in the war in Bosnia, C-020 testified that he was paid partly in the combat area and the rest when he returned to Headquarters in Belgrade. Asked about the source of the funds, he speculated they came from the Serbian MUP and Arkan.

http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=167&tribunalID=1

Testimony of Jovan Dulovic, a Serbian journalist

After Vukovar an urgent telegram came into Mr. Dulovic's hands. It was from JNA Lieutenant Colonel Milan Jeremija, transmitting complaints of the Minister of Defense of Serbia to the Command of the First Military District. The Minister complained that the paramilitaries' objective was not to combat the enemy but "to loot people's property and engage in sadistic abuse of civilians of Croatian nationality." He went on to cite the village of Lovas where captured villagers were used for clearing a minefield resulting in the deaths of 17. He also complained about "the deliberate spread of misinformation, exaggeration of numbers of opposing forces, the existence of snipers and of eyeballs gouged from the heads of Serbs." A copy of the telegram was introduced into evidence.

The Minister recommended disarming the paramilitaries and stressed that Serbia should participate, since, according to the witness, no one else could accomplish it. Mr. Dulovic said he had never seen any attempt to implement the proposal.

--Elephantus 09:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

All right, Elephantus, I changed a sentence a little, but there is still no reason to post your POV sentence or references into article. It is clear that it was part of the leadership and institutions, since for example the ministers for agriculture or tourism certainly did not exported arms to the RSK and RS. Second thing, we still should to write word "supported" instead of "participated in war", since participations is something much more than you presented here. Also, your links should not be posted here because links about much more important things are not posted and this is not place for you to heal your war frustrations. PANONIAN (talk) 00:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

No argumet

Sombody have putit Kosovo here with out argumet. We dont have a argumet that Kosovo is part of S/M. We have tha Constitution of this countrie but we have the rez. 1244 wich is more importen for the Wikipedia and is saying that Kosovo it is a part of Yougoslavia and is prototoriat of UN. Till we dont have a clearly argument from UN, Kosovo must be out of this articel. Pleas dont make the discution with intepretation or the Law wich are not accordin to 1244. Everybodoy can do that but that is nothing for Wikipedia. --Hipi Zhdripi 03:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

? --HolyRomanEmperor 20:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I have requested semi-protection for the Kosovo, Serbia and Serbia and Montenegro articles. Hipi Zhdripi is simply too much to cope with. He has started to not just removing content but vandalise articles too. Have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Current_requests_for_protection if you feel like adding anything. Regards, --Asterion 20:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Kosovo, Serbia, Serbia and Montenegro, Ex Yugoslavia

Edit War, sock puppet, mytology ect. Beacos of thate we need to do:

English

Panonia and Ilir must be temporaly the two administrators for Ex-Yugoslav articels in Wikipedia. The pages on Ex-Yougoslavia: Serbia, Serbia and Montenegro, Kosovo must be protcted temporarily until the staus of Kosovo is decided. All users should be able to leave their comments at the discussion page. These two administrators should now be the ones in charge to control the articles based on the UNSC Resolution 1244. This is a compromise. This has to do with project, not with sciecne. With the science you can not make compromise. With compromise, you can make a human Law. With the human Law you have chance to make science. I know that this was not planed in this project called Wikipedia. But for the sciene we must do that. With that, we are doing nothing else, just protecting Wikipedia from Edit Wars. This is the Law in Balkan: to protect the Children at War time. Im a Kosovar I dont hate anyone, the only thing that i hate is mythology in science.

Deutsch (German)

Panonia und Ilir muessen zeitweilig die beiden verantwortlichen Adminstratoren fuer Ex Jugoslawien / Artikel in Wikipedia sein. Die Seiten von Ex Jugoslawien, Serbien, Serbien und Montenegro und Kosovo muessen zeitweilig geschuetzt werden, bis der Status von Kosovo sich entschieden hat. Jeder Benutzer kann seine Arbeit auf der Diskussionsseite lassen. Die beiden Administratoren kontrollieren dies und wenn dies inhaltlich mit der Resolution 1244 zu vereinbaren ist, koennen sie entscheiden, ob es in den Artikel uebertragen werden soll. Das ist ein Kompromiss. Das hat mit dem Projekt zu tun, aber nicht mit Wissenschaft. Mit der Wissenschaft kann man keine Kompromisse machen. Mit Kompromissen kann man ein zwischenmenschliches Gesetz machen. Dieses Gesetzt hilft der Wissenschaft. Ich weiss, das so etwas nicht in diesem Wikipediaprojekt geplant war, aber fuer die Wissenschaft, im Namen der Wissenschaft, muessen wir das tun. Damit machen wir nichts, wir schuetzen nur Wikipedia vorm Bearbeitungskrieg von Seiten. Das ist das Gesetz vom Balkan: Die Kinder in Kriegszeiten zu verteidigen. Ich bin ein Kosovar und hasse niemanden. Die einzige Sache, die ich hasse, ist die Mythologie in Wissenschaft.

Albanians want inclusion in constitution

This is document to make a better articel

*B92-Serbian Radio Station in English
10:06 April 18 2006| Beta

BUJANOVAC -- Riza Haljimi said that Albanians should be included in the drafting of a new Serbian constitution.

“The national minority in Serbia should have certain rights, by principles proposed by the international community, because this is what is being asked to be done for Serbs in Kosovo.” the leader of the Democratic Action Party said ...

He added that decentralisation is one of the best methods for integrating the minority.

“If this happens, there will be no talks of changing borders and of having South Serbia belong to Kosovo.” Haljimi said.

He also criticised the Serbian Government for not speaking enough about the problems faced by the people living in the Presevo Valley.

09:49 April 14 2006| Beta BELGRADE -- Rasim Ljajic met with Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica yesterday to discuss his recent resignation.

Earlier this week, Ljajic, who is the president of the National Council for Hague Cooperation and Serbia-Montenegro Human and Minority Rights Minister, resigned from his position as president of the South Serbia Coordination Centre. The decision was made after the Serbian Government decided to intervene in Novi Pazar and disband the municipal government...

Sorry but in this Serbian democratic radio ar talkin about two cuntries. Now I don understandent is Kosovo a part of Serbia?

Ehm, could you sum up what you're trying to say, please? --HolyRomanEmperor 19:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Reference to War Crimes

I believe that the war crimes that Serbia committed or supported are so widespread that make war crimes an integral point of the simpliest description of Serbia. I believe that for the next few decades, the reference to war crimes should be part of any article on Serbia. This will have three purposes:

1. It will be just towards the truth

2. It will be just towards the victims

3. And it will remind Serbs of the horrible crimes that were committed on their name. Dardanv

Few comments:

You provided no reference to any established war crime that Serbia comitted. Please exclude any individual and/or unofficial actions - if you want to include them, make up an article about that group and then add the reference there. This is the article about Serbia in general and not about any possibly related criminal/paramilitary groups (incl. Albanian - Serbia is multinational).

Where is the reference to victims? I for one would like to see details included (somewhere) on Kosovo victims - from 1945 onward, categorized based on nationality and whether they were proven innocent civilians or not and (also) who committed the crimes against those victims. Anything less than that, such as your statements is just your personal POV.

No horrible crime has been commited "on my name", so I don't need to be reminded of anything, thank you. I do not associate myself with few criminals and/or government I did not choose. Do you associate yourself with Albanians who victimized all non-Albanians on Kosovo for the past decades (including threats, murders, robberies, monastery bombings, etc.)? Do you associate yourself with those Albanians from Albania who crossed the Kosovo border illegally and claim to be from Kosovo while "their documents are lost"? Do you associate yourself with those Albanians who went outside Kosovo just to fight and kill Serbs or distribute propaganda against Serbs? Tell me if and when you do and you are proven to be not involved (very hard given your actions on Wikipedia). Maybe you just think these things didn't happen so you need to be reminded? If you do, just say so.

--Aleksandar Šušnjar 17:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but I find ridiculous what you are saying. It is common knowledge that Serbia commited crimes in croatia, just go read the transcripts at the Hague Tribunal. I think the crimes that Serbian expansionist nationalism brought in Kosovo since 1912, in Bosnia and Croatia since 1918 are enormous and they were conducted on your name and on the name of all Serbs. They were not the personal interest of Rankovic or Milosevic, they were on the interest of all Serbs, as Serb nationalists perceived it. Of course I am ashamed of any criminal act that Albanians committed against Serbs either in revenge or out of nationaisist feelings. I am ashamed of the Albanian youth crowds burning Serbian Churches in March 2004. I consider those churches a valuable heritage of my country, Kosovo, that need to be protected. What you are saying about Albanians having crossed from Albania, you should know that that is total BS. There are no such Albanians. I was born and raised in Kosovo and I know only one old man who came from Albania during WWII as a teacher (there are exactly 180 of those teachers who were brought by the Italians to open schools in Albanian). That is total propaganda. Ever since Serbs invaded Kosovo in 1912, they have been trying to ethnically cleanse it of its Albanian population. When they failed to do it, after the WWII, they came up with the strangest theory ever, that Albanians actually came from Albania ivited by Tito. That is funny and tragic. Dardanv

You mention Serb expansionism in Kosovo, Croatia and Bosnia. That is possibly popular propaganda, but try to find any official attempts at any expansionism:

Serbia could not have been "expansionist" towards Kosovo as Kosovo was and still is a part of it (we don't know for how long, though). Serbs simplly lived for centuries in those areas that are now Bosnia and Hercegovina and Croatia and did not seek to be somehow added to Serbia or placed under Serbia's domain. So that is not expansionist either.

So you say that "They were not the personal interest of Rankovic or Milosevic". OK. Let's get that one over with.

Re Albanians crossing borders I actually happen to know that very well. And I am talking about whole villages along with their cattle, not indivuduals, crossing at once, as vitnessed by my direct relatives that served as border guards during those times and were told to do nothing. Maybe not a proof good for you, but it is sufficient for me.

Serbs did not invade Kosovo in 1912. Learn your history a little wee bit better and you will discover that Serbia *WAS* Kosovo. Or do you think that all those burned monasteries were built after 1912?

Ethnical cleansing of Albanian population on Kosovo since 1912? Just check the crimes records and data on population from year to year to discover who was actually beaing cleansed by whom. You say Serbs "failed" to do it... Maybe those Serbs who tried (if any) just weren't as persistent as those Albanians who cleansed Kosovo of all non-Albanians?

You also say "they were on the interest of all Serbs, as Serb nationalists perceived it". First, noone can state my own interestes other than I personally. Second, apparently those Serbian nationalists were not as numerous or persistent as their Albanian counterparts and, as you say, failed to achieve their goals. In any case, did Serbia help them do any of that?

--Aleksandar Šušnjar 21:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I could not not answer you. If you believe these things you are saying, then I feel endulged to give you an information therapy. My diagnosis for you is 'serb nationalistic propaganda infected. I will address your points one by one:

1. Serbia had expanssionist goals. The causes for it are the spread of nationalism in the XIXth century. Have you read 'Nacertanije' from Garasanin? You should read it, if you haven't as that is the recipe for Serb expansionism and you can see where Milosevic's ideas came from. Have you not heard of Ilija Garasanin and his plan "The expulsion of Albanians"? Please google and find them and read them both. I could give you more, but these will suffice for now. I will give you a link which gives you access to all these documents, you will love them, but you shouldn't http://www.elsie.de/pdf/B2002GatheringClouds.pdf Once your infection is over, you will feel sorry. dardanv

Garasanin has nothing to do with me, so that does need to make me feel sorry for anything. Assuming all you want about him nothing remotely similar occured since. You also claim "expanionism" ideas while addressing a part of Serbia? Very introvert way to be expansionist. While I don't like Milosevic either, you only stated your personal belief as to what his ideas were but have provided absolutely no statement of his own or other proof to back it up. --Aleksandar Šušnjar 04:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

If you say "Kosovo, is was and will always be Serbian, that is exactly what Garasanin, Milosevic and the alike say. From what you are saying, it seems that you don't like Milosevic what he couldn't do. I am saying that there should be reference to war crimes and genocide in the Serbian article, because the Serbian leadership from earli XIXthe century was pursuing a policy of ethnic cleansing the link with documents that I put up there provides enough proof. Moreover, it is also the Serbian people that has supported or accepted the conduct of war crimes. During the genocide in Bosnia it was only a small number of obscure women protesting in Belgrade. Serbs still don't recognize the fact that theri army killed some 7,000 men and boys in Srebrenica. Therefore, I think we do a favor to Serbs if we keep the reference to war crimes on any introductory text about serbia for the three reasons outlined above. dardanv

2. When I heard for the first time the the theory of Albanians crossing over from Albania to populate Kosovo, I laughed. It was a very good Serbian friend of mine who told me. But ever since then I have heard it some 10 times more and another Serbian friend of mine told me that you even learn that in schools. I can guarantee you that that is total bullshit. It has nothing to do with reality. There is a town in Albania (Fier) that half of the population are Kosovars, who were expelled to Turkey and were not let to go back, then King Zog accepted them in Albania. But the number of Albanians coming from Albania to Kosovo after WWII should be insiginifcant, as I as a citizen of Kosovo know not of them. dardanv

Well, go ahead - laugh all you want. I did not say you came that way but that many did. I don't blame you for not knowing. I don't base my beliefs on any one's statements other than those close to me who vitnessed it. As I stated before, had there been no Albanians cleansing Serbs away from Kosovo, I would not have been here today because my grandfather would have not moved to Belgrade. I also have to thank my existence to one of his Albanian friends who did not uncover him to his fellow Albanians when he saw him hiding... But that is just my personal story.

What year did your grandfather leave Kosovo? When did he come to Kosovo and from where? And well done for leaving to Belgrade! I kiss my hand of my grandfather who moved with his family from a remote village to Prishtina, the capital. I would have been a villager, can you imagine? While you would have been living in an enclave now. Instead you are enjoying Canada, I wish my grandfather emigrated to Canada! What I am trying to say is that, if it wasn't during WWII, then your grandfather must have moved to Belgrade out of pure reason, it is better to live in the capital of Yugoslavia then in a village in underdeveloped periphery of Kosovo? Isn't it? dardanv

3. Yes Serbia invaded Kosovo, which was internationally part of the Ottoman Empire. The people of Kosovo were not asked whether they wanted to be part of Serbia. Instead they were massacred, expulsed by the Serbian Army and they fought against them. Oh Yes, Kosovo was part of the Nemanjic territory in medieval times, but remind you, Nations didn't exist at that time. Stephan Dushan called himself "King of Serbs, Albanians and Wallahians." We don't know the composition of the population then, so we can only speculate. But Let me remind you that Kosovo was part of the Kingdom of Bulgaria for a far longer period then that of the Nemanjic dinasty. Kosovo was part of the Roman Empire for quite some time to, and Kosovo was for a very long time the Kingdom of Dardania. Let's not forget that Kosovo was part of the Ottoman Empire for 500 years, and they are not claiming it. The most important element is that when Kosovo was invaded by Serbia, the army was not considred a home army by the people, it was considered a foregn army in the same manner as it was considered 87 years later. We the people of Kosovo, fought against it as an ivading foreign army. So if Turkey ivades Kosovo tomorrow, you will say that it is not invasion because Kosovo was part of the Ottoman Empire for 500 years? What about Bulgarians? dardanv

Ahm, nations did not exist, Serbian culture was not present. As for the Ottoman Empire: Turks invaded the areas and Serbs essentially did not loose the battle the famous battle of Kosovo but did lose the war. Serbian culture remained and continued to exist in the region while the rest of Europe feared further expansion of Ottoman Empire. During its fall, Serbs regained control of their own territories they already lived in - they did not "go" there and invade it as you are trying to present it. --Aleksandar Šušnjar 04:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

The majority of the people in Kosovo in 1912 were Albanian. All Ottoman registers show that. THe Serbian Army was not an army generated in Kosovo but was an army that entered to Kosovo from Serbia commanded by Belgrade and committed outrageous crimes throughout Kosovo. It is absolutely not important whether the majority of the people in the medieval times were Serb or Albanian, at that time nations didn't exist. It was mere people who would change language very easily. Who knows, maybe you are Albanian by blood and I am Serb. We cannot prove these things. Important to me is that several relatives of mine were killed in 1912, and the number of my relatives killed by the Serbian state since 1912 is quite large. There is living memory of Serbian crimes throughout Kosovo. That whenever kosovars hear a Serb say "Kosovo is Serbian territory" they rightfuly get disgusted, angered and frustrated. Because this Serbian goal has brought to them so much suffering and ethnic leansing. dardanv

4. Ethnic cleansing! Hmmmm, do you know about the agreement between Serbia and Turkey to send 'Turks' to Turkey before the WWII? Do you know how many Albanians went to Turkey under oppression by the Serbian army? Read Garasanin please! The agreement was put again in practice by Rankovic. Hundreds of thousands of Albanians were forced to leave to Turkey. Albanian sources claim that some 350,000 Albanians were killed by Serb forces in Kosovo since 1912. Hard to prove, but I rad the list of people killed in the village of Tuxhec (where former PM Kosumi comes from) 124 people were killed in this village alone. There are a few thousand villages in Kosovo. The only time when ethnic cleansing against Serbs has occurred is during the WWII and after 1999, when Albanians revenged. I don't agree with revenge, I think revenge does not erase the previous crime, it just creates one more. However, let me also inform you about the Agrarian Reform. You must have heard of the "Plan for Colonization of Kosovo and Metohija". Do you know how much land was taken away from Albanians and given to Serbian colons, Yes COLONS, the Serbian Government called them colons! dardanv

Just read my previous statements. --Aleksandar Šušnjar 04:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I asked you do you know anything about the Serbian plans for the colonization of Kosovo? Do you know anything about the agreement between Turkey and Serbia to 'exchange population' and do you know about the 'Agrarian reform' which took land away from Albanians and gave it to Serb colons? It just annoys me to my bones when Serbs, want to portray themselves as victims after they have committed so many crimes. Of course, in a more profound sense they are victims of their own chouvinism. dardanv

5. Hitler failed to kill all Jews, but his goal was to do so! And he tried it! The goal of Serb nationalists has always to kill, expel 51 percent of the people from Kosovo in order to achieve a Serb majority. Is anyone talking about Nis anymore? No! Because it was ethnically cleansed in 1878 and now it is the decendants of colons from Serbia and Montenegro living there. Serbia tried to do that continuously in Kosovo but the situation had changed and the international community would not allow anymore the same means to be used as in Eastern Kosovo, today Southern Serbia. This is the dose of antibiotics for now. I am sorry to tell you that your infection is quite dangerous it may harm you and others around you. It must be treated immediately!!!! It is more dangerous then the bird flu! Your infection has caused the death of some 200,000 people in former Yugoslavia since 1990, it has lead to the economic collapse of the region, it has delayed EU integration for some 20 years and it has destroyed the reputation of the region for some 50 years. Dardanvv

1. Which relevant Serb nationalists are you talking about? Where did you learn about their goals? I have no infection and certainly not the one that caused a single death, let alone the propaganda number you state. No point talking here. I clearly stated that I don't have official references for what I said - so I did not include them in the article. You have provided absolutely nothing other than your own opinions and are trying to enforce them on unsuspecting readers. There is no point continuing this discussion. --Aleksandar Šušnjar 04:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I just gave you the link with documents that show you what the goals of Serb nationalists were. I also told you that they were quite successful in achieving those goals in today's Southern Serbia. I beg you to read the link above. I will put it here again. It will do you so good. dardanv

MUST READ FOR SERBS!!!!

http://www.elsie.de/pdf/B2002GatheringClouds.pdf

My last post for this subject: You gave me a link to a document showing how one person describes another person's views. None of these are official and, at the very least, not for a very very very long time. Are there Serbian nationalists? You bet there are - just like for any nationality out there. Your hypothesis that those ideas were somehow official is just that - someone's hypothesis, not to mention unsubstantiated. Don't mix your stereotypes of known any-nation nationalists with who you assume or would like to think as a nationalist. Also don't assume that those stereotypes apply to Serbs in general in any way or fashion. Extreme majority of Serbs I know are nothing like you are trying to describe.

Your goal is to make Serbs 'feel sorry' (these are your own words) for what you assume were the actions of their (not truly ellected) government. That just does not add up. I, for example, did nothing of sorts. On the other hand, I am saddened by any crime committed anywhere by anyone and against anyone. But I do not identify myself or any nation with that crime. Should I, say, 'feel sorry' for Americans because of crimes committed by their criminals like you do for Serbs? No answer needed.

You aspire to be (self-proclaimed) healer by bringing the truth out, yet you, at the very least, twist it badly. For example, you mention 200,000 victims as somehow caused by Serbs. The number is wrong however you describe it - it is either lesser or greater. The number most definitely includes Serbs and other victims of non Serbs (for example, why not, Agim Çeku). You fail to mention, if you wish, hard-line nationalistic tendencies of non-Serbs that could easily be major causes for all the suffering. Learn about Alija Izetbegović and Franjo Tuđman at least as much as you claim to know about Milošević before you make similar comments in the future.

You want to tell me the truth of my own family - that they moved to Belgrade because it was better there. Well guess what. It was better for them there - you were absolutely right. My grandfather owned significant land near Priština. My father was born there. Should you ask anyone about my grandfather (or father) you will find that he (they) were well respected men I can only aspire to. They did not want to leave the land they had, so a group of armed Albanians came to make sure they did. My grandfather hid in the barn and was spotted by a friendly Albanian from that party, as I mentioned before. He made a comment that he saw noone and they all left. Empty threat or not, the family had to move to a better place they will not be threatened again - so they ended up in Belgrade.

You dismiss anything unfamiliar or unfavourable to you with simple ignorance and "BS" comments. Yet you ask someone to trust your "truth". Should there be a healing process? Absolutely agreed. But trust me on this one - your attitude does not help and in the same regard that you would like to attribute the need for healing to others, you seem to be in dire need of one. I am proud to have friends of many nations, including those that stereotypes suggest I should not - including Albanian working near my home. I judge people by their personality, not their nationality. You should do the same.

Last, but not least: your comments about how were settlers called are just plain insulting. Learn the languages and meanings of words before you use them.

Bye! --Aleksandar Šušnjar 03:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I realize a little bit of improvement in your last post. The link that I sent you describes how the Serbian Army conquered Kosovo. It explains how the Serbian King promised that "Serbs and Albanians have lived together for 13 centuries and will continue to do so". This promise of brotherhood, was not kept. The Author was a western journalist and it was written in 1913. The second article is a letter written by three Albanian priests sent to the League of nations. While the last three are documents written for or by the Serbian government. I enjoy reading Ivo Andric's work, and I think Nobel Prize was deserved by him for literature. But this piece of literature that you will find in the link, makes one throw up.

About the term 'colons'. I didn't invent it. It was the Serbian government who used the term continuously for some 50 years. There were governmental official "Plans for the Colonization of Kosovo and Metohija". In these plans, the people sent by the government to live in Kosovo, usually on acquired Albanian property, were called 'colons.' I am not talking about Kosovar Serbs but about Serbs who were brought from Serbia to change the ethnic structure of Kosovo.

About your grandfather, I am very sorry to hear that story. I never claimed that Albanians were angels. Actually we have some that make me throw up too.

But Albanian nationalism is not expanssionist. Go read the Albanian Nacertanije, Sami Frasheri's "Albania, what was, is and will be" and compare it to Garasanin's masterpiece. Albanian nationalism seeks (maybe naively) to establish good relations with all the neighbours. Being an Albanian nationalist means following a policy that seeks to Streanghthen Albania and its position in the world, working for good neighbourly relations with all the neighbour and caring for the rights of Albanians in the neighbourhood. Whilse being a Serb nationalist presupposes: Working to strengthen Serbia, working to increase the territory of Serbia and remove the people living in those territories at present, Believing that Serbs were victims throughout the history. Unfortunately, Serbian nationalism does not care much about Serbs elswhere, if it doesn't manage to include them within Serbia. On the basis of what I described, Albanian nationalism is progressive, while Serbian nationalism is sick and needs revision because it is outdated. Serbia is in desperate need for a new elite, that will be heroic in changing the basis of Serbian nationalism. That will call the Garasanin plan finished and that will come up with a new plan that fitts within the modern world. Sami Frasheri's plan, on the other hand, fits completely with modern principles. dardanv

MUST READ FOR SERBS!!!!

http://www.elsie.de/pdf/B2002GatheringClouds.pdf

Truth hurts, sometimes. But it is better to face it than hide behind lies in a cawordly manner. Be strong and tough and accept the truth and you will feel better. The sooner Serbs do this, the better it will be for them and for and for others aroudn them. Be bald and say: "Yes, my govevernment and the elite of my people have continuously wanted to expand Serbia to the disadvantage of other peoples in the region, who fell victims of my country's expanssionism. I am sorry for all the victims that this expanssionism has caused!" This is what I would respect deeply. dardanv

Hopefully, you will be able to live beyond your hate against Serbs. I wish you all the best. --Manojlo 12:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

O no, no! I don't hate Serbs. I feel sorry for Serb nationalists. It is like the doctor, he doesn't hate it's patients even if they have a congageous desease. Serb nationalists (unfortunately still quite strong in Serbia) have my sorrow. Serb nationalists don't deserve to be hated, they deserved to feel pitty for them. Fortunately, they can only harm themselves now as they have no access to civilians in Croatia, Bosnia or Kosovo. BTW, was that a threat? dardanv

For Dardanv: please do not be ridiculous. First see yourself and then speak about Serbian nationalists. Your "bad faith" edits in this article speak much about you. PANONIAN (talk) 11:39, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Panonian, please address my points if you want to be useful to the debate and lave out the nature of my "faith" and my character. That is absolutely irrelevant to the subject. I am suggesting that due to the amount of crime committed by Serbia with full backing of the Serbian elite has infected the people with an expanssionist form of nationalism. I am puting forward a proposition: it is important to include a reference to war crimes and genocide in the introductory part of the article on Serbia because it is an integral part of the Serb national conscience. If you disagree, tell us why. And don't delete other people's contributions without explaining why, because that is considered vandalism. In good faith, dardanv.

"it is important to include a reference to war crimes and genocide in the introductory part of the article on Serbia because it is an integral part of the Serb national conscience"

You just insulted all Serbs including me with this statement. I have nothing to talk with people like you. Better say something about crimes of the members of your own nation against Serbs. PANONIAN (talk) 16:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Panoian, do not insult me! My comments are of an analytic nature and have nothing to do with the race of the Serbian people. My comments have to do with the effects of Serb expanssionist nationalist ideology and the brainwashing that the Serbian elite has conducted on the Serbian people. I am denouncing this fact. I am calling on you to respond if you have comments on the subject. If you don't then please do not remove the reference to war crimes and genocide. Again, dealing with my character and my values does not help the subject that we are discussing: the importance of expansionism and acceptance of ethnic cleansing and genocide by the Serbian nationalistic elite and the spread of these degressive ideas among the Serbian nation. Again, this has nothing to do with the race of the Serbian people. This is not a generalization of all Serbs, it only coveres the 'infected' people and it requires action to inform the Serbian people, who have been missled by the Serbian leadership and the Serbian elite. Your comments/insults on my character and values are just an attempt to divert attention from the subject in question. Doctor dardanv

Reference to war crimes (both Serb and Albanian ones) do not belong to Serbia article but to Kosovo war article. Since this is not article about Kosovo war but about Serbia we do not have reason to post that here. PANONIAN (talk) 21:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Kosovo war, as the other wars of former Yugoslavia, I am maintaining, are a result of Serbian expansionist ideology, which has broad support within the elite and extenssive support within the Serb masses, and is quite visible even here in Wikipedia. I believe this is an integral part of the Serbian nation. Wars are just a result of this. If we want to describe Serbia to a foreigner, if we don't include the element of Serbian expansionism and it's direct result, war crimes and genocide, then the article will be defficient.

We can argue a lot who is responsible for 1999 war. In 1993/1994 (if I remember correctly), Milan Panić was a candidate for the president, if Albanians voted to support him, he would defeat Milošević and Serbia would became democratic. But Albanian leaders said that Albanians should not vote on this election, thus they did not vote, Milan Panić lost, and Milošević stayed in power. It is Albanian leaders who choosen that Milošević should stay in power (they admited that latter), and they choose this because they thought that only with Milošević on power they can to provoke NATO intervention (and they were right). So, do not try to tell me who is responsible for war. PANONIAN (talk) 22:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

There is nothing to argue about, Panonian. Albanians are not responsible who Serbs vote for their leader. Albanians never saw Serbia as their state since they were forcefully included in Serbia. On the other hand, Serbia never treated Albanians as their citizen. Do you know of one respectable Albanian member of the Serbian elite since 1912? Serbian nationalism was exclusive, as far as Albanians were concearned. Albanians were considered as a population that needed to be assimilated, expelled or killed and but never integrated (Numerous references!). Albanians responded with thier resistance and demands for separation. All Serbian leaders are the same, when it comes to Albanians. Do you honestly think Kostunica would have performed differently from Milosevic, had he been in power then? Do you honestly believe Milosevic and the Serbian nationalists would let Panic win? They would have manipulated elections as they always did, even if Albanians voted. Milosevic did not turn a peaceful Serbia nationalist. It was the expanssionist nationalist Serbia that created room for Milosevic.

Peace, Dardanv

Added copyright information to the Arms of the city

I added the proper copyright information to the Coat of Arms. The arms were rendered by our society, we since short have a website (see image information). Our society did most of the designs (if a city did not have an arms since medieval times) and did all of the rendering of these images. The images can be used freely provided that no one makes any changes to them. We do however wish that we are being recognised for our work and ask people to see & verify that all images of the cities in Serbia get a link back to use with a notice that the design has been done by us.

Our site: Serbian Heraldic Society White Eagle/Beli Orao Gallery of arms: Gallery of Coat of Arms

We will in the near future expand our gallery and provide background information of the different designs. The information may be used on Wikipedia be it provided that we are being credited.

Thank you. SGS 13:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Unlocking?

Can this article be unlocked even for day or two? I would like to make some changes in gallery. --Pockey 17:22, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

It is only semi-protected to avoid sockpuppet/unsigned IP vandalism. You should be able to edit it as it stands. --Asterion ^{talk to me} 17:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

FYI: User:Dardanv

Copy of the comments left by Dardan V. on my talk page about his recent edit war on this article:

It makes no sense what you are doing. Stop vandalizing articles on Kosovo. Enjoy Spain, instead. Stop reporting me for defending the Kosovo article from you and the alike. For everythime you attack Kosovo, I will put the reference to war crims on the Serbia article. I honestly believe that the reference to war crimes is important. But I will stop, if you and others stop.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dardanv (talk • contribs) 17:08, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

You know the rules. Stick to civility and NPOV, discuss your views and respect other wikipedians. You were warned many times about your behaviour. Indeed you are your worst enemy. --Asterion ^{talk to me} 17:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

PS:I do not "trade" articles. Wikipedia is owned by no one. The sooner you understand this, the better for everyone--Asterion ^{talk to me} 17:24, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

This explains everything. This user and others previously threatened to disrupt any Serbia-related article if any non-Albanian wikipedian had anything to do with the Kosovo article (see talk page archives). I would appreciate any advice on how to take effective action against this sort of behaviour. This user is currently blocked for second time for breaking the 3RR rules. --Asterion ^{talk to me} 18:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Revert war backfires from all sides. It is a boomerang. I asked for understanding from many, to prevent this. I am afraid it is soon getting out of hand. Bear up with Hipi and the rest now, or ask yourself how you can stop fueling up the tensions. Ilir pz 23:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I have always suggested peace. Kosovo article should describe Kosovo from a Kosovo/international perspective. Absolutely not from a Serbian nationalist perspective. If the Serbian nationalist perspective is insisted on, then I will remind them that it is the Serbian nationalism. Please read my earlier posts on Reference to War Crimes, just above. Dardanv —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dardanv (talk • contribs)

Yes, I remember when they said that they will disrupt Serbia-related articles and it is what is happening now. PANONIAN (talk) 22:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

No, I said, if you keep vandalizing Kosovo-related articles, I will start helping you with the Serbia article. Of course, only adding useful material such as reference to war crimes and genocide and similar. I never said I would disrupt Serbia-related articles. Dardanv —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dardanv (talk • contribs)

And who vandalized Kosovo articles? Was it me? I do not think so. By the way, reference to war crimes do not belong into any geographical article. Every reference about any war crime posted into any geographical article is always POV. That is why war-related articles exist. PANONIAN (talk) 02:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

You and a few others vandalized the Kosovo article constantly by presented facts in a way in which Milosevic would have been fully happy to read. Please read my all comments above before you respond, I was saying that ethnic cleansing is an integral part of the Serbian national conscience (read Kaufmann, Smith and many other authors). The reason why I am not pushing for this is because we need together, jointly to work to improve the image of the region. We need to help each other and Wikipedia is a great tool that we can make use of constructively. I assume we are all people who have read at least a few books and we are obliged to do the best to help to get our region get where it belongs, in the EU as soon as possible. If we continue our petty, ridiculous wars here, it will help no one! Serbia belongs to its people, Kosovo belongs to its people both belong in Europe! We would have been ther in 1994, had we not obayed Milosevic, Tudjman and the alike! We need to get there by 2014! (Just 22 years later, 250,000 killed, hundreds of thousands of raped and frustrated, tens of thousands of people living with bad conscience after having killed innocent people. Stop it man, tell the others to stop it too! Dardanv

Show me my edit in which I "vandalized Kosovo article". My edits in that article were very minimal and these edits certainly were not vandalism but some minnor improvements. Now please stop insulting Serbs with statement that "ethnic cleansing is an integral part of the Serbian national conscience". That statement is ridiculous and only show how much you hate Serbian people and it also eliminate you as an serious editor of Wikipedia. I certainly do not have intentions to read what some idiots you named there wrote about Serbs, because if you ask them to find Serbia on the map of the World, they would not manage to do that, and I should read what they wrote? If they wrote what you just said, then their credibility as sources is an big zero. Also what exactly you want me to stop? Regarding the "others" (whom ever they are), why should I tell them to stop something? Tell them by yourself, you do not need me. PANONIAN (talk) 22:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

The 'idiots' are among the most renown scholars of the modern times: Eric Kaufmann, Anthony D. Smith and I can name more, including Serbian sources if you want. The theory is that nations with expansionist nationalism have used different strategies to expand the influence of the core ethnie. Some 'core ethnies' have used assimilation (Greece, Turkey, Russia, Germany, France...), while Serbia is always used as the most important example where the core ethnie has used ethnic cleansing as a way of expanding the territory. This is of course a brief description of the theory, if you are interested I can send you sources. Again, this does not have to do anything with hatred, and of course I am not trying to offend the Serbian people in anyway. As for my criticism of your actions on the Kosovo article, you have been involved in the revert-war on the Kosovo article, as have HolyRomanEmperor, Asterion and a few others. I, and a few others, have responded by inserting elements in the Serbia article, which do not suit Serbia, but which are nevertheless true. I am kindly asking you to stop and tell the others to do the same, as I am assuming that you are working as a team. Of course, my assumption may be wrong, but even if you are not working as a team, I would highly appreciate if you help improving the image of the region as a whole by stopping the conflict. Sincerely, dardanv

First of all try to see difference between Serbian people and Serbian nationalist ideology. If you talk about Serbian national conscience, then you talk about Serbian people, not about ideology, and ideology have nothing to do with national conscience. As for your claim that "I was involved in revert war in Kosovo article", I only returned image gallery which you removed, and if I remember correctly, after I asked you why you removed this gallery, you returned it by yourself and apollogized for your removal. See for yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kosovo&diff=49291184&oldid=49269973 And now you say that I was "involved" in revert war? So, you cannot ask me to stop, because I stopped when you returned this gallery. :) Do not be ridiculous, Dardanv, and first try to learn with whom you talk, ok? First try to see what were my edits and then talk about these edits. And no, we do not working as a team, Dardanv, I am responsible only for my own edits and you have to talk with other people about their edits. And I suggest that you try to do something useful on Wikipedia instead to post bad faith edits into Serbia article. Try to improve article about Albanians in Kosovo for a change... PANONIAN (talk) 01:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

If this does not stop somehow, I will ask for a Wikipedia:Request for Comment --Asterion ^{talk to me} 22:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Can samboy stopt this user who is puting his nois only to make troub in the Albanias and Serb articels.User:Asterion. Please PANONIA and Dardanv or who you are stop maken war and finde a soulution. Don let that souch cand of user make yu crasy. The articel of Serbia and Kosovo they are gonin to have the same karakter. If Serbia articel is going to be a geograficel articel that is going to be a Kosovo articel. But PANONIA it has no seans if you dont put a map in Kosovo articel and you let this mape hier. I think for the momet you and Ilir must finde a soulution. Don forgetit the only way ist to finde a global soulution about this problem and to localise the user als User:Asterion. Don let that this use put a gas in fire.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs)

We cannot find global solution until end of the year when final status of Kosovo will be solved. I told you that for 1000 times already I think. PANONIAN (talk) 00:36, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I have a great idea how to deal with it! Just stop vandalizing the Albanian-related articles (Kosovo-included) and the problem will be over. How about that? Dardanv —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dardanv (talk • contribs)

The only way is to work in the global soulution and to lokalised the problem makers -- like me (some times) Hipi Zhdripi

Importen material for the articel

South Serbia officials want date changed | 12:05 April 27 | B92 [3]

Unlocking and subsequent vandalism

This is rediculous. This article has been unlocked for 10 hours, and an annonymous user has already vandalized it. Хајдук Еру ( Talk || Contributions) 05:07, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

== Serbs have done nothing for Croatia but sucked the life out of it for there greedy needs ==

First of all Serbia waged war over croatia and not letting Croatia have back their land for about 86 years. Serbs have taken Croatian riches, stole their land and killed inocent croatian people during the 1990's war. Made Croatia look like terriosit, Facists even though serbia had there own facists regime. If it wasn't for King Tomislav of croatia serbia would have been conqured by the bulgarian empire if Croatia didn't Fight and win for Serbia. --Marbus2 5 16:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

You want to say that Croats had their land 86 years ago or they were just Austro-Hungarian COLONY??! Serbs liberated Croats from foreign rule, even you cannot deny that. If Serbs did not liberated Croatia in 1918, it would not be independent now, and you now would be a proud citizen of Austria-Hungary (a dungeon of nations). LOL. :))) PANONIAN (talk) 16:32, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

This is exactly the problem with Croats: Too much anti-Serb media and not enough historical accuracy in their reports.

First of all, the Serbs rebelled in Serb land, I didn't hear of any Serbs rebelling in Zagreb, or other mostly Croatian regions. Yes, innocent people were killed, but Marbus forgot to mention the word on both sides, I'm refering, of course, to the Gospic massacre, Dalmatian kristallnacht and Operation Storm.

And who can forget that famous "Danke Deutschland" song or maybe the video of Branimir Glavaš openly expressing his love of fascism by telling the freed Croatian POW's: "Slobodno recite da ste ustaše, i jeste!" (feel free to say that you are the Ustashe, because you are!), why would anyone think that the government was fascist. Oh, and the flags of the Nazi pupped state of the NDH does "not" look like the one that Croatia has now.

And last, but not least, after WWII, there was no apology for the holocaust comitted by Croats. The Serbs, thrilled of the idea of brotherhood and unity, had forgiven their brothers, the Croats, for all the attrocities, and the Croats repaid them by putting the chessboard symbol on their flag, a symbol of the Ustashe, which is just like if the Germans put the swastika on their flag in the 1990s. How do you think the world would react if that happened?

And I'm supposed to listen to storied that the Croats fought for Serbia? Don't make me laugh, or maybe I should cry that there are still people in this 21st century, so poorly educated and brainwashed by the media, and even trying to contribute to a free encyclopaedia. For shame. --serbiana - talk 01:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

They did fight for Serbia but back then it wasnt called Serbia it was called Rugska so considering Croatia had problems with Bulgeria at the time King Tomislav with all his kindness decided to help the small countrie of Rugska. The only reason it became Serbia is because of the Ottaman invashion of Rugska around the early fourteen centuary. The country of Rugska decided to become the Ottaman Servant's. So then the country of Rugska was changed to Servia at fist and then to Serbia. So in fact Serbia means Turkish slaves or servants. By the way the Croatian Gerb isnt Facist its been used by Croatian kings since the early 11th centuary when the Croatian king diceded to have a chess match with the King of Bulgeria to dertmin Croatia freedom and in result the Croatian king won. Serbia also had a facist regime the Chetnicks lead by Drago Meholovich. --Marbus2 5 04:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

A few questions before I respond: What is Gerb? What is Bulgeria? What is determin? What is Drago Meholovich? I'd like to understand exactly what you're saying before I show just how wrong you are. --serbiana - talk 05:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The Gerb is the chess board which is in the middle of the Croatian flag. Secondly Bulgeria is a country. Thirdly Drago Meholovich was the leader of the Facists chetniks army who were loyal to the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. --Marbus2 5 07:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Gerb means nothing in English. You're thinking about Coat of Arms. "Grb" is Coat of Arms in Serbian and Croatian. Bulgeria means nothing in English, you're thinking about Bulgaria. Drago Mehlovich means nothing in English or any other language, it's Draza Mihajlovic, or simply Draza. This is the English Wikipedia. How come a lot of your words mean nothing in English? --serbiana - talk 20:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The Serbs? hmmmm Liberete Croatia? This is exactly the problem with Croats (Sllovens, Muslims, Makedonians, Albanians, Montenegrins, Bugariens ect): Too much anti-Serb media and not enough historical accuracy in their reports. Way?

First of all, the Serbs rebelled in Serb land, I didn't hear of any Serbs rebelling in Zagreb, or other mostly Croatian regions.

Serbian Jogurt Revulution before the Yugoslavien War in

Serbia
Sandzak
Vojvodina
Montenegro
Macedonien
Kosovo
Bosnia
Croatia
Sllovenia

Huuu , all this countries are Serbs?

Serbs liberated this countries? Way it was War there?--Hevnonen 18:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Its not "way" its "why". Secondly, a country cannot be a Serb, it just doesn't make sense. "this countries" doesn't make sense, it's "these countries". When you learn how to communicate in a proper way I will show you just how wrong you are. Untill then, my efforts won't be fully appreciated simply because you won't understand everything. --serbiana - talk 20:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hahaha I just can't quit laughing //Servia

This entire discussion has turned into a juvenile forum

And should be deleted. --Hurricane Angel 01:44, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I fully agree, we should archive this talk page and start a new one Хајдук Еру (Talk || Contributions) 04:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Agree. --serbiana - talk 18:34, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Administrative subdivisions

Please till we don t know wat is going to be with Kosovo, let the mape in this section. If Kosovo is going to be "de facto" and "de juro" part of SM then we are going to chance that.--Hevnonen 18:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

CIA

OK, I've had enough of reverting this page after vandalism acts of clearly separatist ideology followers. According to the CIA factbook, Kosovo, even though administered by the UN, is a part of Serbia, and there is a map that also shows that. "Administrative divisions: 2 nominally autonomous provinces (both in the republic of Serbia); Kosovo (temporarily under UN administration, per UN Security Council Resolution 1244) and Vojvodina." End of discussion. --serbiana - talk 19:30, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Your wrong it may show in map form but Kosovo has its own government within serbia. So even though it might show its in serbia the region of Kosovo is never going back to serbia after the UN leave. After the UN leave there be more support for a complete independance in Kosovo.

Not to mention the country of Montenargo will get their independance soon and if Serbia refuse it will be war again. Serbia can't afford another war. Its bad enough there consisered as the poorest country in Eroupe, so if the serbs want war it will be a big blow to the Serbian econemy. Not to mention the already aid that has been cut off to Serbia by the EU and the USA for not giving war criminal Radco Mladic. --Marbus2 5 12:35, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

nb: Moldova is the poorest country in Europe

So what if Kosovo have its own government within Serbia? Vojvodina too have its own government. The question here is not what will be the future status of Kosovo, but what is its current status. PANONIAN (talk) 15:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

This article is about Serbia

This article is about Serbia and not for Yugoslavia, Kosovo is not a part of Serbia--Hevnonen 13:50, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Kosovo is still part of Serbia under UN administration. We should wait the end of negotiations in Wiena. --Pockey 16:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Map

Can someone change the map to indicate that Montenegro and Serbia are no longer a political entity? Politis 15:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

They still are until official separation is proclaimed. PANONIAN (talk) 16:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I was basing myself on the fact that yesterday the Serbian Ambassador stated that Belgrade would respect the referendum and the two entities had different currencies (Euro and Dinar) and separate economies. Basically, that, in effect, they were separate for a number of years. But with the ex-Yugoslav referenda, in 1991, I think the 'yes' vote to independence took effect immediately. Politis 16:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

No, it did not. The separation need some time. Officially, Serbia and Montenegro still exist. PANONIAN (talk) 17:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC).

In that case we must wait until the separation is official and, especially, that Montenegro becomes a full member of the UN in its own right. Politis 19:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Voivodina referendum?

Is Voivodina going to break away from Serbia. My thinkin is that it has a Hungarian majority that would prefer to join the EU through Hungary. How did a country that was considered a heroic WWII ally, end up with no one wanting to have anything to do with it. Even the Serbs are trying to get out. Politis 15:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Your thinking is that Vojvodina has a Hungarian majority? I would suggest that you read Vojvodina article (especially demographics section) before you say something like this. Also read Politics of Vojvodina article, where you can see that there are no political parties in Vojvodina that advocate independence and there is no support for that idea among majority of population in the province. PANONIAN (talk) 16:40, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I thought, according to maps, that the Hungarians were the majority in the north of Voivodina. No problem. Politis 16:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

They are majority in several northern municipalities, but in the entire Vojvodina they represent 14% of population. If referendum about status of one territory is implemented, then 100% of its population have right to vote, not only 14%. :) PANONIAN (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Successor state?

Since Serbia and Montenegro will soon be dissolved, does this mean that Serbia now becomes an entirely new state, and not simply a successor to the union?

I'm not sure. In the cases of Slovenia, Croatia and BH they left Yugoslavia. In this case one party choses to dissolve a union between two states. So, it could be seen as different. However, I know that Serbia will inherit the place in the UN while CG will have to apply for a new place. The same applies to negotiations and accords reached with the EU and other international organizations. So, I guess Serbia will be the successor state and CG will be a 'new' state.Osli73 08:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

That was also the case with Soviet Union and Russia. I think it could be the case here too. PANONIAN (talk) 11:49, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Osli73, if you mention Slovenia and Croatia: please note that The Opinions of the Badinter Arbitration Committee is that SFRY was dissolved (against the will of SR Serbia, back than, as we know). This opinion was also adopted by the United Nations; see note on former Yugoslav republics on List of UN member states. There is no single successor to the SFRY (I'm not stating anything about successor of SCG). --romanm (talk) 17:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the info romanm. As Serbia and CG continued to use the Yugoslavia name and I never heard of them being recognized by other states or the UN following the dissolution of the old Yugoslavia, I always assumed that it was the successor state to the old Yugoslavia.Osli73 18:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

History, Serbia in World War I

In World War I, Serbia had 1,264,000 casualties — 28% of its population, which also represented 58% of its male population. I would like to see some citation regarding these numbers. All what I found was that Serbia had 45.000 military casualities. Total human loss in WW I was around 9 million.--193.81.246.92 09:31, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

You can put a {{fact}} tag on it. I'll go do it for you. Since there were other warnings for vandalism on your page, and blanking is standard vandal behavior, I assumed your edit was vandalism, sorry! --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 09:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC) ^{[citation needed]}

Though on second look, why did you blank out the whole history section? It looks like it is indeed vandalism. --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 09:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I did not. I unintentionally added sentence on a top not to the discussion but to the History itself, so I deleted it there and put it here. Not vandalist intention.--193.81.246.92 09:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, the blanking was apparently inadvertent then. --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 09:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

National motto

Where's the national motto in the article? Paulus Caesar 01:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, not every country has a motto. Duja 15:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

New Infobox

Got it filled out and raring to go at User:Estavisti/Serbia, for as soon as we become independent. Any day now...--estavisti 03:31, 27 May 2006 (UTC) Didn't realise someone had beaten me to it :( --estavisti 03:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I looked at the other one, but I think yours is more aesthetically appealing. Хајдук Еру (Talk || Contributions) 05:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC)