Talk:Bijeljina
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality, if possible. Wikipedians in Bosnia and Herzegovina may be able to help! |
Bijelijna had a same namber of muslims and serbs before the war.
Contents |
[edit] Bosniaks or muslims?
Before the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina todays bosniaks called themselfes muslims.
The term bosniak (bošnjak), not bosnian (bosanac), has emerged during the war.
[edit] Comments moved from main article page
COMMENT: In the first days of April it is not Arkan who first atacked Bijeljina but the muslims have made barikades in Bijeljina and the first victimes shoted by the muslim sniper was serb1992, than the town was liberated by Serb paramilitary groups led by Arkan. muslims vanted to take over the controle of the town by force not provoked by anithing. It is true that the arkan was a criminal but the fact is that he liberated Bijeljina and not atacked. Also it is true that in 1991-1992 Bijeljina was the center of the self-proclaimed local Serbian Autonomous Region, organized by the local Serbian authorities but it vas called - SAO Semberija i Majevica. Romanija is the mountine near Sarajevo!!! You shoul also mentioned that majority of the Muslims have fled to (at that time) Yugoslavia!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Milutin Jokić (talk • contribs).
- If you want to insert this version in the article, you should provide sources. Your version does not agree with the sources already provided.--Barend 20:57, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sources and references
This article lacks sources and references, namely for statistics and statements made in order to make Bijeljina Serb(ian)/Orthodox Christian. Although, I do not dispute that the majority of population of Bijeljina were Serbs before the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1990s, it would be in line with Wikipedia's requirements to support the information stated with sources, references and bibliography. -- Benjamin, 20070124 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.52.200.2 (talk) 10:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
[edit] History
The best idea is not to diplay history between 1992-95. The events you all are posting looks like propaganda which is very one sided. Why don't you mention the muslims planing and attempting to ethnically cleanse serbs from Bijeljina. Arkan liberated Bijeljina and saved the lives of serbian civilians. The best thing is not to write anything about the war since we can't agree to what occured during the period. Why don't you investigate serbian sources and compare it with yours?—The preceding
unsigned comment was added by Semberac (talk • contribs) 13:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
- Deleting perts of article is considered as vandalism. And the person who vandalise the article will be blocked. Clear? Media is very neutral and they are giving facts, not opinions or personal points of view, so you can't disregard them. On the other side, informations from participants in the war can't be neutral, because every participant has it's own POV. --Kahriman 14:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Agreeing with Kahriman. Serbian sources are obviously POV, as would Bosniak sources be. The sources given are based on neutral, foreign eye witnesses. These facts are well documented, and should be included, even though one side may not like them. --Barend 14:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Why do you think that foreign eye witnesses are neutral? And, why would anyone think that media are very neutral and giving facts? (I haven't looked at specific Semberac's edits, just a general comment.) Nikola 05:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- well said Nikola
-
-
This was original message from Semberac [2] (he changed it few times). I agree with you Nikola in general. But in this specific case, Semberac said that this (foreign) media in not neutral, and Sebian media is. And that is just like somebody say that there was no Holocaust, and as a proof of that, he give a link to some nazi website. And this specific media is very neutral (although, that doesn't mean that every foreign media is neutral). --Kahriman 12:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Expelled Serbs
During the war, Bijeljina saw a large influx of Bosnian Serbs expelled by Bosniaks and Bosnian Croats from other regions of Bosnia-Herzegovina. This is a well known fact so why did you delete it Kahriman. It seems you Kahriman are trying to hide the truth. Bijeljina accepted many serbs expelled by bosniaks from places such as Tuzla, Sarajevo, Zenica.....
First of all, expelling Serbs from Sarajevo is a lie and you know it. Every orthodox church in Sarajevo survived the war, I know thousand of Serbs who lived in Sarajevo during war, and many of them were soldiers in Armija Republike Bosne i Hercegovine. And, also, I know thousands of Serbs, witch left sarajevo few days before Siege of Sarajevo, and they didn't tell anything to their Bosnaik friends, or neighbours. I was in Sarajevo during the war and I remembered everything, so don't lie about it. The reason of big influx of Bosnian Serbs to Bijeljina was that they left their homes - they were not expelled. And if you think that Serbs was expelled from any Bosniak city or village, write the source. --Kahriman 12:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
And one more thing, SIGN YOUR COMMENTS! (write this --~~~~) --Kahriman 12:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Example: Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat forces attacked the Serbian majority villages around Konjic, expelled or ethnically cleansed the Serbs and held them at collection or detention centers and camps, the most famous of which was the Celebici camp.
"semberac" 13:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] mosque built on place of serbian orthodox church
http://www.pogledi.co.yu/galerija/bijeljina/
OK, I'm not saying that didn't happend, but you need to give a neutral source. Website you gave is so not neutral. It said that bosnian war was civil war (we will know was that civil war or not on february 21, until then it is just bosnian war). And your source said that bogumils did not existed in Medieval Bosnia, witch is a lie. So, how can we be sure that everything else is truth (they lied twice)? --Kahriman 12:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- What will happen on February 21? Nikola 20:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
