Talk:Greek Civil War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Greece Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Greek Civil War, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
High This article has been rated as a High priority article
Citation
This page was cited by Konstantinos Avtziyiannis (2005). "Ο Ελληνικός Εμφύλιος Πόλεμος 1946-1949" (The Greek Civil War 1946-1949) p.81 Sources-bibliography.

Contents

[edit] PASOK and national reconciliation

Please, when you make a comment about PASOK cite your sources and avoid saying your personal opinion about the party

Yes, but Vafiadis was indeed elected with PASOK. You should not remove that.--Yannismarou 08:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] False Numbers

Otay, I see that the Allied Losses are 55,000 and the Communist Losses were 10,000. I am calling B*llS*it on that, as I noticed that it includes most of the apparent Communist Foreign "Tresspassers" as Royalists ie Like the unfortunate Bulgar "Voyvoda" (named after the actual Voyvoda in honor of their insurrectionary acts against the Germans in WWII) Infantry Regiment (using US army standard, actual unit term unkown) that managed to trap itself in between an Italian Voulanteer Regiment fighting for the Government and a Anglo-Greek Regiment, and got incinerated with over 90%+ losses. This is biases and MUST be dealt with. ELV

[edit] Old talk

The article should be called GREEK CIVIL WAR THE COMMUNIST VIEW. Maybe there should be another article side by side called GREEK CIVIL WAR THE CONSERVATIVE(or right wing)VIEW. (STELIOS DECEMBER 2004)

This article is the official view of the stalinist group of Zachariadis in KKE. It has no relation with the truth. In some days I will give the real history

the aim of ELAS was to destroy every noncommunist resistance. The greatest crime was the execution of the great democrat socialist officer Psarros. The former general secratery of KKE Farakos has accepted the great crime of KKE which disclose the posture of KKE against the democrats. See book «Άρης Βελουχιώτης - το Χαμένο Αρχείο-Άγνωστα Κείμενα» - Εκδόσεις «Ελληνικά Γράμματα»-Αθήνα 1997).

A few notes on style. We don't usually add abbreviations to article titles, so [[Democratic Army of Greece (DSE)]] should be [[Democratic Army of Greece]] with a separate article [[DSE]] redirecting to it if necessary. Articles are usually written in the past tense. Don't worry if English isn't your first language. Plenty of people will be willing to fix this up. DJ Clayworth 16:16, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I intend rewriting this article when I have finished fixing History of Modern Greece. Adam 03:17, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Rewritten as threatened. Efharisto :) Adam 13:06, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

English is not my mother tongue so, I must accept all notes about english language and style. The rewritten article reproduces the cold war theory of the communist insurgency. This theory, though not completely inaccurate is far from the truth. In fact, civil war was in some way the result of Yalta Conference. During the german occupation, a great anti-fascist people's movement had fought against the Nazi's and the day after the liberation all these people wanted peace and democratic reconstruction in a self-determined state. This movement could not be controlled by the communist leadership.

(NOTE by STELIOS) It is a great mistake to confuse the patriotic feelings of the people During the german occupation,and call them anti-fascist which in communist terminology is anti conservative. The day of liberation was expected by all these people to continue their pre war lives. Only the communist party of Greece (less than 5% before the war)wanted a political reconstruction in what they called a self-determined state (USSR satellite in fact). The communist controlled organizations managed very well to terrorize almost every opponent during the German occupation. Then when at the end of the war they were the major armed force in Greece they didn't wat to leave power. I can write noumerous cases of Greek citizens executed by OPLA a communist organization that was used to terrorize Greeks only.END OF NOTE


Furthermore, if all communist leaders were soviet puppets there would have been no civil war because Stalin had accepted the British influence in Greece. Some of them were, others were not.

The main political problem was to defeat this people's movement and to return the country into the pre-War status of British satellite. Winston Churchill was neither a peace maker nor a fighter against communism but a faithfull servant of the British Empire who used the Greek government in exile as an intermediate to achive his target. Being never exhibited to free elections, this government was fed by the British and the greek army was under British administration. It was a-more or less-british marionette. The prime minister should have been Churchill's choice. There are a few examples to prove it.

In the frame of Lebanon conference, on July 29, 1944, PEEA sent a telegram accepting to take part to the government of National Unity, under a one-only condition: The replacement of Papandreou. Several ministers answered that: "British government made them confidentially aware that it cannot accept any change of the prime minister". A second example is Papandreou attempt to resign on December 4, 1944. British ambassador did not give the permission and Papandreou kept his post. A third example is mentioned in the text. Papandreou finally resigned by early January 1945 as a result of Churchill's intervention. Soviet Union had recognised this government to avoid any rift to the WW II alliance and it did not care whether it represented or not the greek public opinion.( NOTE and who represented the Greek public oppinion? The author of the article when says the Greek public oppinion means the Greek communists. Because when the communists say public mean anyone who supports them. According to them their opponents do not have any right to speak. END OF NOTE)

On the other hand, a Stalin-loyal communist leadership was not mature enough to handle the movement it worked to build. Unable to control the movement, it was drawn by the political coincidence. KKE had inspired but it could not control EAM. During the war, 6 bishops, 30 university professors, 2 members of the Academy of Athens, 16 generals of the pre-War greek army as well as 34 colonels and 1,500 officers were members of EAM. None of these was a communist. Communists had to hide their political identity inside the ELAS units. Until 1947, the communist general secretary was hoping to negotiations and used the military force as an advantage. The socialist revolution was a desparation move, when DSE had nothing to loose and the decision was taken without the Stalin's permission.

It is completely inaccurate that "most of ELAS fighters were eager to take control and begin the socialist revolution". Most of them, uneducated villagers, they could not even define what "socialist revolution" is. Most of them fought against the Nazi and could not tolerate that the ex-Nazi supporters-responsible for group executions, burnt villages and other atrocities of the war-were free and ready to fight against the "communists" side by side with the British. The socialist revolution was an intention of a minority part of the communist leadership and only Zahariadis' return changed this balance.

The article mentions nowhere the role of the Nazi-collaborators though their impunity was the main cause of ELAS anger. However, this impunity explains mostly the massacres of ELAS. On the other hand, affraid of their lives in case of an ELAS victory, these collaborators were the most head-strong anti-communist fighters. Of course, under such conditions many innocent people are among the victims.

The article shares arbitrarily the Stalin and Tito influence on the EAM and KKE leadership. Giving the intention of a seizure of the political power and socialist revolution to the KKE and EAM, anybody who studies this period cannot explain their moves. It is hard to understand why the EAM which controlled the country in the summer of 1944 did not get the power and then it was willing to fight against the british under worse conditions. It is hard to explain how "As relations between the Soviet Union and the Western allies deteriorated with the onset of the Cold War, Communist parties everywhere moved to more militant positions", a civil war occured only in Greece. On the other hand, Stalin adviced greek communists to take part in the 1946 elections and later did not help them during the civil war.

The rewritten article (and the theory of "communist mutiny" as well) had found an easy way to overcome these inconsistencies. KKE did not get the power when it could, because of Stalin's influence and later it tried the same target because of Tito's. So, all KKE moves can be easily explained by alternation of influence between Stalin and Tito. This theory fits everywhere. It is up to the reader to accept this approach. By the chance, Zakhariadis was a faithful stalinist but he made the most important decision of his life breaking Stalin's instructions.

I also add once more, the link to the 1946 election results. It is inaccurate that People's Party of Tsladaris took part in the elections as an independent party. This is minor inaccuracy though. The important point is that these results show the representation level of the parliement elected (1.2 million votes approximately in a seven million population).

An important part is the role of the British forces once they landed in Greece. It is inaccurate that they met no resistance. They simply did not run after the germans. At the same time ELAS attacked the departing germans in several places and the British troops could have done the same. They did not because their aim was to fight against the left-wing resistance not the germans.

Thanks a lot for the correct spelling of surname Scobie, that I have seen only in greek or greek translated texts. HERAKLES

User:Adam Carr comments: Herakles obviously knows a lot about this subject and I thank him for his extensive comments. I have done an edit to fix the English and grammar and remove some of the more opinionated statements.

Could I suggest that Herakles become a registed user?

Question: What is the Greek name of the organisation you have translated as "Military Hierarchy"?

Adam 13:56, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

What a pity dear Adam, I am not satisfied with the article no matter what POV one can accept. I am the author of the very first article which you have entirely rewritten. My plan was to write some kind of "very expanded stub". I had written some info based on facts. By the word fact, I mean undisputable events or references of who said what. I tried to avoid personal estimates. I expected more contributions adding information from all parts, representing all POVs. The reader would have found the truth and form personal estimate by the juxtaposition of the facts.

This is the way I understand the word "neutrality". Say everything you know and let the reader to decide. If you know only the truth from one side, say it and let other contributors to fill the other side. The text should be composed in such a way to encorporate all information available. If it is too expanded, we can reorganise it and add more links to various aspects.

Perchaps, this is not the correct way. I am not a PhD in history so, my opinion counts less than yours. That's why I let you finish your work. I thought that you tried to write it in a professional manner. At the end I saw a text that summarized the marration and had many personal (or at least one-sided) estimates. I edited it to correct the points faulty (according to me) but the result was another article coloured by my personal POV. Let me say an example. I cannot really answer the question why ELAS fought against the command under which it was freely subjected two months earlier. I found your answer insufficient and I wrote mine, but I would not intended to erase any of them. The article should have made the reader aware of all options.

To be honest, I did not expect to be engaged that much. My intention was not to be a permanent contributor. It was a "write and forget" contribution (you know the "fire and forget" smart weapons). I am not willing to edit the text any more. You are a scientist. I trust you. If you accept my point, please reconsider the article in a way to encorporate contradictory references and future contributions. Do it with your professional manner.

I translated "Stratiotiki Ierarkhia" to "Military Hierarchy". HERAKLES

That is a literal translation but it doesn't really work in English. I will take some advice on this. Adam 00:15, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Excuse me Adam but I have one more comment. You thought that it was my personal estimate that the British troops landed in Greece avoiding to fight. It is not. Let me distinguish the truth from the opinion.

FACT: The British troops landed in Greece and they followed the retreating germans from a distance without opening fire. The germans took their time to leave and the British occupied empty space. If you could fly above Greece, you would have seen a wide no man's zone moving north. So, it is true that "British met no resistance" as you have written. If an army occupy an area from which the enemy had left two days earlier, it meets no resistance. This is not normal in a war however. I do not ask you to trust me. Find relative books, headquarter's archives, or personal testimonies the next time you come to Greece.

ESTIMATE (which of course, you may disagree with): The British did so in order to leave the bloody job (and the bloodshed) to the greek and yugoslav partisans and furthermore to the Soviet army. HERAKLES

Since the Germans were leaving Greece as fast as they could it made perfect sense for the British not to attack them and sustain pointless casualties. You may well be right that one reason the British occupied Greece was to prevent the KKE taking power - a perfectly legitimate objective. The allies didn't fight the war just to hand Europe over to Stalin. They are often criticised for abandoning Poland etc to Communism. Are they also to be criticised in the one country where they prevented a Communist takeover? I hope it is not your view that the KKE should have been allowed to take power. If it is I disagree with you. This disagreement should not prevent us writing a good article. Adam 09:26, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Needless to say. This is history so, we discuss about what happened, rather than what whould/should have happened. But if I were among the powerful people at this period I would fight for the right of the greek people to decide for its future without ANY pressure, through free elections. Unfortunately, this is very difficault when the violence of one part justify the violence of the other. As an ordinary greek who felt and still feel the bitter smell of this period, this is THE POINT for me. None of us loves this period. HERAKLES

[edit] nicely done!

this article is wonderfully thorough. As a political scientist, I find the information full and well-organized. However, this terrific detail needs to be better summarized at the start. The introductary summary that begins the article is good, but not wholely adequate. I would work on making the introduction more full, but I don't know enough about the subject matter at hand. So I appeal to you to do it :) Kingturtle 03:37, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] EAM wasn't established by KKE alone

The 4 founder parties of ELAS were:

  • The Communist Party of Greece (greek:Κομμουνιστικό Κόμμα Ελλάδας), led by Lefteris Apostolou (Λευτέρης Αποστόλου),
  • the Greek Popular Republic (Ελληνική Λαϊκή Δημοκρατία), led by Ilias Tsirimokos (Ηλίας Τσιριμώκος),
  • the Agricultural Party of Greece (Αγροτικό Κόμμα Ελλάδας), led by Apostolos Voyatzis (Απόστολος Βογιατζής) and
  • the Socialist Party of Greece (Σοσιαλιστικό Κόμμα Ελλάδας), led by Christos Chomenidis (Χρήστος Χωμενίδης).

However, KKE had the leading part.

Etz Haim 12:16, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] "normal" state?

Quoting from the article:

It was not until the fall of the military regime in 1974 that the KKE was re-legalised, and not until the election of a left-wing government in 1981 that Greek politics returned to a "normal" state.

That "normal" inside quotes is vague and disputable. Who says so? The public consensus in Greece defines 1974 as the landmark for the restoration of democracy, called Metapolítefsi (Μεταπολίτευση) in Greek. This is not meant to dispute views regarding PASOK's contribution to democracy in Greece; though this POV here is outside of the scope of this article. Etz Haim 12:16, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  • Feel free to add additional material about the groups that established the EAM, so long as it remains clear that it was essentially controlled by the KKE, which was the case according to everything I have read.
  • By "normal" politics I mean politics where parties can alternate peacefully in power within agreed constitutional rules. That was not the case in the period between the end of the civil war and 1967, as was shown when G Papandreou took power, precipitating the 1967 coup. I don't think there's anything POV about saying that. Adam 12:54, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I agree that "normal" politics includes that, but the definition of "normal" isn't the same for people in belonging in different parts of the political spectre. Therefore it needs an explanation. However, in the 1981 election the power changed hands from ND to PASOK in an efficiently democratic manner; this should satisfy your criteria for normal. Etz Haim 13:18, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Um, yes, I think that's what I said. Adam 13:32, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

s/\"normal\"/stabilized/ Heh. I think the argument is over? :) Project2501a 19:41, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)


[edit] edits by user:213.5.97.8

User:213.5.97.8 made some changes in the article which I do not agree with. See history for more details.

When did the Navy counter-coup happen?

Project2501a 21:10, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It was not exactly a coup. As far as I remember it was the summer of 1973 when the officers of a Greek destroyer (velos) that was participating at a NATO's exercise in Italy decided to ask political asylum in Italy. It was a huge blow on junta's image.(Newcomer 01:55, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC))

[edit] Greek Education System and the Greek Civil War

I feel i have to make this short comment:

I consider that it's a very, very sad situation, when the Greek Educational (Read:Indoctrination) System, asks the students to memorize and regurgitate the POV of the Greek state about how great the ancient greeks were, while playing down the role of christianity in the destruction of the ancient greek civilazation (Ioustinianos, anyone?), exalting the Byzantines and the concept of Megali Idea, exalting the heroes of the greek war of independance, and leveraging the history curriculum in the public school system in such a way, that it convienently stops at 1910, right before WWI. Greek teenagers never learn about the Civil war, nor do they learn about the Dekembriana, or any other part of the modern greek history.

they never get taught, while in school, the reasons Greece is, at present time, such a fucked up place. Instead they concentrate in such useless(imnsho) classes as Religion, which is basically indoctrination on the "official" greek religion, imposed by the greek orthodox church, in order to maintain political influence over the greek state.

on the other hand, they never learn to question the judgement of the greek state over such matters as conscription or immigration ("ΟΙ ΑΛΒΑΝΟΙ ΚΑΙ ΚΟΥΡΔΟΙ ΦΤΑΙΝΕ!"), or why turkey is not a threat to greece or vice versa. Prime example is this past year's Parliament of Teenagers (Βουλή των Εφήβων) and their decree to restrict influx of immigrants in greece... (btw, the moments of this past year's meeting are NOT published in full on the website due to the blunder our precious hope&lt/irony&gt managed to make...)


(Έχω μια αδελφή, κοριτσι αληθινή..., <-- i used to sing that during the 6 grades of elementary school, even though i had no idea what it was refering to, i was just signing along)

Η διστυχία του να είσαι Έλληνας...

Project2501a 19:28, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)


The idea that Greece is such a fucked up place (sic) is totally YOUR idea, if you beleive that you live in Psarokostaina I suggest you migrate...but since you paradise is lost over 15 years now, I suggest alternative places like Cuba or North Korea perhaps, what do you say?

I'm sick and tired of people like you, always complaining about the bad things, but without nothing different to offer...

And please, stop confronding others with such an altitude, who do you think you are? The only wise on earth that we all must obey to? Kapnisma 15:43, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

What a jerk thinking Greece is "fucked up!" You think that kids in America learn about immagrents? Are they introduced to Christan belifs? Or do most Americas know how the American Civil War realy started? Zntrip

I'm not comparing our little country to the USA. I'm saying that we're 100+ billion euros in dept, but no Greek wants to face the truth. Any truth. The Public Sector should not and cannot support any more people. 1 out of 3 people in Greece live off the Public Sector. We give up a year of our lives to the Army/Airforce/Navy, without pay and with a good chance of getting electrocuted while trying to straighten some stupid fucking flag pole at 6 in the morning, after being awake for fucking 10 hours at a stupid guard post? (Remember Manitsa? Those five people were the same line as i was: D'02, 279 ESSO. I could have been one of them). That the Greek media is terrorising us? That our politicians are lying to our face? Are you happy that noone speaks up against the current situation, because most are employed in the public sector and they fear that they are gonna get thrown out? That all our differences with Turkey have been ironed out during the past 10 years, and that all the "fly overs" and "breaches of airspace" are just a smokescreen used to continue supporting a corrupt public sector? Kickbacks (mizes) from guns/arms/airplace purchases, THAT YOU PAY OUT OF YOUR OWN POCKET. if you try to stand up against the current, you're simply told to either compromise and learn to live with the corruption, ignorance and laziness of the Greek society OR LEAVE THE COUNTRY if you don't like it!
Are you happy that those "epikoinwniaka problhmata" of the goverment are nothing but pure propaganda? NO, GREEKS ARE NOT A SPECIAL PEOPLE AS YOU'VE BEEN TOLD EVER SINCE 3RD GRADE! What's so special about being Greek, at present time? Why do we insist of leeching off the fame of some people that HAVE BEEN DEAD for 2 thousand years now? Why can't we be GREAT ourselves? NOW! NOT IN THE PAST! NOT IN THE FUTURE! NOW!
Are you happy that employers in Greece are of the opinion that you should thank them for giving you a job. How do you feel knowing that 20%+ of the population lives in poverty? How do you feel knowing that if you graduate from a Greek univerity there's a 60% chance of NOT being employed in a job relevant to your degree? Are you happy that Greece is spending 5% of it's Gross Domestic Product on weapons purchaces instead of spending it on the health/educational sector? are you happy that you pay taxes for your kids to go to school in the morning but you have to pay money to the SAME PROFESSOR that's supposed to be teaching your kids during the morning to TUTOR them during the afternoon? Are you happy that 2/3rds of the people trying to pass the entry exams, fail because there are not enough seats in universities? Are you happy that there are univesity departments in every freaking village and minor town, for the purpose of supporting the local community and not for the purpose of educating the students?
How do you feel knowing that there's a good chance you might not get a pension 20 -30 years from now, because social security and public trust-funds are close to a financial collapse?
are you happy that 40 billion euros have been wasted or were never utilised, ever, since the 1st Delor package?
How do you feel that the Olympic Games cost the Greek people close to 20 billions dollars, and the only thing that was good about them was the expose Mrs Aggelopoulos's face to the international jet-set? (Did you gain financially from the Olympics? I sure know I didn't)
Are you happy that OTE charges you 200 euros/month for 1mbit aDSL, where the french phone company can give you a 4mbit aDSL line for 40 euros per month?
I know I am not.
So kids in the US don't learn about immigrants. So? what's so bad about a starving man, traveling 10 thousand miles from pakistan to here ON FOOT so, he can get a better life? Are you happy that amnesty international rates us with a 6 out of 10 as a racist country?
So, kids in the US are not introduced to "Christian beliefs" (Uh, they are but i'll just go along with what you are saying, for now). So? Faith is a personal matter. There's complete Separation of church and state in the US. What's so bad about that? If you want to pray, go do it on your own time, in your own place. Don't make everybody pray along with you. Why is it oblicatory to be Christian in Greece? How do you feel knowing that you PAID FOR THE RED G-STRING your priest might be wearing? How do you feel knowing that you pay the priest's salaries, when the Greek Church has a SHITLOAD of money in the bank?
By the way, where do you think that the Fundamental Christian movement originated? Bingo. The US. Southern US.
And yes, most people in the US DO know how the American Civil War begun. See, there's official propaganda on that side of the ocean, too. Part of it has to do with the American Civil War and how Linkon wanted to free the slaves from the evil southerns.
If you are going to answer me by replying with such bullshit as:
* IF YOU DONT LIKE IT LEAVE
* THAT'S WHO WE ARE
* GREECE MEANS CHRISTIANITY
* YOU ARE A TRAITOR
* GREECE IS THE BEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD
please, don't bother. you're going to waste my time. i've heard that bullshit a million times before. I've refuted them a million times before. I'm not interested in hearing that crap any more. Gimmie some valid, logical reasons as to why we couldn't be like sweden. Cuz sweeden has 10 million residents, too, but they have a pretty solid economy. Yeah, we had a lot of wars in Greece. that's no excuse. During the past 30 years of peace, we have worsen our financial possition. We could have had a pretty solic economy. We got nothing, instead.
We DO live in Psarokwstaina. We don't want to acknoledge it, though. We are happy living in the illusion of Frappe-Drinking and "where are we going for drinks to night"...
WAKE UP YUNAN! YOU BELIEVE WHAT THEY ARE FEEDING YOU.
Project2501a 13:29, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Calm down will you? The Civil War "is there" in the history book. As long as one is interested in reading the thing, of course. As for the theology course (which is, indeed, not a real "theology" course until high school, especially the three last years), it's actually "semi-obligatory". One can be excluded from that course, if he ever wants to. And you see, it's not as if your opinions about modern Greece are far from reality, they are not congruent with it either. No, we don't learn that song anymore:p Don't confuse present times with the 70's. Oh, of course there is a tendency to promote "official" opinions through the greek educational system. Others are in worse fate than us though... Things are not as bad as you make them sound (at least in the particular matter... there aren't many other things I could disagree about). And who makes you think that Greeks don't know the truth? At least "none of them". Perhaps you are doing the same mistake as the people you blame, but in reverse. Also, we can't be like Sweden, because we suck:p Although we had plenty of help from the outside...yeah, yeah, it's easy to put the blame on others, but their "contribution" is not easily forgotten... Michael85 13:48, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] This article is totally not neutral

It is totally biased against the communist side. The funny thing is that here in Greece, even right wingers will not say, publicly at least, that "Metaxas was the legitimate prime minister of Greece who suspended certain articles of the constitution in 1936 after a period of riots organized by the Greek communist party(Markezinis political History of modern Greece)". I hope Markezinis is not the puppet "prime minister" of the 1967-74 military junta in Greece... "Suspension of certain articles" means a full-out dictatorship by Metaxas, who sent into exiles thousands of communists and left-wingers in general. This is fact, not fiction.

And how about that: "King George II himself had returned to the throne after a period of exile after a disputable plebiscite in 1935. According to the communists the government in exile was cut off from events in Greece and had little support in Greece.But in fact Greece during this period was terrorized by armed pro communist fighters who were killing and kidnapping their opponents, who they accused as being collaborators."

So, Greece during occupation was a place "terrorized" by pro communist fighters! Those terrorists who are still alive are now recognized, under certainly not left wing goverments, as freedom fighters, they get a pension and special benefits from the state, a state that derives from the one that actually beat them in the civil war! No one, but NO ONE, in Greece claims that the resistance struggle in Greece, which was overwhelmingly lead by left wing people (not communists necessarily), was terrorist! And just claiming that the problem of Greece under Nazi occupation, with hundreds of thousands of people killed by them, directly or indirectly from hunger, was the "communist menace" is totally false.

And the article goes on and on with such distortions. I am not a communist, but this is simply an article to be shamed of in Wikipedia. I don't have detailed knowledge of the facts or disputes of the greek civil war, and no time to do detailed research to edit the article, but until it improves i think it must be put into hold. IliasZ

*chuckle* *shakes head* Linus Torvalds said it best: "Either show me the code or stfu". So, either help us edit it by giving us the facts in this talk page, or go read a book or two and come back when you've got more details and change the article. You're not helping any by firing off fireworks and calling for the article to be "put into hold", as if you're running for office in the Greek parliament. User:Project2501a 12:48, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Ok, you'ne got a point there :-) I edited the page to remove the following: "But Metaxas was the legitimate prime minister of Greece who suspended certain articles of the constitution in 1936 after a period of riots organized by the Greek communist party (Markezinis political History of modern Greece). King George II himself had returned to the throne after a period of exile after a disputable plebiscite in 1935. According to the communists the government in exile was cut off from events in Greece and had little support in Greece.But in fact Greece during this period was terrorized by armed pro communist fighters who were killing and kidnapping their opponents, who they accused as being collaborators. As i pointed before, part of it is totally unfounded. I replaced it with a shorter and more sensible text. IliasZ
I agree with Ilias. Alleged civil disobedience, dubbed as "anarchy", is the pretext used by almost every dictatorship to impose its order of totalitarianism. I have the privilege to have the junta's original "War History of Greece" in my library. Guess what, the situation prior to 1967 is described as "Greece under anarchy" («Η Ελλάς αναρχούμενη») and it's filled with pictures of protests of the "Lambrakis Youth". Then the following chapter presents the 21st April "revolution" (sic) as the deus ex machina that saved Greece from anarchy!
Markezinis (and who else but Markezinis) shamelessly provides the same excuse for Metaxa's dictatorship, in order to provide him some legitimacy, and the article copies from Markezinis' advocacy. But this doesn't change the fact that Metaxas was a dictator. Period. Etz Haim 17:27, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)


I agree with Ilias, too. I just wish I more money to buy books to read about the subject. And also, i need to learn how to read faster... :( Project2501a 19:21, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hello again OF COURSE Metaxas was a dictator. I do not understand where is the point. None says he wasn't. Stalin was a dictator also. And Pinoshet and Yaruzelski So what? Hitler was a dictator also but there is none German who says that Hitler's regime was illegitimate

The FACT that Markezinis finished his political carrier as a puppet prime minister does not changes the fact that he started as a left wing politician. It also doesn't mean that he is writing lies.

I suppose (correct me if I am wrong) that you are discussing about my disagreement on the use of the term "legal government". The term Legal is a term that belongs to the law science.

It would be helpfull to define the term "legal government" using a law book and then let's check if we can use the term on this case or any other in the future.

Anyway I agree absolutely with the correction you have made The first part seems quite objective to me now.Newcomer 00:09, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Strange... why doesn't this article mention the... "Churchill Assassination atempt?":p The English are presented as if they "found themselves caught in the middle"... as if their participation was completely unintentional. Also, this part is pretty interesting... "The EDES was wholeheartedly committed to the liberation of Greece from both facism and communism alike, and bore little ideological identity." See, there was never any real commitment to liberate Greece from Communism, simply because Communism never prevaled in Greece in the first place. Yes, it is somehow biased against the communists, if you read carefully. Not that I mind though, they were not much different from any other.... Michael85 13:59, 8 December 2005 (UTC)


I agree with Michael185 100%. There is no mention of the huge bomb planted by ELAS under Churchill's hotel in Athens. Equally there is no mention of the suprise attack launched by ELAS against British troops on Xmas eve when they foolishly thought the British would be off guard. In actual fact General Scobie cancelled Xmas that year (known as "scobiemass" by those involved) and ELAS instead faced some very hacked off veteran British troops who'd had their leave cancelled at no notice and been made to stand to all night (which in an Athenian winter isn't fun).

I'd also challenge the claim that ELAS controlled Crete: Cretan resistance was mainly non-political (apart from being violently anti-nazi) and the Cretans threw out anyone suspected of being a communist. See "the Cretan runner" english translation Patrick Leigh-Fermor. PeterSym 20/7/2006


Hello again OF COURSE Metaxas was a dictator. I do not understand where is the point. None says he wasn't. Stalin was a dictator also. And Pinoshet and Yaruzelski So what? Hitler was a dictator also but there is none German who says that Hitler's regime was illegitimate

Apparently you aren't very bright aren't you? Hitler came to power via elections. Metaxas performes a coup de tat while his party prior his coup had nonsignificant support(3%). This is why it is illegitimate. Apart from that, this entire article is the anglo-american version of history we came to save you from communism etc. in the same manner that they saved the Iraqies,the Vietnamese and the rest of the liberated(sic) people.~

[edit] Papadopoulos a Nazi collaborator?

This is the first time I hear of this, could someone please site a source? To my knowledge he served in Egypt with the allies where he was among the small minority of ultra-monarchist troops that did not mutiny. He later took part in the so-called "Rimini brigade" named so because of its participation in the liberation of the Italian city of Rimini by the Allies.

Thanks!

This comes a bit very late but it is an interesting point. From the Georgios Papadopoulos article:
Papadopoulos, an anti-communist, did not join ELAS and instead worked for the "Patras Food Supply Office" of the Greek collaborationist administration. The "Patras Food Supply Office" was run under the command of Colonel Kourkoulakos, and was responsible for tax collecting at villages on behalf of the Nazi Occupation Forces. Colonel Kourkoulakos is responsible for the formation of the "Evzoni Regiments" at Patras, who were military regiments comprised by anti-communist Greeks collaborating with the Nazi occupation forces against the ELAS. Papadopoulos worked under the commands of Kourkoulakos against ELAS, which was initially sponsored by the Soviet Union. At he beginning of 1944, Papadopoulos left Greece with the help of British intelligence agents and went to the Middle East, where he received the rank of Lieutenant. Along with other right wing military officers, he contributed to the creation of the right wing paramilitary IDEA organization, at Fall 1944.
This information comes from the encyclopedia "Idria ("Υδρία").
So, Mr P worked for the greek quisling government under the command of the guy who created the "germanotsoliades", and terrorized the countriside on behalf of the Nazis. But later, the Brits awarded him for his anticommunism, effectively whitewashing him. That's all. --Michalis Famelis 11:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The first time that I've read that Papadopoulos was a nazi collaborator was here in wikipedia some months ago. I do not know which is the source.

You are wrong to the point that the soldiers and officers who remained loyal to the Greek Government were "small minority" or "ultra monarchists" On the contrary many of them were anti royalists who had participated at the 1935 pro Venizelos coup.

I' ll give you an example. The commander of IEROS LOCHOS in middle East was Chr.Tsigantes who had participated at the March 1935 coup, was court martialled (as well as his brother John Tsigantes) they were stripped from their medals, reduced to the rank of soldier and condemned to death. Metaxas changed the death to exile. Can any objective person call these officers ultra monarchists?

Only the KKE condemned John Tsigantes again to death (no 21 KKE and EAM confidencial report Athens March 18 1943) when he came to Athens in order to organize the anti nazi resistance. The reason was that he also gave money to non EAM organizations which had different political points.

Aw for the term "liberation" you are using on Rimini, I think that the right term is occupation, since Rimini is an Italian city. I think that the citizens of Rimini do not celebrate a liberation but only the "battle of Rimini"Newcomer 23:02, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Italian city of Rimini was liberated (no quotes) by the Allies (including the Greek Army Brigade) in the end of September 1944 after one of the hardest battles fought on Italian soil against the German occupiers. Zippo

Hello again OF COURSE Metaxas was a dictator. I do not understand where is the point. None says he wasn't. Stalin was a dictator also. And Pinoshet and Yaruzelski So what? Hitler was a dictator also but there is none German who says that Hitler's regime was illegitimate

Apparently you aren't very bright aren't you? Hitler came to power via elections. Metaxas performes a coup de tat while his party prior his coup had nonsignificant support(3%). This is why it is illegitimate. Apart from this, this entire article is the anglo-american version of history they came and save us from communism etc. in the same manner that they saved the Iraqies,the Vietnamese and the rest of the liberated people.~

[edit] The beginning of the civil war

Although it is politically correct it is not true that the civil war started in 1944. There are many accounts that the civil war was going on in 1942 and 1943. (source History of the Greek Nation "Ekdotiki Athinon" volume 16)

It also had 3 phases (during the occupation, december of 1944, and the last phase)

I 'll wait for your answers before editing the article Newcomer 08:41, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Macedonia's role

I find all the viewpoints on this page interesting, especially the ones in conflict with each other!

I find it odd however that the role of ethnic Macedonians in ELAM/ELAS has only been alluded to. The defection of thousands of ethnic Macedonian ELAS fighters into the Yugoslav Partizans, after they had been backstabbed by their Greek comrades, combined with Tito's decision to redeploy many of them to Kosovo and other Yugoslav hotspots -- basically conceding the partition of Macedonia -- was a critical chain of events that needs to be fully explored.

I would appreciate all of your comments on this subject. Thank you.

When you refer to "Macedonians" you probably refer to the Slavic minority of Greek Macedonia. Am I right? We call them SlavoMacedonians in order to distinguish them from the original (Greek) Macedonians.

To answer your question now, the Greek civil war is a very big subject (and equally controversial) and this article is really small yet. I intend to write in the future about the slav organizations (SNOF, NOF)that fought with as well as against ELAS and the National Greek Army. Newcomer 21:48, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fall of the Millitary Junta

Given that this article briefly refers to the fall of the millitary junta towards the end, I think it should be linked to Athens Polytechnic uprising

[edit] Why not in 1974? =

after the Athens Polytechnic uprising the junta of greece had the public against them, Karamanlis senior came in greece and took the seat of prime minister in a 'national unity goverment' during 1974 and with the constitution of 1974 the democratic operation of the goverment and the political parties was again a day to day fact. the PASOK partie took office in 1981 but they are actually define the post 1974 period as metapolitefsi as everybody in greece--EleftheriosKosmas 00:31, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)


I agree that the date is 1974. Anyway I started editing the article slowly a paragraph every month in order to give time to everybody to answer my objections. I also think that the civil war article should stop in 1950 with one or two sentences, only about the political situation in Greece until 1974. All the rest should be transferred at the History of modern Greece. Did you create an account? Newcomer 21:24, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Well, the way the junta collapsed was a bit "unnatural". It's not as if all those that collaborated with the regime were persecuted. Conservatism still ruled the country, and several remnants of the monarchic or military regimes had found shelter in the ND party. That's the reason why it's believed that the "mark" of the junta didn't go off until 1981. Of course, there is some exaggeration in this matter, mostly originating from supporters of PASOK. Michael85 14:05, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I DONT KNOW IF THIS ARTICLE IS BIASED BUT I SURE AM

This comment comes months after the one I wish to criticize but here goes.

I would like to comment on the "this article is totally not neutral" comment.

It seems that it's author denies the fact that communist guerrilla factions carried out terrorist actions during the civil war.

Let me inform him, that my family suffered due to this terrorst action. My great-grandfather, Evangelos Glavanis, a businessman, was ,murdered by communists in Volos. his body was never found.

I don't know if you can look this up, but if you can, i propose you do so.

So, what you mean to say is that you are biased? So, you lost a family member during the civil war? how does that help us write a better article?
Answer: it doesn't. it just propagages the current situation of Right Wing Vs Left Wing.
Project2501a 13:34, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

I do agree that my comment does'nt add anything to the article itself, αλλα ρε παιδιά, μη λέμε και μαλακιες. That's all i'm saying. Having said that, the magazine stratiotiki istoria published an article on the Dekemvriana a few months ago. It's all about the mlitary side of it but it could be useful. I'll try and find the exact month and come back to you with it.

Answer: The magazine Στρατιωτική Ιστορία includes many ex-junta military staff on its editorial board and I think we all know what that means. What's more, like most publications originating in fact from organs sponsored by the Ministry of National Defence from glorifying the 'strugglles of our people' has been caught between a rock and a hard place on account of the constant review of historical facts by the Hellenic academia. The 'αφιέρωμα' on Dekemvriana is a case in point.--I personally like the series, but as a trained historian I would reccomend its use as supporting document only in very particular circumstances and by no means as general reference.-- : reg457 07:00, 22 January 2006 (GMT)

[edit] Proposals

  1. We should summarize the resistance section and move the bulk of it to Greek Resistance.
  2. The introduction contains the phrase: "Hot controversial topic", which just sounds wrong in English. The term "hot topic" is usually reserved for gossip, not for such a serious matter as civil war. Simply "controversial topic" would be much better. --Jpbrenna 11:15, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I just changed number two. Jkelly 03:07, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I was not sure where to add this, it concerns a minor edit concerning Stalin's post-war and loger term objectives under the heading Confrontation 1944. It used to read: 'which included above all control of Germany'. Research has shown that this was hardly the case, so I deleted it. I'd be happy to substantiate that view if asked by a fellow user.--: reg457 07:00, 22 January 2006 (GMT)

It comes down to this then, nationalism versus the struggle for freedom ,however flowed.unsigned

Strange, I thought it came down to stalinist totalitarianism against the fight for freedom. And the word is flawed, as in "the flawed and propagandist representation of Stalinist murderers as freedom fighters". 212.251.127.172 11:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Im not in the KKE. But they played a great role in kicking out the Nazis,unsigned

Interesting how they were not interested in kicking out (or for that matter, fighting) the Nazis while the Hitler-Stalin pact was still standing. But, of course, the moment mother-Russia was invaded, they changed their tune, and saw resisting the Nazis as "national duty", rather than "Metaxas's imperialist war", as Zahariades had characterised it before. 212.251.127.172 11:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

and once more took on the collaborating greek ruling class and their militias. Neither Moscow nor Wasingthon brohers. Its time we cleaned up the rotten foundations our country was founded on.

We can only feel optimistic, knowing that brilliant minds such as yours are onto the task... 212.251.127.172 11:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

On the comment by 212.251.127.172 on the 3rd of June above: It is true that CCCP's position, as well as that of the KKE by extension in the first part of the War (i.e. before "Barbarossa" was launched) was that this new World War, like the Great War before it, was an imperialist conflict. AT the same time however, the principles of Fascism had been repudiated and in fact named Communism's main enemy by the VII and last Congress of the Коминтерн in 1935. So on an ideological level, no one can blame Zachariades, or any member of the CC of the KKE at the time, of political opportunism. Fighting fascism had been the basis upon which the United Front policy had been built. Needless to say, all of the real Communist Parties subcribed to the decisions of that Congress, KKE included. Need I remind you, insolent pup, that Zachariades suffered greatly for his beliefs? Need I remind you further that he was one of the few non-Jewish Hellenes that was sent to Dachau? In any case, he was a great and respected Communist, who took upon him to re-assemble the KKE upon his return after Varkiza, which was no mean task. Perhaps you should read some more Wikipedia articles, such as the one on Zachariades or the one on Коминтерн before attempting any further "revelations" of the type.reg457 8 August 23.47 GMT+2

[edit] Who added the warnings?

There is really nothing wrong with this article.(87.203.229.163 12:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC))

Yes, there is. Instead of reading like Communist propaganda, or anti-communist propaganda, it bounces back and forth between the two, depending on who last edited any given paragraph. A Neutral Point of View is not served by slanting statements in multiple directions, but by stating verifiable facts, and reporting the beliefs of all sides of the conflict as those parties' beliefs. Argyriou 19:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Statment in intro

"The civil war left Greece with a legacy of political polarisation; as a result Greece also entered into alliance with the United States and joined NATO, while relationships with its USSR-allied northern neighbors became strained."

Really, the civil war left Greece "politically polarized?" Wasn't it already polarized in the pre-war years - royalists, Venizelists, communists? Maybe we should define "polarized" better - exactly how many violent coups and other poisonings of a country's political life have to occur before it is officially "polarized?"

Metaxas seems to have been a polarizing figure until the Germans invaded - even if now he is somewhat romanticized for saying "Okhi!" Relations with neighboring Bulgaria were already strained, in light of the Second Balkan War and later when Bulgaria cooperated with the Germans in the invasion of the mainland and Crete and the subsequent occupation.

I'm not saying the civil war was a boon to Greece, but there certainly would have been serious internal and external issues even if it hadn't occured. It's not clear that the civil war actually caused any of this; it seems more likely that it merely exacerbated existing tensions. Unless we can cite a reputable scholarly source for the opinion expressed above, I think it should be removed from the article. If it does have a source, we should frame it differently: "Greek Civil War expert Prof. X holds that..." etc. --Jpbrenna 19:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First of many victories in the Cold War

That should also be mentioned here. This keep the soviets honest and started a roll back of communism in other countries as well such as malaya and Turkey and in the middle east. But this was the first. Romanyankee(24.75.194.50 20:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC))

LOL, The Soviets didn't even participate in Greek Civil War, ignorant yankee.~


No shit, because we helped!! Ignorant pinko! RomanYankee(68.227.214.248 02:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC))


You are full of nonsense son. 1st) The CCCP had given Greece to Britain during the Yalta conference. It has nothing to do with US interference. 2nd) Hello?? How was it a victory against Soviet Union when the Soviet Union didn't participate in the war?

LOL these little yankees, they always surprise you. ~


LOL, where did It say it was a victory against the soviet union, idiot!! I said communism. The soviets would've invaded or at the very least supplied the communists if the US didn't support the good guys (who won). The CCCP didn't 'give' Britain anything. Stalin just obliged by the yalta conference but do you think he wouldn't have gone back on what was agreed?

LOL these little pinkos, they always surprise you. RomanYankee (24.75.194.50 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC))


The soviets would've invaded or at the very least supplied the communists if the US didn't support the good guys (who won). The CCCP didn't 'give' Britain anything.

Great Britain would have 90 percent in Greece according the percentages agreement. That is because Greece was already under the British sphere of influence long before the war, due to the control of the Mediterranean which ended in the Suez crises. The Soviets didn't send any help to the Greek guerrillas because of the arranged agreement. Your lack of knowledge regarding the subject is telling.

but do you think he wouldn't have gone back on what was agreed?

History is not written by hypothetical scenarios. ~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.131.121.177 (talk) 02:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


"The Soviets didn't send any help to the Greek guerrillas because of the arranged agreement."

The soviets didn't send help because of international pressure. The british would have 90% of what?! The agreements where made during WW2 and before the outbreak of violence between the commies and the good guys. Britian then couldn't handle the load after.

'Your lack of knowledge regarding the subject is telling."

No, YOUR lack of knowledge on the subject (as well as critical analysis) is telling.

"History is not written by hypothetical scenarios."

Thats is what happend. This isn't an hypothesis. If you think the soviets wouldn't have invaded or taken control of greek affairs (like they tried to do in Spain during the civil war there) or anywhere else had American aid and protection not been there....you need help

YankeeRoman(65.222.151.74 (talk) 17:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Post-war Nominations- edits by user:89.210.83.136

Yo 89.210.83.136! "with both sides vilifying their opponents"?? Could you please indicate me post-war vilifications of right-wing supporters by official left-wingers? These terms were used for decades by the Right in Greece to nominate the side of the defeated in the Civil War.

[edit] Question-

How can there be a strength of 20,000 men and women for the Communist guerillas with 38,000 killed and 40,000 captured or surrendered ?

I'm wondering the same thing. Ufwuct 17:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

20,000 was the max DSE ever reached. There was massive attrition in DSE

[edit] predominantly conservative Greek civilian population?

I dispute that, especially given the percentages EDA and Enosi Kentrou got in elections in the 50s and 60s, despite those elections being infamously unfair, institutionalised right wing domination of politics and a strong presence of the deep state (murder of Lamprakis being the most extreme example). Mavros 21:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The Greek rural population was predominantly conservative. But not the entire Greek population. Mitsos 13:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RELIABLE SOURCES????

The main rule of wikipedia are the reliable sources!! where are they in this article, when it is refering a ELAS like the group that was commiting attrocities! Please, WHAT is that? we are talking about the greek history and the struggle of greek people, not just communists and you portray them as being some mindless troups of extremists? ELAS is established in the HISTORY as a heroic people's resistance group, yes it had come from the communist party but it was undoubtfully more than a tool of KKE!!! It was the soul and the spirit of people that was fighting in the mountains, and yes it was very tough with so many forces around claiming parts of Greece, but it was the only way! it is unbelievable that even now they refer to massacre of Meligala, I state here and now that i want even the smallest shread of evidence of the massacre presented!! In the same time evidence of Aris Velouchiotis killing around people like a maniac (that's how you present him!) and not being a symbol of the struggle against the opposition (as we know!). and evidence that Sarafis was the poor helpless child that Aris took by his side on force having killed everyone around him! (please!). Where are your sources? Even if you present facts without any evidence whatsoever, than at least where is the neutral point of view? Where in the whole text does it refer to the real shamefull, hideous, atrocities that the ONLY terrorist group in greece , the X , has commited? I am very dissapointed, i have already presented a change in some part of the text and i hope that at least it SHOULD be considered, (at least I have cited sources), when in reality I SHOULDN'T need because the history has already claimed the struggle of ELAS, EAM and the free people against their oppositors, the worst of them sadly coming from the land of Greece itself! I ask that the least you should do, since this is a matter of importance is re-examine parts of the article. It insults me! Beltenebros 19:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Beltenebros, your partisanship for the communist thugs in Greece is so overwhelming that there's no good reason to take your complaints of partisanship or bias at all seriously. If you think that statements in the article are untrue or unsourced, place {{fact}} tags after those statements. Αργυριου (talk) 19:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


So it all comes back to this!! you have given me the light: COMMUNIST THUGS!! And i really thought you should at least take a time to consider all the points i am reffering to at my post! But no! you just prefered to summarize briefly and with utmost profficiency your point of view! Which we have seen clearly from your comment WHICH is (see: communist thugs!)! And to imagine that I AM NOT EVEN a communist! not that it is your bussiness anyhow, but i am saying it only to help you, since you obviously are very narrowminded,see the big picture! you see the point here is not to express your personal hatred but to answer, if you are capable, in more serious issues!!

Is this how you understand dialog? I state again my will towards a re-examination of the article! Beltenebros 20:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I've provided a citation for the Communist atrocities. I have no idea what your are talking about when you claimed that the article was locked. Your ranting is rather tiresome, so I will not engage in listening to further tiresome monologues by you, though I will endeavor to provide sources to prove other communist atrocities. Αργυριου (talk) 20:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

God, you really are mising the whole picture are you? you insist in providing me communist attrocities!! didn't you even understand of what i was talking about? and since you are doing the labor of retrieving these attrocities could you do me a favor and be a good boy and state all the attrocities that X (or should i say Chites?) have done? i think it might be a little difficult, because they are a little obscured, no? anyway, i give you too much credit i think! i UNDERLINE again the fact of THE IMPORTANCE THAT ELAS meant to the resistance, (with the communist and the non communist all together) and the serious lack of solid information! If it was an article regarding the fishing of codfidh in Norway i wouldn't insist but since it's about greek history than it should be much better elaborated! Just don't come presenting me attrocities also from the people that were in MAkronissos because than it's pathetic!

seeu

P.s>it was a fault of mine regarding the article locked!




Since i was not given any serious answers, I 've made clear my statement that this article is not neutral and in some parts is even insulting to the memories of the people that had fought for freedom.

And YES, the main resistance was EAM and ELAS and you should also think why.

And YES, they were not all communist thugs and you should consider why.

And YES, they gave up their lifes, the majority of them, for the people's freedom.

And YES, in the Dekembriana, was not just KKE communist fighting (I am becomingg tired of this term used more than a thousand times in this article!), it was much more than that, so that it seems ridiculous now to try and explain why the EAM had gathered so many PEOPLE, COMMON PEOPLE supporting it and why they have BEEN slaughtered in the center of Athens by all these forces that were acting against communism

For all these reasons and more i have posted the need to re-examine the article of its neutrality and of its integrity . Beltenebros 21:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Greece was the only country were the collaborators of the NAZIS weren't trialled. Apparently their offsprings are irritated that a small portion of their treacherous buddies were executed for treachery against the nation and since in Greece no historian takes them seriously, they have flooded wikipedia in a desperate attempt to pass their own version of history.~

[edit] Doesn't make sense.

The enemy of my enemy maybe wasn't my friend but could sometimes be a source of equipment. To me, this doesn't make any sense, although I'm not an expert on Greek history, just merely browsing. Vandalism anyone?

It makes perfect sense. It means that, for example, the enemy of EDES was ELAS, and the Germans were the main enemy of ELAS. Althought EDES wasn't collaborating with the Germans, it sometimes took weapons from them in order to fight ELAS. Mitsos 11:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Napoleon Zervas and his right-wing organization EDES were fighting for a right-wing independent Greece. For Zervas Greece's liberty was more important than it's orientation. That's why he collaborated with ELAS in the EAM. But in the Civil War it was obvious that Zervas was allied with ELAS only because he saw ELAS as a "minor evil". P.S. I changed "Slavic Macedonians" with ethnic Macedonians, because that is the official name of the Wikipedia article and because of the rules in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Macedonia-related articles). Revizionist 01:53 31 August 2007 (UTC)


Please do not start edit wars for nothing. The name Macedonian Slav or Slavomacedonian is a moderate way to call you. Furthermore, since this is an article about Greece and it deals about Macedonia (Greece), according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Macedonia-related articles) we should use this name. Kapnisma ? 09:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I imputed some new photos in this article. Revizionist 04:10 02 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ac.athens44.jpg

Image:Ac.athens44.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The British started the fighting. In a letter to the commander of the British troops who had been deployed in Athens, supposoedly to give chase to the Germans (who had already fled, under the overwhelming pressure of ELAS) Churchill said that in order to gain advantage over the Communists, the British had to deal the first blow and it had to be not only unexpected, BUT COMPLETELY UNPROVOKED(Britsih military de-clissified documents) Additionaly, the British re-armed the 'Security regiments', fascists groups who had cooperated with thw NAZI's, in an attempt to smother thw communist resistance. It is also widley believed, that EDES only attacked ELAS under strict orders to do so by the British, who were supplying their wewapons, when ELAS were on the verge of forcing the Italian armies of Thessalia to surrender-something that would greatly empower the arsenal of ELAS. Finally, one should not forget that ONLY EAM-ELAS honoured the Varkize treaty (which, among others, set a time-schedule for the departure of all non-Greek armed forces from Greece) and, even according to official state archives, thousands of communists were murdered, imprisoned, executed, sent to exile on islands like Makronisos (the concentration camp of Makronisos had been called 'a new Parthenon' by G. PApandreou senior), raped, or terrorized in a number of ways. In '44, the KKE had nearly 800.000 members (in a population estimated at around 6 million) and by 1951, herdly any of them remained free, healthy and without perxecution in Greece. As a post-scriptum, one might add that most of the populations that were moved during, or before the war, were moved from the country side ( where ELAS was all-powerful) to Athens, were they could be mopre easily controlled, and they never returned home. "for the sake of historical truth" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.16.225.56 (talk) 09:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Some referenced corrections

Of course the Greek civil wasn't a communist insurgency. There was not even a kind of revolution attempt. ELAS saw Germans off Greece and remained the only considerable political and militarry force in Greece. It is a joke to talk about insurgency. EAM was the undeniable ascendant but Curchill and Stalin had other opinion and EAM leaders were not ready to accept a certain solution for this problem. And of Course there were not three rounds! There were just two rounds the first and the second guerilla war ("Πρώτο και Δεύτερο Αντάρτικο"). Only the nationalistic right wing accepts three rounds, with the first supposed to be during the german occupation. EDES was just a small minority which sometimes collaborated with the germans against ELAS. EDES was not able to start a kind of civil war... Left people used the term "third round" as a wishfull thinking, as a promise to continue their struggle.


 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vardos (talk • contribs) 13:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The interview of the politician in the last parapgraph

The last quote/paragraph, that is the Leonidas Kyrkos'interview in a daily newspaper, shall be removed since it provides subjective views and opinions of a politician (not a historian), doesn't provide any additional information (or at least experiences) regarding the examined events whatsoever. If it stays, then we will have to provide opinions of other politicians which is will bring us up to a vicious circle. Regards