Talk:Dutchbat

Jargon/Military Terminology

I find this article quite difficult to understand....for instance:

"The contingent stood out to two Canadian companies in the mission, and was made up of two companies of Infantry and one of flat major, about the 450 military in each one of the three relief (denominated Dutchbat I, II and III) of which the mission consisted, armed only with sidearms and vehicles with machine guns."

"stood out", "flat major" "three relief"

I suggest that the article be rewritten to make it more intelligible to those not familar with military terminology. Sadly I don't have this expertise.

ahpook (talk) 12:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Ill be glad to have a go at re-phrasing some of it. I dont think the terms above are jargon (correct me if Im wrong). If you could give me it in Dutch, I could probably figure it out. Its a nice article. Dutchdavey (talk) 11:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

A norwegian soldier

Should Hagerup Hauklands name, figure into this article?

http://www.nytid.no/arkiv/artikler/20050727/blank/ --Sølvguttene (talk) 08:05, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Who was a Mr. Vranken in this dutchbat team ?

Many of the woman think this man should also be condemned. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SvenAERTS (talk • contribs) 20:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

File:T. Karremans.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:T. Karremans.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests May 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Unclear passage

>The 3,400-page report criticized the political and military High Commands of the Netherlands as being guilty of criminal negligence, for not preventing the massacre. The conclusions were devastating:

The mission was not suitably prepared. There was no coordination between the Ministry of Defence (under Joris Voorhoeve) and of Ministry of Foreign Affairs (under Hans van Mierlo). The contingent did not receive sufficient means to accomplish the mission. Adequate firepower and Forward Air Controllers (FACS) to direct air attacks were missing. The non-Dutch in charge of air support refused to give aid as requested by Karremans. The Netherlands and the UN did not perform their duty.<

2nd sentence of extract implies the criticisms were devastating for the Dutch, but 5th point re air support canot be a criticism of Dutch. Hardicanute (talk) 14:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Hardicanute

I agree about " but 5th point re air support canot be a criticism of Dutch". --Gazprompt (talk) 09:41, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

A potential falsehood in a newspaper

A Nordic newspaper claims that "the UN soldiers fled"—[during the] Srebreinica massacre. From what I remember reading in other sources—that phrase should be disregarded; do you agree? --Gazprompt (talk) 09:38, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

NATO is somehow responsible for the genocidal massacre in Srebrenica??

Here's a curious, uncited sentence (the last in the "Operation" section):

"DUTCHBAT's zone fell under siege by the VRS when NATO air forces began bombing the Bosnian Serbs besieging Sarajevo"

This seems to imply that NATO is to blame for the attack on Srebrenica (and consequent genocidal mass-murder) because it was so bold as to finally start helping to defend Sarajevo from years of monstrous, murderous siege. Does anyone want to tackle this? 59.102.49.226 (talk) 04:12, 13 November 2018 (UTC)