Talk:Operation Trio

Sandžak Muslim militia

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Thread closed, the editor involved did not produce any source to support his contention that the Sandžak Muslim militia participated in Operation Trio Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:13, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

According to many sources Sandžak Muslim militia participated in this operation. I propose to add this important information to the text of the article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:26, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

What sources? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 07:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I.e.

• Жарко Видовић, Трећа пролетерска бригада, Београд 1972 (link) "Dalji polet NOB u Sandžaku privremeno je prekinula tzv. treća neprijateljska ofanziva koja je u proleće 1942. zahvatila Sandžak, istočnu Bosnu, Crnu Goru i Hercegovinu. Udružene italijanske i nemačke okupatorske snage, sa četničkim, ustaškim i domobranskim formacijama i jedinicama muslimanske milicije uložili su krajnje napore da likvidiraju slobodnu teritoriju i unište NOB u ovim pokrajinama. U proleće 1942. na teritoriji Sandžaka nalazile su se ove neprijateljske snage: italijanska divizija »Pusterija« i delovi divizije »Venecija«, zatim sandžački i delovi srbijanskih, crnogorskih i istočnobosanskih četnika i muslimanska milicija."
• Gledović, Bogdan (1986). Četvrta sandžačka NOU brigada. Vojnoizdav. i Novin. Centar. p. 47. У трећој офанзиви непријатељ је, током априла и маја, усмеравао главна дејства из санџачких гарнизона долином Таре према Чајничу и планини Љубишњи да би пресекао слободну територију Санџака и уништио санџачке партизанске снаге у кањону Таре. Најтеже борбе вођене су у рејону Мојковца, на вододелници између Лима и пехотине и на подручју Косаница — Глибаћи — Мељак — пл. Љубишња. На мојковачком сектору су вођене драматичне даноноћне борбе, у којима су против најопасније непријатељске групације (делова црногорских и санџачких четника, под командом Павла Ђуришића) биле ангажоване главне партизанске снаге Санџака: Бјелопољски НОП одред, 1. пљеваљски ударни батаљон „1. децембар", Милешевски батаљон „Љубиша Миодраговић" и 4. пљеваљски батаљон. У исто време, дивизија „Пустерија", делови „Венеције", санџачки и делови србијанских и босанских четника и муслиманска милиција нападали су Пљеваљски НОП одред, 1. и 3. златарски ударни батаљон и делове Бјелопољског одреда на правцима: Пљевља — Чајниче, Пријепоље — Камена гора — Маоче — Косаница, Пљевља — Косаница — Бо-бово, Бијело Поље — Коврен и Пљевља — Љубишња.
• Knežević, Danilo (1969). Prilog u krvi: Pljevlja 1941-1945. Opštinski odbor SUBNOR-a. p. 97. Јединице италијанске дивизије „Пустерија" кренуле су у напад 22. априла од Пљеваља, преко Чајничка, ка Горажду и од Вишеграда, преко Рогатице. На правцу Пљевља — Чајниче, начитавом фронту између Ћехотине и планине Чемерна, наступало је око 4.000 Италијана заједно са четницима и муслиманском милицијом из Пљеваља.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:44, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

and in the language of this Wikipedia? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:16, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

• Istorijski zapisi. Istorijski institut SR Crne Gore c. 1975. p. 274. Снаге окупатора, санџачких четника и санџачке муслиманске милиције нису биле у стању да без јачих четничких...--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:21, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

• It is very rude to continue to add sources and quotes in languages other than English when you have been repeatedly told that the editor you are communicating with doesn't read the lingo. Please provide translations if you wish to continue this discussion. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 10:28, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

I thought that language is not a problem, based on this diff and your editing at June 1941 uprising in eastern Herzegovina where you extensively used work written on the same language (by Marjan). If you don't know the language why did you remove my sourced addition of Operation Trio here diff? Anyway, if the language is really a problem, I will present a translation when I have more time. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

That is a big assumption, particularly when it is at odds with what I have expressly and repeatedly stated about my language skills. I can use Google Translate to tell if the words "Operation Trio" are in a passage, regardless of what language it is, and the term just doesn't appear in the quotes above. But Google Translate is very poor at providing translations of Cyrillic that are good enough to ensure context and meaning is clear, so I'm going to need translations of the above if you want to continue this conversation. Take your time, I'm in no hurry. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:57, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

What passage were you looking at when you removed my sourced addition of Operation Trio here diff? The source "Историјски записи" was also published in Cyrillic.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:46, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

All of them. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:18, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

You are again caught red-handed. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:55, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Your comment is completely unfathomable. You apparently have no point and you are wasting my time. To be absolutely clear, I "Google Translated" ALL of the above quotes, and exactly NONE of them included the words "Operation Trio". Are your eyes painted on? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 07:10, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Your reply is WP:IDHT. What passage of "Историјски записи" were you looking at when you removed my sourced addition of Operation Trio here diff?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:21, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

You clearly have no point other than to attempt to bait me. When you began this tirade, you seemed to think you had many sources that said that the Sandzak Muslim militia were involved in Operation Trio. You produced three (now four) above, none of which are English, and NONE of which support your initial statement. NONE of them say anything about Operation Trio (according to Google Translate). If you claim one of them does, translate it here, now. If not, go and annoy someone else with your marginally comprehensible ramblings. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 07:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

If you wanted a quote to verify the assertion, you should request one. You should not remove cited addition of other editor.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:41, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

It is clear from the quotes that you have pasted here that you a. don't know what you are talking about, or b. are purposely being obtuse. You have not produced a translated quote that shows that this militia (or some part of a Muslim militia) participated in Operation Trio. I have already pointed out that you are probably confusing Operation Trio and the Herzegovina Offensive, but yet you appear to persist in trying to equate the two. They might both fall into the communist "Third Enemy Offensive" trope, but that is not necessarily relevant to the Operation Trio article, and the Herzegovina Offensive article is yet to be created. You have yet to produce a translated source that says they participated in Operation Trio. If you have one, produce it. If you don't have one, stop pestering me here and on my talk page. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:00, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

If you wanted a translation to verify the assertion, you should request one with Template:Source needs translation. Not remove cited addition of other editor. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:16, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

A Google Books snippet search of that work reveals no Операција Трио, and no Operacija Trio. Stop wasting my time. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:54, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Why did you search for Операција Трио/Operacija Trio when you know that it is associated with the Third Enemy Offensive in Yugoslav historiography?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:13, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Because that is the name of this article, AND the operation you claim the sources say the SM militia was involved in? See you first comment in this thread. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:34, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

See my last comment in this thread: "when you know that it is associated with the Third Enemy Offensive in Yugoslav historiography".

1. you knew that Yugoslav historiography do not use term Operation Trio, but the Third Enemy Offensive
2. still, you searched works of Yugoslav historiography for Операција Трио/Operacija Trio
3. and deleted my sourced addition of Operation Trio here diff because Google Books snippet search of work of Yugoslav historiography revealed no Операција Трио, and no Operacija Trio

Honesty is expected in all processes of Wikipedia, including content discussion, the dispute process and all other functions of the community. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:43, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

If I were you, that would be the last time you accuse me of dishonesty. That is the sort of direct personal attack that WP considers completely unacceptable. This article is called "Operation Trio", not "Third Enemy Offensive". "Operation Trio" was just one of several operations that fall under the fairly vaguely defined "Third Enemy Offensive". Operation Trio ran from 20 April – 13 May 1942 in eastern Bosnia. It is a subset that didn't involve the Sandzak Muslim militia (according to sources you have yet to translate but which you are apparently relying on). YOU wanted to link THIS article (Operation Trio) to the article on the militia, because YOU stated that there were many sources that say that the militia participated in THIS operation (Operation Trio). You didn't say the militia participated in the "Third Enemy Offensive", you said "this operation" ie "Operation Trio". But they didn't participate in THIS operation (according to your sources, that don't even mention the words "Operation Trio"). I don't know how I can make it any clearer than that. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Another misinterpretation of my position. I did not accuse you of dishonesty. It is your insisting on Trio term which I believe violates Wikipedia:Honesty because you know that Yugoslav historiography uses "Third Enemy Offensive" instead of Operation Trio. Since you decided to continue with this approach you discouraged me from further editing here. This will be my last comment in this article. This page is removed from my watchlist. All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Good riddance. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:35, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested quotes

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Thread closed, apparently there was no point to it Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC) The following is verbatim from Tomasevich 2001, p.414.

At a German-Italian-Croatian conference in Opatija (Abbazia) on the Istrian peninsula on March 2-3, 1942, a series of anti-Partisan operations was planned in eastern Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sandzak, Montenegro, western Bosnia, and Lika. However, only operations in eastern Bosnia by German and Croatian troops and in Montenegro and eastern Herzegovina by Italian and Montenegrin Chetnik forces were undertaken from March to June 1942 (the Third Enemy Offensive).

Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The following is verbatim from Rodogno 2006, pp. 310-311.

During the inter-allied military conference of Opatija – organised to prepare the “Trio” anti-partisan operation planned to take place in Bosnia-Herzegovina between 20 April and 13 May 1942 – the Croats rejected an Italian proposal to involve the Chetniks of Bosnia-Herzegovina in the campaign. And, with the support of the Germans, they prevailed. But then, at a conference held in Ljubljana (28 and 29 March), it was decided to conclude temporary and non-political accords with the Chetniks of Herzegovina, but not with those of eastern Bosnia (and especially not Dangic’s Chetniks).

Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:17, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

None of them mention Yugoslav historiography.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

What are you talking about? The fact that the "X Enemy Offensives" is a trope of Yugoslav historiography is WP:BLUE. I fail to see what your point is. What is it about the article you are challenging? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 06:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

If you are desperate for confirmation that the "X Enemy Offensives" is a reference used in Yugoslav historiography, then p. 60 of Redžić's Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Second World War, or p. 194 of Donia's Sarajevo: A Biography will set you straight. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 06:59, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sources

Lack of references

Unsourced Deletion

@Peacemaker67: , IP 109.93.49.149 made an unsourced deletion. I undid their unsourced deletion quickly after. Why is the burden of proof on me? 108.54.93.183 (talk) 09:14, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

My mistake, I deleted your undo at the same time as I restored NDH rather than Croatia. You now have similar IPs. It would make it a whole lot easier if people registered an account. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 20:31, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

No worries. Actually when undoing the other IP, I accidentally reinstantiated Croatia instead of NDH. Sorry about that. But shouldn't it be Chetniks, which is what is what you had before the other guy deleted your edit? Not Sandžak Chetniks? 108.54.93.183 (talk) 20:36, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

There were two lots of Chetniks involved, one on the side of the Italians (Sandžak), and one acting independently (East Bosnian). I have now corrected it. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:35, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, I see. Fair enough. I assumed they were under the same name based on the previouse version. Thanks for correcting me. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 23:01, 23 May 2017 (UTC)