Talk:1940–1944 insurgency in Chechnya

Cleanup
This article is very badly written, so much so that it is hard to tell the facts that are supposed to be conveyed by it. Many of the red links have counterparts in the English Wikipedia and would be blue if they were corrected. No attempt is made to relate it to current conflicts in the Caucasus. Some English sources, provided any exist (?), would be helpful if they were added here. — A lizard (talk) 02:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

62,000 troops in the Red Army
The anecdote about the desertion is interesting because they way it is written, it suggests that there were fewer than 62,000 troops in the Red Army during WWII. In a word, no. :) Did the author of this page mean that there were fewer than 62,000 Caucasian soldiers in the Red Army during that war? The way it was written, it is hard to tell. — A lizard (talk) 02:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I think this criticism is correct, but I know that the article is far from complete. It VERY difficult to find any free sources in English language about that time, moreover, probably this theme is not clearely understood. The only text I found is written by Chechns themselves.: History of chechnya in 19th cent WWII in Chechnya. These writing seems to be an attempt to aquilt the collaboration. The theme is rather taboed. So, some relialible sources (in Russian) I found were not about the Chechens, so the current article consist of the different fragments, which give an idea about events, but not on the whole. Other sources are rather contradictory. And the last, my English, far from perfect possibly discomforts reading, such as in case of 62,000-men Soviet Army. Being translated into Russian this construction would be understood well :)--Üñţïf̣ļëŗ ( see also: ә? Ә!) 19:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * As for the red links, the most of Chechnya's placed have no articles on wikipedia.--Üñţïf̣ļëŗ ( see also: ә? Ә!) 19:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

KIA?
Schouldnt commander Mairbek Sheripov also be noted as killed in action? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.226.50.232 (talk) 21:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://chechenpress.info/events/2006/10/26/02.shtml
 * In 1940–1944 insurgency in Chechnya on 2011-05-25 03:16:03, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 1940–1944 insurgency in Chechnya on 2011-06-04 16:12:52, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 16:13, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.hro.org/editions/karta/nr9/avt1.htm
 * In History of Chechnya on 2011-03-29 09:26:00, 404 Not Found
 * In 1940–1944 insurgency in Chechnya on 2011-05-25 03:16:06, 404 Not Found
 * In 1940–1944 insurgency in Chechnya on 2011-06-04 16:13:00, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 16:13, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

When did it start?
"The 1940–44 insurgency in Chechnya was an autonomous revolt against the Soviet authorities in the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. Beginning as early as in June 1941..."

So, did it start in 1940, or "as early as June [of] 1941?" If the latter, it would seem to be tied in with Operation Barbarossa. Anyone know whether it actually started in 1940, June of '41, or perhaps some later date? KevinOKeeffe (talk) 21:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1940–44 insurgency in Chechnya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080527103905/http://www.hro.org/editions/karta/nr9/avt1.htm to http://www.hro.org/editions/karta/nr9/avt1.htm
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5jWeINeYx?url=http://www.history.neu.edu/fac/burds/Burds-FifthColumnists.pdf to http://www.history.neu.edu/fac/burds/Burds-FifthColumnists.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:31, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Number of insurgents
, I've checked this article following your edit and 14 struck me as an unbelievably low number. Now Akhmadov does say that "according to some reports Israilov's band numbered 14 people," giving GARF and some other book as his sources. I've found an article that puts the number at 5 thousand, and its quality is definitely higher than that of Akhmadov's book. I've left Akhmadov's number in the article, let me know what you think, whether it's possible to reconcile the numbers. Since there is a disagreement regarding the numbers, I think it's safer not to describe the insurgency as "small-scale" in other articles, unless there are multiple RS which describe it as such. Alaexis¿question? 20:22, 1 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reaching out. I'll take a look at it when I get some time on my hands. I think it's a good idea to show both numbers for the time being. Ola Tønningsberg (talk) 22:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Grover Furr
I deleted the writings of this "historian". Why? I'll write it below. An unreliable source. A "historian" Stalinist who denies any crimes committed by the Stalinist regime, including Katyn Massacre. The following is all the criticism of this "historian" that discredits him as a source

This "historian" refers to N.F. Bugai and his followers. Since they can not use the accusations, which were debunked by the KGB itself in the 1980s, they use innuendos, vague innuendos, conclusions not related to the premise and simply falsification of documents. Thus, in one of his first publications on the deportation, he cites the alleged text of a telegram from L.P. Beria to Stalin:

"I have familiarized myself with the materials on the behavior of the Balkars both during the offensive of the German-fascist troops in the Caucasus and after their expulsion...

In fact this telegram begins like this:

In connection with the alleged expulsion of the Balkars from the North Caucasus, I have read the materials about their behavior both during the offensive of the German-Fascist troops in the Caucasus and after their expulsion...

Thus, the document concealed a key part of the phrase in order to fit it to the desired version of the interpretation of events. As a result, a falsified version of the document ended up in many books devoted to the deportations in the Soviet Union.

The favorite method of N.F.Bugai and his students is to present NKVD reports with figures on the high level of banditry and desertion without indicating the nationality of the bandits and deserters, in order to lead the reader to the idea that they were representatives of the deported peoples. Thus, while justifying deportation of Koreans, he talks about banditry and desertion during World War II in the Far East from where Koreans were evicted en masse in 1937.

The "treachery" of the deportees is explained, for example, by the benevolent attitude of the Nazis to them. He refers to Hitler's appeal to his subordinates:

In the Caucasus, as nowhere else in Russia, the adats, the Muslim laws, the Shariah still firmly hold a large part of the mountain population in obedience. And this makes the planned action much easier. The mountaineers are by nature very naive and frivolous. It is easier to work with them than with other nationalities.

Here Bugai substitutes real events with Hitler's alleged intentions, without finding out how successful he was in realizing them. The writings of N. F. Bugai and his students raise many questions.

Well, the rest of the criticism, along with the assessment of the rest of the scientific community, was laid out in his separate article on wikipedia directly:

Историки утверждали, что Фурр «восхвалял создание коммунистических режимов» в Европе и Азии, потому что «миллиарды рабочих во всем мире эксплуатируются, убиваются, пытаются, угнетаются капитализмом». В ответ на критический обзор Фурра историк Джеральд Мейер написал, что «Фурр защищает изгнание советским государством немцев поволжья, татар, чеченцев и других этнических меньшинств со своей родины», «возражает против моего утверждения, что коллективизация сельского хозяйства привела к широкомасштабному сопротивлению и голоду». «Тратит большую часть своей энергии, пытаясь опровергнуть трюизм, о котором Сталин знал и одобрял огромное количество политических казней».

Historians John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr stated that Furr "lauded the creation of Communist regimes" in Europe and Asia because "billions of workers all over the world are exploited, murdered, tortured, oppressed by capitalism." In response to Furr's critical review, historian Gerald Meyer of Hostos Community College wrote that "Furr defends the Soviet state's expulsion of the Volga Germans, Tartars, Chechens, and other ethnic minorities from their homelands", "objects to my contention that collectivization of agriculture resulted in widespread resistance and famine", and "spends most of his energy attempting to refute the truism that Stalin was aware of and approved of huge numbers of political executions. " Furr's books, especially those on the Katyn massacre, have been cited in Russia as confirmation that the revisionist views are also supported by foreign historians. Cathy Young, describing Furr in an article for The Daily Beast as "a 'revisionist' on a career-long quest to exonerate Stalin", said that Furr's work, along with that of Douglas Tottle, was being used as part of a larger propaganda campaign by the Russian government to muddy the waters and obfuscate the history of Soviet crimes. Historian Jarosław Szarek, president of the Polish Institute of National Remembrance, condemned Furr's work as denying Soviet war crimes, comparing it to "the scandalous manifestations of Holocaust denial." The comparison to Holocaust denial was itself criticized as unwise because Poland's education minister Anna Zelewska indirectly denied Polish complicity in the Jedwabne pogrom, a massacre of Polish Jews in July 1941. Во время публичного. Во время дебатов в университетском городке в 2012 году Фурр сказал: «Мне еще предстоит найти одно преступление — еще не найти одно преступление — которое совершил Сталин. ... Я знаю, что все они говорят, что он убил 20, 30, 40 миллионов человек — это чушь. ... Геббельс говорил, что Большая Ложь успешна, и это Большая Ложь: что коммунисты — что Сталин убил миллионы людей и что социализм никуда не годится». И The American Conservative, и Washington Examiner писали, что Фурр ссылался на нацистскую пропаганду, потому что посредник дискуссии предположил, что Фурр использовал тактику, изобретенную Йозефом Геббельсом. According to British journalist John O'Sullivan writing for National Review, Furr is "a 'historian' who denies that Stalin committed any crimes at all. [...] On reading this, my first reaction was that Grover Furr must be a fictional character or teasing Internet hoax. Revisionist historians nostalgic for 'really existing socialism' have long sought to minimize the number of Stalin's victims and the scale of Soviet crimes. But the extravagance of Furr's claims — every accusation against Stalin false! — made it hard to take them seriously. They amount less to revisionism than to outright denial of historical reality." Controversial conservative author David Horowitz, known for compiling lists of professors he regards as “dangerous” and “anti-American”, listed Furr as one of the "101 most dangerous academics in America" for "venting his Stalinist and anti-American political passions on his helpless students" by claiming that the United States got what it deserved on September 11 and misinforming his students by claims like the United States being behind the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II Horowitz also criticized Furr for believing that "it was morally wrong for the United States to bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union". Фурр был обвинен в академической халатности консервативным профессором Рональдом Радошем, который призвал к его увольнению из Государственного университета Монклера и утверждал, что «срок пребывания в должности не должен использоваться для защиты его занятости». Радош пишет: «Гровер Фурр не является выдающимся ученым. Он педантичный халтурщик; человек, который делает вид, что опровергает десятками сносок всех своих идеологических противников — как будто бесконечные цитаты доказывают, что он прав — на самом деле любого, кто бросает тень на своего любимого героя Иосифа Сталина. Если Фурр использует свою классную комнату, чтобы привести те же самые аргументы, как это легко представляется, это другое дело. В 1950-х годах в основополагающем эссе покойный философ Сидни Хук утверждал, что, хотя коммунист имеет право на свои мнения и на то, чтобы выводить их на рынок идей, он не имеет права быть нанятым университетом для преподавания этих идей как истины и использовать классную комнату в качестве арены для идеологической обработки студентов ложью, предназначенной для подтверждения жизнеспособности движения, которому он принадлежит. поклялся в верности». 188.0.175.252 (talk) 11:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)