Talk:Exercise Trident Juncture 2018

Untitled
"from over 30 countries"? Isn't the exact number known? There should not be any other reason to not have it. 109.240.135.245 (talk) 16:29, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Incidents section
I am reverting several edits made by user Justm for the following reasons:

Harassment
The original content claimed that the man from Spillum was "aggressively detained". User Justm claims that this is conjecture. I take personal responsibility for not citing the source properly. I've added an additional source that corroborates the original contents. I hesitated in doing so earlier because it was behind a paywall. It was the first source published and it is from a local news source, if I am not mistaken. This source says the following:

"Mens han skalv av panikk, ble funksjonshemmede Arnt Gunnar Alte påsatt håndjern og ransaket av tungt bevæpnede Nato- soldater."

which translates roughly to "While he shook in panic, disabled man Arnt Gunnar Alte was placed in handcuffs and ransacked by heavily armed NATO soldiers." Moreover, the source I cited first reads:

"46-åringen var på sine daglige trimtur da han ble stanset og ilagt håndjern av NATO-soldater."

which translates roughly to "The 46-year old was on his daily jog when he was detailed and handcuffed." As can be seen, the original content was not "conjecture", but what has been reported by all major news publications in Norway, up to and including the VG article that was cited to claim that it was conjecture. In fact, this VG article goes into more detail, describing that the man has suffered from sleep issues and has been traumatized by the incident. As the NATO soldiers have no legal jurisdiction to detail civilians in Norway, this is most definitely a form of harassment. Urinating and defecating on kindergarten property is also a form of harassment. I am also reverting changes to the wording of the claim, which constitutes a seemingly deliberate attempt to mitigate negative publicity following the incident. The source clearly states that soldiers were observed defecating and urinating on school grounds. The original wording of "recess" grounds admittedly reveals a bias, and this change is more than appropriate.

Environmental damage and complaints
The table provided by the source does not add the numbers correctly, which can be easily verified by simple arithmetic. For an extra check, one can also load an archived version of the page in the source for the date preceding the last update, which shows that the totals reported on the page are inconsistent, although this is hardly necessary, given that the current table can be used to find the total. That said, I agree that this does not fall under the category of harassment, and I appreciate that the user corrected the number of collisions reported, which was erroneously reported as 50, when the correct total is 30. To rectify the categorization issue, I've moved this information up in the hierarchy and used it as part of an introduction to the section.

Public perspective study
Is the study conducted by Kantar TNS publicly available? There are several news agencies in Norway reporting these figures, but no document provided as a source, as far as I can tell. Is there a methodology report that people can read?

If not, then this may be of relevance in the public perception section, especially given that the report was commissioned by the Norwegian Armed Forces itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndersLeo (talk • contribs) 19:37, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

--- OK, let's be honest when editing, please.

First: Nowhere in your source does it claim the man was aggressively detained. Not once. You're purely speculating. He's handicapped (autism), and says he was afraid. That's it. The man was detained lawfully per Lov om politimyndighet i forsvaret § 1 (Offiserer, befal, militærpoliti og militære vakter har politimyndighet overfor alle som er på militært område eller i umiddelbar nærhet av det.), and handcuffed on the basis of suspicious behaviour. You're effectively adding words to an article which does not contain them, hence conjecturing.

Second: You seem to struggle with translations. The man wasn't jogging. He was walking. Your own source verifies this. Why would you make this up?

Third: You state your source backs up your claim of soldiers urinating and defecating on school grounds, saying there were witnesses. I believe my reading comprehension is good enough to undertand the difference between "next too/proximity of" and "on". Your source says "next to", and I'm correcting your unfortunate mistake.

Fourth: It seems the detained man himself disagrees with you 100%. https://www.t-a.no/nyheter/2018/11/06/–-Hils-soldatene-og-si-at-jeg-ikke-er-sint-på-dem-17831437.ece

Fifth: The study done by Kantar is cited by several reputable news sources. That's how Wikipedia works. Like it or not. Justm (talk) 20:51, 12 November 2018 (UTC)


 * There's no reason to accuse me of being dishonest. I appreciate you clarifying your edits and I genuinely appreciate when other editors can tell me when I am being honest, as long as they are doing so in good faith.


 * Re: First: Perhaps my Norwegian is not as good as I thought it was, but as far as I'm aware, "stanset" means stopped. Or in other words, "detained", as is the common diction in this context. As for "aggressively", I will admit that I may be struggling with the word "ransaket". The best translation I can come up with is "ransacked", or perhaps "aggressively searched". Perhaps you can provide a better translation. Unless this is incorrect, then the only "speculating" I have done is that soldiers who aggressive searched a man would have aggressively detained him as well. In that case, maybe "aggressively searched" or even "ransacked" would be a better edit?


 * By the way, are you suggesting that non-Norwegian NATO soldiers have police jurisdiction under Lov om politimyndighet i forsvaret § 1? If so, that would be a shocking development in the interpretation of Norwegian law that I think most Norwegians would be unaware of. Unless, of course, it is referring to the Norwegian forsvaret and not any incidental military personnel invited on Norwegian soil.


 * Re: Second: The NRK source says he was on his "daglige trimtur". In my region, this means a daily jog. It is incredibly petty to accuse me of "making up" something so trivial to the matter at hand.


 * Re: Third: You are absolutely correct. My apologies. The source says "rett ved", i.e. "right by". Arguably open to interpretation, but I agree that we should err on the side you are inclined towards. "Unfortunate mistake" is a gross mischaracterization.


 * Re: Fourth: Thanks for providing this source. Your earlier source indicated otherwise. Moreover, that he forgives the soldiers does not change the fact that he was reportedly traumatized by the incident and suffered sleep disruptions as a result, as your first source indicates. This nonetheless has exactly 0 bearing on whether or not the incident constitutes harassment. If anybody else with no legal jurisdiction were to handcuff you against your will, this would not be called "harassment". It would be called "assault". If anybody were to defecate on or right next to a kindergarten, they would again be facing something more serious than a harassment charge. To call these things harassment is incredibly generous.


 * Re: Fifth: Wow! You know how Wikipedia works too? Excellent, we're on the same page! And since you have, as you put it, good reading comprehension, you might understand that I'm simply asking if there are any editors who know where to find the Kantar study. Reputable news sources write about studies like this all the time. Almost always, those sources with journalistic integrity will provide a link to the study they are citing, or at the very least will provide a proper citation for the reader so that they may find it themselves, or at least to know who was responsible for its findings. If any other nation's military commissioned a public perceptions study regarding the most massive exercise in its modern history and offered only claims from said study without offering a methodology report or a full report, this would be newsworthy information. All I'm asking is if this is publicly available. If not, it bears mention when it is cited. After all...let's be honest when editing, please. AndersLeo (talk) 22:50, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Did I question he was detained? No. You really have to read before editing or answering me. "Å ransake" means to search someone. It's a common police procedure. I oppose your word "aggressively" since it doesn't imply this in any of your sources. As for "trimtur". Read the TA article. It says "Den daglige spaserturen". It literally says walking. I've added the source so you can't make up he was running around. The soldiers DO have legal jurisdiction to apprehend. Read the law, or even better, read THIS: https://www.riksadvokaten.no/document/ovelse-trident-juncture/ Read both the page, and the PDF. Justm (talk) 00:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clarifying. Again, there's absolutely no reason to accuse me of operating in bad faith and "making things up". I was unfamiliar with the word "ransake"; now I'm not.
 * I was also unfamiliar with the law you cited. Subjectively, I find that absolutely shocking. Thanks for sharing this information. That said, I never made any edits that intended to imply that these things were illegal (although the argument has been made--not only on the basis of the detention of the man from Spillum). Nor is it legal for soldiers to defecate in public spaces--neither per Norwegian law, nor by Forsvaret's own standards, as the source indicates. However, the word "harassment" does have a legal implication, so I agree with your assessment that its use is inappropriate. I have then replaced it with the juridically ambiguous "disruption".AndersLeo (talk) 14:02, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Tense
This article could use a change in tense from future to past while keeping in mind that because this article was written before the exercise, facts may have changed about the exercise such as locations/players, etc. due to weather or other issues during the course of the exercise. It will not be enough just to change the tense. I would do so myself, but am currently lacking in specific knowledge or time to dedicate to such a task. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 06:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll dedicate some time to it after the exercise ends on 23 November. Justm (talk) 12:11, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Of course! You proved my point ;) Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:18, 13 November 2018 (UTC)