Talk:Ustaše/Archive 2

Serbian Bodyguards and troops
A fact that should be mentioned in the article is: 1. Ante Pavelic had a Serbian bodyguard right up until he fled to Argentina. He was not just a bodygurad but was like a right hand man. 2. Many of the Ustashe troops were in fact Serbian by blood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.111.75.195 (talk • contribs) The above is known and written about in the former Yugoslvia. I forget the name of the book...Evergreen Montenegro1 03:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Molba za hrvatske trolove
Ima nas Hrvata kojima ne imponira da nas smatraju retardiranim nacistima pa bi vas ljubazno zamolio da vaše štovanje Ante Pavelića i Adolfa Hitlera ostavite za svoje jazbine i iz njih ne izlazite. Hvala. Jakiša Tomić 22:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Jakiša, svaka ti čast, drago mi je da je već neko to lepo napisao da svi vide. Bravo, ura za Hrvate kao što si ti :-) --[[Image:Flag of Serbia.svg|20px]] serbiana  -  talk  23:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hvala. Inače, ništa posebno. Svatko čisti smeće u svojoj kući pa ne vidim zašto bi na Wikipediji pravili iznimku. Jakiša Tomić 10:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Mene samo zanima zasto ima tako puno napisano o ustasam,dok o cetnicima ,koji su pocinili najgore zlocine od holokausta, ima par recenica, a najgora je ona u kojoj kazu da su cetnici brutalno ubili puno ljudu u Srebrenici I Vukovar? Prikazuju ih kao eto tako neku kraljevsku vojnu formaciju odanu svojoj kraljevini, dok su ustase prikazani kao najgori zlocinci sto su ikad postojali.Zasto se ne pise o tisucama ubijenih,mucenih i silovanih. Sta je sa cijelim selima koja su poklana od strane cetnika? I zasto se uopce govori o nepostojecim pretenzijama Hrvatske na ostala podrucja i tzv. ideji velike Hrvatske. Srbi imaju samo jako dobar PR i pokusavaju promijenti povijesne cinjenice. Barem budite posteni i koristite svjetski priznate povijesne cinjenice, a ne tu neke knjige po cika ovom i onom.

This discussion is no doubt highly interesting. I would love to read it, because I can't, as I cannot read Serbo-Croatian. Which is why I read the English-language Wikipedia. Perhaps if someone could translate? (Or as teacher used to say, don't pass notes between yourselves, share it with the rest of the class!) --Davecampbell 23:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC) Jakisha,o kojim klanjima prichash,o Jasenovcu,1.000.000 Srba pod zemljom,Hercegovina,50.000,o onim gde su tvoje ustashe ostavile tragove,sreca pa se neznaju im isti kod Staljingrada,otishlo ih 10.000 i niti jedan se vrati zhiv...to je istorija,i to da je smrad Stepinac,pokrstio 200.000 Srba,to su chinjenice,to vas boli...pa hocete da kazete da nije,,,razmisli djed ti mozda bio Srbin,Tomic je samo Srbsko prezime...nacistichka stoko..

Jao
Jao tebi Tomicu jao tebi.

Concerning the gruesome photos
I see that the two particularly gruesome photos portraying Ustasha atrocities have been removed from the article without explanation by user 72.140.100.156. While there may be some merit to the contention that having images of such a repugnant nature in the article is an appeal to emotion and perhaps a distraction from the information of the article itself, it does not appear to me that that was at all the intention of said user. Rather, I am led to believe, unfortunately, by the history of said user's vandalizing articles concerning Croatian matters with what seems to be a racist bent, that the removal is in fact an instance of censorship. However, the matter of the appropriateness of the images to the article is certainly something worthy of consideration, and I think it should be discussed whether the images ought be restored, and a consensus formed. Personally, I feel at least one of the images ought to remain, but that using both was superfluous and not a little inordinant. Any thoughts?71.205.198.107 19:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The picture with people holding a head (Image:Ustase1.png) is indeed gruesome; then again, the picture with people holding a person (Image:Ustasenoz.jpg) is not particularly obvious since I can't seem to see a knife or a saw on it (probably because it's black and white). I'm not sure either of them is particularly enlightening, although they are both quite scary.
 * About the first image, notice another complaint above - section . --Joy &#91;shallot] 20:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Reordering the Sections
I think it makes alot of sense to move the Ideology section to the begining of the arcticle, followed by History, and then the rest. As it stands now, the reader is told what the Ustashi did before bieng told why they did it. Crocodilicus 21:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Robert Kaplan
Why would Balkin Ghosts not be valid enough to mention? Since it documents allot of what is stated in this article. The mention is for reference. LoveMonkey 12:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Discrepancy
"In all of Yugoslavia, the estimated number of Serb deaths was 487,000 according to Kočović, and 530,000 according to Žerjavić, out of a total of 1,014,000 or 1,027,000 deaths (resp.). Žerjavić further stated that there were 197,000 Serb civilians killed in NDH (78,000 as prisoners in Jasenovac and elsewhere) as well as 125,000 Serb combatants."

As per the above Žerjavić claimed 530,000 deaths, but he "further stated that there were 197,000 Serb civilians killed in NDH (78,000 as prisoners in Jasenovac and elsewhere) as well as 125,000 Serb combatants."

The difference between the two numbers is 208,000. Can anyone clear up this discrepancy?

Evelyn1010 13:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Not sure, but I think 530.000 is the number for whole of Yugoslavia. It would make sence since the total number of victims for Yugoslavia is about 1 million. Like Croatia, there was a civil war also in Serbia between nationalist and communist forces and many Serb nationalists and other proclaimed 'traitors' were executed by communists after the war. Also, at least 10.000 Serbs died in the Bleiburg massacre. paladin 14:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

=
Do you really think it's that general? Some Serbs have invested a lot of effort in duping people like you into believing that the Croatians are a bunch of bloodthirsty Holocaust deniers. You need to carefully re-read whatever history lessons you've been given before making such a blanket statement, because a lot of us are very passionate about dispelling this myth. Mihovil 01:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, you should sign your comments. Mihovil 01:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

=
I'm afraid you entirely missed the point of my comment. It is a fact that is hardly ever argued amongst historians that the Ustashe performed acts of genocide against Serbs, Jews, Roma and other minorities in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Still, you choose, either wilfully or through ignorance, to portray this as a myth. Again, it goes to strengthen my previous argument that a large portion of the Croatian public was never forced to come to terms with the horrors of their past, unlike the Germans, Japanese, Austrians, and other Axis powers, which is a dangerous precedent for the re-occurrence of fascist ideologies and such atrocities.

You present no real argument, supporting source, or fact, but a blind blanket statement that its all a myth? So according to you the Jasenovac concentration camp was invented by the Serbian and Jewish propaganda? And its name the "Auschwitz of the Balkans" was subsequently given by the Jewish survivors because their soul purpose is to portray Croatians as blood thirsty? If you truly believe this then I ask you to read virtually any reliable source on the matter and try to accept what you find. On the other hand, if you don't, and are simply trying to insult the memory of the victims by calling it all a "myth", I would ask you to refrain from doing so.

visit: http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/jasenovac/ - United States Holocaust Memorial Museum http://www.jasenovac.org - Jasenovac Research Institute

p.s. Your strongest point was me not signing my name. For that I'm sorry, I am new to wiki and have not registered as of yet. But I'd ask you to separate your comments in the future as you simply added a paragraph to my previous post which is confusing at best.

Lazar

CŘoatia was a puppet state with Ante pavelic as a leader, he joined becaoseof the independece and ustase were a movment and not all croatians were ustase and did those crimes ,and what about cetnik's they did worst crimes than ustase and about Croatians being bloodthursty that's just propaganda of serbs MetalCro 17:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Croatian Ustashe Denial
It may not sound too objective, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Croats, among theselves, suopport and applaud the Ustashe's actions, yet deny most atrocities publicly. The NDH (new Ustasha party) counts the population's majority among its members. Among NDH supporters are the clinton-Albright-Berger team, and that's one reason why they committed the 1995 Serb extermination.

Sorry to sound partisan, but truth is not always PC. Wiki guidelines unfortunately satnd often between truth and the permitted content.Www.jpfo.org
 * but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Croats, among theselves, suopport and applaud the Ustashe's actions,


 * Care to cite a source for that? 69.118.244.33 02:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

You gotta love this...
75.199.43.11 03:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC) vonList I cannot understand how this article is controversial. The discussion section perhaps. Mostly I am afraid for my safety just commenting:

"Ustaše were implicated in over two dozen terrorist acts following the post-war period including bombings in the United States"

That is serious. For the record I would not trust either side in their argument. It's like playing ASSASSINS, kind of fun until you get grabbed by the ass with both hands.

To all those believing in our country, our constitution, and in our freedom - please continue to do a good job as you have demonstrated with this article.

Modified Intro
Modified 1990's reference in the into: from After the collapse of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, there was a certain resurgence of Ustaše ideology and some paramilitary units claimed the mantle of the name.

to ''After the collapse of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, there was a certain resurgence of Ustaše symbology coinciding with the residual hate from the recent war. This phenomenon was mitigated with the passing of legislation by the Croatian government banning Ustasha symbols and associated references.''

The reasons for the change include: iruka 08:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There is no evidence of resurgence in ideology, but lots of evidence of increase use of symbology especially around areas that suffered heavy casualties and devastation during the war - thus the adjustment to reflect this fact;
 * No evidence of paramilitaries adopting the ideology - I do not count HOS in that group who had a Party of Rights agenda as opposed to an Ustasha agenda - often the two get confused as the same b/c the Ustasha was an offshoot of the party of rights and there was some crossover in political goals e.g. independent Croat state; notion of historical territory ;
 * No mention of anti-hate speech legislation and the ban of Ustasha symbols - included mention of this in intro.

Be Valid!
Nothing you said is credible. mm

Grossly Invalid
This article is digustingly biased and slanted. The bombardment of the Catholic Church is even more disturbing. This article should be written be a valid historian, not a Serbian crackpot. Hrcalifornia 01:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Inaccurate, unreferenced propaganda
The entire content of this 'history' article is either inaccurate, completely false, exaggerated or pure propaganda.

The only way to make this article valid is to present both the Serbian and Croatian views. In this way, we can let overzealous nationalists spread both sides of the propaganda and simply average out the figures to find a middle ground.

A poorly referenced, historically inaccurate article such as this undermimes the integrity of Wikipedia as an "encyclopaedia".

Still no thanks!
Around 921-924, the Bulgarians had their foot on the necks of the Serbs which made many Serbs flee and seek shelter in Croatia. If it was not for the Croatians there would be no Serbia or a living Serb today. Hey war is hell for all sides. There are things that all sides are ashamed of. But at the time they were done there was reasons. Good or bad there was reasons. No one is crying about the “Bleiburg massacre” (http://www.answers.com/topic/bleiburg-massacre) that was done in the same time period.

Right or wrong: Ustaše had a greater reason then being a puppet state to the Nazi/Italian Axis power of Europe. Like it or not, first and foremost they were Croatian Freedom Fighters. They would do anything to preserve their family and homeland. Siding with the Axis power got them their Croatia back. Now, is that so bad? Remember! Croatia’s payment to Axis power was to be a “PUPPET STATE”. The Ustaše paid in full with their blood to god for what they did. So get off there F#@KEN backs! They could have lain down like another country did back around 921-924 but they had more pride.

For all the Croatian, Serb, and the others regardless of the number 1 or 1,000,000 that lives were lost during the world wars; I hope they all are resting in peace. God bless them all!

136.181.195.9 19:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)CroCrew

Answer to "Still no thanks"
What you're saying about the bulgars and the serbs in 921 is history thats hazy at best. The Bulgars where agressive but anything else cant really be said one way or the other, every thing from them fighting to fleeing to croatia. Much like all the fake history invented to prove croatias superiority to all other countries (i.e. King Tomislav and his 160k troops). What is a proven fact is that after WW1 croatia was completely screwed becaused they had sided with the germans and came up second best (not the only time they let someone in there country because they couldnt fight like men). After croatia lay in ruins Serbia let them into the union which was meant to be from day one run by Slavs. Without this help that the Serbs gave despite croatia siding with the people that threatened to destroy all Slavs (which they are), croatia would of have been in complete ruins and without an army would of have been RAPED. So before you talk out of your ass read a fucking history book.

answer to answer: i think that you should read a history book and understand that if we fight like girls and not like men, how did croatia beat all of yugoslavia in 1990. mate you have no idea of the odds croatia was up against and we beat them all. they spilt their guts just like the ustasa did for an independent croatia and i would gladely do the same to keep our country free from the serbs

Serbs are Hipacrits
Serbs always think that we Croats are the villians, they kill our people and take our land and call it Serbian patriosism against the nazi Croats. This is lies from the Serbs, they act as they are the victims but when they kill our people they act as if we were killing them. Most Serbs in particular who live in Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo and Montenagro all caused troube for the Yugoslav Federation to grab more land. The Serbs in Kosovo are the worst of them because in 1987 they complained to Slobodane Milosovic that the Albanians were killing them, rapping them ect but they were straight out lying and thats was the starting point of whole problem which spread throughout Yugoslavia through the lies which the Kosovar Serbs were spreading. --Marbus2 5 08:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)