This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Rape during the Bosnian War article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | Rape during the Bosnian War was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (November 17, 2014). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 22 June 2009. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have restored this section as it is obviously pertains to this article. Darkness Shines ( talk) 08:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
And it's been deleted again without consensus. And I fully intend to restore it unless a consensus is formed for its removal. Darkness Shines ( talk) 21:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
I am happy to discuss what I have removed if anyone is interested. So I will fully explain the first part for now: It read
Firstly, encyclopaedias are not what is "widely believed" on such a definitive claim. Either something is or is not. Just to be able to assume such a thing implies that Yugoslavia's ethnicities inherently hate one another but found themselves unable to think naturally because of a dictator who somehow suppressed conscience. A total fantasy. In reality, the country was created for a reason; its roots are in Pan-Slavism. Historically Serbs did not have a reason to hate Slavic Muslims and despite the circular rumours of "Turkish origin" which floated about in the early 1990s, more credible and unquestionable sources show that Serbs have traditionally viewed Bosniaks as "Serbs who converted faith in Ottoman times" - a reason for disagreement with Croats who say the Bosniaks are actually Croats who converted. I am happy to edit the piece I removed but I still believe that just its very exploration is suggestive of dislike among nations being hardwired in people's brains and this is the propaganda that is used by the western media establishment when fishing for reasons to justify Yugoslavia's breakup so that nobody might impugn the west over its role. -- OJ ( talk) 14:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
It says:
"In 1997, Radovan Karadžić was sued by Bosniak and Croat women in an American court for genocidal rape. He was tried and convicted in absentia."
I don't have access to the cited sources; but if it is true that he was sued, and not prosecuted, then it cannot also be true that he was convicted. Suing someone results in a determination of liability (i.e. damages and compensation), not a determination of criminality. I'm aware that US jurisdiction provides for 'punitive damages', if the damage was accompanied by various aggravating factors; but still, losing a lawsuit never results in a conviction, even when punitive damages are awarded.
http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1585&context=ncilj says it was a suit under tort, which is a kind of damages suit; no conviction can arise from a tort suit.
Alternatively (and I have no source for this), perhaps Karadzic was actually charged under the 'Alien Torts Act', rather than sued; perhaps the act provides for criminal remedies, in which case he could have been convicted.
Can someone with access to the sources fix this? Failing that, I will come back later and remove the words 'tried and convicted', and rerplace them with 'lost the case' (I have not found a record of the outcome of the case, but I assume Karadzic lost, because failure to defend a civil suit automatically results in loss by default). MrDemeanour ( talk) 15:53, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
"Rape, in the Bosnian war, was meant not only to take the bodies of the victims, but also their souls, identity, and their existence."
Is this wikipedia or a poem of some kind? Suggesting rape victims are removed from existence seems extremely metaphoric at best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.100.177.101 ( talk) 09:20, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Rape during the Bosnian War article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | Rape during the Bosnian War was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (November 17, 2014). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 22 June 2009. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have restored this section as it is obviously pertains to this article. Darkness Shines ( talk) 08:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
And it's been deleted again without consensus. And I fully intend to restore it unless a consensus is formed for its removal. Darkness Shines ( talk) 21:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
I am happy to discuss what I have removed if anyone is interested. So I will fully explain the first part for now: It read
Firstly, encyclopaedias are not what is "widely believed" on such a definitive claim. Either something is or is not. Just to be able to assume such a thing implies that Yugoslavia's ethnicities inherently hate one another but found themselves unable to think naturally because of a dictator who somehow suppressed conscience. A total fantasy. In reality, the country was created for a reason; its roots are in Pan-Slavism. Historically Serbs did not have a reason to hate Slavic Muslims and despite the circular rumours of "Turkish origin" which floated about in the early 1990s, more credible and unquestionable sources show that Serbs have traditionally viewed Bosniaks as "Serbs who converted faith in Ottoman times" - a reason for disagreement with Croats who say the Bosniaks are actually Croats who converted. I am happy to edit the piece I removed but I still believe that just its very exploration is suggestive of dislike among nations being hardwired in people's brains and this is the propaganda that is used by the western media establishment when fishing for reasons to justify Yugoslavia's breakup so that nobody might impugn the west over its role. -- OJ ( talk) 14:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
It says:
"In 1997, Radovan Karadžić was sued by Bosniak and Croat women in an American court for genocidal rape. He was tried and convicted in absentia."
I don't have access to the cited sources; but if it is true that he was sued, and not prosecuted, then it cannot also be true that he was convicted. Suing someone results in a determination of liability (i.e. damages and compensation), not a determination of criminality. I'm aware that US jurisdiction provides for 'punitive damages', if the damage was accompanied by various aggravating factors; but still, losing a lawsuit never results in a conviction, even when punitive damages are awarded.
http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1585&context=ncilj says it was a suit under tort, which is a kind of damages suit; no conviction can arise from a tort suit.
Alternatively (and I have no source for this), perhaps Karadzic was actually charged under the 'Alien Torts Act', rather than sued; perhaps the act provides for criminal remedies, in which case he could have been convicted.
Can someone with access to the sources fix this? Failing that, I will come back later and remove the words 'tried and convicted', and rerplace them with 'lost the case' (I have not found a record of the outcome of the case, but I assume Karadzic lost, because failure to defend a civil suit automatically results in loss by default). MrDemeanour ( talk) 15:53, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
"Rape, in the Bosnian war, was meant not only to take the bodies of the victims, but also their souls, identity, and their existence."
Is this wikipedia or a poem of some kind? Suggesting rape victims are removed from existence seems extremely metaphoric at best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.100.177.101 ( talk) 09:20, 20 September 2020 (UTC)