Talk:Attack on Prekaz

The Myth of 5,000 Serbian Soldiers Hunting Adem Jashari

First, let’s address the scale of this supposed operation. 5,000 soldiers is an enormous force, far beyond what would realistically be needed to deal with any one individual, regardless of his military involvement. The assertion that 5,000 Serbian personnel were deployed specifically to hunt down Adem Jashari is nothing more than an unfounded exaggeration and an attempt to distort historical facts. There is no credible evidence to support such an absurd claim, and it appears to be a fabrication aimed at generating false narratives of persecution. Eren Beksac, an Albanian writer, is the only source to mention this inflated number, and this should immediately raise concerns about the accuracy and objectivity of the claim. What's the point of Wikipedia if its used to spread propaganda and self interest? Benyakov (talk) 21:44, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Read WP:IDONTLIKEIT, the sources give the number 5000 or "large". Durraz0 (talk) 15:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

1 Source, which is obviously biased and non objective, please stop spreading propaganda, i will include large but 5000 is absurd Benyakov (talk) 20:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

A deployment of around 5,000 men is entirely plausible given that Adem Jashari was wanted for nearly a decade by Serbian authorities, and all previous attempts to capture or kill him failed. Thanks, Yung Doohickey (talk) 03:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Absolutely not. you can easily deploy 50 to 500 personnel depending on terrain to hunt down anyone. Problem is source, Eren Beksac, using propaganda numbers is dangerous. Benyakov (talk) 16:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not work like this. Read WP:IDONTLIKEIT. You not liking the source, or claiming it is dangerous is your personal POV. Wikipedia must reflect what RS say. Durraz0 (talk) 15:47, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

In this case Wikipedia reflects what Unreliable source says. I can use some random news article to prove somehow Skanderbeg was a Greek, is that RS? Also using poor source is dangerous. Benyakov (talk) 17:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

5000 active personnel is most probably not true; do we have any other sources available? — Sadko (words are wind) 20:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

None of them mention 5000 except Eren Beksac report that is also unsourced on his news article. Benyakov (talk) 20:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

I did some digging and couldn’t find any reliable sources to support the 5000 figure or any similar claim. My guess is that this number is part of the myth-making and narrative-building surrounding the legendary commander and his story which is a part of the national metanarrative. — Sadko (words are wind) 22:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

The operation lasted seven days and was led by the Special Operations Unit of the State Security Service and the Special Anti-Terrorist Unit of the Serbian Ministry of Interior. It’s simply not possible for two elite units to consist of 5,000 people—that’s outright nonsense. A logical estimate would be several hundred at most. — Sadko (words are wind) 22:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

You are right, thats what i have been doing this whole time but he seems like to totally ignore it.

Its almost as if he is trying to force it without reliable source. Benyakov (talk) 15:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Nevertheless, that's no reason to engage in edit wars; there are other ways to address the issue.— Sadko (words are wind) 16:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I will gladly stop, unfortunately i dont know about many options that i can do except just undo propaganda edits. Benyakov (talk) 20:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

You must stop with your EW and try to be patient. Also, other editors should join the debate.

Do we have any quotes regarding the 5000 figure, aside from Eren Beksac? It seems like a compelling example of of WP:EXTRAORDINARY. — Sadko (words are wind) 10:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: The claim about the total number of Serbian troops deployed in Prekaz is supported and I've added the quote. At the time of the event, there were at least 14k members of police units, 15k military personnel and thousands who were part of Serbian paramilitary units in Kosovo (Stanar, Tonn 2022). As such, it's not WP:EXTRAORDINARY that 5,000 were involved in a high profile operation.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

  Quote comes from news article without any source supporting that claim, or simply Eren Beksac who is unreliable and biased, its basically trust me number.

  Also 14k 15k is even more absurd, where are you getting these numbers please? Benyakov (talk) 23:02, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

  Nevermind, i have the source here, as long as its supported its fine.

  I dont know why others didnt show this source. Benyakov (talk) 23:05, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

1) It is supported by a single source, which is not reliable and is the only one to use the figure of 5000. 2) Can you provide the quotes for the other sources, or is this another case of WP:SYNTH? 3) The presence of approximately 30,000 armed Yugoslav and Serbian personnel does not provide sufficient grounds or logical support for the claim that 5,000 of them attacked 50 militants. This assertion lacks backing from a broader range of sources, and the attack was primarily led by elite units comprising several hundred individuals. 4) As you likely know, the terrain itself is not conducive to deploying a large number of troops, not to mention other factors. — Sadko (words are wind) 00:37, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

The link provides you with the exact page where the numbers. Well it comes to the plausibility of there having been 5,000 forces it is certainly possible considering the amount of troops there were in Kosovo. Durraz0 (talk) 14:49, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

The references cannot be accessed, which is problematic. Aside from that, there was no police involvement in the Yugoslav wars or any recent conflict where 5,000 primarily policemen took action. More importantly, we need to verify the sources for the 5,000 figure. — Sadko (words are wind) 15:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

This debate is completely moot. Anadolu Agency, the only source which explicitly mentions the 5,000 figure, is a tool of the Turkish government which has been deemed "generally unreliable" for "controversial topics and international politics" at WP:RSN. [1] The fact we are even having this discussion is insane. According to the U.S. State Department, at the start of the NATO airstrikes the Yugoslav government had around 40,000 armed forces and law enforcement personnel in and around the province. [2]

Aside from the obvious sourcing issues, the notion that 1/8 of all Yugoslav forces in Kosovo were involved in what was essentially a SWAT action against several dozen entrenched militants is preposterous, as is the recently added notion that there were only ">3 militants" on the KLA side. In fact, according to historian Saul David, there were 38, all of whom were killed. The same source lists the personnel strength of the Yugoslav security forces for this particular operation as 100, which is what this article said for over a decade before a certain group of individuals with far too much time on their hands decided to change it. [3] Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 18:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out that Saul David's figures are not reliable since 38 militants overlaps with the 28 women and children killed and the three adult men who were extrajudicially executed upon surrendering by Serbian police. The total killed was most likely 58-59 (Adem + 58 family members), and his figure clearly implies all adult men (including elders) and then some women or kids were militants, which I'd argue WP:EXTRAORDINARY as the only confirmed combatants are Hamez, Shaban, and Adem, so we'd need something more than a brief mention in an encyclopedia to support that. Likewise, the previous figure of 28 militants was erroneously used as the only source attached was the deaths of the 28 women and kids. Thanks, Yung Doohickey (talk) 19:25, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Your argument carries with it the assumption that the category "women and children under the age of 16" automatically means that each of these individuals was a non-combatant/civilian. A person wielding a firearm in a combat zone is (by definition) a combatant, regardless of age or gender. The KLA's penchant for using child soldiers isn't exactly a secret, and quite a few women fought for the KLA, as well. While I understand Kosovo Albanian society is very patriarchal, you can be sure that a lot of that patriarchalism goes out the window when one is outnumbered and outgunned by highly-trained special forces as the Jasharis were.

Amnesty International's contemporary description of "dozens" of armed men in and around the compound is broadly consistent with the figure of 38 fighters that David provides: "Meanwhile, some or all of the male members of each family repelled the police attack with arms. It also appears that they were expecting the police to attack, as they had done in the police action against the Jashari house in January, and in the incidents around Likošane a few days before. Nevertheless, it is evident that they were outnumbered, and had fewer and inferior weapons than the police used. They may well have had dozens of men armed with assault rifles and some other weapons such as anti-tank weapons." [4] Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

There's not much connection you can make to the KLA occasionally using child soldiers (the vast majority being above the age of sixteen) and the Jashari compound having been defended by children below the age of 16, women, and elders (other than Shaban). Amnesty International's description of "dozens" of armed men is purely speculative and is worded as a blind guess. Most of the evidence was destroyed or covered up by Serbian authorities, so we can only verifiably say there were at least three people in the compound who tried protecting themselves with force. We should approach this with a lot of caution as to not mischaracterize and downplay the number of defenseless civilians, some of which trying to surrender, as active combatants. Thanks, Yung Doohickey (talk) 20:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Your addition of "Unknown", while better than ">3 militants", flies directly in the face of multiple sources that have already been provided on this talk page. Additionally, I hope you realized how ludicrous your claim was that the Yugoslav government sent 5,000 special forces against 3 militants. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I believe my skepticism of the "multiple" sources (one being speculation in the same year as the attack, and the other from an unsourced and brief encyclopedic entry) was warranted. I also seriously doubt the accuracy of David's overview as he also describes the shelling and mortaring of the village as "police dispersed a hostile crowd". Thanks, Yung Doohickey (talk) 21:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

If only you would show the same "skepticism" to sources that happen to align with your very narrow POV. But who am I kidding. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

You're right, which is why I'm removing the 5,000 figure until it gains more credible backing. Thanks, Yung Doohickey (talk) 21:36, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Excellent. Always good to see some common sense practiced around here. Best regards, Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your objectiveness, Best regards, Benyakov (talk) 01:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)