Talk:2010 Mardakert clashes

Armenian occupants, lol

Didn't know that a people who systematically have lived in Artsakh over two millenium become occupants. Ionidasz (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I guess that Azerbaijanis don't want to accept that Nagorno-Karabakh is simply not theirs...--Davo88 (talk) 15:50, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

"Millenium" when referrring to Armenians is what you believe in, others may believe other ethnicities like Albanians lived in the area for over a millenium. Recorded history also shows how hundreds of thousands of Persian and Ottoman Armenians were moved to Karabakh by imperial Russia in the 19th century and Turkic tribes lived there since the Seljuks moved in in big numbers in the 11th century. So whether the inhabitants of the area that lived there for millenium were Albanians, Armenians, Azeris, Persians or Turks can be contested and debated for long. These groups lived in the same area in majorities and minorities in comparison to each other with time and policies of superpowers changing often. What the editor probably refers to when saying "occupants" is the fact that the territories are recognized as legal parts of Azerbaijan whether anyone lived or died there millenium ago, and any foreign force appropriating the lands unrecognized by anyone else is of course to be called "occupants".  Anastasia Bukhantseva  04:11, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter who lived there a millenium ago. The only important thing is that neutral sources recognize the fact of occupation. This is not the question of history but the question of violation of international laws. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:15, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Anastasia, the Armenians were living there at least since Strabo described it, I'd believe that would make it at least 2 millenium and the at least two millenium is also true if we take the sources which claims Armenians moved there recently, as it only means 600 BC and at least since 200 BC for Artsakh. There was no thousands of Armenians having moved in Artsakh, Karabakh does not equal Artsakh since that includes the lowlands. And there is no evidence that there was any considerable Turkic, Tatar etc. population in Artsakh anywhere in history, Shushi (and Khojali, and this only recently) was an exception and was granted by the Malik to have a Muslim fortress there.

There is no foreign control of Artsakh, those people lived in Artsakh for at least two millenium and are now running the place. They can not be occupants, as the place was not invaded by any foreign people but is run by its own people and its own army. --Davo88 (talk) 17:11, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Then why does the president of Armenia takes part in negotiations about Nagorno-Karabakh. Isn't Armenia a foreign state for Azerbaijan? --Quantum666 (talk) 17:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Davo, once more, what you say is what YOU believe in. Of course there are historical data speaking of Armenian presence in Karabakh for several centuries but there also is data on recent movements of Armenians into Karabakh from Persia and Ottoman empire after Russo-Persian wars. This all is documented in Ambassador Griboyedov's reports and any Russian archives of the time. The same can be said about movements of Azeris from the lower Zangezur in 1940s by orders of Stalin and relocation of Armenians from diaspora there. What you say about presence of Armenian melikdoms is not contested. They existed during and before the Azerbaijani khanates and during the presence of Turkic inhabitants, but who and when lived there ages ago does not matter in the present. With that argument, we should create another Caucasian Albania and abolish Azerbaijani and part of Armenian state now, or maybe allow another Arabian Caliphate, Ottoman Empire, Persian Empire or better yet Russian Empire to be created on all territories they once owned. Do you think Armenian Republic of 1991 should exist then?  Anastasia Bukhantseva  21:22, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Ha!Ha! Fairy tales! Albanians or not, there were Armenians there at least since 200BC and this even according to the most critical sources. And no, there are no sources, including Griboyedov which claims any Armenians having been relocated in the territory of current NK. And the rest of your relpy does not worth answering to, fact is that occupy is unencyclopedic, POV and innacurate, period! BTW, you act a lot like Tuscumbia.

The Artsakh republic wants to be part in the negociations and replace Armenia, but Azerbaijan has been refusing to let that. Go blame Azerbaijan for that. --Davo88 (talk) 02:55, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

The question is not about NKR's wishes but about the fact that the negotiations are held between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Go blame Armenia for that. --Quantum666 (talk) 06:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Protected

Due to the recent edit warring this page has been protected for a week. Please use the time to discuss the matter here and come to a consensus on what should and shouldn't be included on the page. If an urgent edit needs to be made during the protection, please place the template {{editprotected}} here with details of the edit that needs to be made and justification for the edit, and an administrator will come by to make the edit. If you have agreed and resolved the dispute before the expiry of the protection, please make a listing at requests for unprotection. While it is also possible to make such requests on my talk page, it would be quicker for you to use those previous methods. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 09:04, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Stifle, there was already a consensus to not use terms such as occupants and occupation; to break that consensus there should be another consensus. Also, the information both users are introducing is inaccurate, it is not the Armenian forces, like Ionidasz has already stated, there is only one internationally recognized Armenian armed force and it is the army of the republic of Armenia. It is the Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army, it's its official name and this regardless of the recognition of NK as a state. --Davo88 (talk) 17:11, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Davo88, we have already discussed this question but tou still ignore the sources saying about Armenian forces but not just NKR. And you know the reason of such wording: the fact that Armenian forces in Nagorno-Karabakh consist not only of NKR forces is recognized by everyone even by Armenians. --Quantum666 (talk) 17:52, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Read this report and you will understand that the presence of Armenian army of foreign soil, that is, Azerbaijan is not contested, but is a fact:

The incidents also confirm the presence of Amenian soldiers in Nagorno Karabakh, something official Yerevan denies, but which most citizens know. Indeed, bribes are often paid to avoid service on the front line. "It's usually the rich who do their army service in Armenia while the poor are sent to Karabakh,” Harutyunyan told Azerbaijani media [1]

 Anastasia Bukhantseva  21:30, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

And there are several Turkish army personals in the Azeri armed forces? And the Azeri press is not credible. Fact is that there is only one recognized Armenian forces, and it is the Armenian armed forces of the republic of Armenia. Period!

What discussion? A discussion implies discussing with someone. Martakert is within Artsakh, and the UN does not recognize Artsakh as an occupation but the territories outside it controlled by the defense army. The same applies for Armenian forces, Martakert is defended by its own people and there is only one recognized Armenian forces, those of the republic. --Davo88 (talk) 02:55, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Whatever you say the neutral sources presented in the article talk about Armenian forces. So please stop writing OR. --Quantum666 (talk) 06:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

That's all well and good, but the edit warring is causing a nuisance and once you're all happy with what should be in the article, it can be unprotected. Stifle (talk) 10:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Belligerents

Belligerents here were obviously Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and Azerbaijan. Propose changing the respective section of the infobox. Note that both NKR and Republic of Armenia forces are Armenian (ethnically), but those are still forces of 2 different states. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 15:33, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

So no objections here? -- Ashot  ^(talk) 09:05, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Even children in Armenia and in Azerbaijan know that those soldiers in occupied territories are mostly armenians from Armenia. For example, one of the armenian soldiers killed by Mubariz Ibrahimov was from Kapan, which is clearly in Armenia, not in Nagorno-Karabakh. --Verman1 (talk) 09:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I recommend you to be patient --Verman1 (talk) 09:09, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

You can keep your recommendations for yourself. Soldiers of Nagorno Karabakh army could be born anywhere, some of them even in Baku, Sumgait, etc. So what? Please note, that children of Azerbaijan cannot be a source to cite here, so if you don't have any sources, the article should be changed respectively. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 09:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

So as of now, there are 2 sources mentioned in Belligerents section of the infobox:

1. Armenian, Azerbaijani Clashes Continue In Karabakh." RFE/RL. June 22, 2010. Retrieved June 22, 2010.

2. Один из раненых армянских солдат в крайне тяжелом состоянии. Google translation.

In the first source we see "Karabakh Armenian military officials insisted their forces suffered no...", "The Defense Army of the self-proclaimed Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) claimed on June 21 that Azerbaijani troops breached the cease-fire regime...", "The Karabakh military has also identified the four Armenian conscripts who were killed on the night of June 18-19". There is nothing to refer to say that Armenia was a belligerent.

The second source just tells that a soldier who was born in Kapan, Armenia, was wounded in the skirmish.

Hence, unless there are other sources, the belligerents are Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and Azerbaijan. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 11:23, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Those sources are apparently misquoted. They say absolutely nothing about Armenia as a state involved in the skirmish. I suggest to adjust the article right away. --vacio 19:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 July 2023

TRAVERA1 (talk) 13:20, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Alot of non azerbaijani state-led references claim that 45, and sometimes 145 armenian soldiers were killed by 1 man, Mubariz ibrahimov. I just want to add that in there.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ULPS (talk) 14:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)