Talk:Bosnian War

Iran supporting Bosnia during war

Please note, that theres creditable sources for this information such as: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRPT-105hrpt804/html/CRPT-105hrpt804.htm

As i saw someone delete previous users attempts to put Iran as Supporter of Bosnian side during the war. 24.135.247.101 (talk) 22:35, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Because we do not record 'supporters as such, we record active participants. Iranian weapons were supplied to the Bosnian side, we record that. Many countries gave diplomatic, moral or material support to all three warring parties (eg Russia and other Orthodox countries supported the Serbs politically and materially). Countries with substantial Croatian diasporas tended to favour the Croats, Muslim countries tended to favour and help the Bosniaks. Additionally, all three factions had volunteers/mercenaries from countries that they were culturally, ethnically, or religiously tied to. We record these when they were significant in scale and impact, but none of these make the various countries 'paricipants' in the war and it isn't practical to record all the countries that were prepared to supply weaponry or give diplomatic support to each party.Pincrete (talk) 11:24, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Well its clearly a significant scale when US spoke about it and released it, we couldove put many things but in my opinion its worth leaving the Iran as Support due to Iranians being in Mujaheeden in Bosnia. 24.135.247.101 (talk) 18:14, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

I agree with your conclusion, if not necessarily your logic. The US State Dept etc., no less than any country's agencies will tend to highlight, those things which marry with their own agenda.

The document you supply though is primarily concerned with examining the morality/legality of the US 'allowing' the transit of arms, through Croatia, and whether the US had perpetrated any 'covert action' in doing so, rather than documenting the supply of weapons per se.Pincrete (talk) 04:15, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

As u said "examining morality/legality" tho that still dosent make Iran not be major part in arming Bosnia, and Iran is mentioned as Supporter on Bosnian-Croatian war aswell, so it would be appropriate to put it here aswell. 188.2.52.224 (talk) 01:07, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

The use of "Supported by" in the combatant parameter of Template:Infobox military conflict is deprecated (see RfC: Template talk:Infobox military conflict#RfC on "supported by" being used with the belligerent parameter). This information should be placed in the article body, not the Infobox. If disagree please seek consensus to override previous consensus. Ckfasdf (talk) 01:26, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Copy-paste response from your edits, when you get a serious rule and not a debate about it you can edit it, untill then i will revert your changes Savingtruth00 (talk) 19:10, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

@Savingtruth00: ​The "Supported by" was removed, not because of a debate, but because the community agreed on a serious rule after a conclusion of Request for Comment (RfC) located here: Template talk:Infobox military conflict#RfC on "supported by" being used with the belligerent parameter. Keeping to revert edits that follow this serious rule is considered disruptive editing. If you disagree with the current serious rule, you are free to open a new RfC. But until a new RfC that change the previous one achieves consensus, you must follow the current serious rule. Ckfasdf (talk) 21:53, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Longest war in modern European history (since World War II)?

If the Bosnian War was the longest war in modern European history (since World War II), shouldn't we mention that fact in this article? ~2025-31208-44 (talk) 00:45, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

I think you probably mean the longest war in Europe since WWII (wars involving European powers have taken place outside Europe in that time).

Was it the longest? Do you have a source for that? I know the siege of Sarajevo is often cited as the longest modern siege, but I'm not sure about it being the longest war, we'd need a [[WP:RS|reliable source for that claim[[. Pincrete (talk) 18:25, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Should we add Herzeg Bosnia to the serb belligerent box as limited cooperation?

In several battles during the Croat Bosniak war there was cooperation between Serbs and Croat forces ~2026-93523-5 (talk) 18:59, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

If I understand you correctly, that is partly already done, in that Herzeg Bosnia (and Croatia) are shown as a 'third party' during the 1992-4 period. This doesn't quite put them in "the Serb belligerent box", but I don't think it is practical to condense the infobox to show the "changing alliances" of that period. Someone has to read the article to get the 'whole picture'.

Any specific suggestions? Pincrete (talk) 14:22, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Maybe we should remove the third party box entirely and put Herzeg Bosnia with the Serbs but put a line between them like the Soviet union is done on the invasion of Poland page. Or, we could keep the third party box but put either Republika srpska in the Croat box or Herzeg Bosnia in the republika srpska box with limited cooperation in parentheses. I believe the first one I said would be the best option as I don’t believe there were any engagements between Croats and Serbs during time besides Croats loyal to the Bosnian government such as the HOS and the HVO in Sarajevo. ~2026-93523-5 (talk) 15:57, 13 February 2026 (UTC)