Humanities desk
< October 4	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 6 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 5

Operation Storm?

During the Operation Storm that pretty much ended the Croatian War of Independence in Croatia's victory, if the Serb leadership had not ordered the population of hundreds of thousands of Croatian Serbs to evacuate the territory being occupied by the Republic of Serbian Krajina and they decided to stay, would they have been harmed by the Croatian Army? Or would the Croatian government have taken significant steps to protect them, since the West were carefully watching and monitoring the situation?

Asking in case Azerbaijan recaptures its occupied territory and the Armenians refuse to flee en masse. Same goes for a scenario in which Georgia successfully reconquers South Ossetia and Abkhazia. StellarHalo (talk) 01:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My educated guess would be that the Croatian Army would not have so much harmed them other than by possibly expelling them en masse. The Croatian Army might have created a sense of plausible deniability by allowing a relatively large fraction (25%? 33%? 50%?) of the Croatian Serbs to stay put, though--similar to the limited expulsions that Israel conducted during its war of independence, which allowed a huge number of Arabs to remain in the Galilee, among some other places in Israel. Futurist110 (talk) 06:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I noticed that you forgot to mention the possibility of Ukraine reconquering the Donbass Republics here. This is something that Ukrainian nationalists would in all likelihood love to do--followed by a forcible mass expulsion of these republics' residents' pro-Russian inhabitants (comprising 40% or more of these republics' total population) to Russia. Futurist110 (talk) 06:48, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This can only be answered by speculation. My educated opinion: if there is anything we can learn from history, it is that this could have gone any way (other than kumbaya). --Lambiam 07:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how Croatia is too relevant, but the situation between Armenians and Azerbaijanis was rather bitter even before the fall of the Soviet Union, and I doubt that too many ethnic Armenians would be willing to live under Azerbaijani rule... AnonMoos (talk) 02:43, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic tension between Croats and Serbs existed even during the Austro-Hungarian Empire. This continued through the volatile politics of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia and became an all-out genocidal war during World War II. Both Independent State of Croatia and Chetniks committed genocidal atrocities before they both were defeated by communist Yugoslav Partisans and the Red Army at the war's end. Yugoslav Wars were the latest in the history of a long ethnic conflict and Croatia's ultimate triumph (with the exception of failing to annex the territories of Bosnian Croats) allowed it to sweep World War II collaboration and defeat under the rug and built monuments to those who have been massacred after the Bleiburg repatriations. The fiasco with Croatian Wikipedia is one example of that. With most Serbs gone, Croatia is now a member of the European Union and the free world. Operation Storm has been officially celebrated by the Croatian government every year and since it is an internationally accepted solution to ethnic conflicts, Azerbaijan is now unsurprisingly trying to replicate Croatia's success. StellarHalo (talk) 03:19, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know about the Yugoslav wars (I was following them in the newspapers and on NPR as they happened), but I fail to see why the Croatia situation would determine what will happen in Nagorno-Karabakh, or vice versa. AnonMoos (talk) 04:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for starter, the success of Operation Storm set a precedent for other countries to take similar actions against a breakaway region. I was actually surprised that the Serb leadership asked the Serb population to flee since it meant they decided to outright give up the region in perpetuity leaving no possible room for future claim and making any allegation of organized ethnic cleansing of Serbs impossible to prove in court. I am wondering if Azerbaijan has similar success, would the Armenia ordered Armenians to evacuate too? If not, would Azerbaijan take steps to try not to commit atrocities and protect the Armenians like how Croatia reached the Erdut Agreement with the remaining Serbs or would all remaining Armenians in the region be screwed at that point? IIRC, prior to Operation Storm, Croatian government even specifically told the Serbs not to flee. StellarHalo (talk) 07:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If Croatia were to allow Serbs to peacefully remain, it would embarrass the Serb leadership after its claims of persecution and cleansing. This was not unlikely, not least given Croatia's reliance on political and military support from international organizations. Serb leadership may also have been less interested in obtaining a possible court victory than an insured propaganda victory, in face of a definite military loss. This exodus has since been portrayed by far-right extremists in Serbia as forced expelling by Croatian forces and promoted as casus belli for a new war. 93.136.178.2 (talk) 00:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

United States Election - A Split Electoral College

A hypothetical scenario here that I hope doesn't come to pass that I suppose could equally apply to Joe Biden - I use Trump as the example because he is currently ill with the coronavirus.

President Trump is currently ill with Covid-19. In the event that either he dies before the election is held or the election is held and Trump wins, but subsequently dies, what happens next? Is this an issue for the Republican Party to resolve or is it a matter of broader national concern. In either scenario the outcome of the election is a republican victory (either decided on or near Election Day, or as determined by the courts).

From what I understand if he passes before the election, the Republican National Committee would meet and decide a successor. It could be argued, however, that this isn't a legitimate decision as it hasn't been decided upon by the primary process. In the event of Trump's death after winning, the President-Elect would presumably switch from Trump to Mike Pence, the Vice-President elect. If the electoral college meets, however, and it cannot agree who the legitimate president-elect is - either because it disagrees with the RNC nominee or it is under pressure to nominate somebody similar to Trump from voters - does the issue go to the Supreme Court (the confirmation hearings could well be disrupted by senators increasingly becoming ill and could lead to a deadlocked court) or is it purely an issue for the republican party.

Likewise, should the decision go to Congress, do they only determine the outcome of the election through the House voting, or do they determine who the legitimate winner of the election is.

I guess my question is what happens when it is known which party has won, but not which individual? --Andrew 12:21, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If it is after the election is held, but before inauguration, the Twentieth Amendment to the United States Constitution applies, to wit " If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President." If he dies before the electoral college has met, then states are free to figure out how to award the electors he may have received before he died; it's likely they will just go to whoever the party selects to replace him. --Jayron 32 12:48, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Healy on Carson - "although a Unionist, he was never un-Irish"

Tim Healy said of Edward Carson "although a Unionist, he was never un-Irish"^[1]. I need to find the original source of the quotation, thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Although a Unionist," said Mr. Tim Healy to me of him, "he never was un-Irish."^[2] Not sure how complete Volume I was at the time of Marjoribanks' death, but the language doesn't look like it was finished by an editor. fiveby(zero) 18:41, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks @Fiveby:. Marjoribanks had completed what was published as Carson the Advocate by the time of his death. Ian Colvin continued the work as Carson the Statesman

References

^ Boyce, D. George. "Carson, Edward Henry, Baron Carson". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/32310. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
^ Marjoribanks, Edward (1932). Carson, the Advocate. Vol. I. p. 9.

Sex and the City - "stick insect"

Did the lead characters in Sex and the City have an unkind nickname for Natasha, the character played by Bridget Moynahan? Part of my mind thinks it was "the stick insect", but I may be remembering The Growing Pains of Adrian Mole (TV series) (which does have a character with that nickname). -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 18:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I associated "Stick-insect" with Robert Maxwell's daughter-in-law Pandora. However the actual association appears to be that the son of Stick-Insect, Adrian's father's mistress, is called Maxwell, while Pandora is Adrian's girlfriend. 2A00:23C6:2403:E900:11BF:FF75:9819:DE51 (talk) 19:28, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Carrie used the nickname "the idiot stick figure with no soul" for her.^[1] --Lambiam 11:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that would be it. Thank you for finding that. I suppose I'm glad my memory was mostly right, but sad that I've wasted a perfectly good part of my brain on such garbage. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 11:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moving statue in Georgia

Hi, I've seen a video about a moving statue in Georgia. Depending on the source, it's called "a man and a woman" or "impossible love". But it seems like there's no Wikipedia article about it. Would anyone be interested in creating one? 1.53.37.115 (talk) 19:30, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We would need reliable sources before considering an article. The sources would also have to shew notability. We would also need to know which Georgia was involved. DuncanHill (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's the country Georgia. I just typed "moving statue georgia impossible love" (without quotes) into Google and found this page which describes the statue and has a video, and identifies the sculptor as Tamara Kvesitadze. Her Wikipedia article mentions the statue briefly and cites this article from The Independent about it. For what my opinion is worth, I'd say it's notable enough for its own article. --174.89.48.182 (talk) 01:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More news sources: [2], [3], [4]. --Lambiam 11:11, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Boyce, D. George. "Carson, Edward Henry, Baron Carson". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/32310. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)

[2] Marjoribanks, Edward (1932). Carson, the Advocate. Vol. I. p. 9.

[1]

[2]