Talk:Serbian campaign

message: Any comment on the effect his betrayal had on the initial campaign?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.104.63 (talk) 00:55, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Alfred Redl

message: there were many contributing factors which caused WWI. Beginnig a paragraph by placing the blame on Serbian officials when this argument has never been proven is not entirely encyclopedic  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.178.233.168 (talk) 06:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause 

message: Atrocities
This is not propaganda. Reiss is a German. The other source is the Austrian historian Anton Holzer(click on "Download Article (PDF, 173 KB)" for the whole article). The photos were taken by the Austrian army itself.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.4.104.99 (talk) 13:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atrocities 

message: The Austro-Hungarian army ordered the massacring of the Serbian civilian population.
"K. u. K. 9 Korps Kommando.
Ruma, 14th August 1914.
By order of A. O. K. Op. Kr. 259.
In consequence of the hostile attitude of the population of
Klenak(1) and Chabatz, hostages will again be taken in all the
Serbian villages, etc., even those situated on this side of the
frontier, which are or will be occupied by the troops. These
hostages are to be killed at once in case of any crime being
committed by the inhabitants against the armed forces (treason)
and the enemy villages are to be burnt. The Commander
of the Army Corps reserves the power to burn the villages on
our own territory.
This order is to be communicated without delay to the population
by the civil authorities.
Hortstein, general.
(1) Klenak is in Hungarian territory."
"K. u. K. 9 Korps Kommando.
Directions for conduct towards the population in Serbia.
The war brings us into a country inhabited by a population
animated by fanatical hate against us, into a country where
murder, as the catastrophe of Sarajevo has proved, is recognised
even by the upper classes who glorify it as heroism.
Towards such a population all humanity and all kindness of
heart are out of place; they are even harmful, for any consideration,
such as it is sometimes possible to show in war, would
in this case endanger our own troops.
Consequently I order that during the whole course of the war
the greatest severity, the greatest harshness and the greatest
mistrust be observed towards everyone.
In the first place I will not allow inhabitants of the enemy's
country, armed but not in uniform, who are met either alone
or in groups, to be taken prisoners. No consideration is to
prevent their execution.
...
In going through a village, they (i. e. the hostages) are to be
conducted if possible until the queue (sic) has passed through,
and they will be executed without any question if a single shot
is fired on the troops in the neighbourhood.
The officers and soldiers will keep a rigourous watch over
every inhabitant and will not allow him to put his hand in his
pocket, which probably conceals a weapon. In general they
will observe the greatest severity and harshness.
The ringing of bells is absolutely forbidden and the bells arc
to be unhung; in general every steeple is to be occupied by a
patrol.
Divine service is only to be permitted at the request of the
inhabitants and only in the open air in front of the church.
No sermon is to be permitted on any condition.
A platoon ready to fire will be kept near the church during
divine service.
Every inhabitant who is found outside a village, especially in
the woods, will be looked upon as a member of a band who has
hidden his weapons, which we have no time to look for. Such
people are to be executed if they appear in the slightest degree
suspicious.
Once more discipline, dignity, but the greatest severity
and harshness."
http://www.archive.org/details/howaustriahungar00reis  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.91.20 (talk) 13:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orders of the Austro-Hungarian army 

message: Could someone explain what is meant by the following sentence, in particular by the "not out of keeping..." part: the first phase of the war against Serbia had ended with no change in the border but the casualties were incredible compared to earlier wars, though sadly, not out of keeping with other campaigns of this war." As such, the sentence doesn't make much sense and I strongly reccomend rewording it. I would do it myself, but do not want to tamper with the original meaning.--Bora Nesic 12:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not out of Keeping? 

message: Heh, there's the word "stupidly" in this article - it's not encyclopedic. :) Also, the article lacks the mention of Montenegro. --HolyRomanEmperor 20:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with the article 

message: At the beginning of 1918, the Allied troops in Salonika were prepared for a major offensive intended to end the war in the Balkans. The Greek Army had been reorganised and joined the Allied force. The offensive began in July 1918, but the British contingent did not play a significant part until early September. Then the British attacked a series of fortified hills. The final assault began along the whole front on 15 Sep 1918; the British being engaged in the Lake Doiran area. This Battle was really on the 18th and 19th September 1918 and was a disaster for the British Divisions. They had to frontally assault 'Pip Ridge' which was a 2000 foot high heavily defended mountain ridge with fortresses built on some of the higher mountains, notably Grand Couronne. (This was what the Bulgarians had been working on in the first months of 1916 and early 1917.) They sustained very heavy casualties. 
The following report from one involved gives some idea of what the men went through. By 'An Unprofessional Soldier' on the Staff of 28th Division. He entitled his paper: "I saw the Futile Massacre at Doiran". It is from Issue 46 of "I Was There" published 1938/9 "The Battle of Doiran is now a forgotten episode of the Great War, overshadowed by the doings of Haig in France and Allenby in Palestine. There was no full contemporary account of the Battle in any British Newspaper. Sir George Milne's dispatch was not published and did not appear in the Times until January 23rd 1919, and then only in truncated form. The very name of the battle is unknown to most. Yet, in singularity of horror and in tragedy of defeated heroism, it is unique among the records of British arms. The real work of the assault was entrusted to the men of the 22nd and 26th Divisions, who were to attack the Doiran hills, co-operating with the Cretan Division of the Greek Army and a regiment of unreliable Zouaves. In the early light of an almost unclouded morning the British and Greek forces advanced in order of battle. The noise of our guns had abruptly ceased before daybreak, and there came that awful pause in which defenders and attackers are braced up to face the ordeal, with fear or desperation, with cool courage or with blazing ardour. Slowly the pale grey smoke lifted in layers of thin film above the ridges, blue shadows deep in every fold or hollow and a dim golden glow on scrub, rock and heather. No one could tell what had been the effect of our gunfire upon those fortified hills. 
The infantry soldier relies upon the guns behind him, trusting in their power to smash a way for his advance by killing or demoralizing the enemy and cutting up his defences. In this case, if he had any hopes or illusions, the infantry soldier was quickly un-deceived. Our attack on ' Pip Ridge' was led by 12th Cheshires. The battle opened with a crash of machine-gun fire, and a cloud of dusty smoke began to blur the outline of the hills, Almost immediately the advancing battalion was overwhelmed in a deadly steam of bullets which came whipping and whistling down the open slopes. Those who survived were followed by a battalion of Lancashire men, and a remnant of this undaunted infantry fought its way over the first and second lines of trenches - if indeed the term " line " can be applied to a highly complicated and irregular system of defence, taking full advantage of every fold or contortion of the ground. In its turn, a Shropshire battalion ascended the fatal ridge. By this time the battle of the " Pips" was a mere confusion of massacre, noise and futile bravery. Nearly all the men of the first two battalions were lying dead or wounded on the hillside. Colonel Clegg and Colonel Bishop were killed; the few surviving troops were toiling and fighting in what appeared to be inevitable and immediate death. The attack was ending in a bloody disaster. No orders could reach the isolated cluster of men who were still trying to advance on the ridge. Contact aeroplanes came roaring down through the yellow haze of dust and smoke, hardly able to see what was going on, and even flying below the levels of the Ridge and Grand Couronne. 
There was only one possible ending to the assault. Our troops in the military phrase of their commander, " fell back to their original positions" Of this falling back I will say nothing. There are times when even desperate heroism has to acknowledge defeat. While the 60th Brigade was thus repulsed on the ridge, a Greek regiment was thrown into disorder by a counter attack on the right. At the same time the Welsh Brigade was advancing towards Grand Couronne. No feat of arms can ever surpass the glorious bravery of those Welshmen. There was lingering gas in the Jumeaux Ravine ( probably ours!) and some of the men had to fight in respirators. Imagine, if you can, what it means to fight up a hillside under a deadly fire, wearing a hot mask over your face, dimly staring through a pair of clouded goggles, and sucking the end of a rubber nozzle in your mouth. At the same time heat is pouring down on you from a brazen sky. In this plight you are called on to endure the blast of machine-gun fire, the pointed steel or bursting shell of the enemy. Nor are you called on to endure alone ; you must vigorously fire back, and vigorously assail with your own bayonet. It is as much like hell as anything you can think of. Welsh Fusiliers got as far as the Hilt, only half a mile below the central fortress, before being driven back by a fierce Bulgarian charge. Every officer was killed or wounded. Following these came the 11th Welsh, who were also compelled to retire fighting. For a time, however, a few of the enemy's trenches, full of dead or dying men, remained in our possession. A third Welsh battalion was offered up, to perish, on that awful day. The 7th South Wales Borderers nobly stormed up through the haze of battle until they had come near the hills of The Tassel and The Knot, Then, all at once, the haze lifted, and they were left exposed in the open to a sweeping and overwhelming fire. Melting away as they charged, a party of Welshmen ran up the slopes of Grand Couronne itself and fell dead among the rocks. Of the whole battalion, only one officer and eighteen men were alive at the end of the day. All night, unheard in the tumult of a new bombardment, wounded men were crying on the hillsides or down in the long ravines. 
Whatever Sir George Milne now thought of his own plans, he must have been gratified by the behaviour of his own troops. Those troops had been flung against positions no infantry in the world could ever have taken by a frontal attack, and they had proved themselves to be good soldiers. Two entire Brigades had been practically annihilated. Only on the right was there a temporary gain of ground by two Hellenic regiments in the neighbourhood of Doiran Town. My own troops (if I may speak of 28th Division) were in support of the Cretans under the Krusha hills east of the Lake. These people were intended to make a " surprise " attack on the high positions to the north, though I do not see how anyone can be surprised by an attack which has to be launched over three or four miles of perfectly open country - unless he is surprised at the futility of such a thing. The Cretans had lined up during the night along a railway embankment, which is immediately below the hills. At dawn they advanced over the plain of Akindzali, breaking through the enemy's outpost line. Our artillery, owing to a failure in co-ordination, did not properly support the advance, and our guns were eventually withdrawn under a heavy Bulgarian fire. There were casualties in the neighbourhood of Akindzali village (the scene of unmentionable Greek atrocities in the war of 1913). The attack rapidly collapsed, and by evening the Cretans were back at the railway line from which they had started. At nightfall the 28th Division took up a purely defensive attitude, overlooking the plain. It may well be asked why this Division was never given the chance of throwing its full weight into the battle. The enemy himself, as we afterwards learnt, was very much astonished by the absence or concealment of so large a body of troops. One of the first questions put to a captured British airman near Petrich was "can you tell us what has become of your 28th Division?" A fresh and equally futile massacre on the Doiran hills was arranged for the following day, in spite of the total breakdown of the general scheme. It was now the turn of the Scotsmen - Fusiliers, Rifles and Highlanders of the 77th Brigade, undismayed by the dreadful evidence of havoc, ran forward among the Welsh and Bulgarian dead. Artillery demoralised the regiment of Zouaves on their left. A storm of machine-gun fire blew away the Greeks on their right, in uncontrolled disorder. Fighting on into a maze of enemy entanglements, the Scotsmen were being annihilated, their flanks withering under a terrible enfilade. A fine battalion of East Lancashires attempted to move up in support. 
The 65th Brigade launched another forlorn attack on the Pip Ridge. The broken remains of two Brigades were presently in retreat, leaving behind more than half their number, killed, wounded or missing. We had now sustained 3,871 casualties in the Doiran battle. Our troops were incapable of any further effort. A terrible high proportion had been lost or disabled. We gained only the unimportant ruins of Doiran Town and a cluster of small hills immediately above it, never of any value to the enemy or strongly defended. The fortress of Grand Couronne was unshaken, with crumpled bodies of men and a litter of awful wreckage below it. No one can view the result of the operation as anything but a tactical defeat. Had it been an isolated engagement, there would have been every prospect of disaster. The whole plan of the battle and its conduct are open to devastating criticism; but so are the plans and the conduct of a great majority of battles. ( The Cheshires, South Wales Borderers and the Argylls were awarded the French Croix de Guerre for their part - the Royal Scots Fusiliers lost 358, the Argylls 299 and the Scottish Rifles 228 men) Luckily, the Franco-Serbian advance was being continued with extraordinary vigour. (elsewhere) Before long the Bulgarian Army was cut in two and a general withdrawal began to take place along the entire front. Our Doiran battle was now regarded as a contribution to victory for had we not been effective in pinning down the enemy reserves? British commanders are wonderfully philosophic after all." 
In other words a waste of lives.
Link
Jackanapes 23:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Battle of Doiran, narrated by a eyewitness 

message: In fact there are two different campaigns, included in present article - a) Serbian campaign of WWI (events up to the fall of Serbia) and b) subsequent Macedonian/Salonica front up to 30. IX. 1918. The second part is much broader than the present name presumes. The Serbian Salonica army wasn't the main factor on the Macedonian front, which name I prefer. There fought bigger Bulgarian, French, British, Greek forces, and also several other smaller national troops. From geographic and ethnographic points of view Macedonian front embraced territories, which were considered as a part of Serbia only from serbian perspective, check article Macedonian. Furthermore, it comprised lands which spread far away from Vardar Macedonia, temporarily occupied by Serbia. Another example - the same problem occures in the Categories menu, which includes only World War I and History of Serbia. So I think the name "Serbian campaign" should be changed if the contents remain the same or the article should be split into two separate articles. Best wishes, Jackanapes 23:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I think it would be best if it is split in two, the "Serbian Campaign" proper until 1916 and the "Macedonian Front", from the landing of the Allies at Salonica in 1915 until the end of the war. Regards, Cplakidas 10:34, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problematic unbalanced name of the article 

message: I softened the first sentence of the article because it implied that the Austrian invasion of Serbia started World War 1. The first hostilities of the war were when the Germans invaded Belgium on 4 August, 8 days before the Austrians crossed the Drina and Sava. A small point, but it makes the article that much more accurate. --Iacobus 00:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starting World War 1 

message: Numbers in this article do not correspond to these cited from relevant resources. Moreover, it appears that referenced sources are not existing any more. Are/were they relevant at all? For numbers please see Wiki article World War I casualties. Plantago 20:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties 

message: There really should be a strength and death list. I usually just look at the info-box and get the participants, strengths for both sides, the casualties, and the result of the battle. In this article, there are the participants and the result but no strength or death lists. I would consider puttind one. Thanks  -Apr.26,08  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.131.232.209 (talk) 18:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the Strength and Death List on the Info-Box? 

message: Is this article still good one?--Vojvodaeist 17:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see a GA review and I don't see this article listed at Wikipedia:Good articles, so I'm removing the GA assessment. GregorB (talk) 18:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: GA

message: The article says the Austro-Hungarian artillery shelled Belgrade on July 29, 1914; however, as the Wikipedia article on the city of Belgrade itself points out, the shelling was acutally undertaken by monitors of the Austro-Hungarian Navy which had navigated down the Danube. Will correct this if no one objects.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.128.246.93 (talk) 20:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shelling of Belgrade, July 1914 

message: I just skipped through the article, so I might be wrong, but at the introduction, where the circumstances are explained (from 1909-1914), I see no mention of the Franz Ferdinand assasination...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.88.169 (talk) 09:12, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to Franz Ferdinand 

message: In the second paragraph of the "1915" section, it talks of Constantinople. DDidn't the Ottomans change the name of this city to Istanbul when they conquered it? I could be mistaken, but I am pretty sure this is right. Borg*Continuum (talk) 21:46, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Istanbul, not Constantinople? 

message: About half the sources listed in the numbered citations don't seem to appear in any reference list. ??? Saintonge235 (talk) 04:29, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the references? 

message: The part "The standing peacetime Austro-Hungarian army had some 36,000 officers and NCO's and 414,000 soldiers. During the mobilization this number was increased to a total of 3,350,000 men of all ranks. The operational army had over 1,420,000 men, and a further 600,000 were allocated to support and logistic units (train, munition and supply columns, etc.) while the rest - around 1,350,000 - were reserve troops available for replacing losses and the formation of new units.Österreich-Ungarns letzter Krieg 1914 - 1918, vol. 1, Wienn 1930, p68 These wast manpower allowed Austrian-Hungarian army to regularly replace its loses and keep the units at their formation strength, according to some sources during the 1914. there were average 150,000 men per month sent to replace the loses in the field army. During the 1915. these numbers rose up to 200,000 per month. http://digi.landesbibliothek.at/viewer/image/AC03568741/1/LOG_0003/
Die Entwicklung der öst.-ung. Wehrmacht in den ersten zwei Kriegsjahren, 10 According to the official Austrian documents in period from September til end of  December of 1914. some 160,000 replacement troops were sent to Balkan theater of war, as well as 82,000 reinforcements as part of newly formed units.http://digi.landesbibliothek.at/viewer/image/AC01351505/1/LOG_0003/ Österreich-Ungarns letzter Krieg 1914 -1918, vol. 2 Beilagen, Wienn 1930, table I )" is a bit confusing, as it is not clear whether this "3,350,000 men of all ranks" and these "150,000 men" / "200,000 men per month" were all sent to fight in the Serbian Campaign (the current sentence gives this impression), or it was the total strength of the army / replacements fighting in all fronts / campaigns. In this latter case, it is not very relevant for the current article, since the army fighting in this particular campaign should be mentioned, instead. These numbers are dubious, since they contradict other sources, e.g., the one cited in the infobox. Also, the supported "source" is way too obsolete (it is from 1933), so its reliability is questionable. Modern scholarly works should be cited instead. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 14:19, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear Clanedstino, thanks for your answer, but please, refrain from making personal attacks. Let's try to be civilized. Historical works published in the 1930s are usually obsolete and might not be reliable. If it was published by the Austrian war ministry, then it looks like a primary source, which should be avoided on WP. Furthermore, I am curious what is your opinion about the numbers this part mentions. Are they (e.g., the "3,350,000 men of all ranks" and the "200,000 men per month") related to the Serbian Campaign or the whole army of A-H, participating in all front and campaigns? Could you provide the exact quote that supports these numbers? Thanks, KœrteFa {ταλκ} 15:46, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military Forces 

message: Someone claims that the end date in this article is incorrect. I have reverted his edit, and am noting the issue here. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 21:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  End date 

message: I am pretty surprised I can not find anything about war crimes and genocide of serbian civilian population commited by austrian and hungarian troops! Very first european genocide in 20th century and wiki is empty???  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.167.151.21 (talk) 12:12, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  austrian and hungarian war crimes against serbian civilians 

message: From what importance is the data that Kosovar Albanians served in Serbian military during WW1...I mean there were other nationalities that served in Serbian army, for example Roma or Gypsy served and were postman, that is written in Živoin Mišić's book ,,My memories, or Jew, Stanislav Vinaver was a Jew who fough bravely in WW1 on Serbian side...Or Cincars, like son of Branislav Nušić...But you never mentioned those nationalities...Why are Albanians so important for this article...For latest politics I guess...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.202.149 (talk) 11:52, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Kosovar Albanians ? 

message: Also, at the end of the introduction, it lists the casualties as a %age of population for the various combatant nations.  Do we have the figure for the UK?    Ganpati23 (talk) 14:21, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  A map would be helpful. 

message: Italian troops were involved in the campaign, occupying southern Albania for the entire duration of the war and holding Durres and its area during the evacuation of the Serbian Army. Italian ships also played a major role in the rescue of the Serbian Army. Shouldn't Italy be included in the Infobox among the belligerents on the Entente side? --2.36.89.156 (talk) 15:19, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italy 

message: This article is way too long and confusing, it should be divided into three articles:
As an example, this is the way it is on the French wiki and it works pretty well (in my opinion):
*Serbian Campaign of 1914
*Serbian Campaign of 1915
*Serbian Campaign of 1918 
Aeengath (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This article looks at the 1914-1915 (which is more or less a "continuous") campaign. The 1918 liberation (not really much fighting) is covered in Liberation of Serbia, Albania and Montenegro (1918). Only as an "epilogue" is the post 1915-fate of Serbia mentioned in the english 1914/15 article (with a link to the 1918 liberation). So I dont see how this article is confusing at all since it follows the battles in Serbia from the start of the hostiles in 1914 to the end of the campaign in 1915, with a mention of Serbia's aftermath at the end, also linking to the 1918 liberation)... --Havsjö (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: With all due respect for all the work you have put in this article there is still room from improvement... this was far from a continuous campaign...read Buttar, Hall, Dinardo, Glenny...just the defeat of the Austro-Hungarian army in 1914 ranks as one of the great upsets of modern military history and deserves its own article Aeengath (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Breaking down this big monster

message: As discussed in the discussion above, it would make great sense to split this article in order to distinguish the two, related but separate, Serbian campaigns thus giving these events the space they each deserve. Here is a quick summer-up of why:
The Serbian Campaign of 1914, aka the failed three Austro-Hungarian invasions, took place between July and December 1914. It was planned, controlled and concluded by Austria with the goal of punishing Serbia. Austro-Hungarian forces by Austrian General Oskar Potiorek numbered around 460,000 men, Serbian troops, numbered 400,000. The country was briefly occupied, It ended with a Serbian Victory. The defeat of the Austro-Hungarian army in Serbia in 1914 is probably one of the great upsets of modern military history.
The Serbian Campaign of 1915, the successful Central Powers invasion and occupation, took place almost a year later from October 1915 to January 1916, after other countries became involved in the Austro-Serb conflict. That Second campaign was planned and conducted with Germany, it was the idea of the German chief of staff, Falkenhayn with the goal of opening a land route to their Ottoman ally, it involved the combined efforts of Germany, Austria–Hungary, and Bulgaria. It was led by German commander August von Mackensen, with more than 600,000 men, Serbia had half that number. On the Entente side it also involved British and French units, it was a complete different planning, conduct and conclusion. It ended with the great serbian retreat and the occupation of Serbia by the Central Powers.
The aftermath subsections contain links to the main articles where that content can be moved. 
Here is an example of the different campaigns on the French Wikipedia: Serbian campaign (1914) & Serbian campaign (1915) and on the German Wikipedia: Serbian campaign 1914 & Serbian campaign by the Central Powers - 
Thank you Aeengath (talk) 12:51, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No such user (talk) 08:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it makes sense to have a Serbia in World War I article, as stated in previous discussion. Aeengath (talk) 15:56, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting proposal 

message: I think it should be split  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.63.65 (talk) 00:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serbian campaign split