Talk:Greek Civil War

Proxy War of Cold War

Following line in the first paragraph is hearsay, without citation: "It is often considered the first proxy war of the Cold War, although the Soviet Union avoided sending aid." It's largely irrelevant and also unsubstantiated that it's considered as such. I'm removing for now.

Alaks Hovel 14:05, 11 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alakshovel (talk • contribs)

The text could be without citation, but it is uncontested nowdays by historians that the Containment proposed by the Long telegram has its 1st application in the Greek Civil war.[1] Sperxios (talk) 11:03, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Manually reverted Alakshovel's 2019 change with these x2 changes. Sperxios (talk) 11:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Seemingly Biased?

Well of course it's biased, it's from the Cold War and especially from Greece. But I noted that EAM had it's ideology (Communism) listed with it in almost every sentence it appeared in. Meanwhile there is no such treatment of the government forces. It is simply called "the Collaborationist Government", with only a handful of mentions of collaborating with Nazis. Similarly there are several mentions of EAM executing civilians, but not as many mentions of government ordered executions. Several of my family members died to government firing squads, my father fled the country under threat of execution, and films from the time feature these firing squads. It simply makes no logical sense that a fascist government wouldn't be performing wide scale executions of dissidents during a Civil War.

Any thoughts on this? My family no longer lives in Greece so my knowledge is limited. Aristidesl (talk) 13:48, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Strongly object to the article's extreme bias as described here. This is history - let's get it corrected. Needs a rewrite from the ground up - please!!!! Thank you Rhysrr (talk) 16:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

The "3 rounds" terminology is considered far-right POV by present-day historians

The "3rd round" (aka "3 phases") terminology in the infobox, it is considered by mainstream historians, roughly since 1989, as a far-right & nationalistic POV adopted in hindsight of the Civil-war, trying to push the start date of the conflict as back in time as possible, and confuse the importance of subsequent events.[2] Such terminology is explicitly mentioned as "fringe" in the Greek lemma.(el:Ελληνικός_εμφύλιος_πόλεμος_(1946–1949)#Ιστοριογραφικές_οπτικές) Britannica traditionally recognized only 2 phases (Dekemvriana, Dec 1944, being the 1st), and this uncontested. Specifically, there was no civil war during german occupation (the "1st round"), it was collaborators vs partisans, as was typical for many occupied countries, including occasional skirmishes between guerilla groups accused of switching sides.

This POV issue of "3 rounds" has been brought up here before (in the archives 2008, here, here and here among others, but never explicitly dealt with. I had personally edited some references to this back in 2009, but somehow this "three rounds" POV resurrected on 2018 by user:Inspirduser simply by using the "phase" terminology.

An additional problem with this POV terminology is that it masquerades some other important "phasings" regarding the Greek Civil War (1946-1949), the intermediate gap between interlude Dekmvriana & the main civil-war, the (white terror, and the involvement of the USA, roughly after Keenan's Long telegram and the Containment doctrine, replacing the British force that were withdrawn from Greece due to the expenses of the the conflict.[3]

There is significant work on the infobox for corroborating this POV, with separate sections for persons, organizations, results, etc, which, although unsourced or WP:OR, it is remarkable, and may have to be salvaged, before being removed. Otherwise, the article provides a "reverse" reading of the history - people & organizations rebelling against the invaders yet skirmishing with each other, did not had a master-plan to fight a civil war, 6 years later.

- Sperxios (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

This is questionable talk, idk what "lemma" is intended to mean here- 'literature'? I am not sure how could the Britannica 'contest' itself(?) it has no talk section. 'Partisans vs collaborators' was not 'like many', there were conflicts throughout, with different varieties in the countries, see for example Yugoslav Partisans' communications with Germans, promising they would resist a British landing operation (since after all at that time it most likely would have the goal of supporting the Yugoslav royal government) and other such moves; different organizations had different motifs, shifting allegiances and relations to power centres, it is precisely 'ideological' to try to 'simplify' things into either a pure harmony or black-and-white simplicity- this seems like the oposite, ie. in an 'anti-junta' attempt trying to 'reverse' its presentation of events in a way that has a specific ideological goal and likewise 'change the significance'; no actual concrete 'evidence' was offered because it is presumably hard to find- it stands to reason that there would be violent bursts of ideological conflict in Greece before the Dekemvriana as elsewhere as opposed to a single scale of 'collaborators vs partisans' because of the obvious reason of radically opposed political goals. See Halik Kochanski "Resistance: The Underground War Against Hitler, 1939-1945"; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A310:E23F:400:ECCB:F190:5239:D6E (talk) 16:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Tito stabs KKE in the back

Can someone include it in article.

Here are sources:

Cheers

Poor Plot (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2022 (UTC)PoorPlot

References

Formatting broken

The box doesn't appear 194.32.68.219 (talk) 11:58, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Article heavily biased

This whole article is biased and written from a pro-Monarchy standpoint conveniently eclipsing the British backing of that conservative monarchy and the previous killing of communist resistance members. 2A02:810D:E80:5FC:F0E4:78B:4292:A8E5 (talk) 06:34, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

'Previous' as in before the Dekemvriana? It seems the 'official line' is that the previous conflicts were only with simple 'collaborators' and therefore funnily by implication this would suggest that non 'collaborator' royalist resistance didn't kill communist resistance members because there was no conflict among resistance members before that.

It doesn't really work — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A310:E23F:400:ECCB:F190:5239:D6E (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Supported by

I've removed this in the infobox per the RfC at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Infobox_military_conflict#RfC_on_%22supported_by%22_being_used_with_the_belligerent_parameter 37.245.43.126 (talk) 07:28, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

i think it would be a good idea to add

bulgaria yugoslavia the soviet union and albania supporting the communists

and the british and americans supporting the monarchists Sanad real (talk) 12:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Start date?

Why do we mark this conflict starting in 1946 when fighting erupted on December 3 1944? Is there any conseus or reasoning to justify a start date of 46 over 44? British troops were engaged in conflict against ELAS in 44 Mlutter1 (talk) 17:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

The conventional starting date for the Greek Civil War proper is 1946. The December events of 1944 are a different conflict, albeit clearly a precursor to the civil war. Constantine ✍ 19:42, 19 November 2023 (UTC)