Talk:Revolutionary United Front

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

al-Qaida[edit]

The claim that the RUF supported and traded with al-Qaida is controversial, and the 9/11 commission presents contradictory info.

Similarly, we have seen no persuasive evidence that al Qaeda funded itself by trading in African conflict diamonds.

[1] 69.77.238.12 16:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've reworded this sentence and added references to the current state of things.Scott5834 14:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Integration into article[edit]

This was on a previous RUF page I just found. It looks dated but the details of the Lome accord should be integrated into the existing article.

Revolutionary United Front (RUF) of Sierra Leone is a rebel movement which started a bush war against the Sierra Leonean government in the early 1990s. Through diamond trade it grew to a sizeable force that became notorious for the brutality of its drugged teen soldiers. RUF used the policy of intimidation by amputating limbs of civilian population in the areas of their influence. In 1999, the Lome peace accord brought an end to the civil war and the RUF leader Foday Sankoh was granted amnesty, and became a member of the government. In May 2000, Foday Sankoh was arrested under charges of inciting violence and will be tried for crimes committed after the signing the peace accord (2001)

SpeakerFTD 00:59, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)

What about Sam 'Maskita' Bockarie? - Sigg3.net 12:47, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Lacks Sources[edit]

Resolved

Needs some sources. There is a more elegant way to indicate this than to slap citation tags on every sentence in the article. Kensai Max 01:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. Cigsandalcohol 18:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable Content[edit]

Resolved

The section about Child soldiers claims "officers reportedly rubbed cocaine into open cuts on their troops to make them maniacal and fearless." This is referenced to 4. That link, http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=4247 , only says "The RUF also became notorious for its use of child soldiers, many of whom it kidnapped and conscripted, often forcing the children to inject cocaine before sending them off to fight." Attys 00:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added references better describing the cocaine treatments. Scott5834 14:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Child Soldiers[edit]

The part of the article that talks about that makes it seem like only boys were child soldiers, but girls were also child soldiers, and they were used for many of the same things the boys were (prostitution, etc.). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.217.176.2 (talk) 02:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Cannibalism? No.[edit]

From the wiki: "RUF members are also said to have practiced cannibalism. [21] [22] [19]"

The sources mentioned are not actual sources. Or at best they are secondary or tertiary sources. They simply state "cannibal gangs roved the countryside" or "There are reports of cannibalism", without taking responsibility for being a source, and without saying where these reports are coming from.

Most every charge of cannibalism throughout human history has been false. Charges of cannibalism are always made by an enemy-- never by the accused themselves. If it was a cultural custom then you could easily get sources to say "Yes, we eat people. [for reason X, for reason Y, tradition Z." The RUF has done brutal and atrocious things. The evidence has obvious. But it also seems obvious from the complete lack of evidence that they did not eat people. Anyone who has a big problem with what can check out William Arens's The Man-Eating Myth: Anthropology and Anthropophagy (New York : Oxford University Press, 1979; ISBN 0-19-502793-0). And read the wiki on cannibalism, specifically the section on "cultural libel". Everybody knows the atrocious things the nazis did. Nobody accuses them of cannibalism though. Probably because there is no pre-existing bias against Europe, whereas Africa is is commonly thought of as nothing more than a "Dark Continent" of barbarians. When in fact, like anywhere else, the barbarians are a minority who manage to bring great misery and suffering to the majority of normal people.

Lastly, we have explicit slogans and motivations given by the RUF for the brutal and awful act of cutting off peoples limbs. There's no equivalent for eating people.

So, reports of cannibalism LOSE again. 69.86.245.104 (talk) 23:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'll take a look at the articles quickly. Last time I checked, there wasn't any mention of Cannibalism. Deavenger (talk) 23:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the articles. One of them, I'm not sure if it would count as reliable, but the other two might. We should probably put that other people have allegged that the RUF partakes in cannibalism or something like that. Deavenger (talk) 00:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The two sources mentioned are The Economist and The Guardian, two of the most well regarded news agencies in the world. Aside from general skepticism of cannibalism, is there anything specific anyone can mention to refute the sources? Until there are other sources specifically refuting this, I'm reinstating the sentence. Sсοττ5834talk 20:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Reference to RUF/Gbao in Locked/Banged Up Abroad documentary[edit]

Should we add this to cultural references? One British peacetrooper had a run in with Gbao.

Updated Cultural References[edit]

I expanded the cultural references section a bit, though it still isn't very...expansive, though I think a worthwhile section. I removed the need for expansion tag since it was from 2 years ago, though it may need to be re-added? I didn't add the reference mentioned by the above poster (see: Reference to RUF/Gbao in Locked/Banged Up Abroad documentary) since I don't know anything about the documentary, nor its significance to RUF though I'm not questioning its validity. Xprivate eyex (talk) 08:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No discussion of political or social goals in the intro[edit]

There should be an overview of the goals and beliefs of the RUF in the intro. Right now, it only says that they fought, not //why// they fought. CameronNemo (talk) 04:43, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Revolutionary United Front. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Revolutionary United Front. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:39, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:23, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Revolutionary_United_Front&oldid=1195352580"