US and the Armenian question...

  • Thread starter Thread starter sevgi
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 33
  • Views Views 4K

sevgi

IB Expert
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
333
i thought i'd get some insight on the views of members of this forum on what is going on with the Armenian question and the US at the moment.feel free to stray off this article...i personally, am yet to understand why the US's opinion matters, and why they dnt go look at their current issues rather than fiddling with the past of others...

Vote on Armenian 'genocide' resolution put off

Supporters of a congressional resolution that would have declared the Ottoman-era killings of Armenians "genocide" dropped their call for a vote on the measure Thursday.

The resolution spurred fierce criticism from NATO ally Turkey, where officials acknowledge the killings of Armenians during World War I but vehemently object to the designation "genocide."

Turkish leaders threatened to curtail U.S. access to bases vital to supporting the more than 160,000 American troops in Iraq if the measure passed.

The Bush administration, which is trying to persuade Turkey not to launch cross-border raids against Kurdish rebels in Iraq, had lobbied aggressively against the resolution as well.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told a House committee Thursday that the resolution's consequences on the war in Iraq would be "quite dire."
The House Foreign Affairs Committee approved the resolution earlier this month. But Rep. Rahm Emanuel, the No. 3 Democrat in the House of Representatives, conceded last week that "the votes are not there" for the resolution to clear the full House.

In a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, its major sponsors wrote that the measure would pass "if the timing is more favorable." Pelosi, D-California, had promised to schedule a floor vote if the resolution made it out of committee, but told reporters Thursday that she accepted the sponsors' request to set the matter aside.

Though the sponsors, led by California Democrat Adam Schiff, suggested the measure could be brought back later this year, a senior Democratic leadership aide said the issue is off the table indefinitely.

"This is not going to be taken up until next year at the earliest," the aide said.
Historians estimate about 1.5 million Armenians were killed by the Ottoman Empire -- the predecessor of modern Turkey -- during World War I. But Turkey, now a secular and democratic Muslim nation, and masses of its people reject the term genocide, viewing the deaths as part of a war that claimed lives among all peoples in the region.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the handling of the issue raises questions about the judgment of Democratic leaders -- "a pattern that is undermining our national security."

"Given Turkey's importance in the war on terror, the role it plays in the care of our troops on the ground, and their close alliance with us in NATO, attempting to force a vote on this resolution in the first place was just plain reckless," Boehner said in a written statement after the news emerged.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/10/25/us.turkey/
 
In my opinion, the issue is just votes. The Armenians in the states are well organized politically. My wife and I have friends who are Armenians and they are part of a tight knit community. For example, neither would marry a non-armenian and we had actually discussed the issue. So when I heard about this it was not surprising.

Yeah, even if we pass this, who would care. How bout Turkey condeming our genocide toward the Native Americans? Every country/society has a dark part of its history. Let's just try to move on.
 
In my opinion, the issue is just votes. The Armenians in the states are well organized politically. My wife and I have friends who are Armenians and they are part of a tight knit community. For example, neither would marry a non-armenian and we had actually discussed the issue. So when I heard about this it was not surprising.

Yeah, even if we pass this, who would care. How bout Turkey condeming our genocide toward the Native Americans? Every country/society has a dark part of its history. Let's just try to move on.

be my new best frend..pretty please...
:D

i agree one hundred percent...unless the UN recognises it as a genocide, i dnt think its any of anyone elses business...not the US, not france...

but they do stirr up a cuffuffle...and thats wat these announcements are for..who knows whats under their sleeve...

u dnt just attack the integrity and 'national pride' of a country for no reason.
 
it has often crossed my mind that perhaps the democrats are stirring trouble with turkey to minimize Bush's entrances and exits in Iraq and possible encourage a withdrawl. Turkey is a key ally for the US in Iraq, ticking them off would be devastating to certain operations.... but who really knows, perhaps they just woke up and thought "hmmmmm..... lets spin the war wheel and see who we can tick off today" :mmokay:
 
it has often crossed my mind that perhaps the democrats are stirring trouble with turkey to minimize Bush's entrances and exits in Iraq and possible encourage a withdrawl. Turkey is a key ally for the US in Iraq, ticking them off would be devastating to certain operations.... but who really knows, perhaps they just woke up and thought "hmmmmm..... lets spin the war wheel and see who we can tick off today" :mmokay:

either way theyre playing with a nations pride and history and reputation til the end of time.

it hurts deep.
 
In my opinion, the issue is just votes. The Armenians in the states are well organized politically. My wife and I have friends who are Armenians and they are part of a tight knit community. For example, neither would marry a non-armenian and we had actually discussed the issue. So when I heard about this it was not surprising.

Yeah, even if we pass this, who would care. How bout Turkey condeming our genocide toward the Native Americans? Every country/society has a dark part of its history. Let's just try to move on.

Armenian genocide was one of the three biggest genocides in XX century.The other two were Holocaust and the killing of millions Ukrainian peasants by Stalin. It is historical fact and thats why it must be said once for all what hapenned there. Of course armenian genocide is nowadays very political incorrect as the murderers were muslims and the victims were christians so it doesnt match to the nowadays stereotype- white christian the opressor and muslim the victim.
 
Armenian genocide was one of the three biggest genocides in XX century.The other two were Holocaust and the killing of millions Ukrainian peasants by Stalin. It is historical fact and thats why it must be said once for all what hapenned there. Of course armenian genocide is nowadays very political incorrect as the murderers were muslims and the victims were christians so it doesnt match to the nowadays stereotype- white christian the opressor and muslim the victim.

who called it a historical fact?

lol. i beg to differ.

it depends on which side u look at it from.

i was affraid that ppl without enuf depth and complexity of understanding and reading on the issue would reply like this...
 
who called it a historical fact?

lol. i beg to differ.

it depends on which side u look at it from.

i was affraid that ppl without enuf depth and complexity of understanding and reading on the issue would reply like this...

Who called it a historical fact? Only this week my profesor in my college was talking about it. There are many pics and other materials.Of course those who dont want to see this, they won't see. Just like even now there are people who deny Holocaust/.
 
Who called it a historical fact? Only this week my profesor in my college was talking about it. There are many pics and other materials.Of course those who dont want to see this, they won't see. Just like even now there are people who deny Holocaust/.

lol...

im writing my honours thesis on the armenian genocide inshallah...

i just finished a course on 'the genocides'...

yep...everyone of em...

lol...'just the other day my professor was talking abt it too.' lol.

historical facts on the armenian side show that 1.5mil armenians died.
historical facts on the ottoman side show that merely 500 000 armeians died.

these are both facts. one side doesnt accept this and that, the other adds a little too much salt n pepper...and voila! a cuffuffle of historical facts.

id like to argue that there is no such thing as a historical fact.but im too sleepy.

history=bias bias bias!

peace.
 
lol...

im writing my honours thesis on the armenian genocide inshallah...

i just finished a course on 'the genocides'...

yep...everyone of em...

lol...'just the other day my professor was talking abt it too.' lol.

historical facts on the armenian side show that 1.5mil armenians died.
historical facts on the ottoman side show that merely 500 000 armeians died.

these are both facts. one side doesnt accept this and that, the other adds a little too much salt n pepper...and voila! a cuffuffle of historical facts.

id like to argue that there is no such thing as a historical fact.but im too sleepy.

history=bias bias bias!

peace.

Its natural that Turks make the numbers lower, isn't it? Actually i also read many things about it and all of them admit that Ottomans killed about 1,5 millions of Armenians.All people who study history who i know also agree with that. Actually no one that i know even doubt it. I think that its good that this case isnt forgotten and France and USA say about this. Just like we cant forget the victims of Shoah , we also cant forget the victims of Armenian genocide, even if Turkey is so afraid about it.
 
if you have time to read this three page spread, I found some of it to be pretty informative since it was written during those times

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archiv...E1730E733A0575BC0A9669D946796D6CF&oref=slogin

I guess you have to first determine what a genocide actually is.... Is it determined by #'s or is it determined by the senseless killing of a persons political, racial or religious orientation. Personally I would call it a genocide, but the ottoman empire doesnt exist today, turkey is certainly not that country anymore and everything that could have been recorded in the books is there for those who wish to dig it up. I dont think that the US politicians need to do it right now and I am not sure what their motive is in bringing it back into the light. I am sure that it is considered to be a shameful time for the Turks and others who live in the region and they would probably like to live it in their past.
 
Last edited:
History is written by the victors.

That's why it ticks me off when every flamin' politician wants 'history to judge' or some such rubbish.

Although, if Boris Johnson ever becomes Prime Minister, it should make some funny reading for our great-great grandkiddies.
 
I think calling the Armenian massacre “genocide” is calling a spade a spade and is long over due. I put it in the same category as “Holocaust Denial”.

I due question the timing and alter motives. My bet is that they are less than honorable.

The thing that discusses me is I feel at the same time they needed to call what was done to the Native Americans genocide too.
 
Its natural that Turks make the numbers lower, isn't it? Actually i also read many things about it and all of them admit that Ottomans killed about 1,5 millions of Armenians.All people who study history who i know also agree with that. Actually no one that i know even doubt it. I think that its good that this case isnt forgotten and France and USA say about this. Just like we cant forget the victims of Shoah , we also cant forget the victims of Armenian genocide, even if Turkey is so afraid about it.

dnt u think its natural that the armenians up the number?

everythng u say can be flipped.

both sides are scared. today the key factor of ones identity has become ones 'nation'. no nation=no identity.

armenians are equally scared.

turks have this 'national pride' to preserve. God knows what the hell national pride is...

but both sides are correct.

to tell u the truth, while doing my studies i am obliged to put my bias aside. im not out to become one of those 'for my country' scholars.

i merely work with 'historical facts' and perspectives of then and now.i do my best to fit em all together.

thus, i have no opinion. i dno if it was a genocide. i dnt think it matters.

THE KEY PROBLEM IS THE DEFINITION OF GENOCIDE.

we need one solid one in order to categorise war crimes etc...we dnt have one at the moment.

thats why its so hard to label the armenian conflict a genoicde.

look.im ending this here.

one more thing. if ur proff. etc hold a bias and portra it to the class, tehy arent very proffesional and i'd question their scholarship.

pls debate with someone else.

i appreciate ur views.

peace.
 
if you have time to read this three page spread, I found some of it to be pretty informative since it was written during those times

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archiv...E1730E733A0575BC0A9669D946796D6CF&oref=slogin

I guess you have to first determine what a genocide actually is.... Is it determined by #'s or is it determined by the senseless killing of a persons political, racial or religious orientation. Personally I would call it a genocide, but the ottoman empire doesnt exist today, turkey is certainly not that country anymore and everything that could have been recorded in the books is there for those who wish to dig it up. I dont think that the US politicians need to do it right now and I am not sure what their motive is in bringing it back into the light. I am sure that it is considered to be a shameful time for the Turks and others who live in the region and they would probably like to live it in their past.

we seem to think alike...

cool.
 
I think calling the Armenian massacre “genocide” is calling a spade a spade and is long over due. I put it in the same category as “Holocaust Denial”.

I due question the timing and alter motives. My bet is that they are less than honorable.

The thing that discusses me is I feel at the same time they needed to call what was done to the Native Americans genocide too.

im teln ya...its becuase we dnt have a good enough definition of genocide.

lemkin came close...but he got a little too close and heated.and was extrememly biased.

so when the UN genocide convention was established, it ruled out all the cultural and social aspects lemkin was yapping abt.

its so convoluted, its almost impossible to hold a debate abt whether or not the ottoman state did commit genocide. seriously.

peace.
 
I think the Democrats were simply trying to make life more difficult for the Bush administration in their relationship with Turkey. If the Dems were really concerned about the Armenians, why wait till 2007 on the heels of an election year? Just feels bogus to me.
 
Its natural that Turks make the numbers lower, isn't it? Actually i also read many things about it and all of them admit that Ottomans killed about 1,5 millions of Armenians.All people who study history who i know also agree with that. Actually no one that i know even doubt it. I think that its good that this case isnt forgotten and France and USA say about this. Just like we cant forget the victims of Shoah , we also cant forget the victims of Armenian genocide, even if Turkey is so afraid about it.

historians make history clear not the politicians..we are open to all historians even to armenian historians..we open our archives...but armenia runs away...we call all historians of the world to turkey..they will se who killed who...
two-facedness of west again...we killed 500.000 japans,2.000.000 ıraqıs ,so many afgans,we killed jews,we killed us indians,we killed algerians..arent we?

we are open to everyone come and see all of our our archives,rsearch all of skeletons u find...but nobody comes..coz they know that we didnt do genocide,so-called genocide..
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top