Israeli-Palestinian conflict (89 Viewers)

Is Hamas a Terrorist Organization?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Should there be a Jewish nation SOMEWHERE in the world?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Should Israel be a country located in the region it is right now?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.
Jul 1, 2010
26,352
Way to miss the fucking point. 2/3's of the Armenian population died in those two years, and your relucatance to acknowledge it as a genocide comes from the facts that the armenian populace had nationalistic movements prior to WW1 (which somehow makes it less bad to be exterminated?), that Turkish irregulars worked in some of the 25 or so concentrations camps and that the Turkish government deported females after they had raped them?
It does not make it less bad at all but it is noteworthy that they were in an armed rebellion.
 

Maddy

Oracle of Copenhagen
Jul 10, 2009
16,545
"Where scholars deny genocide in the face of decisive evidence ... they contribute to false consciousness that can have the most dire reverbrations. Their message, in effect, is ... mass murder requires no confrontation, no reflection, but should be ignored, glossed over"

http://www.armeniapedia.org/index.php?title=Professional_Ethics_and_the_Denial_of_Armenian_Genocide

The quoted is very spot on.

I'm yet to see any argument to why the armenian genocide isnt a genocide, and thankfully most scholars recognise it as a genocide both historians and lawyers.

tehcir law, deportations, death marches and extermination camps. But not a genocide? please..

Genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
It does not make it less bad at all but it is noteworthy that they were in an armed rebellion.
How is it noteworthy when the Turks opted to exterminate every able bodied male regardless of their involvement in a rebellion?

- - - Updated - - -

"Where scholars deny genocide in the face of decisive evidence ... they contribute to false consciousness that can have the most dire reverbrations. Their message, in effect, is ... mass murder requires no confrontation, no reflection, but should be ignored, glossed over"

http://www.armeniapedia.org/index.php?title=Professional_Ethics_and_the_Denial_of_Armenian_Genocide

The quoted is very spot on. I'm yet to see any argument to why the armenian genocide isnt a genocide, and thankfully most scholars recognise it as a genocide both historians and lawyers.

tehcir law, deportations, death marches and extermination camps. But not a genocide? please..

Genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group
And most importantly has fuck all to do with who is carrying it out, irregular or not. Treq is trying to make it look like bands of Turkish criminals comprised 90% of the staffs at the 25 bonzentration bamps.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
The ideal of historical legacy of crimes is one of the most backward ways of thinking
Really? So you mean you thought I was seriously apologising for the Viking colonisation of America?



I don't talk about the Holocaust I talk about the systematic murder and enslavement of millions of people, be they jews, serbs,poles or otherwise.

The Genocide in Europe was a genocide of the non-Aryan

The Ottomans essentially had the same idea
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
Really? So you mean you thought I was seriously apologising for Viking colonisation of America?
Thrown off by it, I had a serious conversation ( evolved into more of a fight ) where a guy was argumenting exactly for that - just with a different example at hand. That's why I pounced on your hook like a hungry salmon.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
Oh ok, the important thing is to distinguish

- Your still guilty you should all die

from

- Your still guilty because you don't even have the decency to say sorry.

I mean for Christs sake the Queen of England laying a wreath to Irish war dead did more than 15 years of peace efforts. 'We're sorry' it's not hard, bloody turks.
 
Jul 10, 2006
6,753
I just happen to be rereading "The Ottoman Centuries" by Lord Kinross... I flipped to the section about the Armenian genocide of 1915... Here is an excerpt for what it's worth:

"The British failure at Gallipoli gave a breathing space to the Young Turk triumvirate, leaving it free to pursue, without external interference, a premeditated internal policy for the final elimination ofof the Armenian race. Their proximity to the Russians on the Caucasus front furnished a convenient pretext for their persecution, on a scale far exceeding the atrocities of Abdul Hamid (in the late 19th century -JV), through the deportation and massacre of one million Armenians, more than half of whom perished."

This book was first released in 1977.
 
Jul 1, 2010
26,352
Just a quick question, why does the definition matter so much?
Because the word "genocide" is used for almost anything nowadays.

- - - Updated - - -

I just happen to be rereading "The Ottoman Centuries" by Lord Kinross... I flipped to the section about the Armenian genocide of 1915... Here is an excerpt for what it's worth:

"The British failure at Gallipoli gave a breathing space to the Young Turk triumvirate, leaving it free to pursue, without external interference, a premeditated internal policy for the final elimination ofof the Armenian race. Their proximity to the Russians on the Caucasus front furnished a convenient pretext for their persecution, on a scale far exceeding the atrocities of Abdul Hamid (in the late 19th century -JV), through the deportation and massacre of one million Armenians, more than half of whom perished."

This book was first released in 1977.
What's his evidence (primary sources)?
 

Eddy

The Maestro
Aug 20, 2005
12,645
'We're sorry' it's not hard, bloody turks.
With the way the country is going right now, more Intellectuals are coming out and on the open with that view. The "Hrant Dink" case only fueled it more. Only recently Kurds were given permission to speak their language, more liberties are being given and more people are coming out and saying what they really think. I'm sure an apology will come soon eough but only through time, especially with the 100th anniversary coming soon.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
With the way the country is going right now, more Intellectuals are coming out and on the open with that view. The "Hrant Dink" case only fueled it more. Only recently Kurds were given permission to speak their language, more liberties are being given and more people are coming out and saying what they really think. I'm sure an apology will come soon eough but only through time, especially with the 100th anniversary coming soon.
Good maybe then my Armenian girlfriend will come to Bodrum for a holiday.
 
Jul 10, 2006
6,753
I should note that he goes into much more detail about the massacres committed by Abdul Hamid II in the 19th century. But the book is a history of the Ottoman Empire, and he considered the empire ended when the Young Turks deposed Abdul Hamid II in 1909. He rather briefly sums up the Turkish involvement in the First World War and doesn't say much more than I posted about the massacres of 1915.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
Oh ok, the important thing is to distinguish

- Your still guilty you should all die

from

- Your still guilty because you don't even have the decency to say sorry.

I mean for Christs sake the Queen of England laying a wreath to Irish war dead did more than 15 years of peace efforts. 'We're sorry' it's not hard, bloody turks.
Right on :tup:

- - - Updated - - -

Sources are not cited per passage as you would normally see in a history book written today. But I found a link to the bibliography.

http://books.google.com/books?id=Zn...&q=the ottoman centuries bibliography&f=false
Perhaps they're at the end of the chapter :)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 2, Guests: 83)