Türkiye (11 Viewers)

JuveJay

Senior Signor
Moderator
Mar 6, 2007
72,607
Norway was known as most peaceful country in the world but one lunatic did kill more than 100 people on last month.

Are you going to say that Norway is not a mental place now? Every country has idiots. If that's the way your view changes about a country, i can find a reason to hate every country in the world.
Obviously. I made two observations, they weren't linked.

1) I thought Turkey was a mental place
2) It's the only place I have seen someone shot whilst eating my dinner
 

Eddy

The Maestro
Aug 20, 2005
12,644
You're just talking without any prove.

You're talking about Armeanian were being butchered just like people who don't know much about history because %90 of the world doesn't recognize that Armeanians were butchered. It was a war and they lost. And yes, you do kill people when you're in war.

Yes, of course Greek were deported to Greece, where else did they have to go? To Ghana?

You should be thankful to us that you're still alive. If we weren't there, French or British would have raped your ancestors and eventually kill you because of your religion.

You're very welcome.
Still don't know what you're on about, if you do your fact finding, more than 50% of the world recognizes the Armenian genocide, if not less. The story is there, the pictures are there, the witnesses have written what they had seen and less than 10 of the survivors are still living. It's just that you don't want to hear it, you look blindly to the other side... because for you, no Turk can do such a thing. You can go to Deir-Zor and you can find scattered bones on the ground if you try hard enough. If you think they died because of war, you must be really delusional. The war was started by the Turks against Armenia in 1920 while the butchering started in 1915. I don't blame you for your lack of knowledge really, since it's your government that tells you that nothing really happened.

And what happened to the Assyrians ? You didn't mention them at all. You probably have no idea that they had been living there for thousands and thousands of years before the Ottomans nearly wiped them out.

Norway was known as most peaceful country in the world but one lunatic did kill more than 100 people on last month.

Are you going to say that Norway is not a mental place now? Every country has idiots. If that's the way your view changes about a country, i can find a reason to hate every country in the world.
Check your facts again, it's not a 100.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
That's how my main man Michael Collins did it. Love the big fella.
More or less, acts of violence against civilians numbered in the single figures and were predominantly due to hostage situations.


Turkey is well mental, I know of a lad who was gang raped on a beach at night :?
 

Elvin

Senior Member
Nov 25, 2005
36,880
Still don't know what you're on about, if you do your fact finding, more than 50% of the world recognizes the Armenian genocide, if not less. The story is there, the pictures are there, the witnesses have written what they had seen and less than 10 of the survivors are still living. It's just that you don't want to hear it, you look blindly to the other side... because for you, no Turk can do such a thing. You can go to Deir-Zor and you can find scattered bones on the ground if you try hard enough. If you think they died because of war, you must be really delusional. The war was started by the Turks against Armenia in 1920 while the butchering started in 1915. I don't blame you for your lack of knowledge really, since it's your government that tells you that nothing really happened.

And what happened to the Assyrians ? You didn't mention them at all. You probably have no idea that they had been living there for thousands and thousands of years before the Ottomans nearly wiped them out.



Check your facts again, it's not a 100.
Do you recognize the Khojaly genocide of 1992?
 
Jul 2, 2006
18,883
If we talk about facts, what happened in 1915 doesn't fit with term of genocide. Armenian gangs started to butcher townsfolk, mostly burned them alive in masjids. Men were gone to war. Armenians slaughtered the old, women and children. Only then the government decided to deport them elsewhere. Though the decision is up to debate and of course huge amount of people died(mostly because of illness, starvation), some of the officers committed crimes but there was no command of massacre, in fact those who acted against the order got their punishment.
 

Elvin

Senior Member
Nov 25, 2005
36,880
If we talk about facts, what happened in 1915 doesn't fit with term of genocide. Armenian gangs started to butcher townsfolk, mostly burned them alive in masjids. Men were gone to war. Armenians slaughtered the old, women and children. Only then the government decided to deport them elsewhere. Though the decision is up to debate and of course huge amount of people died(mostly because of illness, starvation), some of the officers committed crimes but there was no command of massacre, in fact those who acted against the order got their punishment.
Typical of them. Pussy nation.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
If we talk about facts, what happened in 1915 doesn't fit with term of genocide. Armenian gangs started to butcher townsfolk, mostly burned them alive in masjids. Men were gone to war. Armenians slaughtered the old, women and children. Only then the government decided to deport them elsewhere. Though the decision is up to debate and of course huge amount of people died(mostly because of illness, starvation), some of the officers committed crimes but there was no command of massacre, in fact those who acted against the order got their punishment.
So they killed over 1 million people without having any command structure or systematic plan?

'They Started it' is not a valid argument for somebody over 10 years of age.
 
Jul 2, 2006
18,883
So they killed over 1 million people without having any command structure or systematic plan?

'They Started it' is not a valid argument for somebody over 10 years of age.
Numbers are between 700.000 and a million. Similiar amount of Turks got massacred in Balkans and in east Anatolia by Armenian gangs. Is there anybody talking about Turkish genocide? And yes, to call it a genocide, there should be a systematic plan.

I don't care if it's valid or not. If you start to kill innocent, better be prepared to die.
 

Eddy

The Maestro
Aug 20, 2005
12,644
Do you recognize the Khojaly genocide of 1992?
It was a blatant massacre but it was no genocide. It was a retaliation on how the Azeris started the pogroms in Baku, Sumgait and other cities. Genocide is a systematic plan to take out a race. It's true the army fucked up at Khojaly in making it a retaliation.

Typical of them. Pussy nation.
No comment. We're adults, grow the fuck up.

If we talk about facts, what happened in 1915 doesn't fit with term of genocide. Armenian gangs started to butcher townsfolk, mostly burned them alive in masjids. Men were gone to war. Armenians slaughtered the old, women and children. Only then the government decided to deport them elsewhere. Though the decision is up to debate and of course huge amount of people died(mostly because of illness, starvation), some of the officers committed crimes but there was no command of massacre, in fact those who acted against the order got their punishment.
No comment on this as well. I like you Turk and I like debating with you, but it all started because the Young Turks lied about giving the Armenians autonomy and nationalist feelings stirred up. They completely changed their position and one of the left-wing nationalist parties, Dashnak, got fed up with it. The main point is that the Ottomans on April 24 took all the Armenian intellectuals out in Constantinople and hanged them. Every single intellectual, and the Turkish government even has proof of this. They were innocent. No nation really does that unless they are sending a signal to the rest of the minorities.

Second, the Armenian population was told during the deportations that they would be leaving to a safe zone. From most of the survivors' story, that was a blatant lie, they were taken to starve and die, while other groups were killed with the bayonets. The main point of the deportations was to let the Armenians and the other minorities starve as to not waste ammunition.
 
Jul 2, 2006
18,883
I have never liked Ittihad Terakki and already said that they were darkest page of Ottomans. They did not even respect for their Sultan, what would you expect against others? But none of this justify what is done by Dashnak. Thousands have died from both sides, if we want to have a better future, we should better focus on present rather than past. Because as i said both of sides have lost their relatives, no good will come from pouring salt on scar.

Second, the Armenian population was told during the deportations that they would be leaving to a safe zone. From most of the survivors' story, that was a blatant lie, they were taken to starve and die, while other groups were killed with the bayonets. The main point of the deportations was to let the Armenians and the other minorities starve as to not waste ammunition.
And Armenians have either burned people alive or beheaded them with sword too save ammunition. You see, you are not only victim of war.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
Numbers are between 700.000 and a million. Similiar amount of Turks got massacred in Balkans and in east Anatolia by Armenian gangs. Is there anybody talking about Turkish genocide? And yes, to call it a genocide, there should be a systematic plan.

I don't care if it's valid or not. If you start to kill innocent, better be prepared to die.
Numbers are between 1-1.5 Million people. Mass deportation is a systematic plan in and of itself.

I think it' very sad that you try to justify murdering an entire group of people as the correct response to anything.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
Yet you attempt to trivialise the murder of children who could not have killed turks even if your theory was correct, can you not see the utter contradiction in that?
 

Eddy

The Maestro
Aug 20, 2005
12,644
I have never liked Ittihad Terakki and already said that they were darkest page of Ottomans. They did not even respect for their Sultan, what would you expect against others? But none of this justify what is done by Dashnak. Thousands have died from both sides, if we want to have a better future, we should better focus on present rather than past. Because as i said both of sides have lost their relatives, no good will come from pouring salt on scar.



And Armenians have either burned people alive or beheaded them with sword too save ammunition. You see, you are not only victim of war.
You have to understand that at the time, "State and Governance" was in the minds of people, everywhere. You can not hold on to a territory that is not rightfully yours forever. Politically, it was also a time of "Nationalism", and we all know how that went for Turkey. How can you explain the "Hamidian massacres" in 1894 ? Did Armenians attack that time as well ? As a fact, Armenians in 1894 were attacked for asking for "autonomy" and the Ottomans saw this as a threat. Even weeks earlier prior to April 24 1915, there were massacres in Van. If people see hangings and their own families wiped out, they are going to try and justify it by doing the same thing if they have no voice, no freedom. The last 20 years of the empire were just complete chaos for everyone that wasn't a muslim.
 

Osman

Koul Khara!
Aug 30, 2002
59,332
Not just Arabs, nobody can complain about Ottoman Empire because we made a huge mistake by not torturing people. All we did was collecting taxes from the countries we invaded. We should have force them to speak our language and believe in what we believe. If we did that, from Austria to Saudi Arabia, everybody would have speak what we speak and believe in what we believe.

So, nobody can say Ottoman Empire was torturing anybody. Thats the mistake that we didnt do. We should have.
You are for real with this post?
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
He's correct from a power politics point of view, Imperial governance without fear is doomed to fail.

Of course the Ottomans would have fallen regardless due to the military excellence of European Armies from 1700 until America became the big swinging dick, the Osman, if you will.
 

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
Apr 14, 2005
69,449
He's correct from a power politics point of view, Imperial governance without fear is doomed to fail.

Of course the Ottomans would have fallen regardless due to the military excellence of European Armies from 1700 until America became the big swinging dick, the Osman, if you will.
this is funny because osman happens to be a turkish name(its spelling at least)
 

MCMV

Junior Member
Jul 22, 2011
168
Still don't know what you're on about, if you do your fact finding, more than 50% of the world recognizes the Armenian genocide, if not less. The story is there, the pictures are there, the witnesses have written what they had seen and less than 10 of the survivors are still living. It's just that you don't want to hear it, you look blindly to the other side... because for you, no Turk can do such a thing. You can go to Deir-Zor and you can find scattered bones on the ground if you try hard enough. If you think they died because of war, you must be really delusional. The war was started by the Turks against Armenia in 1920 while the butchering started in 1915. I don't blame you for your lack of knowledge really, since it's your government that tells you that nothing really happened.

And what happened to the Assyrians ? You didn't mention them at all. You probably have no idea that they had been living there for thousands and thousands of years before the Ottomans nearly wiped them out.



Check your facts again, it's not a 100.
%50 of the world recognizes so-called Armenian genocide? Are you high or excessively drunk right now?

20 countries have recognized the so-called Armenian genocide. Should I remind you that we have over 210 countries in the world. I'll let you do the math.

Or should I do it? Since I have my MBA for International Finance.

I'll do it for you.

20 (number of countries that have recognized genocide)/ .210 (we have more countries but lets leave it at this) = .09523

Which means %9.

Good luck with that math.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
That doesn't mean it didn't happen. Someday your grandchildren will look upon your generation and feel a horrible sense of shame and disgust at your callous disregard for basic human dignity and the stringent nationalism that fuels it.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 9)