World War I Armenian Genocide

[minux]

Just curious as to what people think this should be called, genocide or some other name...

There is evidence that would suggest the Turks killed some 1.5 million Armenian's in world war I. They claim it was just 250k to 500k and that's only because the Christian Armenian's took up arms against them during the ottoman collapse.
I know a few direct descendants from this genocide and their stories are so much the same it is scary, yet they have never met.

The turks are currently trying to scare Bush into not labelling it a genocide which i think is absolute crap. I don't see why we need to sugar coat something that is the truth(in my eyes and in many other countries eyes). Turkey is also threatening use of a key logistic airbase the middle east.

Any thoughts?

Any post that is off topic will be deleted without prior notice. If you have an issue with this please refer to Just Commodores Rules of engagement found here http://forums.justcommodores.com.au/...must-read.html

[Joe Peeps]

SOAD did a song about this yeah?
It was a Genocide.

*Edit: the song was P L U C K
System of Down Steps Up Armenian Genocide Awareness Campaign

[Grennan]

Theres a young girl at tafe who did a presentation on the "Armenian Genocide" not long ago, to be honest up untill that point i knew nothing about it, nor had even heard of it so it was quite interesting. She brought in a guest speaker, who was also her Grandmother or Great Grandmother (i cant exactly recall) but the detail she gave of what happened was incredible. If her story was accurate, and judging by what i have followed up on it, it does seem quite accurate, then i dont see why Governments should try to sugarcoat something, belittling the situation.

I really didnt want to mention the World War 2 Holocaust at the risk of causing an off topic discussion but, it would be like the German Government today saying it was "only a couple of hundred thousand jews". A lot of people know what happened, so why say its something its not?

I think people, espically those who are descendants of those involved would have some sort of solice in the fact that the current government stopped trying to deny the situation, in my eyes they wouldnt have to apologise, but just come forward and stop trying to hide the fact it happened.

[haloeight]

the definitions of genocide to me are unusual

it is genocide to nuke a city or kill most of them in one hit

but "securing freedom" to shoot/starve them all one by one...

[xlr8_87]

you'll always find the government trying to "suger-coat" events they're ashamed of, they'll either down-play it so that it sounds like it wasn't nearly as bad as it was, or they'll deny it

hell, there are people completely denying the Holocaust happened...

[Pub247]

the definitions of genocide to me are unusual

it is genocide to nuke a city or kill most of them in one hit

but "securing freedom" to shoot/starve them all one by one...

Nothing America does is considered genocide, terrorism or bullying but they are always quick to point out other people for doing same.
I think it was a terrible event and i would call call it genocide without a doubt. I admire they're attempt though to stand up to america i wish other western countries would do the same.

[Skitz]

Another name In the process of genocide is ethnic cleansing.

[minux]

Nothing America does is considered genocide, terrorism or bullying but they are always quick to point out other people for doing same.
I think it was a terrible event and i would call call it genocide without a doubt. I admire they're attempt though to stand up to america i wish other western countries would do the same.

You obviously do not understand the whole situation so let me explain.

Turkey is threatening to pull the US usage of a logistics airfield if the US go ahead and pass a bill to label this tragedy a Genocide in official US terms. Why on earth should countries stand up and do this crap when they are just trying to hide what truly happened?

Its like saying Germany should stand up to the US and say the holocaust never occurred...

Hope that makes better sense.

[Cane_It]

Turkey are using whatever political leverage they can to avoid that term coming to pass... Is the turkish government paying compensation to the decendents of these armenians like the German govt has been paying to the jewish decendents?

It would also tarnish the legend of Gallipoli (ie brave turkish soldiers trying to fend off an invasion)...

The US are the biggest hypocrites going and are a law unto themselves and have some very selective blind spots.

[jules]

there's no reason why the US should legislate on this matter. it's not an issue of law.

however the obvious double standard is that they have given special treatment to victims of other genocides in the form of congressional resolutions and the like, when it suits them politically.

in a similar vein, australia also often treads a fine line in not wanting to offend indonesia.

[Cane_It]

in a similar vein, australia also often treads a fine line in not wanting to offend indonesia.

so much so that its pathetic... how the worm has turned since kicking the Japanese off those cursed Islands in WWII...

[mulligan-can]

in a similar vein, australia also often treads a fine line in not wanting to offend indonesia.

yet somehow i dont think we'd use whatever leverage we might have to attempt to deny a genocide. the aremenian killings were clearly a genocide as defined under international law and for turkey to try and hide that fact is disgusting.

Never mind that I find it ridiculous that america needs to legislate on this fact. The stupidity of some of the laws that get passed or the things that politicians feel need to be discussed on tax payer time is another issue.

Quite frankly I find turkeys attitude abhorrent. Denying the deaths of over a million people is just plain wrong. Even if they never pay a cent of compensation they should at least acknowledge it happened.

[minux]

Quite frankly I find turkeys attitude abhorrent. Denying the deaths of over a million people is just plain wrong. Even if they never pay a cent of compensation they should at least acknowledge it happened.

Could not agree more.

It is a little also like the aboriginals and saying sorry to the stolen generation.

The government should say sorry for what did happen, however, on the same note the current or future government should also make clear that this happened in the past and as bad as it was we have no control of past issues nor should we be responsible to compensate said issues.

Sometimes a little recognition of some bad **** a country did can go a long way to full reconciliation.

[jules]

yet somehow i dont think we'd use whatever leverage we might have to attempt to deny a genocide. the aremenian killings were clearly a genocide as defined under international law and for turkey to try and hide that fact is disgusting.

every country has skeletons in its closet.

did you know australia and the US secretly approved of the indonesian invasion of east timor in 1975?

that resulted in the deaths of 100,000s of east timorese.

while we certainly didn't do any of the killing and i'm not suggesting it's on a par with turkey's genocide against armenians, we sure as hell don't talk about our support for the invasion and i'll bet most people falsely assume the australian govt. was dead against it.

it's easy to understand why turkey don't want their dirty laundry hung out again.

[totq]

I was just waiting to see if anyone realised that by formal admission, Turkey may be liable for compensation, and some have mentioned it.

But i have also read about something more abhorrent than not admitting it.
I read about this a year or so ago, and some political analysts are suggesting that Turkey is uneasy about international pressure to admit it....and that it's not a matter of 'if' but 'when' they will 'recognise' it.
The abhorrent bit is they are stalling until all the survivors are passed on before considering it....so that there are no 'credible' witnesses in potential proceedings against them.

Also, off topic a bit but still within context of American hypocrisy, isn't dropping 2 atomic bombs on civilians, killing them by the hundreds of thousands and maiming many thousands more over whole generations in the aftermath....amount to genocide?
And, i also think, generally speaking, as long as a country has political leverage to affect american military interests, they are in a strong position.....but not so in this case....

[minux]

I was just waiting to see if anyone realised that by formal admission, Turkey may be liable for compensation, and some have mentioned it.

But i have also read about something more abhorrent than not admitting it.
I read about this a year or so ago, and some political analysts are suggesting that Turkey is uneasy about international pressure to admit it....and that it's not a matter of 'if' but 'when' they will 'recognise' it.
The abhorrent bit is they are stalling until all the survivors are passed on before considering it....so that there are no 'credible' witnesses in potential proceedings against them.

I also read something about this, which makes it even more appalling. Problem is, i am sure there are many people who documented the whole scenario so well that it would classed as credible evidence. Will be interesting to see how it pans out.

Also, off topic a bit but still within context of American hypocrisy, isn't dropping 2 atomic bombs on civilians, killing them by the hundreds of thousands and maiming many thousands more over whole generations in the aftermath....amount to genocide?
And, i also think, generally speaking, as long as a country has political leverage to affect american military interests, they are in a strong position.....but not so in this case....

In short no, the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was is not classed as genocide but an act of war. America never intended to wipe out the Japanese population, which is what genocide is, their intent was to just cripple japan,(although who knows the true intent behind closed doors).
As for the turkey having leverage against the US, well not really, i am sure the US could find another country to pay off to setup base, it is just that the Turkish airfield is in a prime logistic support area. I am sure for relaxation of Nuclear testing Iran would only be too happy to accommodate another US base.

[jules]

As for the turkey having leverage against the US, well not really, i am sure the US could find another country to pay off to setup base, it is just that the Turkish airfield is in a prime logistic support area. I am sure for relaxation of Nuclear testing Iran would only be too happy to accommodate another US base.

i would disagree slightly. the US values relations with foreign countries, particularly in the middle east, very highly.

it has put enormous resources into its relationships with israel, saudi arabia, even egypt, kuwait and now afghanistan and iraq.

it would see turkey as also a key ally. the last thing they want is middle eastern nations turning their backs on them.

no prizes for guessing why they're so obsessed with the region of course

[minux]

i would disagree slightly. the US values relations with foreign countries, particularly in the middle east, very highly.

it has put enormous resources into its relationships with israel, saudi arabia, even egypt, kuwait and now afghanistan and iraq.

it would see turkey as also a key ally. the last thing they want is middle eastern nations turning their backs on them.

no prizes for guessing why they're so obsessed with the region of course

In a sense yes, they do value their current relations, however, i don't really think Turkey is a huge concern for the US. The US have shown with various countries in the past that they are happy to step away and let the country coming running back for support. I just don't think Turkey is a country that the US are truly concerned about.

Secondly, if theres no prizes im not guessing

[Reaper]

Could not agree more.

It is a little also like the aboriginals and saying sorry to the stolen generation.

The government should say sorry for what did happen, however, on the same note the current or future government should also make clear that this happened in the past and as bad as it was we have no control of past issues nor should we be responsible to compensate said issues.

Sometimes a little recognition of some bad **** a country did can go a long way to full reconciliation.

It is something for another thread however there is no reason for our current or any future government to say sorry to the Aboriginals over this issue.

Reaper

[fabz]

It is something for another thread however there is no reason for our current or any future government to say sorry to the Aboriginals over this issue.

Reaper

Agreed 110%. But if Rudd gets in he said he will do it......

[totq]

This is a very sensitive issue and the type of world affairs i am always interested to learn more about, and I will not be subjective in my opinion.

Again, my aim is to put up information for others to think about to better form an opinion, rather than based on emotions, and what they hear from others - of course, i fall into that "others" category too, but how the info i put up is used/interpreted is up to the individual.

I will only stick to facts i have gained from my constant reading, listening and watching tv docomentaries....and above all by common sense.
Some examples of the sources of my information are documentary shows such as "As It Happened" - SBS, all current affairs programs such as "Sixty Minutes", "Four Corners", "Foreign Correspondent"...countless newspapers and magazines when they feature certain issues.
I don't watch much commercial tv that i don't learn something from.

This sort of issue is sensitive and we should all try not to be subjective because...while it is good to keep this sort of issue alive and talked about so that we don't forget such horrors happened, it is also bad that it can relive or remind the horrors for surviving victims when subjective opinions become arguments.

Minux, i believe some of your opinions in this thread are beginning to sound subjective.
Now, don't take this the wrong way or over-react, i would prefer this thread to continue in an infrormative way.
I am also subject to disagreements of what i say and i welcome criticism and constructive debates....

In short no, the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was is not classed as genocide but an act of war. America never intended to wipe out the Japanese population, which is what genocide is, their intent was to just cripple japan,(although who knows the true intent behind closed doors).

This sounds subjective to me because one horror is sugar-coated against another, to excuse the atom bombs as "an act of war" is sugar-coating.
Let's be pragmatic and realisitc and approach this with common sense about the meaning of 'genocide' instead or its 'paper meaning' - mass killing of innocent civilians is genocide, and i will let others judge that comment, rather than debate it with you.
What i have learned - in the lead up to the end of World War 2, America approached Japan and basically said, hey we've got this weapon that can not be beaten etc, and we would like your unconditional surrender (which would end the war)....and Japan's basic reply was refusal.
So, America dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima....then shortly after, another on Nagasaki - killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians...instantly.
Is that a justifiable "act of war"?
Why not 'demonstrate' that power away from a populated city?

Another example, i believe the Serbian goverment has also refuted claims they perpetrated genocide during the recent Balkan War.
Physical evidence shows their troops rounded up their victims by the masses, gunned them down in mass graves - which have been unearthed.
This is not an attack on Serbian people, it is happening right now - former leaders are being tried for 'crimes against humanity and genocide.'
I have read that their defence is 'this is not genocide, these things happen in the theatre of war'.
Their are other countless examples i can use, to show this is not singling out Serbia, such as - Rwanda, Cambodia, at right now Sudan etc...

Ethic Cleansing and Genocide means the same thing - mass killings of innocent people, the methods and excuses may differ, but the result is no different.

I leave it here for others to decide for themselves.

As for the turkey having leverage against the US, well not really, i am sure the US could find another country to pay off to setup base, it is just that the Turkish airfield is in a prime logistic support area. I am sure for relaxation of Nuclear testing Iran would only be too happy to accommodate another US base.

As for this comment about Turkey.....
U.S. relations with Turkey is very critical given the U.S.'s current precarious situation in the Middle East to not set off a wider regional conflict - which will affect the whole world, particularly to your hip pocket for driving your 'cubic inches' V8 cars, lol.
Given current tension with Iran, Syria and North Korea etc..
"Turkish airfield is in a prime logistic support area"
Therefore it is very good leverage against the US, but I did say it is also not because Turkey is a long time enemy of Israel.....and unwavering ally of the U.S......you can read between the lines that the US can say they can't stop Israel if war breaks out in the region etc etc etc.

The U.S.'s economy and military budget is very very precarious also, the cost to just packup such an important and size of base to somewhere else is a big big big call.

I leave it here for others to decide for themselves.

[jules]

on the nuking of hiroshima and nagasaki, i've read a bit about it.

there are two schools of thought. the strongest argument against it was based on the second bombing of nagasaki, which took place as i understand it literaly while the japanese high (war?) council was meeting after the first one. there's a good argument that they should have waited for the outcome of that meeting to see whether they were going to surrender.

on the other hand history records that there wasn't agreement on that council to surrender and that the army chief (i think) wanted to take the allies on in any invasion of japan. this is the primary justification for nuking them. a full scale invasion of japan would have been disastrous in terms of loss of human life on both sides.

[Cane_It]

Japan shouldnt bleat too much about the nukes after what they did to allied PoWs, not to mention strafing runs to kill allied sailors in the water after their ships had been sunk...

I dont think Japan has issued any formal apology for their war time atrocities, in fact I think their education system tells a slightly adjusted version of history around that time...

sorry to get off topic.

[totq]

cane_it, i think you're getting slightly off-topic.....we're not on about Japan's atrocities, and let me tell ya, in their old days when they occupied pretty much of Asia, they were one of the worst mofos on earth, but like i said, off-topic.

on the nuking of hiroshima and nagasaki, i've read a bit about it.

there are two schools of thought. the strongest argument against it was based on the second bombing of nagasaki, which took place as i understand it literaly while the japanese high (war?) council was meeting after the first one. there's a good argument that they should have waited for the outcome of that meeting to see whether they were going to surrender.

on the other hand history records that there wasn't agreement on that council to surrender and that the army chief (i think) wanted to take the allies on in any invasion of japan. this is the primary justification for nuking them. a full scale invasion of japan would have been disastrous in terms of loss of human life on both sides.

Hey jules, some interesting info there.
I have more info to add for you to consider and test the second part of your comment, if it's ok by minux as this is his thread and it's about Armenians.

[minux]

cane_it, i think you're getting slightly off-topic.....we're not on about Japan's atrocities, and let me tell ya, in their old days when they occupied pretty much of Asia, they were one of the worst mofos on earth, but like i said, off-topic.

Hey jules, some interesting info there.
I have more info to add for you to consider and test the second part of your comment, if it's ok by minux as this is his thread and it's about Armenians.

Go for it, i dont mind straying off topic within reason, i am just working up some energy to respond to your last post