Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Other Side of the Monitor > Thread: Recognize! Condemn! Prevent!
Thread: Recognize! Condemn! Prevent!
ratmonky
ratmonky


Famous Hero
Abu Hur Ibn Rashka
posted April 24, 2005 05:17 PM

Recognize! Condemn! Prevent!

THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
“I am confident that the whole history of the human race contains no such horrible episode as this. The
great massacres and persecutions of the past seem almost insignificant when compared to the sufferings
of the Armenian race in 1915.”

– Henry Morgenthau, Sr.
U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire
April 24, 1915


April 24 symbolizes the beginning of the Young Turk government's organized genocidal campaign to
eliminate Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. On that day in 1915, the Ottoman Turkish government
arrested some 200 Armenian community leaders, most of whom were later murdered.

Background

During the second half of the nineteenth century, the Armenian population of the decaying Ottoman
Empire became the target of heightened persecution. These persecutions culminated in a three-decade
period during which the Armenians were systematically uprooted from their homeland of 3,000 years and
eliminated through deportation and massacres.

Sultan Abdul Hamid’s brutal reign ended in 1908 when a coalition known as the Young Turks came to
power and established a new constitution. Initially there was tremendous support for the new rulers who
promised many reforms and appeared to favor fraternity among the various nationalities within the
empire. Armenian political parties actively participated in this movement for political reform. However, by
1914, the triumvirate of Young Turk dictators, Talat, Enver and Jemal Pashas, had adopted pan-Turkism
as a nationalist ideology and set out to Turkify the country’s minorities, beginning with the Armenians.
Before the onset of World War I, they had already declared that the war would create an opportunity to
pursue a final solution to the "Armenian Question", i.e. forcible removal of the Armenian population from
the area of its ancestral settlement. These premeditated, well-planned decisions were put into effect and
deportations and exterminations began under the Ottoman Government’s order and supervision.

The Pattern of Persecution: 1894-1923

1894-1896 300,000 Armenians massacred during the reign of the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II.

1909 30,000 Armenians massacred in Cilicia; Armenian villages and city quarters
looted and burned.

1915-1923 1,500,000 Armenians perished, and 500,000 survivors forcibly exiled from their ancestral
homes in Ottoman Turkey.

At the beginning of World War I, there were some 2,100,000 Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire.
After the Armenian Genocide, fewer than 100,000 declared Armenians were left in Tu rkey.
Mobilization for World War I Sets the Stage for Genocide

1. On August 2, 1914, the Ottoman Turkish army mobilized. Like their fellow Turkish citizens, all ablebodied
Armenian men, with few exceptions, were called up for military service. Beginning in
February, 1915, the Armenians in the armed forces were segregated into labor battalions, disarmed,
and ultimately worked to death or massacred.

2. Also in August 1914, the Young Turk government began to release murderers and other confirmed
criminals from prisons throughout Asia Minor to be used by the Ottoman Security Service (Teshkileti
Mahsusa) for the express purpose of ending the “Armenian Question” by annihilating the Armenians.
Whole villages in the eastern provinces were massacred outright in the fall and winter of 1914-1915.

3. In Spring, 1915, the Ottoman government disarmed the Armenian mountaineers of Zeitun, near
Marash, and deported the population to the Salt Desert near Konia in Central Turkey, or to the Syrian
desert. Packed into boxcars, or forced to walk, often without food or water for days, they quickly
perished. Deportations and massacres soon became the plight of Armenians in other areas as well.

4. On April 24, 1915, about 200 Armenian religious, political, and intellectual leaders were arrested in
Constantinople (now Istanbul), taken to the interior of Turkey and murdered. Similar measures were
implemented throughout the empire in all Armenian centers.

5. The Edict of Deportation was formally promulgated on May 27, 1915. Soon afterwards, Armenians
throughout the Ottoman Empire were deported on short notice. Men were usually separated from the
group and massacred. The remaining women, children and elderly were marched across Asia Minor
and Turkish Armenia to the Syrian desert. Thousands were kidnapped. Most of the deportees were
massacred by brigands and the Special Organization or died of starvation, disease or exposure.

First Genocide of the 20th Century

Professor Raphael Lemkin, a lawyer who escaped Poland during the Nazi invasion of 1939, is the key
figure in the history of establishing genocide as a crime under international law. Having lost 49 members
of his own family in the World War II Holocaust, he coined the word “genocide” in 1944. He worked
tirelessly until his death in 1959 toward the adoption of the UN Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which was ratified by the U.S. in 1988.

Professor Lemkin was the first to characterize the atrocities of 1915-1923 as the “Armenian Genocide.”
During his effort to obtain ratification of the Genocide Convention, Lemkin repeatedly cited the Armenian
Genocide and the Jewish Holocaust as prototypes for the crimes of genocide.

Documentation of the Armenian Genocide

The U.S. National Archives contain thousands of pages documenting the premeditated extermination of
the Armenian people. American intervention prevented the full realization of Ottoman Turkey’s genocidal
plan, and U.S. humanitarian assistance was extended to those who survived.

The U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Henry Morgenthau, acting on instructions from Secretaries
of State William Jennings Bryan and Robert Lansing, protested the slaughter of the Armenians to the
Young Turk leaders. Other nations, including Great Britain, France and Russia accused Turkey of crimes
against humanity. An organization known as Near East Relief, chartered by an act of the U.S. Congress,
contributed some $113 million between 1915 and 1930 to aid Armenian Genocide survivors. In addition,
132,000 orphans became foster children in American families and owe their lives to this effort.

While the U.S. record on the Armenian Genocide is the most expansive in the detail of its coverage of the
events of 1915 to 1918, the official records of many other countries corroborate the evidence gathered by
U.S. diplomats. Researchers have now established that all major European states, whether friends or
foes of the Ottoman Empire during World War I, hold substantial archival collections of documents.
These countries include Austria, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, and Russia.


Countries that have officially recognized and condemned the Armenian Genocide:

European Parliament
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
Argentina
Belgium
Canada
Cyprus
France
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Lebanon
Netherlands
Poland
Russia
Slovakia
Sweden
Switzerland
Vatican
Wales
Uruguay

Currently the matter of Armenian Genocide is discussed at German Bundestag

US states that have recognized and condemned the Armenian Genocide

Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Montana
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin

Please, light a candle and pray for the innocent victims of the Armenian Genocide.
And please remember that Genocide is a crime against humanity and unless all countries condemn Armenian Genocide there will be no guarantee that your nation won't suffer a similar fate.
____________
Dies illa, dies irae,
Calamitatis et miseriae.
Requiem aeternum
Dona eis, dona eis Domine.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
privatehudson
privatehudson


Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
posted April 24, 2005 06:27 PM

I'm intruiged as to how Wales condemned the genocide but not the rest of the United Kingdom...
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
ratmonky
ratmonky


Famous Hero
Abu Hur Ibn Rashka
posted April 24, 2005 07:23 PM

Unfortunately the British ambassador in Armenia has been shamelessly denying the fact of Armenian Genocide.

Here are some photos of Genocide Memorial in Yerevan. Approximately 1 million people have visited it today.



____________
Dies illa, dies irae,
Calamitatis et miseriae.
Requiem aeternum
Dona eis, dona eis Domine.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
privatehudson
privatehudson


Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
posted April 24, 2005 08:44 PM
Edited By: privatehudson on 24 Apr 2005

Quote:
Unfortunately the British ambassador in Armenia has been shamelessly denying the fact of Armenian Genocide.


So how pray tell did the Welsh manage to do so when they don't have an ambassador whatsoever? Wales is part of the UK, even if it has a seperate regional assembly, any official protest would surely have to be done officially, i.e. through the British government. If we're talking unnoficial protests then why aren't Britain on that list since we condemned the actions of the Turkish government at the time as crimes against humanity? For that matter we still do condemn it as an atrocity according to the Ambassador.

I personally think it should be classified as Genocide, but I believe her motives were something like classifying it as such may raise tensions in the region once more, and perhaps it would be better to look to the future rather arguing about the past. Again, not my opinion, but that seems to have been her intention.

Oh and can we try to present this properly please. The British ambassador did not deny a crime had taken place, she said she wasn't sure if it counted as a genocide under UN law. She may be quite wrong, she may well be quite stupid for voicing her opinions openly, but she did not deny a terrible crime had taken place as you seem to imply there. The way it's being presented in various online sites and armenian newslpapers as far as I can make out makes her sound on a par with neo-nazi holocaust deniers which is total rubbish.

I also take issue with your argument that it was the first genocide of the 20th century, unless you mean first officially recognised genocide that is. People have made the argument that the British tried genocide on the Boers in 1900-1902. I don't personally agree that they did, but they sure fit the UN convention's points.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Svarog
Svarog


Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
posted April 25, 2005 01:46 AM

Truly gruesome act that should be remembered and learned from. My sympathies.
I think there were speculations not too long ago that EU would require from Turkey to apologize for the genocide, if they ever want to get their status as country-candidate. What ever happened to that?
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
privatehudson
privatehudson


Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
posted April 25, 2005 04:10 AM
Edited By: privatehudson on 24 Apr 2005

I believe they rejected the calls to declare it a genocide and instead offered to open a commission into investigating the events using sources from both countries. This was rejected totally by the Armenians who say the facts are already clear. The Turkish seem to believe the calls have more to do with keeping them out of Europe than any desire to help the Armenians right a wrong.

It's also further to be noted that part of why the Turks find the claims so hurtful is because they consider the period to be more one of civil strife than genocide. According to them, in the same period and area around 2 million Turks also died, either fighting the allies or fighting against Armenians who rose against them during the conflict. Co-incidentally, Americans dispatched to Eastern Anatolia to investigate the problems the Armenians suffered reported on some of the crimes the Armenians perpertrated on the Turkish population also.

Obviously this is a complex period and subject, but equally obviously there is more than one side to the story here. I wasn't aware of the Turkish side of the argument before today, and surely an investigation into the events done using extensive sources from all sides would benefit everyone? What are the Armenian government so afraid might come out of those sources? Should they not wish to openly investigate the chance that their own people may be guilty of similar crimes and also appologise if needed? And why on earth could the combined efforts of the British and French governments not find enough evidence to try any Turkish officials after the war despite having a clear desire and motive to do so?

Given that this is such an interesting but heated problem, it's not impossible to understand just why some countries are not overly eager to start accusing one side or the other of genocide/crimes against humanity until both are going to look at it openly and quit ignoring the crimes they committed.

Please note I in no way am taking sides, nor do I necessarily agree with the Turks on this. I'm more playing a kind of devil's advocate here, there's clearly 2 sides to this story and you've only posted one which offends my sense of balance sorry
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
ratmonky
ratmonky


Famous Hero
Abu Hur Ibn Rashka
posted April 25, 2005 11:02 AM

Quote:
So how pray tell did the Welsh manage to do so when they don't have an ambassador whatsoever? Wales is part of the UK, even if it has a seperate regional assembly, any official protest would surely have to be done officially, i.e. through the British government. If we're talking unnoficial protests then why aren't Britain on that list since we condemned the actions of the Turkish government at the time as crimes against humanity? For that matter we still do condemn it as an atrocity according to the Ambassador.


Actually it was the Welsh Parliament (or regional assembly or whatever is the right word) that passed a resolution about Armenian Genocide in 2001 if I'm not mistaken, but the official British government hasn't done so yet.

Quote:
I personally think it should be classified as Genocide, but I believe her motives were something like classifying it as such may raise tensions in the region once more, and perhaps it would be better to look to the future rather arguing about the past. Again, not my opinion, but that seems to have been her intention.

Oh and can we try to present this properly please. The British ambassador did not deny a crime had taken place, she said she wasn't sure if it counted as a genocide under UN law. She may be quite wrong, she may well be quite stupid for voicing her opinions openly, but she did not deny a terrible crime had taken place as you seem to imply there. The way it's being presented in various online sites and armenian newslpapers as far as I can make out makes her sound on a par with neo-nazi holocaust deniers which is total rubbish.

She basically said I'm truly sorry for the killings of Armenians during world war I, but according to historical documents it cannot be considered a genocide. And she repeated the same thing during several press conferences. I believe she did express her own opinions rather than the official British position to the matter, but anyways it was unethical and undiplomatic.
I apologize if my previous post sounded somewhat harsh.

Quote:
I believe they rejected the calls to declare it a genocide and instead offered to open a commission into investigating the events using sources from both countries. This was rejected totally by the Armenians who say the facts are already clear. The Turkish seem to believe the calls have more to do with keeping them out of Europe than any desire to help the Armenians right a wrong.


These are all speculations. There are already enough documents in American, Russian, German, Austrian, French, British archives. And more importantly there are thousands of pages of the accounts given by those who survived the Genocide.

Quote:
It's also further to be noted that part of why the Turks find the claims so hurtful is because they consider the period to be more one of civil strife than genocide. According to them, in the same period and area around 2 million Turks also died, either fighting the allies or fighting against Armenians who rose against them during the conflict. Co-incidentally, Americans dispatched to Eastern Anatolia to investigate the problems the Armenians suffered reported on some of the crimes the Armenians perpertrated on the Turkish population also.


I'm sorry to say that but this is all nonesense. There was no Armenian revolt and no Turkish genocide as Turkey now claims. However, during the massacres and mass deportations the Armenian neighborhoods in many cities in Western Armenia did organize self-defense, but this cannot be considered a revolt, because they were fighting to protect their lives. Nevertheless, the Ottoman army which was much better armed did manage to crush all these self-defense movements and did finally realize their horrid plan.

Currently Turkey is rewriting it's own history. For many years it was illegal in Turkey to utter the words "Armenian Genocide". According to them, Armenians never lived in Turkey or if they even did, one day the entire Armenian population just woke up in the morining and left their motherland. They even claim that Armenian monuments in Turkey are of either unknown origin or they are Greek. Turkey has tied the matter of Armenian Genocide with a red tape and there is no surprise that the majority of Turks are unaware of their own history. Each time a European coutry recognizes Armenian genocide and each time a Turkish government official says "Armenian Genocide" without the traditional "so-called" attribute, it causes massive Anti-Armenian hysteria in Turkey.

I would also be grateful if you could find any proves of Turkish Genocide if there are any of course.

Quote:
Obviously this is a complex period and subject, but equally obviously there is more than one side to the story here. I wasn't aware of the Turkish side of the argument before today, and surely an investigation into the events done using extensive sources from all sides would benefit everyone? What are the Armenian government so afraid might come out of those sources? Should they not wish to openly investigate the chance that their own people may be guilty of similar crimes and also appologise if needed?

I'm ready to apologize in behalf of all Armenians if anyone could prove that we have committed Turkish Genocide.

Quote:
And why on earth could the combined efforts of the British and French governments not find enough evidence to try any Turkish officials after the war despite having a clear desire and motive to do so?

Given that this is such an interesting but heated problem, it's not impossible to understand just why some countries are not overly eager to start accusing one side or the other of genocide/crimes against humanity until both are going to look at it openly and quit ignoring the crimes they committed.

Please note I in no way am taking sides, nor do I necessarily agree with the Turks on this. I'm more playing a kind of devil's advocate here, there's clearly 2 sides to this story and you've only posted one which offends my sense of balance sorry

no need to be sorry. I would also like to hear the Turkish side of this issue too.  

Quote:
Truly gruesome act that should be remembered and learned from. My sympathies.
I think there were speculations not too long ago that EU would require from Turkey to apologize for the genocide, if they ever want to get their status as country-candidate. What ever happened to that?

It is up to EU to decide whether they want a country in their ranks that has so brutally violated human rights and is still denying it.

And one more interesting fact. Belgian Chamber of Representatives has recently passed a bill to punish by law everyone who denies the Armenian Genocide (up to 10 years of imprisonment and/or up to 5000 euros fee). It still has to be approved by the Senate and signed by the Queen, but if it does take into effect, then the EU will most likely include the issue of Armenian Genocide in the requirements for Turkey to become an EU country-candidate.
____________
Dies illa, dies irae,
Calamitatis et miseriae.
Requiem aeternum
Dona eis, dona eis Domine.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
privatehudson
privatehudson


Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
posted April 25, 2005 12:25 PM
Edited By: privatehudson on 25 Apr 2005

Quote:
Actually it was the Welsh Parliament (or regional assembly or whatever is the right word) that passed a resolution about Armenian Genocide in 2001 if I'm not mistaken, but the official British government hasn't done so yet.


That would be an unnoficial opinion then. The Welsh regional assembly has no powers to determine seperate foreign policy from the rest of the UK, and from what I've read is not exactly going out of it's way to even try to persuade Blair either. Makes their declaration as much use as a choclate teapot frankly.

Quote:
These are all speculations. There are already enough documents in American, Russian, German, Austrian, French, British archives. And more importantly there are thousands of pages of the accounts given by those who survived the Genocide.


Surely an investigation into these sources and their validity would therefore only extend even more support and give even greater reason for others to recognise the case though? Surely it would bring you even more publicity and information? Seems to me that a country with no embarassment about it's past would welcome the chance this would bring to adress the points. If there was enough proof in British and French hands, why could they find nothing to act upon at the time?

Quote:
There was no Armenian revolt and no Turkish genocide as Turkey now claims


So when the Dashnak society, Hunchak Committee and an Armenian politician all make calls for siding with Russia this doesn't count as an revolt? Are those lies also?

Quote:
I would also be grateful if you could find any proves of Turkish Genocide if there are any of course


The Americans Captain Emory Niles and Mr. Arthur Sutherland found enough evidence of it for a start. I don't imagine they had many reasons to lie given that they were supposed to be there to determine what funds should be made available for the Armenians.

Quote:
Nevertheless, the Ottoman army which was much better armed did manage to crush all these self-defense movements and did finally realize their horrid plan.


According to the above that was also a significant amount of similarly horrid actions had been carried out by the Armenians themselves.

I'd also suggest that you might ask yourself why the victorious allies could not find a single thing to charge the Turks they arrested with the intent of trying for such crimes. Quite frankly I'm starting to get the impression that more than one side here is in denial of their past.

Quote:
It is up to EU to decide whether they want a country in their ranks that has so brutally violated human rights and is still denying it.


*buzzer sound* Afraid France is already in the EU.

Quote:
believe she did express her own opinions rather than the official British position to the matter, but anyways it was unethical and undiplomatic.


It would have been just as undiplomatic to take sides on the issue which is at the moment unresolved.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted April 26, 2005 06:28 AM
Edited By: Consis on 26 Apr 2005

Let's Be Honest About This

Who is going to tell the Turks what to do? Who has the power and influence? They are too strong, too independent, and they have their own way of doing things. Turkey depends on no one. Regardless of what the latest research says, Turkey is as strong as a global superpower when it comes to something like this.

~The U.N. could declare sanctions on Turkey: it won't hurt them.
~The U.S. will only publicly criticize them very little because there is nothing we can do. What bases do we have in the middle east? Iraq? Hah...
~The U.K. might try something inconspicuously but with little affect. Turkey is too stable and they don't like the English anyway.
~What can Armenia do? They are lucky to still have the rest of their country.

The Turks are middle-eastern bullies who get away with things like this simply because they can. The worst part is that they are a strong democracy and that makes the U.S. U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Methinks they will not acknowledge the truth and no one; not America; not the U.K.; nor Russia; and not the U.N. can do a thing about it.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
terje_the_ma...
terje_the_mad_wizard


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
posted April 26, 2005 09:00 PM
Edited By: terje_the_mad_wizard on 26 Apr 2005

Well, the Turks are reforming their system to become more democratic, with an EU membership as the ultimate goal (though the French - along with some other xenophobic countries - will probably block their entry). Maybe they'll be forced into apologizing to be accepted into the EU?

Though personally, I think that would do more harm than good. And what's a forced apology good for anyway?
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
privatehudson
privatehudson


Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
posted April 26, 2005 10:09 PM

Quote:
Though personally, I think that would do more harm than good. And what's a forced apology good for anyway?


Exactly.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted April 26, 2005 11:04 PM

I Disagree

The Turks can't be forced into an apology. The Turks can't be forced into doing anything. Turkey is one of the strongest nations in the world right now. Who will do the forcing? The E.U.? Hah...
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
privatehudson
privatehudson


Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
posted April 26, 2005 11:11 PM

They could do if they wished to make an issue of it. Turkey is quite deeply interested in joining the EU.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
terje_the_ma...
terje_the_mad_wizard


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
posted April 26, 2005 11:16 PM

Turkey one of the strongest countries in the world?

Isn't that the country that's been alienating itself from its Musilm/Middle Eastern brethren through its close relationship to the U.S., and through its long-lasting attempts at Westernization?

The country that has equally alienated itself from (or has been actively alienated from by European politicians) the Europe it strives to become a member of, through its oppression of the Kurds, and many other violations of human rights?

Sure, it's got some 80 million citizens, and have a geo-strategically invaluable position (though not as important as it used to be), and it may be the key to creating bonds between the European and the Arabian/Muslim world.

But one of the strongest countries in the world? Not even close. Of course, it all comes down to how you define "one of the strongest nations/countries/states in the world", but it'd have to be a very wide definitions to include Turkey. At least, that's my impression.
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Defreni
Defreni


Promising
Famous Hero
posted April 26, 2005 11:26 PM

Quote:
The Turks can't be forced into an apology. The Turks can't be forced into doing anything. Turkey is one of the strongest nations in the world right now. Who will do the forcing? The E.U.? Hah...


Well Concis, in this you are wrong. Turkey`s ultimate foreign policy goal, has since 1966 been to become a member of EU (At that time it was called the Steel-Union). So if it is a demand from EU`s side that Turkey apologise for the Armenian genocide, they will probably bite the apple. Same thing they have done regarding the recognization of the Greek-Cypriotic government.
Things that talk against such a demand from EU`s side, is the fact that France hasnt apologised to Algeria, and there  is still the problem regarding Belgium`s and France`s participation in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Meaning that such a demand would be a blatant example of double standards.
I havent even mentioned Great-Britains role in the Independence of India and Pakistan in 1949, or Portugals colonial wars in Mozambique and Angola. Neither of which have thrown a formal apology from it.

When all this is said and done.
My opinion is offcourse that Turkey should extend a formal apology to Armenia, and more importantly to the descendants of the victims.
But in all this there is the creeping feeling that this is being used as a propaganda campaign against Turkeys admission into the EU. Im especially refering to the coverage of the 90. anniversary this genocide has been given in the press in EU, and on the polls that shows that a majority of EU`s population is against Turkish membership, primarily because they are muslims.
*Bow my head in shame*

Regards

Defreni

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
terje_the_ma...
terje_the_mad_wizard


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
posted April 26, 2005 11:31 PM

Quote:
... the polls that shows that a majority of EU`s population is against Turkish membership, primarily because they are muslims.
*Bow my head in shame*

You can say that again...
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Defreni
Defreni


Promising
Famous Hero
posted April 26, 2005 11:35 PM

Quote:
Turkey one of the strongest countries in the world?

Isn't that the country that's been alienating itself from its Musilm/Middle Eastern brethren through its close relationship to the U.S., and through its long-lasting attempts at Westernization?

The country that has equally alienated itself from (or has been actively alienated from by European politicians) the Europe it strives to become a member of, through its oppression of the Kurds, and many other violations of human rights?



Hehee, 2 post in the span of my reply.
Just got to respond to this one Terje.
Actually alot of west-european countries where actively supporting Turkey against the Kurds up untill the 1989, mainly because the Kurdish cause was being fought by PKK, which is a communist organisation.
The reason today that Turkey is being hit in the head about Kurds has more to do with the fact that internal pressure in major European countries (France and Germany) against immigration from islamic countries, has turned us all into islamophobes, where you have the ultimate fright scenario where hordes of extreme islamist overrun our beautifull countries if Turkey becomes a member of EU. (Hope you can hear the sarcasm dribble).

But I agree completely that Turkey is by far one of the most powerfull countries in the world.

Regards

Defreni

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
terje_the_ma...
terje_the_mad_wizard


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
posted April 26, 2005 11:45 PM

Thanks for the additional information, Defreni!
I always enjoy reading your insightful posts.


As an addition to my argument against Turkey being one of today's strongest nations, is this: Why would one of the strongest nations in the world buy Norwegian military equippemnt?
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted April 27, 2005 12:04 AM

LoL!

Quote:
Why would one of the strongest nations in the world buy Norwegian military equippemnt?

Do they come with the lotion?...(bort's thread)...
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Svarog
Svarog


Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
posted April 27, 2005 01:47 AM

Defreni, there's a notable difference between a powerful country and a strategically important country. Turkey is the latter; from all aspects, huge market, industry potentials, sizable population, geostrategical location, democratic model for the Middle East (very important!) etc. But powerful, not quite. While they do have a big army, I dont think that they play by far a key role in world politics.

Also, the thing about the Kurds opression is a pumped up story created by the Westerners in order to hold Turkey hostage to non-existing problem, fearing the thought of facing them with the truth that they are not wanted in Christian Europe. True, they arent the most liberal in that field, but Turkey is by far less oprssive than Greece is, for example. The Kurds workers party had been dealing with terrorists activities and openly fought for separation. Death penalty is (was) another reason for Turkish "human standards" failiures, but then again no one mentions USA and their executions (50 per year, was it?).
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread »
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0884 seconds