About "ArmenianSurvival"

Yes, discussing history is kind of the only point to this forum .

I was unaware of your stand on the Armenian Genocide.

The Armenian occupation of "Azerbaijani land" is well justified, my friend. Before the Soviet Union, those lands had been ancient Armenian lands for millenia. Stalin cut Armenia up into pieces and gave it to Azerbaijan, and this area included Nagnorno-Karabagh (why do you think then, that the region of Nakhichevan belongs to Azerbaijan when it is not even connected to Azerbaijan Proper? It was ancient Armenian land handed to the Azeris by Stalin). I am fully aware of the half a million or so Azeris that fled Karabagh to Azerbaijan, Armenians dont hide that, ive read many Armenian sources which state that fact. Its very unfortunate as there are people from both sides suffering. But those are ancient Armenian lands, no matter what Azeri propaganda might say, because the churchs in those regions (the ones that are still standing) outdate the mosques and all other Azeri buildings outright. And if you read our history you will know of many Armenian settlements in Karabagh in almost every time period. I know because i was there 3 months ago. I even saw an Azeri mosque that is still standing in an Armenian village, and the Armenians kept it untouched because they said it has historical value (i believe it was built in the 1800's). They might even make improvements to keep it standing longer. Thats a major step up from what Azeri forces did, which was occupy Armenian churches and use it as a Barracks and a hideout, because they knew the Armenians would not shoot at their own church. I know, because that very church was right across the street from our hotel in Karabagh. I also visited a church in which Azeri forces threw a mortar in the priests' living quarters. The mortar got stuck in the wall and has not exploded until this day, its pretty spooky going up to it and touching it, knowing its still live ammo. And not only that, the entire outer walls of the nearly 300 year old church are littered with bullet-holes by Azeri forces. I was told this by the priest of that church that was nearly blown away by the aforementioned Azeri mortar.

Is the war in Karabagh unfortunate? Of course, for both sides. But it is not unjustified, because the Armenian population in Karabagh even before the war was the vast majority, and there are stories of many atrocities against Armenians in that region before the war even started, perpetrated by the Azeri government. Its painful for Azeri citizens and thats very unfortunate, thats a different story. But i have no remorse for their government.

BTW, whatd you think of 'Ararat'? The director has a very strange style, wonder what you thought about it.

besides, diplomats and government officials are civilians

Originally posted by Beylerbeyi 'Those are our ancestral lands' is a very lame excuse to remove thousands of people from their native land. This is an extreme nationalist point of view. If you think it is OK to remove other people from their lands by force, you have no right to complain when it's done to you.

I never said its ok for other people to move just because of us. That is simply one of the tragedies of war. And would i complain if it was done to us? No i wouldnt, because Armenians dont migrate and then try to set up countries outside of their ancient lands. On the contrary, other nations have done it to us. Although unfortunate and messed up from my biased point of view, this is simply the way of the world. Turkey took all of Anatolia by force, and they are praised for 'independence' wars and 'successful military campaigns' for taking over land that had nothing to do with them....but if we try to take back land that has historically and traditionally been ours for millennia, we are at fault. I really fail to see this point of view, if you could explain this to me from your point of view i will greatly appreciate it.

Originally posted by Ihsan Murdering people with the aim of trying to convince other nations to recognise a past event in history is truely senseless, brutal and utterly barbaric. Those murderous terrorist bastards were so evil.

Murdering people with the aim of trying to save a dying empire and trying to convince other nations that it wasnt part of history is truly senseless, brutal and utterly barbaric. THOSE murderous terrorist bastards were much more evil.

I get your point, i dont like terrorists any more than the next guy. But are they effective? As long as they target those members of a government that choose to deny a nations past and historical facts, then it is pretty effective. Just look at the major governments of the world recognize the genocide one by one. They are not accepting because they are afraid of terrorism, they are accepting it because before the terrorism it was hid under the rug and no one really knew about it. Now that people know about it, they research it and see that it is historically accurate, and their governments pass bills on it. Why do you think every U.S. president in the past 20 years has gave speeches on April 24th (rememberance day of genocide) saying that the Ottomans "systematically murdered" Armenians and that it is a tragedy for all humankind? The only reason they dont pass the bill is because they will lose their vital military bases in Turkey. 

America was about to pass the bill 4 years ago, but then the Turkish government said "if you pass the bill then American lives will be in danger"....What is that supposed to mean? Of course Bill Clinton got scared and pulled the bill right before they were about to vote on it. And trust me, i know people that had insider knowledge on it and it easily had enough votes to pass. Anyway, bottom line, it happened and people noticed it because of the terrorism. Doesnt mean i agree with terrorism, but hey, its obviously uncovered some dirty little secrets about Ottoman history.

AS, don't talk about those terrorists any more, they are truely disgusting.

One of their goals was to kill my grandfather; retired diplomat Besir Balcioglu on June 2nd 1978 in Madrid. They took out a handful of bullets out of his body. Dont give me that "goal" thing!!!!

Originally posted by MixcoatlToltecahtecuhtli besides, diplomats and government officials are civilians

At last someoone remembered that diplomats are also human beings and they dont deserve being killed because they are ''officials''...

In my opinion,there has been a genocide concept anarchy recently...People actually dont know how a horrible crime genocide is..This is really  a big insult to victims of the second world war...AND actually Aram Manukian,Antranik Pasa,Sivasl� Murat Boyamaciyan,Karekin Pastirmacian had the idea of exterminating the Turks of eastern anatolia in order to turn the nimority into the majority in the region.

IT SHOULD NOT BE FORGETTEN On 18 May 1915,the Russian Tsar,Tsar Nicholas II was sending a telegram to Aram Manukian,the leader of the great Armenian Rebellion in Van,for their success and service to the Russian Empire.

Hincak Armenian Rebellion Movement

i will replyonly  your message to me on the Armenian relocation Issue in the wake of the Great Armenian Rebellion.

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival I have read many Non-Armenian sources about these "rebellions" in Ottoman cities such as Van. The Ottoman forces had already disarmed every Armenian city because they said they needed the weapons since they were running into dire times against the advancing Russian army, and were gradually running out of supplies.

is that how the Armenians of Van accomplished to build a shorth-lived Armenian state in Van?

In eastern Anatolia,any armenian village was like a castle.Dashnags and Hincakists with the help of the Armenian church armed and brainwashed the Ottoman Armenians to rebel.

when the great war broke out,Ittihat ve Terakki members met with Dashnag members in Erzurum.Ittihat ve Terakki asked Dashnags for being neutral and loyal to the Ottoman Empire.Dashnags gave promise in the name of their pride.

but when the war broke out,they seemed that they had neevr promised ...!

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival Most Armenians, as even Turks will tell you, were loyal citizens of the Ottoman government

Most of The Ottoman Armenian community were loyal ''till ''1877-1878 Russo-Turk War.After this war,it was only the Armenians now,who were christians but not declared independece from the Ottoman Empire yet.after this date,armenian rbellion movements founded and started to pursue the Bulgarian tactic.

if you look back to the history you see that after this date,Armenian Rebellion Organizations founded.Hincakist movement founded in 1887 in Switzerland.Dashnagsution founded in 1890 in Tbilis/Georgia.see?these organizations were even founded abroad. 

The Armenians had a right to look for the independence in my opinion...But following the Bulgarian tactic was their important mistake..Because they were not majority in the region like the in the case of Bulgaria.

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival   Why do you think then, no city in western Turkey rebelled? Because that was the first region to be hit by the genocide.

Because the Russians  were at the eastern front.Because the Russians invaded the eastern Anatolia.Because the Armenians were at a higher number in comprasion to the western Ottoman Empire.So the eastern Anatolia was the best choice without doubt...

Make no mistake,it is obvious a history produced on the table and taught to you.Otherwise,you wouldnt be missinng to notice this easy to know fact. 

and let me show a picture from a western Ottoman city:Adapazari.

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival  The rebellion of Van was indeed a rebellion, but the citizens of the city had to rebel or else they were going to be massacred, and share the same fate as the Armenians in western Turkey.

The Ottoman government used that as propaganda, saying they had to "deport" the Armenians because they were constantly rebelling. They only rebelled in Eastern Turkey, when word of the genocide had already spread. [/quote]

Come on man!..You are already at 18.You must be able to investigate what is taught to you...You must be able to think twice on the issues at least...This scenario you have written abovedo you really believe that could really  take place....if you sey yes,you must have no knowledge of Ottoman transportation,ottoman teleghram system,Ottoman Armenian Society....

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival And funny how some Turkish sources tell me two different reasons for the deportation of Armenians. Ive read many Turkish sources which say that they deported the Armenians because they were "rebelling" in Eastern Turkey. And i have also read sources and heard from the mouth of members of the modern Turkish government that they deported Armenians "for their own good, to protect them from the Eastern war zone". Hmmmmm.

But both of these above open the same door of meaning

AND!theArmenians in the Eastern war zone were not deported...They were ''relocated''...

There is a vital difference of meaning between deportation and RELOCATION

Here is the DEFINITION OF RELOCATION for you:

THE DEFINITION AND PURPOSE OF RELOCATION (TEHCIR)

The Arabic originated word �tehcir� means �emigration / immigration�, it definitely not means �deportation� or �exile�. Hence the law commonly known as the �Tehcir Law� is the same as �Temporary Law On The Military Measures To Be Taken For Those Who Resist The Governmental Acts And Supplementation�s.� The word used to explain the implementation in line with this law is �tenkil� in the Ottoman language and means �transport- not the equivalent of �deportation�, �exile� or �proscription� in Latin originated languages.

The immigration, which was started with the orders of Talaat Pasha, and approved by the Government and the Parliament as a measure against the Armenian riots and massacres, which had arisen in a number of places in the Country - pre - dominantly in Van province, was only implemented only in the regions in which such riots and massacres affected the security of the fronts directly. The first area was Erzurum, Van and Bitlis Vicinities which formed the rear part of the Caucasian - Iran Front; and the second was Mersin - Iskenderun Region which formed the rear part of the Sina Front. In both of these regions, Armenians had collaborated with the enemy and involved in activities to facilitate the enemy�s invasion.

Later, the scope of the immigration was widened in order to include the Armenians in the other provinces, who rioted, collaborated with the enemy and screened the activities of Armenian Gangs. Although the Catholic and Protestant Armenians were excluded from immigration at the beginning, later those whose harmful activities were observed, were also relocated.

Since 1915, numerous papers, reports, books, etc. were written and published about the immigration implementation. The Armenians, by using false documents have succeeded to deceit the World for a long time. The rumor about Armenian holocaust (!) which expressed at first as three hundred thousand and later increased to three million has no basis at all. In fact, although English and French authorities have extensively studied the Ottoman archives during their occupation in Istanbul have failed to find even a single document hinting about such holocaust.

Had the Ottoman State intended to make genocide on Armenians; could not they realize such an act at the places where the Armenians live? Why would it be necessary �to immigrate� them for such an intention? Why did they undertake the significant fiscal and material costs of their security, safety, health and food of the immigrating Armenians? During this immigration and re-settlement process which lasted approximately 1,5 year from May 1915 until October 1916, why would the central and local administrations take measures to ensure the lives and properties of Armenians in spite of the difficult war circumstances? In addition, would it be necessary to accept great administrative, military and financial burden �as if opening a new front- to protect and secure these people?

The answers to these questions shall be sufficient to understand the real intention of the Ottoman State. Also there is no logical explanation that why the Ottoman State suddenly changed its policy towards a community which had always been called as �millet-i sadika� (loyal people) due to their being really faithful to the Government. Hence the party whose attitude had changed was not the Ottoman Government, but the Armenians who were deceived by the independence promises of Russia and the Entente States.

In conclusion, it can be said that the Armenian Immigration which was a necessary measure to ensure the State Security and Safety is which the European Human Right Commitment explained later in terms of some rights can be restricted for the state security....

TO MY EPILOGUE:

A Turkish memorial to the victims of the Armenian uprising of 1915. The bodies of 5000 Turks lie beneath the monument in a gully that opens into lake Van. The Turks were rounded up on this spot and massacred.
Reference: A Myth Of Terror.

 

Edited by TheDiplomat

I've seen this happen in Hg and believe me it resulted into flames and "you are ignornat" analogy to prove his position.....

It's happened here to demon........

Originally posted by TheDiplomat <> Here is the DEFINITION OF RELOCATION for you: THE DEFINITION AND PURPOSE OF RELOCATION (TEHCIR) The Arabic originated word �tehcir� means �emigration / immigration�, it definitely not means �deportation� or �exile�. Hence the law commonly known as the �Tehcir Law� is the same as �Temporary Law On The Military Measures To Be Taken For Those Who Resist The Governmental Acts And Supplementation�s.� The word used to explain the implementation in line with this law is �tenkil� in the Ottoman language and means �transport- not the equivalent of �deportation�, �exile� or �proscription� in Latin originated languages.

Diplomat, I know the whole diplomacy education is based on subtle word games and to be able to persuade the people you're dealing with and to be able to present historical, political and economical facts in such a way that is plausible to the situation -which is only natural, I'm not blaming you, that is what diplomacy is all about after all- but, pray tell, how exactly is a forced "emigration" an emigration and not a deportation? Hundreds of thousands of people were relocated against their own will, many of them died in the process, and how exactly that qualifies as "tehcil" ie. "relocation" can only be explained by an extreme usage of euphemistic approach.

The stanza from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet gives the best explanation to the rhetorical question of "what's in a name?". Of course, he was talking about something pleasant, and we are not.

"What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet"