Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Comparing Palestinian and Armenian causes

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Comparing Palestinian and Armenian causes
    Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 03:59

Ok i started this thread because i wanted to discuss this issue without flooding the other thread. This is what was said:


Originally posted by mortaza

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

The same forumers supporting Palestinian resistance groups which kill Israelis, turn around and condemn Armenian fighters for killing Turkish diplomats. I see no difference, they are both fighting and doing something inhumane for the cause of their people. Both groups are doing what they can, with what they have. But one is accepted, and the other is cursed. Please give me a civil answer to this statement. You can even PM me about this, lets not flood this thread.

 

Uh we are not supporting terrorists, we are supporting palestinians, I think this two is much different.


First off i would like to say im not here to start a thread where people can come in and insult each other. I will keep my posts civil and only raise civil questions and points. That being said, here are my questions and thoughts:

Supporting Palestinian resistance means morally agreeing that Palestinians do not have the means to wage a traditional war, and in some cases must resort to terrorism to either defend their communities, and more importantly, to get their cause noticed... and no one noticed until some of them started blowing themselves up. This does not mean supporting terrorism, it simply means accepting that the inhumane act of killing civilians is a result of government oppression. I want to make that very clear to everyone.

Lets say the Ottomans relocated Armenians, and that all of them died by chance. The Ottomans gave the property of 'relocated' Armenians to Turks and Kurds. Some Armenians still have their property rights to the land, and some Armenians dont. The ones that dont have them is because they are dead, and their deaths were caused by their relocation due to insufficient supplies by the government. The ones that still have their property rights were denied by the Turkish government. No one supported the Armenian refugees, over 1.5 million in number. Many of them died either by "genocide" or by "insufficient relocation". They did not relocate people based on anything other than the fact that they were Armenian. That automatically makes the situation based on ethnicity.

So an entire ethnic population suffers by way of government order. Palestinians are also an entire ethnic population suffering by way of Israeli government order. They are "relocated" by the Israeli Army, and their homes are occupied by Israelis, in the same way Armenians were "relocated" and their homes were occupied by Turkish families. Some Palestinians have resorted to terrorism as a result, in much the same way Armenian militants used guerilla tactics against Turks, resulting in civilian death. My question: What is the difference between the two struggles?

If you are supporting Palestinians and not their terrorists, why dont you support Armenians and not their terrorists? I am pointing to the economic blockade on Armenia by Turkey as one of these provisions that is hindering our relationship as neighbors.

The blockade issue is automatically going to bring up the conflict in Karabagh. This raises another question:

If you support Palestinian defense of their lands from the Israeli Army, why do you condemn Armenian defense of their lands from the Azeri Army?

I have raised many points and would like to hear responses to all of them if possible.
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 04:19

their deaths were caused by their relocation due to insufficient supplies by the government.

Well, If you think This is a point for genocide, I should remind you 100 000 Turkish soldier died due to insufficient supplies by the government.

If you support Palestinian defense of their lands from the Israeli Army, why do you condemn Armenian defense of their lands from the Azeri Army?

If I am not wrong, before to war, Karabak is belong to azeris, and azeris accept a huge autonomy for armenians, am I wrong?

They did not relocate people based on anything other than the fact that they were Armenian. That automatically makes the situation based on ethnicity.

Again If I am not  wrong,300 000-500 000 armenians didnt exiled. I remember Armenians exiled have a different religious sect than bolsohays and non-exiled armenians.

For Me, I dont support  exile, and I think you have right, Survivers childs have right to take their  land back.

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 04:34
While you may have some reason comparing the two cases, and pure abstract justice would be done (in pure theory) with the retoration that was stolen (but lifes can't be restored, sadly). The depressing truth is that nowadays Palestinians would be content to have 1/3 of their ancestral land, the so called occupied territories, because they are the losing side and they have been forced to negotiate in disadvantageous conditions. Even now Israel bargains with parts of the West Bank and doesn't want to give back East Jerusalem. Palestinians claim the return of the refugees but that's not something that will happen most likely. They are in position of force and therefore in fact they can do it. A simmilar conclussion can be reached in the Armenian case: Turkey has the pan by the handle and there are almost no Armenians left in western Armenia, so they can force to keep the status quo. Besides, while the Palestinian genocide is still fresh in our collective psyche (it started in 1948 but some massacres happened in recent years), the Armenian genocide happened almost a century ago - it's almost as old as Wounded Knee. Anyhow, in order to effectively claim something, eventually you must be there, not generation after generation living in other countries. Yes, I know it was forced exile... but still. That's also what gives some legitimacy to Israel: that many of their people has been born and raised there.

I don't mean to justify anything, much less genocide... but reality imposes its rules - even if they are against all justice. Nowadays to reinstate Armenians in western Armenia, many Turk and Kurd dwellers, most born there, would have to be displaced, so simply it's not realistic (and would be unjust to those that were born there). Unless you have the force of weapons and money: with that you can achieve almost anything, like Israelis and Turks.

On Nagorno Karabakh, I think it should be the will of their inhabitants, naturally.


Edited by Maju

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 04:38
Originally posted by Mortaza

Well, If you think This is a point for genocide, I should remind you 100 000 Turkish soldier died due to insufficient supplies by the government.


Yes, so you know how oppressive the regime was. Again, we are not blaming Turkish people, we are blaming the government. Republic of Turkey did not reach out to the relocated Armenians of the Ottoman Empire. Ataturk actually conquered land that the newly-formed Armenian Republic had gained from international treaties.

And during relocation, Ottomans knew that they didnt have enough supplies for Armenians. They didnt wake up one day and realize there were no supplies, they knew how much they had and what they were using.

Lets try not to discuss the events of 1915 so much, but rather the comparison with the Palestinian struggle.

For the sake of the thread i referred to 1915 as "relocations". Although it was a strictly ethnic relocation.

Originally posted by Mortaza


If you support Palestinian defense of their lands from the Israeli Army, why do you condemn Armenian defense of their lands from the Azeri Army?

If I am not wrong, before to war, Karabak is belong to azeris, and azeris accept a huge autonomy for armenians, am I wrong?


Before the Soviet Union took power, Karabagh was ethnically over 90% Armenian. Stalin gave the regions of Karabagh and Naxichevan to Azerbaijan, the same way Western powers gave Palestine to Israel. Azerbaijan originally wanted to give Karabagh back to Armenia, but Stalin ruled with an iron fist, and it was not their choice. Azeri government moved Azeris into Karabagh, and the region became 75% Armenian when the war broke out. Before the war, the province of Karabagh voted to be part of the Armenian Republic, and the overwhelming majority voted for separation from Azerbaijan. But the Azeri Army responded by occupying the entire province, which sparked the war. Thus it is very similar to the Palestinian struggle.

Originally posted by Mortaza

Again If I am not  wrong,300 000-500 000 armenians didnt exiled. I remember Armenians exiled have a different religious sect than bolsohays and non-exiled armenians.


Even by your logic, relocating Armenians based on their religious sect is the same thing . But even Armenian Catholics from Pontus were relocated. "Bolsahays" is just a word which means "Armenian from Istanbul", it is not a religious sect. But you are right, even Bolsahays were relocated.


Even after many years, the Turkish government continues to bury the past of its Armenian inhabitants. Turkey's Ministry of Culture and Tourism's official website has an entire article on Saint Gregory the Illuminator, the man who converted Armenia into the world's first Christian nation. However, their site does not mention ANYTHING about Armenia! They have many Armenian churches on their list of historical buildings, but they are not mentioned as "Armenian", it is usually replaced with another adjective. It is the same on any official Turkish Government website. Armenian monuments throughout Turkey have been neglected and many of them have collapsed. Ancient cities like Kars and Ani are not referred to as "Armenian cities", which is what they were. Why has the government of the Turkish Republic neglected the history of its entire Eastern region? Is this a response to Armenian accusations of genocide? Your thoughts.

Edited by ArmenianSurvival
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 05:10

Even by your logic, relocating Armenians based on their religious sect is the same thing . But even Armenian Catholics from Pontus were relocated. "Bolsahays" is just a word which means "Armenian from Istanbul", it is not a religious sect. But you are right, even Bolsahays were relocated.

I am not refusing exile is ethnic based,  It is an ethnic cleansing  with much  death.

Yes, so you know how oppressive the regime was.

I agree with this  too, and I remind you, young Turk's coup is supported largely by minorities. in Turkey, they are not loved much, and our feeling for them is  still not fine.

Even after many years, the Turkish government continues to bury the past of its Armenian inhabitants. Turkey's Ministry of Culture and Tourism's official website has an entire article on Saint Gregory the Illuminator, the man who converted Armenia into the world's first Christian nation. However, their site does not mention ANYTHING about Armenia! It is the same on any official Turkish Government website. Armenian monuments throughout Turkey have been neglected and many of them have collapsed. Ancient cities like Kars and Ani are not referred to as "Armenian cities", which is what they were. Why has the government of the Turkish Republic neglected the history of its entire Eastern region? Is this a response to Armenian accusations of genocide? Your thoughts.

I think It is not response, It looks like Turkey is trying to turkify  anatolia. we suffered for anatolia much, and we are trying to protect it, but I think we should change this politic. do Armenia  make any wish related with this? I think Erdogan will not resist this type of wish.

Before the Soviet Union took power, Karabagh was ethnically over 90% Armenian. Stalin gave the regions of Karabagh and Naxichevan to Azerbaijan, the same way Western powers gave Palestine to Israel. Azerbaijan originally wanted to give Karabagh back to Armenia, but Stalin ruled with an iron fist, and it was not their choice. Azeri government moved Azeris into Karabagh, and the region became 75% Armenian when the war broke out. Before the war, the province of Karabagh voted to be part of the Armenian Republic, and the overwhelming majority voted for separation from Azerbaijan. But the Azeri Army responded by occupying the entire province, which sparked the war. Thus it is very similar to the Palestinian struggle.

For this, I dont say this ,We dont support division much.we cannot return past, we have  minoritiees  at bulgaria and greece, but our wish is not to annex that land but protect their cultural rights.I thing a huge autonomy is fine with  karabak, maybe a con-federation, but they should rule their country by themself.But If I am not wrong, Armenia want to annex this land?

 

 

 

Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 05:29
Originally posted by Mortaza

I agree with this  too, and I remind you, young Turk's coup is supported largely by minorities.


Yes, because Young Turks promised equal rights for all minorities, and Armenians wanted a new Ottoman government because Abdul-Hamid had killed many Armenian civilians in 1895-1896, because they were pushing for an independent Armenian Republic. The Turkish government nowadays says that Abdul-Hamid did that because of Armenian terrorists, but Abdul-Hamid killed over 100,000 Armenian civilians, it is written in many international sources. Only the Turkish government denies the massacres of 1895-1896, and claims that "whatever happened" was because of Armenian terrorists. This does not justify civilian death carried out by the government . I understand a couple of thousand, but international figures are usually drawn between 100,000 to 200,000 deaths...i use 100,000 to be conservative in the argument.

Originally posted by Mortaza


I think It is not response, It looks like Turkey is trying to turkify  anatolia. we suffered for anatolia much, and we are trying to protect it, but I think we should change this politic. do Armenia  make any wish related with this? I think Erdogan will not resist this type of wish.


Turkifying Anatolia is one point i was trying to make, and you pointed it out. Yes, UNESCO has sent many complaints to the Turkish government, also Armenians in the diaspora have sent complaints as well. Armenian Cathedrals are not even called Armenian Cathedrals on many official Turkish websites. All you have to do is look at the neglected ancient cities of Ani and Kars to see how the Turkish government is trying to bury the past of Armenians. They have chosen to fight a cultural war, and that is the worst type of warfare.

Armenians in Karabagh on the other hand, have been telling the Azeri government that they want to restore an Azeri mosque in Karabagh. The Azeri government has refused, and i dont know why. I have actually been to this mosque, and even the Armenian locals said they want to restore it, so i know that this isnt a fake story. This is completely the opposite of what the Turkish government is doing.

Originally posted by Mortaza

For this, I dont say this ,We dont support division much.we cannot return past, we have  minoritiees  at bulgaria and greece, but our wish is not to annex that land but protect their cultural rights.I thing a huge autonomy is fine with  karabak, maybe a con-federation, but they should rule their country by themself.But If I am not wrong, Armenia want to annex this land?


Before the war, they wanted to be part of the Armenian Republic, as they originally were, until the Soviets came and took over. Now, Karabagh is an independent republic, officially known as The Republic of Mountainous Karabagh. It is not internationally recognized. If they cannot combine with Armenia, they would love to be an independent nation. But no one will recognize them. Armenia's argument is that it makes no sense to make them a separate republic, they are all Armenian, and they border Armenia. It would be like splitting Turkey between Turks and Kurds, but even more illogical because both sides are Armenian.






Edited by ArmenianSurvival
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 05:52

es, because Young Turks promised equal rights for all minorities, and Armenians wanted a new Ottoman government because Abdul-Hamid had killed many Armenian civilians in 1895-1896, because they were pushing for an independent Armenian Republic. The Turkish government nowadays says that Abdul-Hamid did that because of Armenian terrorists, but Abdul-Hamid killed over 100,000 Armenian civilians, it is written in many international sources. Only the Turkish government denies the massacres of 1895-1896, and claims that "whatever happened" was because of Armenian terrorists. This does not justify civilian death carried out by the government . I understand a couple of thousand, but international figures are usually drawn between 100,000 to 200,000 deaths...i use 100,000 to be conservative in the argument.

have not much knowledge about this, I know, Armenians tried to kill patisah himself, and there are some armenians  killed both at Istanbul and eastern, but  100.000 is a big number, anyway number is not important., but you cannot say  Sultan himself is racist against armenians. Ottomans were harsh rulers but they were never racist.

Turkifying Anatolia is one point i was trying to make, and you pointed it out. Yes, UNESCO has sent many complaints to the Turkish government, also Armenians in the diaspora have sent complaints as well. Armenian Cathedrals are not even called Armenian Cathedrals on many official Turkish websites. All you have to do is look at the neglected ancient cities of Ani and Kars to see how the Turkish government is trying to bury the past of Armenians. They have chosen to fight a cultural war, and that is the worst type of warfare.

Infact this cultural wars also openned by armenians, try to show us as murderer and brutal people too. It is not one-sided. Even all armenians say they dont hate Turkish people but Turkish goverment, This dont looks  like real, how can you dont hate some people brutal murderers of your people, and I think there are not  much people like you,most of your people  becomes rude and agresive.Demonising Turks is also another cultural war.

But  I dont support my goverment  at this cultural war, We should care for armenian historical buildings. But I dont wait that our goverment will waste our limited source for an enemy nation history, but I think they should.

For karabag, do you think we should take west trakia from greece and bulgarians? as  I said before, I think armenian rights should be guarantied, they should take a huge autonomy,  Their cultural and economical links with armenians should be  protected  but dividing a country  was made by agreement with others.If a peaciful division happen, I support It too.

 

 

Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 06:30
Originally posted by Mortaza

but you cannot say  Sultan himself is racist against armenians. Ottomans were harsh rulers but they were never racist.


Even Talaat Pashas close friend was an Armenian, and he is the person Armenians blame for the events of 1915 . Killing Armenian citizens doesnt mean that the Sultan was racist, but it was political. Turkifying Anatolia is political as well, and i think Abdul-Hamid would do the same to anyone living on those lands. He didnt do it because they were Armenian, he did it to show them his power, and to prevent them from forming their own republic on what he called "Turkish land".

Originally posted by Mortaza

Infact this cultural wars also openned by armenians, try to show us as murderer and brutal people too. It is not one-sided. Even all armenians say they dont hate Turkish people but Turkish goverment, This dont looks  like real, how can you dont hate some people brutal murderers of your people, and I think there are not  much people like you,most of your people  becomes rude and agresive.Demonising Turks is also another cultural war.


There are Armenians who try to make Turks seem like butchers and uncivilized people. Some Turks try to do the same to Armenians. It is the same for both people. When it comes to the two governments, however, they are radically different.

The Armenian government does not accuse Turkish people of anything... they accuse the government of genocide, but you can understand why. The Armenian government does not neglect historical buildings by non-Armenians. Turkey, ever since independence has done nothing to restore ancient Armenian buildings. One of Turkey's main economic strengths is tourism, and even then they do not restore Armenian buildings. And they dont mention Armenians in many of their tours and historical sources. Armenian history books have recorded and given credit to Turks for whatever they have done. The current government in Turkey does not do the same. Kars and Ani are now known as Turkish cities, when in fact, they were built by Armenian kingdoms before the middle ages. No official Turkish source calls it "Armenian", at any point in history.


Also, this past April 24th, which is the commemeration day for the Armenian genocide in 1915 (as it is called by Armenians), Turkey had an official televised commemoration of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Out of all the days they do it on the 24th of April? Ataturk conquered lands that were given to the Armenian Republic by international treaties. This is one of the land issues that i used to relate the Palestinian and Armenian causes. It is still unresolved in my mind, because Ataturk had no reason to take those lands, other than making Turkey more powerful. That is not justifiable.

Turkey says the Republic of Armenia attacked Turkey during Ataturk's reign (1918). The Republic of Armenia was formed in 1918, and during that time they were still recovering, as half of the worldwide Armenian population at that time were refugees, most of this half were already dead. They were living in poverty and disease, i have seen pictures and video from the Armenian Republic in 1918, they lived in horrible and disgusting conditions, and dont forget it was a newly established republic . The capital city of Yerevan only had tens of thousands of people living there. That was their biggest city. And the Turkish government claims that this tiny country of hungry farmers attacked the Turkish Republic. That is their justification for taking land gauranteed to Armenia by international treaties. I would like to hear your thoughts on that. It is one of the things the Turkish government never talks about.

Edited by ArmenianSurvival
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 06:55

Even Talaat Pashas close friend was an Armenian, and he is the person Armenians blame for the events of 1915 . Killing Armenian citizens doesnt mean that the Sultan was racist, but it was political. Turkifying Anatolia is political as well, and i think Abdul-Hamid would do the same to anyone living on those lands. He didnt do it because they were Armenian, he did it to show them his power, and to prevent them from forming their own republic on what he called "Turkish land".

Infact for  him, there is only ottomans land, Abdulhamit  is not a Turkish nationalist(He wont liked much in Turkey too) unlike Talat.He have not pan-Turkism dreams, he is a realist., If he was still at power, Most probably this stupid exiles would never happen.

There are Armenians who try to make Turks seem like butchers and uncivilized people. Some Turks try to do the same to Armenians. It is the same for both people. When it comes to the two governments, however, they are radically different.

Not excatly,There are turks who try to show armenians  bad, and they are diaspora, who try to show Turks bad. It is not only personal issues,

For ex: Hitlers famous word " who remembers armenians" are a false words, this words didnt become famouse because one or two armenian supported It, but because diaspora supported it.

For goverments, It is complatly different. Armenian goverment was more  nice because She need us, and because she want to prevent our help to azeris. Lets say All goverments are evil. If You think armenian goverment is different, look who created that goverments.

The borders of Turkey was accepted before the war. It named as misaki milli means border of Turkey.I think It is related with war time. when war finished, ottomans have some places,and It is accepted as misaki milli. I think kars and ardahan was inside of that  borders.

That is their justification for taking land gauranteed to Armenia by international treaties.

For that international treaty, most probably you means Serv treaty, It was unaccepted by TBMM(Turkey parliment at independance war). I think you will not accuse Ataturk, because a treaty he should refuse.

If you look for justification, There are not much justification for wars, but we cannot  change past.I think people lands should be given them back, but giving land to another country is not a choice. do you know any country who give her lands with peacifully? Or do you think Germany  will accept jewish genocide, If she won the war? 

Turkey, ever since independence has done nothing to restore ancient Armenian buildings. One of Turkey's main economic strengths is tourism, and even then they do not restore Armenian buildings.

I accept this, In fact his is not much different for greek or Turkish buildings too. I can say mostly Turkey dont respect history enough.I think turkey should restore  armenian buildings, It looks like armenians suffer this from much.

 

 

Back to Top
kotumeyil View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 21-Jun-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1494
  Quote kotumeyil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 07:10

Originally posted by Armenian Survival

Also, this past April 24th, which is the commemeration day for the Armenian genocide in 1915 (as it is called by Armenians), Turkey had an official televised commemoration of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Out of all the days they do it on the 24th of April? Ataturk conquered lands that were given to the Armenian Republic by international treaties. This is one of the land issues that i used to relate the Palestinian and Armenian causes. It is still unresolved in my mind, because Ataturk had no reason to take those lands, other than making Turkey more powerful. That is not justifiable.

On April 23rd 1920 Turkinsh Great National Assebly was opened. That program might be related with that. On the other hand, you should remember that the Treaty of Sevres was one of the most merciless treaties on the world. It just gave 1/20 of the Ottoman lands to Turks but no independence. I accept that many Armenians lived in Eastern Anatolia, but it was the land of the Ottoman Empire for half a millenium. So, when Ataturk tried to preserve that land, it was very natural.

My family is from Erzurum and my grandfather told a lot about the fights between Turkish army and the Armenian militants, how a lot of our relatives were killed by Armenian gangs and how they had to be refugees and immigrated to inner parts of Anatolia, but I have no hate against Armenians. All happened was a great tragedy. Armenians have a history there and so do the Turks and Kurds. I wish none of those bad things happened...

[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 16:24
Originally posted by kotumeyil

On the other hand, you should remember that the Treaty of Sevres was one of the most merciless treaties on the world. It just gave 1/20 of the Ottoman lands to Turks but no independence. I accept that many Armenians lived in Eastern Anatolia, but it was the land of the Ottoman Empire for half a millenium. So, when Ataturk tried to preserve that land, it was very natural.


Yes, but it was still an international treaty. After all the Armenians had been through, one of Ataturk's first actions as leader of a new Turkish state is to attack his neighbors. I only say this because many people call him a 'humanitarian'. His first action was to attack a country of refugees and poor farmers. Is that being a humanitarian?

Also Turkey has the economic blockade on Armenia (for the past 10 years), and they disregard ancient Armenian buildings and artifacts, most of them have been destroyed. In Turkish history books, Armenians basically dont exist. It is not just one incident, its continuing today.

There were Armenian gangs that killed Turks, the same way some Palestinians kill Israelis. Its not right, but its for the same reason. I say this because most Turks morally support Palestinians. My question is, what is the difference?
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Artaxiad View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 10-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 488
  Quote Artaxiad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 17:26

For karabag, do you think we should take west trakia from greece and bulgarians? as  I said before, I think armenian rights should be guarantied, they should take a huge autonomy,  Their cultural and economical links with armenians should be  protected  but dividing a country  was made by agreement with others.If a peaciful division happen, I support It too.

Armenians had their rights in Karabagh, both historically and because they always formed a majority there.

On the other hand, Turkish minorities of Greece and Bulgaria have limited historical rights because those regions were once part of the Ottoman Empire (which was a fairly new region compared to Armenia, Greece, and Bulgaria). Those lands were Greek and Bulgarian before the Turks reached Thrace. Turkey can't just annex Western Thrace because Thrace itself was Greek and Bulgarian.

If you think that Turkey has historical rights in Bulgaria and Greece just because the Ottoman Empire once ruled over those lands, Turkey has to inherit the bad things too, such as the responsability for the genocide.

The only Armenians who killed unarmed Turks were the ones from the Russian Empire, or the ones who were acting independantly for revenge. Major milita groups such as the dashnaks were barely able to defend Armenian regions.

Back to Top
kotumeyil View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 21-Jun-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1494
  Quote kotumeyil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 17:42

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

Yes, but it was still an international treaty. After all the Armenians had been through, one of Ataturk's first actions as leader of a new Turkish state is to attack his neighbors. I only say this because many people call him a 'humanitarian'. His first action was to attack a country of refugees and poor farmers. Is that being a humanitarian?

After the first world war Armenian bandits were in Erzurum, Kars, etc. and they attacked Muslim cities and villages and today still their torments and brutality are told by fear. In all of those cities everybody has a relative who experienced these. I mean there wasn't a peaceful neighbourship. Meanwhile the Ottoman Empire was occupied by Allies and it was a huge trauma. A nation was dieing. The Treaty of Sevres was signed by the Istanbul government and Istanbul was occupied at that time. The Ottoman Empire was dead. Mustafa Kemal was in Ankara and the government in Ankara never accepted that Treaty and declared that accepting that was treason. I demand from you some empathy. Ottoman Empire was in continuous war since 1911 and lost millions of its citizens. Only at the Sarkam mountains 90000 soldiers froze in one night because of the lack of equipment. My grandmother tells that her grandfather went to military in Yemen and came after ten years but when he came he was killed by Russians. There are many tragic strories like this. A nation in such conditions has to fight in order to exist. So feelings are very different. For Turks, accepting the Treaty of Sevres is equal to what denying genocide means for Armenians.

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

Also Turkey has the economic blockade on Armenia (for the past 10 years), and they disregard ancient Armenian buildings and artifacts, most of them have been destroyed. In Turkish history books, Armenians basically dont exist. It is not just one incident, its continuing today.

I don't support such things, too. Sure Armenias lived here and we shared a lot with them. My elder relatives lived together with Armenians in the same village and they also saved many of them from deportation. We have many things in common. For example you will have the same feelings when you listen to the following sound of kaval:

http://www.discoverturkey.com/muzik-ornek/03-kaval.mp3

I don't support such policies, either.

Originally posted by Armenian Survival

There were Armenian gangs that killed Turks, the same way some Palestinians kill Israelis. Its not right, but its for the same reason. I say this because most Turks morally support Palestinians. My question is, what is the difference?

I think if the Armenians could return to their homes after the war, it would be good. However there was much hatred between the two peoples at that time because of the mutual assaults and this couldn't be possible. After one century this is impossible, because many people were born on these lands and new population movements will be very tragic, too. For example nowadays the Jews has to leave their houses and this is also very tragic. Many of them were born there. Another similar issue is that, after the loss of lands in the Balcans, millions of Muslims and Turkish refugees came to Turkey, but if we demand relocating to their previous homes, this will create another tragedy. I think these problems should be solved as soon as possible after the events. Otherwise new tragedies will occur.



Edited by kotumeyil
[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">
Back to Top
strategos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 09-Mar-2005
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1096
  Quote strategos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 18:11

It is similar, except christian armenians do not put bombs on themselves to blow themselves up.

turks do not support armenian "terrorists" because it is against There country, not as the palestinians against the infidel jews.

http://theforgotten.org/intro.html
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 18:31
Originally posted by Strategos

turks do not support armenian "terrorists" because it is against There country, not as the palestinians against the infidel jews.


Finally someone came out and said it.

Thats my hypothesis on the subject, I started the thread to try to get new ideas. Because honestly, supporting Palestinians and denouncing Armenians is a defiance of logic. Either support both or denounce both...it is illogical to pick and choose. Yes, one issue is older than the other. But ideologically, they are essentially the same, for the reasons i have already given.
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 18:57
Originally posted by kotumeyil

but if we demand relocating to their previous homes, this will create another tragedy.


But you support giving Palestinians their lands back? What about those poor Jews? Why should Jews leave and not Turks? Please explain.


Originally posted by kotumeyil

I think these problems should be solved as soon as possible after the events.


They should have. Turkish Republic has waited 90 years so far, and no reconciliation has been reached, even though Armenians have been stating their case from day 1. It is the fault of the Turkish government that so much time has passed. If it wasnt for Armenian "terrorists", no one in the world would know about 1915, whether you call it "genocide" or "deportation", no one would know about it. If we left it up to the Turkish government  1915 would not exist. If it wasnt for Palestinian "terrorists", no one would know about Palestinians either. So why do you support Palestinians and not Armenians? Is it only because the Armenian cause is aimed toward Turkey? Someone please explain.


Edited by ArmenianSurvival
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
kotumeyil View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 21-Jun-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1494
  Quote kotumeyil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 19:44
I can speak for myself. I admit that both Palestinians and Armenians suffered from those events. I also don't support any kind of terrorism. But also there are differences. For example, Armenians were  former citizens of the Ottoman Empire and they tried to be independent from their own state but unfortunately they couldn't be successful and faced a severe retaliation. So many of Turkish nationalists see this as a betrayal, though I don't think in this way. On the other hand, in the case of Palestine, a totally alien people came and took the land depending on the idea that it was the promised land since some thousand years ago. These are not the same things. Also I admit that many Turks symphatize to Palestinians because of they have common religion, though I don't, because I'm an atheist. But  this prejudice is all over the world. I think if it were the Bosnians who killed Serbs, the western world would intervene on the very first day.
[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">
Back to Top
strategos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 09-Mar-2005
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1096
  Quote strategos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 19:48

Originally posted by kotumeyil

On the other hand, in the case of Palestine, a totally alien people came and took the land depending on the idea that it was the promised land since some thousand years ago. .

there not totally alien, because there was still a substantial amount of jews in the area before it became a full jewish state of Israel.

http://theforgotten.org/intro.html
Back to Top
kotumeyil View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 21-Jun-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1494
  Quote kotumeyil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 19:55
Yes but all over the world many Jews immigrated to Palestine... If they didn't come, local Jews wouldn't be able to capture there...
[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">
Back to Top
Artaxiad View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 10-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 488
  Quote Artaxiad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2005 at 21:17

I also don't support any kind of terrorism. But also there are differences. For example, Armenians were  former citizens of the Ottoman Empire and they tried to be independent from their own state but unfortunately they couldn't be successful and faced a severe retaliation.

By saying ''it happened because they tried to create their own state'', you're justifying the order of the Young Turks. In that case the ''terrorism'' Armenian groups did in the 70s-80s, and especially in the 20s (when a group called Nemesis killed those who were responsable for the genocide) are easily justifiable.

Don't forget that the Young Turks had the support of minorities, including most of the Armenians. Even the Dashnaktsutyun supported the Young Turks and participated in anti-ottoman congresses in Europe, with the Young Turk revolutionnaries. Between the Young Turk Revolution (1908) and the self-defense of Van (1915), Armenians in general supported them, because they overthrew Sultan Abdul Hamid ''the Red Sultan'' - the one who ordered the massacre of around 200 000 Armenian civilians. Armenians hoped that they would live better and that the rights offered to them by the new Turkish Constitution would be respected. Armenians were even sent to the Ottoman army... Even during the massacre of Adana (1909) Armenians believed the claims of the Young Turk government - that the ones who massacred were supporters of Abdul Hamid.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.938 seconds.