US Jewish lobby warns Turkish MFA on Armenian genocide bill

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov


ever heard of tankers going through the Mediterranean?

Why not just go through the Suez, then?

[Barnabas]

So this whole issue about being friends with Turkey and helping Turks with their armenian genocide problem would be Kissinger Realism?

"Realism, also known as political realism, in the context of international relations, encompasses a variety of theories and approaches, all of which share a belief that states are primarily motivated by the desire for military and economic power or security, rather than ideals or ethics. "

[Barnabas]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Why not just go through the Suez, then?

I was going to ask this, but then I thought, even if oil must be sent by ship from Turkey to Israel, a pipeline from israel must still be cheaper than the whole trip on ship.

[KrazyHorse]

I was going to ask this, but then I thought, even if oil must be sent by ship from Turkey to Israel, a pipeline from israel must still be cheaper than the whole trip on ship.

Why? There's a cost associated with loading/unloading.

It's not obvious to me that offload+400 km(?) pipeline+onload is less expensive than 400km boat ride + canal crossing

[Edan]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Why not just go through the Suez, then?

The cost?

[Chemical Ollie]

Jooz denying a well-proven genocide

But on the other hand, who cares what happened 90 years ago? No one living today can be blamed for it. But Turkey sucked 90 years ago, and it still sucks, that's all we care about. Let's keep it out of EU until it deserves a membership.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Why not just go through the Suez, then?

beats me.

perhaps they are indeed thinking of laying down pipes in sea...

i assume this is somehow cheaper.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Jooz denying a well-proven genocide

But on the other hand, who cares what happened 90 years ago? No one living today can be blamed for it. But Turkey sucked 90 years ago, and it still sucks, that's all we care about. Let's keep it out of EU until it deserves a membership.

Hey, I don't like this denying business. It's not like Israel is hosting a "let's prove the armenian holocaust never happenned" conference


But it's not a reason to diss turkey right now. It's already as volatile as it is.

And by rejecting turkey from the EU, you're merely encouraging the muslim fanatics there. This is a horrible step for the EU, because it shows Turks that their attempts to become closer to the west are fruitless and that the west doesn't want them.

You'll be faced with a much worse antagonized Turkey in the future. Too bad you're snobbish biggots

[Zoid]

Germany should give Turkey a lesson in dealing with past genocides

[Dinner]

This really isn't a big deal. So what if a meaningless bill passes "acknowledging" the Armenian genocide. The Turks really should figure out better things to worry about thing meaningless political gestures.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Oerdin
This really isn't a big deal. So what if a meaningless bill passes "acknowledging" the Armenian genocide. The Turks really should figure out better things to worry about thing meaningless political gestures.

This is the key point: whatever their other merits, the Turks are crap politicians. The Turks want to stand on principle and argue that there was no genocide. I agree -- if by genocide we mean what happened to Jews in Germany, or Tutsis in Rwanda, then what happened in Turkey wasn't genocide. A monstrous tragedy, a war crime, even an act of evil -- but not genocide.

Actually, what happened to the Armenians in Turkey very, very closely resembles what happened to the Cherokee on the Trail of Tears. I'm sure the US Congress is busy passing a bill recognizing that genocide, too.

[KrazyHorse]

There's a giant Holocaust monument in downtown Baltimore, and a huge statue to the Katyn massacre nearby. But while there is an African-American history museum, there is no (as far as I know) monument to the Indians or the slaves in Baltimore.

It's easier to criticise others than yourself.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


This is the key point: whatever their other merits, the Turks are crap politicians. The Turks want to stand on principle and argue that there was no genocide. I agree -- if by genocide we mean what happened to Jews in Germany, or Tutsis in Rwanda, then what happened in Turkey wasn't genocide. A monstrous tragedy, a war crime, even an act of evil -- but not genocide.

Bull****, of course it was genocide. The turks planned the exctinction of an entire people. It's a obvious case of of state-sponsored ethnic cleansing and mass extermination. They even rounded them up, and placed them in concentration camps along the Iraqi border...

And how come the Tutsis are elevated to "Holocaust" level?

Actually, what happened to the Armenians in Turkey very, very closely resembles what happened to the Cherokee on the Trail of Tears. I'm sure the US Congress is busy passing a bill recognizing that genocide, too.

No, but in 2004, Senator Sam Brownback (Republican of Kansas) introduced a joint resolution (Senate Joint Resolution 37) to "offer an apology to all Native Peoples on behalf of the United States" for past "ill-conceived policies by the United States Government regarding Indian Tribes." The United States Senate has yet to take action on the measure. (Wikipedia)

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Zoid

Bull****, of course it was genocide. The turks planned the exctinction of an entire people. It's a obvious case of of state-sponsored ethnic cleansing and mass extermination. They even rounded them up, and placed them in concentration camps along the Iraqi border...

Bullsh!t right back at ya. The Turks rounded up Armenians living in eastern Anatolia because they were suspected of sympathizing with the enemy during wartime. They left Armenians elsewhere alone -- Armenians in Istanbul, for example, lived their lives exactly as they had before the war. And, yes, there was a military order to forceably remove the Armenians to a different part of the country (similar to the US internment of West Coast Japanese in WWII -- was that genocide?). But it's never been shown that there was an order to massacre those Armenians (the Turks have always maintained that the military acted on its own -- similar to MyLai). It's certainly never been shown that there was a general order to exterminate Armenians altogether. And that's why it doesn't compare with Germany or Rwanda, and is a misuse of the term "genocide." As I said, its a war crime, a crime against humanity, an evil act -- but not genocide.

What the Turks object to is the West getting on a high horse about this when we have our own horrors that go unacknowledged. clinton caught flak in 1998 for merely suggesting that the US might apologize for slavery; no US politician would ever dare suggest that the transport of slaves to America was genocidal. What happened in the Belgian Congo or on the Trail of Tears was far worse that what happened in Turkey; where are the Western resolutions naming those things as genocidal?

That's their beef in a nutshell;
1) it wasn't genocide by the standard definition of that term, and
2) countries with a relatively recent history of exterminating indigeneous peoples and using slave labor really need to apply the same standards to themselves or STFU.

And they're right.

[germanos]

That is what I've read as well during the debate in Holland a few months ago (where citizens of Turkish descent were stricken as candidates for parliamentary elections by their respective parties because they refused to label the crimes as genocide).

What's not clear to me is:

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
As I said, its a war crime, a crime against humanity, an evil act.

Does the Turkish state acknowledge that? And if so, has it done anything to reconcile the Armenians?

The recent murder of Dink Hrant and the row over Pamuk's Nobel Prize suggest that there is still a rift between Turks and Armenians. Is this just because the Armenians want to hear 'genocide' or is it they feel the crimes against them are not recognized properly? Is it just that 'genocide' is a red cloth for the Turkish bull or do the Turks rather view this episode not a crime?