Devrim wrote:Armenians have lived in Turkish lands with great privileges for 600 years so if Ottomans really wanted to totally destroy them, they'd have already did it before 1915.
This is a pretty hollow argument. A comparable argument could be used to dismiss any massacre anywhere in the world. It also completely ignores the apparent escalation of hostility towards Armenians in the lead up to WWI, for example the Hamidan and Adana massacres.
When balkans were lost, all of newly founded countries (Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia etc. ) totally destroyed mosques, expelled Turks or burned them to provide the majority of their nation in those lands. But why nobody brings it into questions ?
Because this is a thread about the Armenian Genocide? I'm also unclear on why the existence of other crimes makes the crime you in particular are defending any less awful. Try going to a murder trial and saying "hey, people get murdered all the time, case dismissed".
do I ask them for an apologize ?
Maybe you should?
As for Dersim which is my hometown
So was your family moved there as part of the subsequent resettlement program?
I'm strongly against its being recognized as a genocide, cause it's not different to what is Israel doing in Palestinian lands.
You can raise all these supposed similar examples all you want, it won't diminish what Turkish government forces have done.
Ataturk did the best thing for Dersim and saved us from bandits.
It's pretty well established that during the military campaign loyal tribes were massacred with the 'rebels'. Never mind the killing of women and children. This makes the bandits thing a nonsense, because it highlights that the reason they were killed was not because of some action they took, but what is called a 'crime of status'.
Of course there were casualties as in every war
So why is there always a fuss about what Armenians are supposed to have done under the auspices of the Russian army?
Also, death marches for civilians is not war, it's a massacre. Or were you under the impression all conflict revolves around rounding up the defenceless and marching them into inhospitable territory?
Iraq War is a genocide too... and of course invasions of Libya, Afghanistan etc. all are genocides.
Except none of these events would fit any reasonable definition of genocide. Where is the deliberate attempt to destroy a people in all these examples?
now don't even refer to my hometown without a knowledge
I think I probably know more about the Dersim massacres than you do. After all you're apparently so ignorant of the topic you think it equivilent to the Iraq War.
Actually many things have changed here since you first began to hear such things about Turkey, traitor government ignores the attacks and insults toward Ataturk, recently a bitch clearly said that Ataturk was a dictator in a national channel and nothing was done.
The law is on the books, and apparently ultra-nationalists like yourself are still slavering to enforce it. I take this as proving my point.
But of course, if you live in the country that Ataturk created and improved, you have to like him, this is my mentality, like it or not.
Great, except visitors to your country are threatened with the same law. Have to accept the laws of the country you're in though, right? Well, you'll just have to live with those laws about acknowledging the Armenian Genocide. Think that's unfair etc.? Maybe now you have an inkling of why your approach is ridiculous.
Izmir was burned by Greeks while they were running away from Turkish troops.
Once again you blame the victims for Turkish crimes, without a shred of evidence.
Actually I don't give a fuck about Armenia and if it's up to me I will work for ground connection between Azerbaijan and Nakchivan.
Which means your whole previous post was a lump of worthless hypocrasy.
Nobody talks about massacres toward Turks and this makes me angry.
Then your inability to understand the Armenian position is completely inexplicable. Oh sorry, forgot, you follow some idiotic brand of nationalism that blinds you to all things not Turkish.
Everything is mutual.
Mutual action does require a script in which one party is made to look my guilty by having to go first.
from now on we will work for the recognizitions of multiple Turkish genocides that were commited by Greeks, Bulgarians, Armenians, Brits, French etc.
Great, but your using your logic these crimes should go unrecognised because
- Turks did the same things to other peoples
- Massacres happen all the time
even many historians presented some arguments about that
No legitimate historian questions that Turkish government forces and their allies massacred Armenians. Instead the only 'debate' are the same lame excuses as you've just parroted.
So you can not talk as if it's a physical fact.
You're saying there weren't massacres?
Because Ottoman Turkey's own allies and the then neutral U.S concur that there were. People saw the bodies for fucks sake. Do you think your ridiculous attempts to establish morale equivilence actually change the fact that there were massacres? How could you possibly be so delusional? Oh sorry, forgot the idiot brand of nationalism thing again.