Turkish anger at US Armenian genocide vote

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by RCT(V), Mar 5, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Turkish anger at US Armenian 'genocide' vote

    BBC Radio4 reported this evening, that the senate/congress committee having agreed/approved the description of genocide, the Turkish government are now lobbying the White House in the hope that Washington will not recognise/ratify the senate/congress committee's decision.

    (Note: "albimangles" and "fantassin" quotations lifted from another thread).
     
  2. It's a Non-Binding Resolution, so what's to ratify?
     
  3. Would anyone care to hazard a serious explanation for the actions of the House Foreign Affairs Committee? Surely they're not just fishing for a fatuous apology?

    B
     
  4. Voters of Armenian Heritage

    1,270,000 potential voters.
     
  5. Well it was Genocide by any stretch of the imagination even though the Turks refuse to talk about it but im wondering why the USA would antagonise thier most moderate(ish) and friendly islamic state in this way.
     
  6. This campaign to get the incident listed as a massacre is going to come back and bite the Armenians in the arse. They have a none to proud history concerning the Azeris.

    Pots and kettles, goose and gander, goes around comes around and all that.
     
  7. Many of them generous donors, particularly to senior Dems.

    All I can say is this is only slightly less idiotic than the last time they tried to make this sentimental gesture at the height of the carnage in Iraq.

    DC badly needs the Turks onside, they are the only credible partner in the region and lately, after much careless abuse of their interests, have been tilting Eastward.

    The Turks are very sensitive about the founders of theirt modern state being called Genocidaires. Guilty as sin of course but many nations have something nasty in the woodshed they'd rather forget about.
     
  8. Lets be Honest Mustapha Kemal "Atter Turk" was a murdering Barsteward
     
  9. He had a habit of getting what he wanted. When I say habit what I meant was a pathological drive in getting things done 'his way' or 'stop living'.

    When he wanted the Turkish language modernised and moved to the Roman alphabet he gave the scholars 6 months, or else.
     
  10. This from Turkish media demonstrates the term "genocide" is becoming quite popular:

     
  11. From the WSJ White House Puts Brakes on Armenia Vote
    Team Barry is right to stomp on this childishness just as his predecessor did.
     
  12. turks we did'nt do nothing anyway they had it coming to them :evil:
    yanks did commit genocide re Americans
    Vietnam carpet bombing north Vietnam etc possible.

    won't list are numerous blood soaked deeds as frankly we'd run out of space.
    some of the boxheads who went onto infamy in ww2 were training the ottomans when it went down they probably took notes on how to improve things :cry:
     
  13. The Turkish argument was that it was done in the time of the Ottoman Empire and has nothing to do with the modern secular state that is Turkey. A bit like the Aussies clearing the way of Aborigines and holding the present UK to task over it.

    A poor analogy but the best I could come up with while typing and watching footy.
     
  14. If Bombing (against a foe who shot back) is Genocide, well then what was Combined RAF/USAAF air campaign over Germany? does that make all Lancaster & Fortress crews the same as Concentration camp guards?
     
  15. I note your rather liberal (in all respects) apparent definition of "genocide" is like that of many others in recent times who use the term as an emotionally rhetorical device in contexts that are similar to real genocide (in terms of the generally accepted and juridical definitions) only in that lives may have been lost.

    In terms of the US bombing in Vietnam you conflate with "genocide," I humbly suggest you do a bit more history study and not be led astray by headlines or other rather meaningless, though no doubt colorful and emotive, descriptors like "carpet bombing." Such terms are used, often quite purposely (the same occurred in the 1991 Gulf War when US B-52s were said to have "carpet bombed" the Republican Guard formations) to suggest a lack of care and ignoring of then-applicable norms of international law (much changed since WWII) by the US that is not borne out by the facts, contrary to the assertions of Ramsey Clark and others.