Let's Assume Turkey Decides To Recognize Genocide

[phantom22]

Is it not true that Armenians were killed in Western Anatolia as well? And how about the Greeks and Assyrians? What about Smyrna, Was that in the war zone?

Will Bush's staff buy this ATAA garbage?

Edited April 23, 2005 by phantom22

[Anonymouse]

There are only two ways in which Armenians will gain land back: fiscally or forcefully. Everything else is pointless.

[Armen]

I'm not interested in getting revenge from Turks. Not at all. My revenge is that I'm Armenian and they are Turks, and that hardly could be changed!

Gams, there is one thing that I value in Baliozian's writings. He has a message in between the lines that the "Turk" is gone. That image of nomadic worrior that commited the Genocide of centuries and basically "formed" the Armenian nation with this act is gone. It is a phantom actually. We are fighting with ourselves now. And this is the most serious battle because we have to struggle with our consciousness, while the enemy is not there.

Sadly, this is very true. Demanding land from Turkey is not asking for something extra. It is a just claim that has to be persued with all possible means. And believe me, it might be not tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, but if Wilsonian plan is not at least partly implemented, soon or later we will get there with different means. What Turks are doing right now is trying to postpone the inevitable.

The World that we are living in is full of dynamics, sometimes difficult to be recognized.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Sometimes Turkey shows its "Turkish" face by assisting Azerbiajan in Karabagh or the Chechens but I think they are torn appart between the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East. And as this regions all are moveing towards regional intgration of this or that level Turkey has to chose something (this is the Wlisonian trick, right? ). I just think that we have to take it kind of easy. Not make this much fuss about it. Turkey is in a very difficult situation itself. By making fuss we are promoting a policy that is not in our interest THAT MUCH.

[ED]

Get Serious. They will have to be forced to admit any responsibility. This is what they are telling Bush. Only a few scholars on their payroll would agree with the following distortions.

 

http://www.info-turc.org/article1521.html

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

It’s not surprising how many times the word Jew is mentioned in that letter and, is there any document of the number of Jewish victims who died in ww1 in Turkey? and who was responsible for it? Letter is intentional and poorly writhen, the value of it would be nothing but a toilet paper

[ED]

Is it not true that Armenians were killed in Western Anatolia as well? And how about the Greeks and Assyrians? What about Smyrna, Was that in the war zone?

Will Bush's staff buy this ATAA garbage?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

Precisely, exactly, this administration is know to buy every garbage, as long as this nation has the "dick" in the white house

Edited April 23, 2005 by Edward

[phantom22]

The reason that they are mentioning Jew, Jew, Jew in the letter is because politicians react to political pressure. The Turks desperately need to convince Bush that to satisfy the demands of Armenians that they will alienate Jewish voters. This has been their modus operandi for many years. Only this year, the "ice" has been cracking around their feet, as Turkey's ugly face "vis-a-vis" Jews has been revealed. What is the message, I ask you all, that 21% of Turks think Armenians are Jews? Don't you think that the Jews worldwide pondered on that revelation from a nation where Mein Kampf is a best-seller?

[gamavor]

Sometimes Turkey shows its "Turkish" face by assisting Azerbiajan in Karabagh or the Chechens but I think they are torn appart between the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East. And as this regions all are moveing towards regional intgration of this or that level Turkey has to chose something (this is the Wlisonian trick, right? ). I just think that we have to take it kind of easy. Not make this much fuss about it. Turkey is in a very difficult situation itself. By making fuss we are promoting a policy that is not in our interest THAT MUCH.

 

The Wilsonian plan, as far as I'm aware sought to establish balance of powers in the region. It is simply difficult to integrate mastodont into Uncle Tom's barak.

Edited April 23, 2005 by gamavor

[TMNT]

I think we should forgive them. Not because we are Christian (lot of people among us are not) but because in long term any claims from our side are not going to advance our nation as a whole. It is a rational choice on our side.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

Armen, your humanitarian gesture is only fitting for nations that strive to uphold humanitarian ideals and in no way am I vilifying Turks, but the sentiments from Turkey are a strong indication that they are still eyeing the ideas of a Pan-Turkish block. Just look at the map, the only nation that is a roadblock is Armenia. History will either see the expansion of Armenia or the unification of Azerbaijan, not both.

 

1. If we demand land we cannot populate it

 

How much of the United States is developed? How much of Russia? How much of China? How much of Israel? Not much, so, we can concur that population is not a precondition for any sort of land compensation or land grab. Those lands are very IMPORTANT to any nation. Land is a resource and since resources are scarce we must strive to get them back.

 

I just came back from a Armenian engagement and on the drive back I was thinking about the many aspects of the Genocide and anyway you slice the pie, I always come to the conclusion that the Turkish lobby, government, and people in general are not really keen on playing within the bounds of international protocol. At this engagement, I was speaking with a few "intellectuals" and they were just shocked that after 90 years of denial the Turkish youth still supports the ridiculous rhetoric of the Turkish Government.

 

With this being said, earlier I stated that our Genocide is not so much different then the Native-American genocide committed by the United States and yes, it still is no different, but in no way should that stop us from claiming what is rightfully ours. Whether it is through compensation or restitution, those lands belong to us and therefore, we will get them back one way or another

 

Let’s face it, Turkey does not strive to high "moral" standards so why should we? We would be fools to "avoid" any opportunity for a land grab.

Edited April 24, 2005 by TMNT

[TMNT]

The reason that they are mentioning Jew, Jew, Jew in the letter is because politicians react to political pressure. The Turks desperately need to convince Bush that to satisfy the demands of Armenians that they will alienate Jewish voters. This has been their modus operandi for many years. Only this year, the "ice" has been cracking around their feet, as Turkey's ugly face  "vis-a-vis" Jews has been revealed. What is the message, I ask you all, that 21% of Turks think Armenians are Jews? Don't you think that the Jews worldwide pondered on that revelation from a nation where Mein Kampf is a best-seller?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

Yeah, let’s beg the Jew, who was selling Israeli military packs to Azerbaijan during the wars of early 90's and was incidentally leveling Armenian neighborhoods in Lebanon. We can just ignore the fact that Jews, for almost half a century, have been selling their old military hardware to Turkey.

 

What is your fascination with the Jew? Why are you forcing us to convert to Judaism? You seriously have a inferiority complex. How can you trust the very same group that is profiting from the Turkish war machine?

Edited April 24, 2005 by TMNT

[Armen]

Armen, your humanitarian gesture is only fitting for nations that strive to uphold humanitarian ideals and in no way am I vilifying Turks, but the sentiments from Turkey are a strong indication that they are still eyeing the ideas of a Pan-Turkish block.  Just look at the map, the only nation that is a roadblock is Armenia.  History will either see the expansion of Armenia or the unification of Azerbaijan, not both.   

 

TMNT, the US involvement in Iraq has changes the significance of "Pan-Turkism" idea. If the reigmes in Syrian and Iran change one day it the importance of "Pan-Turkism" for the West will go to 0. As Pan-Turkism can develop only in case it is relevant to the West I see that the reverse process is happening currently. A intergrated Turkish element was necessary only in case US and EU needed it to gain access to the Central Asian energy resources. This scenario is not there anymore and you could even see this from the passive position of Turkey regarding its relations with the Central Asian republics. Turley simply cannot concentrate on its EU accession and built Turkish union. Theu have to chose.

 

Armenia is in no way a roadblock. It is a n illusion.

 

By the way my position which you call a "humanitarian gesture" is based on rational distribution of our efforts to become a normal country.

 

How much of the United States is developed? How much of Russia? How much of China? How much of Israel? Not much, so, we can concur that population is not a precondition for any sort of land compensation or land grab.  Those lands are very IMPORTANT to any nation.  Land is a resource and since resources are scarce we must strive to get them back.

 

AT ITS BEST we can get back Kars and Ardahan. Now what are these lands? Basically, the same like the Gumri area - not fit for any kind of development except for livestock. If Armenia has a developed economy with some 5-6 mln population we could easily feed that amount of people by developing a modern livestock industry.

 

Territory has lost its value in modern times. The only values that we can get back are Ararat and Ani.

 

Let’s face it, Turkey does not strive to high "moral" standards and therefore, we would be fools to "avoid" any opportunity for a land grab.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

I don't know. In moder societies land is loosing its value especially if you're not going to be an agricultural country. Armenia's agricultre is mainly grapes and fruits. And these good are already produces more than we need.

[Twilight Bark]

Territory has lost its value in modern times.

Without expressing an intention to enter a "backyard-geopolitics-debate-over-barbeque-on-a-pleasant-saturday-afternoon", let me just make an empirical counter-observation, and suggest a thought-experiment.

 

If territory has lost value, countries would start eliminating their armies, scale back their weapons purchases to nearly zero, or drastically change their armed forces into mobile, covert forces to defend their "economic interests". Also, demands for independence would be met with a yawn, and a "oh, whatever, if that's what you want". None of that is happening. It seems that anybody that counts disagrees with that assessment.

 

A thought experiment: If territory has no value, let's give away the current republic. It would make Armenians instantly the citizens of a "normal" country that unenthusiastically takes over, without us losing anything valuable; after all it's just territory. If that sounds absurd, it's only because territory becomes valueless or a negative asset if you have "too much" of it, not because it lost its value recently.

 

What constitutes "too much" entirely depends on whether diasporans return or whether they dutifully donate their descendents to their host countries.

 

Having said all that, I think territory should be the last thing on our minds right now, when we are in the grip of pervasive apathy, incompetence, lack of creativity, nastiness towards one another, and corruption in the "homeland".

 

And I said I would stay out of wisdom-peddling business. Huh!

[Armen]

Don't play with words TB, like you don't know what I mean. Clearly I did not mean to say that the present territory of Armenia can be given away because it has lost value.

 

Territory has lost it value. Resources didn't however. Resources acquired more value because industry is becoming more important than agriculture. Countries keep armies to gain resources and protect them. No-one sends armies to Antartica or Sahara. They do it in case of Mosul, Basra etc. So your experiment hit the wrong target.

 

Kars and Artahan (which are the first thing we can get) do not have anything except for the most severe climate in the whole region. Karabagh however, is the paradize spot. Armenia and Karabagh together could host (easily) a 8 mln modern nation (that is if the whole Armenian nation returns home overnight).

 

The only territorial expansion worth is gaining an access to a sea, which is impossible. So, the way to go is careful diplomacy and development.

 

Yes, and TB, either save your pointless hints and stuff or go to hell ...

[Twilight Bark]

Yes, and TB, either save your pointless hints and stuff or go to hell ...

style_images/master/snapback.png

Did I mention "nastiness towards one another"? Thank you for displaying a fine example. And who needs to go to hell, when I can see that the "best and the brightest" of our homeland, with "leadership" ambitions are nasty know-it-all midgets, and that there is negligible chance that they can turn the place into something our descendents would consider connecting to. Nice going, Mr. Geopolitics; you see, I already am in hell.

[Armen]

Did I mention "nastiness towards one another"?  Thank you for displaying a fine example.  And who needs to go to hell, when I can see that the "best and the brightest" of our homeland, with "leadership" ambitions are nasty know-it-all midgets, and that there is negligible chance that they can turn the place into something our descendents would consider connecting to.  Nice going, Mr. Geopolitics; you see, I already am in hell.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

What do you want TB?

[gamavor]

Armen, I think you brought a very interesting point. Yes, resources at present day are the reason why military exist, but in our case I think it has broader context.

 

Western Armenia is as resourceless as the East. But isn't that make our case even stronger in purely politics accounts?

 

Honestly speaking, I think cutting of the "navel cord" would be positive for Turkey too.

[Twilight Bark]

What do you want TB?

style_images/master/snapback.png

Better people. Better men in particular. But considering the facts, never mind. I give up.

Good bye.

[Armen]

Western Armenia is as resourceless as the East. But isn't that make our case even stronger in purely politics accounts?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

It will cost too much to develop that area into something acceptable for living. There are better ways to invest and get something back in terms of societal development. Even Turkey could not develop those regions with all the money it got from international organisation. With intensification of urbanisation it will be very hard to populate those areas with farmers. Moreover, I don't think any emmigrants from dispora would wish to live in village type areas. They will clearly prefer cities. Also, what is going to happen to the population of those lands? Are they going to be driven away or assimilated? Don't know. It is too complicated. Right now, developing what we have and concentrating our effors in that direction seems more efficient.

 

Surly, we can keep the "claims" as a political tool but at present it seems to be a burden.

[Sasun]

It will cost too much to develop that area into something acceptable for living. There are better ways to invest and get something back in terms of societal development. Even Turkey could not develop those regions with all the money it got from international organisation. With intensification of urbanisation it will be very hard to populate those areas with farmers. Moreover, I don't think any emmigrants from dispora would wish to live in village type areas. They will clearly prefer cities. Also, what is going to happen to  the population of those lands? Are they going to be driven away or assimilated? Don't know. It is too complicated. Right now, developing what we have and concentrating our effors in that direction seems more efficient.

 

Surly, we can keep the "claims" as a political tool but at present it seems to be a burden.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Armen jan, I will allow myself to be romantic, considering that Russia has many big industrial cities in harshly cold Siberia, building smaller and perhaps less industrial cities in Kars and Ardahan regions would be a piece of cake... provided we have the money ... from Turkish coffers which we will get as a restitution for AG

Realistically, I don't think this is impossible. Who defines what is possible and what is not? Nothing is impossible, let's be creative. Let's not forget that the only defeat is defeat in mind, and at this point the only victory we can have is to not forget that justice is on our side and we are right to remember and keep our demands of justice. Realipolitik is important and powerful enough not to ignore it, but it is not as powerful as to break the spirit of our nation into believing that we are incapable of demanding and receiving justice, be it by hook or by crook, now or at some unknown time in the future

I perfectly understand your pragmatic view, and it is largely true for a short term. My point is, let's be balanced and realistic, but also let's not give up our dreams. We really can build cities in Kars and Ardahan regions, also in Cilicia and other places

[Armat]

Every time this discussion arises about territory I can’t help but reflect that Armenia most probably lost million and half citizens to immigration since independence.

It is really pointless to talk about a vision, which will never happen. Turkey a country of seventy million will never succumb to a country which population numbers equal to its active military personal.

First things first right? Secure and vibrant Artsakh is still a plausible reality. There is a strong chance another war is looming on the horizon. We better be prepared both militarily and leadership as well.

Pragmatism is what we most need. I just had a group exhibition in memory of AG but in seriousness I felt like shit all night. I felt it is long saturated enough being a victim and felt sick in my stomach to see so much material about it. Need to move on.

[Sasun]

It is really pointless to talk about a vision, which will never happen.

style_images/master/snapback.png

How do you know Armat? The stars tell so? If that's the case we will prove stars wrong.

All major achievements in the world have been visions of great men, some of whom have been considered not-pragmatic and even insane. The key is to try to reach the stars, but also keep the feet on the ground at all times.

Our problem is not a standard one, therefore we need a non-standard approach, and for that we need good visions. Lack of visions is the surest death for us.

Edited April 24, 2005 by Sasun

[Armat]

How do you know Armat? The stars tell so? If that's the case we will prove stars wrong.

All major achievements in the world have been visions of great men, some of whom have been considered not-pragmatic and even insane. The key is to try to reach the stars, but also keep the feet on the ground at all times.

Our problem is not a standard one, therefore we need a non-standard approach, and for that we need good visions. Lack of visions is the surest death for us.

style_images/master/snapback.png

I think you misunderstood me. but must go to bed will talk

[Sasun]

I think you misunderstood me. but must go to bed will talk

style_images/master/snapback.png

Armat jan, it is quite possible. In fact, reading your post again, I see you talking about another vision of ours, Artsakh, being in a state of half-fruition. We agree more than what it may seem

[ED]

We agree more than what it may seem

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

Sasun jan, to add on your line, we intend to forget time and time again its only a internet in which we comunicate, lots get lost in here, and its only the caracters we type which we are inslaved for we really intend to say or express, in the case of me, I always stated this is not the best inviorment for me for my thoughts

 

god, i hate the internet!

[Twilight Bark]

Territory has lost it value. Resources didn't however. Resources acquired more value because industry is becoming more important than agriculture. Countries keep armies to gain resources and protect them. No-one sends armies to Antartica or Sahara. They do it in case of Mosul, Basra etc. So your experiment hit the wrong target.

Before I go to the second stage of hell, as ordered by herr Armen, let's analyze this stuff for a moment.

 

First, if one is going to pretend to speak with expertise, then one is duty-bound to use precise terms and sentences. Because all too often one relies on the "metaphorical", approximate, "you-know-what-I-mean" sense of a statement, while at the same time using its face-value meaning for other, contradictory purposes. Having one's cake and eating it too is reserved for hypocrites with armies and memory-holes. It's not a privilege taken to be granted by internet pundits.

 

Second, the empirical observation is that countries will go to war over a stupid bunch of rocks. And that includes quite "civilized" ones as well. I will not attempt to analyze why that is so. But the relevant "market" still functions in such a way as to assign a near-inifinite value to territory. While it is not rational, it is nevertheless the case. It is a rare occasion where a country lets go of territory in order to avert civil war. And it is much rarer still to find a country that will simply back down and give away some stupid piece of land or a barren bunch of rocks with no resources under them without a bitter fight. You will not hear them say "oh it's not worth the life of one young man; it's got no resources". They should say that; but they don't.

 

Third, we are not really talking about the planet, but our own neighborhood. Armenia is surrounded by countries that would readily sacrifice a sizeable chunk of their own and others' populations for a small piece of worthless land, especially if it involves losing it. Much more so in the case of Turkey. So let's stop the BS about territory having lost its "value", because the evidence simply doesn't bear it. And that's all the more reason why Armenia+Artsakh should focus on only its own territories for the foreseeable future, as the price of extracting territory from anyone in the neighborhood is quite high, as it already has learned.

 

So the outcome, namely what Armenia should focus on, is still the same as in the case of territory "having lost its value". But getting the reasons right is still quite important. Even if it comes from someone you unjustifiably dislike for a rather stupid reason.

Edited April 24, 2005 by Twilight Bark

[Harut]

մինջև լողալ չսովորենք (միգուցե օդո՞ւմ), էս աշխարհի հզոր երկիրները մեր ավազանը ջուր չեն լցնելու...