Simple Questions.anyone Care To Answer?

[Z'areh]

Dear Armat, I must thank you, unlikr your compatriot David Davidian of Cambridge, Mass. you don't bring us what Mhmet said this, what Mustafa said that or what Fatma says.

Forgive me for saying this. Slowly but surely you are showing symptoms of the Patty Hearst/Oslo Syndrome.** Please search an find what thosesmean.

The first thing I would do is stop talking, trying to reason with those turds hose main purpose is to confuse us and derail our "train" of thought. AS to numbers . Who is the accountant? Just as in philology- Who says what is G and what is not! Is it because we claim 1,500,000 were massacred and they say it was 1,499,499? One less to qualify as G?

As to numbers and words. Can we ask them where and when they were certified as CPA-s, and got their PHD in statistics, not to mention their PHD in linguistics to diffeentiate between g and G.

** Just in case. That is when the abductee/hostage is indoctrinated and begins to sympathize with the abductors/hostage takers.

 

I think what Armat is doing is very healthy, there are questions in his mind that need to be answered I see no "Stockholm" or any other syndrome here. In fact, the more we think like the Turks the better we understand how to respond to them. When I say "respond them" this includes the Western media and all those who stick by the Turks.

 

It is an undoubted fact that the Turks can come up with very ingenious arguments to veer off from the truth. I remember a few years ago watching a debate on Al-Jazeera. The host had invited a Turkish and an Armenian experts debting the genocide. After watcing this I thought this can be a very good case-study on how to debate, the Armenian was basically shot down by the maneuvers of the Turk. Speaking in fluent Arabic the Turk did not give a chance to the Armenian to defend his thesis. To a non-Armenian a Turk can be quite convincing, of course most of the facts will either be twisted or simply lied, but the conviction with which it is delivered can be quite potent and effective.

 

You can't simply answer "but they killed us all" and expect to win a case.

 

Armat is looking for answers through the Turkish prism, not only there is nothing wrong in that but it could also be a very good exercise. If nothing else it is a psychological exercise.

 

[hagopn]

I think what Armat is doing is very healthy, there are questions in his mind that need to be answered I see no "Stockholm" or any other syndrome here. In fact, the more we think like the Turks the better we understand how to respond to them. When I say "respond them" this includes the Western media and all those who stick by the Turks.

 

It is an undoubted fact that the Turks can come up with very ingenious arguments to veer off from the truth. I remember a few years ago watching a debate on Al-Jazeera. The host had invited a Turkish and an Armenian experts debting the genocide. After watcing this I thought this can be a very good case-study on how to debate, the Armenian was basically shot down by the maneuvers of the Turk. Speaking in fluent Arabic the Turk did not give a chance to the Armenian to defend his thesis. To a non-Armenian a Turk can be quite convincing, of course most of the facts will either be twisted or simply lied, but the conviction with which it is delivered can be quite potent and effective.

 

You can't simply answer "but they killed us all" and expect to win a case.

 

Armat is looking for answers through the Turkish prism, not only there is nothing wrong in that but it could also be a very good exercise. If nothing else it is a psychological exercise.

 

Agreed. Devil's advocacy is an important exercise, but one shouldn't lose sight of the fact that it is Devil's Advocacy and not some query into discovering "truths" in a murderer's version of a murder. The truth is in the fact of the murder.

 

[hagopn]

Dear Armat, I must thank you, unlikr your compatriot David Davidian of Cambridge, Mass. you don't bring us what Mhmet said this, what Mustafa said that or what Fatma says.

Forgive me for saying this. Slowly but surely you are showing symptoms of the Patty Hearst/Oslo Syndrome.** Please search an find what thosesmean.

The first thing I would do is stop talking, trying to reason with those turds hose main purpose is to confuse us and derail our "train" of thought. AS to numbers . Who is the accountant? Just as in philology- Who says what is G and what is not! Is it because we claim 1,500,000 were massacred and they say it was 1,499,499? One less to qualify as G?

As to numbers and words. Can we ask them where and when they were certified as CPA-s, and got their PHD in statistics, not to mention their PHD in linguistics to diffeentiate between g and G.

** Just in case. That is when the abductee/hostage is indoctrinated and begins to sympathize with the abductors/hostage takers.

 

You're gooood, man, goood=== Took the words right out of my spleen

 

Is David still around? what is he doing? Where is his archive project? I keep asking around---

[Takoush]

100-200k Armenians joining the Russians were a formidable reason considering Ottomans were at war on multiple fronts.Armenians were deserting and fighting against the Turks so in reality Ottomans reacted more "lets get rid of these Armenians before all start to join the Russians"

Lets be honest we would have done exactly that.

Armat; I don't know where your numbers are from but I don't think that they would be accurate. Our fronts on the Russian border did what the rest of their Russian compatriots were doing as it was war. On the Turkish front the Armenians did what they had to do for their Turkish government. My own grandfather was a Colonel in the Turkish army in WWI and he heard about the Armenian Genocide much later. Needless to say how horrified and tearjerkingly sad he was to hear about his family and his nationality.

 

Armenians were fighting on both fronts being part of the country that they lived in and probably were forced to fight against each other too.

 

To your last sentence, at all times while we were peacefully living in Turkey and serving Turkey with the high taxes we were obliged to pay; being killed and annihilated continuously, I disagree with you and your last sentence would not be justified or right. The enemy attacked and annihilated us pretty much our whole nationality and they don't stand a single chance of coming up clean under any circumstances.

 

 

[Yervant1]

The key word in all this is "Doubt" and that is all that the turks are doing.

Once you spread doubt in peoples mind no matter how much proof you present it will be taken with a grain of salt.

[Takoush]

Yes Yervant; unfortunately that's exactly what the Turks are doing. They are putting doubt even in our people's minds.

 

However, when anyone opens up legit, thruthful and dignified history books they will undoubtedly find it in there the "Truth" about our innocence and our almost complete annihilation by Turkey. In short a Genocide.

[Arpa]

Title: General Andranik and the Armenian Revolutionary Movement

Author: Antranig Chalabian

 

Goes in great detail about that whole period and pathetic way we lost Kars basically without even firing a shot.Lot of Armenians refused to fight even though we had better equipment and we had more soldiers.We often brag about our military victories but at Kars we simply did not fight.Turks were better organized and were motivationed.

Its a great book.True eye opener.

If you think, or they make you believe that the "genocide" began after Andranik

Andranik Ozanian was born in the village of Ozan, pursuant to oppression his family moved to Shabin Karahisar.

Yes, we know that Zoravar Andranik and his soldiers may have killed a couple of turks and azeris. Count them again, a couple, 10, 100, 1000? How does that justify the extermination of a whole nation?

Do we exterminate the entire African Amarican nation just because a few black boys may have killed a couple of white boys?

Besides the fact that I have known Andranik Chalabian. That is another story as how he, a lab technician at AUB had accidentally stumbled into a crateful of documents.

I have his exhaustive work about Andranik in both the Armenian and the English versions.

To see how and when his passion for vengeance came about, (several decades before 1915) turn to page 3 of the book and see how when his father came home all bloodied, and how then and there he vowed to avenge, how he stalked that turk, until he came face to face, eye to eye with him.

Very reminiscent of Varuzhan’s Derenik;.

Note that Varuzhan was murdered in 1915. He had to have written this poem long before. Did he fashion it on the saga of Andranik’s father?

http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=5319&hl=DERENIK

http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=5214&hl=DERENIK

And all this several decades before 1915. Now, you tell us that the acrimony and persecution started only after 1915-1925. That Andranik and his boys killed 15, 150 or 1,500 turks and azeris after they had killed 1,500,000?

 

[Armat]

Guys

 

Let me clarify (Zareh understood me well) AG no matter how you cut it its a fact! Within this AG I like to know how much what Turks say such as Justin Macarthy, B.Lewis is true.

Now let me bring you an example

Turks say we killed 500k muslims as well. Now that sounds absurd right?Sure it does however do we have a solid evidence saying no that's a lie we only managed to kill 40k? See?Dashnak archives are not accessible as far as I know so in this vacuum Turks can come up with any number they like in fact we have not been successful against this allegation.

Another fact

Armenian rebels were very active prior of AG and Armenian soldiers in Ottoman army being killed later was directly relates to "perceived disloyalty"Understand this if you got Rebel bands roaming the country,supplying arms,aiding the Russian army then same ethnic group serving in your army would you trust them?

 

I may get lot of heat on this but Dashnaks did deliberately intentionally provoked massacres in order to get the allies to invade Turkey.Our own people sacrificed our people for political gains.

I would like to see Dashnak archives fully opened.This organization needs to answer lot of questions which it has not.

 

We should not be afraid of truth.

Edited October 31, 2007 by Armat

[vava]

Another fact

Armenian rebels were very active prior of AG and Armenian soldiers in Ottoman army being killed later was directly relates to "perceived disloyalty"Understand this if you got Rebel bands roaming the country,supplying arms,aiding the Russian army then same ethnic group serving in your army would you trust them?

Again, I question the scale of some of your terms. The bolded section in your quote above implies that there existed a large scale, armed, organized movement representing the Armenian people within the empire. From what I've read, this is false. There is no question that there were pockets of ad-hoc Armenian "rebels", and this due to intolerable conditions in some communities. But for an empire with a sizable army, the threat this could have represented would have been rather insignificant. The Armenian "resistance" was in a large part, a pretext for the activities that followed.

 

We should not be afraid of truth.

You are absolutely right about this.

[Armat]

Again, I question the scale of some of your terms. The bolded section in your quote above implies that there existed a large scale, armed, organized movement representing the Armenian people within the empire. From what I've read, this is false. There is no question that there were pockets of ad-hoc Armenian "rebels", and this due to intolerable conditions in some communities. But for an empire with a sizable army, the threat this could have represented would have been rather insignificant. The Armenian "resistance" was in a large part, a pretext for the activities that followed.

You are absolutely right about this.

 

Vava

 

There were Georgian,Russian Armenian volunteers in Russian army and it was not a small number in addition to Andranik,Dro,Njdeh,Sepu etc. groups which were not small at all.

 

 

[DominO123]

Maybe you are right but Armenians joining the Russians as much as 200k soldiers or even 100k posed a greater threat.Combined Russian and Armenian forces were a serious threat if you were the Ottomans.

I believe Armenian Genocide was directly relating to Russian/Armenian campaign and frankly I have difficulty pan Turanism being the reason as often sited by our historians.

 

Thanks for taking your time bro

 

Armat, it took me years to understand one thing. The Armenians were in all their right to revolt, and this will not be treason. It was not a country, it was an Empire, they were not citizens they were subjects. They were invaded and were subjugated, it was their right and they should have revolted given what was done to them.

 

Once one accept this, and understand that there is nothing wrong there, he will be less prone to minimise and hide any Armenian revolt.

 

I did, and arrived to the same conclusion.

 

Armat, beside Musa Dagh, and Van, how many pseudo-successful so-called revolt could you find? Musa Dagh was not successful, had the ship not arrived they will have been killed. In Van the success was an Armenian myth, when the Russians arrived there, already a large number of Armenians were killed. Even Nogales admit it, and let me remind you that this psychopath (and anyone having read his work will have to conclude he is indeed a psychopath) who brought to the ground Armenian churchs, buildings to the ground one after the other admitted it.

 

The point I am trying to make is that if Armenians were so well organized and so well armed, so well prepared to be of any considerable threat to the Ottoman, how is it that not only have they lost every villeyets one after the other, how is it that the KEmalists have annexed junk of even lands outside of its realm (Russian Armenia), how is it that even in the Armenian bastillion outside of the Ottoman realm, Armenians haven't been able to keep what they already had. Pieces were sliced from there to be distributed to Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan.

 

I mean, even some Jewish ghetto's had a life expectency of longer then even the Armenian bastillion of Zeytoon, which population was evacuated even PRIOR the so-called ''immigration'' law of may, prior April 24 when intellectuals were arrested. In fact, the first deportatons were not in Eastern Anatolia, they were in Cilicia.

 

I would have LOVED and would not have found NOTHING WRONG had there been a generalized revolt. In fact, the Armenians were just COWARDS, insteed of attacking the Ottoman during the Balkan war while the Russians were not bothered by the world war. But NOOOO!!! What the Armenians did INSTEED was to open their doors to Muslim refugees from the West, those same refugees who will later take their posession. (EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED WITH ZEYTOON soon during the war, prior to Dardanelle, which revisionists yap to justify April 24, when reality is that both dates match is a total coincidences, since the order in Van was given on April 20 by Jevdet than Dardanelle).

 

To think that the Armenian genocide happened because of revolts depict an ignorance of the situation. The Young Turks when they took power were supposed to reestablish the constitution, then they had policies such as the nationalization of the economy, then there was policies about the replacement of the milleti system, which as much unfair was to the Armenians it was at least guaranteeing its survival. The real replacement of the milleti system was the assimilation of populations. The nationalization of the economy, the replacement of the ''subject'' concept were all plans to homogenous the Empire. For the first time for the Turks they had a government which represent the Turkish identity.

 

The nationalizationwas opposed by the Armenians, they controlled Anatolia economically, they were the ones who would lose, the repacement of the Milleti system, with who? Armenians who have resisted assimilation(Take for instance the Capital tax imposed in WWII, read what the Turkish government say about the Armenians, that THEY ARE NOT ASSIMILABLE).

 

Pan-Turkism, was not a main reason of the genocide unlike what advanced by some, what I mean is that the union of all Turkish people including those outside as a concept is unnecessary to understand why the genocide happened. It happened because the Armenians were a pain in the @ss, they were after the Young-Turk came to power seen as an alien element, the Turkish scholar Ayla göl present this as Armenians being ''othered'' a consequences of the plans to modernize the Empire. Prior Armenians were seen as subjects of a Muslim Empire, but then they were seen as Armenians in Turkish soil, parasits eating the ressources. Gocek and several other modern Turkish scholars too view it as such (modernization being ironically what caused the genocide). Avioglu already in the 70s, claimed that one of the major componment responsable of the genocide was the nationalization of economy.

 

It was premedited, they were still in doubt as to the application, it was only after the Winter defeat that the decision was taken(end of 1914 beginning of 1915), by then there was still no Van ''revolt,'' the Germans were already speaking about it. The Ottoman with their double talk shot the Germans by claiming that they will replace the Armenian economical power with the German and the Baghdad railroad was ment to facilitate that.

 

There are various elements to that, so the simplicised dumb ''they revolted'' is not only an oversimplification, but it isen't even supported by the cleaned Ottoman archives. I have already exposed this by using their own records, the first date record on March 2, already document deportation, and it say that revolt during this deportation should not be permitted, the reasons are nowhere to be found. No documention of revolts justifying it. Then the Turkish government attached a document by number which preced this one, but by date of the archive, it was fabricated after the war.

 

This is all I had to say right now, when I have time I'll write more.

Edited October 31, 2007 by Domino

[DominO123]

Nope, not in contact, I just had the chance to have them. I had a full digitized copy of Nogales work, I have lost it when my HD died, but I gave copies to some of the forum members if you want it.

We seem to have the brainpower at our disposal, but no initiative.

 

Among your cited sources are the standard David Davidian archival material: the memoirs of de Nogales, Nansen, and so on. Are you in touch with the fellow?

 

Davdian has done a lot of archival work and has been promising to have a website to make this available since 1993. His easily bruised ego has incapacitated an otherwise great genocide studies scholar and leader.

 

George Aghjayan, another very competent amateur scholar on the genocide, has torn to shred Justin the Prostitute's so-called "demography," starting with GA's own province of Palu/Balu. He has presented his papers in various conferences, including the UCLA conference on Tigranakert and the relevant villayets.

 

We have yet another veritable genius, no exagggeration, in a chap named Artur Martirossyan, whose political analysis and photographic memory on particularly Artsakh related archival material has caused mental paralysis in many a Turko-Azeri detractor or their pimped out prostitutes.

 

Where are the works of these people?

 

What is a good amount of pay for anyone to take the intituative?

 

Whereabouts are you?

 

[DominO123]

Vava

 

There were Georgian,Russian Armenian volunteers in Russian army and it was not a small number in addition to Andranik,Dro,Njdeh,Sepu etc. groups which were not small at all.

 

And? The first Armenian republic berely had over 40,000 soldiers. At its pick in Tsarist Russia, Armenian volonteers achieved 150,000. And? Jews served in the allied army, in the Soviet Union they had several of their generals. So what? What happened outside of the Ottoman Empire is outside of the Empire.

[vava]

Vava

There were Georgian,Russian Armenian volunteers in Russian army and it was not a small number in addition to Andranik,Dro,Njdeh,Sepu etc. groups which were not small at all.

 

 

... What happened outside of the Ottoman Empire is outside of the Empire.

 

This is what I'm trying to get at. Armenians fighting in the Russian army is a completely different matter than Ottoman Armenians banding together in rebellion. A similar situation occurred in Canada (and the US I believe) with Japanese Internment Camps - when Canadian citizens of Japanese origin were relocated during WWII. This, because of a war with Japan. All Japanese in Canada suffered - but the people in question could have hardly been considered "rebels". They just happened to share ethnicity with enemies outside the nation.

 

So, were there Armenian "revolts" within the Ottoman empire? Yes certainly, but:

1) Were they effective? Evidently not.

2) Were they "armed, organized, and widepread"? History indicates the opposite.

3) Were they in fact a serious threat to the empire? Highly doubtful.

Edited October 31, 2007 by vava

[Armat]

Domino

Great post.To be honest I never considered the nationalization of economy at all to be a factor.This is comes totally new to me.

I am tying from work and got 10 min.

Armat, beside Musa Dagh, and Van, how many pseudo-successful so-called revolt could you find? Musa Dagh was not successful, had the ship not arrived they will have been killed. In Van the success was an Armenian myth, when the Russians arrived there, already a large number of Armenians were killed. Even Nogales admit it, and let me remind you that this psychopath (and anyone having read his work will have to conclude he is indeed a psychopath) who brought to the ground Armenian churchs, buildings to the ground one after the other admitted it.

 

It is sad that the real reason we could not hang on to our homeland were our infighting,and 1917 Russian revolution.Our moral was pretty low.At Kars half the army desserted.Read the Andranik book.The amount of details are unreal.He takes you right there.You'll find out his frustrations with Dashnaks and along with host of other problems.

 

What you are saying AG was planned prior to Van revolt and Russian winter Enver's defeat? Or the nationalism of Young Turks and their idology by default was on collision caurse with Armenians?Since like you said they were not assimilble?Interesting.

 

Must go now.This is getting real interesting.

[HyeFedayis]

"The first upsurge of Armenian nationalism starting in the 1880s had caused both the Ottoman and the Russian Empires to be increasingly suspicious of the loyalty of their Armenian subjects. Thus, in retaliation for an 1894 uprising in the old Armenian heartland of eastern Anatolia, the Ottoman government organized a series of massacres over the course of two years with, according to Armenian sources, hundreds of thousands of Armenian deaths the result."

 

Source: Modern Hatreds, the Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War by Stuart J. Kaufman, page 51.

[HyeFedayis]

So? what if some Armenian groups rebelled against the Ottoman Empire it was no excuse for the massacre of innocent civilians and the deportation to the Syrian deserts. Anyway its more likely that they attacked us first and started to deport us and when Armenians formed groups and started fighting back after. Or the other way around, still no excuse for committing a crime against a whole race.

[DominO123]

Armat, PM me an email address, I'll sent you some papers from Turkish scholars and other materials I find relevent. You will understand the context. some modern Turkish scholars work is the closest work documenting premeditation than any others. Dadrian document with archives, but like others don't document the Ottoman situation, context etc. The Armenian genocide should be understood in the context of the modernisation of the Empire.

 

The short answer will be yes, there was an intention, at first they intended to evacuate the Armenians, not much different than Hitlers Reich plan to evacuate the Jews much before their decision to liquidate. The Winter defeat settled the issue as if whatever the Armenians will be kicked out or eliminated. Both solutions were a new Turkey without Armenians. If you read Enver telegram justfying the so-called ''migration'' law, he talk about the Armenian ''problem'' as a problem in the history of the late Ottoman Empire rather than a question of revolt.

 

I'll select for you papers to send if you want.

Edited October 31, 2007 by Domino

[Armat]

Armat, PM me an email address, I'll sent you some papers from Turkish scholars and other materials I find relevent. You will understand the context. some modern Turkish scholars work is the closest work documenting premeditation than any others. Dadrian document with archives, but like others don't document the Ottoman situation, context etc. The Armenian genocide should be understood in the context of the modernisation of the Empire.

 

The short answer will be yes, there was an intention, at first they intended to evacuate the Armenians, not much different than Hitlers Reich plan to evacuate the Jews much before their decision to liquidate. The Winter defeat settled the issue as if whatever the Armenians will be kicked out or eliminated. Both solutions were a new Turkey without Armenians. If you read Enver telegram justfying the so-called ''migration'' law, he talk about the Armenian ''problem'' as a problem in the history of the late Ottoman Empire rather than a question of revolt.

 

I'll select for you papers to send if you want.

Domino your box is full so I am posting it here.I would love those materials to have and thanks for great posts.

armat@verizon.net

 

[Armat]

Domino,Arpa,Vava and others

 

We know that B.Lewis and Macarthur are two pillars of Turkish denials however has anyone serously challenged their views? Has Dadrian.Hovanisian,Papazian ever wrote a rebuttal papers? If not then why not.

[DominO123]

Domino your box is full so I am posting it here.I would love those materials to have and thanks for great posts.

armat@verizon.net

 

 

Yeah, sorry for that, I recieve many PMs, so it becomes full very frequently, have to constantly delete.

[DominO123]

Domino,Arpa,Vava and others

 

We know that B.Lewis and Macarthur are two pillars of Turkish denials however has anyone serously challenged their views? Has Dadrian.Hovanisian,Papazian ever wrote a rebuttal papers? If not then why not.

 

No for Lewis, not significantly for McCarthy. Lewis hasn't covered the subject significantly to be dealt with. He is much brighter than McCarthy in this, he just slightly covered it not enough so that others pay more intention to his thesis, he kept himself out from the heat.

 

I already posted here someone on hyeforum a review of one of McCarthy's work, where the reviewer call the covering as ''junk history'' and compare McCarthy with a nationalist historian.

 

 

[Armat]

Domino

The Talat telegram.Wasn't the one Turks say it was a forgery by Adonian?

[Armat]

I am little disappointed that this loud mouth McCarthy (all over UTUBE) has not been seriously challenged.That's my point.If he is saying garbage which I think he is then why have Armenians not seriously challenged his views.

 

[AK-47]

I am little disappointed that this loud mouth McCarthy (all over UTUBE) has not been seriously challenged.That's my point.If he is saying garbage which I think he is then why have Armenians not seriously challenged his views.