Guest Posted December 30, 2000 Report Share Posted December 30, 2000 What is Colin Powell's stance on Armenian and/or Turkish issues? I'm celebrating the end of Jewish pro-Turkey in top spots (Madeline Albright, William Cohen) but I do not have enough information to determine whether we will have a more cooperative administration with Bush. Can anyone add to this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 30, 2000 Report Share Posted December 30, 2000 Americans, just like their English "rivals", do not have friends - they have interests. So don't expect anything positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2001 Report Share Posted January 4, 2001 quote:Originally posted by gamavor:Americans, just like their English "rivals", do not have friends - they have interests. So don't expect anything positive.I join gamavor, to celebrate the wisdom of his stance. I also wonder why should we expect that Collin Powell, or anybody else for that matter, has to have any stance in Armenian issues? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2001 Report Share Posted January 4, 2001 well isn't george w part armenian? if he cares about his armenian heritage maybe he will do something, but i highly doubt it he is from the south a very anglo/saxon oriented area so he probably will not treat the armenian/ turkish issues as something special Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2001 Report Share Posted January 4, 2001 quote:Originally posted by Alex Kornev:well isn't george w part armenian? if he cares about his armenian heritage maybe he will do something, but i highly doubt it he is from the south a very anglo/saxon oriented area so he probably will not treat the armenian/ turkish issues as something special Alex, I think you have forgotten to put a symbole of smile in your posting. It may confuse some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 5, 2001 Report Share Posted January 5, 2001 Why a smile MJ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 5, 2001 Report Share Posted January 5, 2001 lol...cute kid...(kiddo jan, George W. has as much a chance of being half armo as I do of being half black--namely, zero)Â Like MJ said, why would Colin Powell have any stance on Armenian issues? Because he'll be the Secretary of State? HUH!! What was the last time you heard anything even remotely related to Armenians come out of Albright's mouth? or any secretary of state's? NEVER!!! And that's how it shall remain. Let's not kid ourselves, people. We're the last thing on the mind of an american statesman. You overestimate our importance. Heavily. Let's not make that mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 5, 2001 Report Share Posted January 5, 2001 quoteWhat was the last time you heard anything even remotely related to Armenians come out of Albright's mouth? When she stated her opposition to H Res 596. Sigh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 5, 2001 Report Share Posted January 5, 2001 quote:Originally posted by wh00t: When she stated her opposition to H Res 596. Sigh.Yes, and that was only in the context of American interests. Armenia was not a consideration in that stance. Additionally, Armenia never was consideration in any political calculations of any country for many centuries, now. Nobody is pro- or anti-Armenian. It is Armenia's sole responsibility to claim importance. It is hard in our conditions, but maybe it can still be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 5, 2001 Report Share Posted January 5, 2001 quote:Originally posted by Alex Kornev:Why a smile MJ?Dear Alex,You got me confused. Initially I thought you were joking. Now I suspect you were serious. Am I right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 6, 2001 Report Share Posted January 6, 2001 quote:Originally posted by MJ: Yes, and that was only in the context of American interests. Armenia was not a consideration in that stance. Well, regardless, Armenian Genocide recognition is an Armenian issue, even if it doesn't involve the nation of Armenia. She has spoken about the Karabagh situation several times as well. Remember how she a leading supporter of repealing Section 907? Here's what she think of the Genocide resolution:SEC. ALBRIGHT: On the Armenian resolution, I think that this is a very important issue and I'm -- thank you very much for asking because it's very much on our minds.President Clinton has traditionally commemorated Armenian Remembrance Day on April 24th by issuing a statement that recognized the loss of huge numbers of innocent Armenian lives in 1915 and after. And he has challenged all Americans to ensure that such events never occur again. And we've emphasized to both Turkey and Armenia that we can neither deny history nor forget it and we need to come to terms with it.But the legislative measures, such as this one, can hurt our efforts to encourage improved relations between Armenia and Turkey. And this can't help promote peace and security in the region.And I have to tell you, frankly, that passage could also undermine U.S. national interests in which Turkey is a partner; not just bilateral relations with a NATO ally, but also Turkey's cooperation on the Cyprus talks and the Nagorno-Artsax process and Iraq. So I think that it is very important that this resolution not go forward.And as for people not knowing about this whole issue, I think that people have studied this; they know it. Our Foreign Service officers are very much aware of it. And this is something that is of great concern to us. But this resolution at this time is damaging.What a bitch. Doug Bereuter is a bitch too. So is Tom Lantos. As is Dan Burton. quote: Nobody is pro- or anti-Armenian. Better explain yourself on this one. Seems to me like an odd thing to say and a pretty false generalization too.[This message has been edited by wh00t (edited January 05, 2001).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 6, 2001 Report Share Posted January 6, 2001 quote:Originally posted by wh00t: Better explain yourself on this one. Seems to me like an odd thing to say and a pretty false generalization too.[This message has been edited by wh00t (edited January 05, 2001).]Sorry, I lost you,,, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 6, 2001 Report Share Posted January 6, 2001 quote:Originally posted by MJ: Sorry, I lost you,,,What's not to understand? How do you explain that statement "No one is pro- or anti-Armenian"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 6, 2001 Report Share Posted January 6, 2001 quote:Originally posted by wh00t: What's not to understand? How do you explain that statement "No one is pro- or anti-Armenian"?Dear Wh00t,It's really simple. Armenia is of no significance to any significant party, so that them to be pro- or anti-Armenian. Those pro- and -anti-Armenians exist only in our imagination. That's where they have always existed. The price of the opposite,and very naive mentality has been very high for us throughout history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.