So now what..
OK of Armenian genocide bill predicted..
A House resolution calling World War I killings by Turks an attempted extermination will pass, the majority leader says.
By Richard Simon, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 3, 2007
WASHINGTON -- A top congressional Democratic leader predicted Tuesday that a controversial resolution calling the early 20th century killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks a genocide will pass the House. That expectation came despite Bush administration worries that the vote would offend Turkey, an important U.S. ally.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), a co-sponsor, made that prediction. He said he hoped for a vote before Thanksgiving.
The resolution's supporters believed its prospects brightened after Democrats took control of Congress this year and Nancy Pelosi, who backs the measure, became speaker.
But the House has not acted even though the bill has gained 226 cosponsors, more than a majority. On Tuesday, however, the House Foreign Affairs Committee scheduled a vote on the resolution for Oct. 10. Lobbying, both for and against it, has picked up.
"We're encouraged," said Rep. George Radanovich (R-Mariposa), a chief sponsor. "This is not about the present government, nor about the Turkish people," Hoyer said in an interview. "It is about a tragic effort that was made by a previous government almost a century ago, in which we believe very strongly that a genocide was perpetrated on the Armenian people. If we are not to relive and see again those kinds of incidents, it's important that we remember them historically and make sure the world condemns such actions."
No date has been set for action in the Senate, where the resolution has 31 cosponsors, including Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). A Senate leadership aide said the chamber might consider the resolution once the House acts.
The resolution, which calls on the president to use the word genocide when discussing "the systematic and deliberate annihilation of 1.5 million Armenians," has been opposed by President Bush, a Republican, just as it was opposed by President Clinton, a Democrat.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, a Democratic presidential candidate, is a cosponsor of the resolution.
Eight former secretaries of state from Democratic and Republican administrations recently signed a letter to Pelosi warning that passage of the resolution "could endanger our national security interests in the region, including our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and damage efforts to promote reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey."
But Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian also wrote to Pelosi, saying: "To view acknowledgment of the truth as an obstacle to political relations is cynical. A resolution that addresses matters of human rights and genocide cannot damage anyone's bilateral relations -- neither yours with Turkey, nor ours."
Armenians say that 1.5 million of their people perished as part of a campaign to drive them out of eastern Turkey. The Turkish government has contended that large numbers of both Armenians and Turks died as a result of civil war, famine and disease that plagued the country.
Similar resolutions were approved by the House in 1975 and 1984, but did not make it through the Senate. A 1990 resolution was blocked by a Senate filibuster.
"The United States has a compelling historical and moral reason to recognize the Armenian genocide, which cost a million and a half people their lives," said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank), a chief sponsor of the resolution.
"But we also have a powerful contemporary reason as well. How can we take effective action against the genocide in Darfur if we lack the will to condemn genocide whenever and wherever it occurs?"
This is a retaliation to the recently-signed agreement on cooperation in energy matters between Tukey and Iran. But good news, nevertheless. The Armenian-American diaspora had for years been pressing for a resolution on the genocide issue. Every year, we had to make concessions of some sort to the US in exchange for the US Administration preventing the passage of such a resolution from the Congress. Washington lost an important leverage while negotiating with Ankara. Turkish-American relations will no longer be held hostage by such a trivial issue. Plus, this will give us a freer hand in dealing with the Kurds of Northern Iraq, the way they deserve to be dealt with. Good riddance, I say!
Actively getting on people's nerves since February 2006
The decision of a parliement or a congress or a house is really irrelevant to what really happened (whether genocide or not). It only has the inevitable effect of shaping the public opinion and the stance of disinterested masses on the issue which is quite bothering.
Re: So now what..
Nothnig is going to happen. Resolutions are like candy for Armenians, but don't have any implications on Turks...
I am just sad in general for all those who suffered as a result of that conflict. Imperialists' games don't belong to Turks. Imperialist West planned the partition of Ottoman lands and carried out their plans. They agitated Armenians, made them believe they can encarve a land for themselves, even though they were minority. They worked on their local servants -the masons of Ittihat and Terraki party -one of them Talat pasa- and voila the both sides of the conflict were created. It was not hard to set the fire. The country was already in a big mess, fighting on three fronts. Then West just watched how Armenians and Turks killed each other for the purpose of West. They got the lands they wanted - the whole Middle East. They left their bloody hands on the corpses of both Turks And Armenians and left to their homes at West. Their sins left to be shared by Ottoman Turks and Ottoman Armenians. Is the West accountable for its crimes? The victorious are always right. Then, No! Are Armenians accountable for the treason towards Ottoman Empire? Well, they got more than what they had deserved. Then, no need-No! Who is left? Poor Turks. Blame everything on them!!!
No my friends we don't fall for that.
Personally, Why should I feel guilty? Not me, even my dad was not born at that time. I don't know what happened. And nobody knows. I didn't do anyhting wrong. Why I should feel guilty. Whoever sinned will be held accountable on the final day. Nobody can take anybody's burden or sin on their shoulders even if they are your parents, brothers or sisters. Forget about your grand fathers...
Well I refuse to be hold responsible for somebody else's crimes. Is that wrong?
The most fair solution would be if all the parties involved in this tragedy come together and recognize their part in it and appologize to each other and shake hands. But nobody accepts that reasonable offer, except Turkey.
Well, we at least tried....Edited by: Yahac at: 10/4/07 12:54 am
RuseBG Senior Moderator
Posts: 9768
(10/3/07 10:35 pm)
Re: So now what..
Quote:Not me even my dad was not born at that time.
That is irrelevant. You and your father were born in Bulgaria. Genocide or not, you are safe.
Re: So now what..
My Great Grandfather's street was attacked by Armenian gangs. Strangely his next door neighbour was Armenian also and gave him a warning to run and hide his family. So all apart from the older men went to the taurus mountains n hid. The men fought the Armenians.
Why should I feel guilty? Do THEY feel guilty when they talk about there greatest wish being to kill a Turk, in the 2007 when none of us have anything to do with them.
Commanding Moderator
Posts: 4850
(10/4/07 8:53 am)
Re: So now what..
My mom's grandmother's town was near Giresun. The town is still there though it is relatively emptied as most people living there left their land for better opportunities in the cities. Nonetheless, after the WWI broke out, the Russian navy started bombarding the coast, and in 1916 the Russians captured Trabzon. Consequently, the Ottoman civilians started to run away to inner parts of the land as they all knew the Russian ways of raging war on civilians.
Since most men in the Muslim villages were in the army, there were mostly children, aged, and women left in those villages. Under the guidance of the Russians, the Armenian and Pontus gangs began to attack on such villages in line with the Russian offensive. As far as my mother told me, her grandmother took the kids and loaded cows with grains and food, and then hid in the mountains for some time. After the war, her husband did not return from the Russian front.
My father's grandfathers were from Circassia. They were the Karachay-Balkars. As late as 1860s, Russians exterminated millions of Caucasian Muslims whilst deporting millions of others to the Ottoman Empire. My forefathers were settled in Macedonia by the Ottomans due to the Russian constraint preventing settlement of these migrants in places close to Caucasus. After some decades, they were on the road to Anatolia due to the Balkan War. After the end of Greek assault in 1922, they were finally settled in the Aegean region. Predictably, my father had only a few relatives as most died or got killed on the way to their final home in Anatolia.
Nevertheless, I do not think anybody is in a position to assess misdeeds of the past on behalf of others.
Edited by: JannissaryofByzantium at: 10/4/07 1:30 pm
Re: So now what..
Empire and Imperialism are different. Ottomans just expanded. The newly conquered lands were not ruled with collonial mindset... Lands were adjunct and continous, ruled with the same laws everywhere...
Edited by: Yahac at: 10/4/07 3:27 pm
Re: So now what..
Have a look at the definition. You don't have to possess over colonies in order to be counted as imperialistic.
Quote:the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.
2. advocacy of imperial interests.
3. an imperial system of government.
4. imperial government.
5. British. the policy of so uniting the separate parts of an empire with separate governments as to secure for certain purposes a single state.
Commanding Moderator
Posts: 4854
(10/4/07 2:08 pm)
Re: So now what..
There is difference between "imperialism" and the "western imperialism". The Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires had foundations resembling the former definition. However, entities like the USA, British Empire, France, Germany, Italy, Russia differ from the empires existed in the past, or it could be said that those are the byproducts of the latter.
Without comprehending the severe "impact of the colonialism", "overseas genocides", "illegal extraction of surplus values", one can not comprehend the rise of Western Imperialism and its overriding principles built upon the definition of the classical one. Most importantly, without understanding the rise of capitalism, one can not understand the rise of Western Fascism.
Did Ottoman Empire exterminate 10-15 million people for increasing rubber output like tiny Belgium did in Congo? Did the Ottoman Empire exterminate 20-30 million people by forcing them to hand out all of their crops like the British Empire did in India? Did the Ottoman Empire kill some 30-100 millions natives to have full access to rich resources like the European Empires did in the Americas? Not at all.
Edited by: JannissaryofByzantium at: 10/4/07 2:27 pm
Re: So now what..
There is difference in everything.
The Ottomans did abuse their dominion in the Romanian principalities. I'm not sure how many people died due to your persistent domination over the two principalities, but if we add the the Crimean Khanate and their Circassian bandits, an ally of the Ottoman Empire, I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers reached over 1 million. This, however, is for a period of 400 years. This would make it an average of 2,500 casualties per year, which is not so horrible, compared to other situations in other part of the world. I also counted the war casualties.
Quote:Did the Ottoman Empire exterminate 20-30 million people by forcing them to hand out all of their crops like the British Empire did in India?
I don't know. The Ottomans were sometimes struggling to keep the population in certain provinces and states to a stable numbers. If the numbers decreased, so did the productivity. In India, however, the size of the population was abundant and the economical system was different there. The Ottomans did force demonic taxes on some states, resulting in the acceleration of serfdom and massive poverty.
Commanding Moderator
Posts: 4855
(10/4/07 2:29 pm)
Re: So now what..
Which countries have the most developed versions of the Western Imperialism?
Those are for sure the USA and the UK.
What do these entities do in Iraq as of 2007?
Those exterminate hundreds of thousands of civilians for a few gallons of oil whilst those also produce comprehensive reports on human right violations in countries like Korea, Iran, Cuba, Rwanda, Vietnam, China, Russia, Belarus, and so on.
In a sense, pornography is the vulgar recreation of sexual intercourse amongst humans, and respectfully, it could be said that Western Imperialism is the pornographic version of Imperialism, or it is hardcore rather than encore of the former.
Edited by: JannissaryofByzantium at: 10/4/07 2:47 pm
Commanding Moderator
Posts: 4856
(10/4/07 2:35 pm)
Re: So now what..
Quote:There is difference in everything.
The Ottomans did abuse their dominion in the Romanian principalities. I'm not sure how many people died due to your persistent domination over the two principalities, but if we add the the Crimean Khanate and their Circassian bandits, an ally of the Ottoman Empire, I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers reached over 1 million. This, however, is for a period of 400 years. This would make it an average of 2,500 casualties per year, which is not so horrible, compared to other situations in other part of the world. I also counted the war casualties.
I don't know. The Ottomans were sometimes struggling to keep the population in certain provinces and states to a stable numbers. If the numbers decreased, so did the productivity. In India, however, the size of the population was abundant and the economical system was different there. The Ottomans did force demonic taxes on some states, resulting in the acceleration of serfdom and massive poverty.
Ottomans oppressed or massacred their subjects when they felt the necessity, just like the Byzantines or the Romans did. In my opinion, the Ottoman Imperialism was like the Byzantine or the Roman ones rather than the British or the American ones.
Edited by: JannissaryofByzantium at: 10/4/07 2:44 pm
Quote:Ottomans oppressed or massacred their subjects when they felt the necessity, just like the Byzantines or the Romans did. In my opinion, the Ottoman Imperialism was like the Byzantine or the Roman ones rather than the British or the American ones.
In some perspectives, it was, altough the Romans didn't wage religious wars. Now, if we take the Crimean Khanate, their entire economy was dependent on pillage and slavery. They basically produced nothing. They had a pact with the Ottomans to sell any slaves that they took from neighboring states. Most often, these neighboring states were Poland-Lithuania and Moldavia. They usually attacked when least expected, or when the state in question was busy conducting war elsewhere. When invading Moldavia, they usually brought with them 60,000 enslaved people, many of whom were sold to the Ottomans. In that aspect, they were much like the colonization powers that entered Africa and took slaves. The difference was that while the Western European powers met little resistence, the Tatars met fierce resistence from Poland and Moldavia. At times, tens of thousands died in not-so-pleasant deaths.
Your people took a part of that khanate and most likely committed such crimes. Therefore, when I look at you, I don't see a humanbeing. I see a criminal.
Quote:Your people took a part of that khanate and most likely committed such crimes. Therefore, when I look at you, I don't see a humanbeing. I see a criminal.
Don't be childish. When I look at you I see a person who sold his country to EU and is proud of that. Now for that I can blame you. But I don't care about your ancient history. Because you can't be hold accountable for the crimes of your grandfathers. Every new born has its own right of life and has its own responsibilities. Even if my father killed say 1000 people no civil law or any religious dogma gives you the right to hold the offspring accountable. Otherwise there wouldn't be a single person on Earth to remain unpunished.
Well, Ottomans did many mistakes I agree, but overall not as much as the Western Vandalism we have been exposed to for the past 200 years. The things you mention regarding Crimean khanate can't be accepted as good deeds. But you should't likewise reject the bad doings of Westerners, eighter.
The crime is crime no matter who does it. So I accept the wrong doings of Ottomans - janissary enrollment, some extreme brutality(most of which happened when the central power got weak) in the last years of the empire, an so on.
But Turks are nor alone in this. It is common weakness of the whole humanity. What can you do?! This is the human nature - we are not perfect. We are sometimes greedy, cruel, inconsiderate, obssessed with material powers and gains. As we get power we get more obssesed with it and we got blind and forget we are humans. But if you put the materialism as your primary phylosophy then there is nothing to prevent you from being the worst.
Nowdays the form of Imerialism has changed. It is psychological enslavement. It is globalism. It is liberal capitalism chasing the cheap labor wherever it is. We don't die as in the past but our brains are possesed by the materialism and their masters and their simple money games keeps us under control. And the so mentioned freedom is a lie too... If you are bound to pay your house mortgage for 30 years or your car for some 6 years. You are simply borrowing from your future. You are simply tied up man... Not free. You have your leash around your neck, and guess what the financial monopolists rule over you and your hopes (you pray for low interest and thus the welbeing of the Federal reserve and their oversea partners)
Mulfunctioning brain is worse than dying... Ooops that probably came out as too extreme statement...
Anyway you got the message! Edited by: Yahac at: 10/4/07 4:09 pm
Quote:It is common weakness of the whole humanity. What can you do?! This is the human nature - we are not perfect. We are sometimes greedy, cruel, inconsiderate, obssessed with material powers and gains.
This is what I've tried to explain to that bandit for the last year, but he won't get it. I can play his game and accuse him for what his ancestors have done.
Quote:When I look at you I see a person who sold his country to EU and is proud of that
Quote:n a sense, pornography is the vulgar recreation of sexual intercourse amongst humans, and respectfully, it could be said that Western Imperialism is the pornographic version of Imperialism,
In this case Ottomans were erotic version of Imerialism.
Commanding Moderator
Posts: 4857
(10/4/07 4:59 pm)
Re: So now what..
Quote:
In some perspectives, it was, altough the Romans didn't wage religious wars. Now, if we take the Crimean Khanate, their entire economy was dependent on pillage and slavery. They basically produced nothing. They had a pact with the Ottomans to sell any slaves that they took from neighboring states. Most often, these neighboring states were Poland-Lithuania and Moldavia. They usually attacked when least expected, or when the state in question was busy conducting war elsewhere. When invading Moldavia, they usually brought with them 60,000 enslaved people, many of whom were sold to the Ottomans. In that aspect, they were much like the colonization powers that entered Africa and took slaves. The difference was that while the Western European powers met little resistence, the Tatars met fierce resistence from Poland and Moldavia. At times, tens of thousands died in not-so-pleasant deaths.
They were not massacred, but assimilated in to the Ottoman society after a generation or two.
Quote:
Your people took a part of that khanate and most likely committed such crimes. Therefore, when I look at you, I don't see a humanbeing. I see a criminal.
You are right about that. Sorry for the misdeeds of the past.
Edited by: 
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies