Armenian Genocide

are you stupid my friend. If you have any real information share with us. Do not talk about your feelings. Do not talk about how do you fell about Turks.

>armenian genocide happened because i have been to turkey and i say so.

5 lira have been deposited into your account

The only things that Turks are right about here is that The Armenians would have ethnicly cleansed the Population(Both Kurds and Turks) like what happened in the Balkans so one could argue it was a "Fuck or get Fucked" kind of thing
Also that it wasn't the Turks who commited ot but rather it was mostly Kurds so any Kurd or Kurd supporting westerner using this to shit on Turks is a retard

The Turks will probably get their comeuppance soon. Rarely has one group of people committed so many atrocities for so long and gotten away with it. The laws of the universe will fuck them in the ass soon enough

Serious question - does anyone objectively like turkey/the turks who isn't turkish?

I read a study once about country's opinions of each other, and only turkey LITERALLY disliked every other country apart from turkey. Ie. something like 40% max approval for every other country in the world.

I've known a grand total of two turks, admittedly - one was a guy who was expelled from uni after stalking multiple blondes, the other was a girl who denied the armenian genocide and called greeks 'homosexual animals.

That first video is selective, to be mild.
Will watch other two.

I appreciate they are standard tactics but I like to see refutations of their claims.

Lmao. I've known two Turks closely. One was from Cyprus. A really nice guy, about 50 or so.

The other was a Marxist, claimed to be progressive, yet denied the genocide. Which caught me a little.

>Maybe you were just a dick?

To whom?

>armenian genocide happened because i have been to turkey and i say so.

I'm saying that from studying your people I wouldn't have put it past any of you to do all this shit.

I think they've gotten away with it, personally. They used a period of chaos to get away with wiping out the locals of Anatolia and now people have mostly forgotten it ever happened. Nobody here in the west has even heard of what happened on Imbros let alone protested against it. The entire island was a Turkish militarised zone for decades in an effort to hide what was going on, and only in the past few years was opened up to tourists like me. They've gone decades without getting a kick in the balls because, as was the case with so many despicable nations, they were a bulwark against the USSR.

I honestly hope, as much as I liked the country, it loses some of its clay to the people around it who rightfully should have it. It needs to be kicked down a peg or two like all countries afflicted by zealotry and ultranationalism once were in the 20th century.

I knew a turkish dude, he was pretty cool.

>yourube

Thought that was banned in Turkey

They got mascaraed around Kars with anti-partisan activity and mass deportations culminating in most of them dying along the way. A couple villages also got starved. There never was any western genocide though, or christian genocide with turks stabbing pregnant women to death in the Levant

It sounds like they made a good decision to me considering the ottoman empire got divided up in every way possible after the war. Though perhaps turkey would be better off without their kurdish eastern regions, the kurds made a good call any considering how armenians treated their Azeri minorities

we (turkey, turks) object it was a genocide because:
1) the official orders had nothing to do with killing. (except the execution of a handful armenian intellectuals and the previous massacres that armenians put in together with this event for some reason) the deaths are result of hunger&disease and mobs attacking the armenians on their deportation, to which irresponsible officers didn't really respond. these offcers also killed armenians on the way themselves, but not in any scale that makes up for a massacre.
2) the term genocide was invented after these happened, so it can't be applied legally to this "thing" even if it fits to the definition (and it doesn't, unless you strecth it to include fuck-ups&irresponsibility).

in short, the state was responsible for ethnic deportation, and it did a terrible job deporting these people.

1) Genocide doesn't have to be about ordering people's deaths by killing, or even completely intentional. The Holodomor and Great Famine in China are genocides by some estimates for exactly this reason.

2) This argument never EVER works. Also, you're using the word legally completely incorrectly. People in the ancient world didn't have a word for economy, do you think that means they didn't have economies you silly tit?

Aren't there telegrams showing the Turks wanted to wipe out the Armenians? Aren't there also reports from diplomats expressing opinions about the Turkish government's desire to do so?

Yeah I remember something about a German consul, advisor or ambassador or something alike(he was German) sending a letter back to Germany with concerns and telling the German government about the problem with the deportations. I will search it

...

That does a lot of damage to the "it was an Allied conspiracy" argument.

From observing and reading debates and papers, I think it was mostly a muddy series of massacres that were for the most part isolated but generally took advantage of official Ottoman deportation orders, as well as the usual plague and famine that decimated the countryside. The Turks couldn't keep up with either logistics or with court martials, and when the Republic started fighting a couple of guilty officials ended up in government positions. For the next couple of decades the debate became increasingly extreme where these officials, in wanting to deny their specific crimes, hid behind the new Turkish nation, and the Armenian nation in turn directed its grievances onto the Turks as a whole until it became a charge of genocide that neither side can really back down from.

It's meme history in that it glosses over a lot for the sake of the narrative, and the actual events themselves are hard to study without getting sucked into the debate.

Does anyone make that argument?

Armenian genocide deniers

There were lots of noteworthy German witnesses.

One of the most important is Max Erwin von Scheubneer-Richter. He had no sympathy for the massacres and even later became a Nazi, but just by reporting the facts he unintentionally exposed every argument the genocide deniers would try to make before they did:

>I have conducted a series of conversations with competent and influential Turkish personages, and these are my impressions: A large segment of the Ittihadist [Young Turk] party maintains the viewpoint that the Turkish empire should be based only on the principle of Islam and Pan-Turkism. Its non-Muslim and non-Turkish inhabitants should either be forcibly islamized, or otherwise they ought to be destroyed. These gentlemen believe that the time is propitious for the realization of this plan. The first item on this agenda concerns the liquidation of the Armenians. Ittihad will dangle before the Allies a specter of an alleged revolution prepared by the Armenian Dashnak party. Moreover, local incidents of social unrest and acts of Armenian self defense will deliberately be provoked and inflated and will be used as pretexts to effect the deportations. Once en route, however, the convoys will be attacked and exterminated by Kurdish and Turkish brigands, and in part by gendarmes, who will be instigated for that purpose by Ittihad.

Turkey denys it because they don't want to pay reparations or have someone having a legitimate claim on their land

The Greek Genocide is even worse.

>Genocide Greek Population
>The UN then says the Millions of Greeks left in Anatolia, who have lived there since Roman, real Roman, Times have to move to Greece in exchange for Thousands of Turks in Greece
>Thousands more die
Fuck

It's a complete coincidence that Armenians went from being a majority in Western Armenia to virtually nonexistent there, the fact that Turks slaughtered them and forced them to leave their homes in not in any way related to their disappearance.

And you didnt read the post above yours.

I think most deniers accept there were killings and deaths. Though there are ones who dispute it.

The main debate is around whether it is technically a genocide, because intent is hard to find.

I think the genocide concept is moving toward where intent doesent even matter and only the end results matter. You see american indians crying about genocides as well even though 90% of the deats were by disease.

what genocide?

I had a Turkish professor tell me if was kind of an accident. That the Turkish overlord wanted the Armenians rounded up (for some reason. Can't remember) but the general of the military started putting them in caves and burning them alive? Like it was some kind of miss understanding. And after the turk overlord (cent I tjink) heard about it. He apologised!

/thread
never happened

Thank you for really making me think

Does anyone have any reliable sources for demographics of eastern anatolia?I have a hard time believing that such a vast area was majority christian in 1915, after 1000 years of Islamic rule.

* demographics of eastern anatolia in 1915

No genocide

move along infedel, nothing to see here

wha t genocide frriend

One could say it's already happening.
"What turkey? You hate those christian minorities representing 10% of Anatolia for standing in the way of your pan-turkish manifest destiny and have separatist tendencies, so you massacred them?"
"Fine, have their islamic commie executioners, that breed like crazy, act like gypsies, and are now one quarter of your entire nation's population, and are really into separatism"

gee maybe because the turkish and the greek government themselves agreed to move their people after the later got btfo in a war they started themselves against a newly formed republic who just lost millions of people after ww1 and just got partitioned by the allies
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_exchange_between_Greece_and_Turkey

also reminder that venizelos supported the greco-turkish population exhange and reccomended attaturk for the nobel peace prize after lmao

what genocide?

what genocide?

this is now an Enver Pasha thread, why is he so based Veeky Forums?

Russia declared war on the Ottoman state.
Armenians lived on the border with Russia, and were friendly to Russia.
They were relocated to prevent a Russian friendly uprising joining the Russian army.
The relocation process was poorly executed, and many died during it, because of exposure to elements, exhaustion, hunger, thirst.
On the micro level, there were many cruel man handling the relocation process.

Compare it to the Soviet movement of Germans or Tatars eastwards. Same practical goal, same bad outcome.

So it was intentional, as the Ottoman leaders were okay with the acceptable loses, and perhaps bad handling made those loses higher than anticipated. But it was not ethnic cleansing, it was just badly done relocating risk populations.

Isn't it amazing that the least controversial genocide in history is the most discussed?

>The relocation process was poorly executed, and many died during it, because of exposure to elements, exhaustion, hunger, thirst.
Kek.
Reminds me of /pol/ arguments.
"Yeah, we didn't kill the jews, they just...sorta died on their own from the lice and the cold and the famine caused by war"

Well it's kinda of a touchy subject, turks deny it because they don't want to deal with the consequences of an action that another past government did and armenians want it to be recognize so they can get some kind of reparation money and the west kinda doesn't touch it since they need turkey as an ally right now. It also opens up another can of worms, like should turkey pay anything for a crime it's predecessor did, how do we define a genocide? Would it still be a genocide even if the armenians revolted first? What's the line between mass murder and genocide? etc. etc.

Here is what happened OP , armenians betrayed the Ottomans during WW1. The Ottoman empire was very unstable during that time, after the russian supplied balkan countries revolted the ottomans were wary of the same thing happening in their eastern border.

When Ottomans and Russians went to war with each other Armenians decided to side with the Russians. They send Insurgents all over the Ottoman empire killing civilians, and terrorising the lands. The Ottoman empire had enough and send a few soldiers and commanders to Armenia. There, the Commanders ignored the Sultans orders and massacred Armenian civilians, perhaps to avenge the people that died because of Armenian insurgents. Once the Sultan found this out, he punished every officer and apologized to the Armenians.

The conflict was actually over and nobody bothered but after the Holocaust Genocide became a serious matter, and I'm guessing that Brits somewhat told the Armenians they should get reparations just like the Jews.

Its pretty funny, Turkey has been trying to fix the Armenian relationship for years but I guess friendly turk-armenian relations will probably never happen

>"Yeah, we didn't kill the jews, they just...sorta died on their own from the lice and the cold and the famine caused by war"

But this is mostly true. They died from the cold and famine, because they were forced to work in winter with no good clothes as slave labor.
Not many were actually executed, since thats a stupid waste.

All the christians who were part of the Ottoman Empire identify themselves as le ebin kebap removers, so they can never be friendly towards Turkey.
Sort of like ex-USSR states and Russia.

>Once the Sultan found this out, he punished every officer and apologized to the Armenians
source?

which was kind of sad because the people who run the ottoman empire was mostly them, the balkan chistians themselves.

i mean look at this shit

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ottoman_Grand_Viziers

like 60% of them were form balkan countries

He was incompetent as fuck.

>le invade russia through the snowy mountains without supplying soldiers with boots man

those weren't christian or culturally balkan, though.
gov officials were balkanars that adopted turkish
religion and culture.
We still call local rulers like that from our history with the apelative "turcitul"(the turk'd)

enver aux enfers

They deserved it Tbh

Turk get out

armenian gecocide never happened and even if it did the armenians deserve it anyway

t. mehmet mustafa

>In 2005, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan sent Kocharian a letter proposing the establishment of a historians' commission to study the events of 1915. Kocharian answered with a counterproposal to establish diplomatic relations and launch an intergovernmental commission. As Kocharian wrote:

>Your suggestion of discussing the past cannot be effective if it does not include a discussion of the current situation and the future of relations between our countries…The political atmosphere should be prepared for the dialogue. To move mutual relations forward is the duty of the politicians. We cannot leave this responsibility to the historians….We can establish an intergovernmental commission to study every problem between our countries and begin the discussions without any precondition."

Oops?

Genocide? What is this?

discussion of armenian genocide is difficult due to how armenians act. anyone who denies that the events constituted a genocide is painted as a "genocide denier" or "turkish nazi" or "turkish shill" whilst the exact opposites are hailed as heroes
to put it simply this whole shebang is not a scholarly discussion but circle jerk for armenian nationalists and christians

in any case there are a few historians that do research the issue, many say that there was no genocide

youtube.com/watch?v=TPcNuu3jJWk
youtube.com/watch?v=qG70UWESfu4

also;

If armenians are so great than why did they got rekt?

>no arguments

>many

What proportion? There are plenty of scholars who have 'researched' the Holocaust and come to the conclusion it never happened, but they are in the minority and their arguments are shit.

Old Greek ladies are always correct.

Turks are evil.

That is all.

no such thing, its a big ploy to get land/money which they never will

Because the Turks have been so adamantly lying l of the murder of not only the Armenian people but also Assyrians, Greeks and Christians in general that to admit genocide now would mean the Turkish state is built on 102 years of lies.

what genocide?

What genocide?

Genocide? Don't make me laugh

It's the usual Turkroach bullshit. Just like how Japan denied committing any war crimes during WWII.

>Just like how Japan denied committing any war crimes during WWII.
Really?
I thought the perceived problem with Japan was "not apologizing hard enough"

I think they used to deny it happened, and now just dodge around the issue whenever it's brought up.

The best book on the subject to this date is Kevorkians 'The Armenian Genocide: a Complete history', which details the genocide on village-by-village basis.

They say there was no intent

Turks don't deny the killings or the scale of them and are usually very quick to (not inaccurately) pin them on the Kurds.

The debate is not over what happened, but over if it was ordered by senior officials, many of whom of course went on to be influential in the heavily romanticized founding of the Turkish Republic post-war.

It's generally percieved as a justified relocation that went unjustifiably wrong but not a deliberate policy of genocide

more level-headed and sympathetic Turks will argue that the officials probably had a decent idea of what was happening on the ground but that still doesn't mean they ordered it

t. studied in turkey, also studied under an armenian professor at SOAS

Go back to pol mate, your bait game is weak

Who am I supposed to be baiting?

what genocide