What's new

"Their claim is false, but they still believe it"

We've gone from outright denial that non-combatant Armenians were murdered to justifications for doing so. Yet if killing the Armenian women and children was justified, why do Turks try to hide these deeds, even today?
the reason why i wrote about backstabbing is not related to trying to justificate it, but to show the ugly hypocrisy of the armenians and the west. why do they not look at the casulties among the Turks? is that no genocide then? is it only a genocide when armenians are killed?
 
why do they not look at the casulties among the Turks? is that no genocide then? is it only a genocide when armenians are killed?
I define genocide as the systematic, deliberate killing of large number of people of a particular ethnic group, simply for being members of that group.

Turks dead in battle don't qualify as victims of genocide. As far as I know, the question in the Armenian case is about the "systematic" and "deliberate" parts - who gave what orders, etc. There doesn't appear to be a question that Ottoman leaders shamelessly endorsed the results.

As for info on Turkish civilian Muslim casualties, of WWI, I've not seen any.
 
I define genocide as the systematic, deliberate killing of large number of people of a particular ethnic group, simply for being members of that group.

Turks dead in battle don't qualify as victims of genocide. As far as I know, the question in the Armenian case is about the "systematic" and "deliberate" parts - who gave what orders, etc. There doesn't appear to be a question that Ottoman leaders shamelessly endorsed the results.

As for info on Turkish civilian Muslim casualties, of WWI, I've not seen any.
"Their claim is false, but they still believe it" | Page 2
 
Sorry, but just as you can't figure out a film from a few frames taken out of the middle, so I cannot survey this aspect of the conflict without further information.

You've seen that the Armenian genocide is backed up not just by demographic analysis but by diplomats' records. Is there anything similar to present about casualties suffered by Turkish Muslim civilians?

U should look for it then
I'm checking out the catalog at Georgetown University but I don't see anything.
 
Sorry, but just as you can't figure out a film from a few frames taken out of the middle, so I cannot survey this aspect of the conflict without further information.

You've seen that the Armenian genocide is backed up not just by demographic analysis but by diplomats' records. Is there anything similar to present about casualties suffered by Turkish Muslim civilians?
Dude just read what I posted. there is demographic analysis, and diplomatic records stating that the armenians were massacring muslims.

___________________________________________________________

Among many documents in foreign archives which are often ignored or concealed, a document in Russia’s official archives shows Armenians carried out mass killings in 1915. The 65 page report was written by Russian Brigadier General Leonid Bolkhovinitov, who was stationed in the Caucasus front, and dispatched to the Russian military headquarters on December 11, 1915 and titled “The Real Situation.”

It constitutes a follow-up to a report submitted to the Russian Tsar by Armenians on “The Activities of the Armenian Voluntary Bands in the Caucasus.” Bolkhovinitov says in his report that “Armenian voluntary units had started violent slaughters against the Muslim people with racist motives,” and that Armenian reports given to the Russians did not reflect the actual situation in the region. The Russian official states in his report that “We shall not believe in the death tolls that the Armenians give. The number of missing people has been constantly exaggerated in the memos distributed by the Dashnak party and there is no doubt that they are politically-motivated.”

Bolkhovinitov’s report also underlines that the history of the events which he dubs the “Armenian Problem” go back to 1890. Some of the important findings Bolkhovinitov lists in his report are:

  • European diplomats imposed the ideas of an “Independent Armenia” on the Armenians. Armenian intellectuals in spreading seditious ideology among Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and designed the plan of shedding enough blood to bring about European intervention.
  • Armenian terrorist organizations waged violence not only against Ottoman Muslims but also against Armenians who did not cooperate with them.
  • Armenian voluntary bands engaged in brutal massacres against the Muslim population in the occupied areas; ethnically cleansed the Muslim population regardless of gender and age, plundered and destroyed the villages. These actions are systematic.
According to Bolhovitinov’s report, Armenian voluntary bands who joined the Russian forces during World War I wreaked havoc on the civilian population of Anatolia. The report includes photographs of the notorious Armenian “Kazar” and “Sepuh” bands, which, according to Bolhovitinov, not even the Russians were able keep under control.
 
Among many documents in foreign archives which are often ignored or concealed, a document in Russia’s official archives shows Armenians carried out mass killings in 1915. The 65 page report was written by Russian Brigadier General Leonid Bolkhovinitov, who was stationed in the Caucasus front, and dispatched to the Russian military headquarters on December 11, 1915 and titled “The Real Situation.”

It constitutes a follow-up to a report submitted to the Russian Tsar by Armenians on “The Activities of the Armenian Voluntary Bands in the Caucasus.” Bolkhovinitov says in his report that “Armenian voluntary units had started violent slaughters against the Muslim people with racist motives,” and that Armenian reports given to the Russians did not reflect the actual situation in the region. The Russian official states in his report that “We shall not believe in the death tolls that the Armenians give. The number of missing people has been constantly exaggerated in the memos distributed by the Dashnak party and there is no doubt that they are politically-motivated.”

Bolkhovinitov’s report also underlines that the history of the events which he dubs the “Armenian Problem” go back to 1890. Some of the important findings Bolkhovinitov lists in his report are:

  • European diplomats imposed the ideas of an “Independent Armenia” on the Armenians. Armenian intellectuals in spreading seditious ideology among Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and designed the plan of shedding enough blood to bring about European intervention.
  • Armenian terrorist organizations waged violence not only against Ottoman Muslims but also against Armenians who did not cooperate with them.
  • Armenian voluntary bands engaged in brutal massacres against the Muslim population in the occupied areas; ethnically cleansed the Muslim population regardless of gender and age, plundered and destroyed the villages. These actions are systematic.
According to Bolhovitinov’s report, Armenian voluntary bands who joined the Russian forces during World War I wreaked havoc on the civilian population of Anatolia. The report includes photographs of the notorious Armenian “Kazar” and “Sepuh” bands, which, according to Bolhovitinov, not even the Russians were able keep under control.
I don't know why materials like this aren't more widely available. Please post a link.
 
I don't know why materials like this aren't more widely available. Please post a link.
This is an excerpt from a letter to the us house of representatives which was signed by at least 20 historians/scholars. I am sure it will answer your question regarding materials. Also the link to this letter and other information is at the bottom of the post. It seems that we will not agree and I have alot of work to do but it was a pleasure debating during my breaks.

ATTENTION
MEMBERS OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
(May 19, 1985)


"Statesmen and politicians make history, and scholars write it. For this process to work scholars must be given access to the written records of the statesmen and politicians of the past. To date, the relevant archives in the Soviet Union, Syria, Bulgaria and Turkey all remain, for the most part, closed to dispassionate historians. Until they become available, the history of the Ottoman Empire in the period encompassed by H.J. Res. 192 (1915-1923) cannot be adequately known."

A Fabricated Genocide | A half truth is a whole lie…
 
I define genocide as the systematic, deliberate killing of large number of people of a particular ethnic group, simply for being members of that group.

Turks dead in battle don't qualify as victims of genocide. As far as I know, the question in the Armenian case is about the "systematic" and "deliberate" parts - who gave what orders, etc. There doesn't appear to be a question that Ottoman leaders shamelessly endorsed the results.

As for info on Turkish civilian Muslim casualties, of WWI, I've not seen any.
and you have the proof that such systematic and delliberate acts were carried out? if you had it, the west would have confronted Turkey with such rock solid proof already. Turkish govt already stated that it will accept the outcome of a common/neutral research, so what are the west and armenia waiting for then? if they are not willing, then they should drop this 'repeat a lie 100 times and people will believe it' tactic.
No govt will send only a portion of the Armenians to Syria while wasting time, resources and manpower for such a task at a critical time. if there was a genocidal intention towards Armenians, Turks would have killed them on the spot. it was not as if those Armenians were sent to camps, like the jews were, to die there anyway. your accusations are based on speculations and half true arguments. if you want to be taken serious, read more about this matter, beause you just admitted that you didnt see any Turkish casualties, that says enough about you
 
@Kaan, what exactly are you trying to prove? Help me out here.

and you have the proof that such systematic and delliberate acts were carried out?
It's thought that the most definitive proof remains in Turkish government archives. The letter Kaan quoted is incomplete; let me reproduce it in full:

The undersigned American academicians who specialize in Turkish, Ottoman and Middle Eastern Studies are concerned that the current language embodied in House Joint Resolution 192 is misleading and/or inaccurate in several respects.

Specifically, while fully supporting the concept of a "National Day of Remembrance of Man's Inhumanity to Man," we respectfully take exception to that portion of the text which singles out for special recognition:

". . . the one and one half million people of Armenian ancestry who were victims of genocide perpetrated in Turkey between 1915 and 1923 . . .."

Our reservations focus on the use of the words "Turkey" and "genocide" and may be summarized as follows:

From the fourteenth century until 1922, the area currently known as Turkey, or more correctly, the Republic of Turkey, was part of the territory encompassing the multi-national, multi-religious state known as the Ottoman Empire. It is wrong to equate the Ottoman Empire with the Republic of Turkey in the same way that it is wrong to equate the Hapsburg Empire with the Republic of Austria. The Ottoman Empire, which was brought to an end in 1922, by the successful conclusion of the Turkish Revolution which established the present day Republic of Turkey in 1923, incorporated lands and people which today account for more than twenty-five distinct countries in Southeastern Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, only one of which is the Republic of Turkey. The Republic of Turkey bears no responsibility for any events which occurred in Ottoman times, yet by naming 'Turkey' in the Resolution, its authors have implicitly labeled it as guilty of "genocide" it charges transpired between 1915 and 1923;

As for the charge of "genocide" no signatory of this statement wishes to minimize the scope of Armenian suffering. We are likewise cognizant that it cannot be viewed as separate from the suffering experienced by the Muslim inhabitants of the region. The weight of evidence so far uncovered points in the direct of serious inter communal warfare (perpetrated by Muslim and Christian irregular forces), complicated by disease, famine, suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. Indeed, throughout the years in question, the region was the scene of more or less continuous warfare, not unlike the tragedy which has gone on in Lebanon for the past decade. The resulting death toll among both Muslim and Christian communities of the region was immense. But much more remains to be discovered before historians will be able to sort out precisely responsibility between warring and innocent, and to identify the causes for the events which resulted in the death or removal of large numbers of the eastern Anatolian population, Christian and Muslim alike.

Statesmen and politicians make history, and scholars write it. For this process to work scholars must be given access to the written records of the statesmen and politicians of the past. To date, the relevant archives in the Soviet Union, Syria, Bulgaria and Turkey all remain, for the most part, closed to dispassionate historians. Until they become available, the history of the Ottoman Empire in the period encompassed by H.J. Res. 192 (1915-1923) cannot be adequately known.

We believe that the proper position for the United States Congress to take on this and related issues is to encourage full and open access to all historical archives and not to make charges on historical events before they are fully understood. Such charges as those contained H.J. Res. 192 would inevitably reflect unjustly upon the people of Turkey and perhaps set back progress irreparably. Historians are just now beginning to achieve in understanding these tragic events.

As the above comments illustrate, the history of the Ottoman-Armenians is much debated among scholars, many of whom do not agree with the historical assumptions embodied in the wording of H.J. Res. 192. By passing the resolution Congress will be attempting to determine by legislation which side of the historical question is correct. Such a resolution, based on historically questionable assumptions, can only damage the cause of honest historical inquiry, and damage the credibility of the American legislative process.

That's the end of the letter, save for the list of signatories, many of whom were on the Turkish government's payroll. Note the emphasis of the letter is perhaps less to deny that Turks committed genocide, but to absolve the current regime and beg for the Turkish government's records to be opened. A discussion of the ethics of their denial and a review of these murderous affairs can be found here. Kaan, I imagine you'll probably want to pay attention to page twelve and ask yourself the reasons for your denial and see which apply to you.
 
@Kaan, what exactly are you trying to prove? Help me out here.

It's thought that the most definitive proof remains in Turkish government archives. The letter Kaan quoted is incomplete; let me reproduce it in full:
The undersigned American academicians who specialize in Turkish, Ottoman and Middle Eastern Studies are concerned that the current language embodied in House Joint Resolution 192 is misleading and/or inaccurate in several respects.

Specifically, while fully supporting the concept of a "National Day of Remembrance of Man's Inhumanity to Man," we respectfully take exception to that portion of the text which singles out for special recognition:

". . . the one and one half million people of Armenian ancestry who were victims of genocide perpetrated in Turkey between 1915 and 1923 . . .."

Our reservations focus on the use of the words "Turkey" and "genocide" and may be summarized as follows:

From the fourteenth century until 1922, the area currently known as Turkey, or more correctly, the Republic of Turkey, was part of the territory encompassing the multi-national, multi-religious state known as the Ottoman Empire. It is wrong to equate the Ottoman Empire with the Republic of Turkey in the same way that it is wrong to equate the Hapsburg Empire with the Republic of Austria. The Ottoman Empire, which was brought to an end in 1922, by the successful conclusion of the Turkish Revolution which established the present day Republic of Turkey in 1923, incorporated lands and people which today account for more than twenty-five distinct countries in Southeastern Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, only one of which is the Republic of Turkey. The Republic of Turkey bears no responsibility for any events which occurred in Ottoman times, yet by naming 'Turkey' in the Resolution, its authors have implicitly labeled it as guilty of "genocide" it charges transpired between 1915 and 1923;

As for the charge of "genocide" no signatory of this statement wishes to minimize the scope of Armenian suffering. We are likewise cognizant that it cannot be viewed as separate from the suffering experienced by the Muslim inhabitants of the region. The weight of evidence so far uncovered points in the direct of serious inter communal warfare (perpetrated by Muslim and Christian irregular forces), complicated by disease, famine, suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. Indeed, throughout the years in question, the region was the scene of more or less continuous warfare, not unlike the tragedy which has gone on in Lebanon for the past decade. The resulting death toll among both Muslim and Christian communities of the region was immense. But much more remains to be discovered before historians will be able to sort out precisely responsibility between warring and innocent, and to identify the causes for the events which resulted in the death or removal of large numbers of the eastern Anatolian population, Christian and Muslim alike.

Statesmen and politicians make history, and scholars write it. For this process to work scholars must be given access to the written records of the statesmen and politicians of the past. To date, the relevant archives in the Soviet Union, Syria, Bulgaria and Turkey all remain, for the most part, closed to dispassionate historians. Until they become available, the history of the Ottoman Empire in the period encompassed by H.J. Res. 192 (1915-1923) cannot be adequately known.

We believe that the proper position for the United States Congress to take on this and related issues is to encourage full and open access to all historical archives and not to make charges on historical events before they are fully understood. Such charges as those contained H.J. Res. 192 would inevitably reflect unjustly upon the people of Turkey and perhaps set back progress irreparably. Historians are just now beginning to achieve in understanding these tragic events.

As the above comments illustrate, the history of the Ottoman-Armenians is much debated among scholars, many of whom do not agree with the historical assumptions embodied in the wording of H.J. Res. 192. By passing the resolution Congress will be attempting to determine by legislation which side of the historical question is correct. Such a resolution, based on historically questionable assumptions, can only damage the cause of honest historical inquiry, and damage the credibility of the American legislative process.

That's the end of the letter, save for the list of signatories, many of whom were on the Turkish government's payroll. Note the emphasis of the letter is perhaps less to deny that Turks committed genocide, but to absolve the current regime and beg for the Turkish government's records to be opened. A discussion of the ethics of their denial and a review of these murderous affairs can be found here. Kaan, I imagine you'll probably want to pay attention to page twelve and ask yourself the reasons for your denial and see which apply to you.
The article itself also admits that there were casualties among both sides. It makes more sense that there was a civil war (combined with diseases and famine) going on between the population in the east of the Ottoman empire. Govt had insufficient control over the situation.
Anyway, why don't we see a common research? It makes more sense when the Turkish govt invites (as it did since a few years ago) Armenia and 3rd parties to open up their archives. Turkey also stated it will accept the outcome of such research, yet we don't see Armenia willing to accept such a research, as if it's happy with the way this matter is already going, which is positive for armenia, not so for Turkey.
There are more logical arguments that there cannot be genocide than there is proof and honesty from Armenian side to proof it.
 
The article itself also admits that there were casualties among both sides. It makes more sense that there was a civil war (combined with diseases and famine) going on between the population in the east of the Ottoman empire. Govt had insufficient control over the situation.
There was no civil war. Kaan's evidence doesn't hang together, for it doesn't fit the timeline. Through the end of September, 1915, there doesn't appear to be significant resistance to the acts of Ottoman authorities. There was war between Turkish and Russian forces, some Armenians fought under Russia's flag. The Ottomans simply decided to eliminate the "backstabbing" Armenian civilians - that is, every Armenian they could - and the policy was visible to neutral observers by the end of summer, 1915.

Anyway, why don't we see a common research? It makes more sense when the Turkish govt invites (as it did since a few years ago) Armenia and 3rd parties to open up their archives. Turkey also stated it will accept the outcome of such research, yet we don't see Armenia willing to accept such a research, as if it's happy with the way this matter is already going, which is positive for armenia, not so for Turkey.
The Armenians, having been mostly wiped out and much of their territory re-settled by Turks and Kurds, and the survivors under the aegis of the Soviets for seventy years, are unlikely to have much in their archives. I imagine what there was is in Moscow and the Russians won't release it unless they see it is their advantage to do so - and right now, Russia wants good relations with Turkey, while it swallows up territory elsewhere.

There are more logical arguments that there cannot be genocide -
So if you kill somebody and there's no record the killing never happened? How "logical" is that?
 
There was no civil war. Kaan's evidence doesn't hang together, for it doesn't fit the timeline. Through the end of September, 1915, there doesn't appear to be significant resistance to the acts of Ottoman authorities. There was war between Turkish and Russian forces, some Armenians fought under Russia's flag. The Ottomans simply decided to eliminate the "backstabbing" Armenian civilians - that is, every Armenian they could - and the policy was visible to neutral observers by the end of summer, 1915.

The Armenians, having been mostly wiped out and much of their territory re-settled by Turks and Kurds, and the survivors under the aegis of the Soviets for seventy years, are unlikely to have much in their archives. I imagine what there was is in Moscow and the Russians won't release it unless they see it is their advantage to do so - and right now, Russia wants good relations with Turkey, while it swallows up territory elsewhere.

So if you kill somebody and there's no record the killing never happened? How "logical" is that?
we can talk as much as we want about it. we are not gonna convince each other.
tell me this; if you are so sure there is sufficient evidence, then why dont the Armenian and European authorities, who obviously have more access to info than you and me, confront the Turkish govt, that also has more access to archives than you and me?
Turkey repeatedly called for a common research, one that will involve historians and researchers (not politicians), why dont the west and Armenia confront Turkey then if they have proof? Give Turkey what it's itching for and make us shut up then. Erdogan already stated that Turkey will accept any outcome. Have I ever seen Armenia taking such a straightforward and open approach towards Turkey? no. why? i leave that up to you.

As long as the Armenians dont want to put a challenge to Turkey's invitation and archives, then why should i, who also has no access to such archives, waste my time here with someone who has even less access to archives and whatnot than the Armenians.
 
I think the concept of nationality is having 2 sides. One is that in which people of all the communities are equal before law dwelling side by side in peace and harmony respecting each other and the another aspect is this when people divide themselves in the name of religion, sects, ethnic groups, minorities etc which is like separating themselves from the rest.
 
...if you are so sure there is sufficient evidence, then why dont the Armenian and European authorities, who obviously have more access to info than you and me, confront the Turkish govt, that also has more access to archives than you and me?
I don't think it's a question of whether the authorities in Armenia or Europe have better access to info than you or I. As for why they don't "confront the Turkish govt", some of them, like the French, already have. What do you think jailing a historian on the Turkish government payroll for denying the Armenian holocaust was all about?

Turkey repeatedly called for a common research, one that will involve historians and researchers (not politicians), why dont the west and Armenia confront Turkey then if they have proof?
What more "proof" do you want?

Give Turkey what it's itching for and make us shut up then. Erdogan already stated that Turkey will accept any outcome.
I'm not sure what you mean. There were no photographs; diplomats state clearly that the Turks did not permit them. I don't see why Turks need wait for the Armenians to open their archives before opening their own. The U.S. doesn't wait for other nations to open their archives before declassifying, collating, and releasing much of its own. That's what makes Foreign Relations of the United States such a valuable resource, not just for Americans but for researchers world-wide.

why should i, who also has no access to such archives, waste my time here with someone who has even less access to archives and whatnot than the Armenians.
I suppose you should just accept that the Armenian holocaust happened, then.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom