Armenian genocide

[Jeppan]

My turkish friend and I have recently discussed wether or not the events that took place in eastern Turkey during WW1 was actually a genocide. He is violently defending the turkish standpoint that it was merely a tragedy and part of wartime deaths, nothing planned as such. I myself is not as involved of course but from my classes in history I have understood it as a genocide. After re-reading the book we mainly used at Uni it briefly mentions the event and calls it a genocide.

Could anyone, with an interest and some knowledge enlighten me about the issue. The web is quite unreliable I find as it is still a very hot topic it seems, even if it took place over a hundred years ago.

On a side note we have drifted into a discussion of what a genocide is and it is a bit tricky to understand wether one event is in fact a genocide or not.

[Rusty]

It's not remotely tricky to define genocide. It was genocide. End of argument. Next.

[Jeppan]

It's not remotely tricky to define genocide. It was genocide. End of argument. Next.

Please elaborate. Give me ammunition!

[Rusty]

Will do; tomorrow, when sober.

[mxlm]

Your friend is suffering from the disease known as nationalism.

It was genocide.

[NickD]

Or, as Darwin would put it, survival of the fittest!

[ç i p h é r]

A nationalist, a fool, an ignoramus, or a liar. Pick one.

I would direct your attention first to the statements by Henry Morgenthau, U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire (1913-16) in the "Statements On Record". It'll give you a good pretext by which to judge the testimony on record of the genocide survivors:
http://www.armenian-genocide.org/research.html

Peter Jennings on The Armenian Genocide - a quick overview
http://youtube.com/watch?v=u8Ab31aXsYo

The Forgotten Genocide - a more comprehensive site containing testimonials by survivors, photographs of the starvation and deportation, and more:
http://theforgotten.org

And if you're an American appalled by the complicity of the United States government in the Turkish denial of the genocide, visit the link below.
http://anca.org/

[Joos]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_genocide
See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_ ... n_Genocide

I found this section particularly intersting.

Outlawing
Some countries, including Argentina, Switzerland and Uruguay have adopted laws that punish genocide denial. In October 2006, France passed a bill which if approved by the Senate and president, will make Armenian Genocide denial a crime.

The first person convicted by a court of law for denying the Armenian genocide is Turkish politician Doğu Perinçek, found guilty by a Swiss district court in Lausanne in March 2007. Perinçek appealed the verdict. Ferai Tinç, a foreign affairs columnist with Turkey's Hurriyet newspaper, added, "we find these type of [penal] articles against freedom of opinion dangerous because we are struggling in our country to achieve freedom of thought."[28] After the court's decision, Perinçek said, "I defend my right to freedom of expression."

[Jeppan]

A nationalist, a fool, an ignoramus, or a liar. Pick one.

I would direct your attention first to the statements by Henry Morgenthau, U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire (1913-16) in the "Statements On Record". It'll give you a good pretext by which to judge the testimony on record of the genocide survivors:
http://www.armenian-genocide.org/research.html

Peter Jennings on The Armenian Genocide - a quick overview
http://youtube.com/watch?v=u8Ab31aXsYo

The Forgotten Genocide - a more comprehensive site containing testimonials by survivors, photographs of the starvation and deportation, and more:
http://theforgotten.org

And if you're an American appalled by the complicity of the United States government in the Turkish denial of the genocide, visit the link below.
http://anca.org/

Peter Jennings I have no idea about but the rest of the sources are all Armenian, hence they can questioned for strong bias. As said in the first post it is not a problem of finding stuff on the web, i had browsed two of the sites here before, it is a lack of unbiased sources as I see it for a proper debate.

Joos: Wikipedia is not a good source unfortunatly

[Jeppan]

Your friend is suffering from the disease known as nationalism.

It was genocide.

Elaborate with sources please. I agree that it seems he would be blinded by nationalist delusions but that does not fly as an argument.

[Stormseeker]

And if you're an American appalled by the complicity of the United States government in the Turkish denial of the genocide

Now this was uncalled for. I didn't find where the goverment denied anything..infact the presidents give a little speech every year to remember it. I even read that bill and they need to spell out exactly what they want....it is a little vague.

[Nyarlathotep]

I'm not really that familiar with the site itself so I can't say anything as to its accuracy as to pertaining to anything else, but it does provide the direct writings of Raphael Lemkin who more or less is the man who developed the idea and concept of genocide. Since he developed his ideas based mostly upon the Holocaust and the Armenian massacres its pretty safe to argue that the Armenian situation would qualify.

Of course the definition that the UN finally settled on was not quite as all encomposing as Lemkin and others first envisioned (for obvious reasons the USSR made sure that large scale killings for social or political reasons were excluded) it should still cover the Armenian killings.


http://www.preventgenocide.org/lemkin/

[ç i p h é r]

Stormseeker:

But it's true. The United States is NOT among the nations that acknowledges the atrocities perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire on the Armenian people as genocide. In fact, the Bush administration has even appointed as ambassador to Armenia a man who as well does not acknowledge those crimes as genocide. If you don't think our position on this is appalling, how would you characterize it? For perspective, imagine if we appointed a man who denied the Jewish Holocaust as ambassador to Israel......

Jeppan:

You mean you don't trust the material published on these websites as being factual? Nobody disputes the fact that these atrocities took place. Not even the Turks. The question of genocide is really splitting hairs, I think. The Turks are simply trying to persuade everyone that killing a million people was somehow not a systematic effort to destroy them. To believe that, you would have to believe that the deaths of hundreds of thousands of ethnic Armenians within the Ottoman Empire was a confluence of random acts.

Even if that were true, as impossible as it is to believe, it does not excuse them of culpability, which is what I think they are ultimately after here by denying it as genocide. It wasn't like they killed men with guns. They killed men, women, and children of all ages. Were all these people soldiers or mixed up in a plot to revolt against the Ottoman Empire? It's a laughable defense and I have to think the only reason the US takes the position that it does on this issue is because of our strategic interests in that part of the region.

p.s. The fact that your University text book called it a genocide as well speaks, I think, to the general belief among 3rd party Western observers at the time (European and American) that a genocide (or something of that nature at least) was taking place within the Ottoman Empire.

p.p.s. You may already be doing this, but use the information on those sites, in particular names and statements of notable individuals, and try to cross reference with other sources to confirm their accuracy. You may have to actually visit the library and look at historical text books.

[Jeppan]

Jeppan:

You mean you don't trust the material published on these websites as being factual? Nobody disputes the fact that these atrocities took place. Not even the Turks. The question of genocide is really splitting hairs, I think. The Turks are simply trying to persuade everyone that killing a million people was somehow not a systematic effort to destroy them. To believe that, you would have to believe that the deaths of hundreds of thousands of ethnic Armenians within the Ottoman Empire was a confluence of random acts.

Even if that were true, as impossible as it is to believe, it does not excuse them of culpability, which is what I think they are ultimately after here by denying it as genocide. It wasn't like they killed men with guns. They killed men, women, and children of all ages. Were all these people soldiers or mixed up in a plot to revolt against the Ottoman Empire? It's a laughable defense and I have to think the only reason the US takes the position that it does on this issue is because of our strategic interests in that part of the region.

p.s. The fact that your University text book called it a genocide as well speaks, I think, to the general belief among 3rd party Western observers at the time (European and American) that a genocide (or something of that nature at least) was taking place within the Ottoman Empire.

p.p.s. You may already be doing this, but use the information on those sites, in particular names and statements of notable individuals, and try to cross reference with other sources to confirm their accuracy. You may have to actually visit the library and look at historical text books.

Please don´t misunderstand me, it is not that I do not hold the sites as non-credible nor that the information on them is bogus. I am merely looking for non-armenian and non-turkish sites discussing the event.

I am also looking in my books and at the library but so far I have no luck, except on the general level already provided in my Uni textbook (McKay, A History of World Societies).

In my mind, given the information I have so far, it was a genocide. The question is why many countries doubt in recognizing it even a hundred years after and why the Turks so violently defend the actions taken. It is very interesting and I am guessing, political bullshit aside (which is of course a huge factor), that some parts of the materials are ambigous. It would also be very interesting to know how far up the chain of command the decision to deport the armenians went.

The discussion came up when we talked about Turkey entering the EU, to which i said it would be a pity if this debate over the genocide would topple the efforts (which is one of the factors as of now).

[Stormseeker]

But it's true. Sad The United States is NOT among the nations that acknowledges the atrocities perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire on the Armenian people as genocide

Hmm i think we are splitting hairs here. Presidents for the past twenty years have talked about it....but what they don't put forth a usa resolution admitting it on paper they are denying it? Especially since the way it is worded could lead to lawsuits braught against turkey itself...when the ones who commited the crimes are dead.

Put it our history books sure, but don't waste my tax dollars on trying to get a presidental paper saying my country acknowledge something that happen a 100 years ago. Especially since they are not saying it did not accorue.