 |
| |
|
|
Ancyrean
|
|
Back to Ankara, Turkey
Feb 2003
time: 12:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Palaiologos
And dudes there can be no smoke without a fire. Why isn't anything heard by the genocides conducted by lets say Lithuania, China or whoever.
We mostly hear about the Turks. Greek and Armenian propaganda can't just have invented all these things.
The reason why the Turks are considered barbarians and evil its simply because they DID CONDUCT genocides at an unprecedented rate. |
If I may attempt to shoot down your analogy, imagine somebody who doesnt like you accuses you of stealing something from her. You can't solve the issue. You go to court and tell the judge about your case. You say there's no evidence to support such an accusation about you. The girl says 'there's no smoke without fire'. Judge agrees with her, eh?
If I may attempt to answer the substance of your post, we mostly hear about the Turks because the wars of independence against Turks were almost always extremely bitter. Sure, those struggles were bloody, Ottomans hit back hard, many thousands died. The difficulty of the task of getting independence was so much within a background of centuries of foreign rule, emerging senses of nationality in the Balkans developed an unheathier dose of comparing the good 'us' against the evil 'them', 'civilised' us vs barbaric 'them', divine 'us' vs 'ungodly' them, 'compassionate' us and 'savage' them. 'Them' more often than not applies to everybody else, not only Turks, but as the hated former heathen rulers, they receive the brunt of the negative construction.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by paiktis22
Here's but a little expert from one of your compatriotes, Stokes' Europe I bothered to find on the net in an instant of exceptional boredom. It propably won't be reapated very often.
Ottoman forces would raid Christian villages, and kidnap boys, who were then brought to Constantinople as slave-soldiers, and forcibly converted to Islam.
A typical example of Ottoman Muslim contempt for Christians is supplied by a consideration of the burial-permit issued by a qadi (Muslim official) in 1855 for a deceased Christian: 'We certify to the priest of the church of Mary, that the impure, putrefied, stinking carcass of Saideh, damned this day, may be concealed underground.' [11] Undoubtedly, Muslims would regard such sentiments made in regard to a Muslim corpse to be bigoted and insensitive; they should not be surprised that Christians would react similarly, and find it difficult to credit that the Khilafah was indeed a Utopian regime.
|
As to the first part, four other people in this thread have dealt with the devsirme levy at length and in better detail than you. Do keep up.
As to the second part- if you're going to use an internet source, it is at the very least good manners to post the address of that source.
If you're going to quote a book, then provide the title of the book and the full name of the author, unless they're particularly well-known.
We have no context for your burial quote, we don't know the circumstances of the death, or where it took place, or why- if you're trying to imply a general state of affairs from the action of one cadi, then I suggest you're going to need more than one isolated incident mentioned out of any context.
I'm sorry that you find finding sources and quotes and facts boring, but if you're going to present an argument, or do anything other than make bald assertions, you will have to back up your more preposterous statements with evidence.
For the record, the author's name is Gale Stokes, and the internet source you were quoting is:
http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/xstnc-6.html#11
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ancyrean
|
|
Back to Ankara, Turkey
Feb 2003
time: 12:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Palaiologos
Ancyrean dude the Greek army in Asia minor did commit atrocities. And propably the Armenians gathered up in mobs and killed turks in the villages of the Caucasus by the dozens.
So what?. This was not a matter of state policy. The Greek goverment or the Armenian leadership didn't order their men to anihilate all the Turks they saw.
The fact that Greek officers and Armenians commited murders was due to their own accord.
Sadly your "great" Kemal ORDERED mass genocide.It was the Turkish state's POLICY. |
State policy, by definiton, is formed through the decision making mechanisms of the state, and becomes state policy when orders to turn the decision into action are issued to the executive and administrative organs of the state.
Unfortunately for your assertion above, there happens to be no evidence, not even a single document ordering, mentioning or implying genocide towards any ethnic group within the Empire. With regard to the so-called "Armenian genocide", such evidence is conspicously absent from the Ottoman Archives, which by the virtue of its sheer compehensiveness, continuity and meticulousness made any 100% evidence destruction attempt nigh-on-impossible. We are talking about a so-called undertaking involving the details of the eradication of a race from the face of earth, to help grasp the complexity of such an attempt.
In other words, Ottomans were obsessive book and record keepers. Ottoman bureaucracy was immensely deep-rooted and had inticate and precise procedures. An enterprise on the order of genocide is unthinkable to have been contemplated, organised and executed without any mention of it anywhere in that vast archive (open to the scrutiny of foreign scholars).
For your information, the Allied Powers after the occupation of Istanbul, acting from similar impulses, arrested high level Ottoman officials pending full inquiry into the issue of "genocide" by Ottomans. They had full access to the Ottoman archives. Not only did they failed to find a single document remotely relatable to the claim, but also they failed to prove any destruction of evidence. They therefore had to acquit those officials.
The same absence of evidence is also valid for your implication about Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who took over intact the whole state structure in Anatolia from the Ottoman Government in Istanbul.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VetLegion
|
|
Nazis is a great example how you can not destroy the evidence of such a large scale operation. They virtually destroyed tons of stuff yet tons more were left - enough to convict them without doubt.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ancyrean
|
|
Back to Ankara, Turkey
Feb 2003
time: 12:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by VetLegion
Nazis is a great example how you can not destroy the evidence of such a large scale operation. They virtually destroyed tons of stuff yet tons more were left - enough to convict them without doubt. |
Exactly. In a bureaucracy like that of the Ottomans, it would be impossible to destroy every single bit of 'evidence'.
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Knevil
Just extemporising here, so don't take it that I believe what I'm saying!
Germany was way more ****ed than Turkey, and was effectively overrun, wheras the Govt in Istanbul remained largely intact after the cease-fire. Being overrun and having a collapse of central authority stopped many records being incinerated?
Germany had an even more complex bureaucracy than Turkey- this was a consequence of Nazi policy. So even though they tried to keep the horrors off the books, some evidence managed to seep in.
The Jewish Holocaust was more visible? I.e in larger population centres, observed by a more literate population?
|
Good point. So can your basic line here be summarised as "we can't be sure they managed somehow to destroy all evidence, can we"? If so, I still would stand by my assertion that 100% destruction of evidence for an act of such scale would be impossible. There would still be something around that hints, implies or mentions about it in passing or in reference.
Actually, over the years, I read quite a bit on both side's views, and the Armenian side of the arguement seems more to concentrate on highlighting the human suffering than to ponder on the absence of documental evidence for the intentions of the government. I get the impression that the intention for genocide on the part of Ottomans is taken for granted as if by default of their inherent evilness. A grand Ottoman conspiracy to destroy documents is not a central theme even in their side of the arguement.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Yep. The black dog of fate (u can find it in amazon) contains many official, prototype documents by the turkish state which are rather breathtaking in their accuracy for eliminating the armenians. Main inspiration was the german "pronazi" idealism.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
It has a nice autobiographical story about that armenian kid growing up in the US so it's not all blood and gore dont worry. The official documents are in the last part of the book.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ancyrean
Well, we are not discussing here if the idea of taking a kid from his family is an adorable act. |
Ah very good. A breathrough, a cautious one but a breathrough nevertheless 
quote:
That's why any approach of "Turks snatched babies from mothers! People built roads in the mountains to escape this! This is such a horrible act to endure! So admit that the Turks are the top barbarians of all time!" is not an arguement at all, both in substance and in letter. |
It was a reality. I never said "the turks are barbarians". I simply pointed out what the reality was.
quote:
I more have the impression that you might be defending your points from conviction standing on years of exposure to folk tales (babies snatched -paidomazoma-, Janissaries were rapists and wanton killers, Christians lived a life of "daily horror" etc)  |
The only onces who try to deny that are some romantic modern Turkish literature and their followers. I don't think they render humanity any service at all 
quote:
As for admitting each other's atrocities, you probably would agree with me that nobody has a monopoly on pain and suffering. Armenians died in the hundreds of thousands but they do not admit they killed as much Turks on their quest to create a country for themselves. They choose to make sense of their suffering by putting it in a context of a grand conspiracy to kill them off. My grandfather is from the city of Van. You really wouldnt want to know the collective memory of those years about Armenians there. Why would we admit we are as evil as Nazis, when the other guys don't even bother to admit they killed a single Turk (figuratively) back then. |
Well for my part, I'm perfectly ready to admit any attrocities committed by the Greeks in the war of independence. Readily and courageously.
quote:
What about the exploits of the Greek army in "Asia Minor"? Do you think they just threw around flowers as they conquered territory? I was in Greece for three years but I never heard anybody talk about it. It was an army of saints. Come on... |
Of course they were not.
quote:
I usually wouldnt prefer to come this close to rubbing sensitivities. I have many Greek friends, and I have the good fortune to have talked about these things with them with no ill will. Instead, what I'm saying is, we should stop trying to mortgage our future peace on the forceful acceptance of our version of history by the other. Nobody, including you, will pay for peace in such a currency. Please think about this (I mean not only you, of course, I mean people who might be thinking along similar lines with you) next time a rush of indignation against any country in the Balkans comes over.
Peace  |
here I disagree. I think it's fundamental that we accept the truth and not "Eachothers truth" but the truth in order to move forward. The same was done with Germany after WWII.
I'm not trying to play holier than thou, simply point out that denying attrocities or pointing fingers is IMHO the wrong approach.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:34
|
|
from the center for holocaust and Genocide studies
"In the spring of 1915 the Turkish government ordered the systematic deportation of the Armenian people. In fact, deportation was a thinly disguised form of extermination. Village by village, town by town, according to a precise plan, the able-bodied Armenian men were taken away and murdered. Then, the remaining people - women, children, and the elderly - were herded south in long columns, exposed to hunger and thirst, attacked by their Turkish "guards" or by roving brigands, and subjected to every form of humiliation and torture. Most suffered horrible deaths along the way or, if they survived the long march, died alone in the Syrian desert. Thus an entire nation was destroyed and the Armenian people were effectively eliminated from their homeland of nearly 3000 years."
Note - the above DOES NOT state that there was an explicit order for genocide - rather one for deportation. The deaths of women and children appear to have been haphazard. The deaths of the able bodied men appears to have been quite thorough. Whatever this is, if it was simply mob driven atrocities, or atrocities by local military officers, it was exceptional in human history in a set of spontaneous actions being so thorough. Perhaps not enough evidence for a criminal conviction in the US ("proof beyond a reasonable doubt") but certainly enough for a civil case ("preponderance of evidence")
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
from the center for holocaust and Genocide studies
"In the spring of 1915 the Turkish government ordered the systematic deportation of the Armenian people. In fact, deportation was a thinly disguised form of extermination. Village by village, town by town, according to a precise plan, the able-bodied Armenian men were taken away and murdered. Then, the remaining people - women, children, and the elderly - were herded south in long columns, exposed to hunger and thirst, attacked by their Turkish "guards" or by roving brigands, and subjected to every form of humiliation and torture. Most suffered horrible deaths along the way or, if they survived the long march, died alone in the Syrian desert. Thus an entire nation was destroyed and the Armenian people were effectively eliminated from their homeland of nearly 3000 years."
Note - the above DOES NOT state that there was an explicit order for genocide - rather one for deportation. The deaths of women and children appear to have been haphazard. The deaths of the able bodied men appears to have been quite thorough. Whatever this is, if it was simply mob driven atrocities, or atrocities by local military officers, it was exceptional in human history in a set of spontaneous actions being so thorough. Perhaps not enough evidence for a criminal conviction in the US ("proof beyond a reasonable doubt") but certainly enough for a civil case ("preponderance of evidence") |
Sloppy work on this by the center. First The Armenian where acting as 5th columist for the Imperial Russian Army an any Nation would relocrate than hosile proplate
else like we did to the Japness illegality against our Cont
in 1942.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:34
|
|
In Europe of that time it than serf got marry the lord whom he was bound to have the legal right to be the first man to have sexual intercouce with her. This is basely rape of than woman they never ask her consent. It than Apartment builting landlord try this today saying that these is than clause in the lease allowance him to have sex with your wife anytime he want to our court will strike that clause from the lease.
1% of the noble sent wife back to hushand without excice they right, 4% slep with the woman but didnot have sex with her, 95 % have sex her and about 50 % kept sleeping with her untril they got her pregeant with they child.
This idear would neverr occour to than Ott or Muslim landowner at all.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
|
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Knevil
Germany was way more ****ed than Turkey, and was effectively overrun, wheras the Govt in Istanbul remained largely intact after the cease-fire. Being overrun and having a collapse of central authority stopped many records being incinerated?
Germany had an even more complex bureaucracy than Turkey- this was a consequence of Nazi policy. So even though they tried to keep the horrors off the books, some evidence managed to seep in.
|
The difference is one of mechanisation of theprocess and 'scientific' application.
The Nazi death camps were exactly that- places set up to exterminate people. If you read the autobiography of Hoess, commandant of Auschwitz, or hear Eichmann's testimony at his trial, youcan see that the Nazi authorities tried various different methods to achieve as large and effective a kill ratio as possible- from mobile units (typically lorries or vans) in which carbon monoxide would be pumped through a hose, to deliberate starvation of Soviet prisoners, withholding adequate or preventive medical treatment (meaning that malnourished or exhausted prisoners died more easily of diseases such as typhus and dysentery) to the mass shooting by Einsatzgruppen units and eventually the Zyklon B chambers.
It was very much a process, rather than what seems to have taken place in the Armenian genocide, where Ottoman armed forces instituted a haphazard uncoordinated campaign against what were alleged to be a potential 'fifth column' of Christian communities (not just Armenians, but Assyrians too). In this they also had the help of resident Muslim communities such as the Kurds.
Similarly there are accounts of scores being settled in Russian occupied Armenia, although it is argued that the Armenians there had no choice but to go along with the Russians, and certainly when the Greeks were encouraged to break out of Izmir and 'restore' order in Anatolia (read: reduce the former Ottoman Empire to a rump state) Muslims were also massacred by Greek forces.
If we condemn one genocide, we should condemn all- one is no more 'understandable' than another.
'Well for my part, I'm perfectly ready to admit any attrocities committed by the Greeks in the war of independence. Readily and courageously.'
This is plainly disgusting and indefensible.
Well done, Fez of the Hellenes, you've reached a new low.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ancyrean
|
|
Back to Ankara, Turkey
Feb 2003
time: 12:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Knevil
However, I'm officially 'opinionless' on the Armenian massacre since I don't think I've done enough research. Any recommendations? |
I'd like to answer to this in two posts. First, a few caveats:
If you'd care to read more into the matter, you'd meet with a difference of style in Turkish and Armenian approaches to the issue.
Most of the Armenian books around (like the book paiktis quoted) aims to prove that it was 'genocide' by presenting firsthand accounts of personal sufferings, including excesses committed by Turkish offciers or troops. At the end of the story you are left with vivid descriptions of real human suffering, and as a token of your respect for that suffering you are expected to accept the strongest word in the dictionary for words of human cruelty, i.e. genocide. "If such suffering does not correspond to genocide, just to what it corresponds?" is the bottomline arguement.
The human suffering approach is very effective, because many people want to show their respects to human suffering, and after knowing about individual experiences they have no reason to risk disrespect by academical arguements like "evidence is not enough to label it genocide, maam".
But genocide has a definiton beyond mere suffering (however large), and that's where their arguement starts to fall apart.
OTOH, Turkish sources attempts to take on the basic arguementative points of the Armenian view. They aim to refute the evidence Armenains present and to show flaws in their overall arguement that it can be defined as "genocide". The term genocide has a very specific definition and requires the meeting of specific criteria. Turkish writers are more academical in their approach in this respect. Check out the links I post below
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ancyrean
|
|
Back to Ankara, Turkey
Feb 2003
time: 12:34
|
|
Idon't intend to start a 'my-link-vs-your-link' contest here but, just couldn't help quote from the first link in its section titled 'history' , which starts with this:
quote:
Thoughout much of its history, Turkey has had it's eyes on the Armenian land. Conquering Armenia was and probably still is their desire today. Geographically speaking, Armenia is the only Christian nation in that part of the world. It is surrounded in all directions by Muslim nations who would like nothing more than uniting their religious lands of muslim nations throughout the middle east stretching all the way to Europe and Asia. |
What about Georgia and Russia? Who's trying to unite what?
And what about this:
quote:
On April 24, 1915 Groups of Turkish soldiers knocked on the doors of Armenian people convincing them that the war would be faught in their lands and an evacuation was in order. They relocated these Armenian people from their land and home by promising safety from the war. They were also told that the Turkish soldiers were fighting for their safety and that they needed every weapon or household appliance that could assist them in fighting the war. The Armenians in their naïve trust in their neighbors gladly gave the soldiers all they had to offer. |
24 April is not a date on which any 'grand plan' was put into effect. If you don't believe me, check out their own chronology next to that article (the 'Genocide Event Search'). 24 April is chosen symbolically by Armenian activists to commemorate their sufferings, it's a date on which certain eminent Armenians were arrested, not one on which soldiers knocked doors and stuff.
By the way DataAeolus, did you examine the Turkish position on the issue before subscribing to the word 'genocide'?
In my experience, whenever I had to discuss this issue with anybody repeating the phrase, people who thought they was just following conventional wisdom was almost always surprised there was an arguement at all against such a politically correct sounding conclusion ('it was genocide')
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
25-03-2004 09:14
|