|
Heresson
|
 |
of frogs
Jun 2000
time: 06:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ancyrean
What I meant was government forces to provide necessary security for the relocees. Kurdish tribes were more often than not themselves were raiding the relocees, killing and stealing taking advantage of the absence of authority.
|
If Turkish forces had enough strenght to force relocation on Armenians ( I doubt they left freewillingly), they should have neough forces to prevent attacks on them.
Also, if they weren't able to protect them, they shouldn't have attempted the relocation at all.
If we take the Turkish number of Armenian citizens for western Armenia (0,6mln), and the Turkish number of Armenians dead during relocation - 0,3mln, we get a half. Perhaps this number is supposed to be referred to the overall Armenian population of the Empire, but why would the rest be affected by resettlements? I'm not that into the subject, but I guess they were. Why? Were they planning an ethnical cleansings in Izmir, Sivas, Ankara as well?
I think both numbers are underestimations. I find it silly that Ottoman census, the way I found it in the net, claims there were more Armenians by % in Izmir region than in any of six vilayets but Bitlis, though in Izmir they were imigrants, and in six vilayets there were autochtones; bah, according to the census, Armenian population in vilayets of original Armenia was comparable to Armenian population in Halab vilayet in northern Syria...
I find it fishy, especially that these regions were next to the regions in which Armenians maintained a majority.
quote:
It is not as doubtful about weapons. Ottomans managed to intercept some of the many shipments through the border. But the border itself was not watertight and the Armenian activists had a good chain of supporters to accumulate arms over an extended period of time.
|
Still I find it doubtful. If they were a small minority, would they be able to hide their plans from their neighbours? Was Turkish rule so impotent it could just intercept a small number of arm transport?
And again, even if so, it is a sign Armenians counted on uprising, it doesn't mean they wanted to cleanse other citizens of thse lands.
And again, I doubt a 1/5 minority can think of successful uprising (and ethnical cleansing), no matter how much weapons does it have, if it is confronted with a large state as Turkey
quote:
As to Van, at what time was the siege of Van by Turkish forces? Can you remind me the date?
|
april, may of 1915
quote:
I was specifically mentioning folk memory, word of mouth from father to son to grandson, not state propganda as you ascribe to it.
|
You can manipulate "folk memory" the same easily as anything else. Especially that this folk watched actions against Armenians, and perhaps participated in them partially.
quote:
Well what diverges our emphasis is that my point is the Turkish army was not next to it but away at the front.
|
It's not late Roman limitanei system.
And to deal with Armenians, especially if they were so good prepared and well - armed as You say, and to deport them, Turks had to use army.
quote:
Zealwise, I would say Turks are in general more reactive, and not always as tenacious and successful on this issue.
|
Turks don't have to be tenacious. They have almost everything they wanted. It'd be comfortable for them to just end the discussion, while for Armenians, it's the other way round.
quote:
Armenians are almost without exception hard-working, talented and intelligent people and they always contribute to the societies in which they live if they live abroad, and this gives them a tremendous edge in addition to the initiative advantage they have in making a case for their perspective.
|
On the other hand, Turkey is way way way more important country than Armenia is. It's also been independant for last decades, while Armenia was not quite this way. Turkish emigration also gives similar advantages in Tureky's hands. Turkey had the same, if not better, possibilities of presenting its version.
|
28-09-2004 21:22
|
|