What's new

Biden poised to recognise Armenian genocide as Turkey left without friends

US has master the art of using everything and anything as a Political tool, whether its word Democracy , Genocide , human rights, Freedom of Speech , Free world , National security.
But American and Israeli genocide in Palestine is ok

For them and world Jews of Israel are the actual victims.

American genocide in Afghanistan

War on Terror for them.

American genocide in Iraq

War on Terror again, and stopping Saddam from getting WMDs which never exists.

American genocide in Korea

Ah wait what?

American genocide in Vietnam

It was a war and people die in war, Collateral damage ...

Nuclear genocide in Japan

Obama went to Japan and apologize, Sorry washes every sin i guess.
 
And why would Turkey end up in China's camp, when Turkey and China historically have never gotten along? They still have a number of key issues with each other.

Turkey is looking to be an independent player, not a subordinate to another nation.


Turkey can be the natural leader of the Islamic world, and decouple important Muslim nations from US or China camp....Iran never had this grand vision, else Iran is also capable of doing it....The one thing going for Turkey is that it never allowed its heartland be occupied by Western powers, while Iran also managed that except during the second World War...This one point alone gives Tirkey far more credibility than any other Muslim power
 
Turkey can be the natural leader of the Islamic world, and decouple important Muslim nations from US or China camp....Iran never had this grand vision, else Iran is also capable of doing it....The one thing going for Turkey is that it never allowed its heartland be occupied by Western powers, while Iran also managed that except during the second World War...This one point alone gives Tirkey far more credibility than any other Muslim power
Islamic world, leadership, etc. these were the paradigms of the past century. The world is changing and going in a different direction. Turkey's ideal is not to leading of anything, but to raise a fair and equally initiative/order that will balance our region. When you see people accusing Turkey with otherwise, just look their flag or which country they are talking behalf. This will tell you a lot.

A country that had to join the Atlanticists for fear of the Russian invasion and struggled for half century to get rid of this: will never ever not want only to be part of a camp. For us, Eurasians, Belters or Atlanticists all are external factors, and each of them must be balanced in our region.

Turkey will build its own factor if possible, if not, will do its utmost to prevent the formation of a single external power's hegamony.

Except countries with historically and culturally tried and proven friendship ties: we are nobody's ally. We are not eager for anyone's friendship, either. If our interests parallel, we can act together, if our interests coincide, we conflict.
 
U.S. regime definition of genocide:
Someone actively engaged in economic activities competing directly or indirectly with U.S. industries or financial institutions and threatening U.S. hegemony by merely existing as an independent entity.

Genocide comitted by Turkey:
Purchased Russian airdefense.
 
stopping Saddam from getting WMDs which never exists.

Obama went to Japan and apologize, Sorry washes every sin i guess.

Saddam already had and he used it on Iran- Iraq war and also on Kurds and later UN destroyed in 1990-92.

Japan is not innocent as it seems, what she did to Asian countries especially Chinese ?

It will give you little bit information:

 
Erdogan is pure stupid, Turkey shot down Russian jet, who was attacking ISIS,
The Russian plane were shot down because persistent border violations and refusing to respond to warnings; and the point of fell was around the Turkmen mountain which was under the control of the Bayirbucak Turkmens at that time, border of Hatay Yayladağı, not the ISIS areas. The order was not given by Erdogan, but by Air force commander at that time, and arranged by engagement rule of the prime minister of the time. Eskişehir base commander at that time, Mehmet Şamver, explained in detail that this order was given by the air force commander, and there are already records of it. Instead of consulting with the top authorities, the Air force commander applied the rules of engagement. So It was a subject he could use on his initiative and he used it.

It could not have been permissible to maneuver repeatedly in Turkish airspace to bomb Bayırbucak Turkmens. Maybe these planes would one day bomb a port in Iskenderun, Which Turkish official could take the responsibility for this?

Before that incident, a Turkish plane was shot down by Assad regime on the international airspace. Turkey was on the verge of war. You cannot even guess what size the tension was. One day after the incident, goverment made a statement that if it was known that there was a Russian plane, it would not be shot down. The Russian pilot's transponder was off and did not respond to the radio.

The government of that time had openly declared an order of engagement rule "to do what is necessary". Russia wanted to stretch it knowingly and willingly Turkey's rules of engagement. "State controlled" petroleum smuggling allegations are also based on the allegations of the Russian defense ministry during the same period.
*

Today, anyone with internet access thinks they are a middle east expert. Unfortunately.
 
Last edited:
I was just listening to Aljazeera report on this.

The President Erdogan spokesman made a lot of sense. He said back in 2005, Turkey offered a joint commission of history experts from Britain, Armenia, France and Turkey to sit togethr and sift through archives to establish genocide. He also said such antics from West calling out genocide when its not even established, makes it difficult for Turkey and Armenia to normalize relations. He said that to establish that genocide did take place, an international court order is needed which is made after thorough investigation. This in the case of Rwanda and Srebrenica, was established by international court that genocide did take place.

Armenian genocide on the other hand, is an Armenian claim supported by personal accounts of Christian missionaries working at that time in erstwhile Ottoman Empire.

Britain saw this as an opportunity to accelerate inevitable breakup of the Ottoman Empire to extend its sphere of influence in Middle East with its eyes on strategic oil reserves and with its Christian Zionist political combine working to establish a Jewish state in the region.

It was this opportunity that compelled Britain and its allies in Europe like France to use Armenian genocide as a propaganda tool against Ottomans to demonize them and portray them as villains in the eyes of their public. In those days in mid 1910s, books were written and movies were made in Britain about Armenian genocide to make public opinion favourable for subsequent actions in Middle East.

Most recent parallel is in the war against Iraq where possession of non-existent weapons of mass destruction was made into a propaganda tool. Western governments and their media lied about those weapons for good 12 years and opponents were portrayed as Saddam sympathizers. This helped in an illegal occupation and destruction of Iraq. Like declining US now, Britain was an Imperial power in decline with its short term interests driving its policies.

The problem is, since we dont learn from history, we keep repeating mistake of believing the West's narrative on everything.

The US official position comes at a time when Turkey seems to be exercising its right to pick and choose its partners and going out of sphere of American influence, at least this is how it looks to us. If US objective was to punish Turkey diplomatically to fall in line, it will have an exact opposite effect.
 
I was just listening to Aljazeera report on this.

The President Erdogan spokesman made a lot of sense. He said back in 2005, Turkey offered a joint commission of history experts from Britain, Armenia, France and Turkey to sit togethr and sift through archives to establish genocide. He also said such antics from West calling out genocide when its not even established, makes it difficult for Turkey and Armenia to normalize relations. He said that to establish that genocide did take place, an international court order is needed which is made after thorough investigation. This in the case of Rwanda and Srebrenica, was established by international court that genocide did take place.

Armenian genocide on the other hand, is an Armenian claim supported by personal accounts of Christian missionaries working at that time in erstwhile Ottoman Empire.

Britain saw this as an opportunity to accelerate inevitable breakup of the Ottoman Empire to extend its sphere of influence in Middle East with its eyes on strategic oil reserves and with its Christian Zionist political combine working to establish a Jewish state in the region.

It was this opportunity that compelled Britain and its allies in Europe like France to use Armenian genocide as a propaganda tool against Ottomans to demonize them and portray them as villains in the eyes of their public. In those days in mid 1910s, books were written and movies were made in Britain about Armenian genocide to make public opinion favourable for subsequent actions in Middle East.

Most recent parallel is in the war against Iraq where possession of non-existent weapons of mass destruction was made into a propaganda tool. Western governments and their media lied about those weapons for good 12 years and opponents were portrayed as Saddam sympathizers. This helped in an illegal occupation and destruction of Iraq. Like declining US now, Britain was an Imperial power in decline with its short term interests driving its policies.

The problem is, since we dont learn from history, we keep repeating mistake of believing the West's narrative on everything.

The US official position comes at a time when Turkey seems to be exercising its right to pick and choose its partners and going out of sphere of American influence, at least this is how it looks to us. If US objective was to punish Turkey diplomatically to fall in line, it will have an exact opposite effect.
A great comment.
If I had the right to give positive rating, I would definitely use it for this post. Thanks.

EzwRdJyXsAUaowO
 
Last edited:
The deep state sure likes to pick fights. China, Russia, Iran now Turkey? Don’t really understand the point of this. We got more than enough to worry about at home.
Turkey can be the natural leader of the Islamic world, and decouple important Muslim nations from US or China camp....Iran never had this grand vision, else Iran is also capable of doing it....The one thing going for Turkey is that it never allowed its heartland be occupied by Western powers, while Iran also managed that except during the second World War...This one point alone gives Tirkey far more credibility than any other Muslim power
Iran is not capable of this because it is Shi’ite. While Turkey will have to abandon its strong pan Turkic nationalism to achieve this but I agree that Turkey is in a better position than Iran. However ethnic nationalism is very strong in the Islamic world so there are limits to political cohesion.
 
Lessons From General Harbord

When General James Guthrie Harbord set sail to the Middle East in 1919, he was one of America’s foremost military heroes. Little known to us today, Harbord played a role in all of America’s turn of the century conflicts – from the Philippines to the Mexican Revolution to World War I, a conflict in which he was one of the leading commanders.

While his military accomplishments are little known today, he played an important role in forming America's modern diplomatic relationship with the Middle East and Turkey.


The events of 1915 carry a special meaning for me as a person who spent a considerable amount of time researching this period in history when I was preparing my doctoral thesis entitled “Harbord’s Military Mission to Armenia.”

Harbord's mission to the Middle East would have a long-term if unexpected impact on both sides of the Atlantic. Following the end of the First World War, and under pressure from certain groups as well as the Armenian lobby, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson sent a fact-finding mission to Turkey, headed by Harbord. He was accompanied by two other generals, 13 officers, and civil servants – more than 50 officials in total who were experts in their respective fields. His undertaking was, above all, a fact-finding mission, and he did just that. Following extensive observations and research in the region over 58 days, the Harbord military fact-finding mission produced a lengthy report. Throughout its 1603-pages, the report managed to see through the propaganda and the smokescreen and demonstrated objectivity along with intellectual honesty in its approach to the war-time relationship between the Ottoman Empire and its Armenian subjects.

It is that issue which still, to this day, over a hundred years after the end of World War I, continues to be a source of controversy. The guns of World War I have gone silent but, the political echoes of that conflict continue to be heard across the region. And even at the time, pro-Armenian lobbies in the United States and some groups in Turkey opposed his mission.

"There is much to show that left to themselves the Turk and the Armenian, when left without official instigation, have hitherto been able to live together in peace. Their existence side by side on the same soil for five centuries unmistakably indicates their interdependence and mutual interest," Harbord wrote.

The "official instigation" referred to here is the meddling of the great powers of the time in affairs of the region. There are, of course, other findings in the report, such as the fact that the Ottoman Armenians were never the majority in any region in Turkey. The report and its annexes also help us in establishing the atrocities committed by the Armenians against other subjects of the empire. General Harbord, above all, wanted to make sure the United States would play no role in such "official instigation" in the future and his report help end the idea of carving a U.S. mandate, indeed a colony, out of the defeated Ottoman Empire.

This is not to disregard the massive humanitarian crises that took place both within its borders and in neighboring geographies during the last period of the Ottoman Empire, as was the case during the disintegration of other empires. In fact, Ottoman Armenians lost their lives under the harsh conditions of the First World War, which is when relocation took place. Other Ottoman citizens also died because of epidemics and migrations, as well as acts of sedition spearheaded by gangs and armed groups that escalated as a result of the weakening of state authority.

It is not my wish to fuel the fire of antagonism. Indeed, in today’s world, deriving enmity from history and creating new antagonisms are neither acceptable nor useful to build a common future. Suffice it to say that General Harbord’s report envisions a more peaceful future for Armenians, Turks, and indeed all peoples of the region. And those genuinely interested in a facts-based approach to the historical record can find his report at the U.S. National Archives and Records Agency (NARA) in Washington, D.C. Copies of the report were sent to the White House and the Senate at the time.

This academic deadlock also fuels a political one. President Erdogan (then Prime Minister) sent a letter to the President of Armenia in 2005 and proposed to establish a joint commission of historians and scholars. The envisaged commission was to conduct its research in Turkish, Armenian and all relevant third country archives and share their findings with the international community. As someone who has personally studied this issue academically, I am glad to say that this offer stands, but I am dismayed to note that Turkey is yet to receive a response to this proposal or see the opening of Armenia’s own archives.

The ceasefire between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which was announced last year, allows an important opportunity for a new page. In addition, Turkey was one of the first countries to reject and condemn the attempted coup in Armenia in February 2020. The opportunity for security, stability, peace and prosperity, not only for Armenia but also for the region as a whole that should not be missed.

Perhaps Armenia's leaders can lend an ear to the messages being sent by Turkey to Armenia, and if they choose to invest in peace, the political and economic dividends will be high for the entire region. Turkey would like to see third countries – including allies like the U.S. – either help with ushering in this new understanding or be wary of efforts to politicize a historical controversy. Our clear preference is for the first alternative. Because only then can the historical interdependence and coexistence that General Harbord was able to report on back in 1919 may once again transpire. It is then and only then that Harbord’s mission may truly be over.

Hulusi Akar is Turkey's Minister of Defence and former Chief of the General Staff of Army(during the US backed coup attempt in 2016).

***

There is nothing but a purely political decision that ignores all academic studies. While Turkey improve the dialogue and coordination with other rising factors; Biden and his team gradually began to exhibit more problematic behaviors. The current US bureaucracy represents possibly the most untalented level of the last 50 years.

***

Armenian Claims and Historical Facts

 
My point is that if you're doing is as a form of retaliation to hurt America's feelings, it won't work.

talking about it in public on every podium hurts anyone, how about immigrants locked up with children separated, murder of millions of innocent Iraqis, abu gharaid prison, situation of blacks in America, even today natives are locked up in reservations...its hurts when everyone start talking about it once again.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom