Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

[KarotheGreat]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

When you review history, you'll know that before the arrival of Turkic tribes to the region, we had some serious issues with the Greeks. And now, the only reason we are friendly with the Greeks is the Turkish threat!!! Are you proposing we not forget the "brave deeds" of the Greeks and consider the Greeks enemy as well, in addition to the Turks?

Almost 1000 year has passed since Greeks and Armenians were 'enemies' and back then because of the absence of nationalism you had two states that were enemies, in the Eastern-Roman part you had as many Armenians and on the Armenian side you had Roman nobility that was fighting under the command of the Armenian kings. So it was very different than what you are trying to present.

It doesn't matter if Turkey is a member of NATO. Georgia was once part of Russia, and Iran was once pro west as well. Greece is also a member of NATO. In case you didn't know, Greece and Turkey's interests don't exactly coincide.

So you are comparing two states that are members of an organization because it is in their interest to be a member of the organization to a state that was conquered by an other state? Are you kidding me or trying to insult the intelligence of the people that are posting here?

Turkey has no reason to leave NATO and the US has zero reason to xxxx over its ally and the second biggest military in the NATO.

Greece and Cyprus are already members of the EU, and don't have Turkey's best interests at heart.

Turkey is not a member of the EU don't see why this is relevant to what I posted about NATO? How are Greece and Cyprus important in the example I gave of the UK and trying to combat the influence of Germany and France?

Turkey's trade with Iran is at an all-time high. The US is very angry about that. Turkey is increasingly proving itself as an unreliable ally.

You really think that Turkey will leave NATO because of that?

I didn't say they're not making claims on Western Armenia. You listed that as one reason why you are opposed to Kurdish statehood. And I told you not to get ahead of yourself. Even if the Kurds were able to get a state whose boundries included western armenia, such a Kurdish state would be much easier to deal with (in terms of hopes for getting the land back) than present-day Turkey.

So lets trade an enemy we know for one we don't know? So that is your brilliant idea?

Turkey is the one who fears the creation of a Kurdish state. Turkey is the one who does everything in its powerful to prevent an independent Kurdish state in northern iraq. I've got news for you buddy: THE REASON IT DOES NOT WANT AN INDEPENDENT KURDISH STATE IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT IN IT'S BEST INTERESTS.

Putting a statement in bold capital letters doesn't give it more weight just makes you look very very foolish.
It would in Western interests and so against our interest. That is more than reason to be against it.

So, congratulations!!!!!!!! You and Turkey have joined forces in your aims!!!

You speak about "our allies", but you forget that the only reason "iran" and "russia" are "allies" (or should i say we're so dependent on them)is to counter the Turkish threat. Secondly, don't forget that iran and russia are not cooperating with Armenia because they care so deeply about Armenia, but for their own self-interests.

You know that those countries are our allies because it is also in our interest to have them as allies? It's not because we really like them? Or is it the first time you are realizing this fact that countries form an alliance because it is in their own interests.

In case you didn't know, trade between Turkey and our "ally" Iran is at an all time high.

Armenia would be doing the same if the borders were not closed, they are still doing that even with closed borders. So why wouldn't Iran do that?

With a reduction of the Turkish threat(ie a fragmented, weakened, smaller Turkey), Armenia would not be so reliant on Russia.

The Kurds don't have the power to do that neither will anyone allow them to do that. Let us assume Kurdistan is formed and it attacks Turkey a member of NATO. You realize what that means right? That every major military will declare war on Kurdistan withing the 48 hours and come to the defense of their ally.

A Kurdistan will also give an excuse to Turkey to put a bigger army near Armenia and strengthen their military even more.

Who would that be, Russia, who recently forbid putting up a statute in honor of general andranik so as not to offend the Turks?

Still Russia has its soldiers positioned at the Armenian border and will have its soldiers die first if an attacks occurs. Still Russia keeps giving Armenia weapons for a cheap price and sometimes even free. Very bad allies.

Or Iran, whose trade with Turkey is at an all-time high?

Armenia would do the same thing if it could. Iran has proven to be a reliable ally during the Artsakh war by supplying food to Armenia while the rest was doing nothing plus all the projects that are going on in the region between the two states.

I know you're not acting, you're just plain stupid. BOOOTIK, as they say in Armenian!

You are so funny, can't even discuss politics as a grown up. Maybe you should go discuss with a child they have the same style of discussing things, they also like to call names.

[Artsakh]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

Turkey is a member of NATO and also a major ally of the UK. The UK wants Turkey in the EU to counter the influence of France and Germany in the EU. So do you really think the US is going to xxxx over two of its major allies for the Kurds? The only way a Kurdish state can be is with Turkish cooperation and then it will be an vessel for Western interests aka against interest of Armenia and its allies.

It doesn't matter if Turkey is a member of NATO. Georgia was once part of Russia, and Iran was once pro west as well. Greece is also a member of NATO. In case you didn't know, Greece and Turkey's interests don't exactly coincide.

Greece and Cyprus are already members of the EU, and don't have Turkey's best interests at heart.

Turkey's trade with Iran is at an all-time high. The US is very angry about that. Turkey is increasingly proving itself as an unreliable ally.

I said they have claims on Western Armenia you can ask the Kurds here if they do and you will see yourself.

I didn't say they're not making claims on Western Armenia. You listed that as one reason why you are opposed to Kurdish statehood. And I told you not to get ahead of yourself. Even if the Kurds were able to get a state whose boundries included western armenia, such a Kurdish state would be much easier to deal with (in terms of hopes for getting the land back) than present-day Turkey.

Or it is more likely that it will be an puppet state of the West used against our allies and will be against our interests.

Turkey is the one who fears the creation of a Kurdish state. Turkey is the one who does everything in its powerful to prevent an independent Kurdish state in northern iraq. I've got news for you buddy: THE REASON IT DOES NOT WANT AN INDEPENDENT KURDISH STATE IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT IN IT'S BEST INTERESTS.

So, congratulations!!!!!!!! You and Turkey have joined forces in your aims!!!


You speak about "our allies", but you forget that the only reason "iran" and "russia" are "allies" (or should i say we're so dependent on them)is to counter the Turkish threat. Secondly, don't forget that iran and russia are not cooperating with Armenia because they care so deeply about Armenia, but for their own self-interests.

In case you didn't know, trade between Turkey and our "ally" Iran is at an all time high.

With a reduction of the Turkish threat(ie a fragmented, weakened, smaller Turkey), Armenia would not be so reliant on Russia.

We already have allies that we know that can be trusted and it is in their interest to have a weak Turkey and also aren't laying claims on our lands.

Who would that be, Russia, who recently forbid putting up a statute in honor of general andranik so as not to offend the Turks?

Or Iran, whose trade with Turkey is at an all-time high?

Some people aren't acting

I know you're not acting, you're just plain stupid. BOOOTIK, as they say in Armenian!

[KarotheGreat]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

It is so funny the way you post. It really is. Because the moment you know that you've got nothing to counter my points you turn to insults and juvenile remarks. Before I forget, reported.

When you go through puberty and start understaning the world around you and the changes taking place, then you will be able to answer the "why" to all your questions. Until then, observe from a distance and learn, and ask questions if you don't understand something. Don't make firm statements of fact out of your a$$ when you don't know Sheet.

Turkey is a member of NATO and also a major ally of the UK. The UK wants Turkey in the EU to counter the influence of France and Germany in the EU. So do you really think the US is going to xxxx over two of its major allies for the Kurds? The only way a Kurdish state can be is with Turkish cooperation and then it will be an vessel for Western interests aka against interest of Armenia and its allies.

What ever Turkey has done the fact remains that both are members of NATO and really close allies and will stay like as long as NATO exists.

IDIOT, IN THE FIRST PLACE, it is you who is talking about Kurds laying claims to Western Armenia (ie TUrkey). Therefore, you ask yourselves those questions, not me.

I said they have claims on Western Armenia you can ask the Kurds here if they do and you will see yourself.

Second, the founding of Kurdish state in northern iraq on Turkey's doorstep can serve as another enemy state to Turkey, as a base for future expansion (taking out chunks of Turkey), in which we can partake to settle our own issues.

Or it is more likely that it will be an puppet state of the West used against our allies and will be against our interests.

No, I don't think the Kurds will have the power to take the Turks, and neither does Armenia. That is why I support Kurdish statehood, because we need a united front against those bastard Turks.

We already have allies that we know that can be trusted and it is in their interest to have a weak Turkey and also aren't laying claims on our lands.

Stop acting "smart" with your stupid questions when u already read my posts regarding them.

Some people aren't acting

[Artsakh]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

When you review history, you'll know that before the arrival of Turkic tribes to the region, we had some serious issues with the Greeks. And now, the only reason we are friendly with the Greeks is the Turkish threat!!! Are you proposing we not forget the "brave deeds" of the Greeks and consider the Greeks enemy as well, in addition to the Turks?

[Artsakh]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

Now, Armenians and Kurds fighting and arguing with eachother. Who wins? The TURKS!!! And you guys expect to bring down the Turkish Republic like that, huh? good luck!

[Zulfiqar]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

I doesn't matter how much you try to soften it. Fact remains fact that the Kurds which lived amongst Armenians participated heavily in the killings and genocide. How can we forget how we were betrayed by our Kurdish neighbours, who killed for some blood money? Sorry but this is not something that can be easily forgotten and it shouldn't. This is not racist or propaganda, these are facts that we shouldn't forget. Should we just forgive the Turks for Genocide and move on with our lives? Of course not! There were similarly Turks who helped Armenians and didn't kill them - but a few good apples doesn't justify all the bad apples.

It doesn't matter whether they helped them or not. What matters is what our national intentions were, and the requirement for such intentions is that they are supported by the majority of the Kurds. These Hamidiye-irregulars did not belong to the Kurdish nationalist curriculum, and acted solely for the Turks. In this context, the term 'Kurd' should only be used to designate their ethnicity, and is should not be handled in a manner as if they represented the Kurdish nation. The fact that some Kurds gave them shelter supports this, so due to the heavy ideological fragmentation of the time, it is unjust to hold the present-day Kurds responsible for these atrocities. We owe you nothing.

It's more a reminding ourselves that Kurds killed Armenians for some Turkish blood money, which is pretty low, and people now living in our historic lands.

It's our historic land too. If your nationalist perception of history is a reason to ridicule my nation, then you are a condemnable person.

The 'Armenian Highland' which consists of portions of Eastern Turkey is the ancestral land of Armenians. Some of our most important cities like Ani our located there, Lake Van is historically important Armenian lake. There's no denying this fact, nevertheless, the Turks drove Armenians out and repopulated the lands with more Turks and Kurds, and often deny Armenian connection to those lands.

Facts? Let me get some 'facts' straight. You migrated to this region from the north-Caucasus around 700 BC, after which you assimilated the Urartians, who were living in Pontus and the southern Caucasus. As opposed to complete extinguishment of the Urartians by the Armenians, the Hurrians, who were living in most of what you refer to as 'western Armenia', gradually evolved into Kurds throughout Iranic interposition that occured around the same time. Considering that the Armenians posess an Urartian, and not Hurrian substratum, it is plausible that the Urartu kingdom(which you idolize so much) was established through violence and brutal extermination, because it annexed Hurrian lands. From a Kurdish perspective, this does not justify Armenian claim over eastern anatolia. The 'Armenian Highland' is just a designation of the region by pro-Armenian(western) entities.

So? Armenians have been living there for ages, these lands and the lands of Eastern Armenia of S. Caucasus are where we have come from, where we have lived for a people as long as we were Armenians.

No, what you define as your 'ancestral land' was heavily fragmented prior to the genocide, and it's difficult to determine Armenia's boundairies. But surely overlapped ancient Kurdish land, and any self-proclaimed Kurdish nationalist will hasten to keep you out.

I'm sorry that I don't bow down to Turkish interests.

Very funny. It's still sad that you arrogantly keep underestimating the importance that Northern Kurdistan has for us, and the level of intellectuality we'll enhance it with.

[Artsakh]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

Why would the US dump an ally that it has had for the last 60 years? A member of NATO and one of the strongest militaries in the region? Or do you think that the policy makers in Washington are that stupid to change a stable ally that they have had for for 6 decades for new ally that they don't know if they can trust them.

When you go through puberty and start understaning the world around you and the changes taking place, then you will be able to answer the "why" to all your questions. Until then, observe from a distance and learn, and ask questions if you don't understand something. Don't make firm statements of fact out of your a$$ when you don't know Sheet.

The United States has quietly deemed Turkey an unreliable ally, government documents show. State Department cables acquired by the international organization WikiLeaks asserted that Washington was harboring increasing concern over the pro-Islamist government of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan. The cables, some of about 250,000 acquired and released by WikiLeaks, showed deep U.S. suspicion of Turkey's emerging alliance with neighboring Iran and Syria.

HERE IS A RECORD OF HOW "RELIABLE" AN ALLY TURKEY HAS BEEN OVER THE YEARS:

Turkey: Ally or Adversary?April 20, 2011
By GENE ROSSIDES

Is Turkey an ally or adversary of the United States and the West?

Since the Erdogan regime took office in Turkey in 2002, the evidence is sufficient to state that Turkey has been an adversary of the United States and the West.

From the refusal in 2003 to allow the United States to open a second front against Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship in Iraq by asking for $6 billion more than the $26 billion irresponsibly offered by then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz to Turkey, an alleged ally, to support the United States. The US Treasury representative in those negotiations was quoted in the New York Times as calling Turkey’s actions “extortion in the name of alliance.”

Turkey’s actions in 2003 made efforts against Saddam Hussein more difficult and more costly in US lives, according to Defense Department officials.

Turkey then embarked on a pro-Iran policy in direct opposition to US positions. Turkey’s pro-Iran positions, including opposition to Iranian opponents of Iran’s religious dictatorship, continue currently unabated.

Turkey’s Erdogan regime, influenced greatly by its Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, also embarked on an anti-Israeli policy. In 2004, at the Davos annual conference Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan publicly attacked Israel President Simon Perez for Israel’s Palestinian policy.

Erdogan’s attacks on Israel continued since then and Turkey initiated a flotilla that tried to break the Israeli blockade which resulted in Israel ships attacking the Turkish flotilla ship.

One important result of Erdogan’s anti-Israel actions was the demise of the Turkey-Israel military cooperation agreement arranged in 1996 by an initiative of Leon Fuerth, national security adviser to then-Vice President Al Gore.

That agreement, in my view, was harmful to US interests in the area. Its ending has provided for the development of a strengthened Greece-Israel relationship, which is beneficial to US interests in the region.

Also during this period, Erdogan has praised the Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who had been indicted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur. Erdogan praised him and actually stated that the Sudanese president was a fellow Muslim and a Muslim does not commit genocide.

Pre-2003

United States officials have routinely stated before 2002 that Turkey was a loyal ally of the United States. That assertion was and is an absolute falsehood. Any time a US official so states the community should react and protest it. Let’s look at the record of Turkey’s actions and inactions before 2002 and since the Truman Doctrine of aid to Greece and Turkey in March 1947, the initiation of the Marshall Plan in June 1947, and in 1952 when Greece and Turkey became members of NATO.

Turkey’s actions and inactions over the decades before 2002 demonstrate that she was an unreliable ally. The facts clearly show that Turkey collaborated with the Soviet Union militarily during the Cold War, which ended in 1991, to the detriment of the West.

As long ago as 1974, Edward Luttwak, a noted strategic analyst, in his book “The Political Uses of Sea Power” (1974) wrote (pages 60-61) that Turkey had made deals with the USSR, allowing the Soviets strategic transit through and over Turkey that included the “overland traffic agreement (unimpeded Russian transit to Iraq and Syria by road), the generous Turkish interpretation of the Montreux Convention, which regulates ship movements in the Straits, and above all, the overflight permissions accorded to Russian civilian and military aircraft across Turkish air space.”

Examples of Turkey’s unreliability for United States strategic purposes include:

• In the 1977-1978 conflict in Ethiopia, Turkey granted the Soviets military overflight rights to supply the pro-Soviet Ethiopian communists under Col. Mengistu, who eventually prevailed. C. Meyer, Facing Reality-From World Federalism To The CIA 276-80 (1980).

• Over NATO objections, Turkey has allowed three Soviet aircraft carriers, passage rights through the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits into the Mediterranean in violation of the Montreux Convention of 1936. The Soviet ships posed a formidable threat to the United States Sixth Fleet.

• In 1979 Turkey refused to allow the United States U-2 intelligence flights (for Salt II verification) over Turkish airspace “unless Moscow agreed.” N.Y. Times, May 15, 1979, at A1, col.3.

• The Turkish government refused repeated American requests during the cold war for the installation of antennas in Turkey concerning 11 transmitters whose broadcasts would have been directed primarily to the Soviet Union and its eastern European satellites.

• Turkey further damaged NATO by vetoing NATO’s effort to put military bases on various Greek islands in the Aegean for defensive purposes against the Soviet navy.

Any time an American official, or anyone else, states Turkey is a loyal ally of the U.S., Greek Americans should respond with the facts that demonstrate Turkey has been a disloyal ally to the detriment of the US, in effect, an adversary.

Gene Rossides is founder of the American Hellenic Institute and a former assistant secretary of the Treasury.

An independent Kurdistan will be in Northern-Iraq because Turkey will never give up an inch of land and the US will not go to war with its own ally. Or do you think the Kurds will have the power to take on the Turkish army?

IDIOT, IN THE FIRST PLACE, it is you who is talking about Kurds laying claims to Western Armenia (ie TUrkey). Therefore, you ask yourselves those questions, not me.

Second, the founding of Kurdish state in northern iraq on Turkey's doorstep can serve as another enemy state to Turkey, as a base for future expansion (taking out chunks of Turkey), in which we can partake to settle our own issues.

No, I don't think the Kurds will have the power to take the Turks, and neither does Armenia. That is why I support Kurdish statehood, because we need a united front against those bastard Turks.

Stop acting "smart" with your stupid questions when u already read my posts regarding them.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

The same applies to Turkey: Members of Turkey's MHP resign, join pro-Kurdish party (http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.p...rty-2011-05-23)

MHP in Başkale! Like seeing penguins in a desert.

[Mos]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

The term "eagerly" is deceitfully used with mal-intent, and as a Kurd I am gravely offended to have my nation accused of genocide. There were two groups of Kurds who participated in the genocide: convicted criminals who were set free, and the Hamidiye-irregulars, who were assimilated into Turkish insanity. Both groups did not massacre Armenians for the benefit of our cause, and did certainly not represent Kurdish nationalism. They can compared to the Kurdish 'village guards' of the 90s, who were appointed by the Turkish government to kill their fellow Kurds. We call these people 'jash', because they have withdrawn themselves from our cause. We include the Hamidiye-irregulars in this category, and therefore it is unjust to hold the Kurds in general responsible for what some jash did. Furthermore, the Kurdish involvement in the genocide is always thrown WAY out of proportion, and I have earlier seen you falsely stating that the Kurds did all the actual slaughtering. Are you saying that the Hamidiye-irregulars were a massive, ultra-flexible force, capable of exterminating 1/1.5 million people in a short period of time? Such a biased statement is revolting, and is characteristic of the racist mentality among many Armenians. It's also an indication of how you've been affected by Turkish propaganda, which tries to put the blame on us, stating that it was a 'local initiative'.

I doesn't matter how much you try to soften it. Fact remains fact that the Kurds which lived amongst Armenians participated heavily in the killings and genocide. How can we forget how we were betrayed by our Kurdish neighbours, who killed for some blood money? Sorry but this is not something that can be easily forgotten and it shouldn't. This is not racist or propaganda, these are facts that we shouldn't forget. Should we just forgive the Turks for Genocide and move on with our lives? Of course not!

I'd also like to point out that the region where I come from opposed the genocide and gave the Armenians shelter, risking their own lives in doing so. 30000 Armenians were saved in my region, and to see you spreading all that bullxxxx sickens me to the pit of my stomach.

There were similarly Turks who helped Armenians and didn't kill them - but a few good apples doesn't justify all the bad apples.

And the Kurds who do want to reach out to the Armenians are wrong to. We're always spit on by the Armenians, especially the ones on this forum. You portray us as inferior mountain donkeys, not realising all the years of misery we've had to endure. Maybe your blind arrogance, brought on by your pathetic superiority complex, will be of a practical benefit when the opportunity for Northern Kurdish independence comes.

It's more a reminding ourselves that Kurds killed Armenians for some Turkish blood money, which is pretty low, and people now living in our historic lands.

And what is the Armenian definition of 'historic lands' exactly? It is based on the presence of some churches? Selectively-recorded population maps? The violent conquests of ancient Armenian kingdoms? Hayk's little fairytale? All this nationalistic rubbish is of utmost insignificance in a geopolitical context. You'll have to look at raw material like demographic density, genetics, multiple theories regarding ethnogenesis, etc. According to these peritmeters, it can only be concluded that the Kurds have been living in this area equally as long as the Armenians, and being the direct descendants of the Hurrians, possibly even longer.

The 'Armenian Highland' which consists of portions of Eastern Turkey is the ancestral land of Armenians. Some of our most important cities like Ani our located there, Lake Van is historically important Armenian lake. There's no denying this fact, nevertheless, the Turks drove Armenians out and repopulated the lands with more Turks and Kurds, and often deny Armenian connection to those lands.

The Kurds had already 'settled' in these regions prior to your genocide. It is their indigenous homeland. It's only the 20th century-style birth rate that makes you come to that biased conclusion.

So? Armenians have been living there for ages, these lands and the lands of Eastern Armenia of S. Caucasus are where we have come from, where we have lived for a people as long as we were Armenians.

Prior to posting here, I had already been haunting this forum for quite a while. And I am sickened by your narrow-minded, arrogant and patronizing stance towards my nation. Not to mention all these pathetic irredentist goals you pursue, which don't even limit themselves to eastern anatolia. You are a threat to every nation in your vicinity, and I will do my utmost to inform my fellow comrades of your filthy interests, so that you may fall victim to your own arrogance.

I'm sorry that I don't bow down to Turkish interests.

[Zulfiqar]

Re: Prospects of a Kurdish state and what it means for Armenia

Cry me a river. What do you expect? With the role that your people played in oppressing Armenians even before the genocide, the huge role that they played during the genocide. A lot of the killing was done by Kurdish tribes man payed by the government in
Constantinople. Add to everything the fact that the Kurds living in Armenia chose the Azeris side and fought against Armenians in the Artsakh war, so you reap what you sow.

That is not a valid refutation of my post. I sufficiently explained the Kurdish involvement in your genocide, but you seem to resort to sophism again.

Although I oppose it, the Kurds during the Ottoman era had a good reason to oppress the Armenians. Prior to the Turkic migrations, as part of the crusades against muslims, the Armenian population repeatedly collaborated with the Byzantine empire to slaughter and uproot the entire muslim population of eastern anatolia, which was almost entirely Kurdish. The Armenians and the Greeks succeeded in uprooting the ancient Kurdish inhabitants of Cilicia, Cappadocia and to some extent, Pontus. All this was done in the name of Christianity, and as a response, the Kurds resorted to religious fanaticism themselves. That's why we subsequently sided with the recently-converted muslim Turks following their migration, and this religious-based friendship with Turks would root itself deep in Kurdish culture. Altough there's nothing left of that today of course, and I think that's probably for the best.

As for collaboration with the Azeris; although that's a total lie, I wouldn't blame them for doing that. You started destroying our community in the Caucasus, out of an irrational phobia for muslims on your "holy land".