Treaty of Sevres... can we do anything about it today?

[TurQ]

I am not expecting you to love Abdulhamid Han. But no state would allow terrorism against its rulers. The interesting part is how Armenian anarchists and Ittihadists were buddies.

About Andranik Ozanyan, check out the book by Antranik Celebyan(Chelebyan) named Andranik Pasha. It was also translated into Turkish.

Hovik or Zara, I know your stand point, and I wont dispute it. Your political point of view allows you to compare Balkan nations with Armenians. They are totally uncomparable. They were living under their own states. Similar to US system today. The Serbs had their own state and they had their own rulers. They were paying taxes and they were not free in their foreign policy, but they had their own internal rule and law. They had their own judicial system etc. The Greeks, Serbs, MAcedonians, Bulgarians, Romanians, Croatians, Albanians, and Bosnians, they all had a state under Ottoman system. Their seperation was easy and compareably smooth.

Armenian case is totally different. Armenians lived among Turks they did not have a state to rule them like the Balkan case. They(revolutionaries) wanted to free the lands that the Armenians live in Adana, Antep,Hatay and Eastern Anatolia. In These areas Armenians Turks, Kurds and Arabs were living in mixed societies.
The fight was to save those provinces from each other. Since Anatolia was the last homeland for the Ottoman Muslims(after losing immense amount of lands in Balkans and Caucusia), the fight for Anatolia was more bloodier than compared to Balkans.

In your posts I can easly get the feeling that you dont believe or dont accept the fact that Erzurum, Kars, Van and Adana belongs to Turks, just because Armenians lived in those provinces for centuries way back than the Turks. You say the same for Karabag, for you as I understand Erzurum and KArabag are the same, historical Armenian lands. Thats why there is nothing wrong with expulsion of 800,000 Azeris from and around Karabag. Same goes with Nahjivan according to you. If all Azeris were expelled from Nahjivan, it will just *fix* a historical mistake done by Stalin, and it will be given back to their real owners.
This stand point is not healthy(no offense to you), it is just 19th century type nationalism.
Pan Turanism or Turkish nationalism is a reaction to the partition of Ottoman state and nationalistic movements among the nations it ruled. It was not invented out of blue moon.

One more Balkan difference is, the clashes in Balkans was between Ottoman state and Orthodox Kingdoms. Armenian case is different, it was the clash of newly founded Turkish and Armenian nationalisms, which happened in a society where they lived togather.

Too bad for them, they would have done the entire empire a favor...



Do you have a source for the date he was ordained a General in the Russian Army - (non-Turkish source if possible)?


I don't know so much about Andranik, but I plan to read more soon. I don't know which "revolts" you refer to - again could you please cite your sources on this.

Regardless of the details of the above revolts, I have to say that it doesn't much matter... Armenians were promised reforms during the Tanzimat period, and were denied them over and over again. Armenians had all the rights to demand better treatment that ANY minority group in the Empire had... Turks didn't perpetrate any Genocides of this magnitude against Balkan nations for the same reason - only Armenians. Why? Because it wasn't about unfair treatment, or reforms or revolts or anything of the sort - It was about ethnic homogenization and Pan-Turanism... If Armenians, led by Andranik waited until 1912/13 to physically revolt, then they waited WAY TOO LONG!!!

[TurQ]

Here is an article in Turkish posted in Istanbul Armenians' web site.

There is a brief story about Antranik Pasha about what he did in Bitlis/Ahlat during Russian invasion(it is early summer of 1915). The story is told by Seher Bulut, age of 122 who went thru the terror by Antranik Pasha, the founder of "Armenian avengers' Brigade".

http://www.bolsohays.com/haberac.asp?referans=7335

[imported_Hellektor]

Ran out of titles!

@Ixtanbul,

You are one brain-damaged, Armenian hating ignoramus.

I really don't feel I have to respond to your nonsense, because in this forum every drop of gall that you have spewed has been answered 100000000000000000000000000000 times.

None of what you say in response to my quotes deals with what I say. You just twist things and you think you are a smart ass.
All you throw up is the official Turkish state denial and historic falsification, fabricated in recent years without citing any valid historic source.

Since they have cut your cranium open, taken out the gray matter and replaced it with feces, you will not absorb this and you will regurgitate the same puke you have, "replying" my post.
Read for heaven's/hell's sake a historically valid book about the Armenian Genocide and don't copy/paste the same McFarty/tallturkishtale.com crap we have already seen gazillion times.

The Republic of Turkey legally isn't responsible for anything good or bad the Ottomans done while Turkish history is.

The "Republic" of Turkey is the "LEGITIMATE" inheritor of the Ottoman Tyranny because:

a change of government does not mean a change of state.

Don't you understand this sentence? Are you that brain-damaged? Don't you read English?
This is a legal fact.

Well the Ottoman Empire ending and the Republic of Turkey being born...blah, blah, blah...

Wish it had died in the filthy womb of the devil who ejaculated it out of its rear.

Greece, Yugoslavia, Egypt and Turkey all inherited Ottoman lands and all payed there share for Ottoman debts. Turkey isn't responsible for Ottoman history just like Greece, Egypt and Yugoslavia isn't.

Your self-righteousness is nauseating.
Not a square nanometer of the land you are occupying belongs to you. Not a pebble that enters your shoe when you walk on other peoples' land belongs to you and you dare whimper that "Greece, Yugoslavia, Egypt... inherited Ottoman lands"?

They liberated their homes that belonged to them in the first place, you brazenfaced Gokturk.

Nothing about Armenians good or bad is taught in Turkish schools. Only Armenian gangs Taşnak and Hınçak are named alongside Greek, Jewish, kurdish gangs during WW1 and that Armenians were deported due to siding with the enemy and joining the Russians to massacre the Muslim population in East Anatolia and that many Armenians died on there way to Lebanon and Syria.

Doesn't this alarm you to doubt that this is nothing but the official state falsification of history?
Then why are you parroting this garbage over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, and you do not read a single valid history book?

Armenians didn't war us, they were handed land by the Allies for xxxxs sake. Easy come, easy go.

In the previous paragraph you say "nothing about Armenians good or bad is taught in Turkish schools" then again you throw up the same putrefaction. WTF is wrong with you?
Go to Yerevan and visit the Sardarabad museum (don’t smash anything!) to LEARN for duck's sake and see how we kicked your asses in 1918. Do you think the Turkish Coke Soaking European Foggerts would give a half-flying bird flu infected duck about Armenia or the Armenians to hand over land to them?

What is it with you Turks that you recruit the Armenian men between 18 and 45 and treacherously execute them in WWI, then you drive the women, children and elderly to roast in the desert, you disembowel women and crush newborn babies against the wall, you kill people when they are sleeping and you won't take it when the Armenians kick your hairless Mongol butts?

Armenians were only allowed to move West cause the Ottomans allowed Armenians too, there was no or very less Armenians in Central, South and North Anatolia during the Byzantian period. Just cause Ottomans allowed Armenians to move Westwards doesn't mean it's your land! About the Iranian Tabriz, it has always been a Iranic and later on Turkic(Azeri & Turkmen) populated city, so who are you kidding mate?

WTF are you hallucinating all over the place? WTF does this mean?

I quoted a HISTORIC ACCOUNT recorded by Jean Baptiste Tavernier, who traveled six times in the East in the period of 1632-1668 and wrote in his notes that “the land stretching from Tokat to Tabriz is almost exclusively inhabited by Christians and this region used to be part of the Armenian Kingdom...That's why it's not surprising to come across fifty Armenians for every single Muslim”.
You have a problem with history? It's not my fault. The Iranian Tabriz is Iranian and never Turkic, stop this pan-turkist, gray wolf conspiracy. It does not mean that Armenians weren't/aren't living there. You have a problem go complain to Tavernier.

Untill you research what horrible atrocities the Russian army and Armenian gangs commited in East Anatolia you will never understand what happened in 1915, Asala, Negro-Karabakh or even today.

You don't care about research. There are thousand upon thousands of books, researched studies, photos, video-taped survivor accounts, written eyewitness accounts by observers of many nationalities, but you don't give a damn about consulting one, otherwise you wouldn't utter all these chewed up and spat out absurdities.

This is what’s happening today. Has anyone of you had the dignity to condemn this?

Btw Armenians are famous for being the only nation in the entire Ottoman history to never make it to the Harem. Egyptians, Ethiopians, Russians, Greek, Slav, Persian, Arabic etc even Italian and French but never ever Armenian women. So obviously you've been fed on propaganda, theres even jokes about that in the Balkans and Middle East.

Your “entire Ottoman history” is nothing but death, destruction, rape, subjugation, terror, slavery, stealing of women and children, pillage, plunder and genocide.
I gather by this insinuation that you believe the Armenian women are not bestowed with outward beauty.
Then let me tell you, Turk, when your goddamn, savage genocidal ancestors arrived, this is what they looked like:

Grigor of Akner, a 13th-14th century historian describes your grandpaws this way when he heard of them for the first time:

"Let us say some more about what these first Tatars resembled. The first who came against our country were not like people. They were awful to see and impossible to describe. They had large heads like a buffalo, narrow eyes like a chick, short noses like a cat, protruding chins like a dog, narrow waists like an ant, and short legs like a pig. They are completely beardless, possessing the strength of a lion and a screeching voice like an eagle. They appear unexpectedly. Their women have attractive hats covered with a brocade shawl on top and broad faces smeared with a deadly pine medicine. They give birth like snakes, and eat like wolves. Death does not appear among them, and so they can live for three hundred years. Such were the folk who came first to the upper land. They never eat bread."

Wonder what happened to your beastly features?

BTW I, Abdulhamid's father, Sultan Abdul Medjid must have really had a thing for that Armenian woman he raped in his filthy harem. It's so sad that what came out of that Armenian woman's womb was one of the most blood thirsty murderers in history, because the poor woman died early and the beast was brought up to become a monster.
I would like to know how many “Egyptians, Ethiopians, Russians, Greek, Slav, Persian, Arabic etc even Italian and French” women have “made it “ as “high” as this Armenian woman?

BTW II, in 2005 an Armenian girl became vice-Miss Europe and she only lost to the German contestant of Iranian origin.

They all put up a fight to defend there homelands in the first place and did the same centuries after.

So, why didn't Armenians have the right to defend their homes and had to be annihilated?
See how messed up your scat for brains is?

There is no Turkish hatred for Armenians, not that i know of. But there is hatred for propaganda and just not Armenian but all.

According to your comments:
"Armenians are Traitors who sided with the enemy and betrayed "their" nation;
Armenian women are not worth the pfff;
Armenians cannot fight and defend their homes..."
All this rubbish you direct at me and comes back to you hitting the truth fan in my hand, testifies to your bottomless hate and condescending of the Armenians.

About barbaric, go ask your great grandafather what he did alongside the Russian army in East Anatolia during WW1?

My great grandfathers were forcefully migrated to Iran in 1604, but I wish they had done what you accuse them of, maybe the Genocide would have been less successful.

It was the middle ages, what are you expecting? The inquisition was running, the Crusades were still massacring and looting in the East.

This was in 1988:
you disembowel pregnant women and hurl babies against hard surfaces and throw them out of the window.
But compare:
1000 years ago "children were ravished from the embraces of their mothers and mercilessly hurled against rocks." exactly the same way.

I say Muslim cause East Anatolia was mainly Armenian, kurdish and Chechnyian populated. There wasn't many Turks and it was the kurds and Chechnyians that suffered Russian/Armenian atrocities the most.

You say Muslim to gain Muslim sympathy in these days of the clash of civilizations so if you have an iota of decency you'll stop playing this filthy religion card.
BTW, didn’t the Ottomans settle them in Armenia to harass the Armenians and force them out of their homeland?

The Ottoman Parliament was raided and the MP's were sent to prison in Malta by the allies. The Brits have invaded Thrace and Istanbul, the Italian army had invaded South Anatolia, the French army had invaded the Middle East and South East Anatolia. So i guess we were in 1000 times worse condition then the Armenians when we signed the treaty of Sevrés.

Serves you right.

Break down the barriers mate, whether you believe it or not Turks and Armenians were real close and had a great friendship. Yes everything went wrong when Russians, Brits, kurds etc came between us. Go to any village in Anatolia and they will tell you scary stories of Russian/Armenian atrocities but they'd also tell you incredible friendship stories that will make you want to cry. I assume it's the same in Armenia (not diaspora), they too will talk about the 1915 and what they suffered but will also tell you great stories about centuries of friendship.

You've been killing us for a thousand years and you still destroy our heritage then you want us to forgive and forget?
When are YOU going to face your ugly history?

I have already given this link several times but you won't bother. Is this what you call friendship?
Here a bibliography of almost a thousand studies is represented that deal only with the genocide of 1894 - 1897 by Abdulhamid.

It was not war, but people died.
Armenians did not allegedly side with the Russians but they were savagely slaughtered.

lol, the Armenian gangs were armed to death in East Anatolia and performed atrocities on the Muslims of the region. As kurdish landlords begged for help from Istanbul and as the rape stories(that was the last straw) started to make it impossible for Muslims to live in the region did the Ottoman authorities intervene. They sent help to the Muslims of East Anatolia, disarmed the Armenian gangs and sent everyone involved with Armenians gangs and Russia to Syria and Lebanon. There are plenty of Armenians they weren't forced to leave and remained in Anatolia, only the people and there families that had any kind of relation to Hinçak, Taşnak etc were sent.

This is the millionth time you regurgitate “Armenian gangs killed Muslims so we gave them hell”, while you won’t read The Key Distortions and Falsehoods in the Denial of the Armenian Genocide.

And put that lol you know where which happens to be your mouth. You are so brain-damaged you will claim the Earth is flat if your fascist state says so.

I ask again:

If all those millions of women, children and elderly were armed to their teeth rebels, how come they did not rebel and walked like sheep to roast in the desert?

At the end I'll make a bet with you I have already made with the likes of you and have never been challenged:
You show me a historic map or a historic document from before the Armenian Genocide, where Armenia is called “Eastern Anatolia” or as you utter “East Anatolia”.
If you can produce ONE such document/map then F*CK ME, if you can come up with NONE then F*CK YOU and all the members of your species who call Armenia “Eastern Anatolia”.

[Hovik]

I am not expecting you to love Abdulhamid Han. But no state would allow terrorism against its rulers. The interesting part is how Armenian anarchists and Ittihadists were buddies.

Sure in *present day* no state would allow terrorism against it's rulers. But (by the same assumption) in *present day* terrorism would be allowed against the state by the rulers either. But what Abdul Hamid perpetrated against Armenians during 1894-1896 and beyond WAS in fact terrorism by a ruler against his state, no? You catch my drift?

About Andranik Ozanyan, check out the book by Antranik Celebyan(Chelebyan) named Andranik Pasha. It was also translated into Turkish.

Thanks for the recommendation!

Hovik or Zara, I know your stand point, and I wont dispute it. Your political point of view allows you to compare Balkan nations with Armenians. They are totally uncomparable. They were living under their own states. Similar to US system today. The Serbs had their own state and they had their own rulers. They were paying taxes and they were not free in their foreign policy, but they had their own internal rule and law. They had their own judicial system etc. The Greeks, Serbs, MAcedonians, Bulgarians, Romanians, Croatians, Albanians, and Bosnians, they all had a state under Ottoman system. Their seperation was easy and compareably smooth.

I think you are wrong. I don't think they are "totally uncomparable". The only way they are "totally uncomparable" is in consideration of 'Turkish interests'.

I don't think they are totally comparable either. There are some aspects which cannot be compared, but many that can. Writing off any comparison between the two looks a little suspicious don't you think?

Can you explain how you believe they had own (implying independent) states under the Ottoman system (a sentence which in itself is a contradiction...)?

Armenian case is totally different. Armenians lived among Turks they did not have a state to rule them like the Balkan case. They(revolutionaries) wanted to free the lands that the Armenians live in Adana, Antep,Hatay and Eastern Anatolia. In These areas Armenians Turks, Kurds and Arabs were living in mixed societies.
The fight was to save those provinces from each other. Since Anatolia was the last homeland for the Ottoman Muslims(after losing immense amount of lands in Balkans and Caucusia), the fight for Anatolia was more bloodier than compared to Balkans.

I don't think we'll get to far arguing this... In a way I can understand the urgency of the situation for Ottomans in a shrinking and dying empire. However, Ottomans didn't have any sense of urgency when it came to the Tanzimat reforms that they promised Armenians over and over and over again - so this takes my understanding back - or cancels it out if you will...

Armenians shouldn't have begged for mercy for so many times before they got angry and did something about it - if you ask me the "revolts" (quite a drastic word for the case) came way to late. Furthermore, "revolts" or not, and shrinking empire or not, Ottoman Turks had no justification to perpetrate Genocide against the nation.

In your posts I can easly get the feeling that you dont believe or dont accept the fact that Erzurum, Kars, Van and Adana belongs to Turks, just because Armenians lived in those provinces for centuries way back than the Turks.

I am sorry but you are nuts if you think these regions "belonging" to Turks goes any further past 1923...

Nobody ever heard of a Turk on these lands prior to 800AD, yet Armenians had KINGDOMS on them 1,500 years BEFORE EVEN THAT!!! and 500 years AFTER THAT (Kilikia)...

You say the same for Karabag, for you as I understand Erzurum and KArabag are the same, historical Armenian lands. Thats why there is nothing wrong with expulsion of 800,000 Azeris from and around Karabag. Same goes with Nahjivan according to you. If all Azeris were expelled from Nahjivan, it will just *fix* a historical mistake done by Stalin, and it will be given back to their real owners.

Ok, you're making some assumptions here about me, my opinions and the like. Yes I believe they are Armenian lands.

But:

What do you say to Armenians about "Western Armenia"? Turks usually say "tough beans, you fought for it and lost the land, get over it"(or something to that effect) right?

Why the double standard on Artsakh? Azeri's started the war, they lost the land and it's over. You take everyone elses possessions and it's ok. But when someone takes yours you cry like a bunch of girls...

Some people say it's a pride issue, but it seems to me like if Azeris had any pride at all they'd be good sports. At least Artsakh (unlike Erzerum and others that were won by cheating through Genocide) was won fair and square by MEN, not cowards who needed to wipe out most of the Azeri nation to take their land...

Big difference dear...

About 800,000 refugees: Tomorrow you'll say it was 8,000,000 refugees and 800,000,000 the day after. Most Azeris agree it was about 400,000. By the way the UN or OSCE (I forget which, but you can find by searching my posts on the site) estimates 400,000 ARMENIAN refugees as a result of the conflict, and most Azeri figures I have read put the number of Azeri refugees at about 400,000 as well. Of course unlike Azeris in Yerevan there were widespread massacres of Armenians in Baku and Sumgait, so in addition to our 400,000 refugees, stack up the dead innocents against your 400,000 refugees... if you want to play numbers games. Anyway, I don't think it's the point. There are refugees on both sides, and it is an equal problem which needs to be solved by settling these people in the respective countries.

I think Azeris and Turks who whine about refugees when there are 400,000 Armenians out of homes because of the conflict is hilarious. Keep planting the old foot in the mouth - I love it.

On Nahichevan, don't make assumptions on my feelings. I would not think at all about correcting Stalins f-up under normal circumstances. However I don't believe Armenians should tolerate the destruction of their heritage on those lands. Heres what I think Armenian policy should be: you occupy our lands, ok, fine - for now - until something can be done to turn the tables, but if you so much as touch a piece of Armenian heritage on those occupied territories you loose all land within a 10 mile radius - and/or whatever distance is required to connect that 10 mile radius to mainland Armenia. You don't touchy, you don't losy... get it? I don't think that would be too much to ask from civilized human beings - then again...

This stand point is not healthy(no offense to you), it is just 19th century type nationalism.
Pan Turanism or Turkish nationalism is a reaction to the partition of Ottoman state and nationalistic movements among the nations it ruled. It was not invented out of blue moon.

You have no idea what my standpoint is or how I feel about Turks or much else for that matter - so i suggest you refrain from making assumptions.

As for Pan Turanism - I don't care how it was born, you're trying to use it to justify the Genocide of Armenians and you'll never accomplish this - there are no justifications. And it should be noted that Armenians were the last to revolt - so according to you, we were the scapegoat, we took the punishment for all minority nations that revolted while we remained loyal.

One more Balkan difference is, the clashes in Balkans was between Ottoman state and Orthodox Kingdoms. Armenian case is different, it was the clash of newly founded Turkish and Armenian nationalisms, which happened in a society where they lived togather.

Don't be so naive. You know about population transfers no? There were Turks living in concentrated numbers in balkan countries as well as the Armenian provinces - don't think there weren't clashes in the balkans between nationalisms of Turks and minorities... that would be a foolish assertion.

[Kharpert]

I would just like to point out that Nakhichevan is a land which consisted of 34.4% Armenians in 1897, 1.4% Armenian in 1979, and 0% Armenian in 2006.

[TurQ]

I think the Azeri and Muslim percentages in Armenia should also be pointed out. I leave it to you to get the figures for Erivan for the same years.

I would just like to point out that Nakhichevan is a land which consisted of 34.4% Armenians in 1897, 1.4% Armenian in 1979, and 0% Armenian in 2006.

[Hovik]

I think the Azeri and Muslim percentages in Armenia should also be pointed out. I leave it to you to get the figures for Erivan for the same years.

If you are referring to the late-80's early 90's you might want to remember they were removed for security reasons, as were Armenians from Azerbaijan. However the latter case invovled massacres and pogroms unlike the former...

Furthermore today there are many Muslim Kurds, a quickly increasing population of Muslim Iranians, Pagan Yezdi's and many more....

And Armenia itself consists only of the Armenian historical homeland, not the homelands of other nations - unlike Azerbaijan and Turkey - for example. So it's really a vague comparison.

[TurQ]

How do you define homeland?

Other nations/ethnic groups dont have right to live in the lands that you define as homeland? They can be removed if it is thought that there is a *security* concern?
My Azeri friend dont tell the same accounts like removal of Azeris for *security* reasons. I am not refering to late 80s I was refering to mid-80s before 88 events in Karabag.

So, Azeris were living in Armenian homeland i.e. Erivan, and they were peacefully transfered outside of Armenia for some security concerns and this is OK because they are already living on Armenian soil, but Azeris massacred Armenians in their own homeland(Karabag) so they have taken back their rightful homeland from occupier Azerbeyjan.
Can we summarize what you say in these words?

Could you also elaborate on those security concerns?

PS: As far as I know Kurdish population in Armenia is less then 1%. I am not sure about the exact statistics, can you provide an exact number for Kurds?

If you are referring to the late-80's early 90's you might want to remember they were removed for security reasons, as were Armenians from Azerbaijan. However the latter case invovled massacres and pogroms unlike the former...

Furthermore today there are many Muslim Kurds, a quickly increasing population of Muslim Iranians, Pagan Yezdi's and many more....

And Armenia itself consists only of the Armenian historical homeland, not the homelands of other nations - unlike Azerbaijan and Turkey - for example. So it's really a vague comparison.

[Kharpert]

According to the CIA factbook, ethnic groups in Armenia account for 93% Armenian, ~3% Kurdish, 2% Russian and 1% Azeri. By 1993, almost all Azeris had emigrated from Armenia. I haven't found an article that explains how or why.

[Turanist]

WHAT TURKS???
They are Kurds , you should stop reading 'The Kemalist Today' newspaper or watch TRT (Terrorist Racist Turks)-channel!!!
You don't know even the ethnic population of those area's what you call 'Türkiye' , that information was all from books from the Ottoman empire,
By the way those casualties were 90% Armenians and the rest Kurds!!!!!!

Hey kerkuk what about the Turkomens in Kirkuk? You are changing demographics because you want the city so must stop this.

Also people are saying the Turks hate Kurds and the Turks want to kill Kurds. but why doesnt anyone say that every Turkish Engineer or Teacher is sent to southeast Turkey then why do Kurds kill them. they are stopping the development of the area. also why is not anyone say about Ataturk dam and other irrigation projects? southeast Turkey is very fertile region. it is very good for farming.


Also Hovik why you saying Nakhichevan is Armenian homeland? if you wanting Turks to take what Armenian is saying seriously then you must leave Nakhichevan stop whinning like little girls is what you are saying. I agree Nakhichevan is Azerbaijan and Qarabag is part of Armenia (see I have agreed that Armenia should having Qarabag. But they must leave other north Azerbaycan territory. Also Azerbaycan should look to the future and look for south Azerbaycan liberation.