Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!)

1] What you CAN NOT post.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is:
- abusive
- vulgar
- hateful
- harassing
- personal attacks
- obscene

You also may not:
- post images that are too large (max is 500*500px)
- post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or cited properly.
- post in UPPER CASE, which is considered yelling
- post messages which insult the Armenians, Armenian culture, traditions, etc
- post racist or other intentionally insensitive material that insults or attacks another culture (including Turks)

The Ankap thread is excluded from the strict rules because that place is more relaxed and you can vent and engage in light insults and humor. Notice it's not a blank ticket, but just a place to vent. If you go into the Ankap thread, you enter at your own risk of being clowned on.
What you PROBABLY SHOULD NOT post...
Do not post information that you will regret putting out in public. This site comes up on Google, is cached, and all of that, so be aware of that as you post. Do not ask the staff to go through and delete things that you regret making available on the web for all to see because we will not do it. Think before you post!


2] Use descriptive subject lines & research your post. This means use the SEARCH.

This reduces the chances of double-posting and it also makes it easier for people to see what they do/don't want to read. Using the search function will identify existing threads on the topic so we do not have multiple threads on the same topic.

3] Keep the focus.

Each forum has a focus on a certain topic. Questions outside the scope of a certain forum will either be moved to the appropriate forum, closed, or simply be deleted. Please post your topic in the most appropriate forum. Users that keep doing this will be warned, then banned.

4] Behave as you would in a public location.

This forum is no different than a public place. Behave yourself and act like a decent human being (i.e. be respectful). If you're unable to do so, you're not welcome here and will be made to leave.

5] Respect the authority of moderators/admins.

Public discussions of moderator/admin actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private.

6] Promotion of sites or products is not permitted.

Advertisements are not allowed in this venue. No blatant advertising or solicitations of or for business is prohibited.
This includes, but not limited to, personal resumes and links to products or
services with which the poster is affiliated, whether or not a fee is charged
for the product or service. Spamming, in which a user posts the same message repeatedly, is also prohibited.

7] We retain the right to remove any posts and/or Members for any reason, without prior notice.


- PLEASE READ -

Members are welcome to read posts and though we encourage your active participation in the forum, it is not required. If you do participate by posting, however, we expect that on the whole you contribute something to the forum. This means that the bulk of your posts should not be in "fun" threads (e.g. Ankap, Keep & Kill, This or That, etc.). Further, while occasionally it is appropriate to simply voice your agreement or approval, not all of your posts should be of this variety: "LOL Member213!" "I agree."
If it is evident that a member is simply posting for the sake of posting, they will be removed.


8] These Rules & Guidelines may be amended at any time. (last update September 17, 2009)

If you believe an individual is repeatedly breaking the rules, please report to admin/moderator.
See more
See less

Question to people of Turkish decent

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    The gradual word was for the period from 1915 to 64, I would call it gradual.
    Obivously I mentioned the tac, 55,64 events(message #50). The rest is your prejuidice and pre-assumptions. Think twice write once.


    Originally posted by 1.5 million
    You're joking right?

    The few (Thousands - perhaps 20-40 thousand at best - just a guess from what I have read) - had hopes of repopulating villages and restarting - particualrly because of the hope from Wilson's promisses - well - most (most who managed to find something to go back to) didn't last beyond 1921-22 thanks to Karabakir and Ataturk - most were driven back out. Those Armenians who did manage to maintain within Turkey were indeed taxed and persecuted into leaving - particularly in 1955...however these were still but a very small fraction of Armenians who once occupied these lands. Talat boasted that he did more in three months then the Sultan was able to do in 30 years of attempting to "solve the Armenian problem" - and you would call this gradual? How much does the government pay you to spread this crap TurQ - you sound more pathetic with each post.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by TurQ
      Sultan's problem was defined as "Eastern Problem" not the "Armenian Problem".
      His right hand was Armenian he would have first got rid of his right hand and then Armenians.

      He saw the problem totally independent of ethnicity. Just a correction. The rest is I think we agree to a degree. After 1918 during French and British occupation, TUrks fought against the Brit + French, and naturally Armenians
      were on their side(French formed armies out of Cilicia Armenians). There is nothing wrong or to be blamed at this point. But they were not driven out, it was the war between Turks and Brits, and the nature of 15 events and 1919-22 are totally different.
      "Eastern Problem" - "Armenian Problem" - you are quibbling with Semantics - are these not the same thing (essentially)? And I was quoting Talat in this case - and the situation of the Armenians (apealing for aid beyond the Sultan and becoming politically aware at the same time the Turks were doing so in an expansive manner) became known as the "Armenian Problem" then and it is known as such (historically) now.

      Ataturk (through his agent Karabakir) was responsible for erradication of 400,000 Armenians - primarily in the Caucuses in Vilyets which had once been under Russian control (but also throughout Anatolia). He was responsible for far more then the final annhilation of the Cilician Armenians (who again were only defending their homes and lives from certain death and destruction - there was no reason for them to think otherwise - given the immediatly preceeding history).

      I find it interesting that you term the nature of events between 1915 and those of 1919-22 as different...i would agree (though both were still tragic from the Armenian perspective and both involved imposition of Turkish state power upon an essentially poweless subject/formerlly subject people). Still that you see these differently makes me think that we cannot truly consider either one now to be "civil war" in the conventional sense...and certainly what would make 1915 different if not that it was a campaign of elimination of Genocide. no? Some argue that Ataturk and Karabakir wished to finish the job...and essentially they did.

      Comment


      • #63
        Nope not, because for the Sultan it was not an ethnically oriented problem.
        He did not saw Armenians as enemies. He saw it as an unrest in east.

        1915 was not a war between Armenians and Turks, but obviously later on it was(after 1917). Karabekir fought against Russians and Armenians. When they
        lost the war they left. In 1915 there was not a divided(I mean totally) society but in 1917 there was, so they are totally different things.


        Originally posted by 1.5 million
        "Eastern Problem" - "Armenian Problem" - you are quibbling with Semantics - are these not the same thing (essentially)? And I was quoting Talat in this case - and the situation of the Armenians (apealing for aid beyond the Sultan and becoming politically aware at the same time the Turks were doing so in an expansive manner) became known as the "Armenian Problem" then and it is known as such (historically) now.

        Ataturk (through his agent Karabakir) was responsible for erradication of 400,000 Armenians - primarily in the Caucuses in Vilyets which had once been under Russian control (but also throughout Anatolia). He was responsible for far more then the final annhilation of the Cilician Armenians (who again were only defending their homes and lives from certain death and destruction - there was no reason for them to think otherwise - given the immediatly preceeding history).

        I find it interesting that you term the nature of events between 1915 and those of 1919-22 as different...i would agree (though both were still tragic from the Armenian perspective and both involved imposition of Turkish state power upon an essentially poweless subject/formerlly subject people). Still that you see these differently makes me think that we cannot truly consider either one now to be "civil war" in the conventional sense...and certainly what would make 1915 different if not that it was a campaign of elimination of Genocide. no? Some argue that Ataturk and Karabakir wished to finish the job...and essentially they did.

        Comment


        • #64
          In 1914-and 15 Armenians had only 5 armies( around 1000 for each made up by Anatolian Armenians headed by Andranik), in 1918 they were organized totally not like 15. They fought under French army even fought against Turks in Palestine along with Brits.
          Ataturk's and KArabekir's fight was against the British, Russian and French occupation.



          Originally posted by 1.5 million

          Ataturk (through his agent Karabakir) was responsible for erradication of 400,000 Armenians - primarily in the Caucuses in Vilyets which had once been under Russian control (but also throughout Anatolia). He was responsible for far more then the final annhilation of the Cilician Armenians (who again were only defending their homes and lives from certain death and destruction - there was no reason for them to think otherwise - given the immediatly preceeding history).

          I find it interesting that you term the nature of events between 1915 and those of 1919-22 as different...i would agree (though both were still tragic from the Armenian perspective and both involved imposition of Turkish state power upon an essentially poweless subject/formerlly subject people). Still that you see these differently makes me think that we cannot truly consider either one now to be "civil war" in the conventional sense...and certainly what would make 1915 different if not that it was a campaign of elimination of Genocide. no? Some argue that Ataturk and Karabakir wished to finish the job...and essentially they did.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by TurQ
            The gradual word was for the period from 1915 to 64, I would call it gradual.
            Obivously I mentioned the tac, 55,64 events(message #50). The rest is your prejuidice and pre-assumptions. Think twice write once.
            1915 approximately 2 million Armenians in OE

            1918 approximately 200,000 to 300,000 Armenians left in OE

            Loss of approximately 1,700,000 to 1,800,000 Armenians (85-90% of the population) from their ancestral homeland of about 3 MILLENIA in a matter of 3 years.

            This is what TurQ calls "gradual". I can only think of 3 words in response "Ha Siktir Ulan" . . . no offense

            Comment


            • #66
              I didnt say uniformly, I said gradually(in time).
              Obviously numbers are different what we know and what you know. We say there are about 1.5, Armenians say around 2.5(you say 2 million)

              Joseph said there were 300,000 in Istanbul during early republican days.

              it was 1.5s falsification or misinterpretation. What I aimed actually was, during the republican days gradually Armenian population forced to imigrate first to istanbul and then from istanbul to abroad.
              I was not talking about the numbers I was talking about the period. Yes you can use gradually for the period 15-64, but not the word "uniformly".
              Birazda onyargisiz okuyun, lafi kicindan anlamak diye de bir tabir var ama demiyim, desemde lafim birbucuka sana deil

              Originally posted by phantom
              1915 approximately 2 million Armenians in OE

              1918 approximately 200,000 to 300,000 Armenians left in OE

              Loss of approximately 1,700,000 to 1,800,000 Armenians (85-90% of the population) from their ancestral homeland of about 3 MILLENIA in a matter of 3 years.

              This is what TurQ calls "gradual". I can only think of 3 words in response "Ha Siktir Ulan" . . . no offense

              Comment


              • #67
                There were about 300,000 or so Armenians in Istanbul until WWII but it must be stated that quite a number of them were had fled from the east in during the various Hamidian massacres and then the Genocide. There were still enough Greek and Armenians in Istanbul at the time that they could try to blend in. Many actually hid themselves for a few years when things were really bad.
                General Antranik (1865-1927): “I am not a nationalist. I recognize only one nation, the nation of the oppressed.”

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by TurQ
                  I didnt say uniformly, I said gradually(in time).
                  Obviously numbers are different what we know and what you know. We say there are about 1.5, Armenians say around 2.5(you say 2 million)

                  Joseph said there were 300,000 in Istanbul during early republican days.
                  And we know how trustworthy Turkish sources are on this subject, now don't we! As for Joseph, he also says that the actions of the Ittihadists amounted to Genocide, and probably also thinks that the total population of Armenians was 2.5 million, but you don't accept his word on that, now do you. If you want to take Joseph's numbers, then that means 500,000 Armenians were left from a total population of 2.5 million (loss of 80%); still not "gradual".

                  Originally posted by TurQ
                  it was 1.5s falsification or misinterpretation. What I aimed actually was, during the republican days gradually Armenian population forced to imigrate first to istanbul and then from istanbul to abroad.
                  I was not talking about the numbers I was talking about the period. Yes you can use gradually for the period 15-64, but not the word "uniformly".
                  Birazda onyargisiz okuyun, lafi kicindan anlamak diye de bir tabir var ama demiyim, desemde lafim birbucuka sana deil
                  TurQ, using the word "gradual" is a massive deception and you know it. Perhaps after the immense destruction that eliminated 85-90% of the population within a matter of 3 years, it may have been "gradual" after that according to your slanted understanding of the word. But in no way can a rational and honest person call the loss of the Armenian presence in Turkey "gradual". Kicinla konusursan, bende kicimla dinlerim; niye guzelim kulagimi senin kicina ziyan edeyim.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by TurQ
                    it was 1.5s falsification or misinterpretation.
                    Please refrain from outright cowardice and demonstrate my "falsification or misinterpretation" rather then vaugely claim such as a generic excuse for your own.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Phantom

                      It might have sounded decieving in that sense, but what I try to say should be judged in the context of my previous posts. I have said various times that for the plight of Armenians CUP should be accused.
                      May be it is because of the my hurry or else I might not have chance to express correctly/perfectly.
                      The gradual word actually aimed for the the remaining Armenians and their pattern of immigration from Anatolia to Istanbul and then from Istanbul to abroad(from 15s to 64s)
                      looks to me that Armenians in Anatolia actually forced or in a way made them to immigrate to Istanbul(remember
                      this is long before the massive immigration from the rural areas to Istanbul). I remember when first Mutafyan
                      was appointed as the head of the Armenian church there was a contravery around him, at that time I again
                      thought that the state still thinks Armenians are of some sort of national security concern.
                      THis is complicated issue, I can not comrehend it in full scale.
                      You might remember the post some months ago, when I went to airforce academy for application, I have seen
                      the list of the applicants that were sorted from highest OSS(SAT type exam) to the lowest. And the
                      highest applicant was an Armenian student. I was suprised, didnt expect to see such a thing and I have asked to colonell that "This guy is Armenian?
                      So will he be flying one of those F-16s?". He said "yes if he is admittedwhy not?". Obviously state
                      is confused about Armenians today.
                      Originally posted by phantom
                      And we know how trustworthy Turkish sources are on this subject, now don't we! As for Joseph, he also says that the actions of the Ittihadists amounted to Genocide, and probably also thinks that the total population of Armenians was 2.5 million, but you don't accept his word on that, now do you. If you want to take Joseph's numbers, then that means 500,000 Armenians were left from a total population of 2.5 million (loss of 80%); still not "gradual".



                      TurQ, using the word "gradual" is a massive deception and you know it. Perhaps after the immense destruction that eliminated 85-90% of the population within a matter of 3 years, it may have been "gradual" after that according to your slanted understanding of the word. But in no way can a rational and honest person call the loss of the Armenian presence in Turkey "gradual". Kicinla konusursan, bende kicimla dinlerim; niye guzelim kulagimi senin kicina ziyan edeyim.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X