History of the Armenian Genocide

[Sako]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

Maybe i did not miss the point and your "summary" is you're not being objective because it's your "baby". My point is that there are much better written summaries for the "lazy" ones, and it takes less than 20 seconds to find them on the web. Why reinvent the wheel when it's a poor reproduction?

Please give us links!

[Crimson Glow]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

Maybe i did not miss the point and your "summary" is you're not being objective because it's your "baby". My point is that there are much better written summaries for the "lazy" ones, and it takes less than 20 seconds to find them on the web. Why reinvent the wheel when it's a poor reproduction?

Oh, I HAVE searched! My dissatisfaction with the results (or "poor productions") of such searches is what led me to type this piece up in the first place (or improved reproduction). There were vital things missing from each site that I wanted to see in one spot. This one didn't go over the true reasoning of the Hamidian massacres, that one didn't mention all the details of the Adana massacres (especially the trail that found the Muslims guilty of instigation, not the Armenians as Turks today claim), etc. And when they DID mention it, it was just No one site had all the events I wanted to see in one place. I spent years piecing together a complete picture of what happened, and now, boiling that down to the basics. If you still don't get that from the thorough explanation I gave Bell, than nothing can help you.

"60,000+ pages" is about 200-300 books, that's all came out of 200-300 books?

That's 60k pages of books, articles, sites, and so on over the course of 7 to 8 years. And no, that's not "all that came out of" all that research, thus why I clearly stated most people aren't willing to read 6 pages, let alone 60k. Are you seriously this dense, or are you here to argue just for the sake of arguing?

THIS is the result of 7 years and 60k pages of studying this subject....

http://soadfans.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=22456

Like I told you in the intro to this thread, what I have displayed here is merely a tiny pond compared to the giant ocean of info I've gathered. I can dismantle any denialist argument given any time, anywhere. I'd venture to say not even YOU would have been qualified to give the rebuttal I gave this Turk. Jampan gorsentsuts.

Of course people are "lazy", Dadrian is "kiddie material" and you are modest.

If you don't realize that most people are lazy, you are denser than I originally gave you credit for. If you're not aware that Dadrian likes to stick with, and defend Armenian "evidence" that has been proven falsified, you are no authority on this subject, and have no business ever commenting on the Armenian genocide again. And I never claimed to be modest.

So let's see, here. So far, you have 4 posts under your belt, 3 of which revolve around you disrespecting my attempts to educate a lost generation of Armenians (as well as non-Armenians) by saying this essay is not as good as reading several books. Really??? Do we really need you to tell us that a 6 page essay is not as good as reading several books on the topic?? Do you really think someone is going to think they're a scholar on this subject by reading a 6 page essay?? And what's more, you claim there are better summaries, but have yet to show them, even though you claim it would take 20 seconds to find them. So you disrespect an Armenian genocide essay, and then make claims to some evidence that you don't provide. Sounds very Turkish to me.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

Still missing the point, I see.

No, it is you who has missed the point, completely missed it, missed it by several miles.

I thought that your initial posting was intended for uninformed Armenians, quote, "most Armenians don't know jack when it comes to the genocide", and "Please take a moment to fully educate yourself on what happened to your ancestors". But now you say you wrote it for non-Armenians, quote, "this piece is for EVERYone, not just Armenians". It was inadequate for the former purpose, it is completely useless for the latter.

I said at the very start that I did not doubt your good motives in trying to write it, but good motives really are not a substitute for ability. Go get all angry and aggressive towards me if you want, but it doesn't hide the raw fact that you seem to be attempting to write something that is beyond your capabilities. Just knowing about a subject from information gleamed from other sources doesn't make you able write about it, and one of the hardest things to do is summarise a detailed and complex subject for readers who do not know much (or anything) about that subject.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

Really? Well in that case I would simply love to read a short summary of the Armenian Genocide written by your furry grace . Let's see what a brief summary really looks like if you have something to say ...

"Once there was, and then there wasn't."

If you want more, pay me $10,000 and give me six months, with the first month or two set aside to produce a far longer report that would carefully consider what should and what should not be in such a summary.

[Crimson Glow]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

What "should" and "should not" be in such a summary is completely subjective. That is not something set in stone that you get to decide. I decided what should be included based on years of reading message boards, sites, YouTube comments, news article replies/comments, etc. from Turks and Armenians alike. I observed what areas were being debated, or used as focal points, or ways to get a foot in the door of denial. I observed how/if Armenians in general were armed with enough info to refute those weak points. I decided to preemptively address THOSE issues with the summary, so that both sides may better understand what truly happened, and why. Why would something of this nature and degree be done?

My findings showed that most Armenians know the April 24th date. They know that their ancestors were removed from their homes, marched, and killed by Turks and Kurds along the way. They know they were beheaded, shot, stabbed, drowned, raped, converted to Islam, stolen into harems, etc. Going over the details or chronology of all those things is of minimal importance. What's important is eradicating these arguments that "the Armenians started it". What's important is having an understanding of how things changed as powers changed hands. My goal was to give the backdrop to the things that happened PRIOR to 1915, which most Armenians don't know anything about. For that purpose, it was MORE than adequate. It brushes on the important incidences, and how, regardless of Turkey's stance today, we were NOT the instigators of those events. It explains how the CUP was not the issue, but rather, the radical right wing that took over in 1913. THESE things are important to understand if you want to know how things went from this supposed "peaceful state of harmony between the Turks and Armenians", to the Turks wanting to annihilate the Armenians.

As to the brief paragraph about the origin of Turks and Armenians, that was only thrown in to give a simplistic rundown of who these people were to non-Turks/Armenians (as well as Turks/Armenians, who all too often, don't seem to know this info). I stated that I'm posting this here to educate the lost Armenian youth on this subject, because.....well....obviously it is an Armenian forum. Regardless of where I posted it, though, or for who, it really wouldn't have changed the way I did it. MAAAAYbe I would have eliminated the first paragraph, but that's about it, and even that is very doubtful.

So yes....yes you DID miss the point of this SUMMARY. A "far longer report" is not a summary. Sounds like you're shooting for a short book. And there is no angry, or aggressive. Just me being blown away by your inability to understand what a short summary is. The average person doesn't like to read more than a paragraph. Even 6 pages is pushing it for most (I guarantee most people look at the length of that initial post, and skip on this thread). But that was the minimum I could go without leaving out things I considered absolutely critical. In fact, it started as only 3 pages, and has evolved to 6 as I tweaked it each of the last 3 years. I, too, can write a MUCH, MUCH more extensive report on this subject (see the link in the above post about my reply to the Turk on the SOAD forums), and free of charge, BTW, but THAT would be inappropriate for a SHORT ESSAY/SUMMARY. Not to mention, no one would read it. If you're going to go that far, you may as well pick up a quality scholarly book to read.

It sounds like you and "Hagop" are in this thread merely to brag about your supposed knowledge on this subject, as in "zomg i am SOOOOO much smarter than this essay!!!" This isn't FOR you or me. This is for people that don't even have a STARTING point on this subject. This at least gives them a brief background/run down. From there, if they want to become a full blown scholar on the subject, it's up to them to dig deeper into every aspect of what I talked about. My job is not to make them an expert, but to point them in a general starting direction.

If you disagree with needing to cover these things, or the depth (or lack of) i went into them, that's your business. But understand that that's how YOU'D do a summary (which apparently, wouldn't be a summary at all). That does not somehow automatically mean my rendition of a summary is "inadequate".

[bell-the-cat]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

What "should" and "should not" be in such a summary is completely subjective.

Is that similar to someone saying what should and what should not be called genocide is completely subjective?

You (and that hypothetical someone) are wrong - it is not subjective. You have provided what you think is an answer before properly thinking about what question you should be answering.

[Pedro Xaramillo]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

I actually thought that Dikran's post was pretty good...

[Gavur]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

No, it is you who has missed the point, completely missed it, missed it by several miles.

I thought that your initial posting was intended for uninformed Armenians, quote, "most Armenians don't know jack when it comes to the genocide", and "Please take a moment to fully educate yourself on what happened to your ancestors". But now you say you wrote it for non-Armenians, quote, "this piece is for EVERYone, not just Armenians". It was inadequate for the former purpose, it is completely useless for the latter.

I said at the very start that I did not doubt your good motives in trying to write it, but good motives really are not a substitute for ability. Go get all angry and aggressive towards me if you want, but it doesn't hide the raw fact that you seem to be attempting to write something that is beyond your capabilities. Just knowing about a subject from information gleamed from other sources doesn't make you able write about it, and one of the hardest things to do is summarise a detailed and complex subject for readers who do not know much (or anything) about that subject.

That's good criticism.

[Pazooki]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

No, it is you who has missed the point, completely missed it, missed it by several miles.

I thought that your initial posting was intended for uninformed Armenians, quote, "most Armenians don't know jack when it comes to the genocide", and "Please take a moment to fully educate yourself on what happened to your ancestors". But now you say you wrote it for non-Armenians, quote, "this piece is for EVERYone, not just Armenians". It was inadequate for the former purpose, it is completely useless for the latter.

I said at the very start that I did not doubt your good motives in trying to write it, but good motives really are not a substitute for ability. Go get all angry and aggressive towards me if you want, but it doesn't hide the raw fact that you seem to be attempting to write something that is beyond your capabilities. Just knowing about a subject from information gleamed from other sources doesn't make you able write about it, and one of the hardest things to do is summarise a detailed and complex subject for readers who do not know much (or anything) about that subject.

Would love to see you write one Mr. Pu$$y

[hrai]

Re: History of the Armenian Genocide

"Once there was, and then there wasn't."

If you want more, pay me $10,000 and give me six months, with the first month or two set aside to produce a far longer report that would carefully consider what should and what should not be in such a summary.

You're pretty cheap in all ways.