The sense of loss?

[Palavra]

Re: The sense of loss?

1. What? So you can say "80,000 people (or that sort of large number) heroically died defending their country, oh and by the way...our enemies lost far less than us and won the entire war"

Who said less? casualties were near.

2. Does it really matter. They could have conquered it...and they sure as hell didn't decide to.

They did. They also used greeks for their invasion and They left anatolia after independence war.

3. Failed logic of yours there. :P Britain controlled the Empire...that does not mean that its colonies did not have some form of self governance...they had to...Britain was so far away.

You should take good and bad part of britain. You cannot choose whatever you want. You come dardenallas because of UK and You lost war because of cowardice of your men. is this sensible?

[hipeter924]

Re: The sense of loss?

So now, You become brit? werent you accusing brits for your defeat?

Just because he says NZ was part of the British Empire doesn't mean he's saying he's British. Is this how a Turkish wolf's mind always works? Just read a post as it's written and stop looking for holes for Ataturk's sake!

I doubt anyone could really call NZ British anymore. NZ's foreign policy is changing...the US is losing influence to China, South Korea, Japan, and the middle east here, as for the UK...its influence died ages ago...its just a distant cultural memory...and at least half the country (including me) don't like them anymore. As for Turkey...it would hurt Turkey to break off anything with NZ...don't know why we don't just recognize the Armenian Genocide already, after all we don't suffer losing 10 million in trade...but they would suffer losing 80 million.

[hipeter924]

Re: The sense of loss?

Who said less? casualties were near.



They did. They also used greeks for their invasion and They left anatolia after independence war.



You should take good and bad part of britain. You cannot choose whatever you want. You come dardenallas because of UK and You lost war because of cowardice of your men. is this sensible?

1. No they weren't...but never mind that.

2. They didn't send in troops...occupy the whole of Turkey...and send the Turkish government off to be shot...and did nothing about the Armenian Genocide. Not a conquest in my book.

3. Yes you can. Because Brits hated colonials, and they were the officers in total control of the army. Aus+NZ used as cannon fodder. Aus+British officers refused to fight at night...NZ ones did. Its not cowardice but incompetence on the British and Australian side to see the logical way to victory.

[Gavur]

Re: The sense of loss?

yeah, special units probably being wild Kurdish bandits... b.astards. Anyway just how many Istanbul or Ankara Turks do you think were active in that region to carry out these supposed acts?

Nice try to sweep under the rug the true criminals identity I guess its a mindset of denial that's even with the best of you children of the red republic. Howsabout 30.000 hardened criminals and psychos trained by Dr. Nazim and the S.O. (which became the MIT)as well as army commanders conspiring with some Kurdish bandits in limited regions.

I believe as the orders to ethnically cleanse Armenians were given

[/QUOTE]

You said enough, the rest of the sentence is a runon.

[Gavur]

Re: The sense of loss?

[QUOTE=ferdi2;265845]

If they were intent on eradicating every Armenian they could have summarily executed them on the spot.

How come the jiews were not executed on the spot by Germany?

One of the things I remember my Genocide surviving grandma telling me, who was from Bursa ,After witnessing rivers of blood coming down the hills, she couldn't understand how so many was killed she said "it takes a million hands to cut million people", she couldn't grasp The concept of organized and methodical,pre-planned killing which the modern world calls Genocide.

[Sako]

Re: The sense of loss?

Well I'm sure we all understand that now ... except the Turks and Azeri's, of course! They only know one word ... KHARABAGH.

[Pedro Xaramillo]

Re: The sense of loss?

Hmmm *consults history books for Azerbaijan and Qarabagh....
its not in here, either of them...found an Artsakh though, but no Azeri Qarabagh...wonder why?

[Mukuch]

Re: The sense of loss?

That's where you're wrong. Whoever is guilty can do the admitting, I'll stick to making observations only.

Dont you think they who deny the Genocide are guilty?

[Sako]

Re: The sense of loss?

Hmmm *consults history books for Azerbaijan and Qarabagh....
its not in here, either of them...found an Artsakh though, but no Azeri Qarabagh...wonder why?

I second that

[Pedro Xaramillo]

Re: The sense of loss?

Now hold on there Ferdi, not all of Armenia was part of the Ottoman Empire, they were part of the Persian/Russian empires too, these are the Armenians that mostly survived, in addition your own historians agree that the Ottoman armies decimated Armenians, forcing the Shah to move them to New Julfa due to the invading Ottoman armies, Pacevi Ibrahim btw

YOU try to put all of the achievements of Armenians on Ottoman greatness, forgetting they were part of the Byzantine, Arab and Persian Empires and survived just fine

To blame all the Kurds is absolutely ridiculous, a minority of the Kurdish tribes participated, the rest were a few Circassian and an overwhelming amoun of Turks, but did you know something interesting, the Kurdish government in exile has admitted the Armenian Genocide and Apologizes for it, so why not Turkey