Gallipoli campaign and the Armenian Genocide

[bell-the-cat]

That's very true ,but he is quoting Taner Akcam .

There is some evidence that Turk's had plans to evacuate Istanbul by burning it down and they were pretty much convinced that it will fall!
What happened after the the battle started by politicians I don't know but those politicians are responsible for the stalmate and the resulting huge loss of life from both sides are damnable in my humble opp.

But he is quoting it because he believes it to be true. And, rather more troubling, Akcam also seems to believe it to be true!

The Turkish army had placed incendiary devices throughout the capital - and, since most of the houses were of wood, it would easily have burned to the ground. But it wasn't only the allied warships they feared, they were also worried about a possible insurrection by the population; many were not supportive of what they saw as a war they had been led into by Germany for Germany's benefit.

[Steph]

Spoken like a true fanatic - someone who doesn't ever let reality get in the way of his silly "own beliefs". : .

You really are a bitter and twisted cat, the visit to the vets obviously upset you, but it probably means you're relatively harmless on your nocturnal prowls.

What do you know of my beliefs??? My only fanaticism is for Liverpool FC ,see you in Athens tomorrow.

Who put you on your pedestal ? I think you've slipped off it.

[Steph]

And someone who squats in another person country - and seems to think he has the right to comment on things he knows nothing about.

Why do you presume I "squat" in someone else's country, how prejudiced is that? How offensive might that statement be to others on this forum and many others everywhere?

I consider that the only squatting done here is by yourself to deliver the bile in the majority of your posts.

[Steph]

What are you, btw - I doubt even the most die-hard Communists would still dare say they wished what happened in Russia and eastern Europe in the 1920s would also have happened in Britain.

.

Why, if I quote an historical fact, must I auotmatically be forced to take one side or the other?
The FACT is, my dear feline, that Europe, from Russia to Ireland, was in social turmoil after, and during, WW1. Britain had witnessed the demise of the Russian, Austro-Hungarian, German and Ottoman Empires and was petrified that Britain was next.
Can you dispute this? Are you a denialist of fact?
You can read between my lines if you wish, however, I prefer open meanings rather than hidden ones.
My obhorrence of Churchill, and others like him, is his willingness to make any sacrifice (of others!) to achieve his goals.

[Steph]

The Dardanelles landings were an attempt to knock Turkey out of the war by capturing Constantinople and driving out the Young Turk leadership. The landings themselves being a second option to the preferred plan which was to send warships up the Bosphorus (that plan was abandoned after too many of the ships were sunk by mines and shore batteries). If they had been sucessfull, a side effect would have been that there would probably have been no substantial genocide committed against the Ottoman empire's Christian populations.

The Dardanelles campaign was primarily to protect India, all British actions were to protect India.

The British Empire fell together as staging posts for trade routes to the sub-continent, Gibraltar, Malta, Cyprus, South Africa, Aden to name a few.

If Britain had been concerned about other nationalities, they could have acted in strength before, during and after the Genocide

Please consider others on this forum, of whom you have scant knowledge, don't assume your superiority, it stinks!

[Steph]

Ahhh ... trust a socialist never to let truth, honesty, or justice get in the way of his or her right to be always right. Your scum leader Blair is a typical example of your breed.

Again, you make your unfounded, vitriolic comments based on absolutely ..........
nothing.
Why do you assume that I'm a socialist, (I'm a democrat), based on what information?
Is he my Tony Blair ? Do I have squatters rights on him? is he scum? Am I of the same breed as he?

1.I've witnessed socialism "in action" in Communist Poland, Ukraine and Armenia, you could never class me as one.
2.Who's truth do you mean, yours?
3.No-one, not even The Pope, has the right to be always right, that disappeared quite some time ago.
4. He's never been my choice for Premier.
5. Is Blair scum? History will tell, whilst committing massive wrongs in Iraq for starters, he's achieved many good things including devolution for Wales and Scotland. Perhaps independence will follow for those but realistically they wouldn't function alone.
6.Breed? Breed? What do you know of breeding? Precious little I would guess.

[bell-the-cat]

The Dardanelles campaign was primarily to protect India, all British actions were to protect India.

Are you a fantasist, or just deluded?
I suggest that you go and read a history book (as long as it is not one of your Marxist tracts). And go and look at some decent maps as well, not one of your small-scale ones. You might find out that the distance between Constantinople and India is is much more than the width of a thumb.

[Steph]

Are you a fantasist, or just deluded?

You are such a bitter and twisted person, lashing out at everyone with your narrow-minded views.

Perhaps you suffered some terrible psychological trauma and this is your way of coping. Was it a woman? A man?

I feel sorry for you as you don't seem happy on this forum and probably are not happy in any area of your life.

Shame.

[Steph]

I suggest that you go and read a history book (as long as it is not one of your Marxist tracts). And go and look at some decent maps as well, not one of your small-scale ones. You might find out that the distance between Constantinople and India is is much more than the width of a thumb.

Could I borrow one of your Fascist tomes (that's a book) ?

Perhaps you could recommend a history book or two? I'd be interested in seeing that.

Someone who discusses an historical fact becomes a Marxist, mmmmm.

When we read history, we need to understand the text, not just look at the pictures.

British interest and fears were to protect India, they attempted to create a cordon to prevent the other powers from threatening her.

Trade routes, to and from India, Gibraltar, Malta, Cyprus, South Africa, Aden,
these were some of the links in the chain to India.

You obviously have no concept of strategy. Look at the bigger picture.

The Berlin-Baghdad railway is completed, this means that Germany has a high speed (for that era) link to the Persian Gulf, next door is Persia, heavily influenced by Russia and highly infiltrated by German agents agitating amongst the tribal leaders.
British India is only a few hundred miles away.

Look at your map, if you can look at a map of the British Empire (usually the pink bits), consider the links between the Empire.

It's not a solid block as was the Roman or Alexander's empire is it?

Britain used strategic points to protect and strengthen her empire. The Dardanelles campaign was part of this.

Look further than the end of your nose.

[Steph]

https://www.davidsjournal.com/WW1/baghdadrr.html

https://www.regiments.org/wars/20ww1/mesopotam.htm

https://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EJ15Aa01.html