Greg Bernhardt said:CNN just announced on their homepage that Turkey is sending the US Ambassador back to the US and might continue bombing the kurd militias in northern Iraq. How much of a problem is Turkey becoming?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7035751.stm
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/11/news/turkey.php
rather ironic.."If they have a problem, they need to work together to resolve it and I am not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go," said state department spokesman Sean McCormack
Greg Bernhardt said:How much of a problem is Turkey becoming?
Bush doesn't want to deal with it.NPR.org, October 11, 2007 · A House committee has voted to condemn the killing of more than 1 million Armenians in Turkey in World War I, explicitly calling the event "genocide." The Turkish government opposes the resolution — as does the Bush administration, which warns that relations with a key ally could be damaged.
But then if not now - when?The Turkish government has deployed a force of Turkish lawmakers and American lobbyists on Capitol Hill to try to block the non-binding measure that labels those events genocide. But the House vote also underscored the quiet influence of the Armenian-American lobby.
The Bush administration tried every tool at its disposal to dissuade committee members from approving the resolution. President Bush spoke of the consequences of offending the Turkish government in remarks he made on the White House lawn.
"We all deeply regret the tragic suffering of the Armenian people that began in 1915," Bush said. "This resolution is not the right response to these historic mass killings, and its passage would do great harm to our relations with a key ally in NATO, and in the global war on terror."
On the flip side, I'm wondering what the point of the resolution is. The distrustful-of-democrats in me is considering that it may be an attempt to sabbotage relations with Turkey to disrupt the war effort.phoenixy said:Personally I don't really understand what the big deal with the genocide vote is. It seems like Turkey is using it as a smoke screen to initiate independent action, ie. curbing the Iraqis Kurds.
russ_watters said:On the flip side, I'm wondering what the point of the resolution is.
It may be bad timing, but with successive Republican majorities in Congress and/or Republican administrations, it has been put off until now.russ_watters said:On the flip side, I'm wondering what the point of the resolution is. The distrustful-of-democrats in me is considering that it may be an attempt to sabbotage relations with Turkey to disrupt the war effort.
I really don't know the history that well, but what does any of that have to do with the US Congress passing a resolution? Why are they doing it now? Why does it need to be done at all?kach22i said:Germany is our ally, right?
What if their government systematically denied the Holocaust for the past 62 years and still practiced NAZI-like ways?
It's been 92 years for the Armenians.
Our time has come.
For 90 years? Doesn't make sense to me.Astronuc said:It may be bad timing, but with successive Republican majorities in Congress and/or Republican administrations, it has been put off until now.
It has been a matter of expedience and convenience, especially after WWII and development of the Cold War.russ_watters said:For 90 years? Doesn't make sense to me.
That sums it up.Astronuc said:It has been a matter of expedience and convenience, especially after WWII and development of the Cold War.
Astronuc said:It has been a matter of expedience and convenience, especially after WWII and development of the Cold War.
In a letter to Hastert, Clinton said, "We have significant interests in this troubled region of the world: containing the threat posed by East and Central Asia; stabilizing the Balkans; and developing new sources of energy.
"Consideration of the resolution at this sensitive time will negatively affect those interests and could undermine efforts to encourage improved relations between Armenia and Turkey."
President ReaganSenate Concurrent Resolution 12 of February 9, 1916, resolved that `the President of the United States be respectfully asked to designate a day on which the citizens of this country may give expression to their sympathy by contributing funds now being raised for the relief of the Armenians', who at the time were enduring `starvation, disease, and untold suffering'.
President Wilson concurred and also encouraged the formation of the organization known as Near East Relief, chartered by an Act of Congress, which contributed some $116,000,000 from 1915 to 1930 to aid the Armenian Genocide survivors, including 132,000 orphans who became foster children of the American people.
President ClintonPresident Reagan in proclamation number 4838, dated April 22, 1981, stated in part `like the genocide of the Armenians before it, and the genocide of the Cambodians, which followed it--and like too many other persecutions of too many other people--the lessons of the holocaust must never be forgotten'.
President BushPresident Clinton, on August 13, 1992, stated `[t]he Genocide of 1915, years of communist dictatorship, and the devastating earthquake of 1988 have caused great suffering in Armenia during this century'.
Haven't we already done so?President Bush, in 1988, speaking of the Armenian Genocide, stated `we must consciously and conscientiously recognize the genocides of the past--the enormous tragedies that have darkened this century and that haunt us still. We must not only commemorate the courage of the victims and of their survivors, but we must also remind ourselves that civilization cannot be taken for granted. . . . We must all be vigilant against this most heinous crime against humanity'.
President Bush, in 1988, stated further `[t]he United States must acknowledge the attempted genocide of the Armenian people in the last years of the Ottoman Empire, based on the testimony of survivors, scholars, and indeed our own representatives at the time, if we are to insure that such horrors are not repeated'.
The tragedy of the Armenian Genocide has been acknowledged by countries and international bodies such as Argentina, Belgium, Canada, the Council of Europe, Cyprus, the European Parliament, France, Great Britain, Greece, Lebanon, Russia, the United Nations, the United States, and Uruguay.
The United States Holocaust Memorial Council, an independent Federal agency, unanimously resolved on April 30, 1981, that the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum would include the Armenian Genocide in the Museum and has since done so.
Since 1988, you had Bosnia, Rwanda, Guatemala, Kosovo, Darfur, and Congo.President Bush, in 1988, stated further `[t]he United States must acknowledge the attempted genocide of the Armenian people in the last years of the Ottoman Empire, based on the testimony of survivors, scholars, and indeed our own representatives at the time, if we are to insure that such horrors are not repeated'.
chemisttree said:Was all this nonsense necessary... now?
I don't think so.
One recent victim was high-profile Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, who was shot to death by a teenager with links to nationalist groups. His son, Arat Dink, and publisher Serkis Seropyan were sentenced on Friday to one year in jail for "insulting Turkishness" by referring to the Armenian genocide. They will appeal the verdict.
kach22i said:Does the United States of America formally recognize the Armenian genocide?
Its a yes or no answer.
russ_watters said:On the flip side, I'm wondering what the point of the resolution is. The distrustful-of-democrats in me is considering that it may be an attempt to sabbotage relations with Turkey to disrupt the war effort.
The answer is no.kach22i said:Does the United States of America formally recognize the Armenian genocide?
Its a yes or no answer.
I think the distinction is made between the Turkish gov't of today and that of the Ottomans but it is vital the Turks face up to their past. It is important for the Armenians to have what happened to them declared genocide for practical as well as emotional reasons. For a start it would allow them to seek financial reparations from Turkey as paid to jewish people by the Germans after the Nazi genocide. These payments are still being made today despite the Nazi gov't too being long gone amd rightly so, whereas in Turkey people today are being imprisoned for mentioning the attrocity. Could you imagine a Germany of today imprisoning jews for complaining about the holocaust? It would be unthinkable and yet that is what is happening in Turkey.BobG said:Genocide is a technically appropriate term to use when reffering to what happened to Armenians in Turkey, but Congress's bill implies a lot more than an acknowledgment of a past crime committed by a government that was deposed soon after the crime. In today's world, the acknowledgment is tossing Turkey in the group consisting of the 'Arabs' in Darfur, the Serbs in Bosnia and Kosovo, etc.
Art said:I think the distinction is made between the Turkish gov't of today and that of the Ottomans but it is vital the Turks face up to their past. It is important for the Armenians to have what happened to them declared genocide for practical as well as emotional reasons. For a start it would allow them to seek financial reparations from Turkey as paid to jewish people by the Germans after the Nazi genocide. These payments are still being made today despite the Nazi gov't too being long gone amd rightly so, whereas in Turkey people today are being imprisoned for mentioning the attrocity. Could you imagine a Germany of today imprisoning jews for complaining about the holocaust? It would be unthinkable and yet that is what is happening in Turkey.
64th Congress
1st Session
S. CON. RES. 12 [Senate Concurrent Resolution 12]
[Report No. 837.]
In the House of Representatives.
February 10, 1916.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
June 21, 1916
Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.
Concurrent Resolution
Whereas in countries now engaged in war there are several hundreds of thousands of Armenians in need of food, clothing, and shelter; and
Whereas great numbers of them have been required by conditions growing out of the state of war to leave their homes and their property, deprived of an opportunity to make provision for their most elementary wants, causing starvation, disease, and untold suffering; and
Whereas the people of the United States of America have learned with sorrow of this terrible plight of great numbers of human beings and have most generously responded to the cry for help whenever such an appeal has reached them: Therefore be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That, in view of the misery, wretchedness, and hardships which these people are suffering, the President of the United States be respectfully asked to designate a day on which the citizens of this country may give expression to their sympathy by contributing to the funds now being raised for the relief of the Armenians in the belligerent countries.
Passed the Senate February 9, 1916.
Attest: James M. Baker, Secretary.
64th Congress
1st Session
House of Representatives
Report No. 837.
Relief of Armenians.
June 21, 1916. — Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.
Mr. Flood, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, submitted the following Report.
[To accompany S. Con. Res. 12.]
The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to which was referred the resolution S. Con. Res. 12, having had the same under consideration, reports the said resolution back without amendment and with the recommendation that the same be passed.
The committee deems it unnecessary to give reasons for its action, as the desperate condition and the urgent need of relief for the Armenians are so widely known. The purpose of the resolution is to give an impetus to the untiring efforts of the generous people of this country who have been responding to the call of humanity and to the relief of these suffering people. Our ambassador to Turkey has authorized the American Committee for Armenian Relief to publish a letter, from which the quotation following is taken:
I again want to urge upon your committee the great necessity of securing additional funds to enable us to render further assistance to the Armenian sufferers.
If you could only bring home to the public the large amount of good done by the expenditure of the funds already sent us and the number of people we were able to save from dire distress, I feel convinced that there would be a generous and prompt response.
94th Congress
1st Session
H.J. Resolution 148 [House Joint Resolution 148]
In the Senate of the United States
April 9, 1975
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
Joint Resolution
To designate April 24, 1975, as "National Day of Remembrance of Man's Inhumanity to Man".
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That April 24, 1975, is hereby designated as "National Day of Remembrance of Man's Inhumanity to Man", and the President of the United States is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe such day as a day of remembrance for all the victims of genocide, especially those of Armenian ancestry who succumbed to the genocide perpetrated in 1915, and in whose memory this date is commemorated by all Armenians and their friends throughout the world.
Passed the House of Representatives April 8, 1975.
Attest: W. Pat Jennings, Clerk.
Read the key portions of H.J. Resolution 148 at the official website of the U.S. Congress. Type "H.J. Res. 148" into the "Bill/Amendment No." box and click the "Search" button.
russ_watters said:The answer is no.
Should it? Why?
The United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was only adopted in 1948, thirty years after the Armenian Genocide. Since then countries like France, Argentina, Greece, and Russia, have officially recognized the Armenian Genocide. However, as a matter of policy, the present-day Republic of Turkey adamantly denies that a genocide was committed against the Armenians during W.W.I. Turkey also dismisses the evidence about the atrocities as mere allegations and vehemently opposes official acknowledgment of the attrocity.chemisttree said:Art, don't forget that much of the world has already done just that, including the United Nations. How will the US's recognition suddenly allow the Armenians to feel good about themselves or heal emotionally and begin to seek reparations?
If this doesn't help the Armenians feel better, nothing will...
Art said:Because of the Turk's continued denial the Armenian Genocide is still an issue of international significance.
Didn't know about it. Why are we even having this conversation, then?chemisttree said:How do you possibly get 'no' out of this?
Greg Bernhardt said:Looks like Turkey is going in!
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/10/17/turkey.iraq/index.html
That is no secret; it is hardly news:kach22i said:No Turkish officials would comment, but Turkish families said their sons had been sent into Iraq and stationed there.
SUZAN FRASER said:In Washington, President Bush said the United States was making clear to Turkey it should not send a massive number of troops into Iraq.
Bush said Turkey has had troops stationed in Iraq "for quite a while."
"We don't think it's in their interest to send more troops in."
EnumaElish said:That is no secret; it is hardly news:
It is BIG NEWS and has been a well kept secret as reporters are not allowed in that area and all news must be smuggled out at risk of death at the hands of the Turkish army.
I don't think most Americans know that Turkey is in Iraq or Afghanistan. At least they are part of NATO in Afghanistan and were invited.
Does anyone know for sure how many Turkish troops are in Iraq presently? Google it, you will not find a straight answer.
The numbers are kept secret, ask yourself why.....who or what is being protected?
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki does not want the Turks there, they are not invited, they would be invading as usual.
I did. Various sources refer to "a few thousand" as of June 2007 (based on "off the record" quotes from Turkish army officials); one source states 50,000 went into Iraq in 1997 (http://www.redorbit.com/news/international/958361/turkish_officials_troops_enter_iraq/index.html )Does anyone know for sure how many Turkish troops are in Iraq presently? Google it, you will not find a straight answer.
EnumaElish said:I did. Various sources refer to "a few thousand" as of June 2007 (based on "off the record" quotes from Turkish army officials); one source states 50,000 went into Iraq in 1997 (http://www.redorbit.com/news/international/958361/turkish_officials_troops_enter_iraq/index.html )
Also of interest, from 2003: http://malaysia.usembassy.gov/wf/wf1007_turkishtroops.html
Two senior security officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, said the raid was limited in scope and that it did not constitute the kind of large incursion that Turkish leaders have been discussing in recent weeks.
QUESTION: Actually, maybe they didn't come out with a formal statement on Turkey on this recent vote, but the Iraqi foreign minister and many other members of the council have said that they don't believe that any neighboring state should be part of the coalition because they feel as if they would bring their own agendas into their duties and --
MR. BOUCHER: Again, has the Governing Council made a statement? No. Have individuals on the Governing Council said things? Yes. And we expect there to be different views and some debate. This is an issue that, I think, as we said at the time some of those statements were made -- that we will work with the Iraqis, we will work with the Governing Council, and arrive at conclusions, hopefully together, about how Turkish troops might contribute to stability in Iraq.
Absolutely (and I take exception the "prior to GWB" bit); that's why I think much of this is "old news."In American, (at least prior to GWB) we do things differently.
EnumaElish said:Absolutely (and I take exception the "prior to GWB" bit); that's why I think much of this is "old news."
GENEVA (AFX) - Washington has, for the first time, acknowledged to the United Nations that prisoners have been tortured at US detention centres in Guantanamo Bay, as well as Afghanistan and Iraq, a UN source said.
TAMPA - Two days after the Sept. 11 attacks, with most of the nation's air traffic still grounded, a small jet landed at Tampa International Airport, picked up three young Saudi men and left.
The men, one of them thought to be a member of the Saudi royal family, were accompanied by a former FBI agent and a former Tampa police officer on the flight to Lexington, Ky.
The Saudis then took another flight out of the country. The two ex-officers returned to TIA a few hours later on the same plane.
For nearly three years, White House, aviation and law enforcement officials have insisted the flight never took place and have denied published reports and widespread Internet speculation about its purpose.
But now, at the request of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, TIA officials have confirmed that the flight did take place and have supplied details.
EnumaElish said:[quote Originally Posted by SUZAN FRASER, Associated Press Writer
In Washington, President Bush said the United States was making clear to Turkey it should not send a massive number of troops into Iraq.
Bush said Turkey has had troops stationed in Iraq "for quite a while."
"We don't think it's in their interest to send more troops in."
Bush said Turkey has had troops stationed in northern Iraq "for quite a while," a reference to about 1,500 soldiers deployed for years to monitor the rebel Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, with the permission of Iraqi Kurd authorities.