Lounge - How about all this Turkish/Armenian Business?

[KilgoreTrout]

The Armenian [ genocide ] first entered my consciousness when I read KV's Bluebeard. Yesterday's news stories about the congressional resolution, and today's stories about Turkish backlash (denial of convoy access, recall of the Turkish ambassador for "consultations") have brought the issue to the fore.

The Turks seem to be acting awful guilty about this. Why is it so hard for them to admit that, yes, their ancestors perpetrated genocide against ethnic Armenians and that yes, it was wrong and we've learned from it? Steadfast denial only validates the application of the term, genocide, anyway.

Since I possess no knowledge about this issue, what's the big deal from both perspectives, why is the US congress now worrying about this, and who determines the difference between, say, ethnic cleansing and genocide?. In other words, why should we be concerned about this right now?

[Phat Mack]

why is the US congress now worrying about this, and who determines the difference between, say, ethnic cleansing and genocide?. In other words, why should we be concerned about this right now?

I, too, was puzzled as to why the US Congress was discussing this. The only answer that I could come up with was that they have solved all of America's problems, and now have some free time on their hands.

[Blarg]

There still exist problems with the Armenians and Turks, so it's not a dead issue. Further, it has echoes in the Turk's -- and other nations' -- problems with the Kurds, whom they are hot to fight, have crossed the Iraqi border to fight, and have threatened war with should they form an independent state. The Turks have active problems dealing with their neighbors and minorities that have resulted in a great deal of violence before and which may result in the same again.

Additionally, Turks have laws against free speech, using the power of the state to threaten, tie up in court, and jail people who say much against the government, even who do so little as to acknowledge the Armenian genocide. They call it "crimes against Turkishness," of all things. Turkey has been trying to join the European Union, and distinguish themselves from other states that are either outright Islamic or may as well be, by being able to live in a more free and open society. They would have to, or so it has been said thus far, to expect to join their European neighbors fully and share their prosperity. So Turkey is poised between violence and peace, the rule of law and dictatorship, modernism and the dark ages. Will or should the country be allowed, in its present condition or any condition in the conceivably near future, to join with countries seemingly far more socially advanced? The Turks say yes, but resist change. The western world by and large says yes too, but only if there is change.

What's going to happen? Will success in Turkey show the Islamic world that it can join the modern world and enjoy its peace and prosperity, much the way it was claimed our efforts in Iraq would make that country the standard-bearer for a new kind of nation in the Islamic world? Can it show the way out of what looks like an ever tightening grip of unforgiving and unforgiveable religious and ethnic hatred and social and political regression? There's a lot on the line.

Does congress debating about it mean much of anything? Usually such things don't. But there's certainly a lot on the line, and for the future of more than just one nation.

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
why is the US congress now worrying about this, and who determines the difference between, say, ethnic cleansing and genocide?. In other words, why should we be concerned about this right now?

I, too, was puzzled as to why the US Congress was discussing this. The only answer that I could come up with was that they have solved all of America's problems, and now have some free time on their hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

That must be it.

[Chips Ahoy]

[ QUOTE ]
why is the US congress now worrying about this, and who determines the difference between, say, ethnic cleansing and genocide?. In other words, why should we be concerned about this right now?

I, too, was puzzled as to why the US Congress was discussing this. The only answer that I could come up with was that they have solved all of America's problems, and now have some free time on their hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

A somewhat modern, democratic, secular country with an Islamic population as an ally is too confusing. Congress insulting them should help clear up the confusion.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is the US congress now worrying about this, and who determines the difference between, say, ethnic cleansing and genocide?. In other words, why should we be concerned about this right now?

I, too, was puzzled as to why the US Congress was discussing this. The only answer that I could come up with was that they have solved all of America's problems, and now have some free time on their hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

A somewhat modern, democratic, secular country with an Islamic population as an ally is too confusing. Congress insulting them should help clear up the confusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

?

[Chips Ahoy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is the US congress now worrying about this, and who determines the difference between, say, ethnic cleansing and genocide?. In other words, why should we be concerned about this right now?

I, too, was puzzled as to why the US Congress was discussing this. The only answer that I could come up with was that they have solved all of America's problems, and now have some free time on their hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

A somewhat modern, democratic, secular country with an Islamic population as an ally is too confusing. Congress insulting them should help clear up the confusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry. Turkey is a long time ally. Turkey is modern, democratic, secular. Turkey could become an Islamic state. Turkey could start ethnic cleansing today against the Kurds. The relationship is in real jeopardy. It's a bad time to poke them in the eye. Like this guy says:

[ QUOTE ]
But this resolution would accomplish nothing substantive, except for doing a great deal of damage to vital US interests. Not everything that's true needs to be said, or said by Congress. I think we've learned a lot this decade about what can happen when the US acts on moral idealism without fully thinking through the real-world consequences.


[/ QUOTE ]