Reply
Sun 14 Oct, 2007 10:08 pm
Not that I necessarily disagree with the contention that the nation of Turkey, in the past, launched a campaign of genocide against Armenians, but I have to wonder why a passing a resolution to that effect in the US House of Representatives is, at this moment, so critical.
Is there an influential Armenian Lobby at work is Washington?
I guess so.
Do we need to concern ourselves with the Armenian Lobby in addition to the Israeli Lobby since both seem to be trying to muck up our relations with muslim countries?
The usual suspects around here who go on and on and on and on about the harmful influence of the Israeli (Jew) Lobby in DC seem to have missed this story, for, since they always tell us how they are not anti-semitics, surely they would include Armenians in their rants if they had.
This is an interesting conundrum.
After all these years, the US congress passing a resolution condemning past Turkish genocidal actions agains Armenians has virtually no practical value. It will neither put an end to genocidal actions (particularly since they have already ended), nor assist in obtaining reparations for Armenians.
And yet, what's terribly wrong with the US government standing up and calling a spade a spade, no matter how badly the Turks want to sweep this historical pile of debris under the rug?
Perhaps there are geo-political aspects of this issue that I have missed.
I question the motivation of today's Democratic led House as well as the value of such a resolution, but am not about to declare they should not uphold the truth -- no matter how the chips may fall, and certainly not because Turkey threatens to end diplomatic relations with us.
I just have to wonder, why now?
Nancy Pelosi responded to that question with a question of our own - something to the effect of "Why not now?" or "If not now when?" A nice dodge, but unresponsive. There are numerous reasons why now is not the most opportune times to stick this bur under the Turkish saddle. As for when would be a better time? When we didn't rely so heavily upon Turkey as a muslim ally.
Again, not saying the notion is wrong, just questioning the timing.
It's a very irritating issue for Turkey. The resolution has been brought forward a few times and has been quenched for various reasons....it needs to be quenched again now.
Excerpt:
Genocide vote will damage US-Turkey relations, says general
C Onur Ant in Istanbul
Monday October 15, 2007
The Guardian
Turkey's top general has warned that military ties with the US will be irreversibly damaged if the US Congress passes a resolution that labels the first world war killings of Armenians a genocide.
General Yasar Buyukanit told Turkey's Milliyet newspaper that a congressional committee's approval of the measure had strained ties between the two countries.
"If this resolution passed in the committee passes the House as well, our military ties with the US will never be the same again," he told Milliyet.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2191299,00.html
Every year on the last Thursday in November the US celebrates life with a huge turkey genocide.
Apparently the Democrats in the Senate do not have anything better to do with my time.
Speaking as one of the usual suspects; I think this resolution was completely dumb at this point in time when Turkey is having so much problems with the Kurdish terrorist who keep going over on to their borders to attack them and the US does nothing about it.
Why now? Good question. I'm also interested in the answer.
Apparently, this thing has been around for several years but has never been (and never will be) convenient.
Re: Why Now?
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Is there an influential Armenian Lobby at work is Washington?
I guess so.
Do we need to concern ourselves with the Armenian Lobby in addition to the Israeli Lobby since both seem to be trying to muck up our relations with muslim countries?
The usual suspects around here who go on and on and on and on about the harmful influence of the Israeli (Jew) Lobby in DC seem to have missed this story, for, since they always tell us how they are not anti-semitics, surely they would include Armenians in their rants if they had.
Are the two lobbies really comparable? Does the Armenian lobby, whoever they are, win as much from us as the Israeli lobby does? If they were as powerful, would they not have gotten this resolution a long time ago?
Don't get me wrong, I have a problem with any lobby, domestic or foreign, pushing our government to do something that's not in our country's interests, so I'm as conflicted about this resolution as you are. But I don't see parity between the two at this point.
This has been a very long time coming. I don't think it's about anyone being particularly powerful, I think it's about persistence more than anything else. (It was a very hot issue when I lived in Pasadena, 10 years ago now. Large Armenian community there.)
Let me chime in and say that I know more then a few Armenian families who have been pushing for this since practically the Clinton days.
At what point during the Iraq war would it be possible to pass such a resolution? Some of you may recall that we had the same sorts of problems as this in the past.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:Let me chime in and say that I know more then a few Armenian families who have been pushing for this since practically the Clinton days.
At what point during the Iraq war would it be possible to pass such a resolution? Some of you may recall that we had the same sorts of problems as this in the past.
Cycloptichorn
Why is this an American debate?
Why are you suggesting we waste our time to confirm someone in another country did smething bad to their people 90+ years ago?
Tell the Senate to do something valuable with their time.
Why do I need to know? I have to assume there is a valid reason that makes sense, if I did know. I can't believe someone just woke up one morning and said that today is a good day to make the occurrence 90 + years ago official. That would be silly.
I even had an epiphany that it was really none of my business, since the people that run this country are trying to manage foreign affairs, and my knowing would possibly be not efficacious for the preferred outcome.
Wow; mind my own business; what a concept!
Maybe this is but a part of the Dem's "feel good" agenda. If it earns them votes amongst the Armenians, so much the better.
On the other hand, it makes absolutely no sense to stick a thumb into the eye of one of the few Moslem Countries we can call Ally.
If this is indicative of the Democratic Party's version of diplomacy..... I suggest we may have a problem budding here.
Halfback
This is an interesting topic and one that is not partisan. Both sides have supporters and dissenters on this one. Pelosi, who has a large Armenian population in her district, says that it is never the right time and has been postponed for the last twenty years. My take is that we should be focused on our own errors instead of those in another country a century ago, but if we are going to do it, then we should do it immediately, take the hit for a year or two and then everyone will get over it.
There are two things going on that is antagonizing Turkey at this point in time. One, the Armenian thing; two, the Kurds. Is the U.S. exacerbating Turkey's annoyance on both issues? Who would gain?
Would the EU enjoy Turkey, possibly, acting too "excited" to become a member of the EU? Everything the U.S. does is not necessarily for our immediate benefit, I believe. Sometimes, we might just like to have some country "owe us one," so to speak?
sozobe wrote:This has been a very long time coming. I don't think it's about anyone being particularly powerful, I think it's about persistence more than anything else. (It was a very hot issue when I lived in Pasadena, 10 years ago now. Large Armenian community there.)
Cycloptichorn wrote:Let me chime in and say that I know more then a few Armenian families who have been pushing for this since practically the Clinton days.
A lot longer than that, even.
The LA Times
reported:
"Similar resolutions were approved by the House in 1975 and 1984 but did not make it through the Senate. In 2000, a genocide resolution was headed to the House floor when the vote was abruptly called off at the urging of then-President Clinton."
Looks like the same will happen now as in the seventies and eighties by the way, as a parallel resolution in the Senate has so far "drawn just 32 cosponsors, well short of the votes needed to pass".
Halfback wrote:Maybe this is but a part of the Dem's "feel good" agenda. If it earns them votes amongst the Armenians, so much the better. [..]
If this is indicative of the Democratic Party's version of diplomacy..... I suggest we may have a problem budding here.
Engineer is right, this is not a partisan issue.
Replying to Okie in another thread, I just posted the following information
there:
okie wrote:The latest big accomplishment of the Democrat Congress. They are spending their time condemning what was done a hundred years ago with Turkey, ha ha, now making Turkey mad, great, Nancy, what a genius of a move. [..]
Perhaps you would also like to address your complaint to:
- George Radanovich, Republican (CA), one of the two lead sponsors of the resolution;
- Joe Knollenberg, Republican (MI) and co-chairman of the Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues, who was one of the four (two Democratic, two Republican) Congressmen who introduced the Resolution;
- Ed Royce, Republican (CA) and senior member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, who praised the passage of the Resolution;
- Frank R. Wolf, Republican (VA), who sent around a "Dear Colleague" letter urging fellow Congressmen to sign on;
- The 8 (out of 21) Republicans on the Committee who backed the resolution;
- The 61 Republicans in the House who co-sponsored the Resolution, eg: Renzi (AZ), Radanovich, Herger, Nunes, McCarthy, McKeon, Dreier, Lungren, Doolittle, Royce, Miller, Calvert, Bono, Rohrabacher, Campbell, Issa, Bilbray, Hunter (all CA), Musgrave (CO), Lamborn (CO), Shays (CT), Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL), Mario Diaz-Balart (FL), Bilirakis (FL), Kingston (GA), Kirk, Weller, LaHood, Roskam (all IL), Souder, Miller, McCotter, Camp, Walberg, Rogers, Knollenberg (all MI), Bachmann (MN), Frelinghuysen, LoBiondo, Smith, Garrett, Ferguson (all NJ), Porter (NV), McHugh, Walsh, Kuhl (all NY), LaTourette (OH), Dent, Pitts, Gerlach (all PA), Fortuno (PR), Wilson (SC), Wamp (TN), McCaul (TX), Marchant (TX), Wolf (VA), Cantor (VA), McMorris (WA), Reichert (WA), Ryan (WI), Sensenbrenner (WI) (see here);
- Republican presidential candidate and Senator Sam Brownback, who is co-sponsoring a similar resolution in the Senate; and
- Republican Senators Allard (CO), Collins (ME), Snowe (ME), Coleman (MN), Sununu (NH), Dole (NC), and Ensign (NV), who are also co-sponsoring the Senate resolution (See here).
It's interesting - now that there's no Delay running the money game for the GOP, they are beginning to splinter up a bit.
Cycloptichorn
Re: Why Now?
FreeDuck wrote:Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Is there an influential Armenian Lobby at work is Washington?
I guess so.
Do we need to concern ourselves with the Armenian Lobby in addition to the Israeli Lobby since both seem to be trying to muck up our relations with muslim countries?
The usual suspects around here who go on and on and on and on about the harmful influence of the Israeli (Jew) Lobby in DC seem to have missed this story, for, since they always tell us how they are not anti-semitics, surely they would include Armenians in their rants if they had.
Are the two lobbies really comparable? Does the Armenian lobby, whoever they are, win as much from us as the Israeli lobby does? If they were as powerful, would they not have gotten this resolution a long time ago?
Don't get me wrong, I have a problem with any lobby, domestic or foreign, pushing our government to do something that's not in our country's interests, so I'm as conflicted about this resolution as you are. But I don't see parity between the two at this point.
In degree of influence they are not comparable, but they certainly are if one believes the Israeli lobby is pushing the US to take positions that are not in it's best interests. Given the current state of affairs, it's hard to imagine how this resolution is the best interests of the US.
As to how powerful the Armenian lobby is, it's powerful enough to create a rift between America and Turkey in the advancement of it's interests. That's pretty powerful. Fie on the notion of persistance. Persistance without power doesn't do much in DC.
In any case, the relative strength of these two lobbies is irrelevant. If one objects to an Israeli lobby pushing the US to take positions contrary to its interests, one should object to the Armenian lobby doing the same thing. Of course, the Armenians are not Jews, and so that may have something to do with it.
Cycloptichorn wrote:Let me chime in and say that I know more then a few Armenian families who have been pushing for this since practically the Clinton days.
At what point during the Iraq war would it be possible to pass such a resolution? Some of you may recall that we had the same sorts of problems as this in the past.
Cycloptichorn
The only relevance of The Iraqi War to this issue is the sensitivity of the Turks as respects a spunky resurgent Kurd nation.
The US has long appreciated the strategic importance of Turkey. During the Cold War it had to do with geography. Now in the Jihad, it has to do with religion.
Resurgent Kurds or not, Turkey has always been touchy about the Armenian Genocide issue, and they will not become less touchy in the absence of a War in Iraq.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace