engineer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Oct, 2007 12:23 pm
This may be tough for us cynics to take, but maybe it is just idealism. Maybe the real reason is that there are some in both parties that just hate it that one million people were killed and no one is willing to say "yes, this was a genocide." No one is assigning blame since the Ottoman Empire is long gone, no one is demanding reparations, this really isn't going to be a big deal after New Year's Day. Maybe it is just a statement of principle. It certainly has generated conversation and brought this event back into the spotlight, if only for a few weeks.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Oct, 2007 12:25 pm
I think the resolution can be postponed again...unless Nancy's plan is to choke the Iraq operation down. Everything happens in her arena for political reasons...what other motive could she have.



US works on alternative to Turkey supply route to Iraq
Oct 16 02:06 PM US/Eastern

The US military is looking for a second route to supply troops in Iraq in case Turkey shuts its borders in reprisal for possible adoption of a resolution on genocide in Armenia, a Pentagon official said Tuesday.

"There is planning going on," a Pentagon official said privately. "It's just looking at what other options are available because there are serious operational impacts" if the Turks deny passage of US military supplies bound for Iraq.

The White House Monday urged Turkey to show "restraint" as Ankara moved closer to a possible incursion against Kurdish rebels sheltering in northern Iraq that could further complicate the Iraq war.

Under strong public pressure for the Iraq War, the White House is concerned a Turkish incursion might upset one of the few areas in Iraq enjoying relative stability and spread to nearby countries home to ethnic Kurds.

Ankara's saber rattling also comes at a time of tense US-Turkish relations over a pending vote in the House of Representatives for a resolution calling World War I mass killings of Armenians by Turkey's Ottoman Empire a genocide.

Flatly refusing the term and strongly opposed to the US resolution, Turkey has threatened to withdraw its logistical support for the Iraq War if US lawmakers approve the measure.

Fearing the loss of Turkey's Incirclik airbase, which provides a crucial staging ground for US supplies headed to Iraq and Afghanistan, the White House has urged House speaker Nancy Pelosi not to bring the resolution to a vote.


Copyright AFP 2007, AFP stories and photos shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Oct, 2007 04:57 pm
engineer wrote:
But back to the Armenian question, the real questions are "is it our place to do this" and "are we ever going to do this?"

On the second question, Turkey is an friendly nation and there will always be a reason not to poke them in the eye. Reagan did it when he labeled it a genocide in the 80's during the cold war and everyone got over it. If Congress passes this, Turkey will be pissed for a while (a couple of months) and then everyone will get over it. Bush is hosting the Dali Lama today, something that pushes China's buttons a lot more than the Armenian genocide does to Turkey. China considers the DL to be the leader of an active separtist movement. Doesn't the same argument hold for China? Don't we need them to help resolve the N. Korean nuclear issue? Wouldn't it be better to wait there as well? Pelosi makes has a point when she says there will never be a good time to do something like this.

For the first question, we have a lot of baggage in our past, but I do see some validity is saying that it might take us 100 years, but we will eventually call it as we see it. Hopefully, we'll call the next genocide early enough to do something about it.


A major flaw in your comparison. Turkey is an ally, and China is not.

China benefits from a non-nuclear North Korea. Turkey, arguably, is hurt by a free and powerful Kurdish region in Iraq.

I'm not a huge fan of Turkey for a number of reasons, but the government acts as if it appreciates its alliance with America. Turks, in general, are not big fans of America. They think less of us than do Palestinians. So its not a free ride for Turkish politicians to work with us.

Not declaring Turkey guilty of genocide is not the same as denying they are guilty.

Not passing the resolution will not allow a crime to continue, nor will it deprive the victims of justice. A US congressional resolution, in this regard, is not a vehicle of justice.

As has been argued, there have been very many national crimes committed throughout history. Clearly we have not, nor will we pass resolutions condemning them all. When we do there must and will be a reason. If the reason is that the resolution will help put an end to the crime, or obtain justice for the victims, I'm all for them. When they are based on domestic political interests, I'm not much for them.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Oct, 2007 05:14 pm
engineer wrote:
This may be tough for us cynics to take, but maybe it is just idealism. Maybe the real reason is that there are some in both parties that just hate it that one million people were killed and no one is willing to say "yes, this was a genocide." No one is assigning blame since the Ottoman Empire is long gone, no one is demanding reparations, this really isn't going to be a big deal after New Year's Day. Maybe it is just a statement of principle. It certainly has generated conversation and brought this event back into the spotlight, if only for a few weeks.


Maybe, but I doubt it.

This is political through and through.

This resolution has repeatedly come before congress over the years, and Democrats and Republicans who might benefit from voicing their support of it get to do so. Then the Leadership kills it and avoids pissing off the Turks.

This time around the Speaker let it get to the floor. Politics, not idealism.

Irrespective of which party controls congress, the most politically oriented positions in the American government are those of the Majority and Minority leadership.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Oct, 2007 07:20 pm
It happened a hundred years ago, hello. We can't even solve today's problems, let alone what happened 25 years ago. I say forget a hundred years ago for now.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Oct, 2007 07:29 pm
and I say forget the"Sooner state" "snooner' meaning those that lied and snuck in early. It's upto your choice what you choose to ignore.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Oct, 2007 07:44 pm
I believed in the "boomers," dys. Besides, I would never have gone to Norman to be a Sooner in modern times.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Oct, 2007 07:49 pm
The reality is that Hillary just wants to have Rosie O'Doughnut go down on her in the Oval Office. The Dems will do anything to help her realize her dream.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 03:14 pm
Brand X wrote:
I think the resolution can be postponed again...unless Nancy's plan is to choke the Iraq operation down. Everything happens in her arena for political reasons...what other motive could she have

Pelosi has pushed for this bill before, independently of Iraq developments. Either she really cares, or it has to do with the significant Armenian-American community in her district, which has long pushed her on this and would probably not take too kindly on her keeping it off the floor now...
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 03:15 pm
I've started a thread that is somewhat related, and also puts the subject of this thread in some perspective:

Turkey: Iran and China more popular than US, EU
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 06:13 pm
okie wrote:
That is what mystifies me why any Jewish American would vote Democratic?


This constant conflation of Jewish people with Israel is simply stupid. An American or Canadian or Australian or any country Jew doesn't necessarily have any connection of feeling for Israel.

There are Jewish people who believe that Israel should not exist as a country. Are they Anti-Semitic?
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 07:00 pm
Re: Why Now?
nimh wrote:

The regional concentration of the resolution's co-sponsors does suggest the work of successful community lobbying resp. the influence of a coveted constituency electorate.

Most notably, of the 225 co-sponsors of the House resolution, a full 49 are from California - or in other words, only 4 Californian Congressmen in the House did not co-sponsor it.


Compare how the Wikipedia page about Armenians in the United States says:

Quote:
California hosts the largest Armenian-American population. [..] The largest concentration of Armenian-Americans is located in Glendale, California, where 26.2% of residents identified themselves as Armenian on the 2000 US Census.


mrs.dtom was born and raised in glendale and we bought our house in glendale in 1990.

the 2000 census is somewhat out of date as local estimates place the armenian population here at closer to 42%.

there is not a week that goes by that the talk of a genocide statement does not appear in the glendale newspress. it is probably the single most important issue to armenians here. genocide day is perhaps the one day that streets are not congested. absences from school and work are more or less excused without prejudice. the armenian flag is even more prevalant than usual.

in other words, it's a very big deal to these folks.

younger armenians are not all that interested (other than the day off ) and the majority of gen day adherents are older or newer immigrants (strangely, most of whom have never been to armenia, but hail from places like greece, lebanon, russia, iran, iraq, cyprus etc.) and the one or two armenian gangs that we have.

with armenians belonging to no one political party (just like any other group), the only thing partisan about this issue is the ceaseless bitching and complaining by the usual suspects any time a democrat dares to draw a breath.

that said, i have to agree that even though turkey is a fairweather friend (remember how they took the 30 million in 2003 and then last minute denied us passage and staging rights for entering iraq ??), right now we cannot afford to have them take an active role against us.

it is fact that the turks butchered the armenians. everybody agrees on that (save the turks). official resolutions and all of that will not make it better or heal it up. it won't cause turks to beg forgiveness, shower armenians with love or money.

in this case, u.s. interests are more important.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Oct, 2007 06:36 am
Cool to hear a local perspective, thanks DTOM.

Talking about Jewish Americans - a big fight has broken out within the Jewish community about the decision by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Jewish advocacy group, to oppose the resolution.

Communities are split, and several have cut ties with the ADL over this.

Basically, while the ADL argues that angering Turkey is not in the interest of Israel and should therefore be avoided, local Jewish communities, especially in places where there are many Armenians and the issue is big, feel that it is unforgivable for Jews, of all people, to turn their back on the issue of genocide denial if it's about another people.

One Jewish-American attending a local Boston meeting, the son of a Holocaust survivor, went as far as comparing the ADL's Abraham Foxman with Iranian President Ahmadinejad.

As with such questions of principle, the dilemma has provoked anguish, as this article describes:

Quote:
Armenian Issue Presents a Dilemma for U.S. Jews

LEXINGTON, Mass., Oct. 17 ?- On the docket for the weekly selectmen's meeting here on Monday were the location of park benches, a liquor license for Vinny T's restaurant and, not for the first time, the killing of 1.5 million Armenians in Turkey 90 years ago.

The debate in this affluent Boston suburb, home to many Jews and Armenians, centered on a local program to increase awareness of bias. The issue was not the program itself, but its sponsor, the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish advocacy group, which has taken a stand against a proposed Congressional resolution condemning the Armenians' deaths as genocide.

"If you deny one genocide," said Dr. Jack Nusan Porter, a child of Holocaust survivors and a genocide studies scholar who attended the meeting, "you deny all genocides."

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/10/19/us/19genocide2.190.jpg
Raised in Turkey, Hovannes Minasian, center, was among many Armenians attending the town meeting in Lexington.

The Congressional resolution has created an international furor and deeply offended the Turkish government, both a key ally of Israel's and a crucial logistics player for the American presence in Iraq. But as events in Boston suburbs in recent months have shown, it has also put American Jews in an anguished dilemma as they try to reconcile their support of Israel with their commitment to fighting genocide. In the end, the Board of Selectmen here voted unanimously to cut ties with the Anti-Defamation League, as did three other Boston suburbs this week. Three other towns had already done so, with more considering the option.

For many Jews, the issue has involved much soul-searching.

"It's hard to talk about it because there are two things or more in conflict here," said Rabbi David Lerner of Temple Emunah in Lexington. "Israel is in a very vulnerable position in the world, and Turkey is its only friend in the Middle East. Genocide is a burning issue for us, now and in the past. It's something of who we are."

The House resolution condemning the killings of Armenians as genocide is nonbinding and largely symbolic, but Turkey's reaction has been swift and furious. It has recalled its ambassador from Washington and threatened to withdraw critical logistical support for the Iraq war.

For Patrick Mehr, a Lexington resident who spoke at the meeting Monday, the overriding priority is condemning the killings, regardless of Turkey's response.

The next day at his home, Mr. Mehr, the son of a Holocaust survivor, voiced the anger many Jews and Armenians feel toward Abraham H. Foxman, the Anti-Defamation League's national director. "Abe Foxman, like George W. Bush, is mumbling that it may not have been genocide," Mr. Mehr said. "Foxman talks about commissions of scholars who should study this. That, to me, rang exactly like Ahmadinejad saying, ?'Let's have a committee to study the Holocaust.' Give me a break."

Jewish leaders have long sought to focus attention on the killings of Armenians, starting with the American ambassador to Turkey in 1915, Henry Morgenthau Sr., who wrote in a cable that the Turkish violence against Armenians was "an effort to exterminate the race." Several members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who voted for the resolution, including a key sponsor, Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California, are Jewish.

Several major Jewish groups, like the American Jewish Committee, oppose the resolution, arguing that it is not the best way to persuade the Turks to examine their past.

Mr. Foxman argues that Turkey is the only friend Israel has in the Muslim world, and it has been hospitable to Jews since giving them refuge after they were driven from Europe during the Inquisition.

"Israel's relationship with Turkey is the second most important, after its relationship with the United States," Mr. Foxman said. "All this in a world that isolates Israel, and all this can't simply be waved away."

Widespread attention to the Anti-Defamation League's opposition to the resolution came in July, when David Boyajian, an Armenian-American resident of Newton, Mass., wrote to a local newspaper saying that the town's anti-bigotry program, known as No Place for Hate, was tarnished because of its sponsorship by the Anti-Defamation League.

He wrote that the A.D.L. "has made the Holocaust and its denial key pieces" of the program, "while at the same time hypocritically working with Turkey to oppose recognition of the Armenian genocide of 1915-23."

The news shocked most local Jews, many of whom have long been active in campaigns against killings in Bosnia, Rwanda and, most recently, Sudan. By mid-August, Watertown, Mass., had decided to end its affiliation with the Anti-Defamation League's program. On Aug. 17, the board of the New England Anti-Defamation League passed a resolution calling for the national organization to recognize the Armenian genocide. Its regional director, Andrew Tarsy, was fired by the national group the next day.

The clampdown on the local chapter infuriated many Jews in the Boston area. Two members of the New England board resigned, although one has since returned, and many local leaders criticized Mr. Foxman. Newton, whose population is heavily Jewish, voted to sever ties with the Anti-Defamation League unless it changed its position on the resolution.

Mr. Foxman quickly rehired Mr. Tarsy and issued a statement intended to heal what he said were dangerous rifts in the Boston Jewish community at a time when Jewish unity was crucial. The statement did not support the House resolution. The killings of Armenians, Mr. Foxman wrote, were "tantamount to genocide."

He added, "If the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it genocide."

Some Jews praised Mr. Foxman, whose reappraisal, they said, was uncharacteristic. But other Jews and Armenians said he did not go far enough.

"It denies the intentionality of genocide," said Joey Kurtzman, executive editor of the online magazine Jewcy.com. Janet Tassel, a congregant at Temple Isaiah in Lexington, said she did not like Mr. Foxman but could not understand how Jews could be fighting over the word genocide when Israeli and American interests are at stake.

"If this resolution goes through, it's goodbye Charlie for Israel, for U.S. troops in Iraq," Ms. Tassel said. "It will lead to more anti-Semitism. I'm conflicted about what's right."

Dr. Porter, the genocide scholar, said the differing views among Jews on the resolution stemmed in part from whether they saw Israel as particularly vulnerable. "I see Israel as a strong nation," Dr. Porter said, after speaking for cutting ties to the Anti-Defamation League at the Lexington meeting. "Jews are strong. They don't have to be intimidated by politics."

The complex of considerations weighed heavily on Rabbi Howard L. Jaffe of Temple Isaiah, who after weeks of thought decided to back the genocide resolution. "It's very hard for me to support a position that could be detrimental to Israel," he said. "But for me as a Jew, I have to take seriously Jewish values, and they require us to do what is right and righteous."

At the Lexington meeting, nearly everyone praised the No Place for Hate program, which has worked with hundreds of residents in the past seven years.

Some Jewish residents pointed out that the local Anti-Defamation League chapter took a stand for the resolution and should not be punished for the national leadership's policy; but Vicki Blier, another member of Temple Isaiah, said in a phone interview that the Anti-Defamation League had to be held accountable for its views.

"If this were an organization that were denying the Holocaust, would they be allowed to do anything in town, even if what they are doing is the most beneficial of programs?" Ms. Blier said. "In my experience, Jews are at the forefront in the recognition of injustice. Jews have always stuck their neck out for others."
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Oct, 2007 12:29 pm
Re: Why Now?
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
with armenians belonging to no one political party (just like any other group), the only thing partisan about this issue is the ceaseless bitching and complaining by the usual suspects any time a democrat dares to draw a breath.

Came across a hard-to-believe-but-it's-true live example of this:

Quote:
GENOCIDE FOLLIES

Minor thing, but as a semi-expert on the congressional Armenian genocide debate I was startled to hear Tom Tancredo interject and ridicule the genocide resolution as a stupid idea.

He descibed the resolution as "pandering for votes" and derided Nancy Pelosi for her "complete ignorance of the foreign policy implications of doing such a thing."

Reasonable people will perhaps side with Tancredo here--though maybe less so if they knew that, until a couple of weeks ago, Tancredo himself was a co-sponsor of the resolution.

Let's see, which smileys are appropriate here.. pick any of the following:

Shocked Laughing Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Oct, 2007 12:44 pm
jesus
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Oct, 2007 01:46 pm
blatham wrote:
jesus


yep. and he wept. Laughing

when i was doing my last post, i started looking to see if the u.n. has done a gen resolution. usual key search= u.n. resolution armenian genocide.

amazingly, the bulk of lead articles were blogs accusing pelosi and dems of using the issue solely to "hurt the war in iraq".

yeah, right. as if bush and his gang that can't shoot straight haven't accomplished that mission already.

and i didn't find that the u.n. had done a resolution specific to the armenian holocaust.

they really should...
0 Replies
 
tinygiraffe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Oct, 2007 11:44 pm
if they aren't going to provide a resolution, they should at least give a reason.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Oct, 2007 09:51 am
The Dems were so worried about distabilizing the ME and causing havoc. If that were the case then how come they went and did something stupid like this?

Turkey is gearing up to move into northern Iraq. Who is going to stop Turkey? Will that be up to the US or is some other country going to try? Will more action in the ME mean other countries will get involved? What did the Dems think was going to happen when they passed this. Remember they control the house, not the Reps. If they thought this was a bad idea then they should have had the votes to kill it. This is going to be an intresting next few weeks. Hope you Dems out there like what you started.

It was contained to Iraq and Afghanistan now its going to spread!
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Oct, 2007 09:53 am
Baldimo wrote:
The Dems were so worried about distabilizing the ME and causing havoc. If that were the case then how come they went and did something stupid like this?

Turkey is gearing up to move into northern Iraq. Who is going to stop Turkey? Will that be up to the US or is some other country going to try? Will more action in the ME mean other countries will get involved? What did the Dems think was going to happen when they passed this. Remember they control the house, not the Reps. If they thought this was a bad idea then they should have had the votes to kill it. This is going to be an intresting next few weeks. Hope you Dems out there like what you started.

It was contained to Iraq and Afghanistan now its going to spread!


Don't kid yourself - Turkey has been planning this for a year. I've been reading about it for two. This resolution, while ill-timed, isn't causing the problems we face with Turkey in the ME.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Oct, 2007 10:26 am
Baldimo wrote:
The Dems were so worried about distabilizing the ME and causing havoc. If that were the case then how come they went and did something stupid like this?

...

It was contained to Iraq and Afghanistan now its going to spread!


Does that mean that you'll be getting a recall notice soon, B. Will it be your sworn duty to be headin' on over there to try to put a stop to this? How long was your last tour of duty anyway?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Why Now?
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/03/2026 at 04:13:36