Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Genocide: historical developement and necessity
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Lord Ranulf View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Mar-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309 		  Quote Lord Ranulf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Genocide: historical developement and necessity
    Posted: 19-May-2006 at 13:34
indeed it is...........
Back to Top
mamikon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200 		  Quote mamikon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 14:40
Originally posted by theDiplomat



Totally crap...

'The term ''gavur'' is used for Non-muslims not for armenians spesifically. Get some knowledge before using it..

They joined the army..Even at Gallipoli 1915 there were Ottoman ARmenian soldiers..

unfair taxes? it is always the same chiche argument for propagandists...you expect everyone to believe you when you argue abo?ut Muslims and Non-Muslms had been put on a equal statues before law since 1856.

By the way,the link you gave.......it is a link to the All Empries forums



Did I say it was for Armenians specifically? I clearly did not, nevertheless they called Armenians "gavurs"/ "dogs"...but I am sure they didnt hate those Christians...they called them dogs out of love.

really? equal state? and which law was that?

Armenians and other Christians were repressed for all 400 years under the ottoman rule, why do you think the reformations in the beginning of the 20th century were welcomed...during the reformations Armenians were allowed to join the army.

about the link...sorry, this is what happens when MACs are used...btw I hope you were smart enough to put the address in the browser.
Back to Top
Lord Ranulf View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Mar-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309 		  Quote Lord Ranulf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 17:56
Originally posted by mamikon

Originally posted by theDiplomat



Totally crap...

'The term ''gavur'' is used for Non-muslims not for armenians spesifically. Get some knowledge before using it..

They joined the army..Even at Gallipoli 1915 there were Ottoman ARmenian soldiers..

unfair taxes? it is always the same chiche argument for propagandists...you expect everyone to believe you when you argue abo?ut Muslims and Non-Muslms had been put on a equal statues before law since 1856.

By the way,the link you gave.......it is a link to the All Empries forums



Did I say it was for Armenians specifically? I clearly did not, nevertheless they called Armenians "gavurs"/ "dogs"...but I am sure they didnt hate those Christians...they called them dogs out of love.

really? equal state? and which law was that?

Armenians and other Christians were repressed for all 400 years under the ottoman rule, why do you think the reformations in the beginning of the 20th century were welcomed...during the reformations Armenians were allowed to join the army.

about the link...sorry, this is what happens when MACs are used...btw I hope you were smart enough to put the address in the browser.
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ok....... then why were the Armenians and or other Christains called dogs in the first place?..................racial epitahet? Dogs are not considered worthy animals in Islamic culture?
 
similar cultural animosities in the far east have also been id'd with the use of the term..............eg. Chinese vs. Koreans.
 
By the way are their a great number of Isamic Armenians in exsistence and I ask the same question reference Turks is there a sizeable number of Christains and or other religious faiths? Because once long ago the area now known as Turkey was bastion of the early christain religion.....
Back to Top
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347 		  Quote bg_turk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 18:38
Originally posted by Lord Ranulf

ok....... then why were the Armenians and or other Christains called dogs in the first place?..................racial epitahet? Dogs are not considered worthy animals in Islamic culture?
Calling someone a dog is certainly not restricted to Islamic culture. In Bulgaria for instance especiall in the army many Turks are also called dogs (pse) because they are circumcised (obryazano pse). Does that mean that dogs are not considered a worth animal in Orhodox culture? I hope you see now how stupid your question sounds.
 
 
 
By the way are their a great number of Isamic Armenians in exsistence and I ask the same question reference Turks is there a sizeable number of Christains and or other religious faiths?
 
Hardly any muslim has survived in Armenia. The situation is similar in Turkey but there are tiny pockets of Christian Armenians here and there, the biggest being in  in Istanbul (~30,000) - Hrant Dink is a well known Istanbullu Armenian.  


Edited by bg_turk - 19-May-2006 at 18:41
http://www.journalof911studies.com
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460 		  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 18:42
Originally posted by Lord Ranulf

By the way are their a great number of Isamic Armenians in exsistence


     Armenian Muslims, called Hamshenis, reside in the Black Sea region of Turkey. There are roughly 50,000 Hamshenis in Turkey, and a few thousand in Kazakhstan (they were relocated out of Georgia by Stalin). They are generally not seen as Armenian by other Armenians (most Armenians don't even know about the Hamshenis), and they have no ties to Armenian communities in other parts of the world. This is because under the Ottoman system, religion designated who you were. Therefore an Armenian who converts or marries into Islam is no longer Armenian, and is cut off by their community. This is what happens when your people are subjects in a foreign empire and are trying to keep from being assimilated. Thats why conversion was not tolerated (and for good reason in my opinion). However I don't think we need to think like this these days.

     Besides the Hamshenis, there are a lot of people who are now Turks and Kurds whose grandparents were full Armenians. My father's aunt in Istanbul used to go to Anatolia to find Armenian children who were brought up as Turks, and she would adopt them and teach them Armenian.

     Btw, these Armenians converted to Islam because of the situation during WW1. The only way Armenians could avoid the deportations was by converting to Islam, and many did. Many of these Muslims know full well that their grandparents were Armenian who converted to Islam in order to keep their homes. They don't speak Armenian or have a special sympathy for Armenia, they are naturalized Turks or Kurds now, but they know they are descended from Armenians.


Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 19-May-2006 at 18:45
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347 		  Quote bg_turk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 18:46
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

 
     Armenian Muslims, called Hamshenis, reside in the Black Sea region of Turkey. There are roughly 50,000 Hamshenis in Turkey, and a few thousand in Kazakhstan (they were relocated out of Georgia by Stalin). They are generally not seen as Armenian by other Armenians (most Armenians don't even know about the Hamshenis), and they have no ties to Armenian communities in other parts of the world. This is because under the Ottoman system, religion designated who you were. Therefore an Armenian who converts or marries into Islam is no longer Armenian, and is cut off by their community. This is what happens when your people are subjects in a foreign empire and are trying to keep from being assimilated. Thats why conversion was not tolerated (and for good reason in my opinion). However I don't think we need to think like this these days.

     Besides the Hamshenis, there are a lot of people who are now Turks and Kurds whose grandparents were full Armenians. My father's aunt in Istanbul used to go to Anatolia to find Armenian children who were brought up as Turks, and she would adopt them and teach them Armenian.

     Btw, these Armenians converted to Islam because of the situation during WW1. The only way Armenians could avoid the deportations was by converting to Islam, and many did. Many of these Muslims know full well that their grandparents were Armenian who converted to Islam in order to keep their homes. They don't speak Armenian or have a special sympathy for Armenia, they are naturalized Turks or Kurds now, but they know they are descended from Armenians.
 
Wow, that is really interesting! Did any of the Hamshenis live in Armenia proper before Russia came? How were they treated?
http://www.journalof911studies.com
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460 		  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 19:43
     I found some interesting info on Armenian Hamshenis (who are not all Muslim) and other Armenian Muslim groups. Here are excerpts:

Historical info:

Leontius the Priest wrote that in the 8th century, the Armenian princes Hamam and Shapuh Amatuni, who lost their domains in Artaz to Arabs, moved to the Byzantine Empire with 12,000 of their people. They were given the town of Tambut in the mountains (S of Rhizaion). The town was immediately renamed Hamamashen, which evolved to Hamshen (the Armenian and local name for it) or Hemşin (the official and Turkish name today). This pocket of Armenian people prospered in the Pontic Mountains, and, virtually cut of from other Armenian populations, developed it's unique dialect of Armenian.

In the 18th century, these Armenians who formed the diocese of Khachkar, began to convert to Islam. They retained their dialect however, and speak it to this day. These people also retained independence until the 19th century, ruled by their own derebeys (valley lords), all under the voivode (general chief).

Modern:

Tartu, May 11 - Officials in Krasnodar kray, a Russian region in the north Caucasus, have refused for the fourth time to register the cultural organization of the Khemshils, a small group of Armenian speakers who practice Sunni Islam and who were among those deported by Stalin to Central Asia at the end of World War II.

YEREVAN (Yerkir)--A three-day conference about Hamshen and Hamshen Armenians ended on October 15 in the southern Russian city of Sochi, home to over 100,000 Hamshen Armenians.

Currently a part of Turkey, Hamshen was a historic Armenian region that was conquered by the Ottoman Turks in 1491. Some Hamshen Armenians adopted Islam, while others emigrated to the Russian Empire.

The conference was organized by the History Institute of the Armenian National Academy of Sciences in cooperation with the Armenian Revolutionary Federation's (ARF) Moscow Armenian Affairs office, with the support of Hamshen Union of the Krasnodar region, and Yerkramas Armenian news center located in southern Russia.

Scholars from Armenia, Russia, Iran, and the United States, including UCLA Professor Richard Hovannisian, participated in the conference.

ARF Bureau representative Hrant Margarian, ARF Bureau member and National Assembly Vice-speaker Vahan Hovhannisian, ARF's Moscow Armenian Affairs Office Director Yura Navoyan, European Armenian Federation Chairwoman Hilda Tchoboyan, and ARF Bureau's Armenian and Political Affairs Office Director Giro Manoyan, also participated.

The reports of the conference will be published in Armenian, Turkish, Russian and English.

Organizers and participants noted that the event holds not only scientific significance but that it also served as a bridge between Hamshen Armenians, Armenia, and diaspora Armenians.

There are currently 400,000 Hamshen Armenians, half of which are Muslims. Most Christian Hamshen Armenians reside in Abkhazia and the Krasnodar region of Russia.



     So you can scratch what I said before...Hamshenis didn't all convert to Islam during WW1 (though the grandparents of Turkified Armenians did, I confused the two) and they are a much older group than I thought.

Heres the link: http://www.armeniapedia.org/index.php?title=Hamshen

Also, a story from last year about efforts in Armenia to print the Koran in the Armenian language: http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=33757&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs

Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 19-May-2006 at 19:45
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Lord Ranulf View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Mar-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309 		  Quote Lord Ranulf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 19:50
 
ok....... then why were the Armenians and or other Christains called dogs in the first place?..................racial epitahet? Dogs are not considered worthy animals in Islamic culture?
 
 Calling someone a dog is certainly not restricted to Islamic culture.
 
...........agreed as I pointed out in my reference to Chinese and Koreans
 
 
In Bulgaria for instance especiall in the army many Turks are also called dogs (pse) because they are circumcised (obryazano pse).
 
........interesting as in America an Infantryman  is called a 'dog' soldier.
 
Does that mean that dogs are not considered a worth animal in Orhodox culture?
 
.......no but that was not my intent or meaning....intoto....as in some culture to be a 'dog' is a racialy based slur...others as a sign of loyalty and hard work......
 
I hope you see now how stupid your question sounds.
 
....the question was not intended to be offensive or stupid and your rejoinder to that fact could for example or  might be considered offensive to myself...I seek knowledge not belittlement as no question fairly and honestly asked is ever stupid.....or only when percieved as such by  an overly sensitive recipent. 
 
By the way are their a great number of Isamic Armenians in exsistence and I ask the same question reference Turks is there a sizeable number of Christains and or other religious faiths?  
 
Hardly any muslim has survived in Armenia. The situation is similar in Turkey but there are tiny pockets of Christian Armenians here and there, the biggest being in  in Istanbul (~30,000) - Hrant Dink is a well known Istanbullu Armenian.
 
........thanks for the clarification. 
Back to Top
Lord Ranulf View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Mar-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309 		  Quote Lord Ranulf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 19:52
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

Originally posted by Lord Ranulf

By the way are their a great number of Isamic Armenians in exsistence


     Armenian Muslims, called Hamshenis, reside in the Black Sea region of Turkey. There are roughly 50,000 Hamshenis in Turkey, and a few thousand in Kazakhstan (they were relocated out of Georgia by Stalin). They are generally not seen as Armenian by other Armenians (most Armenians don't even know about the Hamshenis), and they have no ties to Armenian communities in other parts of the world. This is because under the Ottoman system, religion designated who you were. Therefore an Armenian who converts or marries into Islam is no longer Armenian, and is cut off by their community. This is what happens when your people are subjects in a foreign empire and are trying to keep from being assimilated. Thats why conversion was not tolerated (and for good reason in my opinion). However I don't think we need to think like this these days.

     Besides the Hamshenis, there are a lot of people who are now Turks and Kurds whose grandparents were full Armenians. My father's aunt in Istanbul used to go to Anatolia to find Armenian children who were brought up as Turks, and she would adopt them and teach them Armenian.

     Btw, these Armenians converted to Islam because of the situation during WW1. The only way Armenians could avoid the deportations was by converting to Islam, and many did. Many of these Muslims know full well that their grandparents were Armenian who converted to Islam in order to keep their homes. They don't speak Armenian or have a special sympathy for Armenia, they are naturalized Turks or Kurds now, but they know they are descended from Armenians.
 
very informative......thank you.
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656 		  Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 21:46
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival



Originally posted by Genghis

If resisters to the rule of the mass murders are the "fish" and their peoples are the "water", genocide can be a means of killing the fish by eliminating the water.  Without water a fish cannot survive, just as resistance cannot exist without the active and passive support of their people.


     If you get rid of the fish and water, then the pond no longer exists and the environment is harder to sustain as a result.

     One would ask why the state would provoke people to revolt against them in the first place by making mass murder and oppression a new rule. Also, rebels never have popular support from their people unless the people are oppressed on a massive scale. If the government oppresses a group based on such things as ethnicity or religion and forces them to rebel, then that in itself shows incompetance on the part of the state (by keeping down those individuals who can potentially benefit the state just because they are not of the right ethnic or religious background). And if the state doesn't oppress them and theres no popular support for the rebels, then there would be no need to destroy such a large group of citizens only to eliminate such small pockets of resistance. The average citizen has no incentive to rebel against their state if they are treated as equal citizens. Sadly in genocides, small pockets of resistence (self-defenses) are made out to look like massive uprisings with the whole group to blame when in fact it is all government propaganda...also, the fighting and instability will only increase if you target a group based on such loose affiliations as religion or ethnicity, as opposed to targeting them based on guilt of a crime or something that actually harms the state. It now gives these people who were once loyal all the incentive in the world to take up arms with anyone who wants to pick a fight with you.

     Plus, if the state has already cut off the intellectual and political leaders of the group and disarmed its citizens (which is the beginning stage in virtually all genocides), then that population will be too weak and disorganized to do anything, so whats the point of throwing them all away? You're throwing away people who make money for your economy, are trying to make scientific breakthroughs, etc. Total waste of human resources. It just creates a brain-drain and a vacuum is created in the economic and cultural spheres, as well as other areas.
 
I'm not disagreeing with you that genocide on a massive scale is not very smart.  I think my definition of genocide is broader than yours.  I was talking more of massacres like those against a certain group to thin out their kind and make the survivors more easy to rule, like what Genghis and others have done, not necessarily to the extent of Hitler or Rwanda.

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival


Originally posted by Genghis

Look at what Genghis Khan did, he killed droves of people so that they could not revolt against him later.  Other examples abound like what the Turks did to Anatolian Greeks after the Fall of Byzantium.


     In both examples they either massacred the people who were rebelling, or they killed everyone within a certain hot-zone or city. For example, the Turks of the middle ages didn't kill every Greek within their borders, but only Greeks in certain areas and just enough to quell any potential uprisings. They still got the benefits from the remaining loyal Greek citizens without the risk of rebellion. Genghis Khan would also only eliminate populations who were in a zone of rebellion...he didn't target everyone within his empire who were of the same ethnic or religious background as the rebel group. The only people Genghis Khan nitpicked and searched his empire for was disloyal citizens/government officials. A genocide would be if the Turks of the Middle Ages went after every single Greek within their borders on the pretext of rebellion, or if Genghis Khan decided that all Chinese were to blame regardless of whether or not they were even close to the rebellion. It would be a complete waste, and they would be alienating huge parts of their populations and throwing otherwise loyal areas into complete rebellion.
 
I think again, what I call genocide you call massacres and not genocide on the Hitler, Serbian, or Rwanda scales.
Member of IAEA
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 22:22
Originally posted by Dampier

I would argue that Genocides and similar suffering bring out the best in man. They also force us to evolve, shange and make life better or avoid a similar genocide- however this can ackfire and lead to another. For example the creation of Israel makes a new Jewish genocide impossible in Europe but has lead to a yet more unstable Middle East and threats of genocide from there.


Well said. I completely agree. And I don't think that no metter how much people whine, nothing will change. And second, poulation reduction leads to the prevention of overpopulation, which has and will extend global and human species life-times immensely.
    
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 22:26
Originally posted by Dampier

I would argue that Genocides and similar suffering bring out the best in man. They also force us to evolve, shange and make life better or avoid a similar genocide- however this can ackfire and lead to another. For example the creation of Israel makes a new Jewish genocide impossible in Europe but has lead to a yet more unstable Middle East and threats of genocide from there.


Well said. I completely agree.And genocide leads to the prevention of overpopulation, which has and will extend global and special lifetimes by enormous amounts.
Back to Top
mamikon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200 		  Quote mamikon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 22:30
I am assuming it will be ok if some crazy leader decided to commence a Genocide in Canada...you know...to stop overpopulation (not that Canada suffers from that)
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 22:37
To mamikon: not really. if this canadian dictator decided to kill people just because he/she felt like it, no i would just let that happen. But if the killings were to get rid of Canada's murderers or extreme criminals, i would be behind it. Pacifism is not the way to go. Killing for a (acceptable) cause should be accepted to a degree.

and to everyone else: yes I know that I postd the same message twice, there was a problem with my computer.
Back to Top
mamikon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200 		  Quote mamikon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2006 at 22:41
Genocide is not the destruction of murders and extreme criminals, but of everyone belonging to a certains group...you should look up its definition.
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460 		  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-May-2006 at 05:18
Originally posted by Genghis

I'm not disagreeing with you that genocide on a massive scale is not very smart.  I think my definition of genocide is broader than yours.  I was talking more of massacres like those against a certain group to thin out their kind and make the survivors more easy to rule, like what Genghis and others have done, not necessarily to the extent of Hitler or Rwanda.


     Ya you're right I misunderstood, I see what you mean now, I thought you meant Hitler/Rwanda type genocides. But isn't the trait which separates a genocide from a massacre the methodical planning and mass destruction of a group (as opposed to massacres which are carried out to crush rebellions)? As far as I know, if a massacre is not planned and does not target groups of a particular group just because they are part of that group (a la Bosnia and Rwanda), then its technically not genocide.
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-May-2006 at 11:48

anyone have any suggestion regards what to do about Darfur? if the US sends troops unilaterally will they be pilloried for doing so if it does not go well? Should Nato, who has many members that have a historic hand in African affairs (and can to an extent be held responsible for a lot of the last centuries blood letting their) go in?

 

Suggestions?

 

 

Regards the Armenian massacre and genocide.that is a stain that turkey Russia et all will have on their souls foreverdriving people into the mountains in trucks and throwing them out ..no food..no water..no where to go..the nazis where just as bad,if not worse,  but at least they didnt make their victims suffer quite as much..I rather have the gas chamber than wonder a road starving to death with my wife daughter and son.and the fact that we have allowed this to go largely unrecognized iswell..just as horrid as the UN cock up in Rwanda ...

 
 

As far as a massacre as opposed to genocide.its a slippery slope from a group of people who hate another, and slaughter them, and a systematic program from town to town to town I might might be able to forgive on town of blues slaughtering a town of greens..but when it becomes systematicthats a line they have crossed from fury of the moment, to a plan to exterminate a chosen sect of people.

 


Edited by Imperator - 20-May-2006 at 11:53
Back to Top
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347 		  Quote bg_turk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-May-2006 at 12:10
Originally posted by Imperator

Regards the Armenian massacre and genocide.that is a stain that turkey Russia et all will have on their souls foreverdriving people into the mountains in trucks and throwing them out

 

First, there were no trucks in 1915, and second people were not relocated into the mountains but into the desert.

 

I rather have the gas chamber than wonder a road starving to death with my wife daughter and son.and the fact that we have allowed this to go largely unrecognized is

I would rather be an Armenian in 1915, than a Jew in 1940 - I think as an Armenian my chances of survival would be much higher. At least in 1915 I would have been able to convert into Islam and save myself, whereas Jews did not have that option.
http://www.journalof911studies.com
Back to Top
Lord Ranulf View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Mar-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309 		  Quote Lord Ranulf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-May-2006 at 12:31

 

First, there were no trucks in 1915, and second people were not relocated into the mountains but into the desert.

 
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
sure there were trucks in 1915 maybe not in lot in Turkey but there were trucks nontheless............. 
 
 
this baby here looks to have an average cargo space of approx 16 sq feet....consequently simple math based on avg size characteristics for a specific racial profile could tell you how many victims of any genocide might fit in the back end.......
 
Back to Top
Lord Ranulf View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Mar-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309 		  Quote Lord Ranulf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-May-2006 at 20:28
ongoing Genocide couched in para-political rhetoric................
 
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Militias kill dozens despite Darfur peace-rebels
Sat 20 May 2006 9:03 AM ET

KHARTOUM, May 20 (Reuters) - Dozens were killed in a major attack by government-backed militias on Shearia town in Sudan's Darfur region, the latest in a wave of raids since a peace deal was signed earlier this month, rebels said on Saturday.

A spokesman for the main rebel faction group who signed the deal in the Nigerian capital Abuja on May 5 told Reuters from the field in Darfur that despite the agreement, heavy attacks have continued on the ground.

"The attack on Shearia was yesterday -- the Janjaweed have attacked many many places in South Darfur despite the peace deal," al-Tayyib Khamis said. Shearia is in South Darfur.

"There are about 20-25 dead and many injured but it's unclear as yet how many," he said.

The government and the Minni Arcua Minnawi faction group signed a peace deal on May 5 under intense global pressure. But two other factions at the talks did not sign saying it was not fair. Thousands of Darfuris have since been demonstrating angrily against the agreement.

Arab militias, known locally as Janjaweed, were not part of the peace talks in Abuja. The United Nations said as Khartoum armed them to fight the mostly non-Arab rebels, the government represented them.

Khartoum admits arming some tribes to fight the rebels but denies links to the Janjaweed, saying they are outlaws.

The African Union, with a 7,000-strong force monitoring a widely-ignored ceasefire in the region, was unable to immediately confirm the fighting in Shearia.

Since rebels took up arms in early 2003 accusing the government of neglect, tens of thousands have been killed and more than 2 million forced to flee their homes.

The Janjaweed stand accused of a widespread campaign of rape, killing and looting, which the United States calls genocide. Khartoum rejects the charge but the International Criminal Court is investigating alleged war crimes.

Shearia is a flashpoint of violence in Darfur as Arab nomadic tribes clash with non-Arab rebel commanders who often use civilian villages as their bases in the region.

CC/@  http://today.reuters.com/News/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=MCD036686
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.