h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hats off though, you managed to cram in a reference to slavery, amongst the gibberish of Aberfan, evil capitalists, WWII and colonialism. Obfuscation, pure & simple.

Should we ignore one issue because, in your opinion, governments don't pay enough attention to what *you* want to whine about?

At least the US is taking steps to recognise an evil that was perpetrated. I'm disgusted that this govt isn't doing the same. You'd rather they didn't bother.

No Im not geting excited about this because the Democrats are simply picking on an easy target.
If this were Bush taking a stand despite peeing off an allie he needed Id be impressed but the Democrats are simply playing to their core audience and pointing the finger at other people.

Are the democrats doing anything to help anyone if so please tell me who this will help?

(that's not a rhetorical question)

If they were doing anything to people I'd be impressed.

I brought up Aberfan, I could have brought up Bhopal or other less geograpically centred examples of how governments and companies let "other people" die while it was profitable for them. to show how while it is in the interest of those with the power to stop it other paeople can die without there being such a reaction from those with the power to say something to stop it.

See genocide isnt simply about "race" or ethnicity or religion. Its a simple question of mind over matter. "I dont mind if you die becase you dont matter to me." It could be they dont matter because its poor people in Wales or people far away who "look" different. Its the profitability that makes people matter or not.

So im not going to get excited about the Democrats bumping their gums when those Armenians are long dead.

I dont care what anyone wants to whine about but lets be honest what is the net worth of this move by the US?

one love

A little education for you.

"Genocide is the organized killing of a people for the express purpose of putting an end to their collective existence. Because of its scope, genocide requires central planning and a machinery to implement it. This makes genocide the quintessential state crime as only a government has the resources to carry out such a scheme of destruction. The Armenian Genocide was centrally planned and administered by the Turkish government against the entire Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire. It was carried out during W.W.I between the years 1915 and 1918. The Armenian people was subjected to deportation, expropriation, abduction, torture, massacre, and starvation. The great bulk of the Armenian population was forcibly removed from Armenia and Anatolia to Syria, where the vast majority was sent into the desert to die of thirst and hunger. Large numbers of Armenians were methodically massacred throughout the Ottoman Empire. ... The entire wealth of the Armenian people was expropriated. ...at the end of W.W.I, the atrocities were renewed between 1920 and 1923, and the remaining Armenians were subjected to further massacres and expulsions."

More at http://www.armenian-genocide.org/genocidefaq.html

And you casually equate that with Aberfan and Bhopal?

It's a crime to even talk about that in Turkey. *That* is why it is so important that every country stands up and adds its voice. If people do not even understand that what they did is wrong, it makes it so much easier for it to happen again.

Incidentally, the US stands to lose a lot because of this stance. A hostile Turkey inhibits action in Iraq, putting their own troops at increased risk.

Note for Eds: The above is an abbreviated paragraph from hundreds at a recognised academic source.

So the US or rather the Democrats in the US push for this to be recognised by the US as a genocide. So far so much hot air.

Then the US (with possibly a Democratic president in the not too distant future) has a better reason to pull out of Iraq. Im not saying this is the deliberate intention of the Democrats in brining this about but...we all know that politicians are known for such long term machinations.

I do think its relevant to mention alongside genocide incidents where governments and businesses collude in such away that people are killed. The deaths at Bhopal were not a deliberate intention but they were a known danger and Union Carbide and the Indian government knew that safety rules were not as stringetly adhered to or as strong in the first place in India as in the US. Having said that there have been a number of cases of people being poisoned in the US because the locales of the factories were not inhabited by the politicians, judges and CEOs who have the final say on safety.

Yes I know there is a degree of difference between setting out to anihilate a given subset of humans, but equally homicidal and pointed at others is the disregard for other humans safety and need for full rights and protection under the law, but in my mind it is one so small as not worth dwelling on.

If you are driven into the desert to starve, left to die because your ambulance cant get through a checkpoint, forced to work under conditions that will kill you because they commodity you mine at gunpoint is woth more than your life to other people the end result it all the same.

"You dont mind and I dont matter"

one love

Let's put in terms you *will* understand.

1/11/09 BNP Prime Minister Griffin makes being black illegal.
8/11/09 Black people in the UK are ordered to report to detention centres. They are taken from there to the North Sea and told to swim home.
1/1/10 Police, Armed Forces and the new Citizen's Patrol start house to house searches for black people. Women & girls are gang-raped. Babies are boiled.

1/1/11 PM Griffin declares Britain free from Blacks.

Not one country in the UN objects.

90 years later, only a handful of countries even admit it happened. In the UK, there have bever been any inquests, no one was ever tried for any criminal offence. It is a crime to say it was a crime.

16/10/2107 Blicky Jnr III says "Why are we even discussing this? Who does it help?"

I think it is unfair to class denying genocide took place as as bad as holocoust denial (I'm sure I read a comparision made and am too lazy to find it if nobody did then don't mind me) denying that an event was genocide is different to denying it happened which is what holocaust deniers normally do.

I already understand the whole shooting match. We have different conclusions becaue you dont.

I think that declaring the Armenian Massacre a Genocie is hot air because the name does not matter if the attitude does not change.

If you think that America the country where this is being said has moved on much on from the mindset that allowed the killing of Emmet Till then you are wrong.

What is the point of a country, any country pointing out the nasty things other countries do without facing up to its own attitudes and actions in the past and the way those attitudes and actions are being echoed today. None in my view.

Its like a man who slaps his wife pointing out that the bloke down the road used to kick his wife and never admitted to it.

Like I said it is a classic distraction ploy, but if you want to like some sealion that's been thrown a fish head knock yourself out.

one love

So going back several of Blickie's posts: b/c the democrats are doing what there "base" wants them to, it invalidates it? It's only meaningful if the Republicans did it, b/c then they would qualify as taking a "stand"?

I take it you live in Bizarro world, in which politicians get re-elected for doing the opposite of what their constituents want?

Well you know please excuse me if I dont get too excited by politicians politiking.

"hey look at those guys theyre so mean...what what's that...oh darn because we called them mean now they are shutting down our bases which will make it impossible for us to keep our troops in Iraq...of course we wanted to keep them there because we believein Democracy and whatevver else we went to iraq to fight for but now someone else is forcing our hand"

Am I too cynical for seing that in this move

Perhaps but I never said anything about anyones pronouncement being "invalidated".

"I take it you live in Bizarro world, in which politicians get re-elected for doing the opposite of what their constituents want?

I take it you have the standard Americano grasp of international geography, I actually live in a small town called Smethwick.

As far as i know its part of the real world, where I know that very often politicians, who are routinely crooked, will say things that they dont really mean simply to get people "on side" without putting any substance behind their words.

I've always found the term genocide rather odd. It means some lot of people wiping out another lot of people, so how can one commit genocide against one's own species? If the LGMs landed and decided we were only loquacious Great apes and inferior to themselves, that would be genocide.
Cheers, all.

'Gens' is just a people, not necessarily a species.

The Turks are mobilising to go into Northern Iraq.

Oh dear. I don't envy the Iraqi Kurds.

I read about that, too. I'm surprised that there was no mention of whether this has anything to do with the recent US decision to recognised the genocide. Of course, Turkey had been at war with Kurdish groups for decades and this sort of thing is hardly out of the blue but it strikes me as something of a grandstanding operation which might be designed to send a message to the Americans.

Apparently the Americans are urging calm, caution etc but urge is all they can really do.

Turkey is the third largest recipient of US military aid (after Israel & Egypt) and also receives large sums from the World Bank, the EU, the IMF and various agencies to prop up a pretty ropey economy.

http://www.usaid.gov/policy/budget/cbj2006/ee/tr.html

I think there's quite a bit the US could do.

>I think there's quite a bit the US could do.

Well could in theory, yes. They could in theory bomb Ankara but we all know they're not going to do that. They need to keep Turkish goodwill because Turkey is an important ally in a very important region which was precisely the reason the Bush administration was pleading for appeasement over the issue (and probably the reason the vote went the way it did - the Republicans aren't in control of Congress any more from what I can gather and they must of known it'd hurt the Bush government). They won't cut military aid or economic aid to Turkey for the same reasons.

Fair points.

It does rather make you wonder what the "benefits" of Turkey joining the EU would be though. An economy already heavily reliant on charity and foreign hand-outs, a military sustained by the US. It seems to me that inclusion of Turkey could only be a burden to the EU.

I would think enlarging the EU as a block of common economic / social policy is in theory a good thing - gives it more strength to look after its interests in the world. I would also look to Turkey to eventually balance out some of the aggressively Christian countries which have joined recently.

But no, not yet. Not for decades.

The Economist had a very interesting article about these events this weekend and highlighted a point I wasn't aware of: that all living former US secretaries of state, both Republican and Democratic, have asked that this bill not be passed.

Their reason is simple - we need Turkey right now. They aren't denying the genocide didn't happen, or that it was a genocide rather than mass deportation and transportation. They also aren't arguing that the current Turkish Republic is a different entity to the Ottoman Empire. Instead they are simply saying that now is not a good time to aggravate an ally.

The genocide happened a long time ago: if it hasn't already, it'll soon pass out of living memory. Calling it a genocide isnt going to bring anyone back. On the other hand, if the Turks do decide to close the Incirlik air base a *lot* of people will die. Many of those people will be innocent Iraqis already in dire straits.

If the Turks get reckless with going after the PKK, it could unleash hell and destabilise the most peaceful area of Iraq. It could concievably cause serious tensions or fighting between Turkey and Iran or Syria.

Soothing people's hurt feelings, grief or desire for revenge isn't worth risking this kind of trouble, not by a long shot.

For all its problems, Turkey is an admirable country, which is improving. We all know about its strategic position, and about it being a secular Muslim democracy. It has a vocal and vigourous political community. And it is improving, there has been a lot of political debate in the country about the genocide and removing the law of 'insulting Turkishness' from the books.

These are guys we want to be working closely with, and it should concern us that levels of support for the US and EU are at historic lows. Joining the EU isn't a reward for good behaviour if a country's citizens don't want it.

Yes, the Turks do need to bite the bullet and recognise the genocide for what it was. But being heavy-handed, patronising and insulting isn't the way to get them to do it.

Iago

P.S. It was also interestign to look at who was sponsoring the Bill in Congress - it was Nancy Pelosi and a couple of other Californian Democrats who have large numbers of wealthy American-Armenians in their constituencies. I'm not saying their argument is invalid, but it is worth checking out vested interests

A not untypical reaction to discussion about the Armenian Genocide -

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/10/rampaging-throu.html

Tonight (Wednesday evening) heavy rioting erupted in Turkish quarters of Brussels, the capital of Belgium. Several cars were torched and shops destroyed. Police forces were unable to restore law and order in the boroughs of Sint-Joost-ten-Node and Schaarbeek where since last Sunday the animosity among Turks is running high. Turkish flags are omnipresent. In some streets the Turkish crescent and star adorns almost every house.

The Turks’ anger was provoked by rising tension with Kurds along the Iraqi-Turkish border and by the debate in the American Congress about the Turkish genocide of the Armenians in 1915