President Obama alludes to the thing and says it can never be forgot, but he doesn't call it a "genocide," and nutbags take up arms. It is a molehill, and the only reason you want to do it is because it gives you warm fuzzies. You want to make international trade and relations more difficult because it'll make you feel better.

Seriously, this is the crap that pisses me off about Israel-Palestine. Nobody who was involved is around anymore. People stir up s*** over things someone's grandfather or great-grandfather did, and it detracts from the actual s*** we're supposed to be getting accomplished.

Move the hell on and solve the problem in front of you. We have troops in Afghanistan. We have an ally in Israel. Iran is trying to get nuclear power and/or weapons. Can we hold off on poking at Turkey's long-past until after we're done needing them?

I realize that Yasser Arfat and Yitzhak Rabin may be dead, but the problem that I have with the younger generation in this country is that they tend not to care about history or think that history (and the world) revolves around them. The modern state of Israel was founded in 1948, I would think that somebody would still be around. Furthermore, people like Benjamin Netanyahu served in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war to cite one example of people, who are a part of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict are still around.
Also are you implying that it is ok for people to act without impunity while committing atrocities, hold out for a generation or two and then expect people to just get over it?

No, I don't think people should act without impunity. I think they should be held accountable for the things they've done wrong. But along with that comes the assertion that we shouldn't hold people to account for the things others have done wrong. If that means you missed the boat on war crime trials, then you missed the boat on war crime trials. You don't get to punish their children.

As a young person, let me explain: If all you can think about is history, and making sure that everything has been taken into account, long after the events (and the lives of the people to be held accountable) have ended, then you're missing the point: there is also a present and a future to work with and plan for.

It's not that we think history doesn't matter. It does. History is a guide on things we recognize now to be right and wrong. But, and I'm sure this is in a song somewhere, today is tomorrow's history. Harp on the past if you must, but don't be surprised if the folks trying to work with the world as it is (and not as it was) reject you as just another stumbling block.

I suppose I should just take my own advice (oft-repeated when the topic of slavery comes up):

I'm thankful, since it resulted in me being born - and born in America.

BTW, you can take your "nutbag" comment and join Condi. Chow down.

IBCoupe wrote:But along with that comes the assertion that we shouldn't hold people to account for the things others have done wrong. If that means you missed the boat on war crime trials, then you missed the boat on war crime trials. You don't get to punish their children.

You do realize that Article 301 of the Turkish code makes it illegal to call the Armenian Genocide, genocide. Not to mention the Kurdish, Cypriot and Anatolian Greek genocides. This IS NOT a case where a country has repented of their past actions and want to move forward or a one off leader denying the Holocaust. Or that I am asking for the Hagia Sophia back (though it would be a nice gesture) after it has been a Mosque and is now hard to divvy up. Or that it has been 1,000 years and the grandfathers of the great grandfathers of the great grandfathers of the oppressors have move three countries over. No, this is a country that jails intellectuals for insulting National Pride (of which they have none) by calling it Genocide, they are still conducting a war on the Kurds and they keep confiscating the Ecumenical Patriarch's property making his ability to execute his position in Istanbul near difficult. Sorry man, there is very little that you can say to turn my position on the Republic of Turkey.

AZhitman wrote:I suppose I should just take my own advice (oft-repeated when the topic of slavery comes up):

Hey dude, I dont think you should apologize for keeping a grudge. Especially, when there has been very little attempt to either recognize, atone, repent or reconcile for their national transgressions. Other than downplaying the genocide and blaming the Armenians for the genocide. I hope you can discern the difference between the African slavery in United States and the Armenian Genocide.

Cold_Zero wrote:You do realize that Article 301 of the Turkish code makes it illegal to call the Armenian Genocide, genocide. Not to mention the Kurdish, Cypriot and Anatolian Greek genocides. This IS NOT a case where a country has repented of their past actions and want to move forward or a one off leader denying the Holocaust. Or that I am asking for the Hagia Sophia back (though it would be a nice gesture) after it has been a Mosque and is now hard to divvy up. Or that it has been 1,000 years and the grandfathers of the great grandfathers of the great grandfathers of the oppressors have move three countries over. No, this is a country that jails intellectuals for insulting National Pride (of which they have none) by calling it Genocide, they are still conducting a war on the Kurds and they keep confiscating the Ecumenical Patriarch's property making his ability to execute his position in Istanbul near difficult. Sorry man, there is very little that you can say to turn my position on the Republic of Turkey.

In the name of human rights, I'll stand up with you and call on Turkey to be more open to free speech. But I'm not going to start a pissing match over something that happened before you or I or even the people working there today were born.

You're not trying to hold them accountable for their free speech violations. You're trying to hold them accountable for the crimes of their grandparents. It doesn't matter to me what you think of what Turkey does today. I think you should advocate for individual liberty whenever a person's human rights are infringed. If that means Congress should pass a law declaring that Turkey should find a way to accommodate individual rights, great! But that has nothing to do with Congress passing a law declaring what happened between 1915 and 1923 a "genocide."

IBCoupe wrote: I think you should advocate for individual liberty whenever a person's human rights are infringed.

Agreed.

Oh, the irony:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/23/world/eur ... index.html