Turkey protests Sweden Armenia 'genocide' vot

Balmed Out

I dont think its strange for someone to think the National Socialist German Workers' Party was in some way inspired by socialism. It does differ from what we see today as capitalism or as socialism.
In national socialism ownership of companies remained in private hands however the state dictated prices, wages, what was being produced, how much of it, at what qquantity etc. The state even dictated how much the owner should make in profit.
Just like socialism the state controlled industry whatever you may say about a non state puppet owners.

Anyway back to Armenia which in no way inspired the Nazi genocides and can be debated as to whether it constituted a genocide......
What is in no doubt is it was an awful case of at the very least mass murder and one wonders if there had been a sort of war crimes tribunal would the events under the Nazi party still have taken place or would the paper revelations and disgust generated during lengthy trials have been enough to stop it.

wes

Balmed Out wrote: »

What is in no doubt is it was an awful case of at the very least mass murder and one wonders if there had been a sort of war crimes tribunal would the events under the Nazi party still have taken place or would the paper revelations and disgust generated during lengthy trials have been enough to stop it.

I doubt it actually, afterall after the Nuremburg trials, we have had Genocide in Rwanda, Darfur, and we even had Genocide in Europe during the conflict in the Balkans. So I doubt trials for the Armenian Genocide, would have stopped later ones.

MarchDub

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Because there are two sides to every story.

This really is a trite platitude. There may be many "sides" to any issue but there are also right and wrong sides - and guilty parties. If all sides were "equal" as I think you are suggesting we would never have criminals and no court would ever return a guilty verdict.

Genocide has been committed throughout history and there are guilty parties to it. Turkey is guilty in this case - the evidence suggests this. The problem frequently for the guilty ones - in many cases - is accepting their guilt.

Thirdfox

MarchDub wrote: »

This really is a trite platitude. There may be many "sides" to any issue but there are also right and wrong sides - and guilty parties. If all sides were "equal" as I think you are suggesting we would never have criminals and no court would ever return a guilty verdict.

Genocide has been committed throughout history and there are guilty parties to it. Turkey is guilty in this case - the evidence suggests this. The problem frequently for the guilty ones - in many cases - is accepting their guilt.

What about the counterarguments?

And if only 20 of 196 countries has deemed Turkey guilty it doesn't seem to be a very strong point to be supporting?

ZorbaTehZ

dlofnep wrote:

could they explain why there is such a broad refusal for Governments to accept it?

Sand wrote:

Turkey is a highly nationalistic state

Turkish nationalists are in a wilful denial of reality because they prefer the comforting embrace of their national myth. We can criticise them for that, but I am'nt sure we dont have the same issue with our own nationalists.

+1, the major reasons for the denial imo:

Nationalism and a type of sentimentality for the greatness of what was the former empire, and the former leaders - also the claim they sometimes make "why should we suffer for the actions of what was effectively an entirely distinct nation"

The associations of the genocide term. Possible claims for reparation.

And the fact that they've being saying for so long that it never happened, they'll look the fool to change their stories now (plus all the textbooks/literature et al!)