20th Century Genocides any, all, or none, please help?

Show all answers

Trotsky vs Kerensky-Ð´Ð°Ñ…Ñ Ð´ÑÐ¸

The mere mention of "I am not trying to provoke anyone" reveals the facts that a) you are a user who's been around for long and thus know the likely reactions of Turks though, checking your profile it appears you are a level 1 user with only 7 answers b) you have asked questions similar to this in many other forums and again, familiar with the type of responses you'll receive which shows us that this isn't something to do with your homework.

First one is not a genocide.
Second one is not a genocide either. Stalin was the biggest brute of all times, but the famine cannot be called a genocide. The ethnic cleansing of Crimean Turks during Stalin's time is not a genocide, for that matter.
Third one, again, not a genocide.
Fourth one, definitely a genocide.
Fifth one, again, a brute, a murderer, but no genocide.
Sixth one, yes it can be called a genocide because these people have been killed just because of what they are racially and culturally.
Seventh, again, what Serbs did, was definitely a genocide.

Please use better bogus sites when you're doing a research and avoid emotional traps like the ones on this site http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/Genocide/genocide_massacre.htm

I guess putting the word "united" like in "united nations" makes one look more respectful, I am positively sure there are Armenians behind this site, that is what I gather from the heavy emphasis on the events of 1915 while by-passing the others superficially on the main page.

nowadays

Let me tell you what I think, no one is guilty until convicted in a court, and genocide is a legal term. Therefore, the validity of these charges can only be determined by the International Court of Justice. It is not for politicians to decide.

The term genocide did not exist before 1944. It was described by a Polish-Jewish lawyer named Raphael as the definition of Nazi policies of systematic murder. United Nations approved the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which defines genocide as an international crime, on December 9, 1948. So, it is a term coined by a lawyer to define a crime and was accepted as a law. Here, then, the crucial point is that it is internationally not legal for an act to be retroactively made a crime, or for punishments to be increased retroactively.

Zmaj Od Bosne

What happened in Bosnia was definitely a genocide, done by the Serbs (I have experienced it). The Nazi holocaust was a genocide as well. Armenian genocide, no I don't believe it, I support our Turkish brothers. I don't know too much about the other ones.

By the way, I agree with Totally Blunt, she couldn't have said it better.

HIGADO (inmune a CNN)

you are forgetting the genocide than the palestine people suffers by the jews

and, in Sudan, black subsaharian people has been attacked by the arab goverment

Lady S

Of all the things you mentioned, I can only talk about what happened in Bosnia, because I was there and saw it with my own eyes. Serbs attacked us because we didn't want to stay in Yugoslavia, or should I say Great Serbia. All the other republics already left Yugoslavia because of the Serbian politics (Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia did it already); we were the last ones to leave and they brutally attacked us and did a huge genocide against Bosnian Muslims and Croats. Later there were plans to divide Bosnia between Serbia and Croatia, so we had some problems with Croats too, but that's a long story. The main reason for dissolution of Yugoslavia and for the war in ex-Yugoslav republics was Serbian megalomania and their plans to create Great Serbia and ethnically cleanse it from all non-Serbs.

ErAs

Firstly, let's make it clear;

By saying "accept" means what?

Since in a country, some of lobbies are working greatly and they succeeded to make a genocide claim accept by the country's courts or laws; no here is not such laws accepting any genocide claim.

Most of these acceptions are based on one-sided historic sources, and Turkish courts doesnt work with the pressure of some kind lobbies trying to make any claim to accept it by the laws.

Such an example; so-called Armenian genocide. You will never hear or find any source explaining that Armenian gangs killing Turkish people, firing their villages, joinning Russian army, ... in a country where Armenian genocide accepted by the law; while there are many museums in East Anatolia of Turkiye, showing many deaths of Turkish villagers by Armenians by the time.

But, if you are just asking people, i will say I dont know anything about "Stalin's Forced Famine", but I know The Rape of Nanking, The Nazi Holocaust, Pol Pot in Cambodia, Rwanda and Boznia-Herzegovina genocides.

Armenian Genocide claim is farther away from that; Turkiye has all archieves, museums, documents etc opened for everybody.

Totally Blunt

Well, if you are not trying to provoke anybody, I'll help you with the following:

the ethnic cleansing of Muslims/Turks in post-independence Greece
the ethnic cleansing of Muslims/Turks in post-independence Armenia
the ethnic cleansing of Muslims/Turks in post-independence Balkan countries
the attempt to ethnic cleansing of Turks in Cyprus

I'm happy I could help.

Tanju

Dear Hazel,

I said many times, but I think, You did not read our answers, carefully and asking Armenian Genocide,

You must know, I am not only saying just 70 million Turkish People saying so-called Armenian Genocide ...

You are saying `Not trying to provoke anyone` ,
But are you really sure ?

Is your question something Prejudice ...
Understand ?

Provoke, Do not know or Prejudice. which one ?
I would like to ask a question for you ?
Did you read any Turkish Point about this subject ?
I wondered ...

In my opinion' You must start' I read this website and bla bla ...

But You did not say,

So ,

What is that mean ?

You can say for me ...

greetings_losers

"If you must know, it is for a project for school."
Uh huh. sure baby sure. We are very, universally, persuaded really. We also watch Teletubbies every single day so we are actually easy to convince. *rolls his eyes*

Tansel

so called-armenian genocide is an unproven theory, so u can remove it from your list.

there is no consensus between all historians about this theory.

if you r not a provoker, i can recommend u to read history from neutral sources.

Some Neutral Historians that i know;

justin McCarthy
Bernard Lewis
Anderew Mango

Bix

Here is a list from Wikipedia:

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

I quote from that article:

"Determining what historical events constitute a genocide and which are merely criminal or inhuman behaviour is not a clear-cut matter. In nearly every case where accusations of genocide have circulated, partisans of various sides have fiercely disputed the interpretation and details of the event, often to the point of promoting wildly different versions of the facts. An accusation of genocide is certainly not taken lightly and will almost always be controversial. The following list of genocides and alleged genocides should be understood in this context and cannot be regarded as the final word on these subjects."

From that list, I would like to take one example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_History#Great_Irish_Famine

The Great Irish Famine is most certainly not considered as a genocide by the British. Actually, the parties "involved", have in most of the cases another opinion on these events. Another example is the Algerian Genocide by the French... Or Americans with the Red Indians, or Spanish with the indigenous people of South America, Australians with the Aborigines, Swiss with the Sinti and Roma...

It's quite obvious that if there is some kind of a relation between a country and an (alleged) genocide, the objectivity can only lose. This is nothing new and certainly not only a Turkish matter... Which country, except for the Germans perhaps, would freely admit that their ancestors were genocide murderers?

Keyser

u can remove armenian genocide from that list,as there was no systematic murder of armenians by turks,only forced population resettlement.

ADD

yes baris and maybe u should spend time thinkin about whats going on in ur own country instead of hanging around the turkish section like a bad smell.

â™¥BarÄ±ÅŸ Awarenessâ™¥

I know there are a few people in Turkey
that wouldn't dispute not one
of them being a Genocide.
And I also know there are quite
a few who have found creating
fictional Genocides is a very
effective policy if one wishes to
avoid recognition of an actual one.

Also, your list is missing
the Greeks, Assyrians Genocides.

BTW- If you are in fact genuine,
I suggest next time you need a
"Turkish opinion" go to Turkey
an get a real one.
Here your dealing with minds
that would write an "attempt"
to ethnic cleansing is more worthy
of recognition than one that has
been carried out,....

Sedatus

I guess there isn't any law article which accept any of these in Turkey. This means that there isn't any official decree about them.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: