Excuse me, is it really Armenian Genocide the 1st of the XX Century? Why to talk about it today?

The Peace of God to all that belong to the Light,
Dear Readers,

The news agencies are registering today what it seems to be a so serious crisis in between the Holy see and the Republic of Turkey
for the words of the Holy Father Francis I on the ceremonial act of canonization of an Armenian Saint.

The Pope not only used the word genocide to refer to the massacres of Armenians that occurred in 1915, but he went far beyond that point to qualify that terrible event as the first genocide of the XX century.

www.cnn.com...

The reaction of the Turkish government has been almost immediate and really not friendly at all with the Pope.

www.usatoday.com...

I sincerely think that in spite of what advising the Pope has received in this topic and considering that his intention was possibly the best, the Armenian massacres he is referring can't be the first genocide of the XX Century.

I am really concerned if he has received the best information from all the points of view among Historians on this topic.

It is evident that something really tragic occurred in Armenia on 1915, there is no doubt on that aspect, as well as a massive annihilation of people is always a crime against humanity, but numbers that are running right now in the web of estimations of 1'500000 possible victims do not look even probable for a nation that by that time it is doubtful had the people required to survive such loss.

Armenia current population is about 3.3 million, the variance of the genocide is huge, from 600000 to 1.5 million depending of the source.

Now, there are so many sad and tragic events occurred in the beginning of the XX century around the world that to claim that a genocide from April of 1915 to September 1915 to be the 1st one, is to ignore other tragedies of similar magnitude.

Let me just enumerate other XX century genocides that occurred before or in parallel to the Armenian massacres :

1) Colombia had a cruel and terrible civil war since 1900 to 1903 , called the thousand days war in a rebellion of Liberals against the conservative government triggering a bloody civil war of devastating consequences for a nation that at that time was just a little more than 2 million inhabitants killed more than 100000 people, it was such the magnitude of the massacres that by the end of the conflict adolescents were recruited in both armies. The final outcome of such conflict was the separation of Panama from Colombia.

en.wikipedia.org...

2) In January 1905, in Russia, an incident known as "Bloody Sunday" occurred when Father Georgy Gapon led an enormous crowd to the Winter Palace in Saint Petersburg to present a petition to the Tsar Nicholas II . When the procession reached the palace, soldiers opened fire on the crowd, killing hundreds at least, but many accounts talk about thousands. The Russian masses were so furious over the massacre that a general strike was declared demanding a democratic republic.

By April 1906, more than 14,000 people had been executed and 75,000 imprisoned. The historian Brian Taylor states the number of deaths in the 1905 Revolution was in the "thousands", and notes the existence of one source that puts the figure at over 13,000.

en.wikipedia.org...

3) The Ten Tragic Days , a rebellion in February of 1913, that triggered the second Mexican Revolution after the coup d'état of General Victoriano Huerta against the government, took by sure , apart of the assassination of the President Francisco I Madero and the Vice President Jose Ma. Pinosuarez, thousands of lives among their sympathizers and supporters in Mexico city and its surroundings, that tried to oppose to the usurpation of the power. The total number of victims that the civil war this event triggered is close to 2 million over a total population of 6 million for the country at that time.

en.wikipedia.org...

4) The Greek and the Assyrian Genocides that were both also under Turkish hands, began in 1914 before the Armenian one and their magnitudes are of many hundreds of thousands.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

5) A genocide of Kurds and Turks committed in 1916, in the border in between Georgia and Turkey, that was occurred when the Armenian massacres were still in run , this time under the Ukrainian Cossaks who were fighting for the Russian Empire.

During WWI, Russian "General Liakhov, for instance 'accused the Muslims of treachery, and sent his Cossacks from Batum with orders to kill every native at sight, and burn every village and every mosque. The approximate number of victims is estimated in 45000.

en.wikipedia.org...

6) The Surdulica massacre was the mass murder of Serbian men by Bulgarian occupational authorities in the southern Serbian town of Surdulica in 1916 and early 1917, during World War I . At least 3000 victims.

en.wikipedia.org...

7) The Moro Rebellion (1899–1913) was an armed conflict between Moro Indigenous Ethnic groups and the United States military which took place on Mindanao, Sulu, and Palawan (Minsupala) in the Philippines. About 20000 moro indigenes were killed before the rebellion was over.

en.wikipedia.org...

8) The Philippine–American War (1899–1902)[12] was an armed conflict between the United States and Filipino revolutionaries. At least 200000 Filipino civilians were death during the conflict, and 20000 among the rebel army.

en.wikipedia.org...

9) Mazocoba massacre, was a major engagement of the Yaqui Wars that was fought in Sonora, Mexico. On January 18, 1900, a Mexican Army expedition encountered hundreds of Yaqui renegades about twenty miles east of Guaymas. During the battle that followed, several hundred people ( in between 300 to 1000) were killed or wounded and over 1,000 Yaquis were taken prisoner.

en.wikipedia.org...

Just as a final remark I have 3 questions, with all the respect to other parts involved on this issue:

1) Is it really opportune in this time to risk the friendly relationship with one of the few Muslim countries that is trying to keep a moderate posture and that by the way is friendly with the west , to dig in the past of an event that occurred about a century ago?

2) What has to do the modern Turkey that is a democracy and also a country with tolerance to other religions, being perhaps an example of what a secular regime can do in the middle east to avoid conflicts in between minorities and preserve a harmonious status quo among religions that are anyway related each one to the other, with the crimes of the Ottoman Empire that ceased to exist in 1918?

3) What is the role that at the light of the doctrine of Forgiveness, that is an essential of the Christian values, has the insistence of to continue remembering by religious leaders trespasses that occurred even three or four generations ago as if they might have occurred Yesterday? why is so important?

The thread is of course open to the discussion of the topic.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

LOL. Racist at a very wrong point of view and target of point of view.
That's what Im saying, Ask and Answers shall be provided to you, RAW no Edit.

a reply to: IAmPhoeniX07

Well Dear IamPhoeniX07

I can't say exactly why the Holy Father could allow a group to pull him to be involved in an issue that is clearly a nationalist one, and I don't want to make any judgments of any kind.

I am sure his intention must be good, to condemn a terrible act of violence, but again this does not seem to be a business in which the Pope received the best feedback from experts in the subject, and I am afraid about the consequences this can create with respect to the relationship with a country in which Catholics never have been censored, prosecuted, harassed or treated bad in modern times.

We all know that Mehmed Ali Agka almost killed HH Pope John Paul II and that is Turkish, but it is clear that he was recruited for such evil mission by the Bulgarian intelligentsia working for a Pact of Warsaw political plot in the middle of the cold war.

I just remain astonished of the level of advising that His Holiness could have received from Vatican historians , I know the Pontific Gregorian University has excellent ones, to go ahead in such a declaration, that is drastically giving to one particular human rights issue a privileged consideration over many others occurred even before.

Every time that I research more on the statistics around the world of genocides happened in the very beginning of the XX century it is more evident that his claim is unfortunately wrong, the Armenian massacres or genocide are far to be the first of that century.

Just another two so important events:

- The Boxer Rebellion, Boxer Uprising or Yihetuan Movement was an anti-imperialist uprising which took place in China towards the end of the Qing dynasty between 1899 and 1901. It was initiated by the Militia United in Righteousness (Yihetuan), known in English as the "Boxers," and was motivated by proto-nationalist sentiments and opposition to foreign imperialism and associated Christian missionary activity. The Great Powers intervened and defeated Chinese forces.
The total amount of victims is close to 40000 and many of them were Catholic missioners in China and possibly Chinese members of the church at that time.

en.wikipedia.org...

- The Xinhai Revolution, or the Hsin-hai Revolution, also known as the Revolution of 1911, or the Chinese Revolution, was a revolution that overthrew China's last imperial dynasty (Qing dynasty), and established the Republic of China (ROC). The revolution was named Xinhai (Hsin-hai) because it occurred in 1911, the year of the Xinhai (辛亥) stem-branch in the sexagenary cycle of the Chinese calendar.

The revolution consisted of many revolts and uprisings. The turning point was the Wuchang Uprising on October 10, 1911, that was a result of the mishandling of the Railway Protection Movement. The revolution ended with the abdication of the six-year-old "Last Emperor", Qing Emperor Xuantong Puyi, on February 12, 1912, that marked the end of 2,000 years of imperial rule and the beginning of China's early republican era (1912–16).

The total casualties of this revolution were around 150000 among the supporters of the Monarchy and 70000 supporters of the revolution.

en.wikipedia.org...

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

G,day mate.
good read .
I knew not of the central and south american events
alas i knew of the others
thankyou i have learnt something today
As for the leader of turkey at times he sounds more like a muslim brotherhood tragic
Than a leader of a moderate muslim nation
oh well one wonders about the sanity of the national leaders on this planet
GOD help us cause noone else will

a reply to: The angel of light

As little as I know, it may be a lot.
And that is that the genocide is still denied.
I think that is the chief point here.

a reply to: Aliensun

Yes Dear Aliensun, that is the only reasonable aspect of the so compromising declaration of the Pope today, and I think it could be an interesting subject for the speech of Vatican Historians attending a conference of History of the XX century, even for a documentary.

Nevertheless, in the context of todays reality and problems of the world and the middle east it is definitively a so risky action since does not contribute at all to improve the so deteriorated relationship in between the Western Hemisphere and the Islamic world.

In the level of priorities the agenda of to endorse the Historicity of the Armenian Genocide does not have the weight to sacrifice the present for a past that by the way is part of a very confuse and conflictive time for the entire world, not only for Armenia or Turkey, since it corresponds to WWI.

I think the world is right now expecting from the Pope other kind of attitudes, moreover a leadership that help to prevent other WW exploding from the middle east crisis, and not to enter in controversial topics or to give lessons of how to interpret a chapter of a war of a century ago, that is a job that correspond to Historians or expert scholars of the Gregorian University with all respect.

The Church has many brilliant experts or other functionaries of less hierarchy that could attend such a ceremony if the idea was to express solidarity with the tragedy of other Christian people, it was not necessary to compromise the entire institution with the presence of the Pope endorsing that cause.

More than 80% of the Armenians of Today are even not Catholics, but members of a church that was the first one that cut ties with the Roman Church in History. The Armenian Schism was just in the V century AD.

en.wikipedia.org...

Now, what the Pope said today that this was the First Genocide of the XX Century is not really accurate, it requires a very selective lens to be qualify in such a way.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

Was It Really Genocide ?

The Armenian thesis claims that the events constitute a genocide, that the Ottoman government had an
official (albeit hidden) intent to exterminate the Armenian nation. It makes extensive references to the
Holocaust to create the impression that the Armenian Genocide had similar methods and goals and is
just as indisputable as the Holocaust. This position is historically not correct. Below, we provide
evidence in hope to enable a better assessment of the historical truth.
By the end of the 19th Century, almost all Christian nations of the Ottoman Empire gained their
independence following national uprisings. The Armenian independence movement started somewhat
later than other nations, around the 1880s, mostly because the former were much more integrated into
the Ottoman society and had a privileged position among the non-Muslim populations of the empire.
Still, the main reason why the events did not follow the same course was demographic. Armenians
were dispersed all over Anatolia and Istanbul; they were a minority even in most of Eastern Anatolia.
When WWI began, Armenians formed militias to help the Russian advance into Anatolia. Large-scale
uprisings in different parts of Anatolia, notably in the city of Van, created panic in the rear of the
Turkish army. By February 1915, the local Muslim and Armenian populations in the country were in a
fierce communal conflict. In April, the Ottomans were pulling back from the Eastern front and the
Armenians were in control of certain provinces. At the end of April, the Ottomans gave the first order
for “relocation.” The following months witnessed the plight of Armenians: As they were transported to
Syrian provinces of the empire, they were killed by attacks of local Muslims, gangs, hunger and
epidemics — as well as the difficulties of moving through mountains and deserts of the region. In the
provinces under Armenian control, atrocities of similar scale were taking place, and the Muslim
population fled in huge numbers in order to save their lives.
Prominent historians such as Bernard Lewis and Stanford Shaw maintain that there was no official
policy of genocide. The claim is based on the fact that the comprehensive Ottoman archives contain no
documents suggesting such a plan. The reports of misconduct by soldiers and civil servants almost
always mention them in the context of how such behavior should be and is penalized; we have accounts
of 1,397 officers being punished, creating a striking contrast with the Holocaust. Furthermore, the
relocations began only after the Russian and Armenian armies began to move into Anatolia and were
mostly confined to the region around the line of fighting.
After the Ottomans lost the war, the British High Commission in Istanbul arrested 144 high Ottoman
officials and deported them to Malta for trial on charges of harming the Armenians. While the
deportees were interned on Malta, the British appointed an Armenian scholar, Haig Khazarian, to
conduct a thorough examination of the Ottoman, British and U.S. records to substantiate the charges.
Though granted complete access to all records, Khazarian’s corps of investigators discovered an utter

lack of evidence demonstrating that the Ottoman officials either sanctioned or encouraged killings of
Armenians. The British Procurator General exonerated and released all 144 detainees.
A state is responsible for the protection of all its citizens, even if they are insurgents. The death of
innocent people cannot be justified by any argument. The Ottoman state certainly deserves the blame
for letting this happen. However, the evidence tells that it is the inability of the state to control its
provinces, rather than its intended plan, that lead to the atrocities. The government authority in most of
that area in question was limited to a network of alliances with Turkish and Kurdish warlords, over
which it had limited control. These and other similar facts cannot make the huge human toll disappear,
or in any way justify it, but they are important nonetheless if we are to understand what really
happened.
The issue of the Armenian genocide today is loaded with emotion, as the generations of Armenians
living today identify themselves with the stories told by the previous generations who suffered through
the atrocities. Yet, it is also loaded with politics, and rulings on the Armenian genocide are the
playground of parliaments and state assemblies. Repeated invitations by the Turkish side to resolve the
issue by objective historical inquiry are being declined by the Armenian side.
This reluctance to give up politics in favor of historical research prevents the true story from being
unearthed and the lessons to be learned from them. The Armenians claim they want their suffering
recognized as genocide to prevent something like this from happening again. Yet evidence tells that the
events were not the plan of a group of sick-minded officials that wanted to exterminate a race,
apparently in the need of a scapegoat. This was the result of inter-communal warfare that was like a
fire engulfing the whole region, driven by the mistrust and suspicions between communities, and the
political ambitions of the powers surrounding them. The Armenians were not innocent victims of the
atrocities, but they played a role in starting them. Nor were the Muslims ruthless killers of innocent
children and women. To present the events as a genocide ignores the complex history that led to the
suffering of millions of people, Armenians and Muslims alike, and would only be a disservice to
humanity in preventing future atrocities like this.
It is our hope that this debate, which has served nothing but to create further estrangement of the two
nations will be dropped soon and objective historical inquiry will be permitted to cast light on the
events of 1915. The issue with the Armenian Genocide is not to condemn horrible atrocities, it is a
question of understanding and as hard as it is to admit, Armenians are standing in the way of it.

web.stanford.edu...

From Stanford University , Point is Both sides played a roll in Killing each other . I am of the Opinion that their was no "Act of Genocide" And History backs My Opinion.

Kap

Civil wars, Revolutions, and border wars do not constitute genocide. Yes masses of people die from the armed conflict. They fight till one side is defeated.

From Webster's,

the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

The Armenians were scapegoats for the failing Ottoman Empire and they were massacred in a systematic way by the powers of their government.

You do pose a good question though, why is the Pope stirring this up at this moment in time?

originally posted by: The angel of light
a reply to: Aliensun

Yes Dear Aliensun, that is the only reasonable aspect of the so compromising declaration of the Pope today, and I think it could be an interesting subject for the speech of Vatican Historians attending a conference of History of the XX century, even for a documentary.

Nevertheless, in the context of todays reality and problems of the world and the middle east it is definitively a so risky action since does not contribute at all to improve the so deteriorated relationship in between the Western Hemisphere and the Islamic world.

In the level of priorities the agenda of to endorse the Historicity of the Armenian Genocide does not have the weight to sacrifice the present for a past that by the way is part of a very confuse and conflictive time for the entire world, not only for Armenia or Turkey, since it corresponds to WWI.

I think the world is right now expecting from the Pope other kind of attitudes, moreover a leadership that help to prevent other WW exploding from the middle east crisis, and not to enter in controversial topics or to give lessons of how to interpret a chapter of a war of a century ago, that is a job that correspond to Historians or expert scholars of the Gregorian University with all respect.

The Church has many brilliant experts or other functionaries of less hierarchy that could attend such a ceremony if the idea was to express solidarity with the tragedy of other Christian people, it was not necessary to compromise the entire institution with the presence of the Pope endorsing that cause.

More than 80% of the Armenians of Today are even not Catholics, but members of a church that was the first one that cut ties with the Roman Church in History. The Armenian Schism was just in the V century AD.

en.wikipedia.org...

Now, what the Pope said today that this was the First Genocide of the XX Century is not really accurate, it requires a very selective lens to be qualify in such a way.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

I thought when the Pope declares something it is irreversible truth, that not even future Popes can refute? He just took this subject away from the University scholars because now to question it would be cause for expulsion.

a reply to: The angel of light

Most of those while mass killings, arent necessarily genocide. I find it odd, that in your list , the only constant among the ones that were definitely genocides, was that they were done by the Ottoman Empire. Modern Turkey, from the little I know of it, has whitewashed Turks role in those genecides. Why can't Modern Turkey admit that their forbearers did some pretty heinous stuff?

a reply to: The angel of light

I may not judge about Armenian people. But i only have bad experiences with them, they (most of them) have wrong intentions to relocate to the US (that is what my ex- Armenian girlfriend told me about her own kind).

a reply to: The angel of light

All these kullings in this thread ... make me really sick of mankind. We are really the worst possible thing what has happened to this planet. And not only are we making the objective of our life to create misery for each others, but we also use our time here to carelessly destroy the planet itself.

The unfortunate readings from more than 100 years ago, but so relevant still today. Man-created religions and ethnicities are still today a prime reason for killing and murdering. Not that any other reason would be much better either. We are a bunch of sick bastards. Bloody Putins alltogether.

My sister in law's father and uncle escaped to the US from Armenia during this period and it is clear to them there was a massacre. To this day descendants do not know what happened to remaining family.

originally posted by: liveandlearn
My sister in law's father and uncle escaped to the US from Armenia during this period and it is clear to them there was a massacre. To this day descendants do not know what happened to remaining family.

Most Armenians well tell you their was a Massacre or Genocide , That's how the story's were passed down the line .

I am not Doubting that their was mass murder ,But History show's it was going on from both ends .

But I can't agree to a Genocide.

a reply to: Kapusta


"From Stanford University , Point is Both sides played a roll in Killing each other . I am of the Opinion that their was no "Act of Genocide" And History backs My Opinion."

...And "history" is written by the victor to properly explain its actions for one and all. Nice.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

I am sorry Tinfold, but many of those civil wars ended in a terrible blood bath for the part that lost it , and many more occurred before to reach that point for each of the sides.

In Civil wars the armies don't respect the civil population, as a matter of fact the civilians are punished for mere suspicions to support one or other side, although many times they were not supported any side, just being stolen by every one.

That happened particularly in the Colombian Civil war, as well as in the Russian one and in the Mexican Revolution, where the civilians were the major part of the victims, peasants, monks, nuns, teachers, physicians, workers, impresarios were kidnapped, or stolen by the armies, the women were violated and who ever opposed resistance was killed. .

Now, to be honest and direct there are many photos of the so called Armenian Genocide in which Armenians appeared carrying arms, rifles or guns and defending themselves of the Turks. I don't know if that disqualify at all the massacre to be genocide, but in the long run it is irrelevant if the looser part was armed or not, the final outcome is what it matters.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: deckdel

Im so sorry dear deckdel to make you feel sick, I understand what you feel, it is not pleasant at all to talk of a so negative topic, so I am going to take your opinion and ask once again:

Why is this so important right now? Why we need to remember a so horrible event happened 100 years ago as if it might be occurred the last week?

I honestly think this is only going to inflame more the ethnical hatred and resentment and transfer them to the new generations of both sides.

It is said that a very important distinction in between Christians is that they know how to forgive, that we don't keep resentment for ever and we never look for revenge, and usually we believe that in this aspect we are better than muslims and Jews that we think they are constrained by the Talion Law, tooth by tooth, eye for eye.

Now, Are we really Better? are we following Christ teachings in this aspect? Is this a religious issue or a political one?

With all respect, perhaps i am so much sensitive, but I found sincerely contradictory that Christian leaders spent time in to revive negative aspects of the past, especially when we need of harmony in the present. I am wondering what William Shakespeare may think if he would be alive to have seen this religious act? Perhaps he would write again Romeo & Juliet, isn't it?

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: liveandlearn

Dear liveandlearn,

I found your reply really interesting and make me think that, putting myself for just one instant, in the shoes of the descendents of who disappeared with out leaving any trace a century ago, it must be certainly extremely painful to ignore what happened with their relatives.

Nevertheless, if the intention is to try to know where are those lost people bodies, to honor their memory, I think to insist in to create a controversy around the historic circumstances that existed in that precise time and place is going to produce by sure the opposed effect to the one it is wanted. By the way missing people must be remembered more for the love they inspired alive than for the cruel circumstances could surround their death, that is a sane way of assume grief.

Now, today we know more about what happened in the fatalities occurred in many wars of the modernity precisely thanks to the collaboration among all the authorities of the different countries involved on them to contribute to find peace for the ones that are alive concerning that past.

The positive contribution of the authorities of Germany, Italy and Japan right now has been extremely important to clarify the final destination of many soldiers that died on WWI and WWII. Now, even countries that were horribly harassed with terrible material devastation , including of course some of the worst massacres of History, committed by the Axis troops , like the ones of the former Soviet Union, have cemeteries for the foreign soldiers that fell in their territory.

Russia , as well as Poland, Ukraine or Belarus have cemeteries of German and Italian soldiers fell in for instance the so cruel sieges of St Petersburg, Moscow, Volgograd, Warsaw, Kiev or Minsk, etc.

I think Religious authorities must be extremely cautious in to don't open more injuries that the time has tried to cure in their attempt to give peace or consolation to the families of the victims. I am sure that many people right now in Turkey is sensible to the pain anybody can feel for disappeared people in conflict, that is common to all the humanity, but to assume condemnatory positions only can stimulate more of the same.

Pls read.
news.yahoo.com...

It is by the way unfair to make feel extremely uncomfortable current citizens of a country that is in peace today for crimes committed 100 years ago, and it is also useless at all as strategy to find missed people to insist in to focus the issue only from the perspective of Guilt.

www.economist.com...

Personally I think it is very difficult to find only one guilty part in the majority of the great conflicts of the XX or XXI century, unfortunately the responsibility in what concerns to grave violation of human rights in the middle of explosion of violence among nationalities or different religions usually is shared, and it is very frequent that xenophobia, racist, classicist attitudes , or sectarianism as well as fundamentalism can easily generate vicious circles of mutual aggression.

I would want to see a more decided role in the Catholic Church in to work in favor of the conciliation in between parts in conflict, than into motivate to inflame the world with more tension factors. The attitude of the Pope in his recent visit to Turkey was several times more prudential than what he did this week, after all Turkey has absorbed more than 1500000 refuges from the people expelled by the civil war of Syria and Iraq, something none other nation has done, including of course Armenia.

www.bbc.com...

Unfortunately this is the second red flag for HH Francis I in less than two months, about his comments concerning very conflict situations around the world. The Mexican government also reacted energetically against his comments on the possible Mexicanization of the Argentina, referring to the narco traffic violence.

www.theguardian.com...

Let me finish this comment by saying that it is very common in Politics to demonize the opponents, to make appear adversaries as the most evil people, to depict them as monsters without feelings or any decency, to build walls of separation among people, that is the role of war propaganda.

Now, in contrast the world of today when is looking for spiritual leadership dealing with any kind of loss is evidently trying to find something entirely different. It is the thirst for unity, conciliation, love, compassion, solidarity, peace, harmony, reasons to move on, what good will people look in Religion on such circumstance.


Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: Kapusta

Well Dear Kapusta,

I don't want to contradict you at all but it seems that today everybody has been involved in the plot to write again one so sad and controversial page of History, the news all talk about the celebration for the centenary of the Armenian Massacres in Yerevan. I am wondering why they decided to call this a celebration, I sincerely don't feel such an event deserves even to be celebrated.

Now, I feel that this "celebration" is more than nothing a political issue, all the countries of Europe, USA and Russia wants to make love to Armenia since they know that in case Ukraine civil war would not be defined soon and also become a disaster, well Armenia is another piece of the international chess game that the super powers are playing to assure spheres of influence.

One thing is sure, this massacres that occur in 1915 can't be divorced at all of what was the WWI, they are part of the terrible collision in between the Russian And the Ottoman Empires on that huge international conflict, to define the most eastern of the battle fronts of that conflict. This Armenian battles against Turkish were not so much different than the fight of Laurence of Arabia against the Ottomans leading the Arabs. So It is likely that they were never part of truly genocide, in spite of the sensationalist headings of the western media , since when people is fighting in a conflict it is not considered as a genocide.

What can be the final outcome of this "celebration" , well I am afraid that the probable exit of Turkey from Nato, something that indeed is going to be a tragedy for the stability of the Mediterranean.

Thanks for your comments.

The Angel of Lightness