genocides....?

[dogukan]

Alright I know I'm going to get tooo many flaming for this but I invite you all to objectivity.
As we all know human history is full of massacares, deaths, killings, rapes, plunderings...etc
This is undeniable. I am Turkish, and I was probably raised with bias about the Armenian conflict.
But as I researched I found arguements why we deny it. Now when people says: "whoooa Turk still deny it, how come??" We don't say no one died. Genocide has some important thing taht should be qualified. From wikipedia:

...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

– Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article II

and this should be the government's policy.
(optional you doN't have to read here)Now in Armenian case things were different. There was a war going on, there were Armenians convinced by Allies that tehy were going to be given their free country. So they had to clean the region from Muslim Turks and they've revolted to build their pure Christian greater Armenia. This is very normal once they're convinced for their own country. So they've started killing people. Turks reacted and started killing their people. ıt aws more of an ethnic war. So government moved them to Syria. A lot of them died on the way. Ottoman archives say that every convoy was given a doctor and guards. They all ate the same thing. So we moved them to Syria. If we were planning to exterminate their race we could have done it centries. Or at least there wouldN't be 200 000 Armenian reaching and settling in Syria. In fact the word genocide was dounded after Second World War and no one mentioned the Armenian one untill 60s,70s. It is now used as political card by west and nothing more. The Armenian diaspora is very strong and no one would like to lose their support, especially France.
IMO it was an ethnic war and Ottomans had no other chance but to move them considerng they've lost all their eastern force in Sarikamiş(90 000 frozen) and cut out of supplies because of Armenian attacks on supply lines.
This part is important
If many people being killed is enough to declare it a genocide
-what about the massacares done by Japanese in China during 2.World War. Just beacuse Chinese are too many will it mean it won't be a genocdie?
What about French massacares of Algerians. 1 million Algerians killed in their own country by INVADERS...no they're Muslim savages? Is that what you think?
What about AFricans, native Australians, Indians killed by British?If you do a little research you can find out hundreds of thousands were killed...
What about the 8 million native south Americans being killed by Spanish and losing their civilazation?
What about American policies on natives, forced assimilations nd extermination of millions of Indians?
What about Dresden bombing? 200 000 Germans being killed on purpose?
What about Russia/Soviets killing millions? Notably in Central Asians and CAucasians?And during tzardam sacking 4 million Caucasians causing death of many?
What about Mao killing millions of Uygurs in eastern China?
What about EOKA deciding to clean Cyprus from Turks by blood?
What about Armenians trying to clean east Anatolia from Muslims?(540 000 Turks/Kurds were killed by Tashnak gangs)

Now the international community accepts these as genocides, yes what Ottomans did was genocide.....if not, what is the difference of Armenian massacares then these? I mean no offence, I can udnerstand the pain of Armenians but they're not the only victims of humanity.

PS:I do like Armenians, Greeks...I'm not the streotypical Turk you think, but I doN't think there is justice in this.....and sorry for the long read.

[Каие]

No ones asking you to recognise it as Genocide, just to recognise you killed them in cold blood. The honourable thing to do would be to admit everything, and play up those darned French. Then they'll be the bogeyman of Europe. You gain nothing from denying anything, and lose nothing by admitting. (except perhaps some money The general consensus amongst white Europeans is they shouldn't have to pay compensation for offences by their ancestors) and in fact, should never have denied it. You should have admitted it, but blamed it on the Ottomans, who it was, and build a brand new country.

What will happen if you admitted it?

[PointOfViewGun]

It already has it's own thread.