Things that happened between Armenians-Turks-Russians

[ancalimon]

Eh when did I say, hell, even imply, anything remotely related to what you are talking about?

Why do you think people never talk about the Turks (or even know about the killed Turks) who were killed in Turkey and all they do is talk about the Armenians that were killed (while neither Ottoman Empire nor Turkey existed)? That's because people like you accept that we invaded our country which belonged to Gods of Europeans in the past.

[Allegro]

So people talk about Holocaust all the time because Germans were invading Jewistan?

[ancalimon]

So people talk about Holocaust all the time because Germans were invading Jewistan?

Were the Jews killing innocent Germans all of a sudden? Were Germans living in Jewistan? Were Jews being armed by Russians and loved and supported by Europeans so that they could create a communist Jewistan in Germany?  The example you give is totally out of context. Armenians and Turks loved each other. They were ancient friends. Turks saved Armenians from Persians. This friendship was strengthened when Turks saved Armenians from Romans. Their culture survived because of this.

[Allegro]

FYI there were Jews living in Germany. Again you are avoiding my question with staw man arguments; Do people talk about killings only when Europeans get invaded by Sandniggers? Nobody claims Armeanians are Europeans, nobody claims Turks were invading Anatolia during the genocide. Besides, I always defended the Turkish side in this forum when it came to discussion and I'm still wondering what the hell do these have to do with anything I've said in this thread. As I've said, you are reaching and you are a straw man.

[ancalimon]

You can not defend Turkish side while accepting that Armenians had the right to arm themselves desert their army and then start cleansing Turkish villages because that they were the rightful owners of these lands. You can not defend anyone when you don't accept that Armenians were guests in Anatolia and Turks were natives.

Show me a single person in this forum who is not Turkish and who thinks that Turkish army did not commit genocide against unarmed civilians or deliberately marched them to their deaths. Do you really think there are anyone who really believes that Turks were defending themselves and not really on the offensive during those times?

[Allegro]

You can not defend Turkish side while accepting that Armenians had the right to arm themselves and start cleansing Turkish villages because that they were the rightful owners of these lands.

Eh when did I say, hell, even imply, anything remotely related to what you are talking about?

But now you said it, if Turks had the right to arm themselves Armenians sure did also. Minus the cleansing part.

Show me a single person in this forum who is not Turkish and who thinks that Turkish army did not commit genocide against unarmed civilians or deliberately marched them to their deaths.

Why?

Do you really think there are anyone who really believes that Turks were defending themselves and not really on the offensive during those times?

I know Bernard Lewis does.

[ancalimon]

You can not defend Turkish side while accepting that Armenians had the right to arm themselves and start cleansing Turkish villages because that they were the rightful owners of these lands.

Eh when did I say, hell, even imply, anything remotely related to what you are talking about?

But now you said it, if Turks had the right to arm themselves Armenians sure did also. Minus the cleansing part.

Show me a single person in this forum who is not Turkish and who thinks that Turkish army did not commit genocide against unarmed civilians or deliberately marched them to their deaths.

Why?

Do you really think there are anyone who really believes that Turks were defending themselves and not really on the offensive during those times?

I know Bernard Lewis does.

You don't arm a bunch of Bankers, Brothel owners, Wine Makers, Doctors, priests, etc and assume that they will become professional soldiers while Armenians never had a military tradition ever. Russia simply knew what was going to happen to those Armenians. That they would desert the army, start killing innocent people to survive and in the end get annihilated by Professional Turkish army.

We can see what happened when Americans armed the Kurds in Iraq. Turkey probably no longer have the right to get back Mosul and Kirkuk. They start to become terrorists killing Turkish people forcing Turkey and Iran to invade Northern Iraq from land.

No. What would happen if Turkey armed Turkish people in Germany and told them to try creating a Turkish country there? Would there be another holocaust? I don't think so. Not the way you think.

[Allegro]

You don't arm a bunch of Bankers, Brothel owners, Wine Makers, Doctors, priests, etc and assume that they will become professional soldiers while Armenians never had a military tradition ever. Russia simply knew what was going to happen to those Armenians. That they would desert the army, start killing innocent people to survive and in the end get annihilated by Professional Turkish army.

Who is talking about professional soldiers here? If Turks had the right to bear arms so did the Armenians, period.

As if Turks who got conscripted were not normal people who went on their own businesses. What's next? That all Jews are greedy, all Arabs are dirty and all Chinese know kung fu? You are an idiot for the millionth time.

No. What would happen if Turkey armed Turkish people in Germany and told them to try creating a Turkish country there? Would there be another holocaust? I don't think so. Not the way you think.

Is that a fact now?

[ancalimon]

You don't arm a bunch of Bankers, Brothel owners, Wine Makers, Doctors, priests, etc and assume that they will become professional soldiers while Armenians never had a military tradition ever. Russia simply knew what was going to happen to those Armenians. That they would desert the army, start killing innocent people to survive and in the end get annihilated by Professional Turkish army.

Who is talking about professional soldiers here? If Turks had the right to bear arms so did the Armenians, period.

As if Turks who got conscripted were not normal people who went on their own businesses. What's next? That all Jews are greedy, all Arabs are dirty and all Chinese know kung fu? You are an idiot for the millionth time.

No. What would happen if Turkey armed Turkish people in Germany and told them to try creating a Turkish country there? Would there be another holocaust? I don't think so. Not the way you think.

Is that a fact now?

Turks were the regular soldiers of Ottoman Empire. That's why they were always farmers and could not progress socially. A Turks life was simply "I open my eyes to the world, I grow up without a father because he is a soldier, I got married, I have a child, I am a soldier, I am dead".  By "arming" I mean professional, heavy weapons. Of course everybody had weapons.

[Allegro]

[Archonsod]

I'm replying to the general consensus that Armenians were right about hating Turks because Turkish people were invaders. I'm not talking nonsense.  I simply say even if we were not Turks thousands of years ago, do we suddenly become invaders because we choose to or were forced to become Turks later? Both options make the aggressive party as Armenians.

 Generally speaking, people utilise culture and language to determine nationality. It's a lot easier than trying to take a DNA samples and sequencing a genome, especially when you don't have a computer. The Turks are considered Turkish because they adopted Turkic culture, even if genetically speaking they're now indigenous to Anatolia. Just like the English are considered Saxon despite the fact that genetically the Saxons are in a minority. The culture is Saxon, hence the English are Saxons.

Armenians and Turks loved each other. They were ancient friends. Turks saved Armenians from Persians. This friendship was strengthened when Turks saved Armenians from Romans. Their culture survived because of this.

Yep, because when two culturally distinct groups share a country, they immediately form close bonds of friendship and don't fight over territory, resources or anything like that. That would be why Scotland, Ireland, Wales and England have lived in harmony for all these years, just like the Cossacks and Russians, French and Germans or indeed the whole world. This would of course explain why the only wars we ever see are with the Australians and Americans ... o.O

 Or you know, you could stop sniffing the glue and notice that generally when you have two distinct cultures together on the same land mass, the result tends to be even more conflict than you'd get if you put them each on a separate island for example.

[ancalimon]

I'm replying to the general consensus that Armenians were right about hating Turks because Turkish people were invaders. I'm not talking nonsense.  I simply say even if we were not Turks thousands of years ago, do we suddenly become invaders because we choose to or were forced to become Turks later? Both options make the aggressive party as Armenians.

 Generally speaking, people utilise culture and language to determine nationality. It's a lot easier than trying to take a DNA samples and sequencing a genome, especially when you don't have a computer. The Turks are considered Turkish because they adopted Turkic culture, even if genetically speaking they're now indigenous to Anatolia. Just like the English are considered Saxon despite the fact that genetically the Saxons are in a minority. The culture is Saxon, hence the English are Saxons.

But once again:  Since the Native Americans today have become more or less "Indo-Europeans" and speak "English" or "Spanish", does this make them invaders in America?  This logic does not make any sense to me.  Anyway, maybe the way I think is different than you and I can't judge you for this.

[Archonsod]

Define invaders. If I declare I own the whole of Africa, can I not claim the Africans are invading? After all, it's my land.

[ancalimon]

Define invaders. If I declare I own the whole of Africa, can I not claim the Africans are invading? After all, it's my land.

Well the genetic makeup of Turks living in Turkey is different than the genetic makeup of Turks living in Central Asia (as can be seen if you look at our faces). Generally our genetic makeup is closer to Greeks and even closer to those Etruscans I have been talking about on the other thread. People living in Turkey were living here before the Hay people reached Anatolia. The Hay people did not even live in Armenia in the past. They took the name Armenian only "after" they migrated to the geography known as Armenia. Before them, The Azeri people who were Turks lived in the geography known as Armenia and all around the Hazar Sea and even most of Northern Iran.

According to what historians and scientists say, some Turkic families migrated to Anatolia because they wanted their sheep to eat grass here. After a while the people in Turkey started speaking Turkic because these people either forced them to speak Turkic or they became the dominant culture thus people started speaking Turkic. The weird thing is that these "migrating" Turkic people can never be (seriously) as advanced or powerful as the natives of Turkey. They had lower population because they were migrating, the lands they came from could not support high populations, they had inferior culture, they had inferior technology, they couldn't have adapted to being settled easily. Than how come they changed the demographics of Turkey this much?  The most they could have been is that they were welcomed by the people living in Turkey and they did not invade Turkey. The native people of Turkey (maybe not their overlords) actually wanted those Turkic families to live in Turkey.  The fact is that today we speak Turkish and have a culture in between European and Turkish and some Arabic influence in our religion and Persian influence in our language.

How the hell were a bunch of nomads that never saw a sea before capturing Constantinople using ships a hundred years after they founded their first city in Anatolia?

The native people of Turkey who are "US" did not invade the land of the Hay people (who did not live in Anatolia let alone Armenia in the past). The migrating Turks did not have a population large enough for them to be considered invaders either. The areas they wanted to live is also different than the settled populations. Tell me who is the invader - trojan horse here?

[Archonsod]

Well the genetic makeup of Turks living in Turkey is different than the genetic makeup of Turks living in Central Asia (as can be seen if you look at our faces).

Turkish genealogy is a melting pot, which is pretty understandable given the size and the location. There's no such thing as a "pure" Turk gene.

They had lower population because they were migrating, the lands they came from could not support high populations, they had inferior culture, they had inferior technology, they couldn't have adapted to being settled easily.

Exactly the same could be said of the Mongols. And look how far they got. Nomadic =/= primitive, the Mongols themselves were fielding troop numbers which would not be seen again in Europe until Napoleon. It's not actually surprising, the steppe nomads militarised their entire population, every man could ride and fight from horseback. Whatever settled people existed in Anatolia on the other hand likely had a small military class, the rest would be farmers and goat herders. I don't know about you, but I'm thinking an army comprised of people who's most dangerous foe to date was a particularly stubborn wolf isn't going to win when pitted against people who consider filling you full of arrows from horseback a national sport.

Than how come they changed the demographics of Turkey this much?

They didn't, they changed the culture. As to how, look at Britain and the Normans, exactly the same thing happened there. It's not that difficult, replace the nobility with your own culture and suddenly everyone starts copying you. Partially because everyone would like to think of themselves as members of the nobility, and partially because doing what the nice men with swords say tends to be a good survival strategy.

How the hell were a bunch of nomads that never saw a sea before capturing Constantinople using ships a hundred years after they founded their first city in Anatolia?

Because real life doesn't work like Civ where everyone needs to research tech separately. If you live somewhere surrounded by ship builders and ship sailors it doesn't exactly take a huge amount of effort to get them to explain this boat concept to you. Furthermore, as you note the Turks didn't come in, wipe out everyone and then breed like rabbits to take over the land, they came in and subjugated the existing population, who were quite likely to already know about boats. And more than likely the guys actually sailing them, what with them effectively filling the role of the working class.