Misplaced Pages

Talk:Armenia–Turkey relations: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:50, 17 October 2007 edit87.229.26.176 (talk) →To our lobbyist at 151.37.183.75 and 151.37.181.12← Previous edit Revision as of 01:52, 17 October 2007 edit undo151.44.145.157 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit →
Line 197: Line 197:
::He would be the ] /]. He is indef banned by the community for edit warring and sockpuppetry. He did a pretty good job on ], its too bad we have to revert his edits. If only he could have calmed down when he was given a second chance. ] 01:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC) ::He would be the ] /]. He is indef banned by the community for edit warring and sockpuppetry. He did a pretty good job on ], its too bad we have to revert his edits. If only he could have calmed down when he was given a second chance. ] 01:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


:::I have come to the conclusion that it's impossible to communicate with the Armenians, especially when they are so obsessed with the point of view that Armenians are 100% angels and Turks are 100% devils. I personally acknowledge the fact that the events of 1915-1917 were nothing less than "ethnic cleansing" (of Eastern Anatolia from the Armenians through deportation and massacre). I am also ashamed of the fact that "speech crime" still exists in Turkey (people should not be sent to court for voicing their opinions, whatever they might be.) HOWEVER (and that's a big HOWEVER), the Armenians should also acknowledge the fact that many Turks and Kurds were killed by the Dashnak and Henchak rebels, backed by the Russian Army, in Eastern Anatolia. They must acknowledge the fact that ASALA was a TERRORIST organization, which killed people in "Europe, North America and the Middle East" (actually the first assassination by ASALA took place in Los Angeles, USA.) When the Turkish Airlines desk at the Orly Airport in Paris was bombed, most victims were French, Canadian and American citizens who were only "unfortunate enough to be there". And it is also a fact that Armenia occupied Nagorno-Karabakh and seven other Azeri provinces in western Azerbaijan (this is also the point of view of the U.S. and the E.U.) It is a fact that direct flights between Yerevan and Istanbul have been resumed in 2005 (see ]). It is a fact that 40,000 Armenian workers have moved to Istanbul ever since. It is a fact that Turkey rejects both the "genocide" claim and the number of "1,500,000", claiming that "300,000" Armenians died (these are "facts" and I didn't invent them myself.) ] 01:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC) :::I have come to the conclusion that it's impossible to communicate with the Armenians, especially when they are so obsessed with the point of view that Armenians are 100% angels and Turks are 100% devils. I personally acknowledge the fact that the events of 1915-1917 were nothing less than "ethnic cleansing" (of Eastern Anatolia from the Armenians through deportation and massacre). I am also ashamed of the fact that "speech crime" still exists in Turkey (people should not be sent to court for voicing their opinions, whatever they might be.) HOWEVER (and that's a big HOWEVER), the Armenians should also acknowledge the fact that many Turks and Kurds were killed by the Dashnak and Henchak rebels, backed by the Russian Army, in Eastern Anatolia. They must acknowledge the fact that ASALA was a TERRORIST organization, which killed people in "Europe, North America and the Middle East" (actually the first assassination by ASALA took place in Los Angeles, USA.) When the Turkish Airlines desk at the Orly Airport in Paris was bombed, most victims were French, Canadian and American citizens who were only "unfortunate enough to be there". And it is also a fact that Armenia occupied Nagorno-Karabakh and seven other Azeri provinces in western Azerbaijan (this is also the point of view of the U.S. and the E.U.) It is a fact that direct flights between Yerevan and Istanbul have been resumed in 2005 (see Armavia). It is a fact that 40,000 Armenian workers have moved to Istanbul ever since. It is a fact that Turkey rejects both the "genocide" claim and the number of "1,500,000", claiming that "300,000" Armenians died (these are "facts" and I didn't invent them myself.)

Revision as of 01:52, 17 October 2007

Armenia–Turkey relations is currently a good article nominee. Nominated by an unspecified nominator at an unspecified date. To complete the template use: {{GA nominee|~~~~~|nominator=~~~|page=1|status=|subtopic=}}

Please use the |page= parameter to specify the number of the next free GAN review page, or use {{subst:GAN}} instead to find the next free page automatically.

This article is not categorized by subtopic. Please edit the |subtopic= parameter on this talk page to include one. For a list of subtopics, please see Misplaced Pages:Good article nominations.

WikiProject iconSoftware: Computing Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
???This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Template:Talkheaderlong

WikiProject iconArmenia B‑class
WikiProject iconArmenia–Turkey relations is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArmeniaWikipedia:WikiProject ArmeniaTemplate:WikiProject ArmeniaArmenian
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconTurkey B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconInternational relations Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
???This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Proof Needed

Look I know that emotions run high on both sides, but let's not forget that we have to back things up... PLS Baristarim 12:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I said that with regards to a comment about the architect Mimar Sinan, not concerning the genocide, I know that there are enough people discussing that in the concerned page :)) Baristarim 13:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

During Ottoman rule

Have a look at the changes I made and tell me what you think... I have tried to enrich the article.. I made many grammatical corrections, expanded the explanation of certain details and ALSO tried to calm certain things down. I HAVE NOT however tried to change the essence of the article to the best of my abilities, including some, let's say 'thorny' issues.

On the other hand, I see this article as an opportunity to not always see the glass as half-empty.. Pls reply and let me know of what you think...

And don't revert directly if you want to change something I wrote!!! I have made grammatical corrections at the same time, so pls look carefully at what you want to change. Peace people!!! Baristarim 12:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Mimar Sinan

Hey Baristarim, thanks for the help and nice editing. About Mimar Sinan, it is arguable but the fact that he came from an armenian populated village and was a christian really narrows it down. It is said he used to go by the name Minan Armen Sinanian (Armen being an armenian name). Other people say that there is a possibility he was greek too. That's why we should just leave it a disputed claim. Fedayee 11:26, 2 September 2006 (Montreal Time) (UTC)

In Turkish, Mimar means architect.. Mimar Sinan means Architect Sinan. Because Sinan is architect. You say me that "Minan Armen" comes together and turns into "Mimar" which means architech. I congurulate you. you made up it youself? good imagination. I am tired of discussing with armenians, really!!.. They only know how to make propoganda and insult us.. In Turkey, I know some armenian People and they are perfect. but here in wikipedia, they make me crayz..

Ok, no problems.. I am cool with that.. Even in Turkey there have been such claims I believe. As long as it is cited it's alright.. Baristarim 16:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I know that this might be a bit of a stretch :), but does anyone have any info or sources on the Armenian-Turkish relations other than politics, such as cultural activities, concerts etc. in Turkey, Armenia or somewhere else? If you do let's put them in the text.. Baristarim 20:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

For Armenians, everyone who was famous in Anatolia was Armenian. They dont care the reality, they just claim. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lardayn (talk • contribs) 12:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Diplomatic relations

I have read again and again over the past 24 hours that "the countries have no diplomatic relations". I am tired of reading something that, while true, does not explain at all why and I have fixed it in this article at least. There are no diplomatic relations because Turkey refuses to have them. Period. At the time of independence, poor little Armenia was starving to death and never made any land claims on Turkey. Turkey insisted that Armenia revoke their land claims before establishing relations. Sounds like paranoia to me. Then they changed the demand to withdrawing from Karabakh (yes, the same country that has invaded and remained in Cyprus for 30 years!). They also have warned Armenia not to push the genocide recognition internationally. Armenia has again and again and again replied to Turkey that they want diplomatic relations and an open border, without preconditions. That they should have relations with their neighbor and work out issues simultaneously. This is what happened, this is how it was, and this is the whole story. This is what the article needs to reflect because there is a black and white in this case and this is it. --RaffiKojian 16:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


Raffi thanks for clearing that up. Can you just confirm that Armenia has made no claims for land in Turkey since independence, it does not have it in it's constitution and give us a link please?

What is the economic state of Armenia? I thought they were getting a lot of economic support from Russia and the Armenian diaspora? If you could give us a few links that would be great.

That is correct, Armenia has never made a claim of land on Turkey since independence. How can I give a reference to that when it never happened? You can certainly read the constitution which was adopted in 1995 and is available on a few sites and see it is not there for example. Armenia gets economic investment and military support from Russia, and a great deal of remittances and aid from the Armenian Diaspora - though the significance of that to this article is not too clear to me. --RaffiKojian 15:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

ASALA

Listen, is there any logical rationale for excluding the Asala link from the see also of the main article about the TR-AM relations? If the title of the link was the problem, pls remove that - not the see also. It is really not cool you know: ASALA is an integral part of the TR-AM relations in the 70s and 80s, right? So, why remove it? Does anyone have a valid explanation? Baristarim 04:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that ASALA has a place in an article about TR-AM relations. Perhaps a better method of including it would be a paragraph about the ASALA assassinations, strictly NPOV. If this does not have a place in this article, then this article should clearly state that it is about Republic of Turkey and Republic of Armenia and should also then refrain from "Turkish-Armenian" issues that don't fit into that rather narrow category - IMO, that would be rather silly. BTW, I don't think ASALA should be mentioned without mentioning Artin Penik. --Free smyrnan 06:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
The Turkish website should not be included. I could compromise on adding the ASALA article in hte see also, but not the website. ROOB323 08:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, the link was kind of dodgy... However, good point by Smyrnan about if we should keep the article at "Armenian-Turkish" or at "Armenia-Turkey". It is an interesting look at the issue. Doesn't mean any content will be changed though, but for stylistic purposes it might be better. That way, we can organize some of the stuff under a history section and try to develop other facets of information. Just a thought. Baristarim 08:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Why trying to define all of Armenians as innocent victims in the past as far as the Armenian-Turkish Relations concerned. As if Asala have not done anything, just an ordinary peaceful organisation... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tiasb (talk • contribs) 09:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC).
I agree on the website not being included. See also, or better, a paragraph about ASALA should be sufficient. --Free smyrnan 09:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
The strange thing is that, on all the pages about Turkey vs. Armenia, each and every page protection measures in this "💕" have been taken on behalf of the Armenians' claims, disregarding all the rest of other editings, WHAT A COINCIENCE!!!Tiasb


OK then, how about this link, its from ASALA's own site http://www.armenians.com/asala/index1.html
No, there is no need for an external link to ASALA information in this article. If you feel that this link and others like it provide information about ASALA, please provide it in the ASALA article. This article however, needs a reference to ASALA. I think that given the impact this has had on how Turks view Armenians, it warrants an NPOV paragraph. Also, please sign with 4~. --Free smyrnan 11:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Could you please pay attention to ROOB323 wording:

"The Turkish website should not be included. I could compromise on adding the ASALAarticle in hte see also, but not the website." what an authority, ownwer of the domain!!!!

Who wrote the above comment about my wording? If you are able to talk shit about me than you should also mention who the hell you are, so I can know which idiot wrote the above comment about me and warn that idiot to watch their mouths. ROOB323 01:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Take it easy guys :) This article still needs a lot of expansion and some re-organization. Keep your energies for when those come around... Baristarim 01:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Some idiot using socks, *rolls eyes* Nareklm 01:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Anonymous users aside, do we have consensus that ASALA goes in the See-Also? --Free smyrnan 01:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
No it should not stay end of story, theres no info on the site. Nareklm 01:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Come on, why not? The whole article needs to be expanded in any case. I honestly don't get it. ASALA was (and in some cases psychologically still) a very important factor in defining TR-AM relations in the 70s and 80s. It is just a see also you know, people can make up their own minds. In cases such as these it is always better to develop the main articles anyways, that's what really matters. Baristarim 01:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
What does this sentence mean, please elaborate since I did not understand. I am referring to including a link to ASALA article in WP in the See-Also, as per ROOB323. --Free smyrnan 01:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
I second Smyrnan. I was talking about the see also. ELs are always complicated things to take care of anyways. To avoid such problems per WP:EL, the best thing is to expand the articles so that we don't need any external links to begin with. Baristarim 01:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
The see also is ok but not the link. Nareklm 01:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
We have consensus then. See-Also gets ASALA reference to WP article. Who does the honors since the page is protected? --Free smyrnan 02:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Can someone please do what is necessary on this particular item that has reached consensus? I don't know how this process works. --Free smyrnan 05:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

We have to ask an administarator to remove the block. ROOB323 05:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
I filed a request for unprotection. Baristarim 05:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I missed this whole conversation, but would like to add my 2 cents at this time. ASALA is crucial to this article, so I am glad to see it is in the article. I do think though that the ASALA section, and discussions have been a bit misguided. The attacks began in a perhaps unprecedented way, and were done at a time when, it could even be said that certain terrorist movements had somewhat widespread sympathy, if not support. It was a very different time. It was - for the Armenian Diaspora - the only time they ever heard Armenia(ns) mentioned in the news for 15 years. A strange circumstance. It was also somewhat different than most terrorist groups of the time, and especially today, in that targets were almost always Turkish officials, not civilians. There were notable exceptions, which were causes/results of splinter groups of ASALA. For Turkey, it was, along with Cyprus and Midnight Express, less than a positive association for the country. I do not however think that external links need to be added in this section, unless they are solid references, and I think Artin Penik needs to remain in the ASALA article, not here. --RaffiKojian 15:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Title

What about the title? Should we move it to Armenia-Turkey? The content will stay the same, so that's not a problem. I just think it looks better and consistent with other similar "X-Y" relations articles. Baristarim 01:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The name is fine, why should we change it? so we can fill it up with Anti-Armenian crap? Nareklm 01:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
? Er, no. It is because "X-Y" relations articles are always titled as such. Assume good faith man, no need to look for ulterior motives just because a Turkish editor suggested it :) I was making a good faith suggestion. I fail to see how it can be filled with "anti-Armenian crap" just because of a stylistic name change... Baristarim 01:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Sadly i don't care if your Turkish since im not anti anything, unless people start acting up, the name looks fine. Nareklm 01:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
This article seems to be mostly about Armenian-Turkish relations rather than RoA-RoT relations. Let's keep the title and see where the article expands to. If there is a move towards limiting the scope of the article to RoA-RoT, then it should be renamed. Current edits are not towards that limitation of scope. --Free smyrnan 02:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
As you wish. But know that per other precedents such a name change wouldn't modify or limit the scope of this article. I am just saying that per the templates present in the article of country foreign relations, it looks like that anyways. Such articles always include history, diaspora, trade, culture etc information in any case. That's why I said that such a name change wouldn't modify any content. I still don't see any valid arguments, all other relations articles are titled as such, and it looks much more encyclopedic like that. Narek, if people are going to act up it is not going to be dependent on the title, right?
I try to organize many articles, so that's why I thought that a title change would be good - it is not for a particular reason frankly... But it's ok, let's move on to something else. Baristarim 02:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Welcome back Baristarim. I also agree with Narek I think we should leave the title alone. The name of the title is fine as it is, unless there is a really good reason to change it to something else, but for now I don't think there is any reason to change it. ROOB323 04:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok, it was just a thought :) Baristarim 05:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Kars treaty

Kars treaty is there an Armenian document (government) that declares the borders between these states are recognized? What would be the legality issues regarding the Armenian constitution calling for Genocide? --OttomanReference 03:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I assume you mean genocide recognition!!! Also, I don't think countries as a matter of policy declare recognition of previous/ratified treaties signed by previous governments/regimes. --RaffiKojian 16:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually Armenia does recognize the Treaty of Kars. This was reaffirmed by Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian on December 13, 2006. As a legal successor to the Armenian SSR, Armenia has not made an issue of the treaty. According to Oskanian, Turkey puts the Kars treaty into doubt by blockading Armenia and severing diplomatic ties with Armenia. The treaty called for Turkey to open a consulate in each of the three Transcaucasian republics. -- Aivazovsky 03:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

So called threat

There is no Turkish military troops in the Turkish side of the border with Armenia but gendermarie. Turkey does not see Armenia as a threat and there is not a single Turkish political / military threat briefing against Armenia, not a single sentence, even a word.

Mr. Koçaryan's ideas are his own thoughts and can not be in a Turkish-Armenian relationship topic in Misplaced Pages. It is an political and one-sided issue. As Turks do not write here their own ideas about Armenia (invading Azerbaijan, genocide in Hojali against Muslims, wanting Ararat from Turkey etc.) Koçaryan's ideas are also must be removed.

You may write them down into the topic about Koçaryan and his life, but not here.

I'll remove them from the article in 3 days if I dont get an answer. Thank you.--hnnvansier 12:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

What kind of country is Armenia, if its president can not be trusted??? If Koçaryan does not reflect the policies of this country, who reflects the "Armenian governments" view? Should we check for the Armenian Diaspora instead? Is the source cited? (YES) Is the source recent? (YES). User:Lardayn if you claim Armenians and Turks are in good position, brought your citations. However I personally know Armenians HATE Turks and see them as a threat. I have seen an Armenian getting in fight with a Turkish student at a restaurant about nationalistic issues. No surprise that boarder between these two nation is closed. --OttomanReference 13:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
That does not make Turkey as a "threat" But that is Armenian hate against Turkey. If Turkey officially does not have any intend neither on invading nor attacking Armenia, and there is no evidence of a possible operation against Armenia and in addition to those you can see clearly that the border is clear from Turkish troops, that means, Turkey is not a threat to Armenia. Turkey does not care about Armenia in a military way. So, Koçaryan must be too blind to see that, or that is just an Armenian internal propaganda to keep 2,5 millions of Armenians in the state under his aggressive rule. You know, threat brings obedience. If you say "we are under attack" people would feel nervous and stay at your side because of their nationalist blood.
Thats why I say again, Misplaced Pages is not a propaganda sheet.
3 days left. Thank you.--hnnvansier 18:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
IT is your POV (Point of View) against the Armenian president POV. Right at this moment, if you are not Turkish president, the Armenian President dominates. Do you have any source claim no hostility between these two states? A country perceives a threat to close its boarders. May be you are not on to things as Turkish Government is. Is it also possible that you are not aware of the seriousness as much as a President of the Armenia? Could this be possible? Bring "your sources" first, I say again, Misplaced Pages is not a your propaganda sheet. --OttomanReference 18:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
A comment like "if you are not Turkish president, the Armenian President dominates." seems like a pissing contest, please do not do that. denizC 22:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
First before I bring my sources, the one who "claims" need sources. Koçaryan's words are not sources, there is no evidence, no source of threat. This is the very basic rule of the law. Koçaryan's POV is Koçaryan's POV and POVs are not "sources".--hnnvansier 20:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I am going to disagree with "A country perceives a threat to close its boarders". The only closed Turkish border is the one with Armenia, but I am sure that Armenia is not that much of a threat compared to the other neighbors of Turkey. The decision to close the borders is an economic and political decision mostly related to Nagorno Karabakh, it's (like) a sanction. The words of a president are notable, so they should be included when relevant, but they are opinions so they should be presented as such. If there are other opinions, they should also be presented. If Turkey wanted to take some military action against Armenia, it could very well do that during the Nagorno-Karabakh war, no better 'opportunity' will arise easily. denizC 13:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Kocharyan's words are one-sided and they are only the Armenian view. No international acceptance and lack evidence. Thats why Im removing them. For the threat topic may be in the main article, there must be an evidence, a direct threat from Turkey, or a Turkish general's, President's etc words against Armenia. Turkey doesnt be a threat when a political leader says she is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lardayn (talk • contribs) 11:00, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

Lardayn, I think we should rather state that there are no major army divisions near the Armenian border. Also a list of threats published by the Turkish security council might be useful. As far as I know, Islamism and PKK were seen as the top threats, I don't know about others atm. denizC 22:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Not Islamism but radical Islamism. And PKK. There is no topic on Armenia by Turkish Security Council. But if there is a threat, it was from Armenia who supported PKK and had ASALA. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lardayn (talk • contribs) 12:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

POV-check

I am putting a POV-check tag, because of the intro - it is too short, as such it is way too POVish - it needs to be expanded to make it more encyclopedic. Generally intros should be two/three paragraphs - one sentence intro really doesn't sit right. So if someone could come in and check it for NPOV-ing, that would be nice :) Baristarim 07:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Just a follow-up note: I don't want to get into a grueling debate on the contents of the article, the tag that I had put was only for the intro for the time being. The intro should be at least two-three paragraphs and summarize the article. In its current state, because it is only one sentence, it looks odd to say the least - as far as I am concerned for the moment, when the intro is expanded, just remove the tag. Cheers! Baristarim 10:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, that's all that I wanted :) Baristarim 22:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Yezidis

I completely removed the Yezidi reference, which has nothing to do with Armenian-Turkish anything, and was wrong to boot. Yezidis are a Kurdish minority, whose religion is not Islam, but their own unique religion. What does this have to do with Armenian Turkish relations? The statement also said they are "diminishing", while all the reference said was that they had a very low rate of school attendance... two completely different things. Anyway, if someone wants to add them to this article, let them explain convincingly that there is any justification for their inclusion. --RaffiKojian 15:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

ARMENIAN TERRORISM

Im removing subheading made by Makalp on "Armenian Terror" it cites POV sources, innacurate, and consititutes original research. Hetoum 19:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Please remove the texts referenced by armenialiberty, armeniapedia, aina, cilicia.com, armeniandiaspora.com, armenica.org, armenianreporter (via highbeam), norharevanner.am as well denizC 23:46, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Most of those are pretty basic, no one disputes Sinans Christian origin and quotes from Armenian foreign FM in armenian news. Zaman and Turkish daily are in there too, so I think it is ok to have some, as these Armenian/Turkish sources. Hetoum 00:36, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I see, maybe we should put tags next to the disputed ones, then. At least cilicia.com should go, if for nothing else, for the fact that the text there is, I believe, copyrighted, I am not sure cilicia.com has the right to publish it. If someone has that article, just write what is written there, and the reference should be the article itself, not some copy. Also, aina reference can be replaced by the actual article from new anatolian. Please let's not have copies of some articles as references, we should find and refer to the original ones. denizC 04:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

hmm... I am a little confused, but ok. On direct articles I agree. But, which are references from Cilica ? I could not find em, were they already removed? (Hetoum 21:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC))

#19, case study in ethnic strife denizC 23:06, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I think its best to ask User: RaffiKojian who maintains this and Armenianpedia. As far as I know he is pretty sharp on his stuff. Hetoum 08:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Closed border/ border claims

Unless someone can provide a shred of evidence that there is a direct correlation between having an open border and a neighboring country claiming/taking land from you, I am going to remove the multiple references which make just that ridiculous assertion. Turkey has refused even to establish even diplomatic relations, does that somehow prevent Armenia from annexing all of Anatolia as well? --RaffiKojian 17:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure which "multiple references" you're referring to, but I believe among them would have to be: The Armenian Revolutionary Federation, for instance, a considerable political force within Armenia, persists in claiming parts of modern Turkey as Armenian historical rights; thus, any radical territorial claims can be isolated by the closure of the border.
Maybe the problem is that the point made in the article is made unclearly, or awkwardly. Perhaps the inclusion of a passing reference to Turkey-PKK conflict circa 1992 would be helpful. To keep the Armenian-Turkish relations section complete, we must make a point about Turkish territorial anxieties, some of which were driven by Kurdish separatist ambitions, in addition to the "climate of irredentism" and Armenian statehood and political empowerment. It would seem inevitable that the Turkish state would be wary of any freely-operating political organization in Armenia making territorial claims, when Turkey was already involved in a brutal conflict with PKK separatists. These groups would make for natural allies, and shutting down any tense border would be pragmatic on that basis alone. So it shouldn't read like Turkey feared "annexation" by Armenia, rather like Turkey feared militant activity or basing for the PKK.
I'd like a brief touching on this, to contextualize the border closing. I think it is absolutely necessary to keep mention of this Turkish territorial anxiety in the article, though I think you're right that this sentence needs to not correlate border-territorial loss quite so overtly. Human Rights Watch gives us the following:

In 1991, an Anti-Terror Law was instituted to punish so-called "separatist propaganda," resulting in the repression of peaceful free expression-especially concerning debate on the Kurdish issue-and the imprisonment of writers and intellectuals. By 1992, the conflict in the southeast entered a new spiral. Torture and deaths in detention increased, as did disappearances under mysterious circumstances. A wave of so called "actor unknown murders" targeted a Kurdish nationalist intellectuals and journalists and also suspected PKK members, rising to almost 1,200 between 1992 and 1994. A Turkish parliamentary commission investigation into these killings, leaked to the press in 1995, concluded that "`illegal formations' within the state bear some responsibility for mystery killings; they must be `cleansed'...and brought to justice." In turn the PKK assassinated those suspected of cooperating with the state, such as teachers, civil servants, and former PKK members. The government intensified a counterinsurgency campaign against the PKK, forcibly evacuating and burning rural villages. Most of the estimated 2,200 villages and hamlets depopulated in the region since 1984 are the result of this campaign. The PKK in turn launched attacks against both security forces and villages that had joined the government civil-defense "village guard" program, killing village guards and their families alike.

Cheers, DBaba 16:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


To our lobbyist at 151.37.183.75 and 151.37.181.12

You know, if you could calm down a little bit, you could really contribute to that article, and many others. But really, while your perspective is helpful, your edits are ridiculous. Why waste your time pretending that the Armenian Genocide is merely an Armenian claim, when you clearly have the English to know better? The world was there; the world knows; you can't edit it away. As pretty as your English is, your behavior is a bit creepy. But go get an account and come back, because we can still work together if you take a deep breath before you type.

I was just thinking I needed to do more work on that ASALA section. It's obviously a big deal to a lot of Turkish citizens, though it hardly made the news in the West, and I'm fairly certain most Armenians of the Diaspora have never even heard of the group. From my vantage point, it looks more like a Lebanese or Cold War phenomenon than an Armenian phenomenon (I'm totally hung up on the parallel of Cuba vs Turkey as Cold War pawns, as per the resolution to the Cuban Missile Crisis). What do you think? And how do you think we should frame it, the 40-odd deaths relative to the hundreds of thousands? Remembering those evil killings of Turkish citizens is essential; but the million Armenian dead, they too warrant mention, naturally.

What's the right way to work with that subject, and what are the defining events of that era of revenge killings? JCAG and whatever else? I'll do the work for you if you can furnish me with an intelligent answer. Challenge me! Cheers, DBaba 01:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry DBaba but banned users are not allowed to edit Misplaced Pages.VartanM 01:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Who is it? And how do you know, I've never understood how these "bans" work! DBaba 01:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
He would be the User:Shuppiluliuma /User:Flavius_Belisarius. He is indef banned by the community for edit warring and sockpuppetry. He did a pretty good job on Foreign relations of Turkey, its too bad we have to revert his edits. If only he could have calmed down when he was given a second chance. VartanM 01:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I have come to the conclusion that it's impossible to communicate with the Armenians, especially when they are so obsessed with the point of view that Armenians are 100% angels and Turks are 100% devils. I personally acknowledge the fact that the events of 1915-1917 were nothing less than "ethnic cleansing" (of Eastern Anatolia from the Armenians through deportation and massacre). I am also ashamed of the fact that "speech crime" still exists in Turkey (people should not be sent to court for voicing their opinions, whatever they might be.) HOWEVER (and that's a big HOWEVER), the Armenians should also acknowledge the fact that many Turks and Kurds were killed by the Dashnak and Henchak rebels, backed by the Russian Army, in Eastern Anatolia. They must acknowledge the fact that ASALA was a TERRORIST organization, which killed people in "Europe, North America and the Middle East" (actually the first assassination by ASALA took place in Los Angeles, USA.) When the Turkish Airlines desk at the Orly Airport in Paris was bombed, most victims were French, Canadian and American citizens who were only "unfortunate enough to be there". And it is also a fact that Armenia occupied Nagorno-Karabakh and seven other Azeri provinces in western Azerbaijan (this is also the point of view of the U.S. and the E.U.) It is a fact that direct flights between Yerevan and Istanbul have been resumed in 2005 (see Armavia). It is a fact that 40,000 Armenian workers have moved to Istanbul ever since. It is a fact that Turkey rejects both the "genocide" claim and the number of "1,500,000", claiming that "300,000" Armenians died (these are "facts" and I didn't invent them myself.)
Categories:
Talk:Armenia–Turkey relations: Difference between revisions Add topic