The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Re: are we being a little capricious?

Re: are we being a little capricious?
Posted by Tiglath (Guest) - Wednesday, September 15 2010, 13:55:36 (UTC)
from 123.2.151.230 - 123-2-151-230.static.dsl.dodo.com.au Australia - Windows NT - Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

>...none of those people you mention took guns and money and orders from the Allies to attack Germans and Germany...which is precisely what Chtistian Turks did. They DID something to bring the wrath of their government down on them...you keep insisting that is was mostly or only because who they were (non-Muslim and non-Turks)..not what they DID....REBEL!
>
> so too were the Syriacs, Chaldeans, Yezidis, Shabaks victims of the Ottoman Empire's purification of its homeland. None of these ggroups unlike the Greeks, Armenians and Assyrians rebelled against the Ottoman empire but were also victims of deportations, massacres and Islamisation policies.
>
>...you expect Turks to bother with which SECT or group, exactly, rebelled? Their move against their own Christians was well-founded, no matter how deplorable....as for the others, yes, they may have done nothing, but the attack by Christian nations, who were clearly using divide and conquer tactics, alerted them that their traditional tolerance was now being used AGAINST them by Christian nations so that regardless of religion, any ethnic group that could be appealed to, because the Turks had allowed them to maintain a separate identity, would now have to join the one, homogenized Turkish people...still, they did not outlaw Christianity....so just how "homogenized" were these people to be, if allowed to keep their religions?

@@@ You can't have it both ways.

You can't claim that the Turks only committed genocide against people who rebeled, such as the Assyrians, Armenians and Greeks, and then when I point out that the during WW1 that other minorities who didn't rebel, such as the Shabaks, Yezidis, Chaldeans and Syriacs were also purified, massacred and homogenised you change tactic to claim that they couldn't tell the difference between these groups.

The Young Turks were sophisticated enough to tell that the Christians had distinct churches and that the Yezidis and Shabaks weren't people of the book who they considered infidels.

And then you have the issue of the Muslim Kurds who were willing Turkish accomplices during WW1 and the victims of the Turkish purification and homogenisation after WW1.

How can you not see that as the European winds of nationalism blew through the Middle East that the "sick old man" followed in the European pattern of consolidation through homogenised religion, culture and language.

Religion was merely a tactic used to strategicaly consolidate the empire.



---------------------


The full topic:



Content-length: 2866
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: image/jpeg, application/x-ms-application, image/gif, application/xaml+xml, image/pjpeg, application/x-ms-xbap, applicati...
Accept-language: en-AU
Connection: Keep-Alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Pragma: no-cache
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?are_we_being_a_little_capricious-KOox.Llvw.QUOTE
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/4.0; FunWebProducts; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5....



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9