The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> War Itself is Genocide

War Itself is Genocide
Posted by pancho (Moderator) - Tuesday, September 14 2010, 16:01:37 (UTC)
from *** - *** - Windows NT - Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

When one nation acts the part of the agressor, when one nation picks an unprovoked fight with another...arenīt the citizens and country attacked the victims of genocide? Before the attack the citizens are civilians, except for the standing army...but in the First World War, as in the Second, the standing armies were not enough...citizens, civilians, fathers and sons and husbands and brothers were forced to take up arms to defend their homes, families and country.

In the case of the Ottoman Empire, wasnīt every Turk a "member of a group"...and werenīt the Allies hellbent on "destroying even members of a group"...meaning, the Turks? And in addition,wasnīt the Allied attack "systematic" and "deliberate" and "government organized" with the" intent" of killing as many Turks as possible, citizen or citizen-soldier?

The Jews never took up arms against Germany until the Warsaw ghetto resistance....but never before...never until they were being hunted like rats and already a few million had perished at the hands of Christians. But the record for the First World War is replete with uncontested examples of Turkish Christians accepting arms and pay and direction from the Allies, of fighting and killing their neighbors for foreign hire..it matters not in the least how natural or noble their intentions were...noble intentions which can only be realized by treachery, deceit and murder are no longer so noble...or at the least are punishable as crimes and the gravest of crimes during wartime.

Therefore the Allied attack against the Turks was itself an act of genocide...by the goofy definition Tiglath provided, courtesy of revisionists at the United Nations.

...the Turks had never manifested the kind of rampant persecution against their Christian subjects as had the Christians towards their Jews since time immemorial(or as had Christians against other Christians)...The Allies commenced an unprovoked genocide on the Turks...on the entire county and GROUP. The Turks merely sought to defend themselves, as was their right. Part of this genocide against the Turks involved luring and supporting Christian subjects to betray their nation and government and neighbors to the Allies...and the record is clear: The Turks did not engage in a wholesale, determined and systematic attempt to wipe out their Christians...they moved against those Christians who took up arms, primarily in those districts where they did so and not anywhere else...as the record also shows (please, no more "facts" from Aprim OR Seyfo!).

The United States didnīt bother to determine which Japanese-Americans it feared as potential traitors during WW II....how could it? Having any Japanese ancestry was all it took to be put in concentration camps. To lessen what the United States did in applying group punishment to all Japanese-Americans simply on suspicion, should not lead us to compare ourselves favorably to the Turk...we should compare ourselves to our own ideals and practices and not go looking for the worst examples we can find and gloat that "we are better than them"...letīs be true to ourselves instead....but the dilemna is the same, how do you treat only the guilty when you canīt distinguish between the guilty and the innocent?

Since only those Christians who took up arms, or who lived in the adjacent areas where such acts took place suffered at government hands, but not elsewhere, it is a safe bet that the Turks had no choice but to act against ALL the Christians of that region....because they couldnīt tell the innocent from the guilty...a sad part of guerilla warfare...but a fact of life, hardly genocide...also that they did not move against all Christians everywhere, when they easily could have ,also shows that this not genocide.



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


The full topic:



***



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9