learntoquestion ltq discussions

Originally posted by Babybackribs on February 09, 2023 22:38

Undoubtedly the destruction and mass murder of the Armenians can not go unchecked as thousands of documents and pictures prove there was an atrocity in the declining Ottoman Empire. Written accounts like the report that Ottoman Turkey seeks to exterminate the Armenian nation. In this specific account, you have an American ambassador in Armenia discussing the situation as if the extinction is in the process of being carried out. Accounts like this are corroborated by the marking on the paper which further solidify it as a fact, rather than a myth; like the stamps labeling "third assistant" secretary. Perhaps the strongest piece of evidence comes from the eyewitness reports, most notably, Noyemzar Alexanian's horrific account of how escaped the Kurdish soldiers who were out for blood under the command and payment of the Turkish government. Alexanian had to endure the struggle of seeing his father and siblings killed at the hands of the Turkish government. Whether it was by the terrible conditions that the Armenians lived in or the brutal torture from the Turkish government. The amount of sheer pain that a child had to go through in the name of arrogant nationalism, can never be shut out or disallowed by the Turkish Hierarchy. These accounts are too descriptive and sense driven, to be deemed "not truthful". I do seriously question the US's reasons for not speaking out against the Armenian Genocide. They say the main reason they cannot speak about the dark history of Turkey is because of the economic dependence that they have on them. However, it should be duly noted that the Turks are heavily integrated into our society, most notably our public institutions. Specifically, in the Heath-Lowry affair, the Turkish government can offer money to historians involved in anything that has to do with Turkey, like record keeping. If people who keep records are being influenced to record history differently, then eventually something that was once considered a fact, may very well be considered arbitrary.

One of the ways I differentiate real history from fake history is by considering the context behind the account and who is speaking on the issue, whether it be a document or a video. A first-hand account from a Turkish officer discussing the Armenian Genocide, for example, would be considered real history as he is a member of the Turkish military/government. If he is speaking on the situation it must further prove how bad the massacres were because soldiers were trained to aimlessly do as they were told, without considering their impact on a group of people. Fake history can also be determined by the tone of the piece. Some Turkish nationalist documents that I found online, had a hostile tone which can be connected to the idea that they were forcefully trying to get a certain opinion across to me, the reader. In summary, I find that accounts with a calmer tone, like the Turkish soldiers' account, tend to be more neutral as they are not forcing an opinion, but are rather speaking facts.

As I continue to read the Turkish Embassy's response to St.John, it becomes harder and harder for me to prove what happened is historically accurate. In their response, most of the defense was very vague and questioned nearly every piece of historical evidence. For example, the data about the number of deaths were considered by them to be "a highly contested debate amongst historians". However, if we could just have our world leaders recognize that what occurred in the Ottoman empire was an intended genocide, then we could socially solidify that a mass killing of Armenians. If dozens of trade partners could unite together to threaten sanctions against Turkey for not admitting their wrongdoings, then maybe the Turkish government would cave into these demands and admit their ugly past.

I agree that external pressure on Turkey could very well head towards their acknowledgement of the genocide, however, I think it's also important to note how this could very easily provoke dangerous conflict between many countries and Turkey, and even possibly re-ignite anti-Armenian sentiments there as a result of this push-back.

Originally posted by FlyingCelestialDragon on February 09, 2023 16:40

What I believe is unquestionably true about these events is that the Turks did move the Armenians and killed many of them during WWI. What I’m confused about is how the Turkish government is able to brush off all of these innocent killings as a necessity for their safety. Only 6 Armenians were colluding with the Russians while the rest were innocent or maybe not, but they can’t use the excuse that all these people can turn bad and start working behind their back. Maybe a few people are colluding with Russia but that does not mean their whole population is going to become bad people and turn against their country. The Ottoman Empire was home to the Armenians, although there wasn’t a sense of patriotism, it is still their home and they all wouldn’t be colluding with their country’s enemy.

How I identify what is “real history” and what isn’t “real” is from the evidence provided for it. For example, the images that photographed the horrors of what the Armenians went through under the Turkish government. The images show us brutal deaths of the Armenians and the horrors they went through. Additionally there were many reports from the victims and witnesses. You can’t easily deny the fact that many people came up and told us about their stories of these atrocities. Although there are many things that are indeed “real” but there is no proper evidence to back them up, therefore people will find it as an excuse to deny that it ever happened.

The Turkish government’s reply to St. John really makes me angry. They passed over maybe of St. John’s questions and even his quote from their website. If I could respond to the Turkish government, I would have tried to get them to answer those questions. But then again, they would try to avoid those questions or not even respond. To me, it feels like a waste of time trying to get the answer you want from someone who isn’t going to change their mind no matter what. Although I do want to demand answers from them, it is best to not do anything in this situation.

Your point about the very small number of Armenians who were actually "colluding" with the Russians is interesting. It made me wonder about the actual extent of possible rebellion, as much of what the Turkish government has reported on that front has been grossly exaggerated to excuse their own actions.

Originally posted by limitlessknowledge on February 09, 2023 19:17

The Armenian Genocide, where over a million Armenians were murdered by the Turkish government during World War 1 and masked as "deportations," is a documented historical event. The overwhelming evidence, including photographs, eyewitness accounts, letters, and even Hitler's own quote, all point to the fact that the genocide occurred. Despite Turkish government propaganda, the pictures and accounts of the horrific events cannot be falsified. The documentary we saw this week highlights the stories of survivors who witnessed rivers filled with dead bodies and described their own personal loss. The Turkish propaganda book, which was created to cover up the government's involvement in the genocide, only serves as further evidence of the cover-up.

real history is meant to be an unbiased representation of events that is accurate and supported by evidence. However, "real" events can be manipulated to benefit a specific party, as seen with the Turkish government's denial of the Armenian genocide. If "real history" is forgotten, the winning side (in this case, the Turkish government) can create its own version of history.

In response to the Turkish government's denial, I would present undeniable evidence of the genocide, including links to photographs, articles, and videos that clearly show the intent and mass murders. If the government still denies the genocide, I would publish our correspondence and pressure politicians and other governments to acknowledge the genocide and their role as bystanders. Overall my goal will be to humiliate the Turkish government for how long they have gone through with their made-up history.

I agree with your point about how "history" should be determined by unbiased evidence, as facts can, and often are, be manipulated to support a specific view point.

I entirely believe that targeted killings and forced deportations of Armenian people took place. I believe that these people were purposefully killed by the Armenian government because of who they were. I also believe that the Turkish government has lied and tried to cover up the fact that this genocide happened, rather than acknowledge it and attempt to move forward. This was the easy choice in the short term, however it was definetely the wrong choice. The vast majority of the Armenian people who were killed were completely innocent, and what the Turkish government did is awful and inexcusable. It is not something that should just be pushed to the side and ignored. The people who died and suffered, as well as their families, at the very least deserve the acknowledgement and validation that their stories are true and what they went through happened. They are owed much more, but at the very least, the Turkish government should give them that.

I don't think that "real" history exists. I think that history can be told from countless perspectives and interpreted multiple different ways. You can look at evidence and determine what you consider to be true, while also considering the different sides to every story. Like with the Armenian genocide, the survivors tell a different story than the Turkish government. If you only had information on this from the Turkish government, then you would probably believe that it wasn't a genocide. But once you see more of the evidence, and see the accounts from survivors, what actually happened begins to fall into place.

Reading the response to St. John's letter definetely made me look back on what we have learned and consider it in a different way. We know from the survivor accounts the atrocities that were committed against the Armenians, but if I had not learned about those (and even having read/listened to them) the embassy tells a pretty convincing story. They walk around the truth, and don't deny that people died, but they make it seem as though these deaths could not have been avoided and were a result of the war. I think that in order to respond to this, you would need to prove that these killings and deportations were intentional. You could use laws that the Turkish government issued as well as survivor accounts.

Originally posted by Martha $tewart on February 09, 2023 17:04

I unequivocally believe that what happened to the Armenians in Turkey was genocide. From what I have seen, I am thoroughly convinced that the Turkish government was systematic in their murder and deportation of the Armenians, and that they tried very hard to disguise their actions. I also believe that their genocide was preventable, there was so much more that other countries could have done. There were many warning signs, people tried to get aid, but no one listened. Because of this, I am doubtful of America’s intentions and supposed “neutrality”. In my opinion, when you are a bystander, you are part of the problem.

I think real history is determined by the quality of the evidence. What happened to the Armenian people is “real” history because of the documents and photographs that exist to prove it. During the web investigation, we looked at photos of starving orphans, death marches, and Armenian heads on sticks. There is no denying that what they were subjected to was not a simple government response to an uprising, it was torture. Priests were murdered, children were crucified, and survivors were sent to the desert to die. There are also so many documents from this time. The New York Times articles updating people on the conditions of the war contain excerpts such as, “The latest recital is from an Armenian doctor named Derderian, who says that the whole plain of Alashgerd is virtually covered with the bodies of men, women and children”. So many Armenians were killed that officials called the area the “Slaughterhouse Province”. There are many letters between diplomats and America describing the suffering that Armenians were enduring, and just as many letters from Turkish officals to others claiming that they were just handling a rebellion. The fact that the government tried so hard to cover up their tracks also serves as proof of their guiltiness. They created fake temporary deportation laws so that their activities could seem official. Even before the genoicde, racism was evident in the discrimination Christians faced in Turkey. They were unequal to Muslims under the law and had to pay higher taxes. The documentary film from class even states that Talaat claimed that the war was a great opportunity to get rid of the Armenians without risk of intervention. What the Turkish government is trying to say is fake history, the real history if evident in everything else.

As a response to the Turkish government, I would first find out if they have the position they do out of lack of knowledge or lack of compassion. Either they have been brainwashed into believing the government’s version of these events due to a political agenda, or they are trying to hide the truth on purpose. So I would start by providing them with hard evidence and showing the effects of what they have done, such as the first hand account of the elderly man from the film. If this truly does not move them to confront the truth, I would let them know that this evidence is available to the public, and that people will call them out for it as it is brought into the light. Everyone knows about the Holocaust. In my opinion, so many of the photos we looked at look like they were taken during the Holocaust. They share the train cars of people, internment camps, and weakened bodies that have died from hunger and exhaustion. Their actions served as an inspiration for some of the acts carried out during the Holocaust. The Turkish government should know that they can’t run from something that lives forever in the past.

I like the idea of finding out if they have their position due to lack of knowledge or lack of compassion. I believe that could be asked in many situations

Originally posted by SillyGoblinMan178 on February 09, 2023 17:34

I believe that virtually every account that we have heard of the Armenian Genocide that is not supplied by the Turkish Government post-World War One is factually accurate, all pointing to a genocide occurring from February 1914 to July 1923. The mass killings of Armenians were absolutely premeditated, as in March of 1915 the Turkish Central Committee announced a decision to eliminate the Armenians. I do, however, doubt the validity of most of the Turkish Government's statements on the Genocide. More specifically, how they vehemently deny it ever happened whenever they are asked a question remotely relating to it. In both the 60 minutes special and the response to St. John's letter, the Turkish official representing the nation tries to blame the deaths on the World War that was occurring at the same time, saying there were killings on "both sides." Although there were some Armenians who resented the Turkish government, and even a few who resisted violently, there were absolutely zero Armenians who could have possibly committed killings on the scale of genocide against the Turks. Identifying "real" history is a tricky process, as much of it is written by people in power the way they want you to see it. Obviously, the best way to find out the real history of something is to get the story of people who were there, although this is now extremely difficult with events like the Armenian Genocide. History that isn't "real" is most often propaganda, so be sure to check who created your historical sources and why. If I was on the receiving end of that email from the Turkish Embassy, I would honestly consider showing up in person at the embassy. It's an insane idea, as the Turkish government has a lot more influence than a Junior at Boston Latin, but I need to see if a person who works for Turkey could actually say what was said in the email to my face.

I agree with the fact that the best way to find out real history is to get the stories of people who were there, but it's also important to consider that there are always very different sides to stories

I believe that nothing about the genocide of Armenian people should be in doubt. It was well documented and extremely clear that a genocide occurred. As shown by our in class discussions there are photos, articles, firsthand accounts, and much more to support this. The thing that I am really in question about is why there are so many people denying this genocide. Whether it be a matter of racism or nationalism out of the Turkish people themselves I do not understand how you can say that nothing happened when it is so extremely obvious that these people were targeted and had an atrocious act committed against them.

In my opinion, "real" history is anything documented, as well as the popular opinions on historical matters. For example, this genocide is "real" because of all of the tangible documents we have to show what happened, as well as all of the firsthand accounts. For something to be "real" the general consensus should be the fact that it was real, something that wasn't acknowledged in the US for a long time, however is now the popular opinion.

I think that the Turkish government is trying to cover up just how bad the genocide was with their response. I believe that them diverting questions and denying the genocide signals something bigger than it just happening. I think that they need to admit that they committed these crimes against humanity, and put their sense of nationalism or pride or whatever is causing their denial to the side and forget about it. I believe that the Turkish government knows a lot more than we do about the situation and that their denial is because they do not want to admit to the level of the genocide that they committed. No matter what they are wrong to continue to act like it never happened though, and they need to accept the fact that their country has a dark past.