You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. Thoughts on this?
President Bush and key figures in his administration lobbied hard Wednesday against a House resolution that labels the killings of Armenians in Turkey during World War I
President Bush and key figures in his administration lobbied hard Wednesday against a House resolution that labels the killings of Armenians in Turkey during World War I as "genocide."
...
Bush urged lawmakers to oppose the resolution, which he said would cause "great harm" to U.S. relations with Turkey, which he called a key ally in NATO and the "global war on terror."
Can we just not put things into context anymore? Shall we take-back what the Germans did in WWII since they are now allies as well?
And with that being said . . . WTF is our Congress DOING? We have important crap to legislate. Let's stop with the Move On and Limbaugh censoring crap and get down to real business.
Besides, if the United States did something like this, maybe it would have to admit to all it's mass killings...
"All"? You can maybe make a case for native Americans (which I would disagree with), but beyond that what has the US done that is any way comparable to what Turkey or Germany has done?
"All"? You can maybe make a case for native Americans (which I would disagree with), but beyond that what has the US done that is any way comparable to what Turkey or Germany has done?
Why compare? Mass killing, is mass killing, and yes I was referring to the native americans...
"All"? You can maybe make a case for native Americans (which I would disagree with), but beyond that what has the US done that is any way comparable to what Turkey or Germany has done?
forgot about that one, huh? It was only 150 years ago.
Basically, this is what the government is telling us. "We can not recognize the Armenian genocide because Turkey is our ally and we are currently committing genocide in Iraq."
Why compare? Mass killing, is mass killing, and yes I was referring to the native americans...
How could you disagree with that?
It is probably just semantics, but I don't think the US wanted the complete annihilation of the Indians, they just wanted their land. The indians dying was collateral damage. Doesn't make it right in any way, but it is different than intentional genocide.
Its hardly a new thing that the U.S.(Or the U.K.) glosses over the past or indeed current mis-deeds of allies or countries that are favourable to their needs.
No one cared what Saddam was up to in his own country when he was fighting the Iranians, and what about the end of apartheid coinciding with the end of communism and therefore the South Africans governments fight against Cuba and other communist regimes in Angola.
Last edited by Crazy_Ivan; October 10th, 2007 at 12:53 PM.
It is probably just semantics, but I don't think the US wanted the complete annihilation of the Indians, they just wanted their land. The indians dying was collateral damage. Doesn't make it right in any way, but it is different than intentional genocide.
You've got to be kidding.
Of course we all reap the benefits of it now, but to act like it never happened or was "collateral damage" is ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salty Dog
I didn't realize the US government was actively tracking down and killing millions of slaves. I'd imagine the slave owners got pretty pissed!
You're rationalizing an incredibly embarrassing black mark on our history.
Last edited by Joe Hoya; October 10th, 2007 at 01:16 PM.
Not at all. Do you think it was the government's policy to kill all the indians? If it was - why not do it? It isn't like anybody at the time would've cared, they were just savages anyway, right? Not to mention, the thing that killed more indians than anything else was smallpox.
Not at all. Do you think it was the government's policy to kill all the indians? If it was - why not do it? It isn't like anybody at the time would've cared, they were just savages anyway, right? Not to mention, the thing that killed more indians than anything else was smallpox.
Maybe not explicitly, but actions speak louder than words. We massacred them in numerous instances.
And heart disease kills more Americans than terrorism, but that's neither here nor there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salty Dog
No, I'm pointing out there is a difference between slavery and genocide. Would you disagree?
And I'm saying it's silly to rationalize an incredibly tragic part of our history into "Oh, well we weren't as bad as this."
Not at all. Do you think it was the government's policy to kill all the indians? If it was - why not do it? It isn't like anybody at the time would've cared, they were just savages anyway, right? Not to mention, the thing that killed more indians than anything else was smallpox.
You don't have to kill every single one of them to be genocide.
Have you heard of the Monroe Doctrine? Manifest Destiny? How about Ishi?
Any Armenian Republicans around? 
