[Graham] Refuses to recognize Armenian Genocide after meeting with Turkey

Yeah, more weak sauce from Lindsey. he needs a fainting couch any time an autocrat is nearby.

 

There was a time I sort of respected Graham because he would always, for instance, pump the breaks an personally attacking other senators.

But then he flipped from his very anti-Trump stance because he was afraid for his job and since that point he's turned into a complete and total weasel. It was like he literally made the calculation that he was more attached to his job than his soul.

 

Graham added that he was objecting "not because of the past but because of the future."

What future? LMAO the future of the dead?

It just means that it will come up again in the next years because history is history and there is ton of evidence of all the murders commited against the orthodox christians.

 

You know what is ridiculous? People using the Armenian Genocide topic to support their politics and to put pressure on the relationship between Turkey and the USA. Screw anyone using mass death to push their politics. You know that's a sensitive area for many Turks who don't agree with the exact framing of the events that transpired, it's actually quite complicated in what happened, and it wasn't the Turkish Republic that actually committed the atrocities that took place.

 

Oh hey I'm sorry, does the Ottomon Empire still exist?

 

I call bullshit. So me the proof

 

You're with the idiot bringing up history from a country that doesn't even exist anymore. Go read up on these events and you'll find it was the CUP, ie Young Turks, who are linked to it. A political reformist group that ran wild during WW1. The events following the killings and deportations then played out, including a complete loss by the Ottoman Empire which was set to be literally carved up like Turkey by the allied countries that occupied it. The country we see today is a product of revolution and completely different from the Ottoman Empire that people are trying to falsely push onto Turkey. Turkey's big mistake is they play into the Ottoman history too often to get political support from traditionalists, despite not being the Empire. The overthrow of that Empire was completely necessary for modern day Turkey to exist actually. The modern politicians often try to draw parallels between the two, because there are some people there who still worship those times and romanticize it.

Overall bringing up events from the Ottoman Empire is not only historically laughable because of all the played out, it's insulting to the people who died.

I highly suggest you read about Ataturk and the founding of the Turkish Republic and the fall of the Empire. It's a fascinating story. One of my favorite biographies.https://www.amazon.com.tr/Atatürk-Mango-Andrew-Mango/dp/0719565928/ref=asc_df_0719565928/?tag=googleshoptr-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=343279541692&hvpos=1o1&hvnetw=g&hvrand=12682261784272690554&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=1012761&hvtargid=pla-483965469324&psc=1

 

You're Turkish right?

 

No just very into its history. Modern and ancient. I won't bash people for their beliefs on those incidents because of the way it is used as a weapon. I actually agreed with Ilhan Omar on her views on that, which is crazy because I never thought I'd agree with her on anything.

Ilhan actually correct for once... "accountability and recognition of genocide should not be used as a cudgel in a political fight. It should be done based on academic consensus outside the push and pull of geopolitics."

 

Ok then. Where is the proof about the post you made?

 

That the ottoman empire isn't Turkey? I don't need to prove something so basic. But if you want proof of the details leading up to it and to know more about WW1, the fall of the Ottomon Empire, and the rise and fall of the CUP, then I suggest you seek out that book. It has a good index and you can find all the relevant parts quickly. There is another book that will detail these things literally called The Fall of The Ottomons. I am not trying to be flippant in suggesting these. I honestly encourage anyone interested in an oft ignored part of WW1 history to check these things out. It's wonderful and it tells you a lot about how modern Turkey came about. Really there is nothing quite like it. Also I suggest visiting Turkey to anyone reading this... go see the old Ottoman stomping grounds in Istanbul and making a side trip to Ankara to visit Anitkabir where there is a huge museum about the Republic's founder and a museum that explains the origin of the Republic of Turkey. Also check out Capadoccia if you're interested in the origin of Christianity or Göbeklitepe if you're a huge nerd about archeology.

 

Graham's objection isn't about the past, but the future. He is objecting to not supporting oil. It's about oil. Oil does a thing to people. It makes them forget about the genocide of the past.

 

Trump keeps on saying we keep troop there ONLY for the oil. The ethnic cleansing is not good but nothing we can do about that. But we need to protect the oil.

Maybe someone can explain the US interest here.

 

Political Stooge

The Trump team is so susceptible to flattery and posturing they think every else is too

 

I was talking from the PoV of Trump and Graham. The ethnic cleansing here isn't that of the past, it's that of the Kurds. They won't do anything about that, yet they protect the oil with US troop. It's an amazing position to take. Oil over ethnic cleansing of a US military ally against ISIS.

What I'm curious about still is, how does US troops protecting the Syrian oil benefit the US? What is the US interest here?

 

I agree with Graham that recognition or non-recognition of the genocide is about the future and not the past. We used to have a good relationship with Turkey and since Erdogan was elected it has eroded badly. They're moving away from the West, closer to their Islamic neighbors and deeper into the Russian sphere of influence (where Armenia already is, ironically).

I'd be happy to officially recognize the genocide, not to poke Turkey in the eye, but just because it's the truth and I don't want us to be on record denying the truth. But it will hurt our relationship with Turkey more to do it. For whatever reason, Trump has his pro-Russian stance (which I disagree with) and is making deals with Turkey to strengthen them as a Mideast regional power, so he obviously doesn't want to rock that boat.

But, for someone like me who thinks we should treat Russia as an enemy and recognize that the West has lost Turkey, maybe we actually want to poke them in the eye. They're members of NATO but they are friendlier with the country NATO is supposed to protect them from than with NATO members. After Trump is gone, is there anything left to sustain this relationship? Thinking of the future, maybe recognizing the genocide is the catalyst for the breakup we can all see coming.

 

A weasel at least is trying to feed itself and keep from being eaten by an owl or coyote or whatever.

Lindsay has no such excuse for his betrayal. He could easily sell out his country the traditional way by joining the lobbyist-industrial complex.

Instead he's trying to actively undo the entirety of the postwar order that he once professed to care about...for basically nothing.

And by that, I mean, literally nothing, he gets nothing from this. We get nothing from it. Malignant narcissist Trump doesn't really get much from it either. Sure a couple of building deals but he'll be dead before they get built anyway, most likely.

It's even worse when your reflect on that part of it.