U.S. Armenian lobby at work again!

bigOz


Joined: 29/09/2010
Posts: 1244

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 13:15

Another example of bad American diplomacy, and what big influence the Armenian lobby can have in USA.

A famous Turkish singer living out there was to sing the American National Anthem at the start an NBA basketball game in L.A. The game was part of a cultural organisation aimed at providing information about Turkey. A concert was to follow at the end of the game, that would have included other Turkish sigers dancers. The latter part was cancelled after strong protests by the Armenian lobby in Los Angeles - only the American National Anthem was sang by Sinem Saniye, something which the Armenians tried to stop without success.

Yet these are the same Armenians depending on food supplies from Turkey so that they do not starve, begging Turkey to open open up its border for transit trade, and still holding a large chunk of Azerbeycan (the size of Cyprus) illegally! Meanwhile, the Armenians are free to run their businesses and practice their religion in Turkey.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 16:20

What the 'eck has a spat between the Azeris and Armenians got to do with your anti-Armenian 'tirade' ?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh_War



Suggest you start here and READ about how the VAST majority of folk - in what is still ( legally) part of Azerbaijan - voted to cede to Armenia...



Here's hoping that TR and Armenia can normalise relations and that a compromise found over the insistence of many nations that modern -day TR recognises the Armenian pogroms carried out in the 'dying days' the Ottoman Empire ..

Denny


Joined: 09/12/2010
Posts: 261

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 21:31

Msg 1: "and still holding a large chunk of Azerbeycan (the size of Cyprus) illegally."



Crikey! I bet Turkey will have plenty to say about countries which do things like that!

Magbs


Joined: 26/02/2009
Posts: 278

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 21:44

'What the 'eck ...' Well, Turkey is Azerbaijan's primary sponsor.



I find some similarity between the two conflicts (Cyprus and Nagorno-Karabach). Both are really conflicts between two principles: territorial integrity and self-determination.

On the one hand, the borders of Azerbaijan including the Karabakh area were internationally recognised at the time of the country being recognised as independent state in 1991. On the other hand, the Armenian population of the region (the majority even before the ethnic clashes) claim the right of self-determination. As a result Armenian soldiers are stationed in Nagorno-Karabakh and the Armenian government transfers large budgetary resources to this area.

Azerbaijan insists on the return of all Karabakh territories and the withdrawal of the Armenian forces . Armenia is ready for a compromise. (What it resembles?)

So I believe that if one supports the TCs case then why blame Armenians?

mahdel


Joined: 28/05/2009
Posts: 255

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 21:55

So what you're saying is a minority group wants to be independent of a nation that is largely composed of a different ethnic group and a different country has sent troops to the region to ensure the rights of those minorities. I can't think of any other nation that resembles at all, can you?

Magbs


Joined: 26/02/2009
Posts: 278

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 22:13

Re 5

I am not sure if you are serious or this is a joke:



Russians - South Osetia etc

NATO/UN - Kosovo

Turkey - TRNC

bigOz


Joined: 29/09/2010
Posts: 1244

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 22:51

mmmmmmmmmmmmm!

One of us is having a problem understanding history! Wikipedia is self admittedly not a full authority on historic facts!

After the break up of Soviet Union the area was officially assigned to be a part of Azerbeycan. The area in question had 75 % of its population as ethnic Armenians, who naturally voted to be part of Armenia when it declared its inderpendence. They changed this to wanting their own independence once they realised what there would be no international accweptance of the former.

During the wars and attacks that followed, territory 9% of the size of Azerbeycan was also invaded and captured with the help of Armenian and Russian volunteers (probably military members). The size of Azeri land under occupation is far bigger than where the ethnic Armenians lived and wanted autonomy for. During these wars the Armenians intentionally attacked and killed hundreds of civilians that included many women and children trying to escape the war areas. (Continues)

bigOz


Joined: 29/09/2010
Posts: 1244

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 22:52

But let us assume we both have our points and we are both ignorant of full details concerning the region, and look at what your quote Wikipedia says:



The offensive provoked international rancor against the Armenian government, marking the first time Armenian forces had crossed the boundaries of the enclave itself and into Azerbaijan's territory. On April 30, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed Resolution 822, co-sponsored by Turkey and Pakistan, affirming Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity and demanding that Armenian forces withdraw from Kelbajar. Human Rights Watch findings concluded that during the Kelbajar offensive Armenian forces committed numerous violations of the rules of war, including forcible exodus of civilian population, indiscriminate fire and taking hostages.

bigOz


Joined: 29/09/2010
Posts: 1244

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 22:54

On January 25, 2005, for example, PACE adopted a controversial non-binding resolution, Resolution 1416, which deplored the "large-scale ethnic expulsion and the creation of mono-ethnic areas" and declared that Armenian forces were occupying Azerbaijan lands. On May 14, 2008 thirty-nine countries from the United Nations General Assembly adopted a Resolution № 62/243 which called for "the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of all Armenian forces from all occupied territories of the Republic of Azerbaijan." Over one hundred countries, however, abstained from voting while seven countries, including the three co-chairs of the Minsk Group, Russia, the United States and France, voted against it, reasoning that, as mediators, they had to maintain their neutrality.

So what is it we are arguing here exactly? As for position of Turkey regarding Cyprus that is my exact point! (Continues below)

bigOz


Joined: 29/09/2010
Posts: 1244

Message Posted:
28/12/2010 23:03

Lets have a reality chewck here! When it involves North Cyprus, where we were never an "ethnic minority" in a Greek owned island but "partners" and "co-owners" of the republic, the whole of Europe and USA supported the murdering Greek opressors - and supports them to this day by punishing the TCs.

Has anyone seen any political or economic sanctions against the Armenians - never mind sanctions, they even got millions of pounds worth of aid from Europe and USA when they had economic problems! A VERY SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS INDEED!

So now lets go back to the original argument of anti-Turkish lobbying in USA by the Armenian population. My question to mmmmmmm... is - do you think that any ethnic minority in any country should have the discretion of stopping a cultural activity by another, because they hold a grudge, they see them as enemy, or they have an animosity against them? And this in a country where "freedom", "liberty" blah blah is supposed to come first!