Armenian Votes or Not?

[Odin]

Like the universe or Turkish national pride, American obsession with race and ancestry is infinite:
Census

Well Louis has more time on his hands then I do, bravo. Not only that but it sets up a rare circumstance here at the backroom of the org, something so rare that very few posters are capable of doing it, so it must be done in bold and special font.

I was wrong

Now that we have that out of the way, LEN the link louis provides states 358k which is a very small % hence my prior posts position.

[LeftEyeNine]

So 358k of which has also a portion unable to vote seem insignificant to care for their votes.

Then only the other option remains ?

[Reverend Joe]

I believe the Allfather pretty much hit the nail on the head... it's a nonissue, sounds-good, everyone's behind it kinda thing. Plus I believe (not know, or think, just believe/hope) that Obama is actually trying to take a stance on issues that he feels are morally, ethically and logically correct.

[Geoffrey S]

Are American politicians really craving for "confirming the truth" or is a matter of acquiring whopping Armenian votes ?

So 358k of which has also a portion unable to vote seem insignificant to care for their votes.

Then only the other option remains ?

Now that has been shown that Armenians voters aren't a significant percentage of the US, it seemed discussion had shifted to the 'confirming the truth' side of things and what could be achieved by doing so.

My suggestion was that Obama sees it as time to confront a valuable ally over a potentially divisive issue with other allies (Armenia, and the EU).

But perhaps I'm falling into the same trap a lot of others do with Obama - projecting my own hopes onto what is essentially a political mirror?

[LeftEyeNine]

Now that has been shown that Armenians voters aren't a significant percentage of the US, it seemed discussion had shifted to the 'confirming the truth' side of things and what could be achieved by doing so.

No it did not. "This or that" type discussions aim to see which one is actual and the supporting views such as this one:

My suggestion was that Obama sees it as time to confront a valuable ally over a potentially divisive issue with other allies (Armenia, and the EU).

But perhaps I'm falling into the same trap a lot of others do with Obama - projecting my own hopes onto what is essentially a political mirror?

Still, however, if you want more of the "truth", I'm happy to accompany with the opposing side in a new topic. Thank you.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I was wrong

Louis is always right about America.

I just knew there would be a meticulous record of the number of Armenians. It's what Americans do. I know America better than you do.

Oh alright. We simply searched simultanously, then posted almost at the same time. Sheer coincidence. I wasn't searching or posting to correct you. Then when I was done writing I saw your post and edited in a link.

[Odin]

Louis is always right about America.

I just knew there would be a meticulous record of the number of Armenians. It's what Americans do. I know America better than you do.

Oh alright. We simply searched simultanously, then posted almost at the same time. Sheer coincidence. I wasn't searching or posting to correct you. Then when I was done writing I saw your post and edited in a link.

For the record Louis I dont mind if you correct me when I am wrong. As to your knowledge about america I find you remarkable intune to some of the cultural subtleties for a foriegner. On top of that your usually pretty even handed when you dole out your judgements.

Sadly your often lazy and what I believe to be aloof, which often translates into arrogance. Your still alright in my book (for now) so correct away.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I don't think it is to do much with an Armenian lobby or massive voting block, LEN. The Armenian Genocide has become something of a moral benchmark, a measurement by which politicians can show their moral compass to their electorate. It is this moral yardstick, more than any obsessing over Anatolian history per se, that makes it an issue. It's somewhat of a free pass.

And it pisses of the Turks. In public opinion, semi-authoritarian, semi-militaristic hotheads, so you look cool irritating and defying them. Plus, Turks won't fly airplanes into buildings nor blame and hate the West for everything so they are not noble people 'who are simply misunderstood' and are therefore not entitled to a relativistic approach to their history.

Which is not to say that I disagree. I do believe in an Armenian Genocide, and I do believe Turkey could do with a more relaxed and less uptight atmosphere about history and nationhood etc, but I won't go over all that again here.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Sadly your often lazy and what I believe to be aloof, which often translates into arrogance. Your still alright in my book (for now) so correct away.

And I love you too, Odin! I'm just here for grabbing a few pints and talking rubbish with you fine lot.

And I'm not aloof, just an insufferable snob! Not through (lack of) upbringing or inability to see my own limitations, but through conscious decision. Snobbery, vanity of vanities! For all is vanity! How else to endure the briefness of our existence, if not through vanity! Through laughing death and eternity in the face by embracing the vanity of it all! It's not you, but mortality I am arrogantly aloof to.

[Geoffrey S]

Can't say I've yet seen a serious history book yet which denies the atrocities. Everyone agrees, except Turkey. Can't really see the point in denial - though it has served well in keeping the issue bottled up for a long, long time. But why bother? Every nation has it's stains, certainly in that time period, what exactly would the damage be in acknowledging this one? Most nations have come out all the stronger, and come across as more trustworthy, for facing their past. Not doing so implies doubts in the strength and solidarity of the Turkish state, and an unwillingness to face those.

[LeftEyeNine]

Can't say I've yet seen a serious history book yet which denies the atrocities. Everyone agrees, except Turkey. Can't really see the point in denial - though it has served well in keeping the issue bottled up for a long, long time. But why bother? Every nation has it's stains, certainly in that time period, what exactly would the damage be in acknowledging this one? Most nations have come out all the stronger, and come across as more trustworthy, for facing their past. Not doing so implies doubts in the strength and solidarity of the Turkish state, and an unwillingness to face those.

This is not an Armenian Issue debate. Please.

If you're eager on the topic, open one. I'll be right there.

P.S. Wonderful pic, Louis.