Almost a century after the fact,our wonderful Democrats decide to pass a resolution condemning Turkey for genocide.Doesn't it seem just a little convienient that this resolution upsts the Turks who have been supporting our war on terror.Could it be that Nancy and the dems were looking for a way to de-rail the recent tactical gains in the region?
2007-10-15 08:29:59 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
lindsey:
Treason:violation to the allegience owed to one's soverign or state;betrayel to one's country,specifically in the U.S.(as declared in the Constitution),consisting only in levying war againt the U.S.or in GIVING AID AND CONFORT TO ITS ENEMIES.(WEBSTER'S 4th edition)
Would not the resolution,which indirectly aids our enemies by ostercizing an alley and,be considered treason when applying the definition given above?
2007-10-15 08:44:46 · update #1
Pardon the typo's.I've got to get a new key board.
2007-10-15 08:51:05 · update #2
The current government of Turkey didn't exist in 1915. The Ottomans still had control then. Should we demand resolution of things done by the British government before July 4, 1776? Until then we were a British colony and thus part of Britain. This is a stupid non-issue. I have contacted my reps and expressed my disapproval of the Congressional vote.
2007-10-15 09:09:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Actually they did that on the request of the President's State Department. If you look back through history, we play with this resolution ever 30 years or so as a diplomatic way to keep Turkey in line. The President would prefer they didn't invade one of the "stable" areas in Iraq, and Turkey would prefer to catch the Terrorists who've been attacking them.
This is a bipartisan measure to ask Turkey to sit there and take a few bombings so the President doesn't look so bad. Blame the Dems if you want, but it's your President's royal screw up that created this entire mess.
If you'd like to talk treason, lets talk treason. Who provided Aid and Comfort to the enemy (Osama Bin Laden), by "Decidering" to call off the hunt?
2007-10-15 15:44:33 · answer #2 · answered by Beardog 7 · 10⤊ 6⤋
Thats stupid because one, the gains pretty much all exist solely in the minds of the White House, the overall problems that are leading to violence in the region are no closer to being solved then they were a year ago. Secondly, even if Turkey bars further use by the US military, it still isn't going to derail our military presence in the region. There are plenty of alternative ways to get supplies to the troops. Third, Bush had promised in a campaign in the year 2000 to condemn the genocide in Turkey of the Armenians if I remember correctly. It happened, and it deserved to be codemned. Calling this some obscure machination to inconvenience the troops in Iraq is just plain dumb.
2007-10-15 15:41:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 5⤋
AH_ HAH!! SEE!! SEE!! THE WAR IS ALL THE DEMOCRATS FAULT!!
Gee, that didn't take long at all. I though the Repubs would at least wait till Georgey was out of office to start blaming the Dems for the war. So the invasion, occupation, and rebellion in Iraq had was all just peachy till those darn Dem voted for this obsure resolution and then all heck broke loose, huh? Wow, us liberal sure are sneaky.
How come I didn't get the memo that we were bringing down the free world for our own sick twisted glory?
2007-10-15 15:44:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 5⤋
Your comparison smacks of partisan wishful thinking.
So no, the Democrats are not "treasonous"
No doubt conservative sheep will be dazzled.
2007-10-15 17:22:20 · answer #5 · answered by Jim W 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The turks have been wanting to invade Iraq for the past couple years...they have hardly been supporting the war
2007-10-15 15:44:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 4⤋
Their actions threaten our troops by threatening
the supply line thru Turkey!
2007-10-15 16:06:51 · answer #7 · answered by realitycheck 3 · 3⤊ 4⤋
Genocide is genocide. I am sorry about an adverse impact to Bush's war on terra, but it is appropriate to call a thing what it is.
I note 8 Republicans on the committee voted for it as well.
2007-10-15 15:39:37 · answer #8 · answered by planksheer 7 · 9⤊ 6⤋
It would have made more sense if they had come out against the genocide going on TODAY in Dafur.
Saw today on Yahoo News that the government of Turkey is asking their parliment to OK an invasion of northern Iraq. Looks like the Democrats got what they wanted-----two allies spliting apart.
2007-10-15 15:35:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 12⤊ 7⤋
I am also unhappy with the timing of this resolution. However, most historians agree that the killings in 1915 were a genocide. This should be recognized. So, please answer this? Why do we have a long term strategical alliance with a historically intellectually dishonest regime?
2007-10-15 15:37:39 · answer #10 · answered by John V 5 · 8⤊ 7⤋