This week the Turks protested the US Democratic-led Congress.
A demonstrator, with Turkish flags next to him, shouts anti-American slogans during a protest near the U.S. Embassy in Ankara, Turkey, Wednesday, Oct. 10, 2007. Hundreds of Turks marched to the U.S. Embassy in Turkey to protest a U.S. bill declaring the World War I-era killings of Armenians a genocide, local media reported. The demonstrations in Istanbul and Ankara came a day after the United States Embassy urged its citizens to be alert toward possible violence if a committee in the House of Representatives votes in favor of the genocide bill, a move that would be considered an insult by most Turks. (AP Photo/Str)
The situation with Turkey is so tense that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has contacted the government and two high-ranking officials to Turkey for talks on Saturday.
Members of the left-wing Workers' Party wave Turkish flags as they chant slogans during a protest against the U.S. and its passing of a bill describing World War I-era killings of Armenians as genocide, Istanbul, Turkey, Thursday, Oct. 11, 2007. Despite intense lobbying by Turkish officials and opposition by U.S. President George W. Bush, the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed the bill by a 27-21 vote, a move likely to be considered an insult by most Turks. (AP Photo/Murad Sezer)
Wasn't it just a leading democrat who blasted Bush for America's reputation in the world?
Max Boot has more on the Armenian Genocide, via Pajamas Media.
++
ReplyDeletemini flashbacks:
excerpt:
[The White House opposes the move -- as did the Clinton White House, which intervened in Oct. 2000 to prevent a similar House initiative. Former national security advisor Brent Scowcroft, a Republican who chairs the American-Turkish Council, has cautioned against the bill, and eight former secretaries of state, Republican and Democrat, have urged Pelosi to block it.]
Bush warns Congress not to recognise Armenian 'genocide'
excerpts:
[President George Bush today urged members of Congress to reject a congressional resolution recognising the killings of Armenians in 1915 as "genocide", warning that it would damage US relations with Turkey.
The resolution would do "great harm" to relations, the president told reporters at the White House. He said: "This resolution is not the right response to these historic mass killings."
His comments followed a similar joint appeal from the US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and the defence secretary, Robert Gates.]
[Ms Rice said the legislation could provoke Turkey, a key Nato ally in the Middle East, to withdraw its cooperation with the US on Iraq.
"The passage of this resolution at this time would be very problematic for everything we are trying to do in the Middle East," she said.
Mr Gates said 70% of US air cargo destined for Iraq goes through Turkey, as does about one-third of the fuel used by the US military in Iraq.
"Access to airfields and to the roads and so on in Turkey would very much be put at risk if this resolution passes and Turkey reacts as strongly as we believe they will," he said.]
i'd like to why it took 90 years, why now, and why wasn't this accomplished during ie: the "peaceful" Clinton years??
and here's the kicker (excerpt from first link):
Support for and opposition to the "non-binding resolution"..
so we've alienated Turkey (a HUGE help & ally in the war), for what??
and what did the Armenians gain?? seems to me they have been left in the political fallout dust once again.. *sigh* on all counts..
==
The left doesn't have the votes to end the war, even David Obey willingly admits that and so does Pelosi.
ReplyDeleteSo this was a tool for them to instead try to cripple the execution. A simple underhanded cowardly tactic.