Should the Treaty of Sevres be reimposed?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:16:42 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Should the Treaty of Sevres be reimposed?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Should the Treaty of Sevres be reimposed?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 28

Author Topic: Should the Treaty of Sevres be reimposed?  (Read 4302 times)
mencken
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,222
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 15, 2015, 04:56:52 PM »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/behlal-azkan/turkeys-isis-haunt-it_b_8288444.html





Seems like an entirely fair response to Erdogan's nonsense over the past several years.
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,051
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2015, 04:59:17 PM »

The oppression of the Kurds didn't start with Erdoğan. If anything, Erdoğan has been better for the Kurds than the Secular/Military establishment.

Logged
mencken
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,222
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2015, 05:01:15 PM »

The oppression of the Kurds didn't start with Erdoğan. If anything, Erdoğan has been better for the Kurds than the Secular/Military establishment.



They deserve independence regardless if their new tyrant is more benign than previous ones.
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,051
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2015, 05:04:25 PM »

The oppression of the Kurds didn't start with Erdoğan. If anything, Erdoğan has been better for the Kurds than the Secular/Military establishment.



They deserve independence regardless if their new tyrant is more benign than previous ones.

Well, if they want it sure. And I suspect an independence referendum would end in a yes vote. But the meme that Erdoğan and the AKP are responsible for the ills of Turkey is ridiculous.

Also, lol at Greece annexing the NW and Armenia taking the Northeast.
Logged
mencken
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,222
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2015, 05:11:25 PM »

The oppression of the Kurds didn't start with Erdoğan. If anything, Erdoğan has been better for the Kurds than the Secular/Military establishment.



They deserve independence regardless if their new tyrant is more benign than previous ones.

Well, if they want it sure. And I suspect an independence referendum would end in a yes vote. But the meme that Erdoğan and the AKP are responsible for the ills of Turkey is ridiculous.

Also, lol at Greece annexing the NW and Armenia taking the Northeast.

They are clearly responsible for aiding and abetting radical Islamists in their own backyard, in addition to moving away from secularism domestically.

Admittedly the last two acts are punitive measures. Greece may not be the best steward for the Kemalist West, perhaps nominal independence would be a better measure there? And restitution for Armenia, while lacking a basis in popular sovereignty, is less absurd than Poland getting Pomerania and Silesia.
Logged
Hnv1
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,505


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2015, 05:13:43 PM »

how exactly are you planning to impose it?
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,051
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2015, 05:14:17 PM »

Armenia regaining those lands would be like Germany regaining Kaliningrad.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 15, 2015, 05:18:50 PM »

Armenia regaining those lands would be like Germany regaining Kaliningrad.

Bad comparison. Turkey was an aggressor, which got rewarded for its agression and genocide. Germany was an aggressor, which got punished for its aggression (and indirectly its genocide).
Logged
mencken
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,222
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2015, 05:20:17 PM »

how exactly are you planning to impose it?

The U.S. waving Article V protection and removing its military protection unless the terms are agreed to should do the trick.

Armenia regaining those lands would be like Germany regaining Kaliningrad.

Yeltsin offered it.
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,051
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2015, 05:20:39 PM »

Armenia regaining those lands would be like Germany regaining Kaliningrad.

Bad comparison. Turkey was an aggressor, which got rewarded for its agression and genocide. Germany was an aggressor, which got punished for its aggression (and indirectly its genocide).

Anyway, the point is that it would basically entail massive ethnic cleansing for Armenia to regain those territories.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2015, 05:20:42 PM »

CHP voters are not Greeks (or at least no more than any other Turks), and are probably likely to be even more outraged by such an idea than Erdogan would be.

The angriest people, however, would almost certainly be the people of Hatay, who would find themselves now resident in the earthly hell known as Syria.

This is silly. Very silly. Even by Atlas standards, this is exceptionally silly.

I have always wondered about how they came to agree on the borders given to Armenia in the treaty. Were they making decisions in ignorance of the extent to which the Armenian genocide had changed the demographics of the region, or in spite of them? I could somewhat understand why they would. It is a bit off that you could kill people and take over their land-- but keep the land in a punitive peace. A lack of Poles east of the Oder-Niesse line didn't stop Poland, after all.
Logged
Hnv1
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,505


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2015, 05:25:18 PM »
« Edited: October 16, 2015, 07:04:19 AM by Hnv1 »

how exactly are you planning to impose it?

The U.S. waving Article V protection and removing its military protection unless the terms are agreed to should do the trick.

Armenia regaining those lands would be like Germany regaining Kaliningrad.
Yeltsin offered it.
Yeah...that won't do the trick.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2015, 05:25:19 PM »

CHP voters are not Greeks (or at least no more than any other Turks), and are probably likely to be even more outraged by such an idea than Erdogan would be.

The angriest people, however, would almost certainly be the people of Hatay, who would find themselves now resident in the earthly hell known as Syria.

This is silly. Very silly. Even by Atlas standards, this is exceptionally silly.

I have always wondered about how they came to agree on the borders given to Armenia in the treaty. Were they making decisions in ignorance of the extent to which the Armenian genocide had changed the demographics of the region, or in spite of them? I could somewhat understand why they would. It is a bit off that you could kill people and take over their land -- but keep the land in a punitive peace. A lack of Poles east of the Oder-Niesse line didn't stop Poland, after all.

In spite of them. Simply a matter of justice (as seen by the Allies). Rewarding Turkey for the genocide would have been unthinkable at that point.
Logged
mencken
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,222
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2015, 05:26:53 PM »

The angriest people, however, would almost certainly be the people of Hatay, who would find themselves now resident in the earthly hell known as Syria.

Syrian Kurds control much of the area currently adjacent to Hatay, it could be arranged for Kurdistan to annex that province as well.

Again, why all the fuss about how the Turks feel about this? Should the US have worried about what the Pakis would think before they threatened to bomb Pakistan to the Stone Age unless they cooperated with the Afghan invasion?
Logged
Angel of Death
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,411
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 15, 2015, 05:36:52 PM »

Since the Allies of World War I are pretty much responsible for the horrible state the Middle East has been in since (Sykes-Picot, Balfour, etc.), it would be especially egregious if things had gone their way even more with Sèvres. The Turkish War of Independence at least was one satisfying middle finger to their ambitions.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 15, 2015, 05:46:57 PM »

Armenia regaining those lands would be like Germany regaining Kaliningrad.

Bad comparison. Turkey was an aggressor, which got rewarded for its agression and genocide. Germany was an aggressor, which got punished for its aggression (and indirectly its genocide).

Anyway, the point is that it would basically entail massive ethnic cleansing for Armenia to regain those territories.

Which raises the question whether ethnic cleansing can sometimes be justified to reverse the results of a previous ethnic cleansing? This is of course a problematic remedy, but at least in Bosnia I would support it (the Serbs should be cleansed from certain areas which had Bosniak majority prior to the war) and you could make a case for Eastern Anatolia as well (there are still a couple of hundred thousand Armenians in the region btw although they are almost all Muslims today - for obvious reasons).

If you can never revert population changes successful ethnic cleansing will always be rewarded. Which is a rather problematic element in international relations.

Turkey got away with the Armenian genocide, slaughtering and expelling the Greeks (atrocities on both sides, but two wrongs dont make a right) and driving Christian Arabs (and Armenians) out of Hatay (and killing quite a few) prior to their bogus 1939 referendum. Modern Turkey is to an unusually high degree the result of successful ethnic cleansing.

Other than that, your comparison with Kaliningrad was simply tasteless, given history. The Young Turks were the proto-fascist orchestrators of genocide and the Armenian Genocide was an inspiration to the Nazis. So the Turks and the Germans are the ones who are comparable in this scenario, not the Armenians and the Germans.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 15, 2015, 05:51:45 PM »

At least in the East, yes.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 15, 2015, 05:51:52 PM »

The only way this could remotely make sense would be if it was meant as an extremely unorthodox solution to the debt crisis where Turkey would have to buy back its lost territories from Greece, thus eliminating their debts (and deeply indebting Turkey instead).

The angriest people, however, would almost certainly be the people of Hatay, who would find themselves now resident in the earthly hell known as Syria.

Syrian Kurds control much of the area currently adjacent to Hatay, it could be arranged for Kurdistan to annex that province as well.

Again, why all the fuss about how the Turks feel about this? Should the US have worried about what the Pakis would think before they threatened to bomb Pakistan to the Stone Age unless they cooperated with the Afghan invasion?

But what have the Turks done to deserve this? Elect Erdogan?
Logged
mencken
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,222
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 15, 2015, 06:07:19 PM »

The only way this could remotely make sense would be if it was meant as an extremely unorthodox solution to the debt crisis where Turkey would have to buy back its lost territories from Greece, thus eliminating their debts (and deeply indebting Turkey instead).

I was leading up to that as a possible outcome, although given how many Turks wish to ascend to the EU, I do not see why their wish should not be granted in a heterodox way.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Syrian Kurds control much of the area currently adjacent to Hatay, it could be arranged for Kurdistan to annex that province as well.

Again, why all the fuss about how the Turks feel about this? Should the US have worried about what the Pakis would think before they threatened to bomb Pakistan to the Stone Age unless they cooperated with the Afghan invasion?
[/quote]

But what have the Turks done to deserve this? Elect Erdogan?
[/quote]

Is supporting terrorism on their southern border insufficient cause?
Logged
Orthogonian Society Treasurer
CommanderClash
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,561
Bermuda


Political Matrix
E: 0.32, S: 4.78

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 15, 2015, 06:16:30 PM »

Yes, although Tsargrad should be in Russian hands.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 15, 2015, 06:22:08 PM »

And an ethnic slur in one of his subsequent posts in the thread as well. Remarkable. But very apt for a poster with that particular username.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 15, 2015, 07:32:34 PM »

I think the Kurds should be allowed to pursue independence.

What happened to the Greeks and Armenians is unfortunate, but almost a century has passed since then. Time to move on.
Logged
ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,226


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 15, 2015, 09:08:53 PM »

To reimpose the Treaty of Sevres you need to ethnic cleanse at the very least 25 million people. So I'm against.
Logged
DavidB.
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,612
Israel


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: 4.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 15, 2015, 09:16:20 PM »

To reimpose the Treaty of Sevres you need to ethnic cleanse at the very least 25 million people. So I'm against.
Yeah, this. Sure, it would have been better if the reality on the ground would have been like this all the time and then states were created along these lines. But that's not the case, and I'm not really for radical ethnic cleansing, so nope.
Logged
ag
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 15, 2015, 10:36:32 PM »

I would prefer the Treaty of Belgrade

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Belgrade

Why, exactly, is this thread not trolling?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.05 seconds with 13 queries.