Today is the memorial day for the approximately 1.5 million Armenians who got killed in a genocide in the Ottoman Empire during World War I. With them died a large number of Greeks and Assyrians. Until this day Turkey, the successor state of the Ottoman Empire, deny the events, and mentioning them is prohibited by law.

See here what happend during the time of 1915 to 1922:

 

i am pleased to go through your blog.i am also pleased to find that you have attained marital status and pray for your successful married life.kindly allow me to disagree your views on genocide as mentioned in the blog. so for war with ottoman empire is concerned it was concerted efforts of the west to dismember the vast turkish islamic empire into fragmentations for which earlier an english citizen lawrance of arabai played vitol role for such dismemberment.finally the dismemberment plan succeeded and most of the central asian part was ceceeded fron turkey and merged with soviet union.there are other historical facts which are closely related to this event of history; may be it takes time becomes exhaustive.i shall welcome your disagreements if any.wish u happy family life. thanks

Thank you for your good wishes!

1. Most parts of the Ottoman Empire still belong to Turkey, others have become independent states (Lebanon, Syria). The Soviet Union did not get much of it. The Central Asian states with their Turk population never belonged to the Ottoman Empire.

2. Denying the Armenian genocide is just as irrational and insulting to the victims as denying the holocaust of the Jews in Germany. There were lots of eye witnesses who reported on the genocide. Some of them were German diplomats and military, and since Germany was the Ottoman Emire's closest ally these people had no motivation to tell anything negative about the OE. Nonetheless they sent these (secret) reports to the German government. Why should they have lied? There wouldn't have been a logical reason for this!

3. I know that some people think that denying a fact makes it untrue. But that's not a logical way of thinking, don't you agree?

thanks for response. as stated earlir one English citizen who loved to be called "Larawance of arabia" penetrated deep into the arab sociology and provoked their sense of extreme natinalisim' the move succeeded and the arab fought and tried to be indentified by their national identification instead being the units of vast islamic empire known as ottoman empire.i may humbly add that under islamic concept the extreme nationalisim is prohibited. we have seen the dreadful results of such nationalisim in the past century when holocaust of jews brothern took place.in the recentpast the similar genocide was repeated at bosnia when numberless muslims were killed being treated either rebel or alien to nationalistic commitment of united belgrade.the turkist empire took the rebel part of arabs so serious that it changed the arab-tark sociology in its entire concept. you may find the muslims names of turk citizens differ from the muslims names of other countries. the pungent against arabs was so strong that atta turk tried to evolove the turky different from muslim world and entirely different from arabs. this national anger sentiment against arab drove him to recognise isreal first from the muslim world{ i wish others may follow it for the peaxceful co-existence of jews and muslims}under these circumstances those kurd and armaninains who fought against turky were killed in action. since; major parts of islamic empire were taken away by russia and good num,ber of such population existed there ; they on some political motivation shifted to this part of this history.Even; the rebel leader of turk-greek rouf denktash had no such complaints against turky.notwitstanding; this may be you possess better part of the history? thanks