What's new

Shekhar Kapur to make film on Armenian genocide?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sir am i not supposed to keep my eyes open.

anyway suggest any art movie from India i would be happy to watch

Most of Satyajit Ray's works, but Charulata above all. However, let me return from my urgent errand and I will post some recent decent-ish art films. Sadly, my wife would have been the right person; she is the cineaste.
 
.
Art movies? hmmmmm .....

I think "1920: Evil Returns" sucked.

Just a few scenes where I closed my eyes into slits.

What do you think Joe?
 
.
Historical perspective of Armenian-Turkish conflict is indeed complicated and contentious and without knowing complete history it is difficult to fathom the facts lie therein.

Ethnic conflict between Turks and Armenians actually began more than 100 years before World War I. Actions of the Russian Empire precipitated the conflict. In 1800, Armenians were scattered within and beyond a region that now encompasses Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Eastern Turkey. In all but small districts, Armenians were a minority which had been under Muslim, primarily Turkish, rule for 700 years. The Russian Empire had begun the imperial conquests of the Muslim lands south of the Caucasus Mountains. One of their main weapons was the transfer of populations — deportation. They ruthlessly expelled whole Muslim populations, replacing them with Christians whom they felt would be loyal to a Christian government. Armenians were a major instrument of this policy. Like others in the Middle East, the primary loyalty of Armenians was religious. Many Armenians resented being under Muslim rule, and they were drawn to a Christian State and to offers of free land (land which had been seized from Turks and other Muslims). A major population exchange began. In Erivan Province (today the Armenian Republic) a Turkish majority was replaced by Armenians. In other regions such as coastal Georgia, Circassia, and the Crimea, other Christian groups were brought in to replace expelled Muslims. There was massive Muslim mortality—in some cases up to one-third of the Muslims died.

The Russians expelled 1.3 million Muslims from 1827 to 1878. One result of this migration, serving the purposes of the Russians, was the development of ethnic hatred and ethnic conflict between Armenians and Muslims. Evicted Muslims who had seen their families die in the Russian Wars felt animosity toward Armenians. Armenians who hated Muslim rule looked to the Russians as liberators. Armenians cooperated with Russian invaders of Eastern Anatolia in wars in 1828, 1854, and 1877. When the Russians retreated, Armenians feared Muslim retaliation and fled. Hatred grew on both sides.

The situation was exacerbated by rebellions of Armenian revolutionaries in the 1890s in which cities in Eastern Anatolia were seized and many Muslims and Armenians were killed. Intercommunal warfare between Turks and Armenians in Azerbaijan during the Russian Revolution of 1905 added to the peoples’ distrust of each other. Muslims and Armenians were now divided into sides, antagonists. Each group believed that in a war they would be killed if they did not kill first, a classic self-fulfilling prophecy. Most Muslims and most Armenians had no wish to be a part of this, but they were caught in the awful consequences of their expectations and their history.

More a bit later …………
 
.
Joe, for a long period of time I have browsed this thread, while I may not completely understand the complexity of the issues that southasian posters discuss in regards to historic significance that continue, I do however see a common theme of paranoia from each side that prevents culture exchange to take place online, my examples would be the Iranian-saudi dilemma, pakistani-indian point scoring threads and i cannot understand the bangladeshis on this forum as I do not understand some of their terms yet, but based on general observation they do resent indians to certain degree. However my point is that the importance of identity over humanity is reoccurring general trend that i have observed so far.

On a lighter note, one surefire way to get a Canadian angry is to call them American, eh? ;)
 
.
Nice to see Indians jumping up and down :)

Saw that story of some forum, googled and got Yahoo site link :)
 
.
Intercommunal war erupted when the Ottoman Empire entered World War I. Armenian revolutionaries, many trained in Russia, attempted to seize main Ottoman cities in Eastern Anatolia. They took the city of Van and held it until Russia invaders arrived, killing all but a few of the Muslims of the city and surrounding villages. In the countryside, Muslim tribesmen killed the Armenians who fell into their hands. Armenian and Kurdish bands killed throughout the East, and massacre was the rule of the time. Russian and Ottoman regular troops were less murderous, but they too gave little quarter to those viewed as the enemy. Some of the worst civilian deaths of Turks and Armenians came at the end of the war. The killing went on until 1920. Many more died of starvation and disease than from bullets.

The results were among the worst seen in warfare. More than forty per cent of the Anatolian Armenians died; similar mortality was the fate of the Muslims of the war zone. In the province of Van, for example, 60% of the Muslims were lost by war’s end.

During the war, each side engaged in de facto deportations of the other. When the Russians and Armenians triumphed, all the Muslims were exiled, as were all the Armenians when the Ottomans triumphed. The Ottoman government also organized an official deportation of Armenians in areas under their control. None of these deportations was wholly justified by wartime necessity, but the deportations were not acts of one-sided genocide on the part of either Turks or Armenians.

It is the Muslim actions against Armenians that have been called genocide, an accusation that is primarily based on counting only the Armenian dead, not the Muslim dead. I do not believe the Ottoman government ever intended a genocide of Armenians. In my opinion, these accusations by western nations were propagated and exploited at this time and under the prevailing environment which are biased against the Muslims in general are nothing more than racial and religious bigotry. Shekhar Guptas of Indian world can not remain behind, after all it tends to soothe their ingrained core feelings about Muslims and their presence in Hindustan.
 
.
Intercommunal war erupted when the Ottoman Empire entered World War I. Armenian revolutionaries, many trained in Russia, attempted to seize main Ottoman cities in Eastern Anatolia. They took the city of Van and held it until Russia invaders arrived, killing all but a few of the Muslims of the city and surrounding villages. In the countryside, Muslim tribesmen killed the Armenians who fell into their hands. Armenian and Kurdish bands killed throughout the East, and massacre was the rule of the time. Russian and Ottoman regular troops were less murderous, but they too gave little quarter to those viewed as the enemy. Some of the worst civilian deaths of Turks and Armenians came at the end of the war. The killing went on until 1920. Many more died of starvation and disease than from bullets.

The results were among the worst seen in warfare. More than forty per cent of the Anatolian Armenians died; similar mortality was the fate of the Muslims of the war zone. In the province of Van, for example, 60% of the Muslims were lost by war’s end.

During the war, each side engaged in de facto deportations of the other. When the Russians and Armenians triumphed, all the Muslims were exiled, as were all the Armenians when the Ottomans triumphed. The Ottoman government also organized an official deportation of Armenians in areas under their control. None of these deportations was wholly justified by wartime necessity, but the deportations were not acts of one-sided genocide on the part of either Turks or Armenians.

It is the Muslim actions against Armenians that have been called genocide, an accusation that is primarily based on counting only the Armenian dead, not the Muslim dead. I do not believe the Ottoman government ever intended a genocide of Armenians. In my opinion, these accusations by western nations were propagated and exploited at this time and under the prevailing environment which are biased against the Muslims in general are nothing more than racial and religious bigotry. Shekhar Guptas of Indian world can not remain behind, after all it tends to soothe their ingrained core feelings about Muslims and their presence in Hindustan.
Do reply to the documents I have linked in Post #20. They can easily be verified, the site links the source of a vast majority of them.
 
.
Art movies? hmmmmm .....

I think "1920: Evil Returns" sucked.

Just a few scenes where I closed my eyes into slits.

What do you think Joe?

These days I am watching dubbed South Indian movies, translations of songs sucks but storyline is good.
 
. .
India is against all Muslims. No surprise here.

Shut the fuk!!! u Gay **** AR$¢ãhole ur name itself sounds gay. Tel me how many times ur american masters has drilled ur AR$¢ãhole....i don't care if i get banned fuk u.
 
.
genocide, an accusation that is primarily based on counting only the Armenian dead, not the Muslim dead.

The victor writes history. If friends of Turkey dominated the global media, everybody would be accusing the Russians and Armenians of committing genocide against Turkish civilians.

Do reply to the documents I have linked in Post #20. They can easily be verified, the site links the source of a vast majority of them.

Did you actually read his post?

He is not denying the Armenian deaths but saying that is only half the story. Atrocities were committed by both sides, but only half the story is promoted by the dominant West.
 
.
Shut the fuk!!! u Gay **** AR$¢ãhole ur name itself sounds gay. Tel me how many times ur american masters has drilled ur AR$¢ãhole....i don't care if i get banned fuk u.

bro keep calm ....... dont loose ur cool
 
.
Did you actually read his post?

He is not denying the Armenian deaths but saying that is only half the story. Atrocities were committed by both sides, but only half the story is promoted by the dominant West.

The Western media has never denied the death of Turks, this is the first I am hearing of this. It is our media that has denied the death of Armenians. No one ever claimed that Turks weren't killed. Right?
 
.
The Western media has never denied the death of Turks, this is the first I am hearing of this. It is our media that has denied the death of Armenians. No one ever claimed that Turks weren't killed. Right?

Pakistan is among few remaining 3-4 countries who don't have diplomatic relations with Armenia
 
.
These days I am watching dubbed South Indian movies, translations of songs sucks but storyline is good.

Yeah I agree. Its the storyline we watch South Indian movies for. :)
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom