Genocide

No. The Armenian genocide has ended of 1917. However, Turkey's continued failure to recognize the Armenian genocide has prevented Turkey and Armenia from reconciling.

Usually, YES. While the genocide technically is the intent to kill or remove the people of a certain ethnic, religious, or racial group, such acts are almost always accompanied by rape and torture. Evidence from war-torn regions, especially the Congo, demonstrate that both men and women from enemy groups are raped and that men are usually killed afterwards while women are not. Displacement is part of the genocide since the killing or removal of people from a certain area necessarily displaces them from that area.

The international community failed to respond to violence in the region.

When "Massacre in Korea" was exhibited in the May Salon of 1951, it was doubly controversial. Not only that painting was criticized by the US, but was also criticized within the French Communist Party for not conforming to the socialist realist style. They found "Massacre in Korea" too abstract and lacking emotional appeal as compared with "Guernica."

From this point of time, several doubts were raised for me. First of all, I wonder why this painting was criticized by the US. Is this because he was a member of the Communists or because he really was anti-American as rumored? But the weird thing is that this painting was actually erased from publications in South Korea and Japan under the control of American power, and was prohibited by government for public display until the 1990s in Korea. The American regime feared that "Massacre in Korea" portrayed an image of American violence against innocent Koreans. There have been some opinions voiced that the painting was based on a massacre of Korean civilians by US forces at No Gun Ri on 26-29 July 1950.

In 1953, a Japanese publisher named Sojusha used the image on the cover of a book, which alleged the American military used viruses during the Korean War. In Korea,

What is a peice of propogada what is said here is false. Picaso was a communist and probaly anti American.

It dipicts a masacre that never happened. The massacre in qustion was invented by the North Koreans. They have many peices of propoganda that are quite famous due to their extremely grafic nature.

Japanese and Vietnamese

YES. The Young Turks, a nationalist group made up of ethnic Turks within the Ottoman Empire, subjected the Armenians, along with the Pontic Greeks, and Assyrians to a GENOCIDEduring the years of 1915-1917.

The genocide was very well-organized. The first group attacked and murdered were the Armenian intellectuals in Istanbul, which were the very people who would be most attached to the Ottoman State and willing to argue against independence in their communities. Next, entire villages were expunged of the majority-Armenian, majority-Greek, and majority-Assyrian inhabitants and the names of the cities completely altered to create "theoretical" Turkish names in a process called Turkification. The Armenians were marched to Deir ez-Zur in the Syrian desert without food and water (the Pontic Greeks and the Assyrians were marched to other places). There were numerous massacres and concentration camps along the route to Deir ez-Zur. Roughly 1.5 million Armenians were killed and over half of the Armenian homeland was depopulated of Armenians.

turkey

Germany

Rwanda

Many were sent to refugee camps on the Thai/Cambodia & Laos/Cambodia border.

dead, not dead yet, and live 2 kill cambodia people who were on our side.

In the United States, almost all 50 states. The Armenian genocide has been recognized all over the world and the Turkish people are denying their ancestor's wrong doings. Sooner or later they"ll have to admit it.

The Armenian Genocide was thought, designed and executed by the Ottoman Empire government. The European , as well as the US government were the witnesses of these tragedy. Actually there are overwhelming evidence about this in the archives of foreign ministeries of these countries. They helped in small ways - like opening orphanages, small hospitals, several French and British ships saved some groups.

Good question. I recently watched a video at YT where a muslim (I think) minister was screaming at all white americans for doing nothing about what happened in Rwanda and other african nations and we should have come to their aide. Well we didn't even know Rwanda was occurring until AFTER it was over. Our tv news is controlled and manipulated by the government. Had we known, what could we do. There are two issues at work here. One is morality, the other is Legality. We americans, white or of any color cannot just walk into another country with guns and begin shooting. its that simple. Its illegal. We would all be killed. For those that did know, the UN was called and they said they would handle it and THEY did nothing. Rwanda does not have oil. Libya on the other hand does have oil, so suddenly they say "you can't treat people like that" lololol. They mean you can't hurt the oil like that and they want some of it. The UN protects ONLY nations with oil and ignores all countries without oil. If America needed protection, the UN would not send in any troops to aide us because we and the whole world, used up all our oil a long time ago. We barely have a single well pumping almost anything. Nothing worth the UN's time to protect.

Morality should override all laws but it does not. We might love to jump on a plane (if we even had the money for air fare) and carry with us hundreds of boxes of ammunition and hundreds of rifles to give the victims of those genocides all the help we could. However, we can't fly with mouthwash now days, much less a gun because we might blow up the air plane with mouthwash since it contains alcohol in it. You can't have a can of shaving cream either. You can only have a very tiny bottle of shampoo or we might wash rwanda to death. GEorge bushwacker decided to remove all american rights of this country and ALL human rights of all countries with his patriot act. If we go to any ones aid, we will be arrested, thrown into Gitmo, and kept for life without a phone call and probably water boarded to death. Which is also immoral. So which moral side on any issue can we actually take? do we die for trying to help them or do they die for trying to help themselves? The valley between "wanting to" help and being "able to" help is a very wide crevice. The question really is WHO or WHAT disabled us to begin with. White Americans have been sending aide to african nations for over a century. White Americans helped to end apartheid in south Africa against the white brits who controlled them. We know all about being controlled ourselves as nearly every person of every race and country on this planet earth was at one time or another a slave. German invaded Poland and enslaved them. That's where my family is from. In the 100 years war of england, they were invaded dozens of times by plenty of other white and non white countries and enslaved by them as well. White americans came to america as indentured slaves. Who came to help us? Nobody, we got our stick and our stones and kicked the british butts out of here. Genocide is a part of every political parties agenda. America first adopted the eugenics program even before Hitler did to sterilize any person in america against their will, without parental consent so they could not ever have children because our government decided if you aren't real smart you don't have the right to have children. One of these sterilized young girls grew up to become a doctor. This was practiced until 1978 in America. So we know quite a bit about enslavement, about genocide, and about the ill treatment of any country towards its citizens. As we speak, cops in California are beating OWS protesters with clubs even tho they have not in anyway threatened a single cop, nor yelled at them in anyway. In 1970 this country ordered the murder of protesters at Kent state University, who protested the war. We have the right to protest but if we do they murder us then dare to tell libya not to mistreat it's people. Everyone old enough to remember Kent State Massacre all had a good laugh at Obama saying that to Libya. We know how they really think of humans in this or any country. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

they were a minority, sadly. people focus on the jews, because more of them died.

this is a really stupid question to ask on wikianswers foooool. but it doesnt reflect well. read jekyll and hyde fo some interesting views on the duality of human nature and then read ac graylings book on the bombing of dresden.

All the cambodian peoples that he didn't think were perfect

Republic

"Organization" as regards a genocide refers specifically to the mechanization and governmental coordination of the genocide. For example, the Holocaust was incredibly well-organized, with numerous different ghettos, camps, and death camps sending constant memos and detailed transcripts of events to the Nazi Leadership in Berlin. Conversely, the Rwandan genocide was poorly organized because each Hutu became his own lawless person, hacking away at Tutsis without reporting the acts to authorities nor was there any systematized removal of Tutsis.

Note that organization is not necessarily correlated with the largest number of deaths. For example, in the Holocaust, which we noted was incredibly well-organized, resulted in the death of an average of 5,000-7,000 people per day while the Rwandan genocide, which we noted was highly disorganized, resulted in the death of roughly 10,000 people per day. In the Rwandan case, many more people were mobilized in the killing.

The Armenian Genocide

yes the genocide is still going on today in Rwanda, they never stoped it. people are still in a cultural war over the same thing to have power.

the treaty prevent,suppres and punish genocide

and also some chinese things~

法克你麻痹，老子也在做阿，你帮我阿！

Yes, twas were killed along with Tutsis and so called "Hutu traitors" in the rwandan genocide of 1994.

It is ILLEGAL to speak about the Armenian Genocide in Turkey (most of Turkey was formerly Armenian homeland) because:

1. It is against Turkish Nationalistic policy to talk against Turkey - in other words if you talk against Turkey it is seen as high treason and you will be punished to the full extent of the law.

2. They deny there was ever a genocide so that they don't have any responsibility to reimburse any of the Armenian losses that occurred as a result of their forcibly removing them from their homeland and taking their possessions or enabling hardened Turkish criminals they put in charge of handling the "armenian problem".

One of the most famous Armenian journalists and newspaper publishers, Hrant Dink was assassinated in full view and in broad daylight in Turkey (formerly Armenia) where his office was, on his way in to work. Instead of punishing the shooter as any civilized democratic country's government would have done - they hailed him as a HERO.

The only reason why the United States has not FORCED Turkey to acknowledge the case of Genocide is because we have military bases there for strategic location and neither this president nor any of the former ones want to "rock the boat". So, whilst we are on US land, the US acknowledges it - but don't ask them to force Turkey to recognize their atrocities - they just will not do it and have openly threatened the US a couple of years ago when they were being strong-armed by the United Nations into admitting it.

At the time of European contact, The Herero or Herero were nomadic herdsman who lived in Namibia and Botswana. The ethnic was shared by groups surrounding them. Brittan showed a lack of interest in the predominantly desert area of South West Africa and thus was declared a German protectorate in 1884 and named German South West Africa. The mere fact the 'savages' had the audacity to challenge white claims of superiority and lands in 'their colony', enhanced racist attitudes which had always been rife amongst the settler population. This ignited the genocide. The Herero and Namaqua genocide is considered the first genocide of the 20th century.

Stalin had a great deal of trouble convincing certain groups to embrace communism, among them farmers, soldiers returning from war, Christians, Jews, Germans and Pols.

They're still discovering mass graves from Stalin's rule and they will probably not find them all while certain people are still in power. A majority of the accounts and actual locations of these mass executions were in the country and devoid of population, natural resources, or agriculture. The reasons are obvious.

While American historians have come clean about our past crimes against humanity i.e. the Native Americans, the African slaves, the use of nuclear bombs, there are plenty of us that call this the price of progress. The former Soviet Union is still uncomfortable with these admissions of guilt and uncomfortable with the roles their leaders played. But we as a nation shouldn't be throwing any stones. Not as long as the Indians are dying penniless on the reservations, Washington and Jefferson still grace our currency, and we preach about the threat of nuclear weapons.

It is widely acknowledged, even by China, that Tibetans possess a distinct cultural identity. To most of the people genocide in Tibet by China is disgusting. It is to me. Today there is still genocide going on in Tibet. Thousands of monks and other Tibetans are being held captive and tortured. Also millions of Chinese are moving into Tibet, making the Tibetans a minority in their own country. In 1950, one year after Mao Zedong took control of China, Chinese forces invaded Tibet. The Cultural Revolution in China started soon after millions across China and Tibet were killed. Mao Zedong like Hitler and Stalin was an extremist Darwinian and the Survival of the Fittest was incorporated in those atheist governments.