Genocide

The Hutu and the Tutsi, who were in fact the same race, were separated based on their appearances by their foreign, Belgian rulers prior to the genocide. The Hutu were the majority; they where more bulky in build and had darker skin. The Tutsi were taller, with lighter skin, and they made more money. For this reason hate for the Tutsi was common among the Hutu. Prejudiced radio stations were geared toward spreading hate for the Tutsi. The Tutsi were a scapegoat, targeted by the Hutu during difficult times in Rwanda. "Poverty breeds extremism"; for this reason the Hutu were willing to believe that the Tutsi were the root of their problems.

Unkindness and discrimination were what caused Turks to murder Armenians. I had the pleasure of hosting an exchange student from Armenia, his country still hates the Turks for what they did. They got away with it and to date, they have not been held accountable for their war crimes.

-----

The Armenian nationalist movement wanted to separate but as they were always minor in the region they started terrorizing. This started a civil war.

Armenians started that.

____

There is a very influential lobby that denies the Armenian Holocaust. The Turks had been gleefully massacring the Armenians off and on since 1896. However, any mention of the Armenian genocide sends the modern Turkish government into a fit of blind rage. In Turkey you can be sent to prison for saying that the Ottoman Empire committed genocide. It's amazing that the Turkish government is allowed to refuse to face up to the past.

The arguments used by denialists are generally very similar, whether they are denying the Nazi genocide of the Jews or the Ottoman genocide of the Armenians. Claims that the victims started it by fighting the bullies are just laughable.

the genocide was 100 days long and if you watch hotel rwanda it wil explain a lot more btw its very sad and horrible!!

bye x

The Armenian genocide and the Holocaust were similar in that people were tortured and killed because of their nationality. There were often no other reason than someone being Armenian, or Jewish, just because of that there were those who thought they should die.

No. It was instead a series of treacherous moves played out upon the battle field and maneuvered through various legal documents.

No. When the identity card system was put in place in 1935, Rwandans were categorized as Hutu or Tutsi solely based on wealth. Those who had more than ten cows became Tutsis, and those with fewer became Hutus. This was partially for practical reasons: there had been so much intermarriage between ethnic groups that almost no one could exclusively claim one ancestry. One consequence (leaving aside decades of ethnic tension and one of the most horrific genocides the world has ever seen) was that, while there are still physical characteristics (height, stature, shape of nose, etc.) associated with one group or the other, many Rwandans have the "wrong" characteristics.

my lai

Depending what you mean types but there are a number of avenues for achieving genocide and categories according to Raphael Lemkin (who coined the word genocide). The main ones are: * Political * Social * Cultural * Economic * Biological * Physical: * ** Endangering Health ** Mass Killing * Religious * Moral Other than that there is Autogenocide. cultural genocide which fits in with above list. Ethnocide, Linguicide (death of a language), cultural genocide.

The inhabitans of all cities were ordered to abandon their homes and forced to led rural life. The industry, trade and agriculture did not work. Because of the returning the inhabitants to the cities becames the insuficiency of labour strengh on the countryside. The healthcare was destroyed.

Armenia has a history dating back to about 3500 B.C, but they were merely tribes. Armenia became a Noted Nation in about 700 B.C. in the late 300's A.D, Armenia fell to the Persian Empire in the east, and the byzantine empire in the west. it gained its independence in 1071 A.D.

The war in Bosnia left around 400,000 people dead.

The purpose of terrorism is to frighten people and society into a response to ruin the prevailing culture. Genocide is the purposeful elimination of a group of people because of their ethnicity, tribe, religion, culture or beliefs.

No. It's more that the UN did not fulfill its mission to help the Bosnian Bosniaks against the Bosnian Serbs. If you want to read that as indirect help to the Bosnian Serbs, you can, but this was not the intent or purpose of the UN forces, especially those in Srebrenica.

The Khmer Rouge committed the "Cambodian Genocide", but the name is a misnomer and the reason for this is specifically why it does not fit the classic definition of a genocide. The elimination of over 1.5 million Cambodians is more properly called the "Cambodian Democide". The distinction is that a genocide is a specific targeting of a group for extermination based on some inherent characteristic (race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, political leanings, etc.). The Khmer Rouge killed anyone who disagreed with the aims of the regime or was unable to comply with the arbitrary and ridiculous standards required by the regime. Therefore, their actions do not target a specific group and are not a genocide. A democide is simply mass killing performed intentionally by a regime, without regard to inherent characteristics.

The genocide that took place due to Hitler's prejudice against the Jews was the HOLOCAUST.

It's really quite simple. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) holds that the Qur'an requires the extermination of all people who will not convert to Islam. (Whether or not the Qur'an requires this can certainly be debated and most Muslim scholars would argue that it does not.) The Yezidi, Yarsan, Shabakis, and Assyrians will not convert to Islam, therefore, ISIL is trying to exterminate them.

The US has signed the Convention.

The US did not as such; except when it comes to the Khmer Rouge claim to the Cambodian seat in the UN, after the "Killing Fields". The US supported the Khmer Rouge claim to the UN-seat, not the Vietnamese puppet-governments claim.

There is no such thing as a "Tibetan genocide". There was no period in time when the Tibetan population was deliberately targeted for execution or was prevented by any government from reproducing. What is referred to by extreme Pro-Tibetan commentators as the "Tibetan genocide" is the deliberate sublimation of the Tibetan culture to Han culture in China. While this is certainly a very serious crime, it is not a genocide.

As for why China is overrunning the culture of Tibet to the point of effectively preventing the Tibetan assertion of a unique cultural identity, this is because the Chinese government wants to assimilate the Tibetan people and crush their desire for political independence. It is neither acceptable or justifiable; the Tibetans, like the Uiyghur have historically operated outside of Han influence and deserve the right to independent self-rule and a unique cultural identity.

The Americans failed to demonstrate their support for rule of law and property rights; because the cherokees successfully demonstrated that they met all the requirments to be considered land owners under american law, and yet were forced off their land anyway.

alot of people stood by cause they were all scared of the bad ones

rwanda

political for those commited the genocide: to be in POWER and further to exploite and loot

Social: a ruined nation, broken families, poverties

Example: Rwanda, Bosna, Sieraleone, Bangladesh

ghettos that are not closed, they were ghettos that did not restrict access, to either Jew or gentile.

they killed each other. and got raped.