The false turkish reasoning of the Armenians 'colluding with the enemy' is identicle to Hitler accusing the Jews of being the fifth enemy colums. To this day, the turks block the Armenian border until the Armenians stop damanding justice for their own murder, as if that is going to happen.

Turks are no US allies. It is a human rights violating, genocide perpetrating, pariah state. After extorting 26 billion US dollars at the beginning of the Iraq War they then block our US troops, the 4th ID, causing harm and cacualties to our soldiers. Then threaten to cut supplies if the truth be told of the Armenian Genocide.

The Armenian Genocide is a Fact! It is accepted by ALL genocide historians including the 126 members of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. And so needs to be regarded as such. HS res 106 is a bipartisan bill, equally supported by both democrats and republicans and will be voted upon after the next election.

We would live in a sad world if we were to pick and choose which mass crimes against humanity to condem purely based by our 'interests'. No one, including the turks, are worth lying about the Armenian Genocide.

So that is why some sources use the date period 1915-1923. When all is said and done, whether you include those later massacres as part of the genocide or not, the fact and the truth of the genocide — that it happened and that it *was* genocide — does not change.

What's next, trying to get the candidates to issue opinions? (Obama immediately says it's the right thing to do, Obama earns cheers, from several of his fans even before he even has expressed his opinion; McCain says Congress shouldn't try, again, to meddle in foreign policy and harm foreign relations in a trouble-ridden Middle East, again, and earns “evil Bush clone” jeers; Clinton waits and goes last and either is jeered, mainly by Obama fans, or gets little to no response at all.)

Congress passed a resolution in 2000 stating that the occupation of the Baltic States by the USSR was illegal. The effectfs of that amount to zero. Russia still interferes and tries to continue its dominance in a myriad of ways, the latest being the cyber attack on Estona. There is symbolic value, but practically speaking, the world goes on in the same manner as iif the resoluiton had never been.

The timing of the Armenian Genocide resoluton was particularly unforutante, as US involvement in Iraq places the relationlhsip with Turkey ivery much in a current context, as opposed to a historical one. In the name of national inteests, countires like the US often balance principle against political expediency. As cynical as that may sound, considering consequences, by necessity, must also be considered.

The European nations who have signed similar resolutions also have a different relationship with Turkety. Presently the inlcusion of Tureky in the EU is a hotly deabated topic.

The significance of using a different end date (1923) in the US has also to be explored further. The question of reparations is a thorny issue. The Baltic States raise the question periodically, but Russia has been successful in averting responsibility for a previous regime. Aside from the rights and wrongs of the idea,
it brings in an entirely new layer of complexity .
The choice has to be made between,possibly passing a less contentious version of such a resolution at a more portentious time, or sticking with the current version and risk failure.

Once again notable in the House and Senate bills (links are bad, BTW) is the dating of the genocide from 1915 to 1923, even though historians agree that the correct period is 1915-1918. Identical language from the House and Senate bills:

Whereas the Armenian Genocide was conceived and carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923…

So why the continuing insistence on the 1923 dating? The answer is simple. One immediately notes that the Sultanate was abolished in November of 1922, that the current Turkish government was formally recognized in October of 1923, and that the 1948 U.N. Convention on Genocide could conceivably permit lawsuits for reparations. By extending the dating of the genocide to 1923, the bills could potentially enable lawsuits against the current Turkish government for reparations of genocide carried out by the Ottoman Empire. And not just against the current Turkish government, but also potentially against the nations that controlled the post-war Ottoman Empire under the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres, namely Great Britain, France, Italy, and Greece. All the nations involved are signatories to the 1948 Convention.

Also notable is that of the many nations that have officially reconized the events as genocide, all have done so using dating within the 1915-1918 period, inclusive. Hmmm….