Tuesday, Oct. 16, 2007 | 7:13 a.m.
It was inevitable that people would begin to write letters to the editor regarding the recent congressional matter of the Armenian genocide. This event has been documented as such.
Although there may be some rationale for avoiding the label to appease Turkey and presumably assist in the Iraq war, to do so would also be inherently wrong. By that rationale, if Germany suddenly balked at the phrase "Holocaust" would we change that historical tragedy to "World War II victims" to appease them, simply out of convenience?
One might as well say, "Well, that was 60 years ago; it's old news, move on." Yet people are contending that the Armenian genocide was nearly "100 years ago," so we should not bother with it. How does 40 years make the difference between significant and trivial?
The Armenians have long fought to have the truth of their tragedy recognized on a world level. To appease Turkey at the cost of the Armenians seems to me to add yet another list of unnecessary victims to the ongoing incompetence that is occurring in this Iraqi occupation of ours.
If we're fighting over there to preserve truth and principles, then why are we so willing to sacrifice truth and principles to do this? How is this sane?
Timothy James, Las Vegas
archive
