As I learn more and more about the Genocide/relocation of 1915, I find certain questions harder to answer than others. I'd like a little clarification from both sides if anybody has answers.
1.) There is no paper trail of "direct" orders to kill every man, woman and child of Armenian descent in SE Anatolia from the time, but is there documentation of "direct" orders to relocate said people? I ask because what's never mentioned is where these masses of Armenians were supposed to be relocated to other than Syrian desert (somewhere), or just plainly "away from here". Where was the end destination supposed to be?
2.) Where were the majority of the Armenian minority living at the time? Were they mostly residents of SE Anatolia, with small households scattered through out the rest of the region? Or were they more evenly or randomly divided through out the territory building upto WWI? Surely there had to be records, for taxation or cencus purposes.
3.) Were there any number of Armenians enlisted in the military of the Ottomans? WWI didn't just happen out of the blue, and the Ottomans hadn't been without opponents before the Germans came-a-callin' in 1914. Surely, there had to be Armenians in the Ottoman army, after all, they were defacto Ottomans too, at the time.
4. ) It would appear that allies of both sides had at the very least a vauge idea of what was happening in 1915. And the more I read and hear, it seems that both sides had more than a little "encouragement" from "friends", that wound up dropping them like a hot potato when the body count started to climb. Not to mention the stratigic benefits of domestic unrest (that would have been labeled a civil war if not for the World War that was already going on) that opens a second front line inside enemy borders. Is there any blood on the hands of war time allies that could have or did play a role in this tragedy?

Some of you are so brain washed that you can't even recognize the truth when you see it THERE WAS NO ARMENIAN GENOCIDE. Just look at the facts with a simple google search...there are thousands of pictures of armed Armenian soldiers with Russian guns! What were they planing to do with those guns? Go deer hunting?
Get real...lets get armed and establish our own state...yea right! What a cry baby these people are...it's their clergy that perpetuates this hatred by the way...if there was no genocide Armenian churches would be all broke!!!

The thing about history of war, is that it is most frequently written by the victors, and seasoned to leave a favorable taste in the mouths of the victorious. This is true of any historical account of any war.
Do you think this preposterous? Ask yourself what your exact thoughts were when you heard of the most recent, near global conflict. Boil it down, and I'm certain it will be along the lines of "Is this really nessecary?" War historians and or propagandists already have the answer explained for us, before we can come to our own conclusions, or find the questions that leaders fear when moving any nation to war with another. The answer on either side of any conflict has to stem from "we are right, we are in the right, and we have been right all along." How else can any person throw their support behind violent conflict? Do you truly believe that any and all soldiers are irrational, violent and blood-thirsty from birth? Trained to commit any act of attrocity unflinchingly, without remorse or after thought? Or that all people throw their support behind any and all decisions that a leader they have and will never likely meet, decides for them?
To gain the support of the people, leaders make it someones full time job to make sure that the people believe what is happening is the right thing to do. Or the only choice left. Wether the case is such, is not for me to say.
War is ugly and tragic, and is an occupation of violence, combat and death. Even the most decorated soldiers bear shame for deaths they have been party to. Even the leaders of nations need to be provoked to move their armies, and most often with a heavy heart and stained soul.
I am neither Turk or Armenian, but I know Turks and Armenians, and have heard of past conflicts from both sides. From all the tales of slaughter I have heard, I've been able to draw some observations that blanket both sides.
First, the genocide that both sides speak of is learned and not experienced. And what is learned is hatred. From a young age, this hatred is passed down, and will continue to be disseminated for many generations to come, and that forgiveness of past transgressions is a sign of weakness, shame, and a slight to every ancestor that fought, suffered or died from this conflict.
Secondly, both sides of this conflict want it to be over, nearly a century after it's end. Many people in both communities have lost family and loved ones arguing over who has the right to be more angry about it.
And finally, with no insult meant, the Ottoman empire is no more, and the Soviet Union has fallen. (both having touched these lands) What remains are two independant nations. Both with rich cultures of language, religion, food, dance, song, literature, tradition, architecture and above all else, fierce pride in who they are as a people. I hope that I can say this point about all the Armenians and Turks that have posted here.
And lastly, that everyone from that region hopes that in their lifetime, that they will be able to look into the eyes of their children and grandchildren, and tell them, "A long time ago, there was a world war, and we fought and hated our neighbours bitterly for generations, but that is over now. And that hatred is gone from our people forever."
The difficulty of this debate, is that so many people are trying to rationalize, defend, or justify the decisions and actions of leaders that have been dead for upto a centruy. Leaders of todays world fear to tread into the debate, either for fear of what their own involvement may have been (and what scrutiny of modern investigative techinques may bear), or the ramifications of "drawing lines in the sand" will bring to their door, for a tragedy that unfurled in the adolescency of the 20th century. But they do so to try to help heal this wound. (to what degree of success is questionable)
The real tragedy is that the only ones that can heal this wound are the two parties that share a border. And when the only thing you are tought about this scar is that it hurts still because of the other, how can anybody expect anything other than arguement?
After reading this, let's all acknowlege the progress that has already been made in healing these peoples.
Although the most obvious thing is the ongoing arguement, look how many more Turks and Armenians are able to talk about this instead of fight about it. For generations, each has been taught that they are right, they are in the right and they have been right all along. It will take generations to come to learn a new way. Peace is possibe, please, don't abandon hope.

aguylikeanyother,

1) Yes, there are direct orders to relocate. The first one issued in May 1915. A few others issued after that, then after a time, orders to stop all relocation efforts were issued. The orders had specific instructions in them and all of that is discussed in detail in Guenter Lewy's book. I recommend it to you if you're interested in more specifics.

2) There were large populations of Armenians in Istanbul and Izmir. Outside of that they were scattered throughout the southeastern portion of Anatolia. Records were kept for taxation purposes by the Ottomans. They record 1.29M Armenians in the entire Ottoman Empire during 1914.

3) There were Ottoman Armenians in the Ottoman military. However, when the Armenian revolutionaries began their guerrilla movement in earnest and openly joined the Russian army, Ottoman Armenians in the Ottoman military were removed from posts that required use of the weapons for obvious reasons. However, the vast majority of Ottoman Armenians joined the Russian army. According to one Armenian revolutionary leaders (Pastermadjian), 160,000 Armenians fought under Russian commands against the Ottoman Empire.

4) The Allies had more than a vague idea because they were the ones who masterminded all of the nationalist movements by the Christian peoples living in the Ottoman Empire. Those nationalist movements were just one of the Allies' strategy for crushing the Ottoman Empire, and it worked. During WWI, the Allies strategy required the Ottomans to not only fight the Allies, but their own people. There wasn't just war fronts at the borders of the Ottoman Empire, but also within it.

Is there any blood on the hands of war time allies? Absolutely. England stays rather quiet on this subject, but during WWI they engaged in a deliberate disinformation campaign that was intended to encourage the U.S. to join WWI. A special favorite piece of disinformation involved massacres of Christian people by muslims--the Brits thought that if American Christians thought "barbarian" muslims were massacring all Christians in the middle east that the U.S. would thereby be immediately incited to join WWI to save those Christians. All of that "fiction" is not compiled in a Blue Book and publications by Toynbee. These are the materials Armenians rely upon for their claims. So you could say, in a very real sense, that the European powers that architected this entire debacle are still actively participating in it. Do you hear the Brits shouting out for all the world to know that the Blue Book and Toynbee's publications were war time propaganda and do not accurately reflect events of WWI? No.

Why do you think it's a criminal offense in France to dispute that an armenian genocide occurred? Why do you think that Russia, France, England and the U.S. continue to conceal archives related to these events from the public? How could releasing archives from 100 years ago compromise national security now? All of these countries hands are bloody and they don't want anyone to see--Russia and France are the ones with the most culpability.

Many of the issues that drove events in WWI are coming back around now. WWI was really designed to seize control of all the oil fields in the middle east from the Ottoman Empire and put it effectively under western european control (see for example, the Sykes-Picot Agreement--which shows that the Allies never intended to form a greater Armenia in southeastern Anatolia like they promised the Armenians).

In fact the battle for control over the oil fields continues to this day and is especially active in Iraq...and who controls most of the transportation of that oil? Turkey.

To AGuyLikeAnyOther:

Lazlee summed it up nicely. Detailed answers can be found at http://www.tbmm.gov.tr/yayinlar/yayin1/6-Halacoglu(109-142).pdf

In case you can’t reach there I can write brief answers here:
Millions of papers with the order to relocate are available, because they were sent o every mayor, every township, every army commander, and anyone involved. Up to two weeks time was given to Armenians to collect their belongings. Protestant and Catholic Armenians were excluded at first. Doctors and their families remained in their homes, some other professions and cities were not touched either. Majority lived in the capital Istanbul and Iznik – and they were not touched. We know a lot escaped into Istanbul. Armenian houses and their Muslim friends’ houses were filled with other Armenians who made their way from Anatolia to evade deportation.

If any deportee’s item was offered for sale below market price, government intervened on the Armenians' behalf. items they wished to leave behind, were recorded in government books to be returned to their owners when they returned from ‘exile’. At firs they were ordered to be settled in Central Anatolia. However unrest destroyed Central Anatolia too. So, they were rerouted to Halep and further down towards what has now become Syria. It is not lush green, but it is not desert land. They were given land and money in some cases to restart new business in their new locations.

In the town that I was born which is Kayseri - smack in the middle of Anatolia, basements of houses had turned into ammunition depots. I have heard stories, how little girls saw young Armenian men removed huge floor slabs and entered into darkness carrying heavy boxes. Her dad reported to the police forces, and they discovered many ammunition depots like that. Little kids who were playing in the haystack overheard two Armenian men discussing their plan to set afire the Mosque during Friday prayer. Going to mosque on Friday is similar to going to Church on Sunday. The kids told their dad, so the crowd was sawed. There are many stories of how Armenians burned houses where Muslims had hidden. One Armenian doctor neatly carved body parts and stacked them neatly as if to save space. Many took pleasure in killing Muslims.

Ottoman Government held census for taxation purposes. So, there are records of how many people lived in which town from 16th century onward broken down by religion. The head of census bureau was a Jewish citizen named Fethi Franko until 1903, then an Armenian named Migirdich Sinopian until 1908. An American was assigned to the post following him. In 1914, their total reached 1.3 million. Your next question must be ‘How can more than the existing number of Armenians disappear?’

The orders did not state so-and-so should be relocated to this city or that town. It only gave broad instructions. They said spread them around in towns / cities where there is not a major concentration of Armenian presence. Then revolt broke out in towns which were unexpected, so they changed the orders to relocate all Armenians from Anatolia down South. To begin with Armenians were clearly in the minority in all towns they lived. They were 16% of total population in the six cities that they wanted to declare their independence in. Their percentage was highest in the city of Van, and even that was 34%. That is why they could not declare their independence as easy as the Greeks for instance. When they did not mix, Armenian villages were scattered among Muslims’, because they were so close culturally and friendly. Obviously, the opportunity to separate from Ottoman government presented itself to the Armenians at a time when relations between the two people were still friendly. The revolutionary bandits who were indoctrinated with Marxist ideals had to first kill the Armenians who did not want to kill Muslims. Then they started to kill Muslims together with the men that they collected on their ranks out of fear (similar to the case of PKK).

Non-Muslims could dodge the army by paying a fee. Most chose this method. In the dying years of the empire army duty was extended to 5 years. It took longer at wartime, which happened to be the case in early 1900s. So, the Muslims became poor and Christians bought their land for little money. Armenians and Jews held the trade from Aegean coast of Izmir to Baghdat – the silk road. When Talat Pasha and Enver Pasha took power, they changed the rules and made it mandatory for other religions to participate in war and join the army or pay increased fee. I recommend you read Prof. Dr. Justin McCarthy, Esat Uras, et al, “Van Rebellion”. The first war in which Christians were called to wear arms was the terrible defeat of SariKhamish (22/12/1914 – 15/01/1915) where almost all of the Turkish soldiers died. Most Armenians deserted, some used their weapons against the Turks, and a lot joined the Russian army. Even the civilian Armenians forbid giving bread to these dying soldiers. So, the Armenians’ weapons were taken from them and they were assigned to dig trenches. When Russian army advanced into Anatolia, Russian Armenian families came and settled in Eastern Anatolia, and when they retreated some returned back into Russia. Muslims did the same; people swayed back and forth in search of security for many years.

Head of Armenian delegation Boghos Nubar boasted in 1918 that 150,000 Armenian men fought in Russian Army, 45,000 wearing French uniforms, and 30,000 elsewhere fought on the side of the entente. This makes a total of 225,000, which is a lot considering total population of 1.3 million Armenians living all over, including Istanbul. All foreign powers were involved in sharing the carcass of the dying Ottoman Empire. They used ethnic strife. They still do!.