Friday, August 22, 2014


Ukraine Rejects Reports Of Selling Missile Systems To Armenia

The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry has described as a provocation media reports in Azerbaijan alleging that Ukraine sold multiple rocket launchers and mobile missile systems to Armenia in 2011.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Oleksandr Dykusarov said at a press briefing on August 14 that Ukraine had been strictly observing the international obligations assumed before the UN and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, as well as national legislation.

Armenia's Defense Ministry also denied the reports on August 14.

Armenia and Azerbaijan have been in conflict for around three decades over Azerbaijan's Armenian-controlled enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, with a fragile cease-fire in place since 1994.

The self-proclaimed Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh has not been recognized by any other country.

Based on reporting by UNIAN and Interfax
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
by: RD
August 14, 2012 14:14
Azerbaijan objects and protests countries for selling arms to Armenia when it spends billions of dollars a year buying weapons. Ilham Aliyev should just stay quiet and not draw attention to itself, but I think he is more inept than he looks.
In Response

by: Phil from: UK
August 14, 2012 16:38
Seeing as Armenia is the occupier and aggressor as mentioned in several UN resolutions (which Armenia is in breach of), I think it’s perfectly reasonable for Azerbaijan to protest weapons sales to Armenia (occupier and aggressor) while at the same time arming themselves.

In Response

by: Atena
August 14, 2012 19:37
Good point
In Response

by: LG from: USA
August 14, 2012 22:11
The aggressor is Azerbaijan. They started the pogroms against Armenians, and to this day they paint Armenians worldwide as the other, as the enemy. Phil, I suggest you stop believing everything the UN says and study history for yourself. Perhaps then you shall see who has the moral claim to Artsakh aka Karabakh.
In Response

by: Art from: Sydney
August 14, 2012 22:11
Get it right, Armenia is not an occupier nor an aggressor. The people of Nagorno-Karabagh defended themselves and libereated their lands. Yes, Armenia helped Nagorno-Karabagh just like Turkey is helping Azerbaijan!!!
In Response

by: Free Artsakh from:
August 15, 2012 04:07

Stop Azeri propaganda lies!!

They always mention some mysterious "UN resolutions" but never quote them exactly.

Because there are NO SUCH resolutions! They think people would not check and just trust Sultan Ilham Aliyev and his servants paid with money stolen from oil revenues.
In Response

by: Anonymous from: Shusha
August 15, 2012 06:53
It is not only UN, but EU, EC, OSCE and others that have repeatedly declared the illegality of Armenian occupation and condemned Armenian military aggression against Azerbaijan. Thus, Azerbaijan is fully within its rights to restore sovereignty in its territory and it is only normal that it would acquire or make weapons for this end, at the same time preventing a recognized aggressor state- Armenia, from further arming itself.
In Response

by: razo from: GE
August 15, 2012 07:39
Phil: Armenia is neither occupier nor aggressor. Besides, first you should worry about what you have done in Northern Ireland and then blame the others for aggression.
In Response

by: Hello from: GE
August 15, 2012 07:47
Azeris can buy as much arms as they want. They can start war too if they want, but they will lose again and even more this time (oil revenues). Can you mention one oil rich country in the Mid-East who has been able to win a war?
In Response

by: Phil from: UK
August 15, 2012 11:00
What I have stated is fact and is easily found online. If some people want to contest facts with fantasy and nationalism, that’s fine, but that won’t get you anywhere in real life, it just makes you look ignorant.

For the ignorant ones, for a start you can look up UN resolutions 822, 853, 874 and 884. All these call on Armenia to withdraw immediately and expressly state that Armenia is the occupier, some of these resolutions are 20 years old. In other words, Armenia has been in breach of international law for over 20 years now.

And no, Britain is not in breach of any UN resolutions so please stick to facts and not fantasy.

In Response

August 15, 2012 23:34
In Response

by: Free Artsakh from:
August 16, 2012 04:39

This is a well known trick by the Azeri propagandists again:

they give you the resolutions numbers and not the years these resolutions were passed. Why? Because it's hard to find them without the years. And they hope that people will just believe without checking the exact words of these resolutions!
In Response

by: Razo from: GE
August 16, 2012 05:17
Phil you are an exploiter. You have found a weakened country to beat on. UN resolutions 822, 853, 874 and 884 ya? What about resolution 242? You are probably much too young to remember that. go look it up and understand the meaning of the UN resolutions. Talking about ignorance, eh? You need to go back to school sonny.
In Response

by: Phil from: UK
August 16, 2012 16:49
Some of these comments are ridiculous.

Seriously, just Google: “UN resolutions Nagorno-Karabakh” and you get a load of info.

And if you want dates and are too lazy to search yourself, here is a breakdown:

No. 822: Calls for the cessation of hostilities and withdrawal of occupying forces from Kelbajar district of Azerbaijan following its occupation on April 3, 1993
Dated 30/04/1993

No. 853: Calls on withdrawal of occupying forces from Agdam district of Azerbaijan occupied on June 23, 1993 and reaffirms UN Resolution 822
Dated: 29/07/1993

No: 874: Calls on withdrawal of occupying forces from recently occupied Azerbaijani districts of Fizuli (August 23, 1993), Jabrayil (August 26, 1993), Qubadli (September 31, 1993) and reaffirms UN Resolutions 822 and 853.
Dated: 14/10/1993

No: 884: Calls on withdrawal of occupying forces from recently occupied Azerbaijani district of Zangilan, calls upon the Government of Armenia to use its influence on the occupying forces, and city of Goradiz and reaffirms UN Resolutions 822, 853, 874
Dated 12/11/1993

In Response

by: Regular Joe from: USA
August 16, 2012 18:34

Putting the nationalist claims of both sides aside, those UN resolutions are based on UN recognition of the internal SSR borders of the USSR, drawn mostly by Joe Stalin and cronies. Essentially, Nagorno Karabakh comes down to two important provisions of international law, 1) the right of sovereignty, which favors Azerbaijan; and 2) the right of self-determination, which favors the Karabakh Armenians. This post isn't the place for an intelligent discussion of the merits of either in Nagorno Karabakh, or elsewhere (Kosovo comes to mind), but acting as if the Karabakhis have no claim at all just because the UN passed a resolution won't resolve the issue.
In Response

by: Free Artsakh from:
August 17, 2012 04:58

Regarding the Azeri Turk tactic of distortion of the meaning and wording of the UN resolutions:

Notice how they change their lies when you catch them red-handed by merely asking to provide the actual quotes:

This is what "Phil" tried to lie to us about in the beginning: "UN resolutions 822, 853, 874 and 884. All these call on Armenia to withdraw immediately and expressly state that Armenia is the occupier, some of these resolutions are 20 years old. In other words, Armenia has been in breach of international law for over 20 years now."

and this is where he ended up so far: "Calls for the cessation of hostilities and withdrawal of occupying forces from Kelbajar district"

There is a BIG difference between his disinformation about specific calls on Armenia to stop occupation and the actual language of the documents referring to both sides of the conflict (Azeri Turk occupiers and local Artsakh self defense forces) to stop hostilities.

The reason there were four of these resolutions is that after each of them Artsakh forces actually complied and stopped, but Sultan Aliyev-baba The First thought that he could bring more mujaheddin from Afghanistan and more Chechen mercenaries and launch another offensive to win the war they started and kill all Armenians in Artsakh.

Every time he did that he failed and Artsakh forces liberated more Armenian lands.

Then Heydar-ogly would crawl on all four back to the UN and ask for another resolution.
In Response

by: razo from: FR
August 17, 2012 08:55
Phil: if you are really from the UK, it does not surprise me that you like to stir up things and put feul on fire. This has been your politics for centuries. You start a war between two parties and then try to benefit from it. This is a platform to bring parties together with meaningful discussions not to antagonize them. Shame on you.
In Response

by: Phil from: UK
August 17, 2012 10:10
I totally agree with you Joe and for sure this is not a good place for a logical discussion. I was just posting these facts in the false hope that some of the zealots on here like ‘Free Artsakh’ would actually do some research in to the issues involved, but as we can see, zealots will be zealots, and I am apparently a Azeri Turk, even though Azerbaijani's are not Turks (neither historically nor genetically) but that is irrelevant for some folks involved in this discussions, isn’t that right Artsakh? (rhetorical question)
In Response

by: hans
August 17, 2012 12:27
Phil, Azeris are a Turkic people who speak a Turkic language. This is not in dispute. Not sure why you would think it's worth denying.
In Response

by: Free Utik from:
August 18, 2012 06:25

Another myth from our UK mythologist - Azeri Turks are not Turks but "Azerbaijanis" - he forgot to give credits to Generalissimo Stalin for inventing this artificial nation in 1930s.

Before that Azeri Turks did not know that they were Azerbaijanis. In fact, many of them don't know about it even now. They call themselves "muslims" or associate with their original tribes (White Sheep, Black Sheep, etc.) when they are among themselves.

Before the Bolshevik invention others knew them as Tartars and Nomadic Turks because this is who they were - tribes of Turkic speaking Tatar nomads who wondered into South Caucasus all the way from the Altai mountains between nowadays Russia and Mongolia.

They are related to Turks who now occupy Western Armenia. So when Turks there resolved the Armenian Question by committing the first genocide of the 20th century, they sent an army to finish off Armenians in Eastern Armenia. These Turkish bands were good friends of Lenin, Stalin and other Bolsheviks. They got money and weapons from the Red Army to fight independent Armenia.

The Turkish occupants created an artificial Turkish state (sounds familiar - remember Cyprus?) on the lands of native non-Turkic peoples (Lezgi, Avar, Tolish, Udin, Tat, etc.) after killing Armenians. But how to call that monster? Well, Bolsheviks had a great idea - they were into the World Revolution and spreading it into the Red East. Why not steal the name from the neighboring province of Persia and call it Azerbaijan? This way, someday, they could claim it as "Northern Azerbaijan" and carve out the "Western, Southern and Eastern Azerbaijans" from Persia. This is exactly what is happening now.

The Iranian Azerbaijans have nothing to do with the artificially created Turkish monster to the North. True, that Persian people who live there were under the Turkic yoke before and many of them were forced to switch to Turkic dialects. However, they identify themselves as Iranians and part of the ancient Persian civilization unlike the nomads to the North.
In Response

by: Shusha from: Free Karabakh
August 18, 2012 16:22
One just have to be downright delusional to believe all these blatant falsifications of history.

Stalin has nothing to do with Azerbaijanis, he would love it if they didn't exist, not create them from nothing himself. Azerbaijanis had a strong separate identity since the 1500s, when the Ottomans and Saphacids fought over. Opposition and religious differences created distinct peoples in Ottoman lands and Azerbaijan, both Turks but different from each other. And no, no Azerbaijani has identified with Black or White Sheep tribes since the 1400s. Maybe these are the theories Armenians tell among themselves, to belittle the "other" as being a lower kind of people, to reassure their own, but someone had to ruin it for them- sorry, it is not true.
Also, there was a state there created by Azerbaijanis when the Ottomans showed up and in fact they were initially hesitant in recognizing the Azerbaijani Democratic Republic in 1918. Then how could they come over and create a fake state? Well, you can throw that theory out of the window too.

It is also ridiculous to suggest that Bolsheviks were friends with or even aided those whom Armenians accuse of commuting genocide. Enver Pasha was killed while fighting Bolsheviks in Central Asia. Get your facts straight before writing nonsense here.

And all those minorities named above continue to live in their lands, unlike Armenia which has become virtually a monoethnic entity.

And no, no one's name is stolen. Azerbaijanis, in north and currently under Iranian occupation are one people, speak the same language and form one continuous sphere of culture, since as I have said above, 1500s. Anyone can see for themselves the degree of connectedness between them and solidarity in hard times, even after centuries of separation.
In Response

by: Phil from: UK
August 19, 2012 21:56
Wow! The Armenia propaganda machine has gone in to hyperdrive on here. Love the way lies are spouted and backed up by more lies. Bears a lot of resemblance to the rise of Nazis in Germany. I attempting to dehuminise your neighbours and cleanse the land, good luck with that. Is this the same sort of nonsense you teach your kids? Pathetic weak people.
In Response

by: from: Free Gandzak
August 21, 2012 05:17

Enver Pasha, a Turkish war criminal hiding in Tajikistan, was executed in 1922 by Hagop Melkumov, an Armenian commander.

by: Jay from: Melbourne Beach, FL
August 15, 2012 14:58
I was watching a video of two Artsakh heroes being interviewed by European reporter. In response to the question," Azeerbaijan just purchased over $1.5 Billion worth of military arsenal from Israel, is that bother you?" They both responded simultaneously saying," Not at all, they are our Christmas gifts from Aliev, we will just have to go and get 'em." And you can hear a loud laughter in the background.
In Response

by: Ron from: Ontario
August 15, 2012 16:27
Yes, exactly the same was being said by Saddam's folks in 2003. Remember Comical Ali? These guys are joke, scalping old grannies is one thing and fighting on your own is totally different.
In Response

by: Phil from: UK
August 15, 2012 17:05
Funny indeed, but not for the nationalistic/patriotic reason.

Sun Tzu’s - Art of War, Chapter 35

“He who exercises no forethought but makes light of his opponents is sure to be captured by them”, in other words never underestimate your opponent.

This is a most basic principle in fighting, to dismiss it is to give in to ignorance and risk defeat.
In Response

by: Arsen from: NKR
August 15, 2012 22:16
If thats the case then Azerbaijan is bound to loose again because the only thing the sultan say is that azeri military budget is larger than the budget of RA and that they can take Artsakh in a week good luck.
In Response

by: Free Artsakh from:
August 16, 2012 04:47

Funny to get lessons from an Azeri Turk safely posting from UK on how to fight a war against Turks. They lost 37.5 thousand troops last time they waged a war on Artsakh peasants. Sultan Aliyev is still hiding the graveyards from his own population - here is a map for all these native peoples of the artificial Turkish creation called "Azerbaijan" who lost their sons in the war for the Great Turan:

See the map in the text -
In Response

by: wake up from: FR
August 16, 2012 05:21
Keep your war lessons for yourself you sick warmonger!
In Response

by: Johny from: SVK
August 26, 2012 10:30
There is one simple rule in this world. and that is, that the history is written by victors. Armenia and people of Artsakh won and defeated Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is looser and hence it lost its territory. simple as that. get use to it!

by: Azeri
August 19, 2012 23:20
To Azeris posting here ... Do not waste your time arguing with Armenians. There is no point. As you can see, they question even the right of existence of our nation. We are enemies. The best thing you can do to Armenians is to destroy them in a war. All arguments is a waste of time. As the Turks proved in 1915, the only thing an Armenian zealot can understand is revenge for the killings they have started. Meet an enemy with a sword not a silly argument. There is room in the Caucasus only for of us: Armenia or Azerbaijan. If we wait long enough, they will be depopulated anyways, and then we can just go and chase away the remaining losers and take back our historical land. The way I see is it their pimp, Russia, will not let us take care of them right now. But sooner or later, they will taste our sword.
In Response

by: Shusha
August 20, 2012 07:01
That's a really racist approach, echoes the Armenian ethnic cleansers. There is enough land in this region for both of us. Armenians and Azerbaijanis ARE capable of living together. They should just learn to tolerate each other, that's the civil way. Azerbaijanis should learn to accept that Armenians are part of this land and Armenians should accept that Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan. These are the ultimate concessions that both sides need to make. The rest will be much easier.
In Response

by: greg from: virginia
August 20, 2012 23:42
Shusha, i am on board with the first part of your reply to Azeri. But i do not agree that Karabagh is "part" of either Azerbaijan or Armenia. Karabagh belongs to the people of Karabagh, and that covers both Armenians and former Azeri residents who were forced to leave land and property behind without compensation. It is for the people of Karabagh to determine their form of government. And if a substantial majority choose independence - or even union with Armenia, then it is for the minority to respect that outcome, then work to insure that the resulting government operates with a common table of rights that must be respected regardless of ethnic background or political view-point. I believe in the right of self determination. I do not believe Baku has the right to "body slam" Karabagh back under its own jurisdiction. The only reason the armenians of Karabagh continue to "occupy" Karabagh with armed force is to insure an adequate defense of its sovereign rights in the face of unabashed confirmation by Baku that they have every intention of going in by force unless the armenians of Karabagh capitulate. That is not negotiating in good faith. That is black-mail.
In Response

by: from: Free Lezgistan
August 21, 2012 05:08
Azeri Turks cannot tolerate anybody. They discriminate against all native minorities in the lands they occupy. They sent Tolysh, Lezgi, Tat, Udin youth to die in Artsakh for their Great Turan Chimera.

Even now there are disproportionate numbers of deaths in Azeri army attributed to minorities. They are hazed, sent to the most dangerous places and sexually assaulted. That's why many of them cross the border to seek refuge in Artsakh and Armenia from the horrors of Azeri Turk army.

There is enough land in the Altai region of sparsely populated Russian Siberia and Mongolia where these Turkic invaders came from. These nomads should go back to their ancestral lands and all the native people of the South Caucasus would be able to live in peace side by side after that.
In Response

by: shusha
August 21, 2012 16:49
Greg, that is exactly the mentality that needs to change- we want everything. Karbakh belongs to all Azerbaijanis. There is no separate nationality on it so that its right to self determination can be followed. There is no Azerbaijan without Karabakh. And if you defend the right of self determination then you must defend the right of self determination of each and everyone of the formerly Azerbaijani towns and villages within Karabakh. Some of them are right on the suburbs of Khakendi (the city for some reason Armenians insist to be named after a Baku Bolshkevik), or other strategic towns like Khojaly, where the airport is located, I'm not even even talking about Shusha. If you are saying that they are minority, then you can create artificial majorities and minorities if you selectively choose any place. Armenians are minority within Azerbaijan. And they are minority within larger Karabakh, why specifically choose the mountainous part of it? Or how about the surrounding regions? If any peace deal affects their lands too then any poll should include all whose lands will be effected. Or how about the lands that connect Karabakh and Armenia which Armenians insist that should be absolutely part of their land? What is more important, their right of self determination in their own lands or a road that connects Armenia and Karabakh? If Armenian interests easily trump people's right of self determination then you should not expect other people to take Armenian claim for self determination sincerely. And it is not. Since union with Armenia is a harder objective, they had decided that this is the best strategy to follow for now. In all likelihood, realizing self determination does not and can not give an absolute right to unilateral secession. Right of self determination can be realized within Azerbaijan's borders too.
Again, Armenians should understand that Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan, it is not going to change, just as Azerbaijanis should understand that Armenians are part of Azerbaijan. Otherwise there will be no peace.
In Response

by: greg from: virginia
August 22, 2012 21:52
Shusha, first, Karabagh does not belong to all Azerbaijanis; This is similar to claiming that Bosnia and Kosovo belonged to all Yugoslavs, or that Darfur belongs to all of Sudan. If you use that argument to nullify the right of Bosnia, Kosovo, or Darfurians to determine their form of government (like Karabagh is trying to do), you violate Section I-a-vii of the Helsinki final act of 1975. That act is part of the body of international law, and that section says in part “all peoples always have the right… to determine… their internal and external political status, without external interference…” That means, territorial integrity not withstanding, a district has the right to choose sovereign government and take itself out of the jurisdiction of an existing national government. That means Belgrade, the Sudanese government, or in this case, Baku, is not in a position to impose or qualify the actions taken by that district. Otherwise, self determination is no longer a right but a granted privilege. You make a point about the boundaries of Karabagh being “arbitrarily” drawn to artificially create an Armenian majority – that Karabagh is bigger than the mountainous part. The district I am referring to corresponds to the boundaries of the NK autonomous region as defined under Soviet law when the Karabagh community first drafted its secession referendum. So the the current boundary was not arbitrarily drawn. If by the surrounding regions you mean the occupied buffer surrounding NKR, I believe the existing Minsk group agreement talks about returning that land to Azeri jurisdiction after the peace agreement is secured. From what I have read, the Armenians have already agreed to that provision. As far as allowing majority Azeri towns within the NKR to exercise self-determination and “retro”cede back to Azerbaijan, there are existing precedents for a town, geographically isolated in one country, to be under the political jurisdiction of a neighboring country. A couple examples; Artsvashen – 3 miles inside Azerbaijan, but under the jurisdiction of Yerevan. Nachichevan - on the border between Iran and Armenia, but under Baku’s jurisdiction. So I see no issue with that. To your claim that Armenian interests trump people’s right to self-determination, you lost me there. I will say that if individual towns like Khojaly want to retro-cede to Azerbaijan, then they have that right as well. What’s right is right, right? To your final point about self determination not giving an absolute right to unilateral secession –I’ll refer you back to the Helsinki final act that I cited above and the precedent set by the former Yugoslav republics, Darfur, and Kosovo. When a constituency has a right, that means by definition it is not subject to approval by those outside that constituency. Otherwise it is no longer a right – is it? Karabagh is not part of Azerbaijan or Armenia. Karabagh is part of Karabagh, and they decide their fate, not you, me, Yerevan, or Baku. My advice? Stop talking to me and Armenians from Armenia or the US or elsewhere. Strike up a conversation with an NKR Armenian. See what they are thinking. You'll find them more reasonable than a lot of Azeri's give credit.
In Response

by: Shusha
August 23, 2012 14:21
OK, the Soviet decision to draw the boundaries for NK is good, but leaving it within Azerbaijan is not? Besides the current regime in Karabakh claims and controls more than the former NKAO in Azerbaijan SSR. Nothing has come out of Minsk group talks and as for declarations from sides those have included anything from marching on to Baku and taking over Yerevan, I wouldn't put much value on them either. The reality is that currently Armenians do not consider any of the occupied territories as part of Azerbaijan and as with others, there is no legal basis for that, just the right of the force. Helsinki act is absolutely not applicable here and your arguments that draw analogy between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Yugoslavia is misplaced. The correct analogy would be saying Herzegovina is part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bosnia-Herzegovina to Yugoslavia analogy is more like Azerbaijan-Soviet Union analogy. And again, unilateral secession is not a right give peoples in regions within sovereign countries have. If Karabakh was a sovereign entity they wouldn't agree to the separation of Azerbaijani populated areas, and they don't, they want Nagorno Karabakh as whole.
And by the Armenian interest trumping the right of self determination I mean the rights of people whose lands Armenians have declared that should absolutely be part of Karabakh as a connection between Karabakh and Armenia, namely the Lachin corridor (and sometimes they include Kalbajar in this claim too, namely the entire area between Armenia and Karabakh). So, by this logic, the people in this land can not decide their own fate but must agree that their land should be a part of connection area? In other words people can not say "no, this is our land and we do not agree to it being taken over from us to build a road". This road as Armenians see it, is vital to Armenian interests and thus, fulfilling national interests is seen as a legitimate reason for taking away the right of people, the exact right that they themselves claim.
As for the Armenians in Karabakh, of course they are more reasonable. We have lived with them for centuries, we can talk with them and agree any time. It is that Azerbaijan should first distance Russia and Armenia with the diaspora from the conflict. Once these destabilizing factors are done with, Azerbaijanis and Armenians in Karabakh can talk and decide between them any issue with much ease.
In Response

by: from: Free Artsakh
August 27, 2012 04:47

Attempts by Azeri Turk propagandists are primitive but multiple and this is what they are counting on. Each of the paragraphs posted consists of numerous lies, but they think that some of these lies would go unnoticed.

Take for example the boundaries of the Soviet Autonomous Region of Nagorno-Karabakh. The first maps actually included a full common border with Armenian SSR. Then little by little the Azeri Turks took lands to themselves to separate Artsakh Armenians from the rest of the nation.

They also took away lands all around Artsakh to make it unsustainable and to block all roads between Artsakh and Armenia and within Artsakh. By the end of this artificial "Azeri" nation creation Armenians had to travel through Azeri Turk populated town and villages (and be constantly assaulted) just to get from one Armenian populated place to another.

Anyway, they need to realize that the train left the station 25+ years ago. There is a new generation of Artsakh Armenians who grew up free from the Azeri Turk yoke and would not under any circumstances go back to the state their ancestors had to suffer through.

In response to peaceful liberation movement by Artsakh Armenians Azeri Turks started an all out war of aggression, killed civilians and occupied Armenian lands. At the end they lost big time and retreated from most (but not all) of Armenian lands. There is now way back from that. Aggressors were punished and will be punished again should they decide to repeat the history.
In Response

by: Anonymous
August 31, 2012 16:09
Never in history Armenians have been able to defeat Turks or Azerbaijanis. The same is for Karabakh. During the war Armenians themselves were desserting in mass, they still run away in any small skirmish. They have no idea how to fight and in any resumption of hostilities there is a great chance that Armenia itself would be taken oer by Azerbaijan, entirely and possibly reconstituted as an occupated area, like Germany after the WWII.
In Response

by: from: Free Tolish Republic
August 21, 2012 04:48
Swords are for warriors. Turkish weapon of choice is a hatchet, like the one their "national hero" Ramil Safarov used to kill a sleeping Armenian officer at a NATO training in Hungary. You, can't fight with a hatchet but you can kill sleeping people, children, women and elderly. That's what Azeri Turks had excelled in.

Most Popular