> As Abdullah Gul said, US domestic politics. The Democrats see an opportunity
> to embarrass the Republicans for not passing another ritual expression of
> regret for popular suffering - mostly that which has occured outside
> America, as Doug notes - even though the Clinton administration also balked
> at doing so. Right-wing Republican fundamentalists will have a particularly
> difficult time with the administration for favouring Muslim Turks above
> Christian Armenians. There are also about one million Armenian-American
> voters, and most states have passed similar resolutions.
I'd think most USers are only vaguely if at all aware of the Xtian/Muslim angle, and the potential embarrassment to Reps on account of the ritual expression seems minor compared to the difficulties it could cause for the occupation. Is it popular among antiwar congressfolk? Yet it seems like such a potentially destructive (to empire) measure that I have a hard time believing it's an antiwar move.
I don't get it.
Juan Cole has a sort of establishment view of it:
<http://www.juancole.com/2007/10/who-lost-turkey.html>
-- Andy