That is the thing..

As soon as you leave the borders of Turkey, people will tell you about what it was.

In Turkey there is pollution of information about history. The ugly parts of our history have been changed, hidden etc. Many lies have been told by the state. For example as a nation we were told "the state suppressed an uprising in 1937 in Dersim" but later on the truth came out that it was not uprising at all and we gassed thousands in caves  for example. The state told us "there are no Kurds in Turkey". 

I dont think the states can hide historical truths forever.

And I dont think it is important if it is called genocide or not.. The ugly truth is that it did not happen the way it was told officially. (the official version is they rebelled, we had to relocate them for their safty, but the it was a long journey, and they died on the road etc).

There was/is an ideology behind it. It was planned and executed.

Well, well, well,

If there we go again to talk about the dirty laundry of states, we should also know about:

Secrets of a "Cristian" State

For example:

Armenians are taught hate from birth and I know it is
extremely wrong that it has been aimed at the Turkish.

I also read Armenians massacred Turks as well. Is this true?

I´m not trying to use this as a justification. I´m just hoping in my own mind there can be some distance between Nazi Germany and what Turkey did in 1915.

That appears to be the case, however they don´t mention that fact. From what I see, it appears to be a sort of civil war within a war. 

It was NOT a civil war.

You should seriously check your facts and numbers and read more.

There is a whole history behind that incident: Ottomans losing wars; Balkan experiences-ethnic clensing of turks/muslims;1895-96 300.000 Armenians dead; Kizil Sultan Abdulhamit-why is is he kizil?; Hamidiye Alaylari -Kurds involvment; shame of Sarikamis incident; psychology of loosing everything..

The end of all is that, there were  1.2 million Armenians in Anatolia in 1914 and remained around 200.000 end of 1915.

That is the reality and it wont go away.

Armenian  have attempted to extricate and isolate their history from the complex circumstances in which their ancestors were embroiled. In so doing, they describe a world populated only by white-hatted heroes and black-hatted villains. The heroes are always Christian and the villains are always Muslim. Infusing history with myth, Armenian Americans vilify the Republic of Turkey, Turkish Americans, and ethnic Turks worldwide. Armenian  bent on this prosecution choose their evidence carefully, omitting all evidence that tends to exonerate those whom they presume guilty, ignoring important events and verifiable accounts, and sometimes relying on dubious or prejudiced sources and even falsified documents. Though this portrayal is necessarily one-sided and steeped in bias, the Armenian  community presents it as a complete history and unassailable fact.

Armenian losses were few in comparison to the over 2.5 million Muslim dead from the same period.

Reliable statistics demonstrate that slightly less than 600,000 Anatolian Armenians died during the war period of 1912-22. Armenians indeed suffered a terrible mortality. But one must likewise consider the number of dead Muslims and Jews. The statistics tell us that more than 2.5 million Anatolian Muslims also perished. Thus, the years 1912-1922 constitute a horrible period for humanity, not just for Armenians.

The numbers do not tell us the exact manner of death of the citizens of Anatolia, regardless of ethnicity, who were caught up in both an international war and an intercommunal struggle. Documents of the time list intercommunal violence, forced migration of all ethnic groups, disease, and, starvation as causes of death. Others died as a result of the same war-induced causes that ravaged all peoples during the period.

You obviously subscribe to the battering ram school of debate, that is just keep saying the same thing over and over again so as to eventualy tire people, who will then let what you say stand. 

You evidently choose to ignore my post #6 and the Hunchek charter of 1887, or I might add the birth of the Dashnak group? ...Then there is ARF akd Dashnak group.

What do you call it when citizens of one country fight against other citizens of the same country?

Maybe this link will help clarify it for you....." a civil war is a war between organized groups within the same state or republic.."

I am not saying the same thing again and again.

On the contrary, what you are saying is the what we were taught in our schools again and again: Armanians betrayed us and we have to relocate them for their own safety  but unfortunately they died on the road..

But now we know that it is not the truth.

I dont know why you think hunchak charter is so important!! what does it prove? what do you think a charter got to do with forcing Armenians from Istanbul? does it prove all the Armenians were thinking like that? (infact I was unfortunate to read many Turkish left wing charters in my life. They had a few thousands or couple of thousands most, people supporters.. Now if you see one of them will you think that all Turks are thinking the same? can you see why hunchaks or dashnaks charters are not important here? )

Anyway..

Just let you know that was not a civil war. Even an average Turk would not call it civil war.

What happened in 1915 to 500 000Muslims (Kurds and Turks)? 

Who is the Dashnak and Hinchak organizations? 

Who was the 1992 Khojaly genocide?

Armenians are not innocent!!!

This guy ( 0.46% ) is just a noise.

He says the same thing again and again but doesn´t answer the question asked.

The question was:

"What do you call it when citizens of one country fight against other citizens of the same country?"

And I cannot see the answer.

I will quote wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war):

A civil war is a war between organized groups within the same state or republic, or, less commonly, between two countries created from a formerly united state.  The aim of one side may be to take control of the country or a region, to achieve independence for a region, or to change government policies.

The above definition perfectly fits what the Armenians did back in 1915. Their aim was to take control of the region to achive independece.

They drew the first blood, they themselves started it all first but they failed. Now they try to put all the blame to others for what happened thereafter.