I agree about the wide spread civillian casualties on all sides. If the Ottomans were guilty, so were the Russians, Armenians, etc. Voluntarily or not, civillians were made party to the various "fronts" (like Armenians on the Russian front) and responses (like the deportation) also targeted civillians. Action-reaction, me thinks. I believe the biggest impact of Churchill's move to keep both Ottoman ships AND money (I believe the Brits kept both), was that the Ottomans were left without a choice. Until Churchill's move, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the Ottoman's were trying to stay out of the fray by diplomatically playing all sides against one another. When the Brits decided to keep the ships, Brits and allies (Russia/France) fell out of the "running", leaving the Germans. not sure what caused Brits to make the move, maybe desperation for the ships/money or belief that Germans would win the Ottomans to their side anyway. Real or self-fulfilling prophecy? not sure.
NATO backs Turkey's fight against ISIS (Reuters)
from the article: Peres to Turks: Our stance on Armenian issue hasn't changed