The victims of genocide have the tendency to consider it as unique. It must be said that the pain and horror are such that do not permit a strategic analysis of the mechanisms that take place in order to achieve the extermination of a nation. However, even if we believe that genocides follow one another but do not resemble each other, there are common points. And besides, it is these common points that satisfy the criteria of the United Nations, which allow us to qualify these crimes against humanity as genocide. Going even further in this sense, we can promote deeper mental schemata. In reality, despite our knowledge regarding the measure of its systematization, we do not analyze the measure of its effectiveness. Yet it is undoubtedly the most important point for the committer of genocide. And it is this point that binds it to history since it is bound to the notion of experience. The people that have underwent a genocide, trapped in their suffering, face great difficulties in decontextualizing their genocide in order to observe and study the guidelines of the barbaric conduct of the committers because even in barbarity, there is method. It is among others, one of the characteristics of the notion of genocide. Yet it is the effectiveness that is the core of the method. The thorough examination of the genocide of the Armenians, the Assyrian-Chaldean, the Pontians, the Ukranians and the Jews, demonstrates that their systematic character becomes increasingly effective. The genocide of the Armenians itself is composed of several phases – Hamidian, Neo-Turkish and Kemalist – and each one is more effective than the previous one. By always relying on the risk of a revolt capable of undermining the state structures, the committers of genocide endeavor, according to them, to fight against evil at the root. For them, it is not only about eliminating but truly eradicating. At this level, how can we not mention the massive use of German military methodology on behalf of the Turks in order to reach their objective. The pretext for the creation of armed groups slowly becomes a strategic stratagem. Initially the pretext allows the activation of a state reaction. Only the asymmetrical character of the later, causes reactions from the international community even if it is not powerful enough to stop the genocidal process. So the committer of genocide, in this case Turkey, activates the massive displacements technique that exploits climate conditions for increasing the internal frictions described by Clausewitz, in the framework of troop movements on the logistics level. These internal frictions, in this divergent framework, cause considerable losses without being directly held accountable for them. It is in this way that the notion of discretion appears, which will be exploited to the utmost in the “white” massacre against the Pontians. The Stalinist regime, which closely followed the evolution of the Treaty of Sèvres, Lausanne and Kars, knew how to increase the performance of this technique for eliminating the Ukrainian people. It created from scratch the risk of the creation of armed groups, put into effect massive displacements, separated the population into categories in order to create internal frictions, politicized the purification in order to avoid racial critiques and prohibited every mentioning of this genocide thanks to the infiltration, the anthropophagy and the state machine. This genocide brought out the interest to incorporate the negation of the genocide in the extermination phase. This lesson was extremely useful to the Nazi regime, which from the beginning put into effect a true network of massive destruction to bring, according to its own terms, a final solution to the Jewish issue. This time the genocide was not only effective via the scientific character of logistics but moreover it was discrete up to the point that it wasn’t discovered but several years after. In this framework the Nazi regime did not have to deny the committed genocide since it had done everything it could to erase every trace of its existence gradually, during its realization. We see through this strategic analysis of genocides that the committers of genocide learn the techniques of their predecessors in order to improve their effectiveness and their discretion. The aim of this is for not having to go through the consequences of their acts. This proves the necessity for the strategic approach of genocides in order to understand the historical implementation of their systematic destruction mechanism. The strategy of the committers of genocide uses the experience of the previous ones. While the righteous and the victims who confine themselves to fighting uniquely in the framework of defense of human rights, do not incorporate these elements. So their fight is uneven. We have to strive therefore to find the common points of genocides in order to fight effectively against the executioners, in order to establish a true jurisprudence, which will increase the strength of our legal weapons. For it is as true warriors of peace, that we must address the fight against genocides if we really want to help humanity in not suffering these crimes. For the committers of genocide, strategy is a luxury that facilitates things. For the victims and the righteous, it is a necessity. And this corresponds to the nature of strategy, which represents the only way the weak have for defending themselves against the strong. The lack of comprehension of this reality is a suicide that humanity has nothing to do with. Humanity aids every nation-victim. Only this is not enough. Every nation-victim must also help it to help. Such is the mental schema that the strategic analysis of genocides teaches us.