# Today it will be decide when Turkey is going to enter the European Union

• News

## Main Question or Discussion Point

what will be the impacts of this new event towards, the European union?

Related General Discussion News on Phys.org
vanesch
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
ramollari said:
what will be the impacts of this new event towards, the European union?
I changed my mind on the issue. First I was not so hot for Turkey joining the EU, but I now think that it is a good idea, if we give it some time to ripe.
In fact, I thought long ago that it was under US pressure that the EU was saddled up with Turkey, in an attempt by the US to weaken (by diluting) any political power of the EU. Surely Turkey is different from most "old European" countries. But when looking at it historically, if the EU is to be the heritage of classical greek civilisation, or of the Roman empire, then Turkey has its place here.
What scares off quite some people is that in all voting that will be done in proportion to demography, Turkey will have one of the most powerful votes within the EU. But then so what ?
I think that the opportunity is great to get Turkey "over the hill" in the next 10 years ; if we don't stretch them too much, and we seem to be on the limit of the Turkish patience. In 10 years, a lot can happen, and if well-handled, Turkey has all the possibilities to catch up (democratically) with the EU. I think the biggest problem is the neglect for human rights outside of the big cities in Turkey (especially women's rights). I'm not talking about legislation, but about mentality.
If the EU does not let Turkey join, I think we'll push them into the Arab world and the rise of Western values there might die off.
It is also a great opportunity for Turkey and Greece to burry their old conflicts, and the best way to do so is within the EU.
As a matter of fact, it is telling that the breakpoint in the negociations seems to be the signature Turkey has to do with the 25 actual members, one of which is Cyprus, and which is not recognized by Turkey. This kind of sillyness should of course first stop ! But I think they'll end up managing.

The question rises then: If Turkey has a natural vocation to join the EU, where should the EU finally stop its expansion ?
Should Russia one day become part of it ? Iraq ? Syria ? Northern Africa ?
From a purely historical perspective, these are valid candidates, if we take the Roman Empire as the defining basis of the EU.

It will be good for Turkey. I wish that it can be an apportunity for them to modernize their lifes a bit, perhaps once they are inside the EU they will acquire more aspects of the modern society: no obsession for religion, total equality for women,... In that sense, to "occidentalize" that country can serve as a basis for the modernization of nearer countries like Syria,Irak,..., that can be influenced by what's happening in Turkey
I have not any problem with any country entering the EU as long as they accept the rules that the EU imposes.

PerennialII
Gold Member
Agree with all the positive aspects given above, in ten or so years the changes might actually happen realistically. Who knows, an added benefit of building a bridge between the west and the islamic world might be something to look forward.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed

vanesch said:
If the EU does not let Turkey join, I think we'll push them into the Arab world and the rise of Western values there might die off
You are wrong. The western values did not rise in a medium of hope for being a part of the western world in Turkey. Actually a freedom war hero, Ataturk, forced them to life. Therefore we come to the most important thing that EU wants from Turkey - reduction of the effects of the army on the social life.

I must say that that effects are not obvious or offending on any thought system (excluding PKK of course, but it is not a thought sytem as you know).

Of course, these effects should be minimised to maintain a western style democracy, but as a result of the third sentence of the first paragraph of this entry, the army should protect the country from radical islamic acts (supported by not only Syria and Iran but also some EU countries) by supporting secularism (if i didnt misspell).

This is what EU dont understand about the social life in Turkey.

And democracy is impossible without laicism and democracy is far sophisticated than using election to decide.

Edit - changed second into third.

meteor said:
I wish that it can be an apportunity for them to modernize their lifes a bit, perhaps once they are inside the EU they will acquire more aspects of the modern society: no obsession for religion, total equality for women,...
Turkey already possesses these aspects, thanks to Kemal Ataturk.

Art
I'd say Turkey's chances of gaining full membership of the EU are slim to none. First Turkey has to formally recognise Cyprus which would be political suicide for the Turkish gov't but failing to do so makes membership impossible and after that they have to gain approval in a referendum in both France and Austria (at least - probably others too) which are highly unlikely to return favourable results.

loseyourname
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
The people over at the Armenian Club forum I moderate are going to be pissed if this goes through.

Art said:
I'd say Turkey's chances of gaining full membership of the EU are slim to none. First Turkey has to formally recognise Cyprus which would be political suicide for the Turkish gov't but failing to do so makes membership impossible and after that they have to gain approval in a referendum in both France and Austria (at least - probably others too) which are highly unlikely to return favourable results.
Agreed. People should understand that EU will not accept Turkey. And RTE uses peoples religious feelings to gain political power.

meteor said:
...perhaps once they are inside the EU they will acquire more aspects of the modern society: no obsession for religion, total equality for women,...
99 percent of Turkish people is modern in an European manner but %1 is the problem and the ones who talk and be talked about is that %1. Turkeys image is that %1. This makes me angry. Grrr... An example - Some time ago, when i was flying to Germany with Lufthansa, I saw an advertorial of a travel agency... It was terrible! They showed women wearing turban and walking 10 meters behind their men. This is light years away from the reality!

EU wants to see Turkey like Syria, Iraq or Iran.

loseyourname said:
The people over at the Armenian Club forum I moderate are going to be pissed if this goes through.
Haha what a country, demanding area from all of its neighbors...

Bah... Istanbul is on the Border between Europe and the M.E. The rest of Turkey is in the ME

99 percent of Turkish people is modern in an European manner but %1 is the problem and the ones who talk and be talked about is that %1. Turkeys image is that %1. This makes me angry. Grrr
Total jibberish... The MAJORITY of turkey is nothing like Europe. There customs, and way of living is more akin to the Arabs than Europeans. The Greeks inherited some of this culture after being occupied for >300 years by them. But Greece is a European Country not a M.E. one.

On top of this massive cultural divide Turkey have a very bad human rights record (Hellinic genocide, which they dont even admit to doing!?), they dont recognise Cyprus, they fly daily into Greek airspace with there fighter Jets. The Baltic region of Europe, will not be happy if they join. The EU constitution was NOT ratified by referendums, and if you ask people why a lot say "It is going to fast, too many new member states, too quickly, where does it stop?"

The people over at the Armenian Club forum I moderate are going to be pissed if this goes through.
And all the Greeks, I cant see it happening, unless Istanbul becomes Constantinople again, and Asia Minor breaks away from “Turkey” and becomes an independent state The likely-hood of that happening is slim to none.

The only benefit to having Turkey in the EU is to increase the size of its consumer base, I wonder is this benefit will outweigh the major problems… Doubt it

Anttech said:
Total jibberish... The MAJORITY of turkey is nothing like Europe. There customs, and way of living is more akin to the Arabs than Europeans.
How do you know? Tell your observations not opinions which are nothing more than results of the western propaganda.
Anttech said:
On top of this massive cultural divide Turkey have a very bad human rights record (Hellinic genocide, which they dont even admit to doing!?),
The main source of the claims of so-called genocide is The Blue Book (if my I remember the color correctly ^^) which was merely a book of propaganda made by UK. (And the have accepted that it did not reflect the reality.)
Anttech said:
they fly daily into Greek airspace with there fighter Jets.
Do you know the Greek claim of where borders of the Greek Airspace lie?
The Greek airspace is 6 miles far from the coast according to international
pacts. But they claim it to be 12 miles - cone-shaped with a base on the islands!!!
Anttech said:
The Baltic region of Europe, will not be happy if they join.
Sure.
Anttech said:
and if you ask people why a lot say "It is going to fast, too many new member states, too quickly, where does it stop?"
Thats an illusion. Turkey has wanted to be a member for app.40 years. In that period some other countries have applied and been accepted!
Anttech said:
And all the Greeks,
Remember that politics is between governments not nations.
Anttech said:
I cant see it happening, unless Istanbul becomes Constantinople again, and Asia Minor breaks away from “Turkey” and becomes an independent state
There is no reason to distinguish Istanbul. Many cities are better than that.
Anttech said:
The likely-hood of that happening is slim to none.
None.
Anttech said:
The only benefit to having Turkey in the EU is to increase the size of its consumer base, I wonder is this benefit will outweigh the major problems… Doubt it
That benefit can be achieved by privileged partnership, what a portion of EU suggest. There are some other benefits for example a shielding from terror with the worlds 5th largest army etc.

gl

How do you know? Tell your observations not opinions which are nothing more than results of the western propaganda.
It is an observation, also perhaps my opinion, but it is based on my observations

Thats an illusion. Turkey has wanted to be a member for app.40 years. In that period some other countries have applied and been accepted!
What? Its not an “illusion” People on the ground were annoyed by two things (especially in Holland), the massive expansion of the EU, and have the Euro shoved down the throats..

The main source of the claims of so-called genocide is The Blue Book (if my I remember the color correctly ^^) which was merely a book of propaganda made by UK. (And the have accepted that it did not reflect the reality.)
Quote:
Actually my source is my Grandfather, who was born in Marmara, and was forced to leave, I also have friends (good friends) living in Athens now, from Istanbul. On top of this there are several independent studies into the Hellinic Genocide, I'll have a look for them if you like. It happend, and it wasnt some sort of propoganda. Many people were marched to their deaths by the "Young Turks" for being christian... Lots of them were indeed Greek. So don’t tell me that I was fed “UK” propoganda

JAMES E. McGREEVEY said:
"WHEREAS, it is important for future generations that we commemorate these events, so that such atrocities may never be repeated; and

WHEREAS, it is fitting that the people of New Jersey share in the remembrance of the 80th Anniversary of the destruction of Smyrna, and join with the Greek-American community in recognizing the genocide of the Greek people of Pontus and Asia Minor;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, JAMES E. McGREEVEY, Governor of the State of New Jersey, do hereby proclaim

SEPTEMBER 9, 2002

as

A DAY OF REMEMBRANCE OF THE DESTRUCTION OF
SMYRNA AND THE GENOCIDE AGAINST THE GREEK
PEOPLE OF PONTUS AND ASIA MINOR"
http://www.greece.org/themis/ny/njprocl.htm

"Can human beings (it may be asked) have perpetrated such crimes on innocent women and children? But a recollection of previous massacres will show that such crimes are part of the long settled and often repeated policy of Turkish rulers. In Chios, nearly a century ago, the Turks slaughtered almost the whole Greek population of the island."
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/1915/bryce/a00tc.htm

heres another:
"The Turks are beginning to take Greeks from the Coast cities into the interior of Asia Minor and are oppressing the Syrian Arabian cities, such as Beirut, where thousands are dying of starvation."
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/memoir/Gerard2/KaiserismTC.htm

And another:
I have been for many years in the Near East—about thirty in all—and have watched the gradual and systematic extermination of Christians and Christianity in that region, and I believe it my duty to tell that grim tale, and to turn the light upon the political rivalries of the Western World, that have made such a fearful tragedy possible.
http://www.hri.org/docs/Horton/HortonBook.htm
Do you know the Greek claim of where borders of the Greek Airspace lie?
The Greek airspace is 6 miles far from the coast according to international
pacts. But they claim it to be 12 miles - cone-shaped with a base on the islands!!!
I am not talking about "skimming" the Greek airspace, they fly over Greek islands, and have skirmishes with the Greek Airforce many many many times, and still today try to contest about the soveranty of many of the greek islands...

here are some other benefits for example a shielding from terror with the worlds 5th largest army etc.
The current combined EU force is far superior technologically and training wise than Turkey can offer. This isnt a benefit, it is unnecessary. Again the only really benefit would be to increase the size of the EU consumer base and thus the weight of the EU's political power in terms of Import and export

Last edited by a moderator:
Anttech said:
It is an observation, also perhaps my opinion, but it is based on my observations
Clearly we have different observations therefore I can only suggest you to visit Izmir if you havent. Generally the tourists visiting Turkey are shocked(this is not for you as you stated that you had observations).

Anttech said:
have the Euro shoved down the throats..
What did you expect after accepting the iron curtain countries? They applied after Turkey.

Anttech said:
my Grandfather, who was born in Marmara, and was forced to leave
Was he Greek? Some Greeks were forced to leave Turkey by a mutual pact (so some Turks were forced to leave Greece too) after the War of Independence.

I dont even bother to give an answer to that pontus genocide crap.

Any info about the Armenian issue can be found at
http://www.ermenisorunu.gen.tr/english

Claude Lanzmann said:
in the book titled Shoah

There are five criteria for an action to be genocide. These are,
1.Political power must have a base ideology to destroy a race utterly.
2.Political power must be racist.
3.The operation must be systematic and planned.
4.The operation must be applied to all of the area that race occupies.
1915 events satisfy only the third one therefore they form an act of replacement rather than genocide.

You gave quotations from your link and I too will do so.

As a bridge between Asia and Europe, with its straits connecting The Black Sea with the Mediterranean and its geopolitical situation at a point where the Central Asian, Caucasian and Middle Eastern natural energy sources intersect, Turkey draws the attention of the entire world.

The Ottoman Empire in the past and Turkey at present has always been an arena for which intrigues were incessantly designed. The colonialist superpowers wishing to eradicate the Ottoman Empire from the world by dividing it did not fail to use in their schemes also the Armenians who coexisted in peace with the Turks for so many centuries.

There are today just like in the past, several countries striving to secure themselves political and economic benefits at the expense of Armenian community. Monuments accusing Turks and Turkey of having committed genocide are being erected in some countries; decisions intending to recognise the so called genocide are brought into the parliamentary agenda in several countries and even voted for in some others. Issues that need to be left to historians are turned into means of self interest by the politicians.

The Armenians who were ousted from one place to the other, pushed into wars, and treated as third rate citizens throughout the history by the Romans, Persians and Byzantines. After the advent of Turks into Anatolia, they benefited from the just, humane, tolerant and unifying traditions and beliefs of their new neighbours. The period that lasted until the end of the nineteenth century when the apogee of these developments and relations was attained, was the golden age of Armenians. In fact, the Armenians were by far the greatest beneficiaries of the opportunities offered by the Ottoman Empire to all industrious, capable, honest and straightforward citizens of the non-Moslem communities. Being exempted from the military service and to a large extent from taxation, they had the opportunity to excel themselves in trade, agriculture, craftsmanship and administration and therefore were rightly called the “loyal nation” because of their loyalty and ability to interact with the Ottomans. There were so many Armenians who spoke Turkish, who even conducted their rites in this language , who rose to topmost public service posts such as the Ministries and Under-Secretariats of State for the Public Works, Navy, Foreign Affairs, Finance, Treasury, Posts and Telegraph and Minting. There were some who even wrote books in Turkish and foreign languages on the Problems of the Ottoman Empire .

With the start of the decline of the Ottoman Empire, the European powers began to intervene in its affairs and degeneration became evident in the peaceful Turkish-Armenian relations. Great effort was displayed by the instigators whom the Western powers planted into the Ottoman Empire under clerical guise, to create a schism between Turks and Armenians in the religious, cultural, commercial, political and social fields. Thus, bloody clashes arose, in which the blunt of pain was borne by the Turks, and thousands of Armenians and Turks lost their lives in the revolts that broke out in Eastern Anatolia and spread all the way to Istanbul.

Though there were many Armenians fighting in the Ottoman armies against the enemy or serving in the rear ranks during the World War I, a considerable number had sided with the foes on the battlefronts and launched massacres against the population without distinction of women, children and the aged. Their toll was hundreds of thousands of Moslems and ruin in Eastern Anatolia.

The measures adopted by the Ottoman Empire to stop this violence were presented to the rest of the world under a completely different light and the Armenians, misguided by the promises and instigation of the Western Powers started to undermine the country where they had led a privileged life more than a thousand years.

The Hinchak, Tashnak, Toward Armenia, Young Armenians, Union and Salvation, Ramgavar, Paramilitaries, Black Cross societies and Hinchak Revolutionary Committee, which were established out of Anatolia, formed organisations urging the people for an armed revolt. These activities were the bloody uprisings that cost thousands of Turkish and Armenian lives.

During World War I, the Ottoman Empire was fighting against Russian armies in Eastern Anatolia, where the Armenian revolt was at its peak; and also against Armenian forces which supported the Russians. On the other hand, behind the lines it had to continue to fight against Armenian guerrillas that were burning Turkish villages and towns and attacking military convoys and reinforcements. In spite of this violence, the Ottoman Empire tried to solve the Armenian problem for months by taking local measures. Meanwhile, an operation was made against the Armenian guerillas and 2345 rebels were arrested for high treason. When it became evident that the Armenian community was also in rebellion against the state, the Ottoman Empire proceeded with the last resort of replacing only those Armenians in the region who actively participated in the rebellion. With this measure, the Ottoman Empire also intended to save the lives of the Armenians who were living in a medium of civil war because Turks started to counter-attack the Armenians who had performed bloody atrocities against Turkish communities.

Today, Armenia and some states using Armenians for their economic and political benefits have launched a massive propaganda campaign to present the replacement decision and the 24 April arrests as genocide to the world public opinion.

At the end of the World War I, when the armies of Allied States occupied The Ottoman Empire and the British officials among them arrested 143 Ottoman political and military leaders and intellectuals for “having committed war crimes toward Armenians” and exiled them to Malta where a trial was launched. However, the massive scrutiny made on the Ottoman, British, American archives in order to find evidence to incriminate these 143 persons failed to produce even the least iota of proof against them. In the end, the detainees in Malta were released without trial and even any indictment in 1922.

The United States archives contain an interesting document sent to Lord Curzon on 13 July 1921 by Mr. R.C. Craigie, the British Ambassador in Washington. The message was as follows: “I regret to state that there is nothing that may be used as evidence against the Turkish detainees in Malta. There are no events that may constitute adequate proofs. The said reports do not appear to contain even circumstantial evidence that could be useful to reinforce the information held by His Majesty’s Government against the Turks.”

On 29 July 1921, the legal advisers in London decided that the intended indictments drawn up against the persons on the British Foreign Ministry’s list were semi-political in nature and therefore these individuals should be treated separately from the Turks detained as criminals of war.

They also stated the following: “No statements were hitherto received from the witnesses to the effect that the indictments intended against the detainees are correct. Likewise it does not need to be restated that finding witnesses after so long a time is highly doubtful in a remote country like Armenia which is accessible only with great difficulties.” This statement was made also by none other than the legal advisers in London of His Majesty’s Government.

Yet, the efforts to smear the image of Turks with genocide claims did not come to an end as the British press published certain documents attempting to prove the existence of a massacre claimed to have been perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire while efforts were being made to start a lawsuit in Malta. It was stated that the documents were found by the British occupation forces in Syria, led by General Allenby. The inquiries subsequently made by the British Foreign Office revealed, however, that these documents were fakes prepared by the Armenian Nationalist Delegation in Paris and distributed to the Allied representatives.

The Armenian Diaspora, who left no stone unturned to keep the genocide claims on the agenda despite all these facts, resorted to terrorism in the end. The so-called Armenian issue, which started to attract the attention of the world and Turkish public opinion through the smearing campaign launched by the Armenians against Turkey after 1965, in the ‘70s turned into terrorist attacks directed against the Turkish representations abroad. In Santa Barbara on January 27, 1973, the first individual terrorist attack was launched by an aged Armenian named Gurgen (Karekin) Yanikian. He murdered Mehmet Baydur and Bahadir Demir, the Turkish Consul General and Vice Consul in Los Angeles, and these murders turned into an organised campaign after 1975. The attacks against Turkish embassies, officials and institutions abroad gradually intensified.

A major increase in the attacks was noted after 1979 when an internal unease started in Turkey. The Armenian terrorists staged a total of 110 attacks at 38 cities of 21 countries. 39 of these acts were committed by small arms, 70 of them were realised by bombs and one was an outright occupation. 42 Turkish diplomats and 4 foreigners were killed and 15 Turks and 66 foreigners were wounded in these incidents.

As these actions received a strong reaction from the world public opinion, the Armenian terrorist organisations changed their tactics in 1980 and began to co-operate with the PKK terrorist group which was pushed into the scene by the Eruh and ªemdinli attacks as the ASALA and Armenian operations were stopped. The documents and evidence from Beqaa and Zeli camps show that the PKK and ASALA militants were trained there together.

The success achieved by the Turkish security forces made the Armenian terrorism pursue the so called genocide claims through the Armenian Diaspora and attempt to make the world believe in the existence of such an event by inducing several parliaments to adopt resolutions and laws which recognise it.

The goal of these terrorists is to plant into minds of people the existence of a genocide, to force Turkey to recognise it, to receive indemnity from Turkey and, finally, to snatch from Turkey the land needed for realising the dream of Great Armenia
Another one,

What is Genocide?
The replacement was presented by the Armenians and hostile states as a massacre and genocide against Armenians, and a massive propaganda campaign was launched against the Ottomans.

Genocide is the crime of annihilation of human groups because of racial, national, ethnic and religious differences. It can be perpetrated only directly by a Government or under its consent. In order to prevent the crime of genocide in the world, the United Nations General Assembly voted in 1948 the Genocide Convention, to which Turkey adhered in 1950.

The mention of genocide reminds the massive massacres perpetrated by Nazis against Jews and other ethnic groups In World War II. In this period lasting from 1939 to 1945 six million Jews, more than three millions of Soviet prisoners of war, more than one million Polish and Yugoslav civilians, about 200.000 Gypsies and 70.000 disabled persons were murdered. This is genocide in the true sense of the word.

Similarly, an imposing number of genocides have been committed in the recent years despite the United Nations Convention. For example, the confessions of two retired French generals published in the daily Le Monde show that the French army murdered at least one million Algerians between 1954 and 1962, while the Indonesian army massacred a full one million communists and their family members in 1965 and 1966, the Red Khmer killed 1,7 million Cambodians between 1975 and 1979, 500.000 Tutsis were beheaded by Huttus of Ruanda in 1994 and thousands of Moslems were exposed to Serbian atrocities in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo.

The crime of genocide was committed in the above cases in its most blatant form. Contrary to the Armenian pretensions, the measures adopted regarding the Armenians in Eastern Anatolia was merely a replacement in another region within the Empire for security reasons and had nothing to do with genocide.

It is true that there were Armenian losses during the war and the replacement operation but they were actually due to the failure of establishment of order because of the war and the revolts in Eastern Anatolia., together with hunger, lack of food and fuel, adverse climatic conditions and epidemics such as typhus. There was no genocide or a planned massacre whatsoever.

It is a fact that the Armenians were subjected to many similar replacements in the past for treason against the states under whose hegemonies they were living. the Sasanites moved 70.000 Armenians to Iran in 379 AD, the Byzantines relocated 40.000 East Anatolian Armenians in Sivas and Kayseri in 1025, the Mameluks sent 10.000 to Egypt, the Iranians dispersed 24.000 into the country and the Russians invading Crimea sent thousands of Armenians into the Siberian steppes.

Without mentioning any of these preceding replacements and exiles, the Armenians strive to make a genocide issue out of their replacement undertaken in 1915 for undeniably sound reasons by the Ottoman State. This attitude is the product of policies designed to break apart the integrity of Turkey. The most obvious evidence of this phenomenon lies in the fact that the Western powers, oblivious to the true genocide events in Africa, the Balkans and several other parts of the world, lend support to the claims of genocide against Armenians.
Anttech said:
they fly over Greek islands
No. They fly over the international airspace when dogfighting with Greek ones. Half Turkish half American made F/A - 16s skirmish with American made F/A-16s. Who gets the most benefit? Turkey? Greece? Or American weapon industry?

Anttech said:
The current combined EU force is far superior technologically and training wise than Turkey can offer.
Not really. Surely EU is better in technology but not greatly. The thing which makes a difference is the nuclear power of France. But you dont approve using it, do you?

They fly over the international airspace
... Hmm Is that what you call Aegian airspace!

Not really. Surely EU is better in technology but not greatly. The thing which makes a difference is the nuclear power of France
And the UK... come on Behave, the Combined armies of western Europe are far advanced than the Turkish army... Dont forget how "big" Iraq's army was, and how easy it fell to the Americans... Well the UK has a lot of the same technology as the Americans.

Was he Greek? Some Greeks were forced to leave Turkey by a mutual pact (so some Turks were forced to leave Greece too) after the War of Independence.
Yes he was Greek..

Well I wont bother with your "pontos excuses"... Because what the Turkish goverment did in Pontos was Genocide, marching people to the desert and letting them starve becuase of thier religion is Genocide, Turkeys "Jihad"...

Heres a nice quote for you:

"The Turk is the only master in his country. Those who are not pure Turks have one right in this country: The right to be servants, the right to be slaves"
Turkish Minister of Justice. Newspaper Milliet, September 30, 1930
1.Political power must have a base ideology to destroy a race utterly.
2.Political power must be racist.
3.The operation must be systematic and planned.
4.The operation must be applied to all of the area that race occupies.
Number 1 see my quote above... Turkey for Turks/Islam
Number 2 see my quote above (Young turks were extremly racist, and in bed with the Nazi's)
Number 3 http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/RM2.T.GREEK.DEATH.MARCH.JPG
See picture, there were systamatically marched to there deaths
Number 4 Well there are NO Greeks left in any part of there homeland for 3000 years around the agean.

The west and the rest

Anttech said:
Dont forget how "big" Iraq's army was, and how easy it fell to the Americans...
In the Gulf War a land war never happened between the USA and Iraq. In Al Khafji, Saddam thought to pull the coalition into a land war but USA was superior at the air... But now terorrists dont have an army to be bombed out from the sky so a well-trained land force is essential in any war against terorrism (not against terorrist countries of course, if you think there were any...).
Anttech said:
Yes he was Greek..
I am repeating that what happened to him was MUTUAL and legal by international pacts. Ask him.
Anttech said:
Heres a nice quote for you:
I have a nicer one.
Originally stated by Winston Churchill
The west and the rest...
Mahmut Esat Bozkurt was racist but the two quotes state the owners personal idea. That statement does not reflect the opinion of the government (and the president, Ataturk, gaved the needed answer to him).
So we are done with the first two:
Anttech said:
Number 1 see my quote above... Turkey for Turks/Islam
Number 2 see my quote above (Young turks were extremly racist, and in bed with the Nazi's)
For Number 3 we come the url you gave. In the site you linked there is a document titled Statistics of Democide Chapter 5 at http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM

Now I admit that I read only the first paragraph of this. Because I couldnt resist ... the laughter! The first paragraph is as follows
The infamy of executing this century's first full scale ethnic cleansing belongs to Turkey's Young Turk government during World War I. In their highest councils Turkish leaders decided to exterminate every Armenian in the country, whether a front-line soldier or pregnant woman, famous professor or high bishop, important businessman or ardent patriot. All 2,000,000 of them.
If my eyes dont trick me this paragraph is about that so-called Armenian Genocide claims. But when do Armenians claim it to happen? 1915.
And what this paragraph say? Turkey's Young Turk Government. Haha Turkey was founded in 1920!!! War of Independence ended in 1923!!!Gallipoli was in 1918!!! In 1915 there was nothing about Turkeys Young Government. There was the old Ottoman Empire with Vahdettin being the king. Therefore the sites you link lose their reliability. Good luck with your lies!

Anttech said:
Number 4 Well there are NO Greeks left in any part of there homeland for 3000 years around the agean.
I share that ovservation having a home in Izmir. But that has to do with the above stated pact. Ask your grandpa.

Edit- When Greece declared its independence from Ottoman Empire there happened a great Greek migration from Aegean to the Greece. They went willingly to their country.

Last edited:
kishtik:

This is exactly the reason, why Turkey has been "waiting" for over 40 year to join the EU, and you will have to wait for another 40 years. Unless things change

Our so called lies, are historical facts where I am from... The thread just shows who deep the rift is between the Balkans and Turkey, even if the Greek government is saying "let them in" its just talk... The people will talk with there votes if they are asked...

It just takes one veto...

Until our Historical fact align, country demographics align (ie cyprus), cultures more align... then you aint gonna get in.

We have no reason to have Turkey in the EU. Apart from the chance of economical gains. (Your theory on your army is totally moot, Europe has no need for your army, and to be honest opening our borders up to Turkey would increase the chance of terrorist attacks not decrease them).

Thats just the way it is...

EDIT:

Our so called lies, are historical facts where I am from
By that I mean:

See below of all countries/orgainisations that Officially recongise the Christian "Genocide" by the Young Turks:

Argentina,
Armenia,
Belgium,
Cyprus,
France,
Germany,
Greece,
Italy,
The Netherlands,
Lebanon,
Poland,
Russia,
Slovakia,
Sweden,
Switzerland,
Uruguay,
Vatican City
and Venezuela.

Orgs that recognise the "Genocide" are:

European Parliament

Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly

United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities

The majority of US states also recognize the Armenian Genocide, however there is no federal (country-wide) recognition.

The Canadian House of Commons voted to officially recognize the Armenian Genocide. The federal government, in opposing the motion, did not express a position on whether the genocide took place.

International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) Report Prepared for TARC

The Association of Genocide Scholars

Union of American Hebrew Congregations

World Council of Churches

The Turkish Human Right Organization

The League for Human Rights

"Parliament of Kurdistan in Exile" (an unnoficial organisation with no parliamentary powers)

Permanent Peoples' Tribunal

Last edited:
Dont tell me how hard it is for Turkey to enter EU. It is impossible indeed not because Turkey couldnt be adequate, it is because EU dont want Turkey - just as you stated. So Chirac shouts about privilaged partnership. That too, is wrong, i think.
Read my previous posts and you will see that I dont want Turkey to continue dreaming about EU while its most important red lines being crossed, most strategical firms being sold to other governments and the nation being pushed into Sevrés fire.
Anttech said:
Unless things change
Things will change of course and Im not saying that Turkey has the brightest history, but not being considerate about the human rights in certain circumstances is different from genocide.
Anttech said:
Our so called lies, are historical facts where I am from...
Then prove them. But not by linking to funny sites. For example your site mentions a 2 million but
originally published in Britannica
...there were 1.5 million Armenians at that time...
originally stored in the Ottoman Archives
...the number was 1.234.671
I hope we are done with that genocide claims. An act cant be genocide unless it satisfies the conditions posted.
Anttech said:
even if the Greek government is saying "let them in" its just talk... The people will talk with there votes if they are asked...

It just takes one veto...
Good morning!!!
Anttech said:
country demographics align (ie cyprus)
What do you mean? Cypruss acceptance was not legal because kypriaki dimokratia cannot enter a group that does not include both Greece and Turkey according to the international pacts.
Anttech said:
and to be honest opening our borders up to Turkey would increase the chance of terrorist attacks not decrease them).
How do you know? Turkey saves you from narchotic traffic.

EDIT - I didnt see your edit when writing this and you will wait until tomorrow to get response to your edit.

Last edited:
Things will change of course and Im not saying that Turkey has the brightest history, but not being considerate about the human rights in certain circumstances is different from genocide
I am curious.. What would you call what happened during the fall of the Ott. Empire? Where (for the sake of argument) >1Million and <2 Million christians, be it Greek or Armenian were Killed was?
A tragidy, yes
Genocide? IMO yes

But what would you say?

Then prove them. But not by linking to funny sites. For example your site mentions a 2 million but
What would you class as proof? You goverment admiting it? I wasnt linking to "sites" I was trying to linking to Documents...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_genocide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides

Read some for yourself, hope you find something that is "non-partisan"

Did you know that it is Illegal to deny the Genocide by the young turks in Belgium ;-) thought you might get a kick out of that one

Originally Posted by Anttech
country demographics align (ie cyprus)

What do you mean? Cypruss acceptance was not legal because kypriaki dimokratia cannot enter a group that does not include both Greece and Turkey according to the international pacts.
I was refering to the fact you dont even recognise Cyprus

Anyway, at least we both aggree on the fact Turkey wont be in the EU :-)

You realised that you couldnt give a historical proof and try to convince people by addressing reliable(?!) organizations. When I say historical proof I mean a collection of historical documents that cannot be interpreted otherwise. That collection can only be acquired from the Ottoman Archives(what Armenians never approach and this destroys their reliability), writings of independent observers, and finally writings of the historians, not politicians.
You started and I will follow although I am not eager to do so.
Some famous historians who stated that there happened no genocide - (some of them arent any near to Turkish - friendly).

Agoshik

Mateos
(tell me if it seems more with the blanks you placed :rofl: )

Voltaire

Lamartine

Claide Farrere

Pierre Loti

Nogueres (if I didnt remember the spelling incorrectly)

Ilone Caitani

Philip Marshall Brown

Michelet

Sir Charles Wilson

Politis

Arnold

Bronsart

Roux

Grousset

Edgar Granville

Garnier

Toynbee

Price

Bombaci

Remind, none of them is Turk.

And a famous Armenian Professor from the USA, Hovannisian, stated that the genocide was not valid nor proven.

Also, the famous professor Bernard Lewis and Prof.Stanford Shaw experienced great pressure from Armenians. Lewis mentioned the subject in his article on Le Monde as follows
originally published on Le Monde in 1993 by Bernard Lewis (translation is mine)
There is not any proof that shows Ottoman Empires any plan of mass genocide over Armenians. There are valid reasons for Turks to refer replacement. That is, Armenians were at war with the Empire in alliance with Russia which was invading the northeastern parts.
Also why should I trust to any link you give? The first of them was beyond my :rofl: and the google links you gave still mentions the concept of Turkeys Young Government. Maybe thats the way Armenians think, to get area from Turkey. Such a comedy.

And Cyprus, thats EUs fault.

Also http://www.tallarmeniantale.com [Broken]

For the Turkish Human Rights Organization, they have little reliability worlwide as they do NOT count PKK (newly KADEK) as a terrorist group when EU and USA does.

Last edited by a moderator:
And a bit about Wikipedia. Did you know that it is a contribution-based project in which readers are also writers. Read the first paragraph of the above post until you understand it (not offending).

And, I know that I would take a court (and surely I would be found guilty) if I said these things in not only Belgium, but also other EU countries. And Turkeys head of the history council, Yusuf Halacoglu did that intentionally and will show the truth in the EU Human Rights Court. Long Live Democracy!!!

Didnt relies the EU was Armeninan...

Sitting the "young Turks" is correct, as the GENOCIDE happened as the Ott. Empire was falling (not very gracefully I may add) and the "Young Turks" were rising, creating a "Turkey for Turks"

Anyway no sweat, It would be a minor mirical if a Turk was to admit to the attoristies..

And a bit about Wikipedia. Did you know that it is a contribution-based project in which readers are also writers
Well you learn a new thing everyday /sarcasim

And Turkeys head of the history council, Yusuf Halacoglu did that intentionally and will show the truth in the EU Human Rights Court
Can wait to dredge up your history

Kurds??????

Anttech said:
Sitting the "young Turks" is correct,
It is not. Dont you read my posts? Or didnt you read your high school history book? Check these and you will see the truth in your book.
When do they claim the genocide happened? 1915.
When did Canakkale Battle happen? 1918. (which was a battle in WW1)
When did Ataturk arrive in Samsun to spark the defence against invasion? 1919.
When was the National Assembly founded? 1920. Remember that at that time there was the war of independence.
There was NOTHING about the new republic in 1915.
Young Turks was merely a group of people in power in Istanbul long before 1920 when Turkey was officially founded in Ankara.

Indeed it is a great miracle that people you think educated are hunted by a propaganda which has no reality base. I admit that terrible things happened mutually at that time but none of them was genocide.