Greece Analysis Greek - Turkish Relations

[Kansei]

Greeks were literally much better position than us Turks in the ottoman dynasty they only gave us duties in the army while Greeks or others were running the economy etc don't play the innocent we know what happened to turks in greece

Oh and once again thank you for comepletelty ignoring my argument in the comment that you are replying and just repeating your stance on the topic

 

[Manomed]

Oh and once again thank you for comepletelty ignoring my argument in the comment that you are replying and just repeating your stance on the topic

playing innocent like a boss again I see lmao chauvinist greek mindset. I would be like this If some people who were living in tents beats me and destroys my empire after what happened to turks at Islands and mainland greece you got everything you deserved that is my stance

 

[Kansei]

playing innocent like a boss again I see lmao chauvinist greek mindset. I would be like this If some people who were living in tents beats me and destroys my empire after what happened to turks at Islands and mainland greece you got everything you deserved that is my stance

Instead of having a report button next to your name, they should make a special approval committee just for you every time you want to comment. Even better just IP Ban you, you literally never have anything to add to a conversation, you either dodge and just make Ad hominems or you dodge a conversation you started by opening another conversation with a completely different topic since you couldn’t reply to the previous one. But yeah yeah cope and seethe, Greek bad Turk Good etc...

 

[godel44]

AH MANOMED my favorite argument dodger ! Last time we had this argument i think you were the one that said that Greeks were treated better in the ottoman empire, I said that Greek children were regularly kidnapped and we had to pay a special tax, and if we broke one of the laws we would be impaled in the ass. Then you replied I think something along the lines of "it's a myth that the kidnappings happened in the sea" or something and then I think you said that you treated us better than other countries that were in the same situtation as Ottomans.Then I said could you specify more clearly what you mean by in the sea and please cite a source that says it's a myth.Oh I also said that just because somewhere people were treated worse doesn't excuse the way you treated us or even counts as being treated "better" than turks.I also made the analogy that it's like me coming and "conquering" your country and raping women and then saying "aren't you glad I didn't use gas chambers like Hitler ?". Between that there was i think more back and forth like you saying that Pasha was only a privillage for foreigners, I then gave you an example and asked you if that Pasha was Turkish or not, and just like my last reply in general ,you never replied. Oh yeah I think there were some cope and seeths in between there and all that stuff.

Execution by impalement, while a ghastly punishment, was reserved for the most serious crimes and applied to the whole empire, not just to the Greek minority.

Greek children were not regularly kidnapped. You are probably thinking of the "Devsirme" system of recruiting boys of 15 to 20 years of age into military and state duties. And the "special tax" you are thinking of is probably "cizye" which was the annual tax for non-Muslim adult males who were exempt for military duties and the general drafts. You might remember that there were a lot of wars during those times.

Some Greek youths being recruited by the state (and many advancing to very high stations) and the rest paying a tax in exchange for not being drafted are not really convincing tales of atrocity as you seem to think. Compared to what European colonist powers or Russia were doing at those times, one might say Greeks had it pretty good. Certainly nothing that would justify the Turkish genocide in Mora starting in 1821.

 

[Kansei]

Execution by impalement, while a ghastly punishment, was reserved for the most serious crimes and applied to the whole empire, not just to the Greek minority.

Greek children were not regularly kidnapped. You are probably thinking of the "Devsirme" system of recruiting boys of 15 to 20 years of age into military and state duties. And the "special tax" you are thinking of is probably "cizye" which was the annual tax for non-Muslim adult males who were exempt for military duties and the general drafts. You might remember that there were a lot of wars during those times.

Some Greek youths being recruited by the state (and many advancing to very high stations) and the rest paying a tax in exchange for not being drafted are not really convincing tales of atrocity as you seem to think. Compared to what European colonist powers or Russia were doing at those times, one might say Greeks had it pretty good. Certainly nothing that would justify the Turkish genocide in Mora starting in 1821.

For your first argument, i quote from wikipedia and I can even cite my source if you want : "Jean de Thévenot, traveling in the Ottoman Empire and its territories like Egypt in the late 1650s, emphasizes the regional variations in impalement frequency. Of Constantinople and Turkey, de Thévenot writes that impalement was "not much practised" and "very rarely put in practice." An exception he highlighted was the situation of Christians in Constantinople. If a Christian spoke or acted out against the "Law of Mahomet", or consorted with a Turkish woman, or broke into a mosque, then he might face impalement unless he converted to Islam.". Also impalement was one of several torture methods used.For example i've never heard of a Turk dying from being sawed but there are plenty of examples of foreigners like : "The Knights Hospitallers, then stationed at Rhodes, sent several knights to aid in the defence of Mytilene from the Turks. They eventually surrendered, under promise of having their lives spared. Instead, according to some reports, they were sawn asunder.According to Kenneth Meyer Setton, the sultan had actually promised to spare the heads of some 400 knights, and sawed them in half to keep his oath of not harming the heads."
For the kidnappings I was also talking about janissaries, and from what I read it was a frequent event, could you please cite your source for your claim ? Hell even Rigas Feraios who some sources claim was killed being sawn in two and from my knowledge never actually commited any violent crimes stated some of his main problems with the Ottomans being " His grievances against the Ottoman occupation of Greece regarded its cruelty, the drafting of children between the ages of five and fifteen into military service (Devshirmeh or Paedomazoma), the administrative chaos and systematic oppression (including prohibitions on teaching Greek history or language, or even riding on horseback), the confiscation of churches and their conversion to mosques...".
Also from my knowledge a forced military draft was only a christian thing up until 1839, Turks weren't forced into military draft ("No universal military conscription existed during this period. Recruitment in the Ottoman imperial army was achieved by the forced enlistment of Christian children every five years.The devşirme came up out of the kul system of slavery that developed in the early centuries of the Ottoman Empire, and which reached this final development during the reign of Bayezid I. The kul were mostly prisoners from war, hostages, or slaves that were purchased by the state. The Ottoman Empire, beginning with Murad I, felt a need to "counteract the power of Turkic nobles by developing Christian vassal soldiers and converted kapıkulu as his personal troops, independent of the regular army.").

" Compared to what European colonist powers or Russia were doing at those times, one might say Greeks had it pretty good. Certainly nothing that would justify the Turkish genocide in Mora starting in 1821."

Again that isn't a valid excuse. That is like me "conquering" your land in the 1940s, raping the women in your country and saying "Aren't you glad I didn't use Gas Chambers like Hitler? I guess you guys have it pretty good compared to what the Nazis are doing.". I can't find the genocide you are talking about, but yeah I admit that in some circuimstances the Greeks took it too far during the War of Independence and what they did was wrong. But from what I know, they commited nothing worse than what Turks commited during previous Greek revolts, or even to innocent women ("During the Souliote War in December 1803, the Souliotes began evacuating Souli after their defeat by the forces of the local Ottoman-Albanian ruler, Ali Pasha. During the evacuation, a group of Souliot women and their children were trapped by Ali's troops in the mountains of Zalongo in Epirus.In order to avoid enslavement and rape, the women threw their children first and then themselves off a steep cliff, committing suicide").
One has to wonder, if the Greeks weren't treated as bad and punished during their 400 years of enslavement , would the Greeks have punished the Turks a differerent way from the way they were punished by them ?

 

[Kansei]

They don't accept the massacres or genocides against turks while still calling for "Best Turk is a dead one" Why should I feel bad for the ones we killed in anatolia or in greece? They should put this on their head Anatolia is a Turkic land now.

Never said that, stop strawmaning and stop derailing the argument.Also weren't you the one that said that you don't care if your fellow Turks die in a war for an economic zone becuase "it's not us who are going to die but the farmer boys ". (@Foulgrim can you please issue a warning for staying on topic ?)

 

[Foulgrim]

Never said that, stop strawmaning and stop derailing the argument.Also weren't you the one that said that you don't care if your fellow Turks die in a war for an economic zone becuase "it's not us who are going to die but the farmer boys ". (@Foulgrim can you please issue a warning for staying on topic ?)

In this topic there is the possibility of expressing views on Greek-Turkish relations and the issues that govern it. If there are no comments that violate the terms of the forum, the discussion can continue in a civilized way. Aggressive rhetoric is clearly not a way of dialogue, you are right. It cannot be said that the massacres of Turks or Greeks during the Asia Minor Campaign were well done, at least it is inhuman.

 

[godel44]

For your first argument, i quote from wikipedia and I can even cite my source if you want : "Jean de Thévenot, traveling in the Ottoman Empire and its territories like Egypt in the late 1650s, emphasizes the regional variations in impalement frequency. Of Constantinople and Turkey, de Thévenot writes that impalement was "not much practised" and "very rarely put in practice." An exception he highlighted was the situation of Christians in Constantinople. If a Christian spoke or acted out against the "Law of Mahomet", or consorted with a Turkish woman, or broke into a mosque, then he might face impalement unless he converted to Islam.". Also impalement was one of several torture methods used.For example i've never heard of a Turk dying from being sawed but there are plenty of examples of foreigners like : "The Knights Hospitallers, then stationed at Rhodes, sent several knights to aid in the defence of Mytilene from the Turks. They eventually surrendered, under promise of having their lives spared. Instead, according to some reports, they were sawn asunder.According to Kenneth Meyer Setton, the sultan had actually promised to spare the heads of some 400 knights, and sawed them in half to keep his oath of not harming the heads."
For the kidnappings I was also talking about janissaries, and from what I read it was a frequent event, could you please cite your source for your claim ? Hell even Rigas Feraios who some sources claim was killed being sawn in two and from my knowledge never actually commited any violent crimes stated some of his main problems with the Ottomans being " His grievances against the Ottoman occupation of Greece regarded its cruelty, the drafting of children between the ages of five and fifteen into military service (Devshirmeh or Paedomazoma), the administrative chaos and systematic oppression (including prohibitions on teaching Greek history or language, or even riding on horseback), the confiscation of churches and their conversion to mosques...".
Also from my knowledge a forced military draft was only a christian thing up until 1839, Turks weren't forced into military draft ("No universal military conscription existed during this period. Recruitment in the Ottoman imperial army was achieved by the forced enlistment of Christian children every five years.The devşirme came up out of the kul system of slavery that developed in the early centuries of the Ottoman Empire, and which reached this final development during the reign of Bayezid I. The kul were mostly prisoners from war, hostages, or slaves that were purchased by the state. The Ottoman Empire, beginning with Murad I, felt a need to "counteract the power of Turkic nobles by developing Christian vassal soldiers and converted kapıkulu as his personal troops, independent of the regular army.").

The majority of crimes for which execution by impalement was reserved was non-Muslims giving an affront to Islam in some form. It would be natural to have non-Muslims get more of that penalty statistically. But this is a conversation of fringe importance akin to the fact that while lethal injection is a practiced punishment in Texas, it will not be a concern for the general population. Devsirme as a recruitment tool is not tantamount to "kidnapping" and yes, Turks were of course drafted into the military. Placing the devsirme soldiers in high positions rather than Turkish nobles was a concern mainly early on and in any case Turks naturally were a big component of the regular standing armies at lower levels. Putting down revolts can be messy but I am not in a position to be able to confirm what you mention about the civilian losses - though one can speculate that if the Turks in general had an intent to commit genocide on the Greeks, I would be having this conversation by myself.

These fragmented, anecdotal arguments all look like what they actually are - a desperate search of the past to justify the Greek savagery that followed.

" Compared to what European colonist powers or Russia were doing at those times, one might say Greeks had it pretty good. Certainly nothing that would justify the Turkish genocide in Mora starting in 1821."
Again that isn't a valid excuse. That is like me "conquering" your land in the 1940s, raping the women in your country and saying "Aren't you glad I didn't use Gas Chambers like Hitler? I guess you guys have it pretty good compared to what the Nazis are doing.". I can't find the genocide you are talking about, but yeah I admit that in some circuimstances the Greeks took it too far during the War of Independence and what they did was wrong. But from what I know, they commited nothing worse than what Turks commited during previous Greek revolts, or even to innocent women ("During the Souliote War in December 1803, the Souliotes began evacuating Souli after their defeat by the forces of the local Ottoman-Albanian ruler, Ali Pasha. During the evacuation, a group of Souliot women and their children were trapped by Ali's troops in the mountains of Zalongo in Epirus.In order to avoid enslavement and rape, the women threw their children first and then themselves off a steep cliff, committing suicide").

Like most comparisons to Hitler online this one is also way off the base. The relationship for centuries between Turks and Greeks were actually cordial. People lived side by side, engaged in trade and were friends with each other. There was not a Hitler-esque environment.

One has to wonder, if the Greeks weren't treated as bad and punished during their 400 years of enslavement , would the Greeks have punished the Turks a differerent way from the way they were punished by them ?

Yes, they would. In fact, looking at history's catalogue of atrocities you'll find that most of them were justified with a sob story that is mostly imaginary. This is an interesting point in the history of the Ottomans as well. If somebody in 18th century were to guess which ethnicities would revolt against the empire, Greeks and Armenians would be toward the end of the list. Both of these ethnicities coexisted with Turks peacefully for many centuries and were considered very loyal. And yet, both of them revolted extremely violently with uncommon levels of hostility. Armenians committed acts of terrorism toward the end of 19th century and at the beginning of WW1 killed so many civilians in Eastern Turkey that we are still uncovering mass graves. Their French commanding officer after the end of WW1 in the occupying force was horrified at how the Armenians under his command were acting. Greeks similarly committed ethnic cleansing against Turks in Attica, on various islands and tried to commit a genocide even in Anatolia in 1920s. Greek atrocities were widely recorded by their Western allies both just after they got independence and during their occupation of Turkey. The hostility continued even after Lausanne and Greeks tried to kill Turks on Cyprus.

The culprit here in my opinion is the Russian influence which sought to start revolts to weaken Ottoman Empire and used Orthodox Christian nations as tools. Both of these tools were fed stories of past golden ages which were mercilessly cut short by Turks and the many past injustices they had to endure. In the end, these things are driven by mass psychology and objective historical analysis is not the thing that gets people moving and dehumanizes the enemy but wounded pride is.

Anyway, these are all history now but the same theme of wounded pride and extreme hostility is still central to Greeks' view of Turkey. Unfortunately, Turkish people usually view Greeks favorably or as only mildly problematic and Turkish governments including the current one tend to be very soft on Greece compared to how a country on our east would be treated. Hopefully, the hostility will be met with an appropriate response at some point and things will come to an equilibrium and lasting peace. The EEZ controversy in the recent years has hopefully been an eye-opener for many in Turkey with regards to the extent of Greek claims.

 

[Ryder]

Do people still believe that Muslim armies were majority slave armies?

The Ottoman army majority were formed by free men not slaves.

So called Jannisaries which are called the Ottoman army itself only reached their maximum peak of 20k numbers.

Jannisaries have always been the small part of the Ottoman army. There were more Sipahis than Jannisaries. Jannisaries overtime got swelled because they were recruiting everybody into the corps.

Osprey publishing books literally talked about how most Muslim armies including the Ottoman army their majority were free men amd not slaves.

Slave soldiers were the elite and their numbers were small. They never became the majority.

Sipahis and the Akincis played a big role in the expansion of the Ottoman Empire their contributions are overlooked because Turkish history is so focused on the myth of the Jannisaries while the Eurocentric view spread out the myth that the Ottomans needed white people to fight for them what a load of bull.

Jannisaries and their myths is cultivated in Turkiye just like how Japan cultivates the myth of the Samurai.

 

[Foulgrim]

Do people still believe that Muslim armies were majority slave armies?

The Ottoman army majority were formed by free men not slaves.

So called Jannisaries which are called the Ottoman army itself only reached their maximum peak of 20k numbers.

Jannisaries have always been the small part of the Ottoman army. There were more Sipahis than Jannisaries. Jannisaries overtime got swelled because they were recruiting everybody into the corps.

Osprey publishing books literally talked about how most Muslim armies including the Ottoman army their majority were free men amd not slaves.

Slave soldiers were the elite and their numbers were small. They never became the majority.

Sipahis and the Akincis played a big role in the expansion of the Ottoman Empire their contributions are overlooked because Turkish history is so focused on the myth of the Jannisaries while the Eurocentric view spread out the myth that the Ottomans needed white people to fight for them what a load of bull.

Jannisaries and their myths is cultivated in Turkiye just like how Japan cultivates the myth of the Samurai.

Unfortunately in the western states there is the illusion that the Janissaries were the majority of the soldiers of the Ottoman Army. For some reason, many in Greece, including university professors, think this is true, but the historical facts tell a completely different story.
For example, in the Late modern period and specifically in 1609, the following numbers existed as a military unit:
-Timarli Sipahi=>50.000
-Cebelu=>87.000
-Janissary=>36.627(Albanians, Armenians, Bulgarians, Croats, Greeks, and Serbs)
-Kapikulu Sipahi=>20.869
-Other Kapikulu=>55.000
-Fortress guards, Martalos and Navy=>25.000
-Sekban=>10.000
The total number of soldiers of the Ottoman Army in the period 1607-1609 amounted to 240,000.

Military of the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Blackhawk]

"Peaceful" Greeks (continue)

Retired Lieutenant General Nikolaos Tamouridis

"Build aircraft carriers, buy as many ships, tanks, SİHAs as you want, you cannot scare us. Because no matter what you do, you will not be able to set foot in our Homeland. And the bells will ring again in Polis (Istanbul) and Hagia Sophia. !"

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1493524406496288770

This is the real face of the Greeks who called Turkiye as provocateurs and war lovers when Turkey remembered that they have to respect international treaties.

 

[Vaggos]

"Peaceful" Greeks (continue)

Retired Lieutenant General Nikolaos Tamouridis

"Build aircraft carriers, buy as many ships, tanks, SİHAs as you want, you cannot scare us. Because no matter what you do, you will not be able to set foot in our Homeland. And the bells will ring again in Polis (Istanbul) and Hagia Sophia. !"

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1493524406496288770

This is the real face of the Greeks who called Turkiye as provocateurs and war lovers when Turkey remembered that they have to respect international treaties.

It's irrelevant what a retired General thinks or does.

 

[Akritas]

But when we opened this forum, we created very sensitive rules. We have stated in the forum rules that we will not allow bloody terrorists to be praised for any reason. Even if your country has strange relations with PKK terrorists or you try to express Turkey's crushing of PKK terrorists in different terms, we will never allow terrorists to be declared as "freedom fighters" in this forum. We have declared in the rules that we will not allow their actions to be propagated and presented as if they are a representative of the Kurdish people with implications, but I see that you have never adopted the rules of this forum and your hatred for Turkey in this discussion and your inability to produce logical arguments due to the situation you were fallen with facts caused you to even justify a bloody terrorist organization like the PKK. It wouldn't be surprising to see this type of actionz from a person who defended those who massacred the innocent Turks in Cyprus but it will have a penalty for you.

First of all, my banning proved not only the poverty of your Turkish arguments, but also your one-sided attitude, leaving the field open for your compatriots to curse me, to post issues that have nothing to do with the thread, to use racist insults against Greece and Greeks and above all, the mod to alter or delete posts and threads by changing the meaning them, suitable to the turkish rhetoric.

Your level, after all, showed that you answered me after you banned me, without even being able to see what you wrote to me.

You constantly insult me by calling me a parrot, when you yourself behave like a parrot carrying Cavousoglou or Akar-day by day- statements in different sub forums.


I always answer you with an counter-argument, putting what International Law says (law, treaty, regulation, decisions of the UN and international courts) and your answer is the “accusations” of ....copy paste.

I point out, that I have never supported terrorists(individuals, organizations or states), as you falsely attach to me. But to baptize as a terrorist anyone who wants liberty and justice then you are the definition of authoritarian. Organized terrorism finds ground to develop when there is a great and severe lack of liberty, democracy and justice from the state that its members live.

Closing, in the West, born concepts such as Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Opinion, Liberty, Dialogue, Criticism and above all the Equation.

When your country learns these, then it will come even closer to real democracy. Behaving like your state does not do what you say…. a forum with rules.

 

[Akritas]

When we exposed the truth to you with the articles of international treaties and the violations you made, this is how you were left without arguments and did not know what to talk about. Like a parrot, you copy/paste the same things to the comments on every subject -no demilitarised word are avaliable behaving as if you can't comprehend what you read- and you keep saying things similar to your every violation. -Go to court-.
Greece is uncomfortable even with the discussion of its 3 international violations, let alone going to the court. You are a state that declares that you can negotiate with Turkey only if these 3 issues are not on the agenda. Because your violations have nothing to defend and you have no answer to give.

• Status of demilitarized islands,
• 10 miles airspace and
• Maritime jurisdictions

Even if we prove your expansionalist and illegal activities with a lot of examples and with the texts of international treaties, you still try to create a perception by parroting false jargons such as "Turkey already seeks war, thirsty for war, Turks are war-loving, neo-Ottomanism, Turkey has never respected international treaties or laws". What you're doing is not arguing, it's making a space for yourself with lies. You will not be allowed to spread your lies in every thread on this forum. You will either prove what you said with your sources or this field will be closed to you.

When we exposed your contradictory theses, the absurd justifications you have given as reasons to your violations, and your interpretation of international treaties with purely assumptions without showing any single word about your claims in texts, you were surprised what you will talk about with anger. All your hypocrisy has nothing to defend against, and the only thing you can say against the truth is "if there is a violation, you will go to international court". This will be on the pages of this forum as a good example to expose who you are and what you're tryng to do.

Returning to the true meaning of the thread, I add the following:

Your country, Turkey, clearly avoids choosing the path of the UN Security Council, because will bear the burden of proving that it does not pose a threat to Greece in order to legitimizing its preparations for the exercise of its right in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter and therefore the inactivation of the obligation to demilitarize, which will be rather difficult......

• given the existence of the casus belli,
• the Turkish Aegean army,
• the existence of the 125 amphibians boats,
• the so called "gray zones"

After all, you went to the UN Security Council on the same issue in 1976, and you broke your face.
If you have 229 examples of the supposing Greek violations of the Treaty of the Lausanne, the Greek side has thousands. Let's start with the Greek minority of the Imvros and Tenedos islands....

Turkey's ultimate goal is to legitimize the measures taken to strengthen the defense of the Greek islands against the existing threat, to neutralize the Aegean and at the same time to impose the perception of islands where there is exercise of limited sovereignty.

Turkey considers that it will facilitate its pursuit in a future negotiation for its position and for a limited influence of the islands in maritime zones that will not extend beyond their territorial waters, which would offer it the opportunity to achieve its permanent pursuit of division of the continental shelf in the middle of the Aegean between the two mainland coasts of Greece and Turkey without taking into account the sea zones of the Greek islands.

The above are at the simple diplomatic level, because in reality, Turkey seeks to…..expand in old Ottomans borders, according to its neo-ottoman doctrine, which doctrine is proven…

• institutionally (Mavi Vatan & Misak-ı Milli),
• verbally (eg Cavousglou's statements, threats of war, etc) and
• in the field (invasions, air and sea violations, casus belli)

Βecause one photo is equal with 1000 words, your minister, at the TAF operational center, with a prominent place-without hiding-information maps of targeted facilities in Greek Aegean islands.

In order for Turkey to be a credible, stable partner of the Civilized World and for its citizens, to enjoy the goods of freedom and social development, it must be an honestly peaceful country which is impossible when it has the spirit of a akinci(predator) in its DNA…
Besides, what to expect more from a state(Turkey), which is in 149th place, among 163 countries, in the Global Peace Index?

 

[Akritas]

To tell me that for 20 years there has been a meaningful dialogue between Greece and Turkey is at least funny. This dialogue takes place without the intention of a solution but in order for one side or the other to put what it wants and demands without any intention for equal use, protection and control of the waters of the Aegean Sea. My proposal essentially erases the geopolitical and economic exploitation of the Aegean Sea from both sides with the aim of focusing Greece and Turkey on the protection of biodiversity and isometric demilitarization. I am tired of dealing with you, in your opinion Greece does everything right and everyone else does it wrong and even with deceit. It is not always possible to present Greece as a victim or to reproduce the governmental foreign policy of the New Democracy. You have reached the point of believing 100% what the Greek State says. I can not communicate with mythologists who parrot.

Your proposal is a utopia, which is why I asked you the question, which of course you did not answer. In international relations you are either a realist, or a liberal, or a utopist. So when someone escalates their demands(e.g. Turkey), then you either react with the appeasement policy, or you react dynamically with increasing your reaction power. Therefore, any utopian proposition is crushed by the aggression, which greedily devours it.
Otherwise, I agree that any communication with you is a waste of time. After all, just because you changed the title of the thread, it proves it.

 

[Akritas]

This is an interesting point in the history of the Ottomans as well. If somebody in 18th century were to guess which ethnicities would revolt against the empire, Greeks and Armenians would be toward the end of the list. Both of these ethnicities coexisted with Turks peacefully for many centuries and were considered very loyal. And yet, both of them revolted extremely violently with uncommon levels of hostility

Let me inform you, then, that the Greeks, from 1453 to 1820, made 123 revolutions against the Ottomans, in order to gain their national freedom. Obviously, these are not taught in your school history books.

1453-1821: 124 επαναστάσεις ενάντια στους Οθωμανούς | Κάρολος Μπρούσαλης

<p>Στα αμέτρητα χρόνια της σκλαβιάς, είχαν προηγηθεί 123 ξεσηκωμοί κατά των Τούρκων. Οι περισσότεροι, αυθόρμητοι κι απαράσκευοι. Όχι λίγοι, με προτροπή ξένων δυνάμεων, που εγκατέλειπαν στην πορεία τους ξεσηκωμένους. Πνίγηκαν όλες στο αίμα.</p>

www.protagon.gr

 

[Akritas]

Osprey publishing books literally talked about how most Muslim armies including the Ottoman army their majority were free men amd not slaves.

Osprey, The Janissaries, page 3

Osprey, The Janissaries, page7

 

[Captain_Azeri_76]

man this dude is posessed you wasting energy my guys;
he reminds me of the "iranians" and "us-americans" at PDF who deliberately flooded the google translator with swollen language and "elevated rhetoric" just to give their bogus arguments more weight - even though the substance is only thin, words without content.... you're wasting energy... really... such people are also known from real life and there you would avoid such choleric people because the only goal is to sell their own selective perception as the only truth and to force it on others..

by this:

hello guys, hope you doing well, long time no see

 

[Ryder]

Osprey, The Janissaries, page 3

View attachment 39925


View attachment 39926

Osprey, The Janissaries, page7

View attachment 39927

You did not get my point.

Majority of Muslim armies including the Ottoman Empire were formed by Free men not slaves.

Slave soldiers were the elite and were kept in small numbers. Even the Ottoman Empire at its peak under Suleyman the Magnificent the Jannsaries reached their peak at 20k some say its 10k or 15k.

Jannisaries corps overtime became overbloated because they recruited everybody. When the Jannisaries disbanded most of them came from Muslim families rather than Christian. Jannisaries themselves became more of a political force with an army. They rebelled they also ruled many Ottoman provinces as their own personal kingdoms. They even assasinated anybody who went against them.

A lot of the smart ones from Devshirme were used as governors, scientists, engineers, teachers or architects because they were too valuable to lose on the battlefield does not make the Jannisaries are dumb brutes at the time they were one of the most feared soldiers.

Not surprising the Jannisaries were the elite. The special forces of the time while at the same time this made a lot of other Ottoman units get overlooked like the Sipahis, Regulars, Akincis and musketmans.

Musketmans and the Ottoman artillery just dont get enough credit they were instrumental in their conquests from Europe to the Middle East.

Ottoman Sipahis too they are underrated as a Cavalry force. What sets the Sipahis apart from the Jannisaries they had a happy ending majority of them retired peacefully and they stayed loyal to the state to the end.

 

[Foulgrim]

Your proposal is a utopia, which is why I asked you the question, which of course you did not answer. In international relations you are either a realist, or a liberal, or a utopist. So when someone escalates their demands(e.g. Turkey), then you either react with the appeasement policy, or you react dynamically with increasing your reaction power. Therefore, any utopian proposition is crushed by the aggression, which greedily devours it.
Otherwise, I agree that any communication with you is a waste of time. After all, just because you changed the title of the thread, it proves it.

You always say that the Turks are escalating and Greece is the victim. But this is not happening because both countries have aggressive policies and rhetoric. The amphibious vessels of the Aegean Army exist, as does the illegal militarization of dozens of islands in the Eastern Aegean. The Turkish slave traders are taking advantage of the immigration crisis. The same happens with the Greek Coast Guard with its illegal pushbacks and the miserable-inhuman structures of immigrants and refugees in Greece. Analyzing a geopolitical problem as a neutral observer is not called utopia, i am not a fanatic and i do not adopt the foreign policy of the Greek Governments as you do. Unfortunately, your mentality is 100 years back.