TR Politics

[Lool]

I'm leaving the bomb here. AKP is considering a new peace process. AKP cadres are trying to convince the MHP administration. This extremely confidential info came to me via a district head of the AKP that has higher connections inside the AKP. If MHP agrees (there is 0 chance) this will very likely trigger a big voter exodus from the AKP and MHP. According to him, AKP will try to sugarcoat this as a civilian movement if AKP and MHP agree to start the new peace process.

Peace process with the HDP?

 

[TheInsider]

Peace process with the HDP?

Details remain to be seen. AKP is desperate to win elections. The odds are not looking good.

 

[Anastasius]

Details remain to be seen. AKP is desperate to win elections. The odds are not looking good.

After all that I've observed about AKP and Turkish politics, this seems like political suicide. AKP supporters or at least anti-CHP proponents on here keep pointing out that AKP is the only one that will combat PKK, they are just going to throw this away?

 

[TheInsider]

After all that I've observed about AKP and Turkish politics, this seems like political suicide. AKP supporters or at least anti-CHP proponents on here keep pointing out that AKP is the only one that will combat PKK, they are just going to throw this away?

Well, AKP hopes to monopolize a voter base of 20 million without bleeding too much from their voter base similar to elections AKP won before. AKP won multiple elections with a vote percentage of between %40-49.5. AKP got the highest amount of votes while there was a peace process. IMHO this time it will be different. I expect a big backlash. I expect a mass voter exodus from MHP and AKP base if a new peace process happens. İYİ, Zafer, DEVA, Yeniden Refah, Saadet and Gelecek Party will try to get those votes.

 

[Xenon54]

I'm leaving the bomb here. AKP is considering a new peace process. AKP cadres are trying to convince the MHP administration. This extremely confidential info came to me via a district head of the AKP that has higher connections inside the AKP. If MHP agrees (there is 0 chance) this will very likely trigger a big voter exodus from the AKP and MHP. According to him, AKP will try to sugarcoat this as a civilian movement if AKP and MHP agree to start the new peace process.

But but but chpppkkkpjk9

 

[guest12]

But but but chpppkkkpjk9

Both of them are a thing.

 

[Cypro]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1537887849080451076

"Westerners, meanwhile, tend to believe that Turkey bears much of the blame for the PKK’s emergence by refusing to grant the country’s Kurds the rights they demand. They have also concluded that Mr. Erdoğan cannot be trusted to decide who is or is not a terrorist. By applying the label to thousands of people, including bureaucrats, academics, peaceful protesters, and Kurdish politicians, and often throwing them into the same prisons as armed militants, Mr. Erdoğan has cheapened the term as badly as he has Turkey’s currency."

Is Turkey more trouble to NATO than it is worth? – The Economist​

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government has proven to be the loose cannon in the NATO alliance, most recently by blocking the membership applications of Sweden and Finland, threatening to attack Kurds in Syria and stoking tensions with neighbouring Greece, the Economist said.

Erdoğan’s bromance with Russian President Vladimir Putin is causing mounting frustration in Western capitals -- many thought the war in Ukraine would force him to reconsider. That has not happened after opportunism prevailed instead and Turkey remained on good terms with Russia, the Economist said for its weekly edition.

Erdoğan’s objections to the NATO bids of Sweden and Finland have further damaged Turkey’s standing in the alliance and Erdoğan occasionally sounds hostile to enlargement, the Economist said. Now the country risks being sidelined as NATO countries plan bilateral security guarantees with the two countries as an alternative to membership, it said.


The received wisdom is that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has breathed new life, and a new sense of purpose, urgency, and unity into NATO. Someone forgot to tell Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Over the past month, the Turkish president has blocked NATO enlargement, warned of a new offensive against American-backed Kurdish fighters in Syria and stoked tensions with Greece, also a member of the alliance. A few pundits, in the West but also in Turkey, are once again debating whether NATO and Turkey should part ways. This time, they are not alone. “Leaving NATO should be put on the agenda as an alternative,” Devlet Bahceli, leader of a nationalist party in Mr. Erdoğan’s coalition, recently said. “We did not exist because of NATO and we will not perish without NATO.”

Frustration is also mounting in Western capitals, and in Kyiv, over Turkey’s willingness to accommodate Russia. Many in those places had hoped that the war in Ukraine would force Mr. Erdoğan to reconsider his romance with Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president. Opportunism has prevailed instead. Turkey has sold armed drones to Ukraine and closed access to the Black Sea for Russian warships, but it opposes Western sanctions against Russia and openly courts Russian capital. According to a report in the Turkish media, dozens of Russian companies, including Gazprom, are planning to move their European headquarters to Turkey.

Aside from a few words of condemnation at the start of the war in Ukraine, Turkey has remained on good terms with Russia throughout. When Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, visited Ankara this month his Turkish counterpart kindly suggested that the West should ease sanctions against Russia if Russia relaxed its blockade of Ukrainian ports. When Mr. Lavrov repeated his claim that Russia had invaded Ukraine to liberate it from neo-Nazis, his host said nothing.

Mr. Erdoğan’s move to block Sweden’s and Finland’s accession to NATO has further damaged Turkey’s standing in the alliance. The strongman has signalled that he wants the Nordic countries to extradite several members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), an outlawed armed group, and to drop a partial arms embargo against his country. He may also be shopping for concessions from America in exchange for withdrawing his veto, or from Russia for doing the opposite. Mr. Erdoğan occasionally sounds hostile to NATO enlargement as a matter of principle. In a recent guest column for The Economist, he went as far as to blame Finland and Sweden for adding an “unnecessary item” to NATO’s agenda by asking to join the alliance.

Mr. Erdoğan may have reasoned that a couple of foreign crises were needed to distract Turkish voters from their fast-diminishing circumstances, as galloping inflation, officially measured at over 70 percent, devours their savings and wages. In late May, he warned of a new military offensive against Kurdish forces in Syria. Forced to shelve such plans, presumably because of opposition from Russia or America or both, he has since lashed out against Greece, demanding that it demilitarise Greek islands hugging Turkey’s western coast. He has also suggested that American bases in Greece pose a threat to Turkey (which hosts American forces itself). This might be bluster, and blow over. But obstructing Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO membership while war rages in Europe is bound to have consequences, even if Mr. Erdoğan backs down. Sweden had been one of the few countries keeping alive Turkey’s hopes of membership in the European Union. That support has now gone.

That may seem a price worth paying to Mr. Erdoğan if the row fires up his nationalist base. Mainstream Turkish politicians, as well as many humbler Turks, see the PKK purely as a security threat, and have long criticised the West for not taking their concerns about the group seriously. They have bristled especially at America’s decision to team up with the group’s Syrian wing to bring down Islamic State’s caliphate. Westerners, meanwhile, tend to believe that Turkey bears much of the blame for the PKK’s emergence by refusing to grant the country’s Kurds the rights they demand. They have also concluded that Mr. Erdoğan cannot be trusted to decide who is or is not a terrorist. By applying the label to thousands of people, including bureaucrats, academics, peaceful protesters, and Kurdish politicians, and often throwing them into the same prisons as armed militants, Mr. Erdoğan has cheapened the term as badly as he has Turkey’s currency.

Turkey and the West will never see eye to eye on the issue, and Mr. Erdoğan’s antics, as well as his habit of suggesting that the West, and not Russia, is the biggest threat to his country, will only make matters worse. Already, 65 percent of Turks say they do not trust NATO, according to a recent survey, although 60 percent support membership of the alliance.

None of this spells doom for the relationship between Turkey and NATO. Western countries will try to work around Turkey’s veto by providing Finland and Sweden with security guarantees. This may leave Turkey sidelined within the alliance. But its departure or eviction from NATO is still fantasy. Turkey is on the front line of the war in Syria and close to other conflicts in the Middle East; it controls access to the Black Sea, which has been central to all of Russia’s recent wars; and it serves as a corridor for trade between Central Asia and Europe, especially in energy, notes Ben Hodges, a former commander of American forces in Europe. “I don’t even want to think of NATO without Turkey,” he says.

Especially in the wake of Russia’s war in Ukraine, Turkey also has no interest in surrendering the power of deterrence that NATO membership offers. “I don’t believe it will ever happen,” says Tacan Ildem, Turkey’s former permanent representative to NATO. There is no credible alternative, he says. Turkey will probably remain a headache for the alliance, even when Mr. Erdoğan is out of the picture. But it is a headache NATO will have to live with.

 

[Anastasius]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1537887849080451076

"Westerners, meanwhile, tend to believe that Turkey bears much of the blame for the PKK’s emergence by refusing to grant the country’s Kurds the rights they demand. They have also concluded that Mr. Erdoğan cannot be trusted to decide who is or is not a terrorist. By applying the label to thousands of people, including bureaucrats, academics, peaceful protesters, and Kurdish politicians, and often throwing them into the same prisons as armed militants, Mr. Erdoğan has cheapened the term as badly as he has Turkey’s currency."

Is Turkey more trouble to NATO than it is worth? – The Economist​

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government has proven to be the loose cannon in the NATO alliance, most recently by blocking the membership applications of Sweden and Finland, threatening to attack Kurds in Syria and stoking tensions with neighbouring Greece, the Economist said.

Erdoğan’s bromance with Russian President Vladimir Putin is causing mounting frustration in Western capitals -- many thought the war in Ukraine would force him to reconsider. That has not happened after opportunism prevailed instead and Turkey remained on good terms with Russia, the Economist said for its weekly edition.

Erdoğan’s objections to the NATO bids of Sweden and Finland have further damaged Turkey’s standing in the alliance and Erdoğan occasionally sounds hostile to enlargement, the Economist said. Now the country risks being sidelined as NATO countries plan bilateral security guarantees with the two countries as an alternative to membership, it said.


The received wisdom is that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has breathed new life, and a new sense of purpose, urgency, and unity into NATO. Someone forgot to tell Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Over the past month, the Turkish president has blocked NATO enlargement, warned of a new offensive against American-backed Kurdish fighters in Syria and stoked tensions with Greece, also a member of the alliance. A few pundits, in the West but also in Turkey, are once again debating whether NATO and Turkey should part ways. This time, they are not alone. “Leaving NATO should be put on the agenda as an alternative,” Devlet Bahceli, leader of a nationalist party in Mr. Erdoğan’s coalition, recently said. “We did not exist because of NATO and we will not perish without NATO.”

Frustration is also mounting in Western capitals, and in Kyiv, over Turkey’s willingness to accommodate Russia. Many in those places had hoped that the war in Ukraine would force Mr. Erdoğan to reconsider his romance with Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president. Opportunism has prevailed instead. Turkey has sold armed drones to Ukraine and closed access to the Black Sea for Russian warships, but it opposes Western sanctions against Russia and openly courts Russian capital. According to a report in the Turkish media, dozens of Russian companies, including Gazprom, are planning to move their European headquarters to Turkey.

Aside from a few words of condemnation at the start of the war in Ukraine, Turkey has remained on good terms with Russia throughout. When Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, visited Ankara this month his Turkish counterpart kindly suggested that the West should ease sanctions against Russia if Russia relaxed its blockade of Ukrainian ports. When Mr. Lavrov repeated his claim that Russia had invaded Ukraine to liberate it from neo-Nazis, his host said nothing.

Mr. Erdoğan’s move to block Sweden’s and Finland’s accession to NATO has further damaged Turkey’s standing in the alliance. The strongman has signalled that he wants the Nordic countries to extradite several members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), an outlawed armed group, and to drop a partial arms embargo against his country. He may also be shopping for concessions from America in exchange for withdrawing his veto, or from Russia for doing the opposite. Mr. Erdoğan occasionally sounds hostile to NATO enlargement as a matter of principle. In a recent guest column for The Economist, he went as far as to blame Finland and Sweden for adding an “unnecessary item” to NATO’s agenda by asking to join the alliance.

Mr. Erdoğan may have reasoned that a couple of foreign crises were needed to distract Turkish voters from their fast-diminishing circumstances, as galloping inflation, officially measured at over 70 percent, devours their savings and wages. In late May, he warned of a new military offensive against Kurdish forces in Syria. Forced to shelve such plans, presumably because of opposition from Russia or America or both, he has since lashed out against Greece, demanding that it demilitarise Greek islands hugging Turkey’s western coast. He has also suggested that American bases in Greece pose a threat to Turkey (which hosts American forces itself). This might be bluster, and blow over. But obstructing Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO membership while war rages in Europe is bound to have consequences, even if Mr. Erdoğan backs down. Sweden had been one of the few countries keeping alive Turkey’s hopes of membership in the European Union. That support has now gone.

That may seem a price worth paying to Mr. Erdoğan if the row fires up his nationalist base. Mainstream Turkish politicians, as well as many humbler Turks, see the PKK purely as a security threat, and have long criticised the West for not taking their concerns about the group seriously. They have bristled especially at America’s decision to team up with the group’s Syrian wing to bring down Islamic State’s caliphate. Westerners, meanwhile, tend to believe that Turkey bears much of the blame for the PKK’s emergence by refusing to grant the country’s Kurds the rights they demand. They have also concluded that Mr. Erdoğan cannot be trusted to decide who is or is not a terrorist. By applying the label to thousands of people, including bureaucrats, academics, peaceful protesters, and Kurdish politicians, and often throwing them into the same prisons as armed militants, Mr. Erdoğan has cheapened the term as badly as he has Turkey’s currency.

Turkey and the West will never see eye to eye on the issue, and Mr. Erdoğan’s antics, as well as his habit of suggesting that the West, and not Russia, is the biggest threat to his country, will only make matters worse. Already, 65 percent of Turks say they do not trust NATO, according to a recent survey, although 60 percent support membership of the alliance.

None of this spells doom for the relationship between Turkey and NATO. Western countries will try to work around Turkey’s veto by providing Finland and Sweden with security guarantees. This may leave Turkey sidelined within the alliance. But its departure or eviction from NATO is still fantasy. Turkey is on the front line of the war in Syria and close to other conflicts in the Middle East; it controls access to the Black Sea, which has been central to all of Russia’s recent wars; and it serves as a corridor for trade between Central Asia and Europe, especially in energy, notes Ben Hodges, a former commander of American forces in Europe. “I don’t even want to think of NATO without Turkey,” he says.

Especially in the wake of Russia’s war in Ukraine, Turkey also has no interest in surrendering the power of deterrence that NATO membership offers. “I don’t believe it will ever happen,” says Tacan Ildem, Turkey’s former permanent representative to NATO. There is no credible alternative, he says. Turkey will probably remain a headache for the alliance, even when Mr. Erdoğan is out of the picture. But it is a headache NATO will have to live with.

"openly courts"

And obviously no mention that Turkey "courts" Russia as in, does diplomacy with them, on behalf of the EU.

 

[Ryder]

Chp proving once again what a trash party they are.

 

[Manomed]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1537887849080451076

"Westerners, meanwhile, tend to believe that Turkey bears much of the blame for the PKK’s emergence by refusing to grant the country’s Kurds the rights they demand. They have also concluded that Mr. Erdoğan cannot be trusted to decide who is or is not a terrorist. By applying the label to thousands of people, including bureaucrats, academics, peaceful protesters, and Kurdish politicians, and often throwing them into the same prisons as armed militants, Mr. Erdoğan has cheapened the term as badly as he has Turkey’s currency."

Is Turkey more trouble to NATO than it is worth? – The Economist​

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government has proven to be the loose cannon in the NATO alliance, most recently by blocking the membership applications of Sweden and Finland, threatening to attack Kurds in Syria and stoking tensions with neighbouring Greece, the Economist said.

Erdoğan’s bromance with Russian President Vladimir Putin is causing mounting frustration in Western capitals -- many thought the war in Ukraine would force him to reconsider. That has not happened after opportunism prevailed instead and Turkey remained on good terms with Russia, the Economist said for its weekly edition.

Erdoğan’s objections to the NATO bids of Sweden and Finland have further damaged Turkey’s standing in the alliance and Erdoğan occasionally sounds hostile to enlargement, the Economist said. Now the country risks being sidelined as NATO countries plan bilateral security guarantees with the two countries as an alternative to membership, it said.


The received wisdom is that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has breathed new life, and a new sense of purpose, urgency, and unity into NATO. Someone forgot to tell Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Over the past month, the Turkish president has blocked NATO enlargement, warned of a new offensive against American-backed Kurdish fighters in Syria and stoked tensions with Greece, also a member of the alliance. A few pundits, in the West but also in Turkey, are once again debating whether NATO and Turkey should part ways. This time, they are not alone. “Leaving NATO should be put on the agenda as an alternative,” Devlet Bahceli, leader of a nationalist party in Mr. Erdoğan’s coalition, recently said. “We did not exist because of NATO and we will not perish without NATO.”

Frustration is also mounting in Western capitals, and in Kyiv, over Turkey’s willingness to accommodate Russia. Many in those places had hoped that the war in Ukraine would force Mr. Erdoğan to reconsider his romance with Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president. Opportunism has prevailed instead. Turkey has sold armed drones to Ukraine and closed access to the Black Sea for Russian warships, but it opposes Western sanctions against Russia and openly courts Russian capital. According to a report in the Turkish media, dozens of Russian companies, including Gazprom, are planning to move their European headquarters to Turkey.

Aside from a few words of condemnation at the start of the war in Ukraine, Turkey has remained on good terms with Russia throughout. When Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, visited Ankara this month his Turkish counterpart kindly suggested that the West should ease sanctions against Russia if Russia relaxed its blockade of Ukrainian ports. When Mr. Lavrov repeated his claim that Russia had invaded Ukraine to liberate it from neo-Nazis, his host said nothing.

Mr. Erdoğan’s move to block Sweden’s and Finland’s accession to NATO has further damaged Turkey’s standing in the alliance. The strongman has signalled that he wants the Nordic countries to extradite several members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), an outlawed armed group, and to drop a partial arms embargo against his country. He may also be shopping for concessions from America in exchange for withdrawing his veto, or from Russia for doing the opposite. Mr. Erdoğan occasionally sounds hostile to NATO enlargement as a matter of principle. In a recent guest column for The Economist, he went as far as to blame Finland and Sweden for adding an “unnecessary item” to NATO’s agenda by asking to join the alliance.

Mr. Erdoğan may have reasoned that a couple of foreign crises were needed to distract Turkish voters from their fast-diminishing circumstances, as galloping inflation, officially measured at over 70 percent, devours their savings and wages. In late May, he warned of a new military offensive against Kurdish forces in Syria. Forced to shelve such plans, presumably because of opposition from Russia or America or both, he has since lashed out against Greece, demanding that it demilitarise Greek islands hugging Turkey’s western coast. He has also suggested that American bases in Greece pose a threat to Turkey (which hosts American forces itself). This might be bluster, and blow over. But obstructing Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO membership while war rages in Europe is bound to have consequences, even if Mr. Erdoğan backs down. Sweden had been one of the few countries keeping alive Turkey’s hopes of membership in the European Union. That support has now gone.

That may seem a price worth paying to Mr. Erdoğan if the row fires up his nationalist base. Mainstream Turkish politicians, as well as many humbler Turks, see the PKK purely as a security threat, and have long criticised the West for not taking their concerns about the group seriously. They have bristled especially at America’s decision to team up with the group’s Syrian wing to bring down Islamic State’s caliphate. Westerners, meanwhile, tend to believe that Turkey bears much of the blame for the PKK’s emergence by refusing to grant the country’s Kurds the rights they demand. They have also concluded that Mr. Erdoğan cannot be trusted to decide who is or is not a terrorist. By applying the label to thousands of people, including bureaucrats, academics, peaceful protesters, and Kurdish politicians, and often throwing them into the same prisons as armed militants, Mr. Erdoğan has cheapened the term as badly as he has Turkey’s currency.

Turkey and the West will never see eye to eye on the issue, and Mr. Erdoğan’s antics, as well as his habit of suggesting that the West, and not Russia, is the biggest threat to his country, will only make matters worse. Already, 65 percent of Turks say they do not trust NATO, according to a recent survey, although 60 percent support membership of the alliance.

None of this spells doom for the relationship between Turkey and NATO. Western countries will try to work around Turkey’s veto by providing Finland and Sweden with security guarantees. This may leave Turkey sidelined within the alliance. But its departure or eviction from NATO is still fantasy. Turkey is on the front line of the war in Syria and close to other conflicts in the Middle East; it controls access to the Black Sea, which has been central to all of Russia’s recent wars; and it serves as a corridor for trade between Central Asia and Europe, especially in energy, notes Ben Hodges, a former commander of American forces in Europe. “I don’t even want to think of NATO without Turkey,” he says.

Especially in the wake of Russia’s war in Ukraine, Turkey also has no interest in surrendering the power of deterrence that NATO membership offers. “I don’t believe it will ever happen,” says Tacan Ildem, Turkey’s former permanent representative to NATO. There is no credible alternative, he says. Turkey will probably remain a headache for the alliance, even when Mr. Erdoğan is out of the picture. But it is a headache NATO will have to live with".

"Turkey Bad!!!!"

They can kick us out of nato If they can find someone replace us lmao these westards and their double standarts always makes me laugh.

 

[Ravenman]

View attachment 45116

Chp proving once again what a trash party they are.

Chp is dangerous for our defense industry. They have no politicall will for domestic weaponry, like they say who's gonna attack us? Better spend that money to build donkey statues like Imamoglu does.

 

[Ryder]

View attachment 45118
"Turkey Bad!!!!"

They can kick us out of nato If they can find someone replace us lmao these westards and their double standarts always makes me laugh.

If we become non aligned thats good for us really.

 

[GoatsMilk]

If we become non aligned thats good for us really.

The reality doesn't matter, only what the media decides to talk about.

We could be a nation of angels, if the media tells the world we are devils then that's how the world will perceive us. These people writing these articles are following a specific geopolitical agenda.

 

[Lool]

Chp is dangerous for our defense industry. They have no politicall will for domestic weaponry, like they say who's gonna attack us? Better spend that money to build donkey statues like Imamoglu does.

No wonder the Greeks like them
While the CHP is ranting about shitty peace, Greek media and govt are already preparing for war. In fact, during the previous week, some prominent greek channels stated that the only way out of this deadlock is through a war in which the victor gets all

They are building anti-tank trenches throughout the Turkish-Greek border, supporting PKK, and forcing the US to build bases on the contested islands

The moment they succeed in doing so, the moment they will declare full control and monopolisation over the EEZ whether the Turks like it or not

 

[Manomed]

No wonder the Greeks like them
While the CHP is ranting about shitty peace, Greek media and govt are already preparing for war. In fact, during the previous week, some prominent greek channels stated that the only way out of this deadlock is through a war in which the victor gets all

They are building anti-tank trenches throughout the Turkish-Greek border, supporting PKK, and forcing the US to build bases on the contested islands

The moment they succeed in doing so, the moment they will declare full control and monopolisation over the EEZ whether the Turks like it or not

Why don't albanians rise against the greeks whom massacred you and destroyed your Identity in greece for centuries?

most of the greeks who claim they are greeks are arnavites who are slavic.

 

[Lool]

Why don't albanians rise against the greeks whom massacred you and destroyed your Identity in greece for centuries?

Sadly because we are weak and because the Christians are the ones who control the world order rn but dont worry, with the way things are going, Turkey will soon be one of us as well

I was always fascinated by Turkey, they have ppl who think, develop, and produce
Never ever have I thought that a Middle Eastern nation can actually manufacture engines, missiles, drones, ships etc.... No wonder both the Russians and the West sees Turkey as an eyesore since the big boys dont want new actors into the arena and they will do everything they can to crush you either morally, ethically, economically, culturally, religiously, or militarily

I know many hate Erdo, but that doesnt justify placing an even bigger idiot in his place! Zafer seems good but they wont succeed in 2023 with the current trend

 

[Manomed]

Sadly because we are weak and because the Christians are the ones who control the world order rn but dont worry, with the way things are going, Turkey will soon be one of us as well

I was always fascinated by Turkey, they have ppl who think, develop, and produce
Never ever have I thought that a Middle Eastern nation can actually manufacture engines, missiles, drones, ships etc.... No wonder both the Russians and the West sees Turkey as an eyesore since the big boys dont want new actors into the arena and they will do everything they can to crush you either morally, ethically, economically, culturally, religiously, or militarily

I know many hate Erdo, but that doesnt justify placing an even bigger idiot in his place! Zafer seems good but they wont succeed in 2023 with the current trend

Nah It wasn't a Insult Im just curious literally Albanians are the reason why greeks are even Independent I have many albanian friends who hates greeks because of what they did to the albanian population etc.

They don't even accept albanian culture or your language in greece.

 

[Lool]

Nah It wasn't a Insult Im just curious literally Albanians are the reason why greeks are even Independent I have many albanian friends who hates greeks because of what they did to the albanian population etc.

They don't even accept albanian culture or your language in greece.

Iam not sad nor did I ever think of it as an insult so dont worry
I would never get angry for saying the truth and that is we are weak.... Period!

Greece hates us to the core and I know many Greeks who feel that they are superior because they are "Christians" and "European" etc..... the current Europe feels that they are of a superior race or lineage even though they were in poverty nearly 300-400 years ago and were kissing Muslim asses. But as my father always said, God is fair to all; if the Christians worked for something while we laxed off, then God will favour those who worked hard and will punish those who laxed off.


I am pissed at our current situation but I alone cant do shit and since we Albanians have decided to remain weak; so we shall
But Turks are different
Regardless of the current political fiasco, Turkey is still trying to develop new things and are succeeding. I honestly dont want to see Turkey falling and for the region to be toyed by those Greedy western pricks.... I hate how they are having fun killing and creating chaos in Turkey, Syria, Libya etc.....
Turkey is a rising power in the region and its moto is "Benificial Synergetic relationship" and this is why many Asian and African countries are looking up to Turkey

 

[I_Love_F16]

because the Christians are the ones who control the world order rn

Please don’t say Christians are against Muslims or they have some agenda, this is simply not true. Christians are also the victims of the states. Here in France they are closing some churches and turn them into night clubs. True Christians are extremely generous people and will be the first to help those in need. Nothing to do with those greedy politicians who wants to destabilize Africa and the M-E.

 

[Lool]

Please don’t say Christians are against Muslims or they have some agenda, this is simply not true. Christians are also the victims of the states. Here in France they are closing some churches and turn them into night clubs. True Christians are extremely generous people and will be the first to help those in need. Nothing to do with those greedy politicians who wants to destabilize Africa and the M-E.

I never said that Christians are against muslims per say. Its not like every Christian out there wants blood or something but...

I just said that the Christians are the ones who rule the current world order and this is an undeniable fact