TR Politics

[Rooxbar]

This what happens when you learn your history by watching tv series

 

[CAN_TR]

Abdulhamid II the loser that destroyed the Navy Abdulaziz build up because of fear of coup and who filled the Ottoman Army with tarikat members we saw the results in the 1st Balkan War (losing all Islands without firing one bullet), the loser who gave Cyprus to the British, the loser that bankrupted the state for the Crimean War, the loser who lost 1.5 million km² soil during his reign.

He is glorified as bright mind, good ruler and defender of islam etc. but in reality he was a rum drinking theater/opera enthusiast who rather worked in his workshop with wood than caring for an Empire. Itthiad ve Terakki put that loser down for a reason and a TRT1 show that glorfies that loser will not change historical facts.

 

[B_A]

How did it prove that,elaborate?

The Ottoman Empire was lost long before Abdulhamid ll so,he was irrelevant.

The timing was too bad,It led to 1st Balkan War

Ottoman lost many wars

But only 93 war and 1st Balkan War were really painful,

North Africa or Egypt or Crimean were not so important for us

 

[B_A]

Abdulhamid II the loser that destroyed the Navy Abdulaziz build up because of fear of coup and who filled the Ottoman Army with tarikat members we saw the results in the 1st Balkan War (losing all Islands without firing one bullet), the loser who gave Cyprus to the British, the loser that bankrupted the state for the Crimean War, the loser who lost 1.5 million km² soil during his reign.

He is glorified as bright mind, good ruler and defender of islam etc. but in reality he was a rum drinking theater/opera enthusiast who rather worked in his workshop with wood than caring for an Empire. Itthiad ve Terakki put that loser down for a reason and a TRT1 show that glorfies that loser will not change historical facts.

He should be overthrowing much earlier or later,1908-12 was a very bad timing.He made the army weaker but he had a very good relationship with Germany so the balkan and ltalian didnt dare to invade ottoman during his time.After his downfall,the German Kaisar was angry and not to support ottomans,and the army weaked by Abdulhamid II and Young Turks had enough time to reform the army,so we lost.

Btw the Crimean War was 20 years earlier than Abdulhamid II didnt it?

 

[CAN_TR]

Btw the Crimean War was 20 years earlier than Abdulhamid II didnt it?

My mistake meant the 93. Harbi

 

[Yasar_TR]

My mistake meant the 93. Harbi

@CAN_TR , Crimean war was in 1853 to 1856.
But as part of the settlement for the British involvement in Crimea, Cyprus’s sovereignty was ceded to Britain by Abdülhamit the 2nd in 1878. And the Island came under British control then onwards.

 

[B_A]

Rumelia was our core and richest homeland for 500 years but we can never claim that again since 1912

Abdülhamit II lost half of that and 1912 we lost another half.

 

[No Name]

People here accuse me of getting all my facts from the TV shows (which is inaccurate), yet they don't even know the wars happening during that time frame or who was leading the country.

Firstly, the navy was too big and expensive for the empire to maintain since it was the 3rd largest navy in the world, and part of the reason the empire was having financial trouble was because of the navy being so big.

Secondly, the Crimean War was not about Crimea. The Russians invaded Ottoman territory that makes up parts of modern-day Turkey to annex it. It is known as the Crimean War because the English and French invaded Russia in Crimea.

Thirdly, the British got Cyprus because the Russians were litually right outside of Istanbul since parliament lost the war of 1878-1978. The Ottoman parliament lost the war, and Abdulhamid II made an agreement with the British to save what was left of the empire and reverse the parliament's loss on the battlefield. Every time Abdulhamid II supposedly lost territory, he wasn't even in control of the country. It was the parliament that was in control of the empire; the first parliament lost half the Balkans the second lost the rest.

Finally, as for him not trusting the military and trying to stop future coups from happening, he was somewhat right to be concerned. The last time there was a coup, it led to over a million Muslims were killed and, an incompetent parliament was established. For those who don't understand the demographic situation of the empire, the population in 1850 was around 30 million, and only about 8 to 9 million were Turks. This is why the young Ottoman and Young Turks movements were just as dangerous as war with a foreign power.

I should also add that he did try to modernise the military while he was trying to restrict them so they wouldn't coup the government. Let's face it: nearly every time the military gets involved in politics and performs a coup d'etat, things end very badly for the Turkish people, whether it was the countless coups of the janissaries, the Young Ottoman coup that led to the war of 1877, the Young Turks coup that led to the Balkan war, the CUP coup that led to ww1 and finally the 80s coup that led to the creation of the PKK.

 

[Rooxbar]

People here accuse me of getting all my facts from the TV shows (which is inaccurate), yet they don't even know the wars happening during that time frame or who was leading the country.

Firstly, the navy was too big and expensive for the empire to maintain since it was the 3rd largest navy in the world, and part of the reason the empire was having financial trouble was because of the navy being so big.

Secondly, the Crimean War was not about Crimea. The Russians invaded Ottoman territory that makes up parts of modern-day Turkey to annex it. It is known as the Crimean War because the English and French invaded Russia in Crimea.

Thirdly, the British got Cyprus because the Russians were litually right outside of Istanbul since parliament lost the war of 1878-1978. The Ottoman parliament lost the war, and Abdulhamid II made an agreement with the British to save what was left of the empire and reverse the parliament's loss on the battlefield. Every time Abdulhamid II supposedly lost territory, he wasn't even in control of the country. It was the parliament that was in control of the empire; the first parliament lost half the Balkans the second lost the rest.

Finally, as for him not trusting the military and trying to stop future coups from happening, he was somewhat right to be concerned. The last time there was a coup, it led to over a million Muslims were killed and, an incompetent parliament was established. For those who don't understand the demographic situation of the empire, the population in 1850 was around 30 million, and only about 8 to 9 million were Turks. This is why the young Ottoman and Young Turks movements were just as dangerous as war with a foreign power.

I should also add that he did try to modernise the military while he was trying to restrict them so they wouldn't coup the government. Let's face it: nearly every time the military gets involved in politics and performs a coup d'etat, things end very badly for the Turkish people, whether it was the countless coups of the janissaries, the Young Ottoman coup that led to the war of 1877, the Young Turks coup that led to the Balkan war, the CUP coup that led to ww1 and finally the 80s coup that led to the creation of the PKK.

Just like how you shouldn't learn history from tv series, you shouldn't learn it from twitter trolls either. You want to talk about something, at least have the decency to learn the ABCs from a book written by a specialist. Any specialist will have biases, but reading books you will at least learn the bicameral first constitutional era parliaments were both still-born, as the first one coincided with the 11 month-long War of 93 for only two months during which it was busy deliberating its own structure and powers, not exerting any influence over matters of administration, which even if it did would be just as subordinates to the Sultan as the members of the more senior body, the senate, were all chosen by the Sultan (and in this sense this was supposed to be just a practice round for bare-minimum democratization); after the debates the parliament adjourned just after two months after the start of the war, the next 8 months of which was waged without any parliament to speak of. Second parliament of the first constitutional period only reconvened for less than a month and before it could pass an electoral law (the prime reason it was established which has nothing to do with administrative or executive power to run the country or wage war) was disbanded by Abdul Hamit II citing that he cannot focus on anything else when he's waging a war, which was a pretext to kill constitutional period to gain absolute power with which he lead the country until 1908, locking the fleet because of reformist navy officers (who always were the most open-minded and forward-thinking part of any army due to their cosmopolitan nature until flight became a thing) and losing Crete because of this.

As "it is as easy to weave a new web of cloth as it is to sew up every hole in a net,” I cannot be bothered to respond to other asinine notions mentioned throughout the past couple of pages, as for me to take seriously people who do not take themselves seriously enough to read up on issues they want to opine about would be a waste of precious time.

 

[Scott Summers]

Accusing Sultan Abdulhamid II with anything and counting every loss on his part, but they dont know which wars he was involved in.

But accusing Abdulhamid-fans of watching to much TV.

 

[Ryder]

Abdulhamid II the loser that destroyed the Navy Abdulaziz build up because of fear of coup and who filled the Ottoman Army with tarikat members we saw the results in the 1st Balkan War (losing all Islands without firing one bullet), the loser who gave Cyprus to the British, the loser that bankrupted the state for the Crimean War, the loser who lost 1.5 million km² soil during his reign.

He is glorified as bright mind, good ruler and defender of islam etc. but in reality he was a rum drinking theater/opera enthusiast who rather worked in his workshop with wood than caring for an Empire. Itthiad ve Terakki put that loser down for a reason and a TRT1 show that glorfies that loser will not change historical facts.

Itihat Terakki even fcked it up even more than Abdulhamid II.

Im not overrating or frothing over Abdulhamid II but I also believe his successors deserve the critisim too Enver, Talaat and Jemal are all failures let be honest with ourselves.

Abdulhamid II may set the empire for failure for good but nothing good came out of Mehmed Reshad, Vahdettin and the 3 Pashas.

I can tell you Talaat was the smartest out of Enver and Jemal. He was more of a statesman.

CUP promised to overturn the fortunes of the empire instead within a decade the empire collapsed.

 

[Ryder]

Alparslan Turkes despite not being a historian has a point here.

We see so many criticism about Abdulhamid II and Sultan Vahdettin but somehow Enver, Talaat and Cemal all get a free pass.

If we do appcreciate looking into our history we have to look at the good and the bad.

 

[Ryder]

The timing was too bad,It led to 1st Balkan War

Ottoman lost many wars

But only 93 war and 1st Balkan War were really painful,

North Africa or Egypt or Crimean were not so important for us

Egypt and Tunisia were all technically apart of the Ottoman Empire but they werent ruled directly but ruled by Dynasties like Mehmet Ali Pasha and i dont know which dynasty ruled Tunisia but all I know is that they were close to the Ottoman Royal Family.

Hence why the Ottomans could not do much to prevent the British and the French taking these two countries.

Algeria was also ruled autonomously with Deys. Ottomans could not do much as their navy got blown to pieces by the British, French and Russians at Navarino.

Ottoman Sultans of the 1800s to the collapse maybe considered the worse because they are constantly compared to Fatih, Yavuz Sultan Selim, Sultan Suleyman, Orhan Gazi, Osman Gazi and Yildirim Bayezid.

This is no different to comparing Turkish leaders of the early Turkish republic to the 1980s to the present.

Ottoman Empire was a 600 year old empire. People love looking at the good but ignoring the bad. People who hate the Ottomans especially lots of Turks who hate them only look at the bad while ignoring the Good.

History is never a black and white affair.

Shows like Ertugurl should always be treated like entertainment not history. Same with a lot of hollywood historical movies.

 

[Ryder]

@CAN_TR , Crimean war was in 1853 to 1856.
But as part of the settlement for the British involvement in Crimea, Cyprus’s sovereignty was ceded to Britain by Abdülhamit the 2nd in 1878. And the Island came under British control then onwards.

Also Abdulhamid II also had to cede Bosnia to Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Ottomans sure did lose a lot. But in the table the Russians sure did felt disappointed as they barely got the gains they wanted despite the costs.

Balkan countries got their independance but overtime most of them apart from Serbia and Montenegro would reject Russian Influence hence why Russia was pretty pissed off when Austria officially annexed Bosnia as they wanted the Serbs to takeover hence why Russia began to support the Black Hand terrorist group as a proxy against Austria-Hungary.

Even if Sultan Abdulhamid II was a good or bad sultan he wont able to reverse the inevitable collapse of the empire.

Sultan Mahmud II is praised for his reforms and his modernisation the man nearly lost his own Empire to Mehmet Ali Pasha who ruled Egypt and nearly lost the Wahabi war until enlisted Mehmet Ali Pasha and his son to help against the rebellion or war.

 

[Ryder]

What ticks me off is how you have many idiots who believe Ataturk was responsible for the empire collapsing when the Ottoman Empire was already in the gutter long before he was born.

Russians were like 13KM off the capital in 1878 and Mustafa Kemal was born in 1881.

I wish people can take a much more objective approach in our history rather than believing Tv shows or conspiracy theories.

 

[B_A]

Egypt and Tunisia were all technically apart of the Ottoman Empire but they werent ruled directly but ruled by Dynasties like Mehmet Ali Pasha and i dont know which dynasty ruled Tunisia but all I know is that they were close to the Ottoman Royal Family.

Hence why the Ottomans could not do much to prevent the British and the French taking these two countries.

Algeria was also ruled autonomously with Deys. Ottomans could not do much as their navy got blown to pieces by the British, French and Russians at Navarino.

Ottoman Sultans of the 1800s to the collapse maybe considered the worse because they are constantly compared to Fatih, Yavuz Sultan Selim, Sultan Suleyman, Orhan Gazi, Osman Gazi and Yildirim Bayezid.

This is no different to comparing Turkish leaders of the early Turkish republic to the 1980s to the present.

Ottoman Empire was a 600 year old empire. People love looking at the good but ignoring the bad. People who hate the Ottomans especially lots of Turks who hate them only look at the bad while ignoring the Good.

History is never a black and white affair.

Shows like Ertugurl should always be treated like entertainment not history. Same with a lot of hollywood historical movies.

Nowadays there were views that Ottoman didn't so weak as we think before 1760s（before the 1768-1774 Russia war everyone still think ottoman a big power)but the industrial revolution and the population growth of Russian make ottomans very weak in 19century （Spain same but Austria a bit better）

By the way
I will wonder how the people views British empire years later as UK s decline.

 

[Ryder]

Nowadays there were views that Ottoman didn't so weak as we think before 1760s（before the 1768-1774 Russia war everyone still think ottoman a big power)but the industrial revolution and the population growth of Russian make ottomans very weak in 19century （Spain same but Austria a bit better）

By the way
I will wonder how the people views British empire years later as UK s decline.

1700s Ottoman Empire was not bad but ama it really began to be undone in the late 1700s to all the way to WW1. Still in the 1700s the Empire was still powerful but in decline. Empire has already overstretched its limits it was need of urgent reforms.

Industrial revolution really came a huge shock to the Ottoman Empire. Society was no longer a medieval or a early modern period it was entirely a new era especially when we talk about warfare.

 

[Scott Summers]

The Ulu Hakan hold the empire together for 33 years against different enemies and colonialist powers.

So they organized a coup and get rid of him, and his stupid brother lost WO I and then the stupid 3 pasha's did the rest.

 

[Kartal1]

Guys, lets try to stick on topic. There are enough history threads.

 

[guest12]