TR Politics

[TheInsider]

It will be kinda fun seeing the CHP back in office and repeating the cycle all over again

As much as I hate the CHP and think they will screw Turkey even more, But the AKP deserved it tbh; Erdogan's economic program from 2021 will be his downfall. He shouldnt have fired Agbal in the first place

Absolute destruction for the AKP

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1832294364715909392

The most serious problem of AKP is a slow one. Turkish voter base is changing especially the AKP voter base. Here is a recent poll about voter bases of political parties.

The Turkish voter base is becoming less religious and less conservative.

Political leaning of youth. 2022 vs 2024. Big losses for Islamists and conservatives.

 

[YeşilVatan]

The most serious problem of AKP is a slow one. Turkish voter base is changing especially the AKP voter base. Here is a recent poll about voter bases of political parties.

View attachment 70475

Can I get a source on that please? So I may post it to another place.

 

[TheInsider]

Can I get a source on that please? So I may post it to another place.

Konda.

https://konda.com.tr/uploads/genclerin-politik-tercihleri-arastirmasi-2024-64df8822aead837953c985b7a856bc911a53b8524850b4725246f7b92b74b216.pdf

 

[Lool]

Fq the DEM party
Those assholes should be banned and anyone who supported them whether now or before should be thrown in jail

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1832779554118664586

 

[RMZN]

Why are we repeating the same baseless arguments again and again

When Saddam threatened Israel and carried out missile strikes, did Israel stand up against Iraq directly? Hell no! Israel commanded their slaves, the US, to embark on a war against Iraq and pummel it into the ground. Till this day, after more than 10 years, Iraq is still a failed state

When Israel attacked Iran with missiles that lead to the death of Ismail Haniyeh, Iran promised severe retaliation; what do you think Israel did to protect itself? They moved 1/3 of the entire US navy within a week to protect Israeli lands

When the day come, and Israel set its sights on Turkey, it wont be the jews doing the fighting but rather a coalition of hundreds of thousands of US slaves, European slaves, and Arab slaves. At that time, no one will stand with Turkey. Not the cowardly turkic nations, not the Russians, or Chinese

That is why Turkey should do its best to prevent such scenario from happening and that is why Erdogan is trying to form some sort of an alliance so that such nations within Israel's radar can protect each other


As for the lieutenant issue, I believe that Erdo screwed up but again, I dont have as much info regarding the incident to even have a say in the matter. My sole point was that Erdo's foreign policy regarding Israel is spot on since these fanatics are a threat


Hell man, you dont even need to wait. The jews already stole historical artifacts from Hatay while Turkey was suffering from the aftermath of the earthquake (source isnt that trustworthy though so be aware)

Translation:
An investigation has been launched into the Zionist Chabat organization for stealing priceless historical artifacts from Hatay, where they came under the pretext of helping during the disaster of the century.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1832356541032185985

Israel already carried out strikes into iraq territory long before any US invasion. Saddam was a loose cannon, already responsible for two wars and he pursued his own nuclear weapons programme. The US felt vulnerable after 9/11 and since they held the position as the worlds Nr.1 military power, they had to demonstrate their might after suffering an attack right on their own home turf .Saddams Iraq was the perfect scapegoat for that.

"Retaliation against Israel" usually ends up as attacking US bases, its only natural that the US would seek to protect their own assets.

US, EU, Arab slaves like the AKP? Erdogan supported the invasion of Iraq, transformed the country into a EU refugee camp and he seems to care more about palestinians than Turkeys own national interests.

Alliance with whom? Arab countries who have no problem looking the other way, because they dont gain anything from helping the palestinians? Let alone the fact that for them Turks are also considered as enemies.


Erdogans foreign policy neither ended the killing of palestinians nor aided any of Turkeys national interests.

 

[Scott Summers]

N

The idea that a coalition of the US and some European countries would attack another NATO country with a population of roughly 90 million people is completely delusional. Hell, I would even call that a hallucination.

Than you are living in a dreamworld. Nobody knows what the day of tomorrow brings.

Saddam was Washington's best friend and Iraq was a moderm Western vassal in the 70's and 80's till the invasion of Kuwait changed everything.

Everything can change anytime within a day.

 

[somegoodusername]

Do you know what would be stupid? Giving Sultan Abdülhamid II absolute power and expecting the Ottoman Empire not to collapse.

 

[Sanchez]

Saddam was Washington's best friend and Iraq was a moderm Western vassal in the 70's and 80's till the invasion of Kuwait changed everything.

Really not true. American Iraqi relations were never good and after the Iran invasion started, even then they armed them via 3rd parties like France, which at the time was not a good American ally at all.

 

[Ryder]

Its a bit intetesting hearing people telling that Turkiye's neighbours dont have territorial irredentism against Turkiye.

Lets see we have Israel, Greece, Bulgaria, Georgia, Armenia, Syria, South Cyprus, Russia, Iran and Iraq.

Dont be fooled even if they dont have the capabilities to launch their Bullshit still take their threats seriously.

If Turkiye got weakened dont be surprised if one of them gets the jump on Turkiye.

A lot of our retarded neighbours still dream of taking their long lost lands.

 

[Ryder]

Do you know what would be stupid? Giving Sultan Abdülhamid II absolute power and expecting the Ottoman Empire not to collapse.

Abdulhamid II only gained absolute power due to incompetence of the parliament.

Still Abdulhamid II should have switched back to a constitutional monarchy when the time was right. Thats all on him for failing in that regard.

Despite Abdulhamid II being ousted his successors preferred the Empire to be ruled as a dictatorship run by 3 people with the Sultan being a mere figure head.

Sultan Abdulhamid II and Tsar Nicolas II both have parallels to each other on how they ruled. They kept absolute power too long. In a way it made sense due to them ruling a vast empire when you rule far too long it creates even more problems.

1 man cant control everything especially in a world of rapid development.

Both were replaced with something even worse. I know people love jerking off to Abdulhamid II at the same time you have lots of people who jerk off over Enver Pasha, Talaat and Cemal. That even Ataturk critised them for their incompetence and ruining the Ottoman state.

 

[B_A]

The most serious problem of AKP is a slow one. Turkish voter base is changing especially the AKP voter base. Here is a recent poll about voter bases of political parties.

View attachment 70475
The Turkish voter base is becoming less religious and less conservative.

Political leaning of youth. 2022 vs 2024. Big losses for Islamists and conservatives.

View attachment 70476

Because Economy is too bad these year.

An Mcdonald Meal price rose from 30TL to 200TL...

And AKP stands for Islamists and conservatives.

otherwise,no such big change within 2 years

 

[No Name]

Still Abdulhamid II should have switched back to a constitutional monarchy when the time was right. Thats all on him for failing in that regard.

A Constitutional monarchy would not have worked the empire was too divided on ethnic, religious, and tribal lines.

The problem with trying to have a democratic state would be that every interest group would use the state institutions to weaken the state. It would be like if 60 percent of the legislature were HDP. The country would turn into a loss collection of vassal states that pay nothing but lip service to the sultan and parliament. The empire would have returned to what it was at the beginning of the 1800s, when the government only controlled Istanbul.

Despite Abdulhamid II being ousted his successors preferred the Empire to be ruled as a dictatorship run by 3 people with the Sultan being a mere figure head.

The three pashas only took power after the parliament lost the most important parts of the empire, and it became clear that the country could not be run democratically.

The fact that Turkey was a single-party state 20 years after the republic was established proved that overthrowing Abdulamid II was probably the greatest mistake in Turkish history.

 

[Ryder]

A Constitutional monarchy would not have worked the empire was too divided on ethnic, religious, and tribal lines.

The problem with trying to have a democratic state would be that every interest group would use the state institutions to weaken the state. It would be like if 60 percent of the legislature were HDP. The country would turn into a loss collection of vassal states that pay nothing but lip service to the sultan and parliament. The empire would have returned to what it was at the beginning of the 1800s, when the government only controlled Istanbul.


The three pashas only took power after the parliament lost the most important parts of the empire, and it became clear that the country could not be run democratically.

The fact that Turkey was a single-party state 20 years after the republic was established proved that overthrowing Abdulamid II was probably the greatest mistake in Turkish history.

Ataturk ruled as a single party because Turkiye was a young nation and still fractured.

I agree regardless if its Ottomans or early Turkish republic rule. It was hard to rule by democratic means due to numerous factors as you pointed out.

 

[B_A]

Abdulhamid II only gained absolute power due to incompetence of the parliament.

Still Abdulhamid II should have switched back to a constitutional monarchy when the time was right. Thats all on him for failing in that regard.

Despite Abdulhamid II being ousted his successors preferred the Empire to be ruled as a dictatorship run by 3 people with the Sultan being a mere figure head.

Sultan Abdulhamid II and Tsar Nicolas II both have parallels to each other on how they ruled. They kept absolute power too long. In a way it made sense due to them ruling a vast empire when you rule far too long it creates even more problems.

1 man cant control everything especially in a world of rapid development.

Both were replaced with something even worse. I know people love jerking off to Abdulhamid II at the same time you have lots of people who jerk off over Enver Pasha, Talaat and Cemal. That even Ataturk critised them for their incompetence and ruining the Ottoman state.

A Constitutional monarchy would not have worked the empire was too divided on ethnic, religious, and tribal lines.

The problem with trying to have a democratic state would be that every interest group would use the state institutions to weaken the state. It would be like if 60 percent of the legislature were HDP. The country would turn into a loss collection of vassal states that pay nothing but lip service to the sultan and parliament. The empire would have returned to what it was at the beginning of the 1800s, when the government only controlled Istanbul.


The three pashas only took power after the parliament lost the most important parts of the empire, and it became clear that the country could not be run democratically.

The fact that Turkey was a single-party state 20 years after the republic was established proved that overthrowing Abdulamid II was probably the greatest mistake in Turkish history.

Pre-1945 and post-1945, the rule of international relationship was a bit different.

In a way, TR was far luckier than Ottomans because even TR was far weaker than Ottomans, if compared to the great powers of the day ,especially Russia/Soviet,(compare 1877 and 1977...)
but TR didn’t need to fight so many wars.

For Ottomans, if there were no 1853 ,1877 and 1912 wars, maybe the country can be more successful.

 

[TR_123456]

The fact that Turkey was a single-party state 20 years after the republic was established proved that overthrowing Abdulamid II was probably the greatest mistake in Turkish history.

How did it prove that,elaborate?

 

[somegoodusername]

Abdulhamid II only gained absolute power due to incompetence of the parliament.

Still Abdulhamid II should have switched back to a constitutional monarchy when the time was right. Thats all on him for failing in that regard.

Despite Abdulhamid II being ousted his successors preferred the Empire to be ruled as a dictatorship run by 3 people with the Sultan being a mere figure head.

Sultan Abdulhamid II and Tsar Nicolas II both have parallels to each other on how they ruled. They kept absolute power too long. In a way it made sense due to them ruling a vast empire when you rule far too long it creates even more problems.

1 man cant control everything especially in a world of rapid development.

Both were replaced with something even worse. I know people love jerking off to Abdulhamid II at the same time you have lots of people who jerk off over Enver Pasha, Talaat and Cemal. That even Ataturk critised them for their incompetence and ruining the Ottoman state.

That post wasn't about Abdülhamid II.

 

[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?