TR Turkish History|Debate and Discussion

[Kartal1]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1454002896593371138

 

[dBSPL]

His Eminence Mehmet Han is one of the greatest state leaders in written history. Some called him conqueror, some called him kaiser of rum or basileus, some called him emirül islam who was blessed with the glad tidings of the Holy Prophet, some called him wise hakan, there were dozens of epithets given to him, some of which are still very famous today. In fact, Mehmet Han lived for an ideal that wanted to bring order to the world and was above all these epithets.

The other state leaders he fought against in Eastern Anatolia, Istanbul, Albania, Romania, Trabzon, Venice and Hungary were the greatest commanders, strategists and diplomatic geniuses of their time. Had Mehmet the Conqueror not lived, each one of them would have gone down in history in golden letters. Mehmet Han's genius for strategy and diplomacy defeated some of these leaders in the battlefield and others at the diplomatic table. Mehmet Han's ascension to the throne and his ability to maintain order within the state is a miracle in itself. War tactics and battle formations are still the subject of dozens of war academies to this day. His ideas and breakthroughs in military technology were far ahead of his time. The fact that he was able to achieve all this progress amidst so many betrayals and games of thrones within the ranks of the state was astonishingly successful.

If he hadn't been killed, he would have made Rome his protectorate.A world state uniting the peoples of east and west was to be created. There was no leader who could match his military genius and military technology. There has never been another leader of a state who has constructed the philosophical depth of this as successfully as he has. And he did this not by becoming the head of a superpower, but by turning a Balkan-Asia minor state, which was basically plagued by countless internal turmoil and in a geography with strong competitors on the borders, into a superpower.

He wanted stability and order not only for his own nation but also for the whole known world and he fought for it. In addition to protecting the Islamic religion to which he was subject, he took the Eastern Christians and even some Catholic churches in the Balkans under his patronage and protection. This freedom of conscience and liberty was instrumental in the Islamization of Bosnia, the Balkans and the Eastern Black Sea-Caucasus.

His intellectual accumulation has a depth that is rare at the level of state leaders. In addition to being closely involved in science, art and sociology of society, he was a polyglot, speaking many ancient and contemporary languages and translating various works.

Mehmet the Conqueror was the great ideologue state leader of his time who synthesized the Turkish KIZILELMA utopia into a world ideal that encompassed the peoples of the world. His lifetime was not enough to realize his ideal. And as the generations passed, we began not to understand his ideal either. We have boxed him into stereotypes and military personas. We have misinterpreted his ideas.

Just as today we have moved away from truly understanding Atatürk's ideals.

The rare and precious statesmen in the Oghuz branch of Turkish-Islamic history, whoever you can think of, is actually a sequence from Tugrul Bey to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. I will not go into politicized and polarized groups of thought here, we just need to understand how the Turkish KIZILELMA has a strong presence in this sequence. When we say state tradition, when we say ancient state understanding, even if these have been distorted today and in some periods in the past, we must understand how this is a state culture that can integrate with every geography and every belief group, starting from our pre-Islamic Turkish identity.

This understanding, which is based on the army-state, freedom of religion and conscience, justice and order, has today been able to submerge countless ancient civilizations and even cultures with imperial pasts within its identity. There is a correlation between the rise and fall of the Turks in history and their adherence to these ancient characteristics. The Turkish understanding of the state can only be survives with the qualities that have emerged through the struggle of history.

 

[GoatsMilk]

His Eminence Mehmet Han is one of the greatest state leaders in written history. Some called him conqueror, some called him kaiser of rum or basileus, some called him emirül islam who was blessed with the glad tidings of the Holy Prophet, some called him wise hakan, there were dozens of epithets given to him, some of which are still very famous today. In fact, Mehmet Han lived for an ideal that wanted to bring order to the world and was above all these epithets.

The other state leaders he fought against in Eastern Anatolia, Istanbul, Albania, Romania, Trabzon, Venice and Hungary were the greatest commanders, strategists and diplomatic geniuses of their time. Had Mehmet the Conqueror not lived, each one of them would have gone down in history in golden letters. Mehmet Han's genius for strategy and diplomacy defeated some of these leaders in the battlefield and others at the diplomatic table. Mehmet Han's ascension to the throne and his ability to maintain order within the state is a miracle in itself. War tactics and battle formations are still the subject of dozens of war academies to this day. His ideas and breakthroughs in military technology were far ahead of his time. The fact that he was able to achieve all this progress amidst so many betrayals and games of thrones within the ranks of the state was astonishingly successful.

If he hadn't been killed, he would have made Rome his protectorate.A world state uniting the peoples of east and west was to be created. There was no leader who could match his military genius and military technology. There has never been another leader of a state who has constructed the philosophical depth of this as successfully as he has. And he did this not by becoming the head of a superpower, but by turning a Balkan-Asia minor state, which was basically plagued by countless internal turmoil and in a geography with strong competitors on the borders, into a superpower.

He wanted stability and order not only for his own nation but also for the whole known world and he fought for it. In addition to protecting the Islamic religion to which he was subject, he took the Eastern Christians and even some Catholic churches in the Balkans under his patronage and protection. This freedom of conscience and liberty was instrumental in the Islamization of Bosnia, the Balkans and the Eastern Black Sea-Caucasus.

His intellectual accumulation has a depth that is rare at the level of state leaders. In addition to being closely involved in science, art and sociology of society, he was a polyglot, speaking many ancient and contemporary languages and translating various works.

Mehmet the Conqueror was the great ideologue state leader of his time who synthesized the Turkish KIZILELMA utopia into a world ideal that encompassed the peoples of the world. His lifetime was not enough to realize his ideal. And as the generations passed, we began not to understand his ideal either. We have boxed him into stereotypes and military personas. We have misinterpreted his ideas.

Just as today we have moved away from truly understanding Atatürk's ideals.

The rare and precious statesmen in the Oghuz branch of Turkish-Islamic history, whoever you can think of, is actually a sequence from Tugrul Bey to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. I will not go into politicized and polarized groups of thought here, we just need to understand how the Turkish KIZILELMA has a strong presence in this sequence. When we say state tradition, when we say ancient state understanding, even if these have been distorted today and in some periods in the past, we must understand how this is a state culture that can integrate with every geography and every belief group, starting from our pre-Islamic Turkish identity.

This understanding, which is based on the army-state, freedom of religion and conscience, justice and order, has today been able to submerge countless ancient civilizations and even cultures with imperial pasts within its identity. There is a correlation between the rise and fall of the Turks in history and their adherence to these ancient characteristics. The Turkish understanding of the state can only be survives with the qualities that have emerged through the struggle of history.

The sense of justice, honour and dignity is important. We read about these characteristics every time our people rise in history. A good example is Tonyukuk, when these ideas are put into practice our people rise.

The sequence you mention is very interesting.

I remember when i started to study pre Islamic Turkish history and came across Tonyukuk, i felt like i were reading about Ataturk. That sequence you mention is critical in understanding why our people rise and why they fall.

These ancient characterises display themselves across time, geography and religions. Every time you read about our rise you see the same concepts taking place. Great ideals are placed at the forefront and everything done is in aid of them, when those great ideals are forgotten about or weak ideals are followed we fall.

 

[Mehmed Ali]

His Eminence Mehmet Han is one of the greatest state leaders in written history. Some called him conqueror, some called him kaiser of rum or basileus, some called him emirül islam who was blessed with the glad tidings of the Holy Prophet, some called him wise hakan, there were dozens of epithets given to him, some of which are still very famous today. In fact, Mehmet Han lived for an ideal that wanted to bring order to the world and was above all these epithets.

The other state leaders he fought against in Eastern Anatolia, Istanbul, Albania, Romania, Trabzon, Venice and Hungary were the greatest commanders, strategists and diplomatic geniuses of their time. Had Mehmet the Conqueror not lived, each one of them would have gone down in history in golden letters. Mehmet Han's genius for strategy and diplomacy defeated some of these leaders in the battlefield and others at the diplomatic table. Mehmet Han's ascension to the throne and his ability to maintain order within the state is a miracle in itself. War tactics and battle formations are still the subject of dozens of war academies to this day. His ideas and breakthroughs in military technology were far ahead of his time. The fact that he was able to achieve all this progress amidst so many betrayals and games of thrones within the ranks of the state was astonishingly successful.

If he hadn't been killed, he would have made Rome his protectorate.A world state uniting the peoples of east and west was to be created. There was no leader who could match his military genius and military technology. There has never been another leader of a state who has constructed the philosophical depth of this as successfully as he has. And he did this not by becoming the head of a superpower, but by turning a Balkan-Asia minor state, which was basically plagued by countless internal turmoil and in a geography with strong competitors on the borders, into a superpower.

He wanted stability and order not only for his own nation but also for the whole known world and he fought for it. In addition to protecting the Islamic religion to which he was subject, he took the Eastern Christians and even some Catholic churches in the Balkans under his patronage and protection. This freedom of conscience and liberty was instrumental in the Islamization of Bosnia, the Balkans and the Eastern Black Sea-Caucasus.

His intellectual accumulation has a depth that is rare at the level of state leaders. In addition to being closely involved in science, art and sociology of society, he was a polyglot, speaking many ancient and contemporary languages and translating various works.

Mehmet the Conqueror was the great ideologue state leader of his time who synthesized the Turkish KIZILELMA utopia into a world ideal that encompassed the peoples of the world. His lifetime was not enough to realize his ideal. And as the generations passed, we began not to understand his ideal either. We have boxed him into stereotypes and military personas. We have misinterpreted his ideas.

Just as today we have moved away from truly understanding Atatürk's ideals.

The rare and precious statesmen in the Oghuz branch of Turkish-Islamic history, whoever you can think of, is actually a sequence from Tugrul Bey to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. I will not go into politicized and polarized groups of thought here, we just need to understand how the Turkish KIZILELMA has a strong presence in this sequence. When we say state tradition, when we say ancient state understanding, even if these have been distorted today and in some periods in the past, we must understand how this is a state culture that can integrate with every geography and every belief group, starting from our pre-Islamic Turkish identity.

This understanding, which is based on the army-state, freedom of religion and conscience, justice and order, has today been able to submerge countless ancient civilizations and even cultures with imperial pasts within its identity. There is a correlation between the rise and fall of the Turks in history and their adherence to these ancient characteristics. The Turkish understanding of the state can only be survives with the qualities that have emerged through the struggle of history.

Sorry it is not possible to give 100 stars . This is befitting for the man who took my people from the point of destruction to the highest levels.
May he be blessed 1000 times .

 

[Baryshx]

His Eminence Mehmet Han is one of the greatest state leaders in written history. Some called him conqueror, some called him kaiser of rum or basileus, some called him emirül islam who was blessed with the glad tidings of the Holy Prophet, some called him wise hakan, there were dozens of epithets given to him, some of which are still very famous today. In fact, Mehmet Han lived for an ideal that wanted to bring order to the world and was above all these epithets.

The other state leaders he fought against in Eastern Anatolia, Istanbul, Albania, Romania, Trabzon, Venice and Hungary were the greatest commanders, strategists and diplomatic geniuses of their time. Had Mehmet the Conqueror not lived, each one of them would have gone down in history in golden letters. Mehmet Han's genius for strategy and diplomacy defeated some of these leaders in the battlefield and others at the diplomatic table. Mehmet Han's ascension to the throne and his ability to maintain order within the state is a miracle in itself. War tactics and battle formations are still the subject of dozens of war academies to this day. His ideas and breakthroughs in military technology were far ahead of his time. The fact that he was able to achieve all this progress amidst so many betrayals and games of thrones within the ranks of the state was astonishingly successful.

If he hadn't been killed, he would have made Rome his protectorate.A world state uniting the peoples of east and west was to be created. There was no leader who could match his military genius and military technology. There has never been another leader of a state who has constructed the philosophical depth of this as successfully as he has. And he did this not by becoming the head of a superpower, but by turning a Balkan-Asia minor state, which was basically plagued by countless internal turmoil and in a geography with strong competitors on the borders, into a superpower.

He wanted stability and order not only for his own nation but also for the whole known world and he fought for it. In addition to protecting the Islamic religion to which he was subject, he took the Eastern Christians and even some Catholic churches in the Balkans under his patronage and protection. This freedom of conscience and liberty was instrumental in the Islamization of Bosnia, the Balkans and the Eastern Black Sea-Caucasus.

His intellectual accumulation has a depth that is rare at the level of state leaders. In addition to being closely involved in science, art and sociology of society, he was a polyglot, speaking many ancient and contemporary languages and translating various works.

Mehmet the Conqueror was the great ideologue state leader of his time who synthesized the Turkish KIZILELMA utopia into a world ideal that encompassed the peoples of the world. His lifetime was not enough to realize his ideal. And as the generations passed, we began not to understand his ideal either. We have boxed him into stereotypes and military personas. We have misinterpreted his ideas.

Just as today we have moved away from truly understanding Atatürk's ideals.

The rare and precious statesmen in the Oghuz branch of Turkish-Islamic history, whoever you can think of, is actually a sequence from Tugrul Bey to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. I will not go into politicized and polarized groups of thought here, we just need to understand how the Turkish KIZILELMA has a strong presence in this sequence. When we say state tradition, when we say ancient state understanding, even if these have been distorted today and in some periods in the past, we must understand how this is a state culture that can integrate with every geography and every belief group, starting from our pre-Islamic Turkish identity.

This understanding, which is based on the army-state, freedom of religion and conscience, justice and order, has today been able to submerge countless ancient civilizations and even cultures with imperial pasts within its identity. There is a correlation between the rise and fall of the Turks in history and their adherence to these ancient characteristics. The Turkish understanding of the state can only be survives with the qualities that have emerged through the struggle of history.

The secret is here. It was Yavuz Sultan Selim and the sultans who came after him who destroyed and corrupted our ancient understanding of the state. Atatürk brought it back to its feet, but then the same corrupt mentalities took over again.

 

[Afif]

Excellent post @dBSPL

Tbh, it is his character that intrigued me most from the Ottoman history.

After all, along with his greatness and unique statesmanship he is the one who has been prophesied by the holy prophet.

If I am not mistaken, historically Mehmet Han knew about the prophesy and like many great Arab and Turkic conquerors before him, was motivated by it to conquer the great city of Constantinople.

Maybe I am particularly bias to this aspect of his legacy because I am somewhat conservative.

But regardless of any ideology, the observation you made in the end is very important.

This sequence of great leaders, their contributions to Nations over the centuries should not be underestimated in light of modernity, their ideals and teaching should be cherished in a well balanced and indiscriminate manner.

But unfortunately, in today’s modern nation states, specially in Muslim countries we see two extreme ends of different ideologies at each other’s throat.
Radical left (with Western blessing) who would denounce anything before the current state, and strongly believe we should just throw away whatever we had before in order to catch up with 'Modernity.' Otherwise we never can be truly ‘civilised'. On the other hand, we have delusional extreme Islamist who refuses our contemporary state and identity, and hates the founding fathers.

The sooner we, as nations can get out of this conundrum and reestablished our ties with all of our historic ideals, modern and pre-modern without any discrimination, the better the path forward is.

 

[dBSPL]

The sense of justice, honour and dignity is important. We read about these characteristics every time our people rise in history. A good example is Tonyukuk, when these ideas are put into practice our people rise.

The sequence you mention is very interesting.

I remember when i started to study pre Islamic Turkish history and came across Tonyukuk, i felt like i were reading about Ataturk. That sequence you mention is critical in understanding why our people rise and why they fall.

These ancient characterises display themselves across time, geography and religions. Every time you read about our rise you see the same concepts taking place. Great ideals are placed at the forefront and everything done is in aid of them, when those great ideals are forgotten about or weak ideals are followed we fall.

It is clear that there is a sequence, you can widen it and maybe narrow it down. There are some important reasons why I see Tugrul Bey as a touchstone. The first one is his struggle to rule with justice and for peoples to live with dignity wherever his horses could reach. In very complicated circumstances, he became a leading commander in whom the Turkish beys, and even the inhabitants of other nations, believed.

He combined this principle of justice and order with an advanced army structure and strategic genius that, despite its very limited size, had very advanced war strategies and mobility according to the conditions of the time. Although the Turks had very, very important functions within the Islamic caliphate even earlier, it was actually when Tugrul Bey destroyed the siege of Baghdad and liberated the city that he defacto took the caliph under his protection. And for us, Islamic history became Turkish-Islamic history from that point on. The religious supreme authority was still the caliph, but the army of Islam, based on the entire northern line and Asia Minor, officially became Turkish. Turks came to Asia Minor, Mesopotamia and the Levant in large groups from the 9th century onwards, and many Turkish overlords were involved in the administration of these regions and played a role in the development and civilization of these regions. However, the army meant the strength and existence of the Islamic unity as a whole. Indeed, starting with his successor Alparslan, the gates of Anatolia were opened as far as the Aegean coast in a very short time.

Justice and order, military state. These two qualities are clearly visible. A third is the separation of the state (army) and religious affairs, which was unusual for the conditions of the time, and even to some extent the state, that is, the army, is decisive over religious affairs. Maybe this cannot be called secularism, but the wheels we use today is quite different from the one first used 6000 years ago too. Tugrul Bey synthesized pre-Islamic Turkish characteristics and leadership qualities within the Islamic understanding and incorporated them into his vision of the world by becoming the flag bearer of the Islamic world (the title given to him by the caliph was the sword of Islam).

Tugrul Bey, the grandson of our ancestor Seljuk Bey, gave his nephew Alparslan the conditions to turn Seljuk into a superpower. Sultan Alparslan started the decline of Eastern Rome and gathered the peoples from the Arabian Sea to the Turkish homeland of Khorosan around his ideal. Just as Mehmet Khan prepared the conditions for his grandson Yavuz Selim to triple the size of his state in just 8 years. However, Selim I, after swallowing the Mamluk empire in one piece, not only annexed the Caliphate to himself, but also laid the foundation for the conditions that would lead to the erosion of this ancient understanding over time with the ulema he brought with him and enabled. That is another story... (edit: dear Baryshx has already addressed this issue above.)

Let's back to the present. Atatürk gave us a vision on which we can move forward. As long as we stick to it, our destination is clear. History teaches us that it is not enough to be a great commander and achieve glorious successes, it is necessary not to lose KIZILELMA.

Personally, one of the things I have noticed in my readings, and in reading historiographies about important turning points in our history, is that Ataturk, as a state leader, had done unprecedented in-depth knowledge of Turkish history. And many of the reforms he introduced under the heading of enlightenment are in some way related to both Turkish Islamic history and pre-Islamic national characteristics. the principle of supremacy of the state, national consciousness, cultural integration and progressivism This vision of synthesizing the past, the future and the world conjuncture is proof that he was a leader ahead of his time. By reminding the Turkish nation of its past and guiding the future, he paved the way for the struggle to become a modern state with our own identity. And unfortunately, not even a generation later, we lost that vision and made it the centerpiece of our political struggles.

 

[Baryshx]

Excellent post @dBSPL

Tbh, it is his character that intrigued me most from the Ottoman history.

After all, along with his greatness and unique statesmanship he is the one who has been prophesied by the holy prophet.

If I am not mistaken, historically Mehmet Han knew about the prophesy and like many great Arab and Turkic conquerors before him, was motivated by it to conquer the great city of Constantinople.

Do you believe in hadiths? Fatih Sultan Mehmet is a man who killed his brothers when they were babies. He said he did it for the sake of order.

Can such a person be praised by the Prophet? Read the Quran again...

For example, 1. Ahmet said of his father 3. Mehmet, "A man who kills 19 of his brothers and one of his sons to gain the throne is a murderer, even if he is my father. I will not bury a murderer. Yours do it and bury him."

Fatih Sultan Mehmet was a great emperor and did what he had to do.

There is no need to ascribe sanctity. It was Atatürk who conquered Istanbul a second time. Is the hadith for the first conqueror or the second conqueror?

 

[Afif]

Do you believe in hadiths? Fatih Sultan Mehmet is a man who killed his brothers when they were babies. He said he did it for the sake of order.

Can such a person be praised by the Prophet? Read the Quran again...

For example, 1. Ahmet said of his father 3. Mehmet, "A man who kills 19 of his brothers and one of his sons to gain the throne is a murderer, even if he is my father. I will not bury a murderer. Yours do it and bury him."

Fatih Sultan Mehmet was a great emperor and did what he had to do.

There is no need to ascribe sanctity. It was Atatürk who conquered Istanbul a second time. Is the hadith for the first conqueror or the second conqueror?

Hehe, I am not getting into that debate right now.

Nevertheless he is widely recognised to be one by scholars.

 

[Ryder]

The secret is here. It was Yavuz Sultan Selim and the sultans who came after him who destroyed and corrupted our ancient understanding of the state. Atatürk brought it back to its feet, but then the same corrupt mentalities took over again.

More of the Yavuz Hate by the way Yavuz is the one who pushed the empire into its apex and gave a legacy for his son to continue. Sultan Suleyman began the erosion because his the one who made the Ottoman Empire reach its apex but showered his ministers, his family, his generals and the jannisaries with so much benefits that began the beginning of the end not to say the Empire started declining after his death which is not true as the Ottomans continued to grow and adapt despite setbacks in the 1600s I feel like the Kopurlu Family dont get enough credit for turning the empires fortunes around even if Kara Mustapha Pasha lost Vienna.

The man was so corrupt that he hanged his own corrupt ministers lets see todays Turkiye even doing one ounce of that. Yavuz Sultan Selim easily won his brother because the man was soldier he led his armies which made him popular among soldiers, Shezade Ahmet was too busy with palace life and enjoying life with parties to a soldier why would he fight for this man? Yavuz Sultan Selim became sultan because of that you had soldiers who are willing to die for him.

Conquering the Middle East and taking down rebellious tribes does not make him a bad guy if not you would have a problem with Ataturk bringing down numerous rebellions. Im not overrating Yavuz neither am I telling you to love him but when comes to talking about him be fair. Yavuz is not a God but some the arguments people use against him is laughable at best a comedy.

Caliphate has stayed dormant since the 1258 many of the Muslim Empires tried to style themselves as Caliphates but never took the serious intaitive in taking it off the Abassids who had held the office in Cairo.

Since the Ottomans were becoming the strongest I think its more than fair game and legit for them to take the Caliphate for themselves even if they are not Arab or have Quraish blood in them.

The Ottomans are a 600 Empire basically an Enigma. Orientalist terms or simplistic black and white terms dont work on the empire. Long lasting empires deserve more study rather than people using simpliatic history to explain them.

Roman Empire was like 1000 years old its not simple to blame Christianity for its fall.

 

[Ryder]

Do you believe in hadiths? Fatih Sultan Mehmet is a man who killed his brothers when they were babies. He said he did it for the sake of order.

Can such a person be praised by the Prophet? Read the Quran again...

For example, 1. Ahmet said of his father 3. Mehmet, "A man who kills 19 of his brothers and one of his sons to gain the throne is a murderer, even if he is my father. I will not bury a murderer. Yours do it and bury him."

Fatih Sultan Mehmet was a great emperor and did what he had to do.

There is no need to ascribe sanctity. It was Atatürk who conquered Istanbul a second time. Is the hadith for the first conqueror or the second conqueror?

Ataturk did not conquer Istanbul he liberated it from hostile Occupation because Istanbul was already under the Turks but only occupied after ww1.

While in 1453 the city was ruled by the Byzantine Empire.

Ataturk never styled himself a conqueror because he believed it was akin to empire or the monarchy which contradicted his republican ideals.

Hadith has lots of debates because you have some who believe Prophet Muhammed predicted the Ottomans to conquer Istanbul while others suggest its for the end of days.

Then again every Islamic Empire took that hadith serious because the Ummayads came close to taking Istanbul but failed twice. Seljuks planned on taking Istanbul but while Ottoman Sultan Bayezid I planned on taking the city before his war with Timur shattered his plans.

Istanbul was like the red apple every Muslim Empire dreamed of taking that city or Rome at the time.

 

[Ryder]

Do you believe in hadiths? Fatih Sultan Mehmet is a man who killed his brothers when they were babies. He said he did it for the sake of order.

Can such a person be praised by the Prophet? Read the Quran again...

For example, 1. Ahmet said of his father 3. Mehmet, "A man who kills 19 of his brothers and one of his sons to gain the throne is a murderer, even if he is my father. I will not bury a murderer. Yours do it and bury him."

Fatih Sultan Mehmet was a great emperor and did what he had to do.

There is no need to ascribe sanctity. It was Atatürk who conquered Istanbul a second time. Is the hadith for the first conqueror or the second conqueror?

Fatih sultan mehmet put in place a brutal law then again this prevented the Empire being rife with civil wars.

That law contradicts Islamic Law but then again. Which is better 1 person being killed or thousands or millions because somebody wanted to be king? Numerous Turkic Empires fell due to infighting and civil wars. Ottoman Civil War lasted 11 years and wrecked decades of productivity in Anatolia. Im thinking this civil war might have been the Catalyst for the Ottomans to be abandoning Anatolia and go more deep into Europe.

Which is better a Law and Order state or a state rife with civil war.

I know which one we all prefer.

 

[Ryder]

Ottomans conquering the Middle East all comes down factors like this

Demographic problems there were more Christians than Muslims in the empire. Which means long term problems.

New lands means new territories to conquer.

Religious wise taking the caliphate title enchanced their prestige and soft power in Islamic World.

Opened themselves up to North Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. This gave them access to the Western Med, Red Sea and the Indian Ocean also a direct trade link to India and Indonesia.

Ottomans also reached into Eritrea, Ethiopia and Somalia. Ottomans even took Eritrea did some expeditions into Ethiopia.

Fun fact the Ottomans ruled Eritrea for 300 years but Turkish settlers rarely settled here compared to Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria.

 

[Ryder]

Shezade Omer Faruk in a German Prussian uniform with the iconic Pickelhaube hat.

What a Almanci

 

[Lool]

@Ryder
Words long forgotten

The Arabs are reaping the seeds of their betrayal

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1717285689031594437

 

[Ryder]

@Ryder
Words long forgotten

The Arabs are reaping the seeds of their betrayal

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1717285689031594437

This makes me sad of course.

 

[Afif]

@Ryder
Words long forgotten

The Arabs are reaping the seeds of their betrayal

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1717285689031594437

What betrayal? Arabs had the right to self determination just like everybody else. It was increasingly becoming clear that empires of the old were not gonna survive the new world.

It would have been better if Ottoman gave the Arabs independence without bloodshed and drew the borders on their own terms. This way, Arab countries and the Ottomans would have been on good terms and Brits wouldn't have got the chance to get involved the way they did.

 

[Ryder]

What betrayal? Arabs had the right to self determination. It was increasingly becoming clear empires of the old were not gonna survive the new world.

It would have been better if Ottoman gave the Arabs independence without bloodshed and drew the borders on their own terms. This way, Arab countries and the Ottomans would have been on good terms and Brits wouldn't have got the chance to get involved the way they did.

Jemal Pasha's plan was to turn the Ottoman Empire into a Austro-Hungarian model.

Mainly for Turks and Arabs since both by the 1900s were the majority ethnic group of the empire.

Each would have had their own army, own parliament and their own capital.

The plan fell through. Would have worked for the short term but not the long term as we saw Austro-Hungarian Empire collapse.

 

[Gary]

Eventually, the question if Arabs are betraying anybody is irrelevant, it's not like the entire Arabs in the Middle East actually rebel to justify labelling the entire Arab people as traitors. Mind to remind people, the Arabs already lived in dignity in that particular land long before being ruled by the Ottomans.

The situation now is, that there's a zionist entity in the land, and depending on your political views and ideology, you either want the zionist to win or you want them to be the loser.

Other than that I see their excuse as a mere facade. It's the end game people should be looking forward to, not some silly justifications from the past.

For the Pro-Israeli camp, the end game is the preservation of a Jewish state, for me it's the opposite. The Pro-Israeli camp bet on the current technological and hegemonic dominance of their Western backers to float the country, while I bet on the eventual cycle of empires, which will come sooner or later.

Again just reminding that Arabs in the end of this century will be 992 million- 1 billion strong people, and there's no guarantee that America will stay forever powerful.

 

[Asena_great]

The Arabs are reaping the seeds of their betrayal

you and i never agree on anything but there is no truer sentence were written then yours