TR Turkish History|Debate & Discussion

[Fatman17]

At its peak in the 1500s, the Ottoman Empire was one of the biggest military and economic powers in the world, controlling an expanse that included not just its base in Asia Minor but also much of southeastern Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. The empire controlled territory that stretched from the Danube to the Nile, with a powerful military, lucrative commerce, and impressive achievements in fields ranging from architecture to astronomy. But it didn’t last...

Though the Ottoman Empire persisted for 600 years, it succumbed to what most historians describe as a long, slow decline, despite efforts to modernize. Finally, after fighting on the side of Germany in World War I and suffering defeat, the empire was dismantled by treaty and came to an end in 1922, when the last Ottoman Sultan, Mehmed VI, was deposed and left the capital of Constantinople (now Istanbul) in a British warship. From the Ottoman Empire’s remains arose the modern nation of Turkey.

While the industrial revolution swept through Europe in the 1700s and 1800s, the Ottoman economy remained dependent upon farming. The empire lacked the factories and mills to keep up with Great Britain, France and even Russia, according to Michael A. Reynolds, an associate professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. As a result, the empire’s economic growth was weak, and what agricultural surplus it generated went to pay loans to European creditors. When it came time to fight in World War I, the Ottoman Empire didn’t have the industrial might to produce heavy weaponry, munitions and iron and steel needed to build railroads to support the war effort.

At its apex, the Ottoman Empire included Bulgaria, Egypt, Greece, Hungary, Jordan, Lebanon, Israel and the Palestinian territories, Macedonia, Romania, Syria, parts of Arabia and the north coast of Africa. Even if outside powers hadn’t eventually undermined the empire, Reynolds doesn’t think that it could have remained intact and evolved into a modern democratic nation. “The odds probably would have been against it, because of the empire’s tremendous diversity in terms of ethnicity, language, economics, and geography,” he says. “Homogenous societies democratize more easily than heterogeneous ones.”

The various peoples who were part of the empire grew more and more rebellious, and by the 1870s, the empire had to allow Bulgaria and other countries to become independent and ceded more and more territory. After losing the 1912-1913 Balkan Wars to a coalition that included some of its former imperial possessions, the empire was forced to give up its remaining European territory.

Despite efforts to improve education in the 1800s, the Ottoman Empire lagged far behind its European competitors in literacy, so by 1914, it’s estimated that only between 5 and 10 percent of its inhabitants could read. “The human resources of the Ottoman empire, like the natural resources, were comparatively undeveloped,” Reynolds notes. That meant the empire had a shortage of well-trained military officers, engineers, clerks, doctors and other professions.

#archaeohistories
X.com

 

[Fatman17]

Who Were the European Sultanas Who Shaped the Ottoman Empire? | TheCollector

These European-born brides and enslaved women mastered court politics and shattered centuries-old customs, emerging as dominant powerbrokers in the Ottoman Empire.

share.google

 

[Fatman17]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2087108142471717137

 

[dBSPL]

View attachment 82128

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2087108142471717137

This tweet presents the Treaty of Sevres as an unimplemented agreement. It wasn't unimplemented; they forcet it, but they couldn't sustain it. Every region you see on the map was occupied; even in the area designated as left to the Turkish people, the ports, sea routes, and railways were completely controlled by the occupying forces. Settlement policies were attempted in the occupied regions, hundreds of massacres occurred, and the civilian population was suppressed. The Ottoman state surrendered its seas, disbanded its army, closed its parliament, and, in complete submission, began to play a role in finalizing the occupation of Anatolia by signing the directives of the occupying forces' outpost commanders.

Having fought almost continuously since the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878, impoverished Anatolia, already suffering from an influx of displaced populations from the Balkans, Black Sea region, Levant, and North Africa, had neither an army nor capital. The only thing left was Anatolia itself. The slogan "Independence or Death" wasn't just a propaganda slogan. Anatolia was now the last stronghold. The Anatolian Turk had nowhere else to go.

The Turkish people's spirit of national struggle was at such a point that they would fight to the very end, to the last drop of Turkish blood. If the British had not withdrawn from Istanbul, the army would have entered Istanbul.

In other words, it wasn't that the Treaty of Sevres wasn't implemented. Attempts were made to implement it. But at the point where it was thought to be over, the Turkish people, amidst such deprivation, demonstrated their will for independence, their political acumen, and their fighting ability in such a way that this treaty could not survive. Turks do not accept living under subjugation. If their state collapses, they will establish a new one. Rather than live without a homeland, they would destroy the world if necessary and take their place in the new world.

 

[Yasar_TR]

This tweet presents the Treaty of Sevres as an unimplemented agreement. It wasn't unimplemented; they forcet it, but they couldn't sustain it. Every region you see on the map was occupied; even in the area designated as left to the Turkish people, the ports, sea routes, and railways were completely controlled by the occupying forces. Settlement policies were attempted in the occupied regions, hundreds of massacres occurred, and the civilian population was suppressed. The Ottoman state surrendered its seas, disbanded its army, closed its parliament, and, in complete submission, began to play a role in finalizing the occupation of Anatolia by signing the directives of the occupying forces' outpost commanders.

Having fought almost continuously since the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878, impoverished Anatolia, already suffering from an influx of displaced populations from the Balkans, Black Sea region, Levant, and North Africa, had neither an army nor capital. The only thing left was Anatolia itself. The slogan "Independence or Death" wasn't just a propaganda slogan. Anatolia was now the last stronghold. The Anatolian Turk had nowhere else to go.

The Turkish people's spirit of national struggle was at such a point that they would fight to the very end, to the last drop of Turkish blood. If the British had not withdrawn from Istanbul, the army would have entered Istanbul.

In other words, it wasn't that the Treaty of Sevres wasn't implemented. Attempts were made to implement it. But at the point where it was thought to be over, the Turkish people, amidst such deprivation, demonstrated their will for independence, their political acumen, and their fighting ability in such a way that this treaty could not survive. Turks do not accept living under subjugation. If their state collapses, they will establish a new one. Rather than live without a homeland, they would destroy the world if necessary and take their place in the new world.

Very well put. But one thing you omitted, I might gather was probably by accident, was the very fact that we were given a genius to lead us in the name of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk through our “Kurtulusş Savaşı”.
As mentioned by British Prime Minister Lloyd George in the Parliament when defending his governments failures :
"Man may see an exceptional genius once in centuries. How unlucky we are that this rare genius of our era was born from the Turkish nation."
If It weren’t for the genius of Ataturk, most of us would not be here and those of us who were would carry a Greek name. At best majority of us would be carrying a foreign nationality similar to Palestinians.

 

[GoatsMilk]

Very well put. But one thing you omitted, I might gather was probably by accident, was the very fact that we were given a genius to lead us in the name of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk through our “Kurtulusş Savaşı”.
As mentioned by British Prime Minister Lloyd George in the Parliament when defending his governments failures :
"Man may see an exceptional genius once in centuries. How unlucky we are that this rare genius of our era was born from the Turkish nation."
If It weren’t for the genius of Ataturk, most of us would not be here and those of us who were would carry a Greek name. At best majority of us would be carrying a foreign nationality similar to Palestinians.

Its defiantly interesting how the psy-op conducted against the Turkish nation works day and night to turn Ataturk into an enemy, while it attempts to turn Ocalan the PKK/marxist shithead, whose own organisation sees islam as the enemy, into a hero.

The YPG was exterminating Muslims in Syria.

Its also interesting how the Turkish state was able to overthrow the entire political establishment in a foreign country. A political dynasty backed by the Russian and Iranian military and place ex al quaide affiliates into power. Yet they want to make the common Turk think the PKK is a problem that has to be diplomatically/politically handled. Absolute f'king nonsense.

 

[TR_123456]

This tweet presents the Treaty of Sevres as an unimplemented agreement. It wasn't unimplemented; they forcet it, but they couldn't sustain it. Every region you see on the map was occupied; even in the area designated as left to the Turkish people, the ports, sea routes, and railways were completely controlled by the occupying forces. Settlement policies were attempted in the occupied regions, hundreds of massacres occurred, and the civilian population was suppressed. The Ottoman state surrendered its seas, disbanded its army, closed its parliament, and, in complete submission, began to play a role in finalizing the occupation of Anatolia by signing the directives of the occupying forces' outpost commanders.

Having fought almost continuously since the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878, impoverished Anatolia, already suffering from an influx of displaced populations from the Balkans, Black Sea region, Levant, and North Africa, had neither an army nor capital. The only thing left was Anatolia itself. The slogan "Independence or Death" wasn't just a propaganda slogan. Anatolia was now the last stronghold. The Anatolian Turk had nowhere else to go.

The Turkish people's spirit of national struggle was at such a point that they would fight to the very end, to the last drop of Turkish blood. If the British had not withdrawn from Istanbul, the army would have entered Istanbul.

In other words, it wasn't that the Treaty of Sevres wasn't implemented. Attempts were made to implement it. But at the point where it was thought to be over, the Turkish people, amidst such deprivation, demonstrated their will for independence, their political acumen, and their fighting ability in such a way that this treaty could not survive. Turks do not accept living under subjugation. If their state collapses, they will establish a new one. Rather than live without a homeland, they would destroy the world if necessary and take their place in the new world.

Yeah most is far fetched,Turks in general dont give a damn about who rules them as long as they can have a somewhat good life.
Turks need a leader to fight for,without a leader Turks are like sheep who dont care who rules them.
Most of the population doesnt have the capacity to think of independence,its always a small minority able to make them fight for a cause.

 

[Fatman17]

How Big Was The Ottoman Empire At Its Peak?

How big was the Ottoman Empire? Discover its peak size, territorial expansion, and the key events that shaped one of history's greatest empires.

share.google

 

[Fatman17]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2087509404119609731

 

[Fatman17]

An extraordinary archaeological discovery in eastern Türkiye is drawing attention after an archaeologist examining satellite imagery noticed unusual formations in the landscape that turned out to be the remains of a vast fortified settlement.

The site, located near the village of Mescidli in Muş Province, covers approximately 120,000 square meters—an area equivalent to around 17 football fields—and is surrounded by roughly 1.4 kilometers of defensive walls. The scale makes it the largest fortress identified so far in Muş.

The discovery began when archaeologist Melik Mirbey Ömeroğlu examined satellite images of the region. He noticed structural traces that appeared inconsistent with natural geological formations. A subsequent visit to the area revealed that the unusual patterns were actually extensive remains of ancient defensive architecture.

Ömeroğlu has referred to the site as “Dev Kale,” meaning “Giant Fortress,” reflecting its remarkable dimensions. An application has also been submitted to the Van Regional Board for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage seeking official registration and protection of the archaeological site.

The surviving fortifications provide important clues about the site's construction. Researchers have identified cyclopean and polygonal masonry, techniques involving the use of large, irregularly shaped stones fitted together to create powerful defensive walls.

Some surviving sections of the walls stand approximately two meters high on their interior faces, while their exterior faces reach as much as four meters. Additional traces of structures have also been identified within the northern part of the fortified area.

In the southern section, researchers found a circular stone-built depression constructed with smaller stones. Its exact function remains uncertain, but it may have played a role in water storage or water management, something that would have been particularly important for a large fortified settlement.

The architecture has been compared with Early Iron Age fortresses elsewhere in eastern Turkey, including Aşağı Anzaf and Zivistan Fortress in Van Province. These similarities have raised the possibility that the newly identified site could belong to the same broader historical period.

The most intriguing question concerns a possible connection with the Kingdom of Urartu, one of the major powers of the ancient Near East during the Iron Age.

Urartu emerged around the region of Lake Van and, at its height between approximately the ninth and seventh centuries BC, controlled territories across parts of modern eastern Turkey, Armenia and northwestern Iran. The kingdom became known for its imposing mountain fortresses, sophisticated irrigation systems, roads and monumental construction.

The location of the newly identified fortress is particularly interesting because it lies near routes associated with the westward expansion of Urartian power and what researchers believe may have been part of the ancient Urartian road network.

However, the connection between the newly discovered fortress and the Kingdom of Urartu has not yet been proven.

The architectural similarities and strategic location make a Urartian association a compelling possibility, but they are not sufficient on their own to establish the site's identity or date. Archaeologists will need systematic fieldwork, excavations, analysis of pottery and other finds, and scientific dating before the fortress can be confidently attributed to Urartu.

The discovery could also contribute to the long-running archaeological debate surrounding Arzaskun, an ancient settlement associated with the early history of Urartu whose exact location remains uncertain. The Muş region has previously been discussed as a possible area connected with the elusive settlement, and the enormous size and strategic position of the newly identified fortress could provide new evidence for researchers investigating the question.

#archaeohistories
X.com