Give Hagia Sophia back to Christianity?

[asad71]

Sounds more like trying to leach off someone else's achievements

1.You dont understand or don't want to understand. Bengalee Muslim volunteers had joined Kamal Ataturk and shed blood fighting the Christian armies here in Turkey. Our youth have fought in Palestine, in Afghanistan and even in Kashmir. Its not only our youth but Muslims from all over joining to participate in the Jihad to stand beside fellow Muslims under attack. The victory of Sultan Fatih Mehmet was a victory of all Muslims.

2. FYI, that is why Pakistan's nuke has been called the Islamic Bomb. Its not incorrect altogether. Muslims under attack anywhere in the world have a right to seek Pak nuke assistance should such a situation arise.

 

[qamar1990]

Thats because European Istanbul was originally Roman Empire and the Cordoba Cathedral/masjid was reclaimed from the Arab Invaders by the Catholics.

Now ay they would let you pray there,be happy they don't prosecute the Moroccans and Algerians who enter illegally.



Have you been there?

I have been there and it is far from a mosque?

They just have stuff in there like a prayer hall and some things,otherwise it is a proper orthodox cathedral.

ok bud what ever you say.
by having a prayer hall for muslims what is it allied to? are christians allowed to pray there?

 

[bronxbull]

i have seen people do namaaz everywhere,in their houses,even on the road as it suits them.

Then whats the importance of the Masjid,the architecture? is there any specific design for the masjid?

Is the friday prayer at the masjid compulsory according to the quran or is it a thing of tradition?

Because if i compare with the similarity of masjid designs,the hagia sofya is a pure orthodox cathedral.

The design,the stairs upto the top floor.

1.You dont understand or don't want to understand. Bengalee Muslim volunteers had joined Kamal Ataturk and shed blood fighting the Christian armies here in Turkey. Our youth have fought in Palestine, in Afghanistan and even in Kashmir. Its not only our youth but Muslims from all over joining to participate in the Jihad to stand beside fellow Muslims under attack. The victory of Sultan Fatih Mehmet was a victory of all Muslims.

2. FYI, that is why Pakistan's nuke has been called the Islamic Bomb. Its not incorrect altogether. Muslims under attack anywhere in the world have a right to seek Pak nuke assistance should such a situation arise.

100,000 plus Ottoman Army won over a small number of defendants,whats the big deal in this?

Any proof of Bengali Muslims in combat in the siege,perhaps the Turks took teenage boys for other reasons.

 

[bronxbull]

Turkiye can start by banning alcohol in European Istanbul,we ll see who goes to Istanbul after that.

 

[Yabgu]

i have seen people do namaaz everywhere,in their houses,even on the road as it suits them.

Then whats the importance of the Masjid,the architecture? is there any specific design for the masjid?

Is the friday prayer at the masjid compulsory according to the quran or is it a thing of tradition?

Because if i compare with the similarity of masjid designs,the hagia sofya is a pure orthodox cathedral.

The design,the stairs upto the top floor.



100,000 plus Ottoman Army won over a small number of defendants,whats the big deal in this?

Any proof of Bengali Muslims in combat in the siege,perhaps the Turks took teenage boys for other reasons.

100,000 vs small number? Is that why nobody could of conquerer it before?

Let's look at it this way, little Britain 60million today ruled India 1.3 billion, it seems 1.3 billions are naturally slaves looking at these figures.

I love how these Indians try to put down other people's achievements while their whole history they been slaves and no achievement in history.

 

[bronxbull]

Dude,please.

The siege was not a crusade.

As that bengali dude says,there were mujahids all over the world in the Ottoman Army and who came to the rescue of the Roman King,

Nobody,not even The Catholic Church which was fighting with the Orthodox church.

Go check History,it may fill you with pride that the siege gave you Constantinople,the prized possession but it was a mere formality.

60 day siege,god we have seen much bigger sieges in India in worse weather

 

[Pakistani E]

Dude,please.

The siege was not a crusade.

As that bengali dude says,there were mujahids all over the world in the Ottoman Army and who came to the rescue of the Roman King,

Nobody,not even The Catholic Church which was fighting with the Orthodox church.

Go check History,it may fill you with pride that the siege gave you Constantinople,the prized possession but it was a mere formality.

60 day siege,god we have seen much bigger sieges in India in worse weather

So I take it you're an expert in medieval warfare are you? Constantinople had strong defended walls. The walls had been restored, the city well stocked with supplies. This isn't modern warfare where you can blast through stone with heavy artillery and what have you. This is bloody hand to hand combat. trying to get to the gates, trying to destroy the walls, you can relegate it to a formality if you want but anyone who is well versed in medieval warfare understand the importance of this victory.

And Ottoman army probably numbered less than 100k. It's mostly western historians who try to bolster the number of ottomans to try to hide their shame because the can't accept losing to the ottomans.

 

[flamer84]

Let's be honest folks ,Constantinople in 1453 was but a former shadow of itself,a far cry from the city which withstood the arab sieges a few centuries earlier,the Byzantine empire was gone but in name,no westerners came to rescue the besieged city except some genoese who were there on business,its conquest was a foregone conclusion from the start.Respect to the last emperor Constantine who chose to die on the walls with his men instead of fleeing aboard the genoese ships who broke the ottoman encirclement and made their way to Italy.A fitting end for the last Roman emperor.

A big LOL at pakistanis and bangladeshis adding their name to the conquest,if anything we should mention the thousands of christians who fought for the ottomans,most of them serbs.
Now ,tell to all those nationalistic serbs screaming against turks that their ancestors actually fought for the turks and helped them conquer Constantinople,that should shut them up.))

 

[Pakistani E]

Let's be honest folks ,Constantinople in 1453 was but a former shadow of itself,a far cry from the city which withstood the arab sieges a few centuries earlier,the Byzantine empire was gone but in name,no westerners came to rescue the besieged city except some genoese who were there on business,its conquest was a foregone conclusion from the start.Respect to the last emperor Constantine who chose to die on the walls with his men instead of fleeing aboard the genoese ships who broke the ottoman encirclement and made their way to Italy.A fitting end for the last Roman emperor.

A big LOL at pakistanis and bangladeshis adding their name to the conquest,if anything we should mention the thousands of christians who fought for the ottomans,most of them serbs.
Now ,tell to all those nationalistic serbs screaming against turks that their ancestors actually fought for the turks and helped them conquer Constantinople,that should shut them up.))

I'm not disagreeing with you that Constantinople in 1453 was a shadow of its former self, I was merely pointing out that it was still defendable. I don't look at these types of things to take pride out of them or big up my ego. I just look at them from a historical point of view. It was indeed a momentous occasion for the ottomans. One of the great ancient powers had been destroyed, the home of the eastern church had been taken, thanks in part to their catholic brethren who left them at the mercy of the ottomans. I'm just disagreeing with the poster who claimed the siege was a formality, I'd like to see him/her charge across open ground under constant fire to get to the walls, only to be attacked from the defenders inside.

 

[Wright]

Ottomans had the cannon, which made city walls obsolete.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

It was a formality. The city was completely cut off. No supplies and all...

I'm not disagreeing with you that Constantinople in 1453 was a shadow of its former self, I was merely pointing out that it was still defendable. I don't look at these types of things to take pride out of them or big up my ego. I just look at them from a historical point of view. It was indeed a momentous occasion for the ottomans. One of the great ancient powers had been destroyed, the home of the eastern church had been taken, thanks in part to their catholic brethren who left them at the mercy of the ottomans. I'm just disagreeing with the poster who claimed the siege was a formality, I'd like to see him/her charge across open ground under constant fire to get to the walls, only to be attacked from the defenders inside.

 

[Pakistani E]

It was a formality. The city was completely cut off. No supplies and all...

yes well that happens in all sieges doesn't it?

 

[flamer84]

I'm not disagreeing with you that Constantinople in 1453 was a shadow of its former self, I was merely pointing out that it was still defendable. I don't look at these types of things to take pride out of them or big up my ego. I just look at them from a historical point of view. It was indeed a momentous occasion for the ottomans. One of the great ancient powers had been destroyed, the home of the eastern church had been taken, thanks in part to their catholic brethren who left them at the mercy of the ottomans. I'm just disagreeing with the poster who claimed the siege was a formality, I'd like to see him/her charge across open ground under constant fire to get to the walls, only to be attacked from the defenders inside.

Oh yes,it still had the greatest walls on Earth ,unfortunately gun powder reared its ugly head,the turks took a huge gamble,for all they knew with all those rumours around a western relief force could arrive trapping them between the walls and an outside army-the arabbs were destroyed this way a few centuries earlier under the walls of the city-,ofcourse no force arrived despite the Pope's desperate urgings( he was desperate not because of Constantinople but because he thought he and Rome will be next).

Constantinople was ruined in 1204 when catholics destroyed it once and for all,if anything the turks restored the city to its place as the center of a universal empire.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

yes well that happens in all sieges doesn't it?

Successful sieges
Where there is no scope of escape for the defending army.

 

[Pakistani E]

Ottomans had the cannon, which made city walls obsolete.

yes and we all know how accurate the cannons of the 15th century were.

Successful sieges
Where there is no scope of escape for the defending army.

exactly, it was just a well planned conquest. That's all I'm saying.

Oh yes,it still had the greatest walls on Earth ,unfortunately gun powder reared its ugly head,the turks took a huge gamble,for all they knew with all those rumours around a western relief force could arrive trapping them between the walls and an outside army-the arabbs were destroyed this way a few centuries earlier under the walls of the city-,ofcourse no force arrived despite the Pope's desperate urgings( he was desperate not because of Constantinople but because he thought he and Rome will be next).

Constantinople was ruined in 1204 when catholics destroyed it once and for all,if anything the turks restored the city to its place as the center of a universal empire.

Totally agree with you.