US plays 'genocide' card to pressure Turkey on NATO missile system

[Tshering22]

T.C. is lucky indeed to have had a strong nation-building leader like Ataturk who laid the foundations for the state.

His vision and ideas of early 20th century are still applicable even today. I don't think the country would be what it is without a leader like him.

He was a real nationalist.

Even though as an Indian I have not place in this thread, but I cannot help but appreciate Mustafa Kemal Ataturk for his noble leadership of Turkey. His fierce views transformed a weakening and dying empire into a modern powerful state.

Hats off to leaders like this in any part of the world. Their personal work must be appreciated and learnt from regardless of nationality.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Erdogan.

What you are saying about Kamal is not correct. Kamal was bitterly opposed to the idea of the Caliphate and supported Turkish nationalism instead of Pan Islamism...

Infact members of the Khilafah movement from India met Kamal and even asked him to declare himself a Caliph but he refused to do so...

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Even though as an Indian I have not place in this thread, but I cannot help but appreciate Mustafa Kemal Ataturk for his noble leadership of Turkey. His fierce views transformed a weakening and dying empire into a modern powerful state.

Hats off to leaders like this in any part of the world. Their personal work must be appreciated and learnt from regardless of nationality.

Kamal remains a dubious character in my opinion... He did some rather strange things in Turkey which have been counter productive in the long run... e.g the Turks lost all connection with their history after he changed his language to Latin script...

Otherwise though, it should be considered that Turkey managed to survive despite having lost the world war alongside Germany...

 

[Jigs]

Kamal remains a dubious character in my opinion... He did some rather strange things in Turkey which have been counter productive in the long run... e.g the Turks lost all connection with their history after he changed his language to Latin script...

Otherwise though, it should be considered that Turkey managed to survive despite having lost the world war alongside Germany...

Arab script was our history? That and Arab culture ? Don't think so.

 

[Jigs]

i just have to say this though: "language" does not make one modern, it's everything else that does. ataturk destroyed a part of turkish culture. i am not an expert, so take this as one person's opinions.

but do note:

Script in use in China: Chinese. Economy size: 2nd.
Script in use in Japan: Chinese and Japanese. Economy size: 3rd
Script in use in Nigeria: Western (English). Economy size: something like 50.

Was not our culture to begin with.

It is claimed that religious unity is also a factor in the formation of nations. Whereas, we see the contrary in the Turkish nation. Turks were a great nation even before they adopted Islam. This religion did not help the Arabs, Iranians, Egyptians and others to unite with Turks to form a nation. Conversely, it weakened the Turks’ national relations; it numbed Turkish national feelings and enthusiasm. This was natural, because Mohammedanism was based on Arab nationalism above all nationalities. -Ataturk

 

[The Clarifier]

Wow bro, I don't know much about Ataturk, but that quote ruined him for me... "mohammedanism" (Islam) is not based on Arab nationalism... it clearly says on the Qur'an that Arabs are not superior to other races...

I might not have much place in the debate, but becoming more 'western' is the same as losing one's identity.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Arab script was our history? That and Arab culture ? Don't think so.

and Latin script is Turkish?

 

[Jigs]

and Latin script is Turkish?

It was us forming our destiny rather then staying under the control of a Arab one.

We do not consider our principles as dogmas contained in books that are said to come from heaven. We derive our inspiration, not from heaven, or from an unseen world, but directly from life.

Statement (1 November 1937), as quoted in Atatürk: The Biography of the founder of Modern Turkey

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

script isnt so relevant because Ottoman Turkish was still different from Arabic; though it did used to take more Arabic words than modern spoken Turkish does. What I like about Ataturk is that there were many sides to him. He was a soldier, a nationalist, a nation-builder, philosopher, and many other things. I also don't agree that he had anything against religion. He was not atheist. He just didn't want religion and state to be inter-twined; his main goal and aspiration was to create a modern nation-state based on democratic and secular ideals. Some religious people sometimes mistake him as being anti-religion; you have to understand also the tumultuous nature of the period during and subsequent to the fall of the Ottoman empire. It was either remain down-trodden and in weak position, or take firm stand and fight for an independent nation-state.

many of the Muslim peoples/ancestors of today's Pakistan also gave sacrifices and support to Turkish independence cause






















by the way, did you know there are 5,000 common words between Turkish and Urdu? Many of our mutual words are also used in Farsi as well.

 

[Kambojaric]

Though completed off topic yet i am very curious to know from our Turkish friends that is Ottoman Turkish very different from modern Turkish?

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

It was us forming our destiny rather then staying under the control of a Arab one.

What are you saying Jigs... The Turks were the leaders and rulers of Arabs... You were not under control of anyone...

Instead of the honor of the leadership of the whole Muslim world... Kamal made Turkey into a third rate country... From the mighty Ottoman Empire to a nationalist republic which Europe and America has been able to exploit for their own purposes...

I can understand why Turks are still upset at Arabs... They rebelled against the Ottomans when the Ottoman state was weak and under attack... but this was no reason to reject the ideology of Islam and try to become like the Europeans who have for centuries hated Turks...

 

[Jigs]

Wow bro, I don't know much about Ataturk, but that quote ruined him for me... "mohammedanism" (Islam) is not based on Arab nationalism... it clearly says on the Qur'an that Arabs are not superior to other races...

I might not have much place in the debate, but becoming more 'western' is the same as losing one's identity.

Well see i understand why you wouldn't like this. Not many here would. To understand what he is saying here you must alter you thinking. Ataturk doesn't view what is quoted in religious text as the absolute authority because he knows it has been altered through the ages. Both the Quran and Bible have been altered repeatedly. Perfect example is the new and old Testimate which in some areas drastic changes occurred. He is saying here that the Idea of Mohammedanism was something implemented to conform with Arab nationalist ideals.

The foundation of our religion is very strong. The material is strong as well, but the building itself was neglected for hundreds of years. As the plaster dropped down, none thought to replace it and none felt the need to reinforce the building. Quite the contrary: many foreign elements and interpretations, as well as empty beliefs, came along and damaged it still more. -Ataturk

This would give you a better understanding of what he meant. Of course most here will completely reject this.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

looking to today, Turkiye seems to have good relations with most Arab countries.....they used to have tensions with Syria over Kurdish rebels issue, but that issue is resolved and they have trade agreements and even lax visa regulations (Syrians and Turks can cross eachother's border with much ease)

yes some left-leaning social democratic Turks tend to be ''anti'' Arab (in absence of better words) but not necessarily in a racist or anti-religious way. Some view them and their customs and norms as backwards, and not compatible with Turkiye.

Again, i am only basing my views based on what I have seen in Turkiye and based on interactions with Turks while I lived there.

You walk around either Asian (Annatolian) or European side of Istanbul, you'll see many Mosques and many devout Muslims and alongside them you will see Westernized looking people, even romantic couples holding hands.

Very interesting to see actually; kind of like Beirut where similar thing takes place.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

script isnt so relevant because Ottoman Turkish was still different from Arabic; though it did used to take more Arabic words than modern spoken Turkish does. What I like about Ataturk is that there were many sides to him. He was a soldier, a nationalist, a nation-builder, philosopher, and many other things. I also don't agree that he had anything against religion. He was not atheist. He just didn't want religion and state to be inter-twined; his main goal and aspiration was to create a modern nation-state based on democratic and secular ideals. Some religious people sometimes mistake him as being anti-religion; you have to understand also the tumultuous nature of the period during and subsequent to the fall of the Ottoman empire. It was either remain down-trodden and in weak position, or take firm stand and fight for an independent nation-state.

many of the Muslim peoples/ancestors of today's Pakistan also gave sacrifices and support to Turkish independence cause






















by the way, did you know there are 5,000 common words between Turkish and Urdu? Many of our mutual words are also used in Farsi as well.

Urdu itself is a Turkish word Abu Zolfiqar

As for the issue of script change... It is important because Turkish history and legacy as recorded by the Ottomans became inaccessible to the younger generation of the Turks...

The children of Osman Ghazi and Fatih Sultan Mehmet may Allah be pleased with the Ottomans are reawakening again God willing...

 

[Jigs]

What are you saying Jigs... The Turks were the leaders and rulers of Arabs... You were not under control of anyone...

Instead of the honor of the leadership of the whole Muslim world... Kamal made Turkey into a third rate country... From the mighty Ottoman Empire to a nationalist republic which Europe and America has been able to exploit for their own purposes...

I can understand why Turks are still upset at Arabs... They rebelled against the Ottomans when the Ottoman state was weak and under attack... but this was no reason to reject the ideology of Islam and try to become like the Europeans who have for centuries hated Turks...

The mighty ottoman empire plz. You forget WW1 ? You forget what the Sultan agreed to ? Let me refresh your memory.

So your actually complete wrong. This was the third rate country that awaited us if we went with the Sultan and Ottoman empire. Most of the Turks would not even be born in Turkey but in foreign occupied territories. I am sure that would have been a fun life.

Instead we are the strongest economic Muslim majority nation in the world. This was due to Ataturks reforms. Why not take a look at the Arab states ? If it was not for their oil they would go back to killing each other till nations jumped in for crowd control.