 |
| |
|
|
kIndal
|
 |
de la taifa de Almería, Spain.
Oct 2000
time: 06:14
|
|
Too, I think that is better speak about this subject in a new thread 
quote:
Sorry, but I would like to laugh at the idea that Iceland, Ireland and Britain are geographically part of Europe (which they are not-nitice the presence of seas seperating them from the continent) but I have to be serious on this matter.
|
Sorry if it offends you, but I think that is a nosense say that these three islands arenīt European, so it means that no islands are part of a continent, Madagascar arenīt African, Cuba arenīt American or Japan arenīt Asian. So each island is a diferent continent????
quote:
I think the problem is that nobody has the perfect definition of what Europe is. During a stage in Switzerland as an Erasmus student one time a French one said me: Well if you are Spanish you are not European, you are African because Europe ends in the Pyrinees mountains.
In fact I think he was partially right, after all historically, culturally and geographically I am nearest to Maroc than for example Sweden or Poland.
|
About French, it is a typical phrase of them but something like when we call them "gabachos" or "son como los moros" it is only a way to insult us. I am not very sure about the nearer of Morroco to Spain they have a culture completly diferent to us and historically, well, we have been in war against Sweden and allied of Poland so.... geographical could be, but our countries are nearer to Polish economics than to Morroco ones.
quote:
I will believe more in a Mediteranean Union (of course south Mediterranean countries must change a lot politically) than in the EC[quote]
could be a very interesting idea, but you have to think that we are the poor countries in EC so do you think that Spain,, Italy or Greece can really make stronger the Economy of other countries in south mediterranean coast?, too you have to think that West Mediterranean Sea there are a lot of armed conflicts as Israel-Palestine,Argelian fundamentalism or Cyprus soveraignity and pair more, so as somebody has said, a union cannot have members in war between theselves.
[quote]Certainly, I as an Armenian condem the Turkish government's behaviour towards us and also towards its own Muslim citizens, but other nations too have to face War Crimes and Human Rights abuses, so the notion that Turkey is prohibited from jioning the EEC due to such notions falls flat when you realise what other 'Developed' nation have done to become 'Developed'.
|
But we arenīt speaking about the abuses of hundred of years in the past (you have forgotten the atrocities of Janissaries in Balkans  and nobody said that Turkey must to pay for them), we are speaking about actual problems.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Masis
|
 |
London
May 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kIndal on 05-07-2001 03:33 AM
Too, I think that is better speak about this subject in a new thread
But we arenīt speaking about the abuses of hundred of years in the past (you have forgotten the atrocities of Janissaries in Balkans and nobody said that Turkey must to pay for them), we are speaking about actual problems.
|
[quote]Originally posted by Masis on 05-06-2001 10:32 PM
Turkeys real reason for being turned down as a member of the EEC
(though it has a Customs Union) is real-politik, the economy.
Currently 2,000,000 Turkish Lira=Ģ1 English Pound.
It can not solely be due to Human Rights abuses as Norway and other
Scandinavian countries have blood on their hands too-The Vikings (famous Viking torture 'the blood eagle' in which a person was tied to
a stake, had their chest slit open and the ribs pulled apart).
Spain, alas, has also it's fair share of Human Rights abuses-The
Inquisition + The conquest of the Americas leading to the
enslavement of Thousands of Native Americans and the destruction of
the MesoAmerican socieities.
[/qoute]
Apologies to Kindal and Henrik if by mentioning the Human Rights abuses of the Spaniards and Scandinavians I have touched a National Nerve within them.
Just because these atrocities happened in the so called past does not excuse the descendants to avoid admiting the Guilt of the Nation.
That is merely copying the stance of the Turkish government which wishes to blame the Ottomans for past atrocities, though the 'greatest' level of atrocites was committed by the Young Turk movement-the Kemalist nation of modern Turkey being it's heir.
I do not look passively at these atrocties as being a part of life, I look at them as a syndrome of the illness of Humanity.
Merely by stating the atrocities of your nations, I follow the saying of Our Lord Jesus Christ "You can not remove the piece of grit from your brother's eye when you have a log covering your eyes, first remove the log and then remove the grit from your brothers eyes".
This means that to criticise a fault of another is pointless when one has many fault to deal with first.
Have the now 'Christian' nations payed compensation to the few remaining minorites who have suffered under their rule?
It is worth noting that the Christian minorites under Muslim rule regulate their lives with the Christian Church, where as Christians living freely are unlikely to be as loyal to their Church, a recent visit to the highlands of Scotland were my Grandmother lives, going to the Protestant Church on a Sunday only to fine me and a few elderly people making up the total congregation.
On visiting my Grandmother in Istanbul last year, going to the Armenian church on a Sunday to find it packed out, with many people not getting seats, I gave mine to an elderly lady.
So the conclusion is that generally it is viewed that Turkey is a barbaric heathen nation of no cultural value and that north European nations represent the pinicle of civilisation.
In reality it is the exact oposite when wieghing the historical level of civilisation with a time span that the former Roman Empire of Constantinople that lasted for over 1,000 years continuing a further 1,000 years of Roman civilisation in itself from its founding in 753 BC.
Can any north European nation claim such an organised society at that period of time?
Turkey is the result of the battle of Manazgert (which was a failure for the Romans due to treachery not amateurism),the 4th crusade and subsequent western antagonism towards the Orthodox nations of the Balkans.
The Turks acted as a blanket, a very thin military one covering an ancient legacy of civilisation which is why few cities in Turkey today are of Turkish origin.
Ankara was Ankyra
Istanbul was Istin Polin (Into the City), New Rome-Constantinopolis
Izmit was Istin Media, Nikomedia
Iznik was Istin Nikia, Nikia
Silivri was Selemvria
Edirne was Adriana, Adrianopolis
Sivas was Sevastia
Kaisari was Kaisaria, Mazaca
Malatya was Meletia, Meletene
Izmir was Istin Smyrna, Smyrna
Antalya was Attalia
Tarsos was Tarsos
Antakya was Antiokia
Erzerum was Ardzen Er Rum (Ardzen of the Romans), Theodosiopolis, Karin
Trabzon was Trabzond, Trapesos
Konya was Ikonia
Erigli was Eraklia, Heraklia
Diyarbakir was Diyar Bakir (Place of Copper), Amida
Niksar was Nea Kaisaria
Amasya was Amassea
Gelibolu was Gallipoli
Efes was Ephesos
Edremit was Adrametion
Van was Van, Tushpa
Erzincan was Sinerva
Kars was Kars
Artvin was Artvin
Manazgert was Manzikert
Many Turkish place names translate into their exact Roman origin, for example Silivri Kapi(Gate) on the Theodosian walls was historically called The Gate of Selemvria, a distirct today called Bakir Koy (Copper District) was called Copper District during the Roman Empire.
Even the area my Grandmother lives is still locally called Samatya, as it was during the Roman Empire.
So the blanket of Turkish nationalism is thin indeed which explains why their are no books to be found in Turkey explaining the cultural legacy of Turkey for Turks to read, all books being State Censored.
Take a look at the below picture, on the your left is the Preseident of Mongolia, on your right is the (ex) President of Turkey Suleiman Demirel.
Notice that for a so-called Turanic person, Demirel looks more Mediterranean, unlike his counterpart the President of Mongolia.
So, who are the people of Modern Turkey?
I will let you ponder on that question...
------------------
MRP
[This message has been edited by Masis (edited May 13, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Masis (edited May 13, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Masis (edited May 13, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Masis
|
|
London
May 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Originally posted by kindal...
"Sorry if it offends you, but I think that is a nosense say that these three islands arenīt European, so it means that no islands are part of a continent, Madagascar arenīt African, Cuba arenīt American or Japan arenīt Asian. So each island is a diferent continent????"
It is hard to offend me, no need to apologise.
No, Iceland is Tectonically neither a part of Europe or America, it can not make its mind up, the island is split into two halves and the unfortunate Icelanders suffer periodical earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.
Ireland is a bastion of Celtic heritage, very little remains in Europe, tihs makes it distinct from the mainland, but back to real-politik, the EEC gives monetary aid to the Republic of Ireland so who are they to worry about their ethnic distinction from the Germans and Latins?
Britain is so ethnically mixed up historically speaking that is will avoid a lot of scholarly headaches if it just says it is an integral part of Europe and clubs in.
The island of Madagascar is technically ethnically a part of Indonesia-How?
Find out Here
The island of Cuba is very seperate from the north American continent, the gulf of Mexico being created by an ancient Asteriod impact that is sited as being the case of the extinction of the Dinosaurs, the crater was deep, leaving a few shattered ridges of islands that had formerly been a part of the north American continent.
Also, it is unlikely Cuba's Communist party will want to be jioned to the U.S.A.
Japan, though it owes its origins to the mainland, has developed a distinct culture that is seperate from that of the mainland, it too is tectonically seperate from the mainland which explains why that archipegalo suffers from periodical earthquakes and volcanic erruptions.
You see Kindal, I was reading about Earth Plate Techtonics when I was six years old, when I say that Iceland is not a part of Europe I know it is not!
------------------
MRP
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Henrik
|
 |
The European Union, Sweden, Lund
Dec 2000
time: 06:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Masis on 05-07-2001 03:15 PM
Can any north European nation claim such an organised society at that period of time?
Turkey is the result of the battle of Manazgert (which was a failure for the Romans due to treachery not amateurism),the 4th crusade and subsequent western antagonism towards the Orthodox nations of the Balkans.
The Turks acted as a blanket, a very thin military one covering an ancient legacy of civilisation which is why few cities in Turkey today are of Turkish origin.
Many Turkish place names translate into their exact Roman origin, for example Silivri Kapi(Gate) on the Theodosian walls was historically called The Gate of Selemvria.
Even the area my Grandmother lives is still locally called Samatya, as it was during the Roman Empire.
So the blanket of Turkish nationalism is thin indeed which explains why their are no books to be found in Turkey explaining the cultural legacy of Turkey for Turks to read, all books being State Censored.
Notice that for a so-called Turanic person, Demirel looks more Mediterranean, unlike his counterpart the President of Mongolia.
So, who are the people of Modern Turkey?
I will let you ponder on that question...
|
I think you have prejucidices about our prejucidices
I do not look at Turkey as a barbaric nation I know my history to so you don't need to tell me about how civilized this area has been before there was even such a thing as civilization in Europe.
What I do have problems whit for example is that they occupy a large portion of a neighboring nation.
[This message has been edited by Henrik (edited May 07, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Henrik
|
|
The European Union, Sweden, Lund
Dec 2000
time: 06:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Masis on 05-07-2001 03:40 PM
Originally posted by kindal...
"Sorry if it offends you, but I think that is a nosense say that these three islands arenīt European, so it means that no islands are part of a continent, Madagascar arenīt African, Cuba arenīt American or Japan arenīt Asian. So each island is a diferent continent????"
It is hard to offend me, no need to apologise.
No, Iceland is Tectonically neither a part of Europe or America, it can not make its mind up, the island is split into two halves and the unfortunate Icelanders suffer periodical earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.
Ireland is a bastion of Celtic heritage, very little remains in Europe, tihs makes it distinct from the mainland, but back to real-politik, the EEC gives monetary aid to the Republic of Ireland so who are they to worry about their ethnic distinction from the Germans and Latins?
Britain is so ethnically mixed up historically speaking that is will avoid a lot of scholarly headaches if it just says it is an integral part of Europe and clubs in.
Japan, though it owes its origins to the mainland, has developed a distinct culture that is seperate from that of the mainland, it too is tectonically seperate from the mainland which explains why that archipegalo suffers from periodical earthquakes and volcanic erruptions.
You see Kindal, I was reading about Earth Plate Techtonics when I was six years old, when I say that Iceland is not a part of Europe I know it is not!
|
Ever since I was a very little child I have been told that Ireland and Iceland are Europe have I been lied to?
It is possible that you are paying too much attention to the word "continent" we arent talking about geological continents, but about geografical ones (or even more precise: cartografical (not entirely sure about this word either I am afraid) ).
On all maps Iceland, Ireland and the brittish Isles are defined as european (even tough the brits tends to refer to every other europeans as living on the "continent"). This is how it has been since the midle ages.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Waku
|
 |
Cádiz, Spain
Nov 2000
time: 06:14
|
|
This is getting too surealist and I honestly think you're wasting lots of words in what im my opinion are byzantian arguments (in spanish this expression mean unresolvable arguments, I don't know in English, but quite suitable here).
Europe
It's only a name, we need to give names to everything, it's only a good way to identify things. You have just reminded me when Homer Simpson was jumping over a line in the ground (don't remember now which border was it) saying now I'm here... now I'm there... It also reminded me of an argument about Cuba, some say it was in North America, Some Say Central, is it really important? Cuba isn't gonna move from where it is!
btw South America is tectonically a part of Africa
Inquisition, Vikings, ...
Unfortunatelly this kind of things have happened in every country, every culture (they still happen in too many places), human being is a very competitive ape. What we have to do is to try to wipe it out from earth at once. I challenge you to tell me only one culture/country free from sin.
Turkey
I'm not so aware about Turkey or Tunis, but I think they are comparable to Maroc, and I really think these countries are making efforts to become modern countries, they have only started to change, but I'm optimistic. Some latin countries (Spain included) weren't too different 50 years ago, some others are still at the same level than 50 yrs/ago.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chris 62
|
 |
But I'm feeling MUCH better now
Jan 2001
time: 00:14
|
|
What the hell are you guys arguing about?!!?  I read all the posts in this thread, and I don't understand (Waku, the Simpsons episode you mention was set in Australia, and the Marine guard punched Homer in the head for doing that ). It sounds like Masis is geogrphically challenged. Iceland is a pertruding portion of the mid-Atlantic ridge (As are the Azores), and is a part of Europe, not undecieded. And don't try to argue otherwise, becasue I've been there.  Ireland may be Celtic in origin, but how does this make it not a part of Europe? Cuba, and all the Caribbean Islands are part of the Americas, and Madagascar is certainly part of Africa, and to say Japan is not a part of Asia is just non-sense. Spain is not part of Europe? That is insane. The Iberian Pennisular is most certainly an integral part of Europe, and always has been. Is this a question of Turkey being part of Europe? Only a small piece of it, that includes Istanbul, is a part of Europe. The rest, including the capital of Ankara, is in Asia. The bulk of this nation is geograpically Asian, not European. As for culture, that is another matter, but my understanding is you have to be a European nation to be in the EU, not an Asian one, but of course, I could be wrong in this.
------------------
All knowledge begins with the phrase: I don't know.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Masis
|
|
London
May 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by cpoulos on 05-07-2001 08:52 PM
What the hell are you guys arguing about?!!? I read all the posts in this thread, and I don't understand (Waku, the Simpsons episode you mention was set in Australia, and the Marine guard punched Homer in the head for doing that ). It sounds like Masis is geogrphically challenged. Iceland is a pertruding portion of the mid-Atlantic ridge (As are the Azores), and is a part of Europe, not undecieded. And don't try to argue otherwise, becasue I've been there. Ireland may be Celtic in origin, but how does this make it not a part of Europe? Cuba, and all the Caribbean Islands are part of the Americas, and Madagascar is certainly part of Africa, and to say Japan is not a part of Asia is just non-sense. Spain is not part of Europe? That is insane. The Iberian Pennisular is most certainly an integral part of Europe, and always has been. Is this a question of Turkey being part of Europe? Only a small piece of it, that includes Istanbul, is a part of Europe. The rest, including the capital of Ankara, is in Asia. The bulk of this nation is geograpically Asian, not European. As for culture, that is another matter, but my understanding is you have to be a European nation to be in the EU, not an Asian one, but of course, I could be wrong in this.
|
Did you like the Azores by the way?
God knows where you are getting the false quote that I said Spain is not a part of Europe, my stance is that to be a member of the EEC your country needs to be near Europe, I was merely giving Irony to the idea that Turkey, Morroco and Tunisa are not a part of/near Europe by comparing the membership of such nations as Iceland, Britain and the Republic of Ireland (by the way, why is Sweden not a member of the EEC?) and that apparently they have had no historical integration into a European realm which is nonsense when you look back to the Roman Empire of the 1st-7th centuies AD, by the 7th century much of Spain and all of Gaul had passed out of Roman control but Mauritania Tingitana (Morroco), Numidia (Tunisa), and Anatolia (Turkey) were still a part of it, continuing the process of civilisation that had ceased in other parts of Europe.
The modern nations of Tunisa, Morroco and Turkey only need to clean up their Act and their economy to obtain EEC membership, other than that they have nothing to prove to Brussels or Strasbourg.
------------------
MRP
[This message has been edited by Masis (edited May 08, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Masis
|
|
London
May 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Turkeys real reason for being turned down as a member of the EEC(though it has a Customs Union) is real-politik, the economy. Currently 2,000,000 Turkish Lira=Ģ1 English Pound.
It can not solely be due to Human Rights abuses as Norway and other
Scandinavian countries have blood on their hands too-The Vikings (famous Viking torture 'the blood eagle' in which a person was tied to a stake, had their chest slit open and the ribs pulled apart).
Spain, alas, has also it's fair share of Human Rights abuses-The
Inquisition + The conquest of the Americas leading to the enslavement of Thousands of Native Americans and the destruction of the MesoAmerican socieities.
Apologies to Kindal and Henrik if by mentioning the Human Rights abuses of the Spaniards and Scandinavians I have touched a National Nerve within them.
Just because these atrocities happened in the so called past does not excuse the descendants to avoid admiting the Guilt of the Nation.
That is merely copying the stance of the Turkish government which wishes to blame the Ottomans for past atrocities, though the 'greatest' level of atrocites was committed by the Young Turk movement-the Kemalist nation of modern Turkey being it's heir.
I do not look passively at these atrocties as being a part of life, I look at them as a syndrome of the illness of Humanity.
Merely by stating the atrocities of your nations, I follow the saying of Our Lord Jesus Christ "You can not remove the piece of grit from your brother's eye when you have a log covering your eyes, first remove the
log and then remove the grit from your brothers eyes".
This means that to criticise a fault of another is pointless when one has many fault to deal with first.
Have the now 'Christian' nations payed compensation to the few remaining minorites who have suffered under their rule?
It is worth noting that the Christian minorites under Muslim rule regulate their lives with the Christian Church, where as Christians living freely are unlikely to be as loyal to their Church, a recent visit to the
highlands of Scotland were my Grandmother lives, going to the Protestant Church on a Sunday only to fine me and a few elderly people making up the total congregation.
On visiting my Grandmother in Istanbul last year, going to the Armenian church on a Sunday to find it packed out, with many people not getting seats, I gave mine to an elderly lady.
So the conclusion is that generally it is viewed that Turkey is a barbaric heathen nation of no cultural value and that north European nations represent the pinicle of civilisation.
In reality it is the exact oposite when wieghing the historical level of civilisation with a time span that the former Roman Empire of Constantinople that lasted for over 1,000 years continuing a further 1,000 years of Roman civilisation in itself from its founding in 753 BC.
Can any north European nation claim such an organised society at that period of time?
Turkey is the result of the battle of Manazgert (which was a failure for the Romans due to treachery not amateurism),the 4th crusade and subsequent western antagonism towards the Orthodox nations of the Balkans.
The Turks acted as a blanket, a very thin military one covering an ancient legacy of civilisation which is why few cities in Turkey today are of Turkish origin.
Ankara was Ankyra
Istanbul was Istin Polin (Into the City), New Rome-Constantinopolis
Izmit was Istin Media, Nikomedia
Iznik was Istin Nikia, Nikia
Silivri was Selemvria
Elazig was Ellasgert ('Greek City' in Armenian)
Edirne was Adriana, Adrianopolis
Sivas was Sevastia
Kaisari was Kaisaria (Caesaria), Mazaca
Malatya was Meletia, Meletene
Izmir was Istin Smyrna, Smyrna
Antalya was Attalia
Tarsos was Tarsos
Antakya was Antiokia
Erzerum was Ardzen Er Rum (Ardzen of the Romans), Theodosiopolis, Karin
Trabzon was Trabzond, Trapesos
Isparta was Istin Parisa, Parisos
Konya was Ikonia
Erigli was Eraklia, Heraklia
Diyarbakir was Diyar Bakir (Place of Copper), Amida
Niksar was Nea Kaisaria
Amasya was Amassea
Samsun was Istin Amisson (Amazon), Amissos
Gelibolu was Gallipoli
Efes was Ephesos
Edremit was Adrametion
Van was Van, Tushpa
Erzincan was Sinerva
Kars was Kars
Artvin was Artvin
Manazgert was Manzikert
Urfa was Urfa, Edessa
Harran was Harran, Carrhae
Iskedurun was Alexanderon, Alexandtretta
Tiribolu was Tripoli
Giresun was Girison
Trua was Troy, Ilium
Marash was Kermarisia, Germanicea
Yozgat was Ioskatia
Uskutar was Skutari, Chrysopolis
Marmara was Marmara (marble sea)
Again, many Turkish place names translate into their exact Roman origin, for example Silivri Kapi(Gate) on the Theodosian walls was historically called The Gate of Selemvria, a distirct today called Bakir Koy (Copper
District) was called Copper District during the Roman Empire.
Even the area my Grandmother lives is still locally called Samatya, as it was during the Roman Empire.
So the blanket of Turkish nationalism is thin indeed which explains why their are no books to be found in Turkey explaining the cultural legacy of Turkey for Turks to read, all books being State Censored.
Take a look at the below picture, on the your left is the Preseident of Mongolia, on your right is the (ex) President of Turkey Suleiman Demirel.
Notice that for a so-called Turkic person, Demirel looks more Mediterranean, unlike his counterpart the President of Mongolia.
So, who are the people of Modern Turkey?
I will let you ponder on that question...
------------------
MRP
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Masis
|
|
London
May 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
"It is a human rights abuse case, but it is not relevant to the matter at hand. As far as I know, Armenians are not being held in Turkish Concentration camps right now. Therefore, it cannot be used to justify excluding Turkey from the EU."
"As far as I know..." Yes, you do not know- but in fact Armenians are being held in concentration camps, my uncle was! And they live in constant fear of government action.
"Bloody hell? Do I really have to agonize over the bones of slaughtered Neanderthals scattered all over Europe just because one of my ancestors might have been involved? I have nothing against not ignoring it, but people should not expect me to give a darn. Time heals all wounds."
"Bloody hell?" Temper temper, that will not win an argument I hear swearing all day where I am so it will not affect me one iota.
"Time heals all wounds" Tell that to a Jew on the subject of the Holocaust.
As to the fate of the so called Neanderthals (an ironic word meaning New Man, that it is meant to reffer to an apparently degenerated humaniod), St. Leo, you don't need to go back 100,000 years to find if one of your ancestors was involved in a Neanderthal Murder Case, if they were Germanic-in particular Vikings, the likely hood of one of them killing their own neighbour is high indeed-but then that is ok-they were nice White Anglo-Saxon Europeans whereas the Turks are apparently nasty degenerate sub-humans with no soul and should be stigmatized for the way they are trying to manage a political situation that was created by the western 'powers' in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Now, all that political wrangling aside...
Age of Alexius version1 is now available at The European Civilisation II site
------------------
MRP
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-05-2001 12:33
|