Your opinion on th Asia Minor campaign of Greek armed forces - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Inter-war period (1919-1938), Russian civil war (1917–1921) and other non World War topics (1914-1945).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By Panagiotis-Hector
#13245074
Haha! Those poor Greeks surely!Yes we are really poor,we only almost tripled our state within 10 years of wars...I bet that no other state or people suffered so much :p .
Ok ok, the truth is that we did suffered too much from these wars, but it's not like we never wanted them or even provoked them.And besides,these wars were like a nessecity of the time in order to make the borders more steady and clear differences of the previous years, so that the next generations may live in peace(at least that was the goal ;) ).

Doomhammer wrote:By the way, Panagiotis-Hector, you might wanna stop double-posting (well quadruple in your case) because the Forumcrats don't look too kindly on such things.


Oh,ok thanks i didn't knew that. :)

Doomhammer wrote:Pardon my sarcasm but I'm trying to make a point. The Greeks could have won in Anatolia, but make no mistake about it: the Greek army could not have been in any worse shape than the remnants of the Ottoman army. Greece (thankfully) failed to capitalize on a huge advantage.


Certainly,the Greek armed forces could kind a have an easy time in Anatolia(if everyone of our guys would do what he was supposed to) and maybe we could have won the war, but one thing i believe is certain...the war would never be over like that.First, the great powers would never allow Greece to grow so much, not because they'd be afraid of her(of course!) but because it's easier to control smaller states.Second,you guys(the Turks) would come back again and again, since after all...where would you go? You left your first motherland(area near or in modern Mongolia) and came here, and you couldn't go back because other people leave there now and this would make a huge mess in that territory.


Doomhammer wrote:The Greeks could have won in Anatolia, but make no mistake about it: the Greek army could not have been in any worse shape than the remnants of the Ottoman army.


Well that's a true story!The Ottoman army a)was not a good army and b)they fought constantly for many years against powerful enemies(Britain,Russia,coalition of Balkan states.....),i think that you're lucky you survived 'till Kemals' take over.
Last edited by Siberian Fox on 25 Nov 2009 11:42, edited 2 times in total. Reason: Back-to-back posts merged. Please use the edit button if you find that you have more to add before another reply is made.
By Aekos
#13246779
You left your first motherland(area near or in modern Mongolia)


And that is, my Hellenic friend, where they'll be sent back in a few hundred years. :D
User avatar
By Doomhammer
#13246909
or even provoked them.

The 1st Balkan War was uncalled for. And the 2nd war... you guys got too greedy (well "you" meaning the infidels that attacked the Empire, not just the Greeks).

order to make the borders more steady and clear differences of the previous years, so that the next generations may live in peace(at least that was the goal

Pax Graecia is alright but the Ottomans were denied their Pax Ottomanica? So unfair. :p

The Ottoman army a)was not a good army

Apparently better than its adversaries'. ;)


and b)they fought constantly for many years against powerful enemies(Britain,Russia,coalition of Balkan states.....),

:lol:

i think that you're lucky you survived 'till Kemals' take over.

You got it wrong. We were doomed. And then Ataturk started the resistance and the phoenix was born from its ashes... (very poetic, eh?)

First, the great powers would never allow Greece to grow so much,

Nah. They were happy with the Greeks until Constantine came to power.

Second,you guys(the Turks) would come back again and again, since after all...where would you go?
Well, the alternative would have been to become colonial subjects.

motherland(area near or in modern Mongolia)

Once again, "Transoxiana". It's not near Mongolia at all.

And that is, my Hellenic friend, where they'll be sent back in a few hundred years.

I'm polymerized tree sap and you're an inorganic adhesive, so whatever verbal projectile you launch in my direction is reflected off of me, returns to its original trajectory and adheres to you.
By Panagiotis-Hector
#13247635
Aekos wrote:And that is, my Hellenic friend, where they'll be sent back in a few hundred years.



..........I hope you're joking.These nationalist ideas are completely wrong.Turks shouldn't go anywhere, they are a vital part of our culture and heritage and we are for them.You should be ashamed of your self for blasting a hate speech!


Doomhammer wrote:And the 2nd war... you guys got too greedy (well "you" meaning the infidels that attacked the Empire, not just the Greeks).



I think that nobody attacked Turkey in the second war.It happened because the victors of the first wanted to set the new borders.I think that Turkey attacked Bulgaria almost in the end of the second and re-captured Andrianoupolis.And why infidels?Isn't that a stereotype racist word?I don't think i ever used anything like that.And if you refer to our religious differences...well i don't believe in any God/s so...Although it doesn't matter, because other people find that offensive.Didn't you felt bad when Aekos said what he said?Since you already answered him with that beautiful poem, you have no right to continue.


Doomhammer wrote:Pax Graecia is alright but the Ottomans were denied their Pax Ottomanica? So unfair.



I think you misunderstood that.I meant for the best of both our peoples.Not just Greeks.I believe that , especially now that we have, at least apparently, forgot all about the past, we should work together to progress in many levels such as trade, culture, energy.


Doomhammer wrote:Apparently better than its adversaries'.



Certainly not in the first war.You lost almost on any front.On the second war perhaps you did better, but we can't tell because Bulgaria was already damaged pretty bad.Although you surely helped a lot to bring them down.


Doomhammer wrote:You got it wrong. We were doomed. And then Ataturk started the resistance and the phoenix was born from its ashes... (very poetic, eh?)



I assume from that sentence that you're a Kemalist.Well if you are i believe that you're on the ''right track''.I never believed that Islamists will make Turkey better.Although Kemalists should ease down a little with their nationalist ideas.Nationalism is bad, it breeds war.Unless you think that war is good.

Doomhammer wrote:and b)they fought constantly for many years against powerful enemies(Britain,Russia,coalition of Balkan states.....),


Don't laugh! :p You doubt that this coalition was strong?The states individually maybe not, but combined???Besides some newspapers of the time, i think in the U.K., said that the coalition was the new major power!!! :D

Doomhammer wrote:Nah. They were happy with the Greeks until Constantine came to power.


Sure, but i think that no matter who's in charge they would never let her grow that much(all of Asia Minor).Our goals were to high.

Doomhammer wrote:Well, the alternative would have been to become colonial subjects.



Colonial?Why?We were going to establish Constantinople as our capital and the rest would be provinces, not colonies.And besides, Wilson(U.S. president) would never allow that.He knew the importance of you having your own state.


Doomhammer wrote:Once again, "Transoxiana". It's not near Mongolia at all.


Oh,sorry i have read that there was a Turkish tribe leaving near Mongolians, before Genghis Khan.Well you obviously know more about your history than i do.


Doomhammer wrote:I'm polymerized tree sap and you're an inorganic adhesive, so whatever verbal projectile you launch in my direction is reflected off of me, returns to its original trajectory and adheres to you.


Wow!Really good.
User avatar
By Doomhammer
#13248068
I think that nobody attacked Turkey in the second war.

Yeah. The second war was more or less a war of spoils between Greece and Bulgaria. It was actually rather useful for the Ottoman Empire because Enver Pasha basically marched his army to recapture Edirne (Adrianapolis) from the Bulgarians. The city was virtually undefended so it was an easy conquest and it sadly gave Enver Pasha much undeserved credibility.

nd why infidels?Isn't that a stereotype racist word?I don't think i ever used anything like that

I'm an atheist so it doesn't really matter. I say stuff like that for entertainment purposes. Aekos and pretty much everyone who has ever posted on Gorkiy Park know about my occasional "terrorist-sounding" references. Perhaps I should avoid using Gorkiy-level chatter in on-topic threads, eh?

I think you misunderstood that.I meant for the best of both our peoples.Not just Greeks.I believe that , especially now that we have, at least apparently, forgot all about the past, we should work together to progress in many levels such as trade, culture, energy.

I like the way you think.

You lost almost on any front

Not in WWI. That was the important war. The Ottomans only lost to the Brits in the Middle East and t'was it.

I assume from that sentence that you're a Kemalist.Well if you are i believe that you're on the ''right track''.I never believed that Islamists will make Turkey better.Although Kemalists should ease down a little with their nationalist ideas.Nationalism is bad, it breeds war.Unless you think that war is good.

Don't be misled into thinking that Turkish nationalism promotes racism and Turanism and what not. The sort of nationalism Ataturk advocated was civic nationalism, based on citizenship. It is simply depressing to see all sorts of fascist parties identify themselves with Ataturk to legitimize their extremist agendas. I've seen everything: Ataturk is apparently a religious man, a fascist calling for a unification of Turkic states, a Communist... etc. It is best to ignore such people. Ataturk's deeds speak for themselves and his principles cannot and should not be tainted by ideologues.

Why?We were going to establish Constantinople as our capital and the rest would be provinces, not colonies.And besides, Wilson(U.S. president) would never allow that.He knew the importance of you having your own state.

I'm aware of Woodrow Wilson's 14-point plan but the Treaty of Sevres more or less left Central and Northern Anatolia to Turks and it might as well have been a colony. lol

Oh,sorry i have read that there was a Turkish tribe leaving near Mongolians, before Genghis Khan.Well you obviously know more about your history than i do.

Never make the assumption that a local knows his history better than foreigners. Having said that, Turks and Mongols are similar but they are from slightly different geographical places and their languages are a bit different.

Wow!Really good.

Thanks but I can't take any credit for it. It's a quote by Sheldon Cooper from the tv-show "The Big Bang Theory".
:D
By Aekos
#13248319
..........I hope you're joking.These nationalist ideas are completely wrong.Turks shouldn't go anywhere, they are a vital part of our culture and heritage and we are for them.You should be ashamed of your self for blasting a hate speech!


I was joking, but I don't see how the occupiers of Constantinople are a "vital part" of our culture. Wouldn't that make them a detriment? And what about Cyprus? Are they a vital part of that, too? We have to make nice with the Turks, but we can't forget the past.
By Panagiotis-Hector
#13248547
Doomhammer wrote:Perhaps I should avoid using Gorkiy-level chatter in on-topic threads, eh?


Oh, well perhaps you should :)


Doomhammer wrote:Not in WWI. That was the important war. The Ottomans only lost to the Brits in the Middle East and t'was it


No. not WWI, i was talking about the 1st Balkan war for the Balkan states and the rest for the WWI.

Doomhammer wrote:Don't be misled into thinking that Turkish nationalism promotes racism and Turanism and what not. The sort of nationalism Ataturk advocated was civic nationalism, based on citizenship. It is simply depressing to see all sorts of fascist parties identify themselves with Ataturk to legitimize their extremist agendas. I've seen everything: Ataturk is apparently a religious man, a fascist calling for a unification of Turkic states, a Communist... etc. It is best to ignore such people. Ataturk's deeds speak for themselves and his principles cannot and should not be tainted by ideologues


You're right i was misled by the Media.At least in Greece media present both sides(Kemalists and Islamists) as nationalists.The only apparent difference they present is that Islamists are religious hot heads and Kemalists are simply nationalists with short of warlike political behavior.I understand what you say about Ataturk, and i understand what you feel about him.You are right about -Ataturk's deeds speak for themselves and his principles cannot and should not be tainted by ideologues.-, i had a totally different approach of his ideas.I thought he simple wanted to restore the Ottoman Empire(on territorial level).I see what you mean.We also have nationalist parties-groups who say that they have as their symbols or guides the ancient Greek heroes and that they represent them in modern world.The reality is completely different.The ancient Greek heroes are true role models for their way of thinking, virtue, kindness, morale in battle...etc.Those groups are nothing like them, they are absolute racists, hot heads,extremists, nationalists and warlike.The deeds and personalities of the ancient Greek heroes are tainted by those people.Due to those groups, if someone has as his role models our heroes everyone says that he's a racist.I hate this situation.


Doomhammer wrote:Never make the assumption that a local knows his history better than foreigners. Having said that, Turks and Mongols are similar but they are from slightly different geographical places and their languages are a bit different


Let me disagree on that.A foreigner might know the history of a state better than a local, but the foreigner will probably never understand the way of life-thinking, the values of the people...These thing are surely more important to understand History.For example, some foreigner might read about the Minor Asia campaign of the Greek Armed Forces and he will probably understand that we did it just to expand our state and find new and rich lands.Probably(not certainly) he won't understand which was the real reason for the campaign, the liberation of Greek lands.In order to find out that he must search better and deeper.If you ask my uncle, sort of speak, who has almost no clue of history, why we did that?he will answer, because these were Greek land for many thousand years and they were ''enslaved''.

Doomhammer wrote:Thanks but I can't take any credit for it. It's a quote by Sheldon Cooper from the tv-show "The Big Bang Theory"


Haha!!! It doesn't matter, the point is that you used it.Others don't even bother their mind with such ''boring stuff''(!!!!!!).




Aekos wrote:I was joking, but I don't see how the occupiers of Constantinople are a "vital part" of our culture. Wouldn't that make them a detriment? And what about Cyprus? Are they a vital part of that, too? We have to make nice with the Turks, but we can't forget the past



Ok, i'm relieved now :p
The ''occupiers'' of Constantinople are a vital part of our modern culture.If you pay attention when you talk(i assume you speak Greek in everyday bases), you will see that the modern Greek language has many Turkish or Greeko-Turkish words.Plus we lived for almost 400 years together under the same sky(so poetic :p )and even though they were the rulers and we, at least the majority of our population, were the slaves, we have shared a lot of things and i don't see any way for someone to doubt that.They might have nothing to do with ancient Greece, but they certainly have with modern Greece.That makes them vital part of our modern culture, as it makes as vital part of theirs.I said-at least the majority of our population- because many Greeks worked as diplomats, educators, state appointed, governors, tax collectors and in many other positions under the Ottoman rule, for the service of the Sultan.
About Cyprus, although it's a complicated story, you doubt that just by being there they haven't effected the people of Cyprus?that especially if the block fall, they won't share things, ideas, wishes?Sure they have a lot of hatred since a great part of the Greeks there were forced to move to the other side of the island and they suffered enough, but i believe that when two people fight for so long over the ages they exchange cultures.Most of the times without even wanting that.
I never said we should forget about the past, if you don't know your past you don't know who you are and where you're heading to.I said that we should use the past in order to forget and forgive, and try to work together.Cultural exchange helps people progress.Look at the cultural progress that happened ever since the English captured the half of the world and brought many cultures together.Although i despite what they did to the world, thanks to their imperialism, we have reached today to a cultural level that allows us to understand that other cultures are as respectable as ours(not Greek culture, generally speaking).Also we have understand the value of a human and animal life, the importance of environmental preservation(at least in our thoughts), it has helped us find out more about who we are and where we came from.For example if there had never been that huge level of cultural mixture as we have today, we would never understand that all humans came from Africa, and that we all used to be black.I think that these things happened through the colonial wars and wars generally.Collision breeds progress, someone said once,if we assume poetically that wars happened so we may bring all cultures together, now we have to understand that wars must stop since we have reached that point and try to find out who we are?What are we supposed to do here?Why we came?From where?I happen to believe(again philosophically) that the human instinct drives your logic, for some matters, to do some things and it stops you from doing other.The last 30 years or so there is a strong peace movement, which according to what a said before, makes me think that we have reach that point and now it's time to stop wars.There is no reason any more.

(All that where a little philosophical and maybe i should write them in the Agora.They might not serve anything of what we said before, but i think it's always nice to take a rest at the Philosophy rest stop :p )
By Aekos
#13249001
If you pay attention when you talk(i assume you speak Greek in everyday bases), you will see that the modern Greek language has many Turkish or Greeko-Turkish words.


I'm sorry if if caused any confusion. I am actually a Serb with little Greek heritage (one ancestor back in the day, pretty much :p) but I did live on Cyprus as a war refugee for some time and got acquainted with the culture. I consider myself Greek Orthodox so Greek culture has had a strong enough effect on me that when I say us I mean "Orthodox people of the Balkans" or even just "Greeks" (or Armenians :p).

I unfortunately forgot most of my Greek but I do notice a ton of Turkish words in Serbian, and while they are cool, I try to avoid them. :D

Collision breeds progress, someone said once,if we assume poetically that wars happened so we may bring all cultures together, now we have to understand that wars must stop since we have reached that point and try to find out who we are?


I'm sure the Turks brought cultures together when they deported all Greeks from Asia minor and Trebizond, when they burned down and massacred the victims at Smyrna, and when they killed over 2 million Christians including 1.5 million Armenians. I'm not sure if we want to have "cultural exchanges" with a culture that believes that all these events were okay and even celebrates them.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#13249012
I'm sure the Turks brought cultures together when they deported all Greeks from Asia minor and Trebizond, when they burned down and massacred the victims at Smyrna, and when they killed over 2 million Christians including 1.5 million Armenians. I'm not sure if we want to have "cultural exchanges" with a culture that believes that all these events were okay and even celebrates them.

How many Persians died at the hands of Alexander the Great and his successors? And don't you celebrate his great achievements? :eh:
By Aekos
#13249112
How many Persians died at the hands of Alexander the Great and his successors? And don't you celebrate his great achievements?


That was a loooooong time ago. This is closer to home. There are still a few survivors of some of the Turkish atrocities.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#13249127
Time heals all wounds, eh Aekos? Or at least, it kills off all the survivors. ;)
By Panagiotis-Hector
#13249630
Aekos wrote:I'm sure the Turks brought cultures together when they deported all Greeks from Asia minor and Trebizond, when they burned down and massacred the victims at Smyrna, and when they killed over 2 million Christians including 1.5 million Armenians. I'm not sure if we want to have "cultural exchanges" with a culture that believes that all these events were okay and even celebrates them


As i said, this was poetic.I don't believe that through war people progress.The exact opposite.These events were horrible and Turkish people should feel shame every time someone talks about that.And not just Turkish people, everyone who was ever done something like that.


Potemkin wrote:How many Persians died at the hands of Alexander the Great and his successors? And don't you celebrate his great achievements?


Don't be misled.We don't celebrate the massacres.We celebrate the fact that he spread the Greek culture in far lands.We celebrate the fact that he gave ''lights'' to enslaved people who believed in a king/God!And don't use the argument that Persians where slaves to him.He never wanted them to be enslaved.He wanted them to be free subjects, but he never established that rule because it needed time to be done, and he had no time since he was fighting in India.Even when he finished fighting and went back to Babylon...he got sick and died before even do anything.His successors messed it up.And that is why after his death the Empire started to collapse gradually.Except for Ptolemy in Egypt. :D
Oh, and what about your Xerxes and the rest of his family?What did they tried to do?I think they wanted to re-capture Rome after the defeat by the Gauls?Oh, wait...they didn't they wanted to conquer the rest of the world.And they wanted to erase Greece from the history.But fortunately they lost.Forgive my sarcasm, but we should point to others their mistakes, but we should first take a good look in ours.(No hard feelings :) )
By Ozzy
#13427288
Panagiotis-Hector, your last words just sounded like politics... I feel like following your footsteps... by changing names, adjectives, advervs etc i can make the same perspective, justification for all the events of the world. Is that what politicians use to fool their public to do all kind of things, no?

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

@JohnRawls What if your assumption is wrong??? […]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]