Fetih 1453 (Fall of Constantinople)

[Penitent]

Well I wish Constantinople never fell.  Not only did the turks hijack one of the most amazing buildings of ancient history (Hagia Sophia) but the changed the name of one of the oldest, most magnificent, and important cities in human history!  It's bad luck to change a city's name, let alone twice!  We should still call it Byzantium.
No offense.

[Penitent]

and by the way, I'm american, I'm of euro background, and i'm the first one that will tell you, that yes, The native americans in North and south america, were victims of genocide. Any retard saying differently, isnt comfortable with the idea of bieng an occupier, or comfortable enough to live with their forefathers actual history, without romanticising it into acceptability.

This is way off topic, but the native americans were not subject to genocide, on the whole.  The vast vast vast vast majority of them died by disease, by the fault of no one.  Some of the disease was spread purposefully (an early biological warfare tactic), but this was WELL after most of them were already dead.  Many were mistreated, lied to, fucked over, and even killed.  To say they were victims of genocide is inaccurate though.  Genocide is the systematic killing of a people.  Most of the Native Americans were killed accidently, not systematically.  The rest were grossly mistreated and in separate cases over a long period of time.

Regarding the statements after that-- Yes, this is actual history.  No, the aspects of this history that can be termed mistreatment should not be romanticized or accepted.  No, current Americans are not occupiers, but SOME of them are the descendants of occupiers and conquerors.  For example, my relatives came over in the early 1900's, so saying "occupier" after this long of a time period is inaccurate.

[Vingnir the Wanderer]

Well I wish Constantinople never fell.  Not only did the turks hijack one of the most amazing buildings of ancient history (Hagia Sophia) but the changed the name of one of the oldest, most magnificent, and important cities in human history!  It's bad luck to change a city's name, let alone twice!  We should still call it Byzantium.
No offense.

It would have been better if people just learned to share it together, rather than kill each other over it.  Unfortunately there are alot of people that still would rather rally around the banner of calling someone 'other' or 'inferior' killing them, and then selfishly bathing in the dead's resources and riches.

Excuses are like assholes.

[Vingnir the Wanderer]

This is way off topic, but the native americans were not subject to genocide, on the whole.  The vast vast vast vast majority of them died by disease, by the fault of no one.  Some of the disease was spread purposefully (an early biological warfare tactic), but this was WELL after most of them were already dead.  Many were mistreated, lied to, fucked over, and even killed.  To say they were victims of genocide is inaccurate though.

Regarding the statements after that-- Yes, this is actual history.  No, the aspects of this history that can be termed mistreatment should not be romanticized or accepted.  No, current Americans are not occupiers, but SOME of them are the descendants of occupiers and conquerors.  For example, my relatives came over in the early 1900's, so saying "occupier" after this long of a time period is inaccurate.

Sorry, bt thats wrong.  your suffering from the same romanticism as the Turkish nationalist.

EVERY State in the United States, was subject to white settlers and National armies murdering natives, and stealing their land, the fact that maybe even most of them died by disease brought by the occupiers, does not change that, or lessen it.

If your Ancestors came later, then yes your ancestors where not the murderers.  But, just like the Germans who moved into Poland after the chocolate chip cookie military rolled over it, they are occupiers just the same.

So are the Saxons in britain and the Northmen who moved to the Danelaw regions in the UK after the initial invasions. so are the Northern Irish.

It is what it is.  Admit it, and move on.  Theres not much you can do as an individual, this is beyond the responsibility of the individual descendent, to be able to rewrite history, but you can respect it, and those that it affected then, and still affects NOW. 

Like I said earlier, one must admit reality, and vow not to repeat the wrongs of our fathers, or we are no better...

but dont try to candy-coat the past, that just means your more likely to candy-coat the genocides of the future, or present...


If what i said above bothers you, and hurts your heart, your doing it right.


Btw, i'll gladly have a beer with anyone of you, THATS whats really important.   

[Penitent]

Sorry, bt thats wrong.  your suffering from the same romanticism as the Turkish nationalist.

EVERY State in the United States, was subject to white settlers and National armies murdering natives, and stealing their land, the fact that maybe even most of them died by disease brought by the occupiers, does not change that, or lessen it.

If your Ancestors came later, then yes your ancestors where not the murderers.  But, just like the Germans who moved into Poland after the chocolate chip cookie military rolled over it, they are occupiers just the same.

So are the Saxons in britain and the Northmen who moved to the Danelaw regions in the UK. so are the northern irish.

It is what it is.  Admit it, and move on.  Theres not much you can do as an individual, this is beyond the responsibility of the individual descendent, to be able to rewrite history, but you can respect it, and those that it affected then, and still affects NOW. 

Like I said earlier, one must admit reality, and vow not to repeat the wrongs of our fathers, or we are no better...

but dont try to candy coat the past, that just means your more likely to candy coat the genocides of the future, or present...


If what i said above bothers you, and hurts your heart, your doing it right.

No, no, no.  You are confusing "oppression and war" with "genocide."  They are two different things.  Taking land has nothing to do with genocide.  Being killed incidentally by disease absolutely changes everything.  For example, if there are martians, and I go to mars as an explorer, and all the martians catch a cold from me and die...does that mean earth committed genocide?  No, it does not. That is how 80% (by most historical estimates) of Native Americans died.  For every 5 native Americans on the continent, 4 of them were killed by no one's fault at all.

Now, on Mars, pretend that not all of the Martians die, just most of them.  We set up a colony there, and sign some treaties.  The people who live there, however, want more land, so they break the treaties, declare war, and kill many Martians.  The Martians armies are decimated.  Sometimes, even the women and children are killed and treated brutally.  Is this genocide?  No!  It's not!  It's lying, war, and brutality.

Now, imagine the human government on Mars issues a mandate calling for the total extermination of all Martians.  They develop plans to systematically gather and kill as many as they can in hopes of completely destroying them, or at least killing so many of them that no one will ever remember they existed.  Is this genocide?  Yes.  It is.  Even if the human government doesn't succeed in killing all of them, it is still genocide.  It is the systematic killing of a people. 

Such a situation did not occur with the Native Americans.  They were lied to, tricked, slaughtered, warred with, and brutalized, but never systematically killed in hopes of wiping them out.  There were always laws protecting them (even if they were shitty) and that's the reason there are reservations today.  It was never the plan to systematically wipe them out, or commit genocide, against them.

I hope this clears it up!

[Vingnir the Wanderer]

Yeah, putting people in state sized worthless concentration camps, while your culture builds plantations on your sacred lands, enslaves other races, and lives in luxery is 'protecting them'   

I'm not confusing anything.

You can call it whatever you want.   

Lets say its not genocide. Ok.  Can we agree that the word is not 1/1000000000 as important, as the event(s) we are talking about?

So the murder rape and destruction of an entire race, (Estimated at about 4.5 million people and the theft of two continents), have it your way.

The word genocide is not really important in that context at all. Its rediculous to argue over, or try desperately to call it something else, in order to lessen its impact and reality, and thus ones responsibility.  Its like saying 'Well yeah, i murdered an entire race, but I didnt call their momma fat!'

Whats important is what happened.


So its not genocide by websters dictionary definition. congrats.   Its still ethnocide, homicide, and policide.  Does that make you feel better about being a benefactore of murderers?

Atleast Genocide has the excuse of state mandate, and thus peer relivance.  Individuals making a personal decision to kill others for profit and land, using pedantic cultural and religious beliefs as an excuse, just makes it even worse.

[Penitent]

Yeah, putting people in state sized worthless concentration camps, while your culture builds plantations, enslaves other races, and lives in luxery is 'protecting them'   

I'm not confusing anything.

You can call it whatever you want.   

Lets say its not genocide. Ok.  Can we agree that the word is not 1/1000000000 as important, as the event(s) we are talking about?

So the murder rape and destruction of an entire race, (Estimated at about 4.5 million people and the theft of two continents), have it your way.

The word genocide is not really important in that context at all. Its rediculous to argue over, or try desperately to call it something else, in order to lessen its impact and reality, and thus ones responsibility.

Whats important is what happened.


So its not genocide by websters dictionary definition. congrats.   

Atleast Genocide has the excuse of state mandate, and thus peer relivance.  Individuals making a personal decision to kill others for profit and land, using pedantic cultural and religious beliefs as an excuse, just makes it even worse.

Yes, I agree with you.  We can both agree that it is really bad, and what actually happens is more important than what people "call it."  I agree. 

It's also important to note that it could have been even worse though!  It could have been real genocide, and these even worse things happen sometimes, and it is pretty much the worst things than humans can do to other humans.  So in that light, it can be important what words we use to describe something.  We have to be able to differentiate between evil, really really bad evil, and the worst evil that can ever be done.

[Vingnir the Wanderer]

Well, i think we generally agree, but, the treatment of the native Americans  was deplorable, even by its historically contemporarly examples.

And I STRONGLY disagree, with the more evil/less evil thing your saying.  Its an excuse for saying 'this isnt as bad as THAT.  And thats wrong.  thats excusing onself, by coldly compartmentalizing different forms of mass murder and abuse, and then saying 'well our version was better than THOSE guys' (Classist group excuses, here we go again). When your talking about the murder and abuse of millions THERE IS NO EXCUSE. Meanwhile as we discuss which word to put on it, Gas company mercenaries are killing tribesmen on the amazon, 1st world countries are supplying Africans with automatic weapons resulting in the deaths of millions for blood diamonds and yellow cake uranium, etc.

einsteins  Holocaust, was only 50-60 years later than the western indian wars and 'Relocation'.  And he didnt steal an entire continent in the deal.

Makes you wonder why the American 'history channel' likes to talk about einstein so much, and frame the indian wars in the distant past.... Hmmm? lets not look at things too closely, lets just talk about 'ancient aliens' and 'bigfoot'   

What did he call the concentration camps? What did the Turks call the Armenian situation? Relocation?  Oh..... Snap.   

[Ronin]

Well I wish Constantinople never fell.  Not only did the turks hijack one of the most amazing buildings of ancient history (Hagia Sophia) but the changed the name of one of the oldest, most magnificent, and important cities in human history!  It's bad luck to change a city's name, let alone twice!  We should still call it Byzantium.
No offense.

Hijacking? Do not forget everyone does that. I have visited a mosque in the Eastern part of the Turkey. It was a pagan temple at first, then christians built a church in top of it, then muslims turned it into a mosque.
Funny? Yes I think

I think it's the way how a culture develops. Istanbul, or constantinople is still a city that many cultures have been gathered. Same applies to the jerusalem and some other cities as well.

I'm sorry I replied to an older post, but you guys really put a long conversation there I just wanted to answer it. As Vingnir said, everyone does that and words do not justify it. Yet, I somehow see it as a part of the live. I mean, these ugly events happened; so it is a part of the live and realism. So we can not deny it. Oh, that is what vingnir also said.

[Ronin]

Oh vingnir, you made me think of comparing two mass murderers that exist in my thoughtland. Lets think:
*Case one - A guy killed 65 people. Since the heaviest punishment we can give is to make him serve a life sentence. So we did, then.
*Case two - Another guy killed 50 people. Since this guy killed 15 people less than the first guy, should we give him a lesser punishment?

Please note that, actually it is even better looking ways to prevent crime; but I'm trying to explain it with simple logic here.

[HarunYahya]

Following quotes from here

Summary:

 


But I guess in Turkey you get some other information than in the rest of the world.

And yes, Wikipedia still has got the reputation of beinga doubtful source, but I bet there are many real books and academic treatises about the topic. And no, I don't think that the rest of the world wants to defame Turkey for some obscure reason. You did what you did. And it happened during the reign of the Ottoman empire.

Turks are offering forming a joined team of histroical researchers to find out what really happened in 1915 but Armenian government declines which means they hide something .They claim over 1 million armenians were killed while documants say there were only 400.000 armenians who forced to be exiled....
It's called Tehcir in turkish which means something like "forced emmigration" it had been made due to Tehcir Law which can be roughly translated to
"Precautians that will be enforced by soldiers , for the ones who rebel against government during the time of war"
So no , nor you or rest of the world can know turkish history better than a turk.I don't know what kind of hatred and bullshit they fill your brains with and i actually don't care.
Call it whatever you want form up words or shit but it is Tehcir.  Not genocide nor something else.


Flash edit:

So basically ;
1)Killing thousands of people by disease , planned murders , forced immigrations to wipe out native civilizations and colonize the whole continent for yourself.
2)Killing thousands of people by disease , planned murders , forced immigrations because you hate their race and richness.
3)Killing thousands of people by disease , planned murders , forced immigrations because they rebel against your country which is at war with several countries.
Are same , they are all genocides which made by different nations in different times ?

(click to show/hide)

Fuck the logic , sure i agree !

[Bobthehero]

and by the way, I'm american, I'm of euro background, and i'm the first one that will tell you, that yes, The native americans in North and south america, were victims of genocide. Anyone saying differently, isnt comfortable with the idea of bieng an occupier, or comfortable enough to live with their forefathers actual history, without romanticising it into acceptability.

In the Sotuh, I agree, North? Eh... not so much, in my opinion, there were wars and deportations, but outright genocide? Not really, especially since the Europeans  needed the Indians at first, be it for trading for the Metropolis or only for the colonist to survive.

[djavo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK6lH9z7hG4

[HarunYahya]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK6lH9z7hG4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqUBkCAmldM

[Vingnir the Wanderer]

In the Sotuh, I agree, North? Eh... not so much, in my opinion, there were wars and deportations, but outright genocide? Not really, especially since the Europeans  needed the Indians at first, be it for trading for the Metropolis or only for the colonist to survive.

Well, i respectfully disagree.

Look up Ohio and Indiana history.

The British Crown, and the East India company, treated the indians fairly well - atleast in comparison.  The colonists, and subsiquently the united states, not so much.

The first actions of George Washington after the Revolution, was the removal of indians from pennsylvania, then Ohio,  and the destruction of and massacre of over 40 Native towns and all their crops, in order to make it impossible for them to live there, and or return, and to expand colonial territory. (Few people know, that many of the natives here were full agriculturalists, with large permanent towns, because to speak of such would kinda be, well, telling too much of the truth and opening a huge moral can of worms for American freedom&justice propaganda...) The reason the indians fought mostly on the british side, was because the colonists settlers where the ones who were assholes towards them, and defying the law of the crown by illegally settling on their lands and murdering them, even befroe the revolution. the East India company on the other hand, just wanted to trade for furs with them, and tried to protect their boundries from colonists.  it is why the majority of Iroquoi now reside over the Canadian border - because the Crown, was much more friendly w/ the native peoples.

Good ole George Washington's nick name to the indians? given variously as "Caunotaucarius", "Conotocarious", "Hanodaganears", and "Hanadahguyus." ' town destroyer, town Taker, Burner of Towns, or Devourer of Villages,'    and that was all based on his actions immediately after the revolution in the north.  From George's orders to Sullivan: I would recommd. that some post in the center of the Indian Country should be occupied with all expedition, with a sufficient quantity of provision; whence parties should be detached to lay waste all the settlements around, with instructions to do it in the most effectual manner; that the country may not be merely overrun but destroyed . When we have effectually chastized them we may then listen to peace and endeavour to draw further advantages from their fears. "
http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=WasFi15.xml&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&tag=public&part=165&division=div1



I learned most of this while doing research for the Revolutionary War Mod for Empire total war, where I did the skins for the native peoples. No one 'volutarily' taught me this, i had to dig it up myself.... 

Look up the 'Sullivan expedition' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Expedition for a start, and follow the links if your interested. My great great great grandfather served in one of the NJ divisions that took part in that, although, as far as I know, he left service right before that happened, (IE at the end of the revolution) although his land grants suggest otherwise perhaps...(i'll probably never know, because NJ military records post the revolution burned in a fire in the early 1800's) another one of my relatives, Mr Degraff, went on expedition to photograph indian tribes before they were extinct, I believe in the 1870's, and his photo's can now be found at the University of Indiana.