|
Post by toskaliku on Sept 20, 2010 20:15:20 GMT -5
sofiaecho.com/2010/06/03/911145_turkey-to-send-naval-squadron-to-albaniaThe president of Albania, Bamir Topi, signed on June 2 a bill allowing Turkish armed forces on the territory of Albania, Bulgarian news agency BTA said. The report said that the permission to stay was temporary – but no further details were disclosed as to the duration of stay. The first Turkish deployment to take advantage of the new bill is a squadron of five Turkish warships, with 1125 personnel aboard. The Turkish squadron is expected to arrive in the port of Durres on June 22. According to BTA, which quoted Albanian media, "the purpose of this visit remains unclear", although Greek media said that those manoeuvres would prompt a rethink of Greece's national security concept. Bulgarian media reported that in the aftermath of the Israeli attack on the Gaza-bound aid convoy on May 31, planned joint-naval manoeuvres between Israel and Turkey have been cancelled. Turkish politicians continued to express their outrage on June 3, calling on their government to completely review its political, military and economic ties with Israel. Lawmakers also said Israel must formally apologise for the raid, compensate the victims and bring those responsible to justice. But Israel has remained unapologetic, saying it acted in self-defence, and it was left with no other option. The relationship between the two countries has been further strained by the fact that at least four of the nine killed activists were Turkish nationals. The ships attacked by the Israeli soldiers were also Turkish, and some politicians in Ankara have branded the raid an "act of open piracy" and a "massacre". International envoy to the Middle East Tony Blair told the Associated Press that Israel should ease the blockade and let more supplies in. According to Blair, the blockade was "counterproductive," but said it would be hard to lift because of Israel's objections.
|
|
|
Post by thracian08 on Sept 21, 2010 12:52:35 GMT -5
cool !
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Sept 22, 2010 16:02:28 GMT -5
Turkey is coming back. Nice to see.
|
|
|
Post by mansterofsouli on Sept 23, 2010 21:30:38 GMT -5
I assume you will be Turkish ally again?
|
|
|
Post by mansterofsouli on Sept 26, 2010 19:18:04 GMT -5
Nice edit Vizier!!!! (:
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Sept 27, 2010 13:08:02 GMT -5
Sorry, nothing personal.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Sept 28, 2010 15:27:21 GMT -5
And with recent investments in Sanjak and in Bosnia... Turkey is building a nice center of gravity in the Balkans.
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Oct 30, 2010 15:15:17 GMT -5
..... ;D
|
|
wbb
Moderator
Posts: 733
|
Post by wbb on Oct 31, 2010 7:31:23 GMT -5
loool, yallah gel geri Balkanba. ;D Magyaristan/Hungary is waitiing for you. We got some unfinished business to finish, let kick the europeans arse like Attila's times. ;D
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 31, 2010 17:18:09 GMT -5
..... ;D A pretty lame show. I heard its popular in Kosova. Im guessing that the fighting sequence is during the Greco-Turkish war? The style of the show is such simple Balkan stuff.
|
|
|
Post by oszkarthehun on Nov 2, 2010 5:58:24 GMT -5
loool, yallah gel geri Balkanba. ;D Magyaristan/Hungary is waitiing for you. We got some unfinished business to finish, let kick the europeans arse like Attila's times. ;D Hungary is European btw Attaturk was striving towards europeanisms.
|
|
wbb
Moderator
Posts: 733
|
Post by wbb on Nov 4, 2010 5:50:46 GMT -5
Actually Hungary and Hungarians are Eurasians. ;D Ataturk i dont like, i dont agreed on his policy, he abolish the Ottoman state.
|
|
|
Post by thracian08 on Nov 4, 2010 20:56:12 GMT -5
i've heard it's popular in Turkey, never watched it. @ wbb, you don't like Ataturk, but what was the alternative during that time do you know? The British would have ruled Istanbul, and we would have been controlled by them. Thank God for Ataturk!
|
|
|
Post by oszkarthehun on Nov 4, 2010 21:33:44 GMT -5
Actually Hungary and Hungarians are Eurasians. ;D Ataturk i dont like, i dont agreed on his policy, he abolish the Ottoman state. Geographically Hungary isnt Eurasian. Genetically majority of Hungarians are not Eurasian. I believe Hungarians have historically been in Hungarian region much longer than is generally theorised. In fact Hungary is one of Europe's oldest nations and Kingdoms. Attaturk was logical in his approach. Ottoman Empire had to start modernising in every way that was a logical concept. Shah of Iran was trying to do something similiar, unfortunatly he at times went over the top with his strongmen the Savak. In many ways Attaturk was a very good leader.
|
|
wbb
Moderator
Posts: 733
|
Post by wbb on Nov 8, 2010 1:33:15 GMT -5
I know what you mean, no offense, but not every Turks loves and like Ataturk. I dont hate Ataturk but i dont like him. I agree that Ataturk has done alot good things for Turkey but i also agree that he done alot bad things as well, I dont expect him to be perfect but his anti-religious Secularity, his Europeanist ideas and his language-reform, i mean the arabic writings being switch to Latin one is what i disagree and it did affect alot of Turks as well. I knew you going to say that, Oskar bacsi. Cause your such a Europeanist. So big deal if Hungary is one of the oldest European nations, does that mean Hungarians are europeans? The Turks got Istanbul, Istanbul one of the oldest European city, does that mean the Turks are european? rubbish. The Roma gypsies, they lived in Europe for 500 years, are they europeans? Hell no, i dont think so. Same goes with Hungarians and Turks, because all 3 of those ethnics are Eurasians. The recent Arabs and Africans or the ching-chong Chinese or the Naac Daangg Duhg Vietnamese who borned in Europe, are they european? looool yeah sure. ;D
|
|
|
Post by oszkarthehun on Nov 8, 2010 20:42:17 GMT -5
Arabic writing /Latin writing whats the difference neither come from the original Turks right.
[
Actually its not that I am being a Europeanist to say that its simply that I am being a realist, becauseTo say Hungary is genetically and geographically Eurasian is simply false in my oppinion. Actually many Turks genetically are European due to much of the Greek and Balkan/East European blood in them. Culturally Turks are perhaps partly European to some extent, depending on the area they are from etc. About Hungarians what makes them Europeans is combination of genetics, the fact they have lived in Europe at least more than 1000 years, their culture, political system, and religious persuasion is predominantly European. The romantic preoccupation some people have with certain historical Turanian elements of the early Hungarians does not change this.
|
|
wbb
Moderator
Posts: 733
|
Post by wbb on Nov 12, 2010 7:52:02 GMT -5
right, neither of them are originally Turkish, but still arabic letter is better since Turks are muslims and it's important for them to read the Quran. Latins is no good since Turks are not Romans.
The oppinion of urs is very unscientific since the mixture of Euro and Asian Hungarians does qualify them as "Eurasian".
Europeans who have assimilated into Turks, are no longer Europeans since they gave up their "European" identity and adopted the Turk identity, that is the Turanian identity. Same goes with "Europeans who adopted the Hungarian identity and gave up their Euro identity and became Hungarians.
Like i told you last time, that i got European Slavic Serb and Arab blood on me but only recently maybe 2 weeks ago, i've found out that my half-arab mother's mother side of her family are Kuns (Cumans) originating from Kunszentmarton which is in the Cumanian region of Hungary. And because of that, i gave up all except my Kun origin which is Turkic and is related to Hungarians, i adopted the Hungarian identity and gave up my Euro, im therefore no longer a European, that's the way it is.
And what about the origin, hmmm? A combination of genetics doesnt mean anything like i said above^^^^. A Europeans who adopted Hungarian identity (including the Iranian Jasz) and inter-married and mixed with the Turkic people had proven enough that they rather want to be oriental than keeping their European origin. The only remaining trace of those European people assimilated into Hungarian is that they still live in Europe and still want to live in Europe under their adopted oriental identity. That's is how much of a common sense.
|
|
|
Post by oszkarthehun on Nov 13, 2010 18:05:04 GMT -5
not Arabs either.
term eurasian usually applies when one parent is European and one parent is Asian, it doesnt usually apply to person born in Europe who has possible great great great great great great great great great etc etc etc ..... grandparents.
Hungarians in my oppinion are not Turks, they are something unique and something of themselves. Actually it can even be said probably Hungarians had the chance to be Turks but they chose not to. They were in at times alliances with large and strong Turkic groups such as Khazars so they could have easily assimilated into these groups but they didnt and they kept their non Turkish Magyarul language, so I dont understand how some people wanna insist they were or are Turks.
If u want to follow only a part of your personal historical genetics and ingnore the rest its completly your choice.
[/quote]
I am from a Hungarian family and grew up around many Hungarian people. I never in all my life thought of Hungarians as anything but predominantly Europeans, with their own unique language and Hungarianess. I have been around Turkish people and Middle Eastern people and Asian people and really I dont see much cultural likeness to Hungarians as u like to imply.
|
|
|
Post by thracian08 on Nov 19, 2010 15:12:31 GMT -5
Turks are considered Eur-Asian, and Turkish people are - including Turkic people.
I get your points Wbb, the only downside of changing to the Latin alphabet is that Turks lost the cultural stuff from Ottomann Turkish. I cannot read it, and I also cannot understand the words, b/c there is a lot of arabic words added in the sentences.
What's interesting is that Ottoman Turkish was spoken more in the bigger cities like Istanbul, but all across Turkey in the countryside, ppl spoke true Turkish like the one spoken today.
I think actually the Latin alphabet suites Turkish language better, b/c Arabic doesn't have for example a letter P. In Turkish we have that letter.
I think Hungarians and Turks are linked to each other ; however due to difference in religion, Hungarians are under the belief that they are European, but they are in reality not European in origin.
|
|
|
Post by oszkarthehun on Nov 23, 2010 22:53:16 GMT -5
Hungarians and Turkics are linked historically in a few ways, and this part of our history is known by Hungarians it is not denied because of the reason you said , that Hungarians are Christians. But this is only part of the ethnogenesis only part of the history. 1) It is known a few Turkic tribes assimilated into the Hungarian tribes /people. In early times these were most likely from Khazar-Khabar people and possibly some Bulgars, and at later times Cumans. 2) Hungarians lived for sometime in the steppe region and hence recieved some Turanian/Steppe influences. Additionally Hungarians were in alliances with both Khazars and Bulgars and recieved certain amount of linguistic borrowings this amounts to today approx 300 odd words in Hungarian that are considered of Turkic origin. Hungarians were not only aquainted with or influenced by Turkics but also Iranian peoples , this is seen via linguistic evidence also. So in such ways Hungarians may have been linked with Turkics but that does not make them Turkics as they had and have their own unique language and self identity "Magyar" which must have come from a non Turkic origin as it is not mutually intelligeble to Turkic language nor any other known living language. Secondly it was not only Turkics that Hungarians assimilated but several peoples, I have even read some Caucasian peoples were assimilated as well as possibly Nordic Viking types when Magyars lived around the Ukraine and of course many Slavic people. Not to mention the later assimilation of many Germanics. The early Hungarians origins may not have been in Europe but I think after more than 1000 years in Europe its realistic to call them Europeans, which probably 99.9% of Hungarians would agree with , there is only a small percentage that have some romantic preocuppation in believing otherwise and that have some strange aversion to Indo Europeaness. Turks are considered Eur-Asian, and Turkish people are - including Turkic people. I get your points Wbb, the only downside of changing to the Latin alphabet is that Turks lost the cultural stuff from Ottomann Turkish. I cannot read it, and I also cannot understand the words, b/c there is a lot of arabic words added in the sentences. What's interesting is that Ottoman Turkish was spoken more in the bigger cities like Istanbul, but all across Turkey in the countryside, ppl spoke true Turkish like the one spoken today. I think actually the Latin alphabet suites Turkish language better, b/c Arabic doesn't have for example a letter P. In Turkish we have that letter. I think Hungarians and Turks are linked to each other ; however due to difference in religion, Hungarians are under the belief that they are European, but they are in reality not European in origin.
|
|