bilako22 wrote:Happy new year you Phoenix and I look forward to more of your ant-Turkish lies. IF the TCs are Mongolian mate what makes you considering the physical similarities between the Greeks and Turks.All Homo sapiens are violent by nature . How do you think there are so many Greeks living on aboriginal land in Melbourne?
Who wants to evolve into a dishonest , lying and ignorant racist person such as you?
. . . . and you are pro-Greeks
Please add
uneducated to that list of Turkish traits after the above post . . . or perhaps you are just in denial
There are no more physical similarities between the population as a whole, of Greeks and Turks, than there are between Turks and eg Iranians, or Greeks and French.
So what is your point exactly? It seems to me, every time I remind a Turk of his origins, he calls me racist. Could this be because you think Mongols are somehow inferior?
If I said you were indeed part of the Hellenes, you would be so proud that you will think you have reached Nirvana
Also, explain in what way
I have been racist.
Did I mention anyone's race?What do you know about the "races" of mankind and how do you distinguish them in your Greek-loving mind?
Here have this extract from The Encyclopaedia Britannica.
EB wrote:Mongolia ... Ethnography and early tribal history
.... Some of the northern tribes migrated westward, where descendants—together with the members of other tribes— Byappeared in Europe in the 5th century AD as the Huns of Attila. then, of course, these people were considerably more mixed ethnically.
In Mongolia the Xiongnu were succeeded both by Turkic-speaking peoples and by others identified by some scholars as Mongols, or Mongol speakers.
Among the peoples who have been considered possibly Mongol, the most important tribal names are Sienpi (Xianbi), who may however have been Tungus (modern Evenk) rather than Mongol, recorded in Han dynasty annals, and the Juan-juan (Rouran, or Geougen) of the 4th to 6th centuries. The latter have been identified by some scholars with the Avars, who migrated into Europe along the plains of the Danube and were nearly annihilated in Hungary by Charlemagne in the late 8th century.
According to a legend recorded by the Chinese, the Turks of Mongolia, whose name is recognizable under its Chinese transcription “Tujue,” were a subject tribe ruled by the Juan-juan. The Turks overthrew their masters and soon were in control of all Mongolia, centring their power in the Orhon valley in the northern part of the country. The Orhon (Orkhon) Turks were contemporaries of the Tang dynasty (618–907) in China, and their fortunes rose and fell in counterpoint to periods of Tang strength and weakness. Comparison of archaeological and historical data, moreover, shows that power in Mongolia was at this time not based simply on levies of nomad horsemen. The khans and great men had fixed headquarters, surrounded by cultivated land that enabled them to breed large, stable-fed horses capable of carrying a man in armour. This situation emphasized a class distinction between the aristocrat on his charger and the herdsman-warrior-archer on his smaller horse. Agriculture also became an element in the economy, and the Uighurs, who came to power after the fall of the Orhon Turks, enter history as an oasis-centred people.
Before the era of Genghis Khan, a defeated Khitan army had migrated westward at the fall of their Liao dynasty. It was led by a prince of the Khitan imperial line but must have included heterogeneous tribal elements. Moving westward through Mongolia, it reached what is now Kazakhstan and created a new and briefly powerful empire, the Karakitai. It ruled primarily over Turkic-speaking peoples, made up of nomads and city dwellers in the oases, and the Khitan nucleus had the opportunity to apply its knowledge of how to deal with nomads and its ability in the administration of a bureaucracy.