Cyprus-Forum.com

[shahmaran]

3000 years to build an army, that is pretty good going man, well done! Whats next, world domination?

I think even if you gathered your entire population together armed to the teeth, you would probably only get as far as Lefke

Plus the number of times Turkey has entered and left Iraq would make any Ayia Napan lady jealous!

But having said that, the simultaneous defeat of the Anzac's and the Allies from Europe have faced in there, would make your defeat here seem like peanuts, would it not?

Think about it, France (2 times), UK (2 times as well as their colonial forces), Greece (2 times), Armenia, New Zealand, Australia, Italy, Cyprus ALL been defeated by single handed Turkey?! And this is just between a few decades.

You are forgetting that, it took you 3000 years to set up an army but Turkey has 1000 years of constant combat experience, it is not something to be messed with and it certainly beats the need for high technology toys

[Get Real!]

3000 years to build an army, that is pretty good going man, well done! Whats next, world domination?

I think even if you gathered your entire population together armed to the teeth, you would probably only get as far as Lefke

Plus the number of times Turkey has entered and left Iraq would make any Ayia Napan lady jealous!

But having said that, the simultaneous defeat of the Anzac's and the Allies from Europe have faced in there, would make your defeat here seem like peanuts, would it not?

Think about it, France (2 times), UK (2 times as well as their colonial forces), Greece (2 times), Armenia, New Zealand, Australia, Italy, Cyprus ALL been defeated by single handed Turkey?! And this is just between a few decades.

You are forgetting that, it took you 3000 years to set up an army but Turkey has 1000 years of constant combat experience, it is not something to be messed with and it certainly beats the need for high technology toys

I haven't got the time right now to put you in your place over the early 20th century (Ottoman) events so consider yourself very lucky!

[shahmaran]

Ahh screw that, the events that lead to the collapse of a 600 year old Empire is hardly relevant.

But please uncle GR, tell me more about how it took you 3000 years!?!

[Simon]

What Shah just wrote above contains so many inaccuracies that I do not know where to start. I too cannot correct him at the moment due to workload, but I will when I get the chance unless GR beats me to it.

[shahmaran]

What Shah just wrote above contains so many inaccuracies that I do not know where to start. I too cannot correct him at the moment due to workload, but I will when I get the chance unless GR beats me to it.

You cannot correct me, full stop!

Either do it or just shut up as claims of "being able to do it and not having time" are not worthy and definitely not arguments.

[Paphitis]

3000 years to build an army, that is pretty good going man, well done! Whats next, world domination?

I think even if you gathered your entire population together armed to the teeth, you would probably only get as far as Lefke

Plus the number of times Turkey has entered and left Iraq would make any Ayia Napan lady jealous!

But having said that, the simultaneous defeat of the Anzac's and the Allies from Europe have faced in there, would make your defeat here seem like peanuts, would it not?

Think about it, France (2 times), UK (2 times as well as their colonial forces), Greece (2 times), Armenia, New Zealand, Australia, Italy, Cyprus ALL been defeated by single handed Turkey?! And this is just between a few decades.

You are forgetting that, it took you 3000 years to set up an army but Turkey has 1000 years of constant combat experience, it is not something to be messed with and it certainly beats the need for high technology toys

Can you please tell us where exactly Turkey defeated Greece twice when all along Greece has expanded and liberated territories from 1821 to 1948 many times?

Also, just in case you are not aware, Turkey lost the Great War and capitulated to the allies. The allies withdrew from Gallipoli because the troops were needed elsewhere (Western Front - France), so you can't exactly deem this as a victory when you were on the losing side and had to concede even more territory to the Greeks as a result.

[shahmaran]

The Greeks expanded on the territories of the collapsing Empire just like everyone else. Albanians I believe, were the people who defeated the Ottomans on that region, but the Greeks were thrown out of the maps of modern Turkey eventually and their hopes for the Megali Idea were thrown in the water along with themselves.

The war of Gallipoli was a direct and severe victory, it was also a turning point in the history of modern Turkey, it is not open for interpretation Paphitis, the Ottomans won that war with huge casualties, end of.

Check your facts as they are way off!

If neither was true then Turkey would not exist today as we know it, or might have not existed at all.

I believe the next time the Turkish Army would encounter Greek soldiers would be in Cyprus

Anyways you should take all this with a dash of salt as I was just pulling GR's leg, however the facts still stand.

[Simon]

You should take this with a pinch of salt because it's rubbish. When were the UK and France defeated twice by Turkey? Please enlighten me. We can then take the discussion from there. I presume you are talking about wars, not individual battles, especially where you ended up losing the war.

If the UK continued to supply and arm Greece for the entire period after the Turkish collapse, and not withdrew its support, Ankara would probably be Ankaropoulos by now.

By the way, the Turks received help from the Russians when they defeated the Greeks. So it was not "single-handed" as you claim.

The Battle of Gallipoli which you so proudly boast about, was exactly that, just one battle. The Ottomans lost many others, and lost the war let us not forget.

As a footnote, Gallipoli was more of a stalemate that led to an Anglo-French withdrawal, rather than an outright military victory by the Ottomans. It is classed as a victory for the Ottomans because it was a successful defence of Constantinople/Istanbul - but by no means were Anglo-French forces routed or anything of the kind. In fact, the Ottomans lost more troops than the British and French.

[YFred]

But surely the Ottomans must have won some wars, because they still have Smirni, Constantinople. Were these given to them as a good will gesture after they lost.

[Simon]

No, I have already acknowledged that Turkish nationalists defeated the Greeks once the British stopped their support. I was responding specifically to assertions made by Shah.