Cyprus-Forum.com

[YFred]

Simon, there is no need to get upset with our friend Bafiti over such trivial matter. You see he is using an idea propagated about the Brits, during WW1. Mainly that the British army has the best soldiers in the world, lead by donkeys. The Officer core did not come out too well with that war on account that there were inbreed, incompetent and mainly from the aristocracy. He has no idea regarding the British army of 21st century.

It's just that in his twisted little mind, he forgot that the saying was for the officers combined with hitherto unexplained Australian hatred for anything British even though most of the Australians are convicts exported from Britain. Add to that his unadulterated hatred for anything Turkish and bingo, you got Bafiti. The worrying aspect to all this is that he claims o be an airline pilot. Now, need I say any more?

[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.

Turks fought the British Empire as well as their allies which included the French in Gallipolli and won the battle (1915-1916), I did not say anything more or less and that is exactly what happened, the campaign was a total failure, however it did not stop the collapse of the Empire, it just turned Atatürk into a war hero and let to the events that followed.

Then during the Turkish War of Independence (1919-1923) the Turks fought the British, Greeks, French, Italians and the Armenians and were victorious, which led to the declaration of the independent republic of Turkey.

The only Russian backing they got during that conflict was of arms smuggling, since the British had destroyed and banned all arms.

This is nothing new and the battle was still fought only by Turks.

I have not said anything different nor was I "proudly praising" anything, not that I have to as the facts speak for themselves loud and clear.

The next time, I also said, the Turks would face the Greeks, would be in Cyprus.

So you do the maths genius and check your facts while you are at it.

Gallipoli was one battle where massive casualties were taken on both sides and the Allies DECIDED to withdraw. By the way, that was the Ottoman Empire, not Turkey. You seem to distinguish the two, and treat them as the same whenever it suits you. Anyway, the Ottomans then lost many other battles and finally lost the war. If that is the proudest moment in your history, I feel sorry for you.

The Turks beat the Greeks in the Turkish War of Independence. I disagree about the rest, as the British and others stopped supplying and supporting the Greeks when the Turks drove them out of Anatolia. I have already explained the political reasons for this. So how were they defeated? They negotiated with the Turks behind the scenes. With regards to the Russians, however you want to word it, they were supporting and arming the Turks. End of story.

You were clearly boasting you fool. I can quote the post if you like to make you look more stupid than what you already are?

If the Turks face the Greeks in Cyprus, so be it. Someone needs to teach you lunatic nationaists that the Turkish Army is not as invincible as what you think it is. Hell, if the British had abided by their obligations, they could have sunk your "peace operation" into the Mediterranean before it even begun. Some invincibility.

[Simon]

Simon, there is no need to get upset with our friend Bafiti over such trivial matter. You see he is using an idea propagated about the Brits, during WW1. Mainly that the British army has the best soldiers in the world, lead by donkeys. The Officer core did not come out too well with that war on account that there were inbreed, incompetent and mainly from the aristocracy. He has no idea regarding the British army of 21st century.

It's just that in his twisted little mind, he forgot that the saying was for the officers combined with hitherto unexplained Australian hatred for anything British even though most of the Australians are convicts exported from Britain. Add to that his unadulterated hatred for anything Turkish and bingo, you got Bafiti. The worrying aspect to all this is that he claims o be an airline pilot. Now, need I say any more?

I have no problem with the frustration over the incompetency of British officers at that time. It is when he tries to make ridiculous accusations and states incorrect facts, whilst at the same time insulting me, when I get pissed off.

[miltiades]

To think that GR and Paphitis , some time back, joined forces and wanted to go to ...war against Turkey !
Its a good job Milti intervened and put them in their places !!!
Now they live to ...f...uck another battle !!!
No hard feelings boys I do really like both of you , and that's the truth .
GR , how about a.... poll " who is the ...best looking , Milti or GR

[shahmaran]

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.

Turks fought the British Empire as well as their allies which included the French in Gallipolli and won the battle (1915-1916), I did not say anything more or less and that is exactly what happened, the campaign was a total failure, however it did not stop the collapse of the Empire, it just turned Atatürk into a war hero and let to the events that followed.

Then during the Turkish War of Independence (1919-1923) the Turks fought the British, Greeks, French, Italians and the Armenians and were victorious, which led to the declaration of the independent republic of Turkey.

The only Russian backing they got during that conflict was of arms smuggling, since the British had destroyed and banned all arms.

This is nothing new and the battle was still fought only by Turks.

I have not said anything different nor was I "proudly praising" anything, not that I have to as the facts speak for themselves loud and clear.

The next time, I also said, the Turks would face the Greeks, would be in Cyprus.

So you do the maths genius and check your facts while you are at it.

Gallipoli was one battle where massive casualties were taken on both sides and the Allies DECIDED to withdraw. By the way, that was the Ottoman Empire, not Turkey. You seem to distinguish the two, and treat them as the same whenever it suits you. Anyway, the Ottomans then lost many other battles and finally lost the war. If that is the proudest moment in your history, I feel sorry for you.

The Turks beat the Greeks in the Turkish War of Independence. I disagree about the rest, as the British and others stopped supplying and supporting the Greeks when the Turks drove them out of Anatolia. I have already explained the political reasons for this. So how were they defeated? They negotiated with the Turks behind the scenes. With regards to the Russians, however you want to word it, they were supporting and arming the Turks. End of story.

You were clearly boasting you fool. I can quote the post if you like to make you look more stupid than what you already are?

If the Turks face the Greeks in Cyprus, so be it. Someone needs to teach you lunatic nationaists that the Turkish Army is not as invincible as what you think it is. Hell, if the British had abided by their obligations, they could have sunk your "peace operation" into the Mediterranean before it even begun. Some invincibility.

Idiot read again, are you talking to yourself or to me?!

Where have I used the word "Turkey" ?

I know the difference between the Ottoman's and Turkey, it is why I have said the TURKS were fighting and it lead to the COLLAPSE of the EMPIRE even though the CAMPAIGN was a total failure, which it was since it caused so much turmoil in the British government!

So stop grasping for straws Simon, all these oppositions set out for an objective which resulted in the failure of that objective, look at it how ever you want my friend but in any language that is considered as FAILURE aka. DEFEAT!

The Turkish army is far from invincible but definitely strong enough to shut everyone up for a long time, as she did

The War of Independence was even more catastrophic and the sweetest of all victories as the Greeks played the foot soldier for the big boys with the mission for the forced signing of the Sevr agreement and it was shoved in their faces of the Greeks, Brits, French and Armenians, along with Turkey's independence.

So who was forced to sign what bitch!?

Again that in any language is considered as an absolute VICTORY!

So you can cry all the "but ifs" you like, it does not change history the slightest, just makes you sound fucking stupid and pitiful.

Good night

[Simon]

You bang on about one battle when you lost the war? What idiot would do that? I can talk about one of the battles in Anatolia which the Greeks won, but what difference does it make when they lost the war? The only one clutching at straws is you. Only a Turk could turn a catastrophic defeat into a rousing war cry of Turkish perfection! You really are pathetic.

The British and French stopped supporting the Greeks, which led to their defeat. You need to learn some history. I never denied that the Greeks were defeated and forced to sign; you seem to be arguing with yourself. I'm talking about the other major powers, who were not 'forced' to do anything due to a defeat of their own forces on the battlefield, as you imply.

It seems that I touched a nerve when I pointed out how easily Turkey could have been defeated by someone its own size. The truth must really hurt Shitmaran when you have been brainwashed about the Turkish Army all your life.

[shahmaran]

You bang on about one battle when you lost the war? What idiot would do that? I can talk about one of the battles in Anatolia which the Greeks won, but what difference does it make when they lost the war? The only one clutching at straws is you. Only a Turk could turn a catastrophic defeat into a rousing war cry of Turkish perfection! You really are pathetic.

The British and French stopped supporting the Greeks, which led to their defeat. You need to learn some history. I never denied that the Greeks were defeated and forced to sign; you seem to be arguing with yourself. I'm talking about the other major powers, who were not 'forced' to do anything due to a defeat of their own forces on the battlefield, as you imply.

It seems that I touched a nerve when I pointed out how easily Turkey could have been defeated by someone its own size. The truth must really hurt Shitmaran when you have been brainwashed about the Turkish Army all your life.

Moron you would just about touch my nuts if you had any argument, unlucky for you, you don't!

You seem to leave out Armenia, how did they loose?

Oh sorry I mean how did they "decide" to give up, since you are so good in history

History is already written and is not open for some "Simon interpretation"

When you say "lost the war", who are you talking about, the Ottoman's or the Turks?!

The Turks fought both the Ottoman remains and the West, so yes they won the war and got rid of the Empire and declared their independent state, how the hell is that not a victory?!

Do not forget that the Turks also fought very hard to get rid of the Sultans who were happy with Sevr.

The entire family was kicked out and sent to Europe with 2000 pounds in their pockets to become peasants amongst the people they loved so much

As to the British, they probably saw what was coming and pulled out just in time and left the moronic Greeks out to dry

Either way, Turks came out with a new democratic republic and the Europeans went home with nothing, well the Greeks got some land back, wohoo big deal, point is it is a victory and not open for re-defining the meaning of the word

[Simon]

You bang on about one battle when you lost the war? What idiot would do that? I can talk about one of the battles in Anatolia which the Greeks won, but what difference does it make when they lost the war? The only one clutching at straws is you. Only a Turk could turn a catastrophic defeat into a rousing war cry of Turkish perfection! You really are pathetic.

The British and French stopped supporting the Greeks, which led to their defeat. You need to learn some history. I never denied that the Greeks were defeated and forced to sign; you seem to be arguing with yourself. I'm talking about the other major powers, who were not 'forced' to do anything due to a defeat of their own forces on the battlefield, as you imply.

It seems that I touched a nerve when I pointed out how easily Turkey could have been defeated by someone its own size. The truth must really hurt Shitmaran when you have been brainwashed about the Turkish Army all your life.

Moron you would just about touch my nuts if you had any argument, unlucky for you, you don't!

You seem to leave out Armenia, how did they loose?

Oh sorry I mean how did they "decide" to give up, since you are so good in history

History is already written and is not open for some "Simon interpretation" :

I wipe the floor with you everytime we debate my friend. I actually find you amusing.

Because you can't deal with what my post actually states, you start talking about a whole load of other shit. What the fuck do the Armenians have to do with it? I'm talking about the role of the Great Powers and Greece. The Armenian Genocide is a whole new ball game, which "Turkish and Shitmaran interpretation of history" claims never happened.

When you say "lost the war", who are you talking about, the Ottoman's or the Turks?!

The Turks fought both the Ottoman remains and the West, so yes they won the war and got rid of the Empire and declared their independent state, how the hell is that not a victory?!

Do not forget that the Turks also fought very hard to get rid of the Sultans who were happy with Sevr.

The entire family was kicked out and sent to Europe with 2000 pounds in their pockets to become peasants amongst the people they loved so much

Do you even read what I post, or do you just enjoy making up your own arguments? I was clear. When I was referring to losing the war, I was obviously talking about the Ottomans (in response to your Gallipoli comments). Please try to keep up. I have already stated many times that Turkey obviously won the war of independence. How many times do I have to say it. What I disagree with is your implication that Turkey practically defeated the world's armies at once (only a slight exaggeration), single-handedly, as you ridiculously claim.

As to the British, they probably saw what was coming and pulled out just in time and left the moronic Greeks out to dry

This is a mythical Shitmaran theory at its best. I'm getting used to this invention of history with you. The Greeks were on top during the war for long periods. They were marching on Ankara for Christ's sake and had already won various battles.

[shahmaran]

OK idiot, I had enough with your illiterate ramblings for the night, I have to sleep.

If you don't even know what Armenia had to do with the war you clearly are not even aware of the parties that took part in the war, meaning you are full of shit and have a lot more research to do on the matter.

Come back when you actually know something, good night...

[Simon]

You fucking prat, I know all about the Armenian Genocide, I referred to it above. What I said was it has fuck all to do with my argument, which is refuting your ridiculous prior claim! All is explained above. Are you such a retard that you're incapable of reading?

Fuck off to bed, you seem to need a good sleep judging by the quality of your posts. Maybe after a long sleep you will forget about the humiliations of today.