Cyprus-Forum.com

[denizaksulu]

Have u noticed that only Turkey represents all 12 haplogroups on the map?

That can only mean one thing, Turkey invaded all those countries, and we know what them Pashas were like with their Harems.

Not forgetting ofcourse, the millions of Moslem refugees that flowed into Turkey from the shrinking Ottoman Empire since the 17th Century. Not all were of 'Turkish' stock.

[insan]

Have u noticed that only Turkey represents all 12 haplogroups on the map?

That can only mean one thing, Turkey invaded all those countries, and we know what them Pashas were like with their Harems.

It does not only have such a narrow meaning of course... In the widest meaning it shows that throughout the history the region we call as Turkey today has been home for people from many different ethnicities... The people of this region mingled for thousands of years...

Uyguristan, Azerbaycan and Turkish(Turkey) haplogroups have more in common than other Turkic states Kırgızistan, Turkmenistan, Özbekistan and Kazakistan... I can easily explain how Turkey and Azerbaycan haplogroups have much in common but it's a bit difficult to explain how a Turkic region in Central Asia has that much common haplogroups with Turkey and Azerbaycan.

[YFred]

Have u noticed that only Turkey represents all 12 haplogroups on the map?

That can only mean one thing, Turkey invaded all those countries, and we know what them Pashas were like with their Harems.

It does not only have such a narrow meaning of course... In the widest meaning it shows that throughout the history the region we call as Turkey today has been home for people from many different ethnicities... The people of this region mingled for thousands of years...

Uyguristan, Azerbaycan and Turkish(Turkey) haplogroups have more in common than other Turkic states Kırgızistan, Turkmenistan, Özbekistan and Kazakistan... I can easily explain how Turkey and Azerbaycan haplogroups have much in common but it's a bit difficult to explain how a Turkic region in Central Asia has that much common haplogroups with Turkey and Azerbaycan.

Insan, I was replying in the manner of Oracle. That's the excuse she would come up with.

[Oracle]

Have u noticed that only Turkey represents all 12 haplogroups on the map?

Yes ... You have many mutations ....

[insan]

Have u noticed that only Turkey represents all 12 haplogroups on the map?

Yes ... You have many mutations ....

What abt genetic drifts besides mutations?

[Oracle]

Have u noticed that only Turkey represents all 12 haplogroups on the map?

Yes ... You have many mutations ....

What abt genetic drifts besides mutations?

Genetic drift works on mutations ... you mutant!

[GreekForumer]

Insan, let me remind you what gave birth to this thread. It was your claim that........

Turks and Kurds fought together and founded Republic of Turkey

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... 102#503102

That's not exactly true, is it ? The imagery of that claim and the historical truth are very different, aren't they ? Kurds thought they were fighting for a Kurdish-Turkish Muslim Brotherhood state. That's what you are telling me when you say Ataturk "could not keep his promises", right?

Ultimately, the essence of your claim rests on the answer to this question : "What did the Kurds think they were dying for on the battlefield in 1919-1922 ? "

In the first post of this thread, I described the Kurds as a diverse, tribal people. Even if their Nationalist character of Kurdish movement was very weak does that mean they did not have an objection to the elimination of their "Kurdishness" ? I don't think so. If these diverse Kurdish tribal leaders had a choice between a Kurd-free secular state or some sort of Kurdish tribal union, what do you think they would have chosen ?

Can you show that the majority or even any significant number of Kurds wanted a Kurd-free secular state in 1919 ?

If not, do you concede that the statement "Turks and Kurds fought together and founded Republic of Turkey" is a grossly misleading characterisation of the true history ?
Make this concession and then we can put this thread to rest.

[insan]

GF, Turks of Turkey; unlike all other independent and semi-independent Turkic states has much more hybrid ethnic elements. Throuhout the Seljuk and Ottoman era which lasted abt 900 years; Islam was the most significant element what united Turks, Kurds and other muslim ethnic groups.

However, because of misinterpretation and abuse of Islam by the last several Ottoman Sultans, religious degeneration had begun undermining the exitence of Ottoman empire and unity of it's muslim population.

Under these circumstances Ataturk and his friends had prepared for an independence war to establish a secular Turkish state. Ataturk believed that including himself all inhabitants of Turkey had share that very hybrid ethnicity which included Turkish ethnicity too.

Ataturk, as a member of dominant ethnic group Turks named the new republic as Turkey and wished/worked to unite the citizens of this new republic under the nationality consciousness of Turkishness.

Due to various internal and external resons unity of Turkic people of Turkey failed.

As i previously explained and u may confirm it with a little research. Nationalist character of Kurdish movement was very weak, it was rather based on fundamentalist religious motives. All fundamentalist religious movements were considered as a threat against the secular principles of RoT by then the dominant Turkish elements of RoT.

So, if even Ataturk promised the Kurds a type of autonomy; the main reason behind why he didn't abide by his words should have been the fundamentalist religious structure of Kurdish community.

Ataturk's presidency lasted just 15 years and he couldn't manage to solve the problem. His predecessors and consequtive Turkish governments couldn't sove the Kurdish problem either.

Currently there r some good movements towards the solution of Kurdish problem at least the part of Kurdish problem that exists in borders of Turkey. However Kurdish problem as a whole is related with the political attitudes of 3 more neighbouring countries of Turkey. Maybe this Kurdish opening process will end up transformation of RoT into a Turkish-Kurdish Federation in few years time...

I'm underlining one more time again that Kurdish problem of Turkey has nothing in common with Cyprus problem....

Here's my answer to ur question, GF.

[GreekForumer]

Here's my answer to ur question, GF.

It's not really an answer at all. You are avoiding answering the most basic questions. Why don't you support your original claim instead of giving justifications of betrayal ?

Let me try again.....

Do you concede that YOUR statement that "Turks and Kurds fought together and founded Republic of Turkey" is a grossly misleading characterisation of the true history ?

What did the Kurds think they were dying for on the battlefield in 1919-1922 ?

[insan]

Here's my answer to ur question, GF.

It's not really an answer at all. You are avoiding answering the most basic questions. Why don't you support your original claim instead of giving justifications of betrayal ?

Let me try again.....

Do you concede that YOUR statement that "Turks and Kurds fought together and founded Republic of Turkey" is a grossly misleading characterisation of the true history ?

What did the Kurds think they were dying for on the battlefield in 1919-1922 ?

It's not misleading at all, when u take into consideration then the circumstances...

"Atatürk" has been praised by former Chief of General Staff Gen. Yaşar Büyükanıt, and last October Mango was awarded an honorary doctorate degree by the Senate of Süleyman Demirel University in Isparta. Deniz Baykal, the chairman of the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP), attended the ceremony and congratulated the university for honoring Mango. I too greatly appreciate Mango's studies on Turkish history and politics, which have significantly contributed to a better understanding of Turkish affairs in the West.

One of Mango's articles on Atatürk that is not so well known in Turkey is the one titled "Atatürk and the Kurds" published in the 35th issue of the journal of Middle Eastern Studies in 1999. In this article, on the basis of meticulous research on the subject, Mango reaches the following conclusion: "To sum up, during the years of the War of Independence, Mustafa Kemal recognized specifically the multiethnic character of the Muslim population of Turkey, while insisting on its fraternal unity. He also promised that local government would accommodate ethnic specificity. After 1923, any idea of the self-rule of individual Muslim ethnic communities dropped out of Turkish political agenda. Mustafa Kemal devoted his energy to the consolidation of his power and to his cultural revolution. He had little time for the Kurds … Thereafter, the requirements of creating a modern nation state took precedence. It is true that Atatürk's cultural revolution was an additional obstacle to the preservation of distinct ethnic cultures, let alone to the introduction of local self-rule. But there was no vocal demand in Turkish society for either. In the circumstances, Atatürk could delegate the management of the Kurds to his government." (p. 22)

Mango observes that, with the adoption of the Law on Resettlement in 1934, "assimilation of all the country's citizens to Turkish culture" became "official government policy … The model was, as ever, France, where Bretons, Occitanians, Savoyards, Flemings, etc. had all been assimilated into French culture." (p. 20-21)

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/colum ... kurds.html

Kurds thought it was a war to protect muslim homelands against the non-muslims.

A proper understanding of Atatürk's policies after the War of Independence requires not only the consideration of the example of the French model and the influence of Namık Kemal, but also the fact that even among 19th century European liberals, the prevailing view was that a modern nation-state necessitated either forced assimilation of national minorities or the redrawing of borders. It may be argued that in the case of Turkey, the obvious choice was the first one since the aim was to create not only a modern state, but also a nation out of the many ethnic groups that were the legacy of the Ottoman Empire.

Similar policies were carried out all around the world during the establishment of nation states.

In Greece, hundred thousands of ethnic minorities were expelled and the remaining ones denied all their cultural rights, language and many other basic human rights.

Now it's ur turn to tell us abt why and how ethnic minorities in Greece were expelled and denied all their basic human rights... start with Pomaks, Chams and Macedonians...