NationStates Jolt Archive

Perfect. Let's look at the first results from the second link.

http://www.cultureconnect.com/maps/europe.jpg
Includes Turkey

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.traveldocs.com/images/europe_b.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.traveldocs.com/europe.htm&h=1049&w=800&sz=66&tbnid=Je9zdm7TiiOxaM:&tbnh=150&tbnw=114&hl=sh&start=1&prev=/images%3Fq%3Deurope%26imgsz%3Dxxlarge%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Dsh%26lr%3Dlang_en%7Clang_hr%7Clang_sr%26sa %3DG
Includes Turkey

http://maps.bzzt.net/europe.jpg
Vague but includes Turkey

http://www.cs.wisc.edu/paradise/snapshots/europe.gif
Includes Turkey

http://historic-cities.huji.ac.il/blaue_europe.jpg
Includes Turkey

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe/c_europe_pol96.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe.html&h=1206&w=982&sz=237&tbnid=elGaZBLzgLNxdM:&tbnh=150&tbnw=122&hl=sh&start=5&prev=/images%3Fq%3Deurope%26imgsz%3Dxxlarge%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Dsh%26lr%3Dlang_en%7Clang_hr%7Clang_sr%26sa %3DG
Includes Turkey

That's the first five. 98%, huh? So far I've listed the first nine, four from my search and five from yours, and all have included Turkey. Seems like unless one only accepts maps without Turkey, then the evidence is all on my side.
Read post above.

Read post above.

You're the one who made the map argument. The made-up figure that has been proven ridiculously wrong.

Were they European before they became part of Turkey? I mean, if I close my eyes I can deny that there are clouds in the sky today over Illinois, but it doesn't make it true.
No. They were Asians, they are still Asians, and always they will be Asians.

Well, my work here is done. I'm through causing trouble, so I'm going to leave you two to duke it out, as it were. Play nice now! ;)

Just one last thing:
*Runs away from thread shouting*

Transcontinental nation!

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

*gunshot*

You're the one who made the map argument. The made-up figure that has been proven ridiculously wrong.
You dont know what else to say, huh?

You dont know what else to say, huh?

I've gotten you to admit that Turkey is partly in Europe. So has the OP. What else needs to be said. It's clearly a transcontinental nation. It is clear that what drives this argument for so many is that they don't want it in the EU. The fact is that geography doesn't magically change because you don't like it.

Turkey - 97% of it's territory is in Asia.

Hmmm... seems like you might as well concede the argument right there, but you don't.

If you take an closer look at maps of Europe, 98% of them won't have small part that belong to the Turkey today.
Now you make up a completely ridiculous figure and when I prove it's ridiculous, you pretend like it doesn't matter. Would it have mattered if we hadn't proved you were just making things up?

No. They were Asians, they are still Asians, and always they will be Asians.

Really? They were Asians even though they were born in Europe and none of their descendants are from Asia? How do you figure that? So Greeks are Asians too? Because that's who had that land before.

Ah, forget it. At this point, I'm just being a bully. It's pretty clear that you're not actually working from evidence. It's pretty clear that you didn't come to actually support points, but simply to make declarations like "Europeans who aren't the way I want them to be are Asians" and "98% of maps do not include the European part of Turkey even if we actually look and find that it's actually hard to find a map that does not include that part."

Eu membership is for european countries, so it shouldnt have been able to apply in the first place...

How many people replying to this thread are turkish? Is it not up to Turkey to decide which continent it feels most closely affiliated to? rather than europeans or anyon else--EU membership is a different matter which should be based on the Copenhagen Criteria-an incentive for Turkey to improve its own Institutions.

Also, those who have said Turkey's history is not linked to Europes are wrong. Throughout the middle ages Constantinople had extremely close links to other european ports like Venice.

Ah, forget it. At this point, I'm just being a bully. It's pretty clear that you're not actually working from evidence. It's pretty clear that you didn't come to actually support points, but simply to make declarations like "Europeans who aren't the way I want them to be are Asians" and "98% of maps do not include the European part of Turkey even if we actually look and find that it's actually hard to find a map that does not include that part."

You are giving up!

Turkey is transcontinental country, but it's Asian nation. You can love or hate that fact.

None of those links appear on the first three pages. I don't believe you. Can you link to your search?

You have to be looking for the keyword "Asia", in the Images search. Oh - and you have to be using Google in Croatian.

You are giving up!

Turkey is transcontinental country, but it's Asian nation. You can love or hate that fact.

Actually -
"Turkey is geographically, politically and officially part of two continents - Europe and Asia. The smaller northwestern portion (Thrace) is part of Europe, while the larger portion (Anatolia) is part of Asia".

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/europe/tr.htm

Thrace is historically part of Greece, and Greece is in Europe... so part of Turkey has been European for more than just centuries.

All the deabte is about now - is whether the European continental border should include the REST of Turkey, or not.

Actually -


http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/europe/tr.htm

Thrace is historically part of Greece, and Greece is in Europe... so part of Turkey has been European for more than just centuries.

All the deabte is about now - is whether the European continental border should include the REST of Turkey, or not.
Egypt was part of Roman empire, are you saying that Arabs are part of Europe?
Nor that part, nor entire Turkey. EU is already too large!

The 3% of Turkey that is in Europe is European, the rest is Middle Eastern.

The 3% of Turkey that is in Europe is European, the rest is Middle Eastern.
And should we consider Turkey as European country only for that 3%?

Egypt was part of Roman empire, are you saying that Italians are Arabs?
Nor that part, nor entire Turkey. EU is already too large!

Egypt was part of the Roman Empire - but Thrace was part of Greece... there's a difference.

Also - since you seem so set on the 'culture' of the place - what we call modern 'Turkey' has been a Thracian culture, a Byzantine culture, and an Hellenistic culture... it's history as Seljuk or Ottoman cultures built ON that.

You could say that Anatolia was ALWAYS European, UNTIL the spread of Turkish culture. All we are talking about here, is resetting the border to it's historic boundary.

Egypt was part of the Roman Empire - but Thrace was part of Greece... there's a difference.

Also - since you seem so set on the 'culture' of the place - what we call modern 'Turkey' has been a Thracian culture, a Byzantine culture, and an Hellenistic culture... it's history as Seljuk or Ottoman cultures built ON that.

You could say that Anatolia was ALWAYS European, UNTIL the spread of Turkish culture. All we are talking about here, is resetting the border to it's historic boundary.
Yes, but only in past. When Turks captured Constantinople, they killed all non -Turks. With that Turks erased all traces of European culture. True remnants of Turksih culture can be seen all over the Balkans. Balkan - turkish word for mountain

Yes, but only in past. When Turks captured Constantinople, they killed all non -Turks. With that Turks erased all traces of European culture. True remnants of Turksih culture can be seen all over the Balkans. Balkan - turkish word for mountain

This is not true. There have been a number of periods in the history of the region, where one force has subjugated or decimated the 'native' population - but there is no point at which an effective 'genocide' has been perpetrated.

Sure - the Turkish influence is by far the STRONGEST - but the older undercurrents still exist - in much the same way that England still feels the resonance of the Norman conquest. (Mainly in truly cultural arenas... like language).

Edit: Another thought - when the Ottoman Empire finally took Constantinople, Fatih Sultan Mehmed actually declared himself the next 'Roman Emperor', and allowed the Orthodox Patriarchy to continue to conduct their own affairs.

Hardly the 'genocide' you seem to want to describe.

You are giving up!

Turkey is transcontinental country, but it's Asian nation. You can love or hate that fact.

If you'd established that fact, evidenced that fact, shown any support for that fact or even not made statements that undermine that fact, I'd call what I'm doing giving up. What I'm doing is deciding that whether you recognize when you're beaten or not, there is a point when I'm pounding on an unconscious opponent. Many times in TKO's the other fighter doesn't realize he is no longer presenting a defense. Even in the absense of a referree the winner had better realize when there is no defense being presented and simply stop pounding on a defenseless opponent.

I caught you admitting a part of Turkey is Europe. You got caught making up figures and then making up support for those figures. You are now trying to rewrite history to make it so people who are descended from Europeans and living in Europe aren't European. And all of this is because you want Turkey to not be permitted in the EU. If you don't want them in the EU, make that argument. But none of it changes that Turkey is a transcontinental nation with people decended from both continents and with a culture that has profoundly affected the culture on both continents and has aspects of the cultures found on both continents, by your own admission.

I don't find it interesting to argue with someone who is just making things up, arguing strawmen and not offering any support. I lost interest.

And should we consider Turkey as European country only for that 3%?

No, you should consider that part of Turkey European. It's unfortunate that you're not following along.

If you'd established that fact, evidenced that fact, shown any support for that fact or even not made statements that undermine that fact, I'd call what I'm doing giving up. What I'm doing is deciding that whether you recognize when you're beaten or not, there is a point when I'm pounding on an unconscious opponent. Many times in TKO's the other fighter doesn't realize he is no longer presenting a defense. Even in the absense of a referree the winner had better realize when there is no defense being presented and simply stop pounding on a defenseless opponent.

I caught you admitting a part of Turkey is Europe. You got caught making up figures and then making up support for those figures. You are now trying to rewrite history to make it so people who are descended from Europeans and living in Europe aren't European. And all of this is because you want Turkey to not be permitted in the EU. If you don't want them in the EU, make that argument. But none of it changes that Turkey is a transcontinental nation with people decended from both continents and with a culture that has profoundly affected the culture on both continents and has aspects of the cultures found on both continents, by your own admission.

I don't find it interesting to argue with someone who is just making things up, arguing strawmen and not offering any support. I lost interest.

Emphasis = mine.

That's what we need! We need a referee! We need a moderator who can be appealed to to be impartial, and that can come in and look at the arguments made, and evidence supplied in a thread (when appealed to), and render a verdict.

Emphasis = mine.

That's what we need! We need a referee! We need a moderator who can be appealed to to be impartial, and that can come in and look at the arguments made, and evidence supplied in a thread (when appealed to), and render a verdict.

They would have been waving this one off forty pages ago. Some of the posters here haven't presented any argument at all except when they were supporting our arguments. Like the poster, no names, who argued that Turkey is 97% Asian, when he forgot he'd been arguing for several pages that the European part of Turkey doesn't exist. Whoops. There hasn't been a real opponent in this thread since Europa Maxima left.

They would have been waving this one off forty pages ago. Some of the posters here haven't presented any argument at all except when they were supporting our arguments. Like the poster, no names, who argued that Turkey is 97% Asian, when he forgot he'd been arguing for several pages that the European part of Turkey doesn't exist. Whoops. There hasn't been a real opponent in this thread since Europa Maxima left.
You just never give up? Turkey is not part of Europe. You can only live with that fact. If you are like that fact - good for you, if not - well that's your problem!

This is not true. There have been a number of periods in the history of the region, where one force has subjugated or decimated the 'native' population - but there is no point at which an effective 'genocide' has been perpetrated.

Sure - the Turkish influence is by far the STRONGEST - but the older undercurrents still exist - in much the same way that England still feels the resonance of the Norman conquest. (Mainly in truly cultural arenas... like language).

Edit: Another thought - when the Ottoman Empire finally took Constantinople, Fatih Sultan Mehmed actually declared himself the next 'Roman Emperor', and allowed the Orthodox Patriarchy to continue to conduct their own affairs.

Hardly the 'genocide' you seem to want to describe.
The patriarchy was reestablished only to pacify Christians (Greeks first). It actualy didn't have much power, nor influence among common people.
City was sacked, and Christians expeled. Why is so hard to understand this?

You just never give up? Turkey is not part of Europe. You can only live with that fact. If you are like that fact - good for you, if not - well that's your problem!

I think the evidence is heavily against you, my friend.

Turkey is historically European. PART of Turkey is CURRENTLY European. The evidence supports it... what is your vested interest?

The patriarchy was reestablished only to pacify Christians (Greeks first). It actualy didn't have much power, nor influence among common people.
City was sacked, and Christians expeled. Why is so hard to understand this?

Present evidence, my friend... all the evidence I've seen says you are talking through your hat.

The Orthodox Patriarchy wasn't 'reestablished'... it was allowed to continue on the proviso it did not affiliate with the Vatican. Whether or not it 'had power' is irrelevent.

I think the evidence is heavily against you, my friend.

Turkey is historically European. PART of Turkey is CURRENTLY European. The evidence supports it... what is your vested interest?
What evidence?

You just never give up? Turkey is not part of Europe. You can only live with that fact. If you are like that fact - good for you, if not - well that's your problem!

Yet, the majority of the maps we found included the European part of Turkey. The current boundaries of Europe include 3% of Turkey. Hmmmm... they do an awefully good job of being a part of Europe for a country that is not. But hey, if you wish to deny logic and declare that no part of Turkey is a part of Europe despite all evidence, please feel free. You'll be wrong, but there's no law against being wrong. Or prove that you're right. So far, even your own posts evidence that Turkey is partly in Europe. "Turkey is 97% Asian" - Blackredwithyellowsuna

Present evidence, my friend... all the evidence I've seen says you are talking through your hat.

The Orthodox Patriarchy wasn't 'reestablished'... it was allowed to continue on the proviso it did not affiliate with the Vatican. Whether or not it 'had power' is irrelevent.
How come?

The patriarchy was reestablished only to pacify Christians (Greeks first). It actualy didn't have much power, nor influence among common people.
City was sacked, and Christians expeled. Why is so hard to understand this?

You contradict yourself. If all the Christians were expeled why would thye have to pacify them? And how was the Patriarchy reestablished if they were destroyed as you originally claimed?

How come?

Because you said it was destroyed, not that it was denied a position of power. Did you forget your own arguments?

Yet, the majority of the maps we found included the European part of Turkey. The current boundaries of Europe include 3% of Turkey. Hmmmm... they do an awefully good job of being a part of Europe for a country that is not. But hey, if you wish to deny logic and declare that no part of Turkey is a part of Europe despite all evidence, please feel free. You'll be wrong, but there's no law against being wrong. Or prove that you're right. So far, even your own posts evidence that Turkey is partly in Europe. "Turkey is 97% Asian" - Blackredwithyellowsuna
And you are saying that 97% of Asian Turkey is nothing compared to, hay, 3% of it's European territory (disputed)!

Because you said it was destroyed, not that it was denied a position of power. Did you forget your own arguments?
Yes, it was destroyed. Only later it was reestablished.

What evidence?

I have (personally) presented citation to support the Thrace part of Turkey as 'within' Europe. You have failed to counter it... which is logical, because it cannot BE countered.

You also haven't managed to answer the 'historic' European nature of Anatolia, except to speculate about a genocide you, again, fail to prove.

How come?

Simple - if the Orthodox Patriarchy remained AFTER the Ottoman occupation, then CLEARLY, the culture hadn't been wiped out, quod erat demonstrandum.

Yes, it was destroyed. Only later it was reestablished.

You don't know what destroyed means do you? It could be rebuilt, but a destroyed group cannot be reestablished. They would no longer exist. You accused them of genocide. If everyone is killed why would one need to pacify them? Unless you're admitting you made another claim up.

I have (personally) presented citation to support the Thrace part of Turkey as 'within' Europe. You have failed to counter it... which is logical, because it cannot BE countered.

You also haven't managed to answer the 'historic' European nature of Anatolia, except to speculate about a genocide you, again, fail to prove.
Anatolia was part of European culture (NOT continent) when it was inhabited by the Greeks. When Turks became majority, their (Asian) culture become predominant.

And you are saying that 97% of Asian Turkey is nothing compared to, hay, 3% of it's European territory (disputed)!

The 'proportion' doesn't matter. Part of Turkey is, even today, WITHIN the boundaries of Europe.

Thus - admission of Turkey into Europe is NOT 'recruiting a new nation'... it is simply realigning the border to contain the WHOLE of a nation that is already PARTLY European.

You don't know what destroyed means do you? It could be rebuilt, but a destroyed group cannot be reestablished. They would no longer exist. You accused them of genocide. If everyone is killed why would one need to pacify them? Unless you're admitting you made another claim up.
I was speaking about Constantinople as city. Greeks remained to live in what's today Greece.

Yes, it was destroyed. Only later it was reestablished.

Evidence, my friend, evidence!

I was speaking about Constantinople as city. Greeks remained to live in what's today Greece.
We are talking about the entirety of Turkey. Meanwhile, is your new claim that they committed genocide and then to pacify the people who were no longer present on their lands they reimported those people? Interesting. Mind if I question what the logic behind such a decision would have been?

Simple - if the Orthodox Patriarchy remained AFTER the Ottoman occupation, then CLEARLY, the culture hadn't been wiped out, quod erat demonstrandum.
No, that just isn't true.
And about culture - did you see Southern Bulgaria, Bosnia or Albania? They are purest examples of Turkish allien culture - mosques, way of life... on the other hand, did you see Churches builted by the Turks in Middle East or Egypt?

Anatolia was part of European culture (NOT continent) when it was inhabited by the Greeks. When Turks became majority, their (Asian) culture become predominant.

Thrace is part of historic 'Anatolia' - and is IN Europe... it is part of the same island outcropping as Greece, proper.

Thrace still IS, ostensibly, part of Greek GEOGRAPHY... (modern) Anatolia WAS historically part of 'Greek' CULTURE (twice - Thracian and Hellenistic).

You still fail to refute the evidence I presented, or cite any evidence of your own.

You are big on rhetoric - but you are bringing nothing to the table.

We are talking about the entirety of Turkey. Meanwhile, is your new claim that they committed genocide and then to pacify the people who were no longer present on their lands they reimported those people? Interesting. Mind if I question what the logic behind such a decision would have been?
Are you stupid or what?
Constantinolpe - Sacked, destroyed, all it's inhabitants killed
Christian population in Asia, Greece, Albania, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Slovenia - alive, not safe!

No, that just isn't true.


Where is your evidence? I'm not just going to accept "I don't think so" as an argument.


And about culture - did you see Southern Bulgaria, Bosnia or Albania? They are purest examples of Turkish allien culture - mosques, way of life... on the other hand, did you see Churches builted by the Turks in Middle East or Egypt?

What is your point? Are we discussing Bulgaria, Bosnia or Albania?

Are you stupid or what?
Constantinolpe - Sacked, destroyed, all it's inhabitants killed
Christian population in Asia, Greece, Albania, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Slovenia - alive, not safe!

You are wrong.

Provide EVIDENCE of your little genocide.

Thrace is part of historic 'Anatolia' - and is IN Europe... it is part of the same island outcropping as Greece, proper.

Thrace still IS, ostensibly, part of Greek GEOGRAPHY... (modern) Anatolia WAS historically part of 'Greek' CULTURE (twice - Thracian and Hellenistic).

You still fail to refute the evidence I presented, or cite any evidence of your own.

You are big on rhetoric - but you are bringing nothing to the table.
first of all: What is the culture of Crete, Anatolia, Macedonia, Pagania, Scotland Bolivia?
Please, explain.

Are you stupid or what?
Constantinolpe - Sacked, destroyed, all it's inhabitants killed
Christian population in Asia, Greece, Albania, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Slovenia - alive, not safe!
I'm stupid because you can't see your argument is ludicrous. You've still presented no evidence. Constantinople isn't all of Turkey so it bears no relation to the argument we're having. You've managed to make lots of often contradicting assertions and then call people names when they've challenged you on them. But perhaps I'm stupid because I know what destroyed means and I can follow how the argument ties to the point. If that's your best argument, that I must be stupid, then run with it. It won't get you very far, but then you didn't even realize that you admitted that part of Turkey is in Europe in the middle of arguing that the European part didn't exist, so what should I expect?

You are wrong.

Provide EVIDENCE of your little genocide.
What?
It wasn't little, and it wasn't my.
Maybe you should prove that there were no genocide!

Yes, but only in past. When Turks captured Constantinople, they killed all non -Turks. With that Turks erased all traces of European culture. True remnants of Turksih culture can be seen all over the Balkans. Balkan - turkish word for mountain
Im already tired of this but let me tell again that we Turks ruled Orthodox population at the times of Ottoman empire, later Russians gained their control. Ottoman empire was protector of both islam and orthodox christians for a loong long time. In the rule of Ottoman empire bloodshed in middle east was ceased. all religions had to live in peace by law. If catholics and orthodoxs tried to kill each other for example they both lost their heads, I dont even speak about what would happened if a muslim and christian tried to start hate against each other, that would make stalin look like a girl scout :D
As you can see I dont claim that ottoman empire was a non violent angel or water elf :p they had severe laws and empire stood firm and strong for a long time. In an attempt to revolt they just filled wells with heads, without caring for race and religion they set bloody examples. One strong demonstration that was burned into minds of communities kept them respectful to law and to each other a looong long time. So practically even with its severe punishments ottoman had internal peace for a long time.

Blackredwithyellowsuna, you either dont know the H of history or a deliberate liar. Spreading filth and misinformation, go get education. Dont come with cheap WW1 propaganda before me, even our open enemies deny such petty claims as the annihilation of Istanbul population. The whole conquest is recorded quite clearly by both turks and orthodox clergy of time. The Fatih Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror even ordered the search of last emperor of Byzantine to give him a proper burial and make him a tomb thats good enough for an emperor, because with the conquest he became an emperor himself. He was also a jeweler, a poet, and scientist that improved the canon technology. I already told his vision of a helen culture in a seperate message that I wont repeat.

Where is your evidence? I'm not just going to accept "I don't think so" as an argument.
What evidence do you want? I give you an evidence. and you say:
What is your point? Are we discussing Bulgaria, Bosnia or Albania?
Yes, because there you can clearly see difference between European and Asian culture

What?
It wasn't little, and it wasn't my.
Maybe you should prove that there were no genocide!

"Constantinople and the Empire finally fell to the Ottoman Empire on Tuesday May 29, 1453, during the reign of Constantine XI Paleologus (see Fall of Constantinople). Although the Turks overthrew the Byzantines, Fatih Sultan Mehmed the Second (the Ottoman Sultan at the time) styled himself as the next Roman Emperor ("Kayser-i-Rum") and let the Orthodox Patriarchy continue to conduct their own affairs, having stated that they did not want to join the Vatican."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantinople

The prior culture was overrun, but NOT destroyed.

Your turn.

What?
It wasn't little, and it wasn't my.
Maybe you should prove that there were no genocide!

Classic trolling. We have to prove that something didn't happen, I suppose. Prove that aliens don't exist. I'll tell you how to do so, start by showing that life exists no where except Earth in the entire galaxy. See, it would be quite easy for you to demonstrate that the genocid happend, if it did. However, no amount of evidence would prove it didn't, especially since you're claiming that after wiping out all the people of certain groups they were reimported to pacify the people who were no longer there.

first of all: What is the culture of Crete, Anatolia, Macedonia, Pagania, Scotland Bolivia?
Please, explain.

Address the points, stop changing the subject, and present some EVIDENCE of your claims.

Or, alternatively - you can remain silent, and I'll accept your resignation with good grace.

first of all: What is the culture of Crete, Anatolia, Macedonia, Pagania, Scotland Bolivia?
Please, explain.

Are you claiming those places are not part of Europe as well? I'm not sure even you understand what your point is.

I'm stupid because you can't see your argument is ludicrous. You've still presented no evidence. Constantinople isn't all of Turkey so it bears no relation to the argument we're having. You've managed to make lots of often contradicting assertions and then call people names when they've challenged you on them. But perhaps I'm stupid because I know what destroyed means and I can follow how the argument ties to the point. If that's your best argument, that I must be stupid, then run with it. It won't get you very far, but then you didn't even realize that you admitted that part of Turkey is in Europe in the middle of arguing that the European part didn't exist, so what should I expect?
Maybe you shuld expect some education, it won't hurt...

What evidence do you want? I give you an evidence. and you say:

Yes, because there you can clearly see difference between European and Asian culture

You presented no evidence - you just shifted the topic.

Please, stay on topic, and present some evidence.

Maybe you shuld expect some education, it won't hurt...
I would if you were willing or capable of evidencing your claims. You might be surprised by this, but proving to me that you don't know what you're talking about isn't teaching me anything I didn't know after your second post.

You presented no evidence - you just shifted the topic.

Please, stay on topic, and present some evidence.

Read back, you'll see that's a pretty common tactic of our friend.

Are you claiming those places are not part of Europe as well? I'm not sure even you understand what your point is.
My point is that they are only places, peaces of land. Humans are the one who influence that land. If humans don't live on that land, they cannot influence it. Turks didn't become Europeans when they conquered land that belonged to Europeans.

Read back, you'll see that's a pretty common tactic of our friend.

I've noticed.

He hasn't managed to touch any of the evidence, or present any.

I'm all for debating ideas - where neither side can be proved - but, in this case, there has been clearly presented evidence to show that our compatriot is incorrect on practically every point.

I can't decide if it is ulterior motive, or trolling...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantinople

The prior culture was overrun, but NOT destroyed.

Your turn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople
Same source!

My point is that they are only places, peaces of land. Humans are the one who influence that land. If humans don't live on that land, they cannot influence it. Turks didn't become Europeans when they conquered land that belonged to Europeans.

But, by the same token, Thrace did not become part of Asia, yes?

So - PART of Turkey has ALWAYS been 'European'.


Also - if you look at Turkey on the world stage, it has often acted more like a 'western' society than a Middle-East society... evidence, perhaps, of the historical European underpinning?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople
Same source!

And, it says it was overrun, not destroyed.

At least READ the sources...

Im already tired of this but let me tell again that we Turks ruled Orthodox population at the times of Ottoman empire, later Russians gained their control. Ottoman empire was protector of both islam and orthodox christians for a loong long time. In the rule of Ottoman empire bloodshed in middle east was ceased. all religions had to live in peace by law. If catholics and orthodoxs tried to kill each other for example they both lost their heads, I dont even speak about what would happened if a muslim and christian tried to start hate against each other, that would make stalin look like a girl scout :D
As you can see I dont claim that ottoman empire was a non violent angel or water elf :p they had severe laws and empire stood firm and strong for a long time. In an attempt to revolt they just filled wells with heads, without caring for race and religion they set bloody examples. One strong demonstration that was burned into minds of communities kept them respectful to law and to each other a looong long time. So practically even with its severe punishments ottoman had internal peace for a long time.

Blackredwithyellowsuna, you either dont know the H of history or a deliberate liar. Spreading filth and misinformation, go get education. Dont come with cheap WW1 propaganda before me, even our open enemies deny such petty claims as the annihilation of Istanbul population. The whole conquest is recorded quite clearly by both turks and orthodox clergy of time. The Fatih Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror even ordered the search of last emperor of Byzantine to give him a proper burial and make him a tomb thats good enough for an emperor, because with the conquest he became an emperor himself. He was also a jeweler, a poet, and scientist that improved the canon technology. I already told his vision of a helen culture in a seperate message that I wont repeat.
With all due respect history you are studying in Turkey is'nt really objective.

And, it says it was overrun, not destroyed.

At least READ the sources...
Read, you must read!

Read, you must read!

I read it.

Which part do you THINK proves your genocide theory?

But, by the same token, Thrace did not become part of Asia, yes?

So - PART of Turkey has ALWAYS been 'European'.


Also - if you look at Turkey on the world stage, it has often acted more like a 'western' society than a Middle-East society... evidence, perhaps, of the historical European underpinning?
Only when Europeans lived there, when they left (or were killed), it stopped being part of Europe!

Only when Europeans lived there, when they left (or were killed), it stopped being part of Europe!

You are fighting a losing battle. Thrace is STILL populated by 'Europeans', and the population of 'Anatolia' is partially 'European'.

Thrace is still GEOGRAPHICALLY 'European'.

My point is that they are only places, peaces of land. Humans are the one who influence that land. If humans don't live on that land, they cannot influence it. Turks didn't become Europeans when they conquered land that belonged to Europeans.
But according to you Europeans became Asians when they got conquered by Turks, namely those in Thrace. Educate me some more, oh wise one. Tell me more about how one can't become European by a given means but by the same means they can become Asians. Teach me more about how to deny evidence and logic and just keep making contradictory claims. I'm all ears.

I read it.

Which part do you THINK proves your genocide theory?

Indeed many civilians were slaughtered by the Turks when they first burst through the walls and captured the towers on the land walls,

After the doors were breached, the troupes separated the congregation according to what price they might bring on the slave markets. A few of the elderly and some infants were summarily slain with a commercial ruthlessness

Mehmet II allowed the rape, pillage and looting of the city
?

But according to you Europeans became Asians when they got conquered by Turks, namely those in Thrace. Educate me some more, oh wise one. Tell me more about how one can't become European by a given means but by the same means they can become Asians. Teach me more about how to deny evidence and logic and just keep making contradictory claims. I'm all ears.
Yes. The ones that started to follow Islam ceased to be Europeans

Read, you must read!

Ha. Parts like this - "He had also threatened Emperor Constantine XI that if the city resisted, the civilians would not be spared. Indeed many civilians were slaughtered by the Turks when they first burst through the walls and captured the towers on the land walls, although order was quickly restored."

In other words, some were killed but not even remotely close to all. Please quote the part you think we missed.

Yes. The ones that started to follow Islam ceased to be Europeans

Ah, I see. So being Muslim makes you automatically not European. Can I see what definition of European you are basing this on? Would a Brit become Asian if they followed Islam?

You are fighting a losing battle. Thrace is STILL populated by 'Europeans', and the population of 'Anatolia' is partially 'European'.

Thrace is still GEOGRAPHICALLY 'European'.
Nope. Maybe we misunderstand eachother, i am not talking about Greeks living in Turkey, i am talking about Turks.

Ah, I see. So being Muslim makes you automatically not European. Can I see what definition of European you are basing this on? Would a Brit become Asian if they followed Islam?
YES!

?

I noticed you took the context out of those quotes where it says that order was restored. No one claimed nobody died. But nothing about those quotes suggest that it was a genocide or that none survived. In fact, it says explicitly that the opposite occurred. Again, you evidence your opponents with your own links. Now, are you going to present evidence for YOUR side?

YES!

And there we have it. Xenophobes always give themselves away eventually. This is about the fact that you don't consider Muslims to be European. It has nothing to do with general culture or location or ancestry, like you've been arguing for a dozen pages. This is about religion and about how you don't like it. At least you've admitted it, finally.

Nope. Maybe we misunderstand eachother, i am not talking about Greeks living in Turkey, i am talking about Turks.
So you admit that Turkey is partly European and that some Turkish citizens born in Turkey and Europe and descendant from Europeans are European. Good. We're done than.

And there we have it. Xenophobes always give themselves away eventually. This is about the fact that you don't consider Muslims to be European. It has nothing to do with general culture or location or ancestry, like you've been arguing for a dozen pages. This is about religion and about how you don't like it. At least you've admitted it, finally.
Islam is culture and tradition allien to Europe. Anyone who follows that religion can't be considered European. They have their homelandm their beleifs, their culture. Why do we in Europe must accept them as part of us? they are not, and never will be.

?

And - from the same source - often from the same paragraphs:

"He had also threatened Emperor Constantine XI that if the city resisted, the civilians would not be spared. Indeed many civilians were slaughtered by the Turks when they first burst through the walls and captured the towers on the land walls, although order was quickly restored.

"A few of the elderly and some infants were summarily slain with a commercial ruthlessness."

"Although Mehmet II allowed the rape, pillage and looting of the city, as was the custom of all armies during that age, he changed his mind after seeing the great structures of the city being destroyed and stopped the activities after 24 hours."


And then: the all important part, that makes a lie of your whole argument - STILL from the same article:

"Of the estimated 50,000 persons residing in the city at the time of its capture, approximately half were still free when Mehmet issued his order to cease the pillage of the city."

And - to confront your ideas of a destroyed culture - still from the same article YOU provided:

"Mehmed waited until the area was secured and entered the city in a ceremonial procession where the local population brought him flowers in congratulations... Constantinople became the new capital of the Ottoman Empire. Hagia Sophia was converted into a mosque, although the Greek Orthodox Church remained intact, and Gennadius Scholarius was appointed Patriarch of Constantinople... Those Greeks who stayed behind in Constantinople were mostly confined to the Phanar and Galata districts. The Phanariots, as they were called, provided many capable advisors to the Ottoman sultans..."

So you admit that Turkey is partly European and that some Turkish citizens born in Turkey and Europe and descendant from Europeans are European. Good. We're done than.
you have 40% of Bosnians and 90% of Albanians whose ancestors WERE part of European culture, not anymore!

Islam is culture and tradition allien to Europe. Anyone who follows that religion can't be considered European. They have their homelandm their beleifs, their culture. Why do we in Europe must accept them as part of us? they are not, and never will be.

Christianity is also an import...

Nope. Maybe we misunderstand eachother, i am not talking about Greeks living in Turkey, i am talking about Turks.

Turkey is a nation. It's 'people' are ALL of the people within... not just the ones that suit your argument.

Yes. The ones that started to follow Islam ceased to be Europeans
*DING DING DING*

And on technical knockout, the fight is OVER! It's been a long run, but the referee is calling it on this one.

Ladies and Gentlemen, it is over, in round 40 it was all over. And it was a stray hit from one of the fighters that brought himself down! The crowd is cheering as the fighters wipe the blood from their gloves, and...

:D

And - from the same source - often from the same paragraphs:

And then: the all important part, that makes a lie of your whole argument - STILL from the same article:

And - to confront your ideas of a destroyed culture - still from the same article YOU provided:
And all true! If you kill an half population of city, than it isn't genocide?

Patriarch were killed, and with that true Ortodox church. New Patriarch who were set up was an Muslim puppet, and he was hated. With death of old patriarch Ortodox church is destroyed. With new one reestablished

Do you really believe that they greeted him with flowers?

*DING DING DING*

And on technical knockout, the fight is OVER! It's been a long run, but the referee is calling it on this one.

Ladies and Gentlemen, it is over, in round 40 it was all over. And it was a stray hit from one of the fighters that brought himself down! The crowd is cheering as the fighters wipe the blood from their gloves, and...

:D

Yay! I got the referee I'd been wishing for!

Next, I want a million dollars...

Turkey is a nation. It's 'people' are ALL of the people within... not just the ones that suit your argument.
Nope. Educate yourself about Europe, than we can talk!
In Europe things are different than in US. By your theory all people living in Bosnia are Bosnians, in Serbia Serbians, In Sweden Swedes, in Russia Russians...
Wich is nonsense!

And all true! If you kill an half population of city, than it isn't genocide?


Damn... you don't even read the bits I highlight.

Nothing like half were killed... less than half were enslaved.


Patriarch were killed, and with that true Ortodox church. New Patriarch who were set up was an Muslim puppet, and he was hated. With death of old patriarch Ortodox church is destroyed. With new one reestablished


No - new Patriarch was set up as Anti-Vatican Christian representative. If you read your own source, Mehmet wished to PROTECT the Christians... just SEPARATE from Vatican control:

"the Ottoman army fanned out along the main throughfare of the city, the Mese, past the great forums, and past the mammoth church of the Holy Apostles, which Mehmet purposely spared to provide a seat for his new patriach which would tend his Christian flock."

He deliberately PRESERVED the Orthodox Patriarchy.


Do you really believe that they greeted him with flowers?

Why not? Constantinople was in disrepair before Mehmet, and very few people were killed. In terms of wars of conquest, Mehmet was pretty benevolent.

Nope. Educate yourself about Europe, than we can talk!
In Europe things are different than in US. By your theory all people living in Bosnia are Bosnians, in Serbia Serbians, In Sweden Swedes, in Russia Russians...
Wich is nonsense!

Educate myself about European?

Ha!

Preaching to the choir, my friend. I'm not 'a yank'.

Yay! I got the referee I'd been wishing for!

Next, I want a million dollars...
Unfortunately, I'm biased - Used to be in this thread you see, just had to drop in and see how everything was. :D

Unfortunately, I'm biased - Used to be in this thread you see, just had to drop in and see how everything was. :D

Well... posts #831 and #839 (see, I'm biased, too) mean it's pretty much all over bar the shouting... so any referee will do. :D

Damn... you don't even read the bits I highlight.
I did!

Nothing like half were killed... less than half were enslaved.
1/2 killed + 1/3 enslaved...


No - new Patriarch was set up as Anti-Vatican Christian representative. If you read your own source, Mehmet wished to PROTECT the Christians... just SEPARATE from Vatican control:
Yeah right, that's why Christians have to pay three times higher taxes than muslims, that's why he builted mosques over entire balkans, that's why christians have to give their first born child to Jannisaries, that's why Christians have for Muslims for freem that's why Every bride have to spend night with local pasha...


He deliberately PRESERVED the Orthodox Patriarchy.
Reestablished it, and with intention to pacify Christian population


Why not? Constantinople was in disrepair before Mehmet, and very few people were killed. In terms of wars of conquest, Mehmet was pretty benevolent.

If some Arab army come there where you live, kills half of your family, and half turn in to the slaves, would you greet them with flowers?

Educate myself about European?

Ha!

Preaching to the choir, my friend. I'm not 'a yank'.
Than you are an...

Greeks who live in Turkey cannot be called Turks! As Turks who live in Germany cannot be called Germans!

Well... posts #831 and #839 (see, I'm biased, too) mean it's pretty much all over bar the shouting... so any referee will do. :D
Then I'm in! :D

"The referee is going to speak, John, and it's... Yes, it seems to be official! He's not going to let the beating continue, the fight is OVER! Well and truly so! I can hardly believe it, it seemed like it was gonna go on for an eternity, but the referee... We see him now on the canvas, and he is calling it! He is pointing at the Red corner, and the match is... You should feel the tension here John, it's unbelievable.

The opponent could not go all the way tonight, John, but we will probably hear from him again. Anyway, Live from Las Vegas, this was... well, a thriller. Back to the studio!."

you have 40% of Bosnians and 90% of Albanians whose ancestors WERE part of European culture, not anymore!

They changed ancestors? Really? Ha.

Then I'm in! :D

"The referee is going to speak, John, and it's... Yes, it seems to be official! He's not going to let the beating continue, the fight is OVER! Well and truly so! I can hardly believe it, it seemed like it was gonna go on for an eternity, but the referee... We see him now on the canvas, and he is calling it! He is pointing at the Red corner, and the match is... You should feel the tension here John, it's unbelievable.

The opponent could not go all the way tonight, John, but we will probably hear from him again. Anyway, Live from Las Vegas, this was... well, a thriller. Back to the studio!."
I guess i can see who is trolling here...

Nope. Educate yourself about Europe, than we can talk!
In Europe things are different than in US. By your theory all people living in Bosnia are Bosnians, in Serbia Serbians, In Sweden Swedes, in Russia Russians...
Wich is nonsense!

Ha. Amusing. We are talking about people who were born there and lived there always and identify themselves as Europeans. You would deny them. It's you that's denying basic European cultural definitions, not us. You should have a microphone and an audience, because this is comedy gold.

I guess i can see who is trolling here...
No, I'm spamming ;) . I'm sorry, and I'll stop doing that though.

NO:

1) Different cultureSo you eat leberkaes and sauerkraut on a daily basis?
2) Only 3% of its territory is in EuropeBy your geographic definition. If you draw the lines right, you can argue just about any country out of Europe.
3) Its Capital is in AsiaHasn´t always been like that. The most populous city is also still in Europe.
4) Has always been regarded as a foreign invader in historyWhich would put it on par with most European countries...

I guess i can see who is trolling here...
Yes, we can. The guy who declared that Europeans who follow religions that originated outside Europe (like Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Taoism and virtually every religion still followed today in Europe) are not European. I guess the only REAL Europeans are worshipping Thor and Hera.

No, I'm spamming ;) . I'm sorry, and I'll stop doing that though.
Bad call. I read their post as a confession.

They changed ancestors? Really? Ha.
Enjoy:
http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/06/79/55/image_1855796.jpg
http://ww2.pstripes.osd.mil/01/jul01/sreb712a.jpg
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-09/20/images/pic04a.jpg

From Bosnia - True Europeans!

http://users.bigpond.net.au/perovicgenealogy/image0023.jpg
http://photos.iofc.org/storage/images/preview/mufti_koci.jpg
http://www.rfi.fr/images/imagesActu/kosovo/kosovo_ecole_islam220.jpg

Albanians

Do they look like representatives of European Culture?

Bad call. I read their post as a confession.
That may be, but I was still spamming.

And I might still be... Difficult thing to stop, especially in this thread :)

Ha. Amusing. We are talking about people who were born there and lived there always and identify themselves as Europeans. You would deny them. It's you that's denying basic European cultural definitions, not us. You should have a microphone and an audience, because this is comedy gold.
Ha, you need an history book - right now!

I did!

Did you? Let's look at the evidence.

"Of the estimated 50,000 persons residing in the city at the time of its capture, approximately half were still free when Mehmet issued his order to cease the pillage of the city. The reason that so many of the civilian population escaped enslavement was primarily due to the topography of the city at the time."\

Hmmm... half were alive and not enslave. According to your math it should be 1/6.

1/2 killed + 1/3 enslaved...

1/2 + 1/3 = 1/6

Seems you made a math mistake there. The total number killed or enslaved was less than half. But since you read it, you noticed that, no?

Did you? Let's look at the evidence.

"Of the estimated 50,000 persons residing in the city at the time of its capture, approximately half were still free when Mehmet issued his order to cease the pillage of the city. The reason that so many of the civilian population escaped enslavement was primarily due to the topography of the city at the time."\

Hmmm... half were alive and not enslave. According to your math it should be 1/6.



1/2 + 1/3 = 1/6

Seems you made a math mistake there. The total number killed or enslaved was less than half. But since you read it, you noticed that, no?
1/2 killed + 1/4 enslaved = 75% enslaved or killed.

Enjoy:
http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/06/79/55/image_1855796.jpg
http://ww2.pstripes.osd.mil/01/jul01/sreb712a.jpg
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-09/20/images/pic04a.jpg

From Bosnia - True Europeans!

http://users.bigpond.net.au/perovicgenealogy/image0023.jpg
http://photos.iofc.org/storage/images/preview/mufti_koci.jpg
http://www.rfi.fr/images/imagesActu/kosovo/kosovo_ecole_islam220.jpg

Albanians

Do they look like representatives of European Culture?

HAHAHAHA! That's great. Your evidence is that they don't look right. You proved their culture evolved. That doesn't make them have different ancestry. And you haven't yet shown that adopting aspects of other cultures makes you not European. Last I checked people in Europe eat spaghetti from China, use fireworks and gunpowder and various spices. Adopting things from another culture doesn't make you suddenly not from Europe. Xenophobia is not an argument.

Enjoy:
http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/06/79/55/image_1855796.jpg
http://ww2.pstripes.osd.mil/01/jul01/sreb712a.jpg
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-09/20/images/pic04a.jpg

From Bosnia - True Europeans!

http://users.bigpond.net.au/perovicgenealogy/image0023.jpg\
http://photos.iofc.org/storage/images/preview/mufti_koci.jpg
http://www.rfi.fr/images/imagesActu/kosovo/kosovo_ecole_islam220.jpg

Albanians

Do they look like representatives of European Culture?
Yes... Eastern european, certainly.

Yes... Eastern european, certainly.
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D
What an comedian....

Nope. Educate yourself about Europe, than we can talk!
In Europe things are different than in US. By your theory all people living in Bosnia are Bosnians, in Serbia Serbians, In Sweden Swedes, in Russia Russians...
Wich is nonsense!


NO RUSSIANS IN RUSSIA

There are no Russians in Russia, there are no Yanks in LA.
There are no Chinese in China, I guess they've all gone away.
There are no Arabs in Egypt, there are no French in Paris.
There are no Turkeys in Turkey - the whole affair's Greek to me.

There are no Serbs in Croatia, there are no Poles in the sea.
There are no Celts in the Caymans. (Did you honestly expect there to be?).
There are no Spanish in Malta, there are no Scots in Peru.
This state of affairs will not alter no matter whatever we do.

There are no Russians in Russia.
There are no Russians in Russia.
(There are no Russians in Russia).
There are no Russians in the USSR.

:(

1/2 killed + 1/4 enslaved = 75% enslaved or killed.

According to the source half of the people were still living free when it was all over. That means that the most number of people killed or enslaved can be is 1/2. And a minute ago it was 1/3 enslaved. When did it change? Did someone change history again?

HAHAHAHA! That's great. Your evidence is that they don't look right. You proved their culture evolved. That doesn't make them have different ancestry. And you haven't yet shown that adopting aspects of other cultures makes you not European. Last I checked people in Europe eat spaghetti from China, use fireworks and gunpowder and various spices. Adopting things from another culture doesn't make you suddenly not from Europe. Xenophobia is not an argument.
No, it didn't evolved. They replaced their European culture with Asian.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D
What an comedian....
Thank you - you should see me when I actually write something funny ;)

Ha, you need an history book - right now!

A profound argument. Please educate me. According to your own arguments they are Europeans who have adopted a religion you don't agree with (even though they aren't all Muslim). It's hilarious. If only I could find a history book written by you. It could rewrite history, have no evidence, contradict itself, make basic errors in understand, and quote things that directly contradict while pretending it is a support.

According to the source half of the people were still living free when it was all over. That means that the most number of people killed or enslaved can be is 1/2. And a minute ago it was 1/3 enslaved. When did it change? Did someone change history again?
Yes. Peoples who lived on outher edges of city have enough time to escape, that's why only 25% survived.

No, it didn't evolved. They replaced their European culture with Asian.

Kind of like when Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Toaism, Buddhism, Asian spices, Tobacco, Corn, Vodka, Whiskey, McDonald's, etc. According to your argument, there is no Europe. Europeans are heavily influenced by other cultures from other continents.

A profound argument. Please educate me. According to your own arguments they are Europeans who have adopted a religion you don't agree with (even though they aren't all Muslim). It's hilarious. If only I could find a history book written by you. It could rewrite history, have no evidence, contradict itself, make basic errors in understand, and quote things that directly contradict while pretending it is a support.
This post clearly point out that you don't have an clue about an Europe.
They stopped being Europeans when they start being Muslims.

Yes. Peoples who lived on outher edges of city have enough time to escape, that's why only 25% survived.

Can you please show your evidence for that? According to the only source you've provided half survived and were free and it was because the looting was called off after 24 hours.

This post clearly point out that you don't have an clue about an Europe.
They stopped being Europeans when they start being Muslims.

Really? Can you show me where that law is in the definition of European?

Which of these women are European?
http://einside.kent.edu/files/Mar072005/TurkishWomen1.jpg
http://media.collegepublisher.com/media/paper247/stills/xo49m668.jpg
http://einside.kent.edu/files/Mar072005/TurkishWomen2.jpg

Warning: Some, all or none might be muslim, but some are turkish.

Well?

Kind of like when Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Toaism, Buddhism, Asian spices, Tobacco, Corn, Vodka, Whiskey, McDonald's, etc. According to your argument, there is no Europe. Europeans are heavily influenced by other cultures from other continents.
Yes, and that mix of Christianity, pagan religions, Whiskey and Vodka make Europe great. That is called EUROPEAN CULTURE.

Which of these women are European?
http://einside.kent.edu/files/Mar072005/TurkishWomen1.jpg
http://media.collegepublisher.com/media/paper247/stills/xo49m668.jpg
http://einside.kent.edu/files/Mar072005/TurkishWomen2.jpg

Warning: Some, all or none might be muslim, but some are turkish.

Well?

European-ness isn't decided by looking at them. It's amusing that you prove more and more that you base your claims on superficial beliefs rather than real evidence. Post some more pictures. That will surely help your claims.

EDIT: Oops. I missed the sarcasm and the poster.

Yes, and that mix of Christianity, pagan religions, Whiskey and Vodka make Europe great. That is called EUROPEAN CULTURE.

You mean, that all the things imported from outside Europe are European except Islam? Based on what evidence?

Really? Can you show me where that law is in the definition of European?
White, Christian, Born in Europe.

This post clearly point out that you don't have an clue about an Europe.
They stopped being Europeans when they start being Muslims.
You are so clueless it is embarrassing.

White, Christian, Born in Europe.

Really? Where does that appear? Is in the EU charter? The dictionary? Where can I find that definition? Especially since it makes the majority of Europeans not European.

White, Christian, Born in Europe.

This deserves to be written larger. The TKO wasn't good enough for you, so you knocked yourself out.

You mean, that all the things imported from outside Europe are European except Islam? Based on what evidence?
Vodka, Whiskey and pagan religiones aren't imported in Europe. Christianity is imported, but than it becomed part of what is Europe today. If you count Christianity out of Europe, than you get an empty shell!

You are so clueless it is embarrassing.
Hi, TOM!

Really? Where does that appear? Is in the EU charter? The dictionary? Where can I find that definition? Especially since it makes the majority of Europeans not European.
Well, just take an look at European Cathedrals...

Vodka, Whiskey and pagan religiones aren't imported in Europe. Christianity is imported, but than it becomed part of what is Europe today. If you count Christianity out of Europe, than you get an empty shell!

The point is that a large portion of European culture is imported. What makes one part European and another part not? According to you, it appears to be based on whether it's something different from you. Hopefully, and undoubtedly, most Europeans would disagree.

I did!

1/2 killed + 1/3 enslaved...

Yeah right, that's why Christians have to pay three times higher taxes than muslims, that's why he builted mosques over entire balkans, that's why christians have to give their first born child to Jannisaries, that's why Christians have for Muslims for freem that's why Every bride have to spend night with local pasha...

Reestablished it, and with intention to pacify Christian population

If some Arab army come there where you live, kills half of your family, and half turn in to the slaves, would you greet them with flowers?

A lot of rhetoric, and still no evidence.

I'm guessing your purpose here is nothing but trolling.

Well, just take an look at European Cathedrals...
Uh-huh. Hey, why bother making an argument when you can post nonsense. I'm now convinced you are trolling. I suspect you're a puppet as well. I've heard rumors that people this ignorant exist, but I simply don't actually encounter them anywhere except the internet.

Than you are an...

Greeks who live in Turkey cannot be called Turks! As Turks who live in Germany cannot be called Germans!

As ex-Europeans now in the US cannot be called Americans? You know that pretty much everyone that is anywhere, now, came from somewhere else, if you go back in history far enough...?

The point is that a large portion of European culture is imported. What makes one part European and another part not? According to you, it appears to be based on whether it's something different from you. Hopefully, and undoubtedly, most Europeans would disagree.
I am sorry to disapoint you but most Europeans would agree. Islam doesn't belong to Europe.

As ex-Europeans now in the US cannot be called Americans? You know that pretty much everyone that is anywhere, now, came from somewhere else, if you go back in history far enough...?
They are Europeans.

1/2 killed + 1/4 enslaved = 75% enslaved or killed.

And that number has what to do with it? It says that, of the 50000 people alive when the city was taken, more than half were still free.

That means AT LEAST 25000 people were neither dead (because they wouldn't be alive and free), nor enslaved (because they wouldn't be free).

So - the total of ALL dead, and ALL enslaved MUST be less than 25000, or 50%. And, since the article said a 'few' of the old people were killed and 'some' of the children, we know that not ALL of the 25000 people were killed.

The article seems to suggest that there were relatively few casualties.

And that number has what to do with it? It says that, of the 50000 people alive when the city was taken, more than half were still free.

That means AT LEAST 25000 people were neither dead (because they wouldn't be alive and free), nor enslaved (because they wouldn't be free).

So - the total of ALL dead, and ALL enslaved MUST be less than 25000, or 50%. And, since the article said a 'few' of the old people were killed and 'some' of the children, we know that not ALL of the 25000 people were killed.

The article seems to suggest that there were relatively few casualties.
Hahahahahahaha, and he call me an Troll!

European-ness isn't decided by looking at them. It's amusing that you prove more and more that you base your claims on superficial beliefs rather than real evidence. Post some more pictures. That will surely help your claims.
No, no, this was me. I agree with you completely ;)

Just wanted to see if Blackredwithyellowsuna would fo for it :D

Edit: Maybe you knew that, huh...

This post clearly point out that you don't have an clue about an Europe.
They stopped being Europeans when they start being Muslims.

Rubbish. Islam is no more 'foreign' to Europe than Christianity is, or Judaism.

Hahahahahahaha, and he call me an Troll!

Yes, he did. Accurately. You claimed that an article that specifically states that half the people were alive and free and continue to argue that it says it was 25% (when your original claim was 17%). It's so ridiculous, it's really hard to take you seriously.

I am sorry to disapoint you but most Europeans would agree. Islam doesn't belong to Europe.
why stop there? like muslims jews and blacks doesn't belong to Europe too :D Come on do it, you know you want it heh heh heh lets see your REAL face...

Rubbish. Islam is no more 'foreign' to Europe than Christianity is, or Judaism.
Wrong. If you are Islam-loving boy, than i suggest you to become an Muslim, then you won't be an European!:rolleyes:

why stop there? like muslims jews and blacks doesn't belong to Europe too :D Come on do it, you know you want it heh heh heh lets see your REAL face...
It could happen, given Europe's current political climate. Why does anyone want to come to Europe anyway? Can't you all just head to the USA?

White, Christian, Born in Europe.
Stop hitting yourself! It's getting embarrassing...

Edit: Hold up! What about atheists?

White, Christian, Born in Europe.

1) Not all of the European peoples are strictly 'white'.

2) Islam has been in Europe only a few hundred years less than Christianity.

3) Thracian Turks ARE born in Europe.

4) Pwned.

Yes, he did. Accurately. You claimed that an article that specifically states that half the people were alive and free and continue to argue that it says it was 25% (when your original claim was 17%). It's so ridiculous, it's really hard to take you seriously.
If i am so hard to be taken seriously, then why are you postiing?

I am sorry to disapoint you but most Europeans would agree. Islam doesn't belong to Europe.

No, it belongs to many parts of the world. No matter how you slice it, your religion does not define your continent of origin. Or you are middle-eastern.

Islam is not european. Would you accept Moroccoa into the EU? I dont think so. Turkey should not be let into the Union because 1) It aint a European Country. Thats a fact. Hell the region itself is called Asia Minor. What do you think that means? 2) Human rights. They still dont acknowledge the armenian genocide.

:upyours: Give them the finger.

Vodka, Whiskey and pagan religiones aren't imported in Europe. Christianity is imported, but than it becomed part of what is Europe today. If you count Christianity out of Europe, than you get an empty shell!

So - when you say Europe, what you MEAN is Christianity?

Turkey can't be in Europe, because it isn't Christian enough?

You seem to think Europe is DEFINED by being Christian... which just suggests you've had a very insular upbringing. You should visit Leicester, in the UK.

1) Not all of the European peoples are strictly 'white'.

Which exactly?

Stop hitting yourself! It's getting embarrassing...

Edit: Hold up! What about atheists?
What? If i say Black, Muslim, born in Africa, would that sound embarasing for some guy in Somalia?

Wrong. If you are Islam-loving boy, than i suggest you to become an Muslim, then you won't be an European!:rolleyes:

Your arguments just keep getting more amusing. Again, I'm certain you're trolling. Who are you really? You're so obviously a charicature.

They are Europeans.

Really? So... anyone that isn't a Native American (or American Indian, whichever)... is actually STILL European?

Hahahahahahaha, and he call me an Troll!

Yes. I do.

If that is the extent of your argument, you are wasting my time.

So - when you say Europe, what you MEAN is Christianity?

Turkey can't be in Europe, because it isn't Christian enough?

You seem to think Europe is DEFINED by being Christian... which just suggests you've had a very insular upbringing. You should visit Leicester, in the UK.
FINALY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CHRISTIAN - EUROPEAN
MUSLIM - ASIAN

GREAT

What? If i say Black, Muslim, born in Africa, would that sound embarasing for some guy in Somalia?

If he was claiming that defined being African, yes, yes, it would be embarassing.

Really? So... anyone that isn't a Native American (or American Indian, whichever)... is actually STILL European?
You forget "born in Europe" part!

Wrong. If you are Islam-loving boy, than i suggest you to become an Muslim, then you won't be an European!:rolleyes:

Good response.

Well, apart from the 'good' part.

Off topic, and a poor attempt at being insulting, I think... although WHY you think it an insult, I'm not sure.

FINALY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CHRISTIAN - EUROPEAN
MUSLIM - ASIAN

GREAT
If Europe decides to label itself as white and Christian/atheist, then that is what it will be I suppose. Most definitions are ultimately arbitrary. So it's what you what one wants them to be.

FINALY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CHRISTIAN - EUROPEAN
MUSLIM - ASIAN

GREAT

See, it's trolling. Told you he wasn't a serious poster. I figured this out several pages ago, but I was trying to help y'all out. We got what we were looking for. He's a xenophobe who doesn't have the first clue about what it means to be European.

Islam is not european. Would you accept Moroccoa into the EU? I dont think so. Turkey should not be let into the Union because 1) It aint a European Country. Thats a fact. Hell the region itself is called Asia Minor. What do you think that means? 2) Human rights. They still dont acknowledge the armenian genocide.

:upyours: Give them the finger.

I'd accept China into the EU, if they wanted in. Religion does not define 'Europe'.

You forget "born in Europe" part!

Okay. Define Asian.

If he was claiming that defined being African, yes, yes, it would be embarassing.
Many blacks are actually Christian, or pagan (ie they have their own religious views). Their tribes are like nations within nations. Defining an african -other than saying most are dark skinned- is quite difficult. Islam is most certainly not Africa's main religion, if that is what anyone is arguing.

Accepting China into the EU is ridiculous so dont even bother going there. They're no more European than Turkey or Japan

Atheist is OK, because he didn't start to prey to some other god, he just stopped to believe that god exist. He is still part of Europe, Muslim aren't, no matter how they look, dress and speak!

I'd accept China into the EU, if they wanted in. Religion does not define 'Europe'.
Sort of crazy. Europe would implode with that kind of massive expansion.

FINALY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CHRISTIAN - EUROPEAN
MUSLIM - ASIAN

GREAT

I'm not sure why you think that is great. The big text, maybe?

Christianity is a Middle East religion. Islam is a Middle East religion.

If one of them can be European, so can the other...

See, it's trolling. Told you he wasn't a serious poster. I figured this out several pages ago, but I was trying to help y'all out. We got what we were looking for. He's a xenophobe who doesn't have the first clue about what it means to be European.
Don't worry - the referee (me) called it several posts ago. This is just post-fight bluster :p

I'm not sure why you think that is great. The big text, maybe?
Great is the fact that you have understand that!
Christianity is a Middle East religion. Islam is a Middle East religion.

If one of them can be European, so can the other...
Islam can't be part of Europe, wether you like it, or not!

If one of them can be European, so can the other...

Islam will never be accepted as a European religion. Not least because of the medieval attitudes many of it followers hold, and the wave of caution and racism islam itself has created through terrorist attacks.

Accepting China into the EU is ridiculous so dont even bother going there. They're no more European than Turkey or Japan

Less, even.

The point is - ultimately, I don't care... I find the whole idea of rigidly enforced boundaries for no reason other than 'It has ALWAYS been like that' to be fairly ridiculous.

At least Turkey is partially within the 'geographic' map of Europe, though... which might relate to the topic.

Many blacks are actually Christian, or pagan (ie they have their own religious views). Their tribes are like nations within nations. Defining an african -other than saying most are dark skinned- is quite difficult. Islam is most certainly not Africa's main religion, if that is what anyone is arguing.
I agree with you. Trying to define African in such simple terms is silly.

Sort of crazy. Europe would implode with that kind of massive expansion.

But, we'd also be bringing one of the fastest growing economies and markets, and the fastest growing industrialisation process, within the European Union.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend... or something like that... something about rather have them with us than against us?

Atheist is OK, because he didn't start to prey to some other god, he just stopped to believe that god exist. He is still part of Europe, Muslim aren't, no matter how they look, dress and speak!

You do realize that Judaism, Christianity and Islam have the same God and simply different means of worship, yes? Jesus is considered a prophet to that God by Islam. Pull up your pants, your ignorance is showing.

I agree with you. Trying to define African in such simple terms is silly.
I was refering to SOMALIA, maybe you should instead of trolling start to read?

Great is the fact that you have understand that!

Islam can't be part of Europe, wether you like it, or not!

Actually - it isn't up to you, or me.

Islam has historically BEEN part of Europe. You know where, right?

You do realize that Judaism, Christianity and Islam have the same God and simply different means of worship, yes? Jesus is considered a prophet to that God by Islam. Pull up your pants, your ignorance is showing.
Yes that is true. There is only one god!

Great is the fact that you have understand that!

Islam can't be part of Europe, wether you like it, or not!

Hmmm... it appears several European countries disagree with you.

Define Asian. We have your definition of European.

Islam will never be accepted as a European religion. Not least because of the medieval attitudes many of it followers hold, and the wave of caution and racism islam itself has created through terrorist attacks.

All of which is true of 'Christian' extremism, too... just incase you hadn't heard of... say, the IRA.

Actually - it isn't up to you, or me.

Islam has historically BEEN part of Europe. You know where, right?

BEEN

I was refering to SOMALIA, maybe you should instead of trolling start to read?

I did read. I was making a point. I'm sorry that you missed that point. It was fairly clear.

I agree with you. Trying to define African in such simple terms is silly.
Europe is relatively fragmented at certain levels (and trying to re-define itself). Africa is infinitely more complex, and currently not in the mood to change.

Yes that is true. There is only one god!

Not according to the 'European' religions... all of the 'native' European faiths were 'spiritualistic' or polytheistic.

BEEN

Hmmm... and when did it stop being a part of Europe? Can you point to the date and some evidence?

All of which is true of 'Christian' extremism, too... just incase you hadn't heard of... say, the IRA.
Didn't see IRA trying to Bomb half of the world!
IRA is not bunch if Christian Extremsits, they just want to join RoI.

BEEN

So - you don't know, then?

Not a very well informed position to be arguing about what 'defines' Europe...

I think Turkey definetely belong to the EU because of it's history. It's geographical position is not that important, I dont think the EU should be stopped by borders or geographical lines. Cultures are different but I think you acn't say that a whole poppulation cannot fit to the principals of the EU.

What do you think abouit this?

So - you don't know, then?

Not a very well informed position to be arguing about what 'defines' Europe...
Been as intruder, but not anymore!

Didn't see IRA trying to Bomb half of the world!
IRA is not bunch if Christian Extremsits, they just want to join RoI.

I didn't see any Islamic movement trying to 'bomb half the world', either... although I have seen a lot of factions, each with individual targets.

IRA have touted themselves as Christian. That makes them at least as 'christian' as the suicide bomber is 'islamic'.

Didn't see IRA trying to Bomb half of the world!
IRA is not bunch if Christian Extremsits, they just want to join RoI.

Half the world? When did that happen?

Been as intruder, but not anymore!

And Christianity HAS 'been' in Europe... but now it is losing ground to a new player.

I didn't see any Islamic movement trying to 'bomb half the world', either... although I have seen a lot of factions, each with individual targets.

IRA have touted themselves as Christian. That makes them at least as 'christian' as the suicide bomber is 'islamic'.
WTF, or should i say WTC?

And Christianity HAS 'been' in Europe... but now it is losing ground to a new player.
And that is?

And that is?
Atheism.

WTF, or should i say WTC?

Which was ONE group of terrorists, with an agenda against America... nothing to do with 'half the world'. It is parallel to the IRA bombing the Conservative conference in Brighton.

WTF, or should i say WTC?

Wow, the WTC was half the world. When did this happen? I must have missed it. Here I thought it was a few thousand people in a world of billions. They must have really been packing it in there if they fit 3 billion people in there.

And that is?

Have you ever even BEEN to Europe?

And that is?

It's losing ground to pretty much every other player.

Wow, the WTC was half the world. When did this happen? I must have missed it. Here I thought it was a few thousand people in a world of billions. They must have really been packing it in there if they fit 3 billion people in there.

Maybe my sources are wrong... maybe half the world's population sleeps in New York?

Have you ever even BEEN to Europe?
I live in Europe, pal!

Atheism.
True

I live in Europe, pal!

And you don't know that Christianity is losing ground in Europe? What cave in Europe?

Well, I'd love to stay and argue with Blackredthingy, but, I have to get up for work in about 4 hours... and I'm not asleep yet.

It's been swell....

but, now the swelling has gone down.

Maybe my sources are wrong... maybe half the world's population sleeps in New York?
Well, if someone declares jihad on the West....

Have you ever seen devout Christians go on a rampage, burn islamic nations flags, torch islamic embassies all because of a fucking cartoon? No. Thought. Not. Until the barbarism is stamped out no Islamic country, especially not Turkey should even be considered close to European.

And you don't know that Christianity is losing ground in Europe? What cave in Europe?
Because that isn't entirely correct. It is, indeed, losing ground in Europe; some nations like Estonia are majority atheist. Others, however, like Spain, Ireland, Sweden and so on are still majority Christian. Religiosity in general though is in decline. That is not exactly the same.

Well, if someone declares jihad on the West....

Again, you're talking about a subgroup of Muslims. Many groups have no issue with the West.

I live in Europe, pal!

That's your claim... but, like everything else, it is neither supported by your evidence or your arguments.

If I had to guess... I'd say 13-year-old teen (probably male), somewhere in that big empty bit (like... Colorado), using his mon's internet connection - which is why you keep such peculiar hours.

But, obviously - that would just be idle speculation.

Because that isn't entirely correct. It is, indeed, losing ground in Europe; some nations like Estonia are majority atheist. Others, however, like Spain, Ireland, Sweden and so on are still majority Christian. Religiosity in general though is in decline. That is not exactly the same.
Religiosity is on decline in Europe would be exactly what we're talking about. How do you say it's not entirely correct and then agree with us?

Well, if someone declares jihad on the West....

Which MOST Muslims have NOT done.

Indeed - MOST Muslims would oppose the idea that another CAN declare 'jihad' for you.

Religiosity is on decline in Europe would be exactly what we're talking about. How do you say it's not entirely correct and then agree with us?
Because less religiosity does not necessarily mean atheism. Some people continue believing, but lower the importance faith has in their lives. Their children are still baptised, and raised as Christians, although again they are unlikely to be fervently religious. In neither situation is there a complete lack of belief.

And you don't know that Christianity is losing ground in Europe? What cave in Europe?
The one when Muslims planted bombs in London, people started to burn mosques...
Pal, you are probably some Arab refuge, because i didnt see such a hate toward Europe and Christianity for a long time. But i guess it's OK, you can only express your hate over net.
Your signature is real little tracking device!

Because that isn't entirely correct. It is, indeed, losing ground in Europe; some nations like Estonia are majority atheist. Others, however, like Spain, Ireland, Sweden and so on are still majority Christian. Religiosity in general though is in decline. That is not exactly the same.

And yet, Sikhism, Islam and Hinduism are growing in Europe. While Christianity declines. And, more nations are becoming more 'secular', at least, officially.

So - Christianity really IS 'losing ground' to most of the players.

Because less religiosity does not necessarily mean atheism. Some people continue believing, but lower the importance faith has in their lives. Their children are still baptised, and raised as Christians, although again they are unlikely to be fervently religious. In neither situation is there a complete lack of belief.

I didn't say Atheism. The point is that Christianity is declining.

And yet, Sikhism, Islam and Hinduism are growing in Europe. While Christianity declines. And, more nations are becoming more 'secular', at least, officially.

So - Christianity really IS 'losing ground' to most of the players.
You can only live in disbelief that that is true...

And yet, Sikhism, Islam and Hinduism are growing in Europe. While Christianity declines. And, more nations are becoming more 'secular', at least, officially.

So - Christianity really IS 'losing ground' to most of the players.
Only because more immigrants are coming in who adhere to Islam. Were they not to come in, ceteris paribus, the only thing that would weaken would be religiosity; not necessarily faith or the number of Christians. As such, it's not the result of conversions, for the most part. Give the next few generations of Muslims some time in Europe and its secular environment, and see if their religiosity remains as strong.

You can only live in disbelief that that is true...

But it is actually true, whether you want to believe it or not old boy.

The one when Muslims planted bombs in London, people started to burn mosques...
Pal, you are probably some Arab refuge, because i didnt see such a hate toward Europe and Christianity for a long time. But i guess it's OK, you can only express your hate over net.
Your signature is real little tracking device!
First he's a Jew, then he's an arab... Boy, everybody wants to speculate about Jocabia it seems :D

First he's a Jew, then he's an arab... Boy, everybody wants to speculate about Jocabia it seems :D
Who said he is an Jew?

The one when Muslims planted bombs in London, people started to burn mosques...
Pal, you are probably some Arab refuge, because i didnt see such a hate toward Europe and Christianity for a long time. But i guess it's OK, you can only express your hate over net.
Your signature is real little tracking device!

Anti-Christian. I'm a white Christian whose family is from Europe. Does that mean that to say what is actually occuring isn't?

And I don't hate Europe. I dislike xenophobia. Most Europeans are not xenophobes.

My signature is a tracking device? I'm not thirteen. I've given tons of evidence of who I am and where I'm from. I'm not hiding from anything. I'm not afraid my parents will figure out what I'm saying on the net. I haven't lived with them for fourteen years.

Meanwhile, I've got a three hour drive to Bloomington, IN, so I'm out for a couple of hours.

Who said he is an Jew?

It was Ny Nordland, earlier.

Anti-Christian. I'm a white Christian whose family is from Europe. Does that mean that to say what is actually occuring isn't?

And I don't hate Europe. I dislike xenophobia. Most Europeans are not xenophobes.

My signature is a tracking device? I'm not thirteen. I've given tons of evidence of who I am and where I'm from. I'm not hiding from anything. I'm not afraid my parents will figure out what I'm saying on the net. I haven't lived with them for fourteen years.

Meanwhile, I've got a three hour drive to Bloomington, IN, so I'm out for a couple of hours.
Run!!!!

You can only live in disbelief that that is true...

Are you actually trying to claim that the number of Christians in Europe is increasing? Seriously?

Are you actually trying to claim that the number of Christians in Europe is increasing? Seriously?
Yes!

Run!!!!

Yeah, I'm running. Becuase you've made such a profound and invincible argument.

Europeans are white, Christians who are born in Europe. Amusing. It eliminates the majority of Europe, but hey, let's pretend it's the definition of Europeans.

You still won't answer what the definition of Asian is.

Yeah, I'm running. Becuase you've made such a profound and invincible argument.

Europeans are white, Christians who are born in Europe. Amusing. It eliminates the majority of Europe, but hey, let's pretend it's the definition of Europeans.

You still won't answer what the definition of Asian is.
What majority?

Can you give me definition of Asian, because i cant. However, i can give you definition of Middle East and Far East.

Yes!

So you're ignoring reality, then?

So you're ignoring reality, then?
No, you are!

Yes!

Ha. Please show some evidence. I'd be interested.

Even Christian sites are bemoaning the decline.

http://www.cbn.com/CBNNews/News/040301a.aspx

What majority?

Can you give me definition of Asian, because i cant. However, i can give you definition of Middle East and Far East.
Well, if we are going by your definitions then Asians must be yellow, born in Asia and Muslim. We are going with ridiculously simple definitions, yes?

Apparently, Asians don't have to be born in Asia like Europeans have to be born in Europe. I mean, according to you.

No, you are!

no u





That isn't really an argument, now, is it? Jocabia just gave some enlightening evidence to oppose your arguement. I suggest you read it.

It doesnt matter if Turkiye is accepted to Eu or not. What matters is the possibility forcing some archaic creatures out of their caves. The creatures that will drag europe back into good old dark ages.

It doesnt matter if Turkiye is accepted to Eu or not. What matters is the possibility forcing some archaic creatures out of their caves. The creatures that will drag europe back into good old dark ages.
Look no further than your very own president to identify such a creature.

It doesnt matter if Turkiye is accepted to Eu or not. What matters is the possibility forcing some archaic creatures out of their caves. The creatures that will drag europe back into good old dark ages.

Oh yeah. Everyone loves the Dark Ages. I mean, what isn't to love? Constant war, disease, feudal systems, oppression, death...lovely.

Ah, but Europa, whoever has inhabited the office of Prime Minister (I assume you meant the Prime Minister since the President has so little power) of Turkey has been an incompetent doodoohead for the past 50+ years. When Atatürk died, Turkey lost the only real leader she ever had. Erdogan is little better or worse than anyone else who's been around recently.

Ah, but Europa, whoever inhabits the office of Prime Minister (I assume you meant the Prime Minister since the President has so little power) of Turkey has been an incompetent dickhead for the past 50+ years. When Atatürk died, Turkey lost the only real leader she ever had. Erdogan is little better or worse than anyone else who's been around recently.
Yes, I know. He is just the most current example.

Look no further than your very own president to identify such a creature.
agreed. He is against everything I stand for. but democracy in turkiye hasnt been without foreign effects for those 50 years, which greatly helped these bad results. Since we sided with USA in cold war, USA spend a lot of money to strenghten extreme islam to fight against communism and that pretty much wrecked our secular revolutions. ITs not that we didnt fought against it, we just didnt fought hard enough because in peoples minds thigns were not that clear and people doubted if they were becoming fascists in fighting against it? Clearly not for me but we are talking about general public.
Without 1WW ottoman empire would eventually have turned into a constitional monarchy. Transition to democracy would have been a lot more easier without rebuilding an entire country from stratch.
With 20 more years to make revolutions stronger before cold war begging we wouldnt have any of these problems now.
But we do...:(

Voted for '#$@^ no'.

First of all, I consider the fall of Constantinople one of the major tragedies that occured to Europe. Byzantium, albeit it had some distict Asian admixtures in almost all aspects, was a thoroughly European state. Notice that even after the traitorous attack of crusaders on their fellow Christians, the country retained its culture and even managed to recover. The Turks, on the other hand, dealt a devastating blow on this nation, everything that was European there was raped and pillaged by them. Byzantium's symbol, - Hagia Sophia, - was desecrated and turned into a mosque. Turkey's (tiny) European territories are the result of a holy war against Europe, and I am unpleasantly surprised to see so many positive answers to the question in topic. I think that either those people have no ties at all to Europe (even ethnically), or they don't care at all for their heritage and maybe even have some clandestine hatred for it.

As for Christianity, obviously its origins are Middle-Eastern. I, for once, would probably prefer it if Europe was not christianised - some of its peoples were much closer to each other before Christianity than they were after various religious schisms. However, I find it difficult to deny that Christianity played a significant, if ambiguous role in the history of Europe. Islam's only role was that of an eternal enemy and opressor, a lot of Southern European states still cannot recover from the damage caused by this virulently anti-European religion. Now, ethnically white people who convert into Islam, - it is, of course, their private concern, - but I view them as traitors of their culture. However, I haven't met in person a single Europid who willingly converted to Islam.

Oh, and notice that most people of European heritage defending Islam and various nations hostile to Europe (usually in the name of democracy, political correctness and stuff like that, not because they're Moslem) come from relatively safe regions that were never, until now, directly threatened by a fate similiar to that of Byzantium, Spain, Balkan states, etc. Southern Europeans and, to a slightly lesser extent, Eastern Europeans value their traditions much more.

I'll probably edit this post after a nap.

Oh yeah. Everyone loves the Dark Ages. I mean, what isn't to love? Constant war, disease, feudal systems, oppression, death...lovely.

The term "Dark Ages" and even "Middle Ages" was created by the people of the "Renaissance" who were trying to identify with ancient Greek and Roman civilization.

To some extent it is propaganda. They weren't as dark as people think.

The whole thing whether Turkey is European should depend on how the population of Turkey sees itself, shouldn't it?

Oh yeah. Everyone loves the Dark Ages. I mean, what isn't to love? Constant war, disease, feudal systems, oppression, death...lovely.

And those things subsided... when? In the 19th and 20th centuries? Uh-huh. The Renaissance was great.

The whole thing whether Turkey is European should depend on how the population of Turkey sees itself, shouldn't it?

Actually, it's how the Europeans see the turkish people.

Actually, it's how the Europeans see the turkish people.

No, it should be based on what _objective analysis_ (as much as can be attained) and logic say it is.

Have any refutations for my arguments, hon ? :)

No, it should be based on what _objective analysis_ (as much as can be attained) and logic say it is.

Have any refutations for my arguments, hon ? :)


None are needed.
Ours to impose - at our whim - without appeal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5071806.stm
EU agrees to start Turkey talks

EU foreign ministers have agreed on a common position to start membership talks with Turkey after Cyprus raised last-minute objections.
...
The EU text reminds Turkey that "failure to implement its obligations in full will affect the overall progress in the negotiations," Reuters news agency reports.

Not sure that language is strong enough for my liking - and that Cyprus thing seriously needs some sorting out. But I suppose as long as the politicians are consequent enough to stop talks if Turkey doesn't do what's required, then this is a reasonable settlement.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5071806.stm


Not sure that language is strong enough for my liking - and that Cyprus thing seriously needs some sorting out. But I suppose as long as the politicians are consequent enough to stop talks if Turkey doesn't do what's required, then this is a reasonable settlement.


No one is going to sort out Cyprus without some serious ethnic cleansing.
I hope no one is advocating that.

Semi-seriously: can't we just Annex Turkey, and make everybody happy?

Who cares if Turkey is "European" or not. Let em in. If Canada, Peru, Russia want in, let em in. Open the doors, let everyone in.

The only criteria for membership should be willingness to abide by EU law.

Actually if that was the case, we´d have to get rid of France and Germany, both of whom flout the law whenever it suits thier purpose.

Who cares if Turkey is "European" or not. Let em in. If Canada, Peru, Russia want in, let em in. Open the doors, let everyone in.

The only criteria for membership should be willingness to abide by EU law.

Actually if that was the case, we´d have to get rid of France and Germany, both of whom flout the law whenever it suits thier purpose.

Why it is the European Union then?