Posted on 05/30/2011 3:10:09 AM PDT by 1010RD
SNIP “The normalization of history,” proclaims the Turkish foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, whose government has tried to reintegrate the region by lifting visa requirements and promoting a Middle Eastern trade zone, as it deploys its businessmen along the old routes and exports Turkey’s pop culture to an eager audience.
“None of the borders of Turkey are natural,” he went on. “Almost all of them are artificial. Of course we have to respect them as nation-states, but at the same time we have to understand that there are natural continuities. That’s the way it’s been for centuries.”
SNIP
“A RECREATION OF THE HISTORIC AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT” is how Mr. Davutoglu describes his vision for the region. And indeed, that vision, which is effectively government policy, has touched in a nerve in Turkey, a country with its own unresolved questions of identity.
Just as Arab nationalism still runs run deep, with the fate of Palestine its axis, so does Turkish nationalism, which includes a sense that the country deserves a role in the region, and beyond that at least echoes of its Ottoman age... “It’s been almost 100 years that we’ve been separated by superficial borders, superficial cultural and religious borders, and now with the lifting of visas to Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, we’re lifting national boundaries... Turkey is challenging the traditional understanding of policy in the Middle East in place since the 20th century.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Any bid (Turkish or otherwise) to “unify” the Arabs is doomed to failure. That doesn’t mean that Turkey or Iran won’t try. Unfortunately, I think both have their sights set on Israel as a way to enable their fantasy. They figure that the country who can take out Israel will given them a leg up in their ill-fated campaign.
the Caliphate is not a joke to Muslims.
we ignore their beliefs, at our peril.
...look at polls in many countries, that consistently show they consider themselves to be Muslims first, and citizens of that country a distant second.
ALL faithful practicing Muslims know this:
Islam doesn’t recognize any non-Sharia compliant government. Islam officially divides the world in just 2 parts.
the “House of Peace” (people living under Islamic Law), and the “House of War” (everything else).
(Btw, i saved your “Numbergate” thread. it had truly excellent information. Thanks!)
your are very correct about Ethnocentrism.
and i am not saying a Caliphate would be stable.
(though the Ottoman Empire lasted a LONG time...)
but Islamists will never stop trying. And this could easily result in a major war. Hatred of Israel is their unifier.
also, you correctly noted the power of “...iron will and “cruel & unusual punishments,”” which Islam under Sharia law, certainly qualifies.
“an Ottoman Empire 2 would not conflict with our national interests.”
/// is supporting Israel in our national interest? perhaps not. but O.E. 2 would certainly not tolerate an independent Jewish State in it’s middle... and OPEC is bad enough now... imagine if it was ONE Nation in control of it all?
My point is, the Muslim world has been faction-ridden for hundreds of years.
Looking to a former imperial master isn’t a very likely way to patch things up.
In theory, the caliphate may serve as a pie-in-the-sky ideal but in reality, the bastards can’t stand one another.
Read “Islamic Jihad” by MA Khan to study up on WHY the various Muslim counties have problems with Arabs, Turks, Persians, and all other countries with expansionist objectives.
absolutely agree. you are very correct.
as i said to hellbender, a caliphate would NOT be stable. but catch-22, Islamists will keep killing until they get it.
...and Obama backing the Islamists “Arab Spring”, especially financially, gives them hope, making a larger war more likely.
Actually Turks were quite good at it for centuries, they even welcomed the Jews after the Europeans threw them out. As nationalism started and as the Ottoman Empire started to collapse, all bets were off.
The caliphate was possible when Arabs were still on tents and fighting against each other. Now, let’s say, it’s very different.
There will never be peace until we defeat the Muslims. Soundly, brutally and with finality. There is only one kind of “good” Muslim.
Paging T.E. Lawrence.
again, i agree.
...but you have over 1 billion muslims who’s religion teaches there is only ONE Muslim nation, and you have many Islamists who will give their lives to make it happen.
again, i agree it is unlikely, and would be unstable.
catch 22, if they get it, it will be unstable and war.
but until they get it, it will be unstable and war.
ISLAM is the problem. and it won’t change, and won’t go away.
...i freely admit i don’t know the solution.
Very plausible. Forseeable result is a lot of dead Turks/Persians/Arabs.
Thank goodness it’s a religion of peace.
I respectfully disagree -the only thing Islamists like more than slaughtering infidels is slaughtering slightly different flavors of muslim.
I think that one of the things that makes the US different is that we aren’t ethnically or religiously founded; the first settlers in what is now the US were Spaniards (in Florida) and Spanish (and later, French) culture was spread throughout the SE and SW. The British arrived soon afterwards in the NE, and like the Spanish, established cultural outposts.
But neither one was particularly ethnically motivated; the Spanish Christianized the Indians...and then married them...and British colonization attempts were very varied, ranging from the Utopian colony of the Pilgrims (which self destructed fairly fast) to more pragmatic settlement attempts.
While both the Spanish and the British brought their culture with them and thought of it as superior, the Spanish related their culture to being Catholic (hence, inclusive...if you were Catholic, you were part of it and had natural human rights) while the British related it to certain political events, such as the Magna Carta (again, inclusive in the sense that if you were a citizen, you had rights).
Reagan said that we were a shining city set on a hill, and he was right.
The problem is that the Dems want to divide us and turn us into squabbling ethnic groups, which gives them more power. They want to separate out blacks, Hispanics and any immigrant group and stake them out as their personal preserve.
In my opinion, this is enormously dangerous to our whole nation. I hope Herman Cain, Allen West, Marco Rubio and others who aren’t part of the GOP “good ol’ boys club” (the white RINO network) can get out there and change this mindset. I think any one of them could be elected president, btw.
Oddly enough, I think the most difficult thing will be to get a woman elected. The Dems want to have the first female prez, but they destroyed Hillary (who was pretty awful to begin with) and I don’t think she can be their candidate. But I don’t think they have any others lined up. The GOP does have some good candidates with good state and gubernatorial credentials (governors have a good track record for being elected...and remember, Reagan was a governor but never a congress critter).
In any case, I think unity is all. We have ideals and we have to defend these ideals, regardless of our race, sex or cultural background, and balkanization drives every single splinter group directly into the arms of the Dems and the Great State.
The Congress needs to slam its foot down about giving money WHICH WE DO NOT HAVE away to people whom we DO NOT KNOW.
The days for that kind of largesse are long gone.
For all of their faults, the Ottomans were kind to Jews living in their lands.
Ethnic cleansing just needs a good PR campaign and an uplifting slogan like “Arab Spring.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.