Replies

Let's go over this ONE more time shall we, because you just aren't getting it, or DO NOT want to get it, which shows me what a bigot and hypocrite you are.

And I was born and raised a christian you arrogant twit, I have NO animosity towards the Christian faith at all.

Let's go over the crusades one more time, I have studied the crusades, thoroughly, I took a class on them in College, have you?

In one of the first crusades, the region in france known as the Languaduc, spelling is probably wrong, was one of the MOST advanced in Europe, art, literature, literacy, government. It was one of Europes MOST advanced cultures, but they would NOT recognize the pope's authority. The Pope therefore declared a crusade against them. One of his knights came to the pope with a question, he asked how the crusaders would tell the difference between a Christian and a heretic, the pope said " Kill them all, to the last man, woman, and child, god will claim his own."

The crusaders went into that region and killed every last man, woman and child, burned down the entire region and took everything of value. They burned the books, the art, every bit of knowledge that these people had, and put over 250,000 people to the sword in a little over a week. Then, just to make sure that ANY survivors would die, they salted the fields, so that crops WOULD NOT grow and they would starve.

This sounds civilized doesn't it?

Over a 200 year period the crusades sent out by the popes killed over 5 million people, 5 million, and probably more.

Now then, on to the "crusade against the Ottomans" as you like to think of it, but in fact it was NEVER considered a crusade. Here let me give you some info.

From the sixteenth century European policy was swayed exclusively by state interests; hence to statesmen the idea of a crusade seemed antiquated. Egypt and Jerusalem having been conquered by Sultan Selim, in 1517, Pope Leo X made a supreme effort to re-establish the peace essential to the organization of a crusade. The King of France and Emperor Charles V promised their co-operation; the King of Portugal was to besiege Constantinople with 300 ships, and the pope himself was to conduct the expedition. Just at this time trouble broke out between Francis I and Charles V; these plans therefore failed completely. The leaders of the Reformation were unfavourable to the crusade, and Luther declared that it was a sin to make war upon the Turks because God had made them His instruments in punishing the sins of His people. Therefore, although the idea of the crusade was not wholly lost sight of, it took a new form and adapted itself to the new conditions.

It was NEVER a true crusade, so check your history and try again...

Your arrogance, hyposcrisy, and bigotry, know NO bounds.

If the Turks are answerable to the actions of thier ancestors the Ottomans, then so are the christians for the crusades, and so is the US for the indians and slavery.

If the Turks are answerable, then in order NOT to be a hypocrite, you MUST admit the christians are answerable and the US is answerable. YOU HAVE TO, or you are indeed arrogant, bigoted, and hypocritical.

Go ahead, squirm out of that one, go ahead. If you try, then you are indeed just what I think you are.

Aric,
First thanks for your message. You have understand my position.
However, there are some important issues that must be clarified:
It looks that you live in the US ( as I do) . Your basic point of view is generous, that people should go over such tragedies in their history, and do not use past experiences to build future conflicts.

The truth is that the view from the US does not reflect at all the sesibilities on the ground, sensibilities that are build after hundred and thousand of years of conflict and occupation. US, and the 'politically correct" policy here is just not working applied anywhere else ( and not even in the US I think).

It's easy to be cool about all the hatred in the Balkans against Ottoman Empire, while living in a quiet subdivision of a new ( less than 100 years old ) American city, and something else to grow in a country where the folklore is impregnated with horror stories about hundreds of years of terror.

I give Turkey the credit it deserves being a modern secular state, where the fundamentalism is subdued not by a ruthless police ( like in some other Muslim nations) , but by a population that is genuinely more interested in Western life style than in Bin Laden rants.

I have not been in Turkey, but my parents were, and they were delighted by the scenery and by Istanbul's animated streets. Being Christians they had no problems, and they never felt threatened. We also had a Turkish friend, a very interesting and pleasant person. And I do remember also the cool guy at David Letterman show ( I am not sure how many remember about the Turkish guy that was using funny English on the net to get chicks in a very special way ).
Anyway, be sure that I am trying to get Turkey the credit it does deserve.
But here is where I stop completely agreeing with you.
Like many Muslim apologists, you put the equal sign between the Crusades and the Ottoman thousand year siege of Europe, and maybe more serious, you are trying to imply that somehow all Christians were to blame ( and be ashamed) about the innocent bloodshed that came from the Crusades.

This is just wrong.
Crusades were about liberating a place considered sacred, while the Muslim push in Europe was about obliteration of civilization the way we know it. It's a big difference that you should be aware of.

Most of the clashes between European Christian armies and the Ottoman armies were happening actually in Europe, and not on Turkey proper . The battles of Vienna, Belgrade, etc, etc etc etc, were against marauding Ottoman hordes pushing as far as possible into Europe proper.

It is not the time and the place to tell you about thousands of real martyrs ( not the sexual perverts that dream about scores of virgins in heaven while taking others lives) that were burned alive or beheaded just because they refused to convert to islam.

Ottoman empire needed though enslaving populations as a source of military manpower ( remember the earlier story) and also for the taxes they extorted from them. Oh yes, and from time to time they needed to replenish their hundreds of sex slaves with fresh virgins from the 'ruled' territories. Remember that you do not have such equivalent in the behavior of any Christian nation/army.
While marauding the losing side/nation was a common act in the Middle ages, there were no equivalent for the atrocities where children were abducted for conversion into fanatical soldiers, nor the institutionalized sex slavery that was the norm in the Ottoman Empire.

You cannot compare the liability of say England or Greece in the fight of any Christian cause, but there is only one side to represent the Ottoman Empire, and that is Turkey. Do not get me wrong, I am not sure that this is about material extortion ( $$$$ for damages), but about getting the right words. I would not support any repayment for the victims ( for their grandsons actually) , but I do support the word 'genocide', because it looks that the Ottomans are the one most able to do it.

And also do not forget that Christianity is not represented by the Pope alone. Orthodox ( Eastern) Cristians never recognised the idea that a man should have the absolute power the Pope claimed. Funny that Constantiople had to pay a price for that (!!!!)

Turkey is actually taking pride in being the successor of the Ottoman Empire, but , you know, without the liabilities of a thousand years of bloodletting .

And if you follow the postings of the Turks on FR forums you will notice how much bigotry is involved. Their hatred against the Greeks is almost pathologic, and if you follow closely they are trying to discredit everything, from the merits of Greek civilization to all sorts of archaeological rants .

Again, from the US this looks less interesting than a BigMac, but I think that is above audacity for any Turk to rant about the role of Greece in shaping the civilization the way we know it.

European culture ( "The West' if you want) that -ironically- Turkey wants to be part of- is defined by several major terms:

1. Greek culture
2. Roman Culture
3. Christianity

You will find this in common roots in all European nations , from Ireland to Moscow. Look even at the dollar bills and see the Greek architecture imitated after thousands of years, look at the Roman law code, an so and so.
And those fundaments are infinite deeper than architectural influences. Aristotle, Pythagoras, Julius Caesar, Plato, Homer, and then DaVinci, etc, etc, etc.
The Renaissance "manifesto" was a return to the vibrant period of Greek culture , and a liberation from the dark ages of Catholic bigotry, and all this while the Turkish armies were pounding the eastern borders of Europe, and the Ottoman empire being the same colorless battle machine that was busy collecting virgins from Romania, Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria, etc ettc etc.
Should I repeat that 1000 years of Ottoman traces in European civilisation ammounts to NOTHING, actually it should have a minus sign ?
So giving the alternative of supporting the Turks in their claim that the Ottoman empire, and that their forefathers were a glory to civilization, and that Greece ( and Russia, and Serbia, etc) are some worthless nations, please understand why I will always side with the Greeks here.
And Turkey itself was instrumental in influencing US in giving the upper hand to islam factions in Bosnia, Kosovo and montenegro,sending that part of Europe into chaos which is another reason I do not see that country with very good eyes.
Guess who was cheering while Christians were bombed in Kosovo and Bosnia ( other than Albright/Clinton, etc) ?
And to make my background clear, I am not a Greek ( I haven't met any in my life) , I am coming from country mostly known for Dracula...

I have studied the crusades, thoroughly, I took a class on them in College

If you went to a liberal college which most are, you should throw out everything you learned about the Crusades and Christianity.

Hey pilgrim, so you took a class in college...like Wow! Have you done any I repeat any independent reading about the Crusades or the history of the Mediterranean region at all? I DOUBT IT VERY MUCH judging from you ill informed and very "imaginative" posts. The leftist revisionist slant on most campuses especially in the history departments is well known. You have obviously swallowed hook line and sinker all the garbage they fed you. (I will be happy to supply you with a short but effective bibliography to help enlighten you but I cannot promise you that you will comprehend it). Then you went to Turkey at some point and after some belly dancing and kebabs and some laughs and stuff...swallowed the whole Turkish myth of modernization and westernization and victimization as well.

Unless you are willing to look at the facts of Turkish terror in the 20th century not to mention the 21st, you are just shi****g in the wind.