Quoting SuiGeneris:

One question!

If we do not have that moustache, cant we agree/support on these lines?


Though i have problems with liking Ismet Inonu...

Quoting AlphaF:

but he was not as bright as Ataturk and he made some serious mistakes.

Quoting AlphaF:

Quoting AlphaF:

Revised to include a special item on dudus....



For us, fiercely moustached Turkish Nationalists (not to be confused with racists), life is simple...

1. Anyone who is telling Turks that Ataturk's time is over, his pictures should be removed from display and he should be forgotten,
his time is over, in a way to say that he passed away.
he should never be forgotten. the contributions he made were essential for Turkia. And worth to be continued in a way that to develop the country. his ideas and achievements need to be taken as a foundation in further openings.
2. Anyone who says Ataturk's revolutions were works of a dictator, not necessarily according to public wishes,
from the very little i know, his works were - taken in generally benefic. might he had oposing public wishes... a country must be very difficult to lead. ))) sometimes sacrifices have to be done.
here is a review i found interesting. i know few of Ataturk's life, deeds and the whole political and historical conjuncture.

ATATURK

by Andrew Mango

Woodstock, N.Y.: Overlook, 2000. 666 pp. $40

Middle East Quarterly
March 2000

Reviewed by Daniel Pipes

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (1881-1938), one of the great political figures of the twentieth century, has not been the subject of a full-scale biography in English since one published by Lord Kinross in 1964. The author, Istanbul-born and a writer on things Turkish, has produced far and away the best biography of Atatürk in English, one boasting solid research, fine presentation, and sensible judgments. The result is a more textured and complex picture than hitherto available.

Mango skillfully captures the themes of his tale. "Atatürk was a competent commander, a shrewd politician, a statesman of supreme realism. But above all he was a man of the Enlightenment. And the Enlightenment was not made by saints." "Atatürk was often described as a dictator - a description he hated above all others. It was, in fact, inappropriate, for he behaved not like a modern dictator, but like a latter-day king, who had delegated government to his chief minister, and then sought to amuse himself as best he could." Atatürk emerges from this biography as resolute yet contradictory. He forwarded women's rights but in his private life "could not accept women as equals." He was a devoted rationalist but invented "fantastic historical and linguistic theories."

Mango concludes with an assessment of the Atatürk experiment that bears quoting for its succinct insight and enduring message: "Atatürk's message is that East and West can meet on the ground of universal secular values and mutual respect, that nationalism is compatible with peace, that human reason is the only true guide in life. It is an optimistic message and its validity will always be in doubt. But it is an ideal that commands respect."

3. Anyone who advocates that Turks should go back to their Ottoman roots, ie. use Ottoman language, adopt Ottoman dress code etc.
why should Turkia go back?
4. Anyone who says being the free citizen of a republic and the follower of a religious belief are two concepts in competition, and Turks should obviously prefer the latter,
the concepts are not in competition.
5. Anyone who preaches that the people in Turkia are from different ethnic groups, and that they should be allowed to separate themselves from the unity...like small pebbles from a mozaic. PKK supportes.
different ethnicities are different ethnicities. they are smole pieces of a mosaic. that is diversity. in unity, as it is called. mosaics are beautiful... i am not aware of what the PKK supporters do and say. (under developement)
6. Any coward (ablebodied, male citizen) who flees the country, when it is his turn to serve in the Army,
if the army is no other way, but an education for those who does not have means to that, it is beneficial. some people learn to wash their clothes there( sorry, it is what a high employee told me... officer?), have discipline... as i was told. now, army might not offer proper conditions, either. i do not think that neither sticking in a place 1.5 years necessary improves a person(in Romania, for ex, some came home with ulcer...), nor that the way armies are equipped nowadays compulsory service would mean a major contribution to the safety of the country. responsibility can be assumed in many ways. the best should be a non-compulsory military service. why not serving civil duties? planting trees, helping disabled? in my opinion, this is also a worthy contribution. this should be compulsory. i think if someone flees responsibilities of life, or being human and just in the meantime, that is condemnable. Armies should introduce civil services, in my opinion. There will always be men fleeing away from army.
7. Anyone who suggests that Turkia should stop being a nation-state and becomes a part of the merry Global crowd,
isn't Turkia part of the global merry crowd? ))) merry crowd. either way, it is a state part of a global "crowd" of states. extend what you have said about the pieces of mosaic. and here we are. what makes the difference? the way you take part in that crowd... what influence do you have, how far it goes, what do you offer to the citizens of your country, how you coop in resolving internal and external conflicts, balancing your own welfare with the global one.
something puzzles me in this. i think the nation state term. nation means that is a group sharing common cultural heritage, common values. a multicultural nation? for example, lutherans are good citizens, but they will not whirl three times round the table the way catholics do(rituals). this is also part of a heritage. if hungarians, they will have different motives on pottery than romanians. yet, they are the members of the same country, co-nationals.
8. Anyone who preaches EU is the only life saving option open to Turkia and strives for membership - even at the cost of national soveregnity and pride,
(chapter under development and reading. at a first glance i would say that, due to it's position adherence to EU is not the only solution for Turkey.).

9. Anyone trying to sell a different religion to Turkish citizens; missionaries of all kinds, operating under veils,
in Romania sects have extended. in what ways? between other things, they went even in isolated mountain village and preached the people. more then that, they helped the poor. they encourage collectivity, common interests and mutual help. Orthodox priests did not much thing in their mandate (as they are, in a way to say "invested"). many times they just accepted gifts, respect without doing much of a thing to their religious community. this created a pre-condition to desert religion. the second was they offered money. people need better financial state and to learn how to make their lives better. then again, if religion is a matter of choice... i think this should relate very much on the personal belief. a good believer had belief in the heart. religion always mixed political and social interests and comes to define identity. still does. hence the reprobation at missionaries. missionaries existed and will exist. and probably there exist methods in avoiding this. one of them should be tie the belief to the heart.(my idealist view here) religions should not be sold... yet they are.
10. Anyone who supports those who intend to replace the current democratic and secular republic with an Islamic mode of government (whether of fundamentalist, or soft kind),
taking number four, this is not a good choice. it looks like a trap. religions have not been reformed. hence, there are some dangers. spiritual should reflect in conducts in everyday life. fundamentalism, in my opinion, is also not a good choice.
11. Anyone who fancies himself to be ethnically of pure Turkish blood, hence imagines that he is superior to all other etnic citizen groups in Turkia, or that he is a better patriot,
so there are ethnicities. all this terminology((... Citizenship gives you rights and restrictions. one of the restrictions should be (and legally is) the referring to a so called superiority in blood. this reminds me many jews bought noble titles... counts i think (these were "buyable" titles)
12. Anyone who likes to sing false songs about Armenian misfortunes, but demands a down payment of 14 billion dollars to start discussing realities in historical terms,
(not aware of the whole situation of the Armenian killing, but there are also always good ways to ask for some money)
13. Any creep who approaches love stricken Western Ladies with intentions to cheat them out of their money, telephones, laptops or gold ear rings, whatever (dudu),
i like point 13. it is a personal statement of integrity which tells that the first 12 are a mixture of beliefs, values, terminologies, facts that belong to political philosophy, and are of big importance in developing national strategies, social conducts and applying terminologies to these. if you ask me, this post is a bubby trap.))) what i like is the way ideas were switched and connected here. a beautiful mind.
not any inloved lady or gentlemen should be approached with the mere intention of cheating. cheating is morally and legally condemnable. love has several levels. treat it like a pleasure of life, like a miracle, like a long term investment, like a shrine yet/but/and love always deserves the best. and energy, and time, devotion, raising mutual interests, learning, effort.

is not our friend....

Quoting AlphaF:

The revolution that Ataturk started died out, immediately after he was murdered...

Quoting portokal:

Quoting azade:

Quoting AEnigma III:

Quoting azade: Quoting AlphaF: The revolution that Ataturk started died out, immediately after he was murdered... And when exactly was it that Atatürk was murdered..?

Quoting AlphaF: