Turkey |
|
|
|
ANDIMIZ! (Student Vow)
|
130. |
02 Apr 2008 Wed 09:51 pm |
Quoting vineyards: The punchline is Ataturk wanted his youth to be very active, very alert and very wise. He wanted to work with pathfinders and pioneers and he personally did his best to aid people at realizing the potential in them. His adopted daughter became the first female combat pilot. In 1934, he gave full suffrage to women. French women would wait until 1941 to gain this right. In 1945 Japanese women gained suffrage. In Belgium, Italy, Romania and Yugoslavia suffrage would come as late as 1946. Just imagine being able to achieve this in a conservative Islam country. |
Really, Ataturk was the greatest world leader ever. Extremely brilliant - talking about having a vision and right judgment..
|
|
131. |
02 Apr 2008 Wed 09:57 pm |
Quoting thehandsom: Quoting janissary: u all dont know anything about Turkey and some countries' politics about turkey. OPEN UR EYES. PLEASE |
I hope you are not referring all those western countries and usa are out there to get us, divide us, rule us etc.
Because if you do, it will remind me the old coffee house talks like 'ah ah..they pressed the button again'
And also it will fit into some of the "Defining
Characteristics Of Fascism":
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause -
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe
7. Obsession with National Security
|
Your definition of fascism fits the Western countries you mentioned so well. Scapegoats and national security obsession... well isn`t this what America has been abusing for years now???
|
|
132. |
02 Apr 2008 Wed 10:00 pm |
Quoting Daydreamer: I don't think Canada is nationalistic. I doubt Canadians are brainwashed every day to believe that they are the greatest nation in the world and whatever the government does it must be obeyed. I also doubt minorities are looked down on. Also, I may be an ignorant but how many terrorist attacks were there recently?
Japan is more business-oriented. I think it's lost lots of its nationalism to materialism.
England, France and Germany are so mixed racially and nationally that it's hard to speak about the German/British/French spirit. Of course, all these countries have organisations and supporters of nationalism but it's a bit like flogging a dead horse. I doubt they'd eagerly fight for whatever cause their country tells them to. Were they really nationalistic, they'd make their minorities assimilate even if it meant using force.
I'm not sure about China but Russia definitely is nationalistic. Both these countries have long history of not respecting individuals who were more like slaves to the country that citizens. Sacrificing millions was never a problem for their wielders. Now, we may of course debate whether you'd like to live in a country where you cannot decide about yourself if your government appointed fate for you. China regulated birth control and riots turned into massacres. Human rights are still not respected there. And there's the issue of Tibet. If this is what makes you call China a great nation then I'm speechless.
Russia is said to have to be ruled by a strong hand. It has been so for centuries. Nationalism as concept has been used by their rulers to justify their imperialism. Russia is strong, unpredictable and dangerous. However, being the biggest country in the world and controlling a huge part of natural resources like oil or gas it has a massive influence on the world. If any other country dealt with Chechnya the way Russia did, the consequences would be different. Russia is not a democracy, it's an Empire and it will remain so regardless of the name it will take. Are you sure you'd like to live in a country where your voice doesn't matter? Right...
And then there's the USA. Sure it has to enforce national feelings - they have no common roots and their history is just over 200 years old. To create a sense of unity in a country like that you need something to keep them together. Why is the US media the most influential in the world? Because it's one of the means of controlling the nation.
Nationalism isn't really putting national flags in your front yard. It's not repeating a pledge every morning. It's what you are taught to believe in. It's what you read in the papers. It's a country the welfare of whose is more important than the welfare of its folk. Nationalism is when you're taught hatred and you think it means love. It's creating a sense of constant fear, unease and being told that you need to make sacrifices to stop it. Then you send your children to war even if your country is not attacked. You tolerate executions not because that is what should happen to people who disagree with you, you tolerate them because you are forced to think they are your enemies. You let the government under your sheets because you are brainwashed to obey.
I have nothing against patriotism. I admire the people who gave their lives for me to be free. For me to speak Polish, not Russian or German. But loving your country does not mean not asking questions, challenging traditions and making changes. Those who don't progress, move backwards. |
|
|
133. |
02 Apr 2008 Wed 10:04 pm |
Quoting tamikidakika: Quoting thehandsom: Quoting janissary: u all dont know anything about Turkey and some countries' politics about turkey. OPEN UR EYES. PLEASE |
I hope you are not referring all those western countries and usa are out there to get us, divide us, rule us etc.
Because if you do, it will remind me the old coffee house talks like 'ah ah..they pressed the button again'
And also it will fit into some of the "Defining
Characteristics Of Fascism":
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause -
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe
7. Obsession with National Security
|
Your definition of fascism fits the Western countries you mentioned so well. Scapegoats and national security obsession... well isn`t this what America has been abusing for years now??? |
Absolutely..
It is a generic definition...
|
|
134. |
03 Apr 2008 Thu 12:03 pm |
Quoting janissary: u must be kidding... if u see turkey maps used by some countries, u will understand us. but I dont want you understand us. we know what is reality. we are aware of it. |
Ok, I saw this map. Do you really think it is an official drawing of US policy? Were these plan real, Turkey would have left NATO on the first hearing of it. Maybe it is a plan, an idea, but it has no chances to succeed.
First of all, Turkey is no threat to the West. Au contraire, being an ally to the West, it is like a wall against the Muslim world. Then, cutting the territories of Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Armenia for the benefit of Kurds seems unlikely. Why would US want to gain friendship of one country and start war with the whole East?
Moreover, the map is from 2006 I think and Pentagon assured that "that the map does not reflect official U.S. policy and objectives in the region" (quote from the site you gave). So far no element of this plan is put to action and new presidential elections are on their way. I doubt the next president will be as interested in interfering in the Middle East as Bush is.
I do understand that seeing a map like this, strange ideas come to your mind. But it will not happen.
|
|
135. |
03 Apr 2008 Thu 12:06 pm |
Quoting Daydreamer: Quoting janissary: u must be kidding... if u see turkey maps used by some countries, u will understand us. but I dont want you understand us. we know what is reality. we are aware of it. |
Ok, I saw this map. Do you really think it is an official drawing of US policy? Were these plan real, Turkey would have left NATO on the first hearing of it. Maybe it is a plan, an idea, but it has no chances to succeed.
First of all, Turkey is no threat to the West. Au contraire, being an ally to the West, it is like a wall against the Muslim world. Then, cutting the territories of Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Armenia for the benefit of Kurds seems unlikely. Why would US want to gain friendship of one country and start war with the whole East?
Moreover, the map is from 2006 I think and Pentagon assured that "that the map does not reflect official U.S. policy and objectives in the region" (quote from the site you gave). So far no element of this plan is put to action and new presidential elections are on their way. I doubt the next president will be as interested in interfering in the Middle East as Bush is.
I do understand that seeing a map like this, strange ideas come to your mind. But it will not happen. |
so much wisdom.....
|
|
136. |
03 Apr 2008 Thu 12:07 pm |
Quoting catwoman:
so much wisdom.....  |
That's coz I've got two brains
|
|
137. |
03 Apr 2008 Thu 12:09 pm |
Quoting Daydreamer: That's coz I've got two brains  |
One of them is extremely underdeveloped... I'm afraid!
|
|
138. |
03 Apr 2008 Thu 12:21 pm |
Quoting catwoman:
One of them is extremely underdeveloped... I'm afraid!
|
How dare you? Don't you know that every child is a genius until the age of 6...when compulsory education begins and kills it
|
|
139. |
03 Apr 2008 Thu 12:42 pm |
when USA declares they have many enemies, it s ok for you.
|
|
140. |
03 Apr 2008 Thu 12:45 pm |
Quoting janissary: when USA declares they have many enemies, it s ok for you. |
No, it's not. I am against US foreign policy, especially their actions in Iraq. Have I ever written that I support the US aggression?
|
|
|