Bulgarian participation in WW 1

Originally posted by Spartakus We did not "cleanse" anything.

By order of the King we are setting fire to all the Bulgarian villages, because the Bulgarians burned the beautiful town of Serres, Nigrita, and several Greek villages. We have shown ourselves far more cruel than the Bulgarians.

 

Here we are burning the villages and killing the Bulgarians, both women and children.

We took only a few [prisoners], and these we killed, for such are the orders we have received.

We have to burn the villages-such is the order-slaughter the young people and spare only the old people and the children. 

What is done to the Bulgarians is indescribable; also to the Bulgarian peasants. It was a butchery. There is not a Bulgarian town or village but is burned.

We massacre all the Bulgarians who fall into our hands and burn the villages.

Of the 1,200 prisoners we took at Nigrita, only forty-one remain in the prisons, and everywhere we have been we have not left a single root of this race.

We picked out their eyes [five Bulgarian prisoners] while they were still alive.

The Greek army sets fire to all the villages where there are Bulgarians and massacres all it meets.  God knows where this will end.

Edited by bg_turk - 06-Nov-2006 at 14:44

Originally posted by Spartakus We did not "cleanse" anything.We made evacuations of certain areas from Bulgarian populations and we exchanged then and those who hand't left yet with Hellens of Bulgaria.The numbers are 50.000 Bulgarians and 30.000 Hellens.30.000 Hellens,which means that Hellenic presence in Bulgaria in that time was more than vivid. Concerning the Carnegie report,ok nice poem you have learned there.The only thing you know from school is the Carnegie report? Just because you have some kind or report,this does not mean that this report is the freaking Bible!It's one report ,only one report which is under heavy doubt.

I want the numbers and records given by my goverment,so i can compare them with modern day studies,reports ,estimations.For example,you can say that they were 200.000 Bulgarians there.But we must take under consideration the fertility of the Macedonian land.How many people could Macedonia actually sustain?And what about the others?Hell,Macedonia of early 20th century is not New York for God's shake!In a report,you just have one man stating things.The accusation of cleansing is very heavy to be examined only by one report.It's hilarious even to think of it.

There was an exchange of population between Greece and Bulgaria.
The numbers of the Greek population in Bulgaria and the Bulgarian in Greece are mentioned there.
The Greek population  in eastern Rumelia was not negligible

Text of diplomats or observers are useful in historical research,but it is out of any historical base to constract a view of a historical era by a single source (Carnegie became the Quran or Gospel! it comes every 3rd post! )

Ont he other hand it would be more serious someone to base his opinion on neutral sources as the League of Nations

Greek Macedonia's Population
1912                                                            1926
Greeks        513.000       42.6%            1.341.000           88.8%
Bulgarians  119.000         9.9%                 77.000             5.1%

Neuilly Treaty -1919 : -92.000 Bulgarians of Macedonia exchanged with 46.000 Greeks of Eastern Rumelia

(the difference of the 2 numbers of Bulgarians (119.ooo-92.ooo=27.ooo / 77.ooo (=50.000)) comes from the join of Greek Eastern Macedonia to Greek state after the victory at 2nd Balcan War,and the Bulgarian population of this area)

The difference of Greek population comes out of exchange after Lausanne treaty -1923 (1.300.000 Greeks from Asia Minor) ,the 46.000 Greeks of Eastern Rumelia and those of Eastern Macedonia.

So ,i would like to see some serious Evidence about this "ethnic cleansing" rather than screams and (again) Carnegie
Numbers dont lie.




Edited by Brainstorm - 07-Nov-2006 at 15:55

Originally posted by bg_turk And finally, what would you consider "serious" evidence? That which conforms to your distorted view of history maybe?

Do you consider your view of history undistorted and objective?

League of the Nations is serious evidence. Don't you think ?

As for WW1 -1916,try to find info about the Bulgarian invasion in Eastern Macedonia.
Thousands of people where killed and others where expelled into Bulgaria to work-in order to change the population status of the area.

What kind of nonsense is this Anton ?

There is a continuous effort to "prove" an ethnic cleasning of Bulgarians in Macedonia,while in the same time the exact same tactics where followed by both sides.

According to real numbers there was no large scale ethnic cleansing by both sides,but for sure terrible crimes.

And it s part of the topic,since Bulgaria invaded the areas of Serres ,Drama and Kavala in 1916,during WW1.


Edited by Brainstorm - 08-Nov-2006 at 12:01

Originally posted by Anton Everybody who is more or less educated understands this, Brainstorm. But I do not consider the discussion who is more evil in Balkans is an aim of this topic. Do you?

Yes,but unfortunately many (incl.some times me and u) ,get in the temptation to answer a silly provokating post ,by a nationalist or sneaky/nationalist member.(for whom the bell tolls? )

Ok,let's end it here.

After all,our ancestors lived in a terrible time when the world was obsessed by hate and wars.Everbody did terrible crimes,some lost many things unfairly,others took something that was not rightfully their.And from all this suffered innocent people.But that was the world,the fate of lossers was in the hand of winners.We all know what was the result and consequences.The decisions after WW1 just send the world into a preparation for another world war.But we are humans,we always make mistakes.