ATATURK!!!

ok i decided to keep this topic closed,

and people who are intersted in continuing their discussion please open a new thread for each topic.

for examples

a topic about sultan vahedin,

a topic about head scarf,

a topic about how someone decided that the rest of the Turks are ignorant and thought of himself as the wisest ...etc.

i wonder what the french, greeks and armenians thought about this peace proposal that would kick them out of ottoman territory. coz if the proposal was to not loose any land then wer talking about iraq, syria, palistine and hijaz. we no that the british wer not men of there word, we know that wen they promised the arabs land. i think vahdettin found out that this proposal was unrealistic and then decided to get an independant turkish state which totally backfired (in his point of view).

when your country is under occupation then the ruler is not going to have much say in who controls financial and administrative authority. eg iraq economy is fully controlled by america right now why becouse they are occupied. similar circumstance in turkey then. this is wer the skill of secret coded language comes in which the turks are very good at (see cypriot war 1974, bulent ecevit). Sultan Vahdettin told the pasa's in a similar way under teh wachtfull eye of the occupying forces to go and stop the uprising (which meant opposite, to start the war of independence) . u showd that treaty which meant nothing to ataturk and vahdettin. that was forced onto us to sign.

he offered to leave all the financial and administrative authority

he offered? more like he was FORCED.

He preferred a nominal sovereignty on a large land instead of economic and political independence

i dont think so, just ask ur self taht question. its like an 18 year old saying i prefer to live under the full control of my parents, rather then to live independantly.  think logically, plz. wud any leader not prefer to live independantly from ENEMY forces. he was forced, he didnt prefer.

There were clashes between Pontos Greeks and Muslims and as I said before:

Sorry It dont make sense, maybe he is not enough for that situation, but  to call him as traitor is complately nonsense. He was owner  of ottoman, he was ottomans himself. Using english ship to resque his life, and when doing this, not taking any penny, dont count as backstabing.

which was my point exactly atleast some one understood, thanks mortaza

Originally posted by Bar�� Originally posted by oTToMAn_TurK Sultan Vahdettin and Mustafa Kemal pasa knew each other. What? Am I supposed to be shocked now? Originally posted by oTToMAn_TurK yes, it was the sultan who convinced ataturk to go to samsun The sultan ordered Atat�rk to crush the rebellion of Rums in that region, not cleanse the country from the invaders and build a republic in the Ottoman borders. Don't be ridiculous. He even ordered Atat�rk's execution.

He ordered to stop Muslim uprisings, because according to the Article 7 of the Mondros Cease-fire Treaty, the Allies could invade anywhere that they consider as a threat to themselves.... 

Nonsense, saying some words dont make it reality.

He is the owner of all country, why should he become traitor to his lands?

Sorry It dont make sense, maybe he is not enough for that situation, but  to call him as traitor is complately nonsense. He was owner  of ottoman, he was ottomans himself. Using english ship to resque his life, and when doing this, not taking any penny, dont count as backstabing.

The sultan ordered Atat�rk to crush the rebellion of Rums in that region, not cleanse the country from the invaders and build a republic in the Ottoman borders. Don't be ridiculous. He even ordered Atat�rk's execution.

well related to who is commenting  history. Ordering Ataturk execution means nothing, Ataturk also ordered other patriots execution. It is a politic conflict.

Baris i know my user name is OSMANLI but i do not want to see a return of them. They were not perfect, since your implying that i somehow think that they did no wrong. And yeah iam aware of the revolutions that had happend prior (eg. Turban replaced by fes) but that comes under westernisation of the Ottoman upper class.

Oguzoglu if the women of Turkey want to wear a skirt or hijab then they should be allowed in a country claiming for a western style democracy.

Anywho, how about the changing of the alphabet to latin. The Arabic alphabet was more than fine it was used for a thousend plus years. And for all those Pan-Turks out there majority of Turkic people also had this alphbet inc. the Uyghur.

Check this link: http://islamharfleri.com/

teaches to read in Turkish Arabic script (which is unique only to Turks)

Or check the worlds first website writtain completly in the Turkish old script (thus proving that this system of writting can still be used by Turks)

http://islamharfleri.com/osmanlica/

This act deprived the Turks of previous knowledge of their national and religious doctrines/culture. On top of that the early Turks were made to feel ashamed of their Ottoman heritage. When MKA came up with the idea he said to the intelectuals that they may discuss this topic as much as they want, he will allow this. However no matter what conclusion they come to the change will be done. Wow, what a leader, he was generous enough to let the Turks discuss the issue, but not contribute in the future of their nation.

The Turks were ignorent, please an answer like that will not fool me. The Ottomans were infact educated to much higher levels then those of the republic.

If MKA was trying for a democracy then an important decision like the removal of the Caliphate should have gone through a referendom.

Or at the very least if it was that bad then give the position to anouther nation, for the Caliphate is not a Turkish post but the Muslims open to all.