Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Megalo Idea

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
Author
R_AK47 View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 25-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 468
  Quote R_AK47 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Megalo Idea
    Posted: 19-Feb-2006 at 12:29
What does everyone here think about the Greek Megalo Idea of the early 20th century?  It seems to me like it was a sound idea, but the Greeks overextended themselves into Anatolia when they should have concentrated more on taking Istanbul.  Does anyone know where I could find more information about the conflict on the net?

Edited by R_AK47
Back to Top
kotumeyil View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 21-Jun-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1494
  Quote kotumeyil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 09:40

I think its correct form is "Megali Idea" = Great idea.

This book is useful about how it collapsed during the Turkish Independence War: Ionian Vision: Greece in Asia Minor, 1919-22 by Michael Llewellyn Smith

[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">
Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 13:44

kotumeyil is right as about the correct form. But he is arong as about the period . Greece After gaining independence in the 1820s, Greece pursued an irredentist Panhellenic policy, known as Megali Idea which aimed at unifying all Greeks from Macedonia until Ionia.

Greece, on the side of the victorious Allies during the WW I, had to withdraw from Asia Minor after a bloody conflict with Turkey. In that conflict Greece never used all the army as Turkey done because  hers Northern borders were not secure and must keep troops for that.



Edited by akritas
Back to Top
DayI View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
  Quote DayI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 13:55

Turkish "army" whas disarmed due the sevres and by being ally of the germans. Greeks got the fully support of the english, they had superior army then the Turkish but with their greezy generals such as stratigos, pullas(?) (or papulis?) and bad tactics they lost.

 

Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 13:57

They should  stop at izmir. instead of this they tried to take ankara. I think even If they could get ankara. they would lost war.

They should take izmir, and thanks god for this.

 



Edited by Mortaza
Back to Top
DayI View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
  Quote DayI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 14:02
Thank for Turkish army they lost, otherwhise youll be now mortazakis.
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 14:05

Yeah thanks to turkish army, I am not saying anything different,

but just think If they only hold izmir, instead of entering middle of anatolia?

By the way, Greek army was never a large threat, at independence wars we lost 30000-40000 soul. Only at dardanellas we lost 250.000 soul.

If brits and others supported greece with their own armies, we would again lost war.

 

Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 14:11

They should  stop at izmir. instead of this they tried to take ankara. I think even If they could get ankara. they would lost war.

They should take izmir, and thanks god for this.

I think they were correct in attacking Ankara. Ankara government was getting stronger everyday. One by one it neutralised other threats, secured the borders, made peace with neighbours, and eventually formed a regular army which concentrated on the Western front against the Greeks. If the Greeks had tried to hold on to Izmir, Ankara government would have secured the rest of the country even quicker, and defeat them.

In Sakarya battle, the Greeks had a solid defensive line west of Sakarya river, and their army had more rifles, trucks, machine guns, aircraft, light guns, etc. than the Turkish one. But the Turks won because Turkish generals and army were WWI veterans, with a lot of experience in many fronts. And Tuks had psychological advantage, because they were defending their homeland.

Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 14:20

I think they were correct in attacking Ankara. Ankara government was getting stronger everyday. One by one it neutralised other threats, secured the borders, made peace with neighbours, and eventually formed a regular army which concentrated on the Western front against the Greeks. If the Greeks had tried to hold on to Izmir, Ankara government would have secured the rest of the country even quicker, and defeat them.

they should try to make peace with ankara goverment. do you think ankara would risk everything for izmir? They didnt it for mosul, why do you think izmir is more precious than mosul.

 

Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 14:27

I agree with Mortaza. When you want all finally you will loose and these that you have. Greek corp lost because the supply lines were not strong enouph in order to support the front. Also the Turkish as Beylerbeyi said had the psychological advantage, because they thaught that were defending their homeland specially when the Greek corp was closed in Ankara.

Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 15:01

they should try to make peace with ankara goverment. do you think ankara would risk everything for izmir? They didnt it for mosul, why do you think izmir is more precious than mosul.

Are you kidding? Izmir was the second largest city in Turkey, developed area, an important port and an important centre for the Ottomans, like Selanik. It was far more important than Mosul, which is really a far away province, important for its oil only. Don't forget that the Ottomans (even Ataturk was Ottoman) were centered in Istanbul. Mosul is very far for them. But Izmir is near. Loss of Mosul would not threaten the Turks in Anatolia, but loss of Izmir would. It would give the Greeks a foothold in Turkey. Besides, Izmir is the economical centre of the region other nearby cities are all economic hinterland. Izmir simply dominates the region. No way would Turkey let Greece keep Izmir, it would sooner or later come to war. And Turkey would win. Greece did the right thing strategically by attacking Ankara, to deal with the problem before it became too big.

If you compare power of Turkey to that of Greece from year 1071 to 2006, 1919 was possibly the most favourable for Greece. They could not have chosen a better time to attack. In fact, the window of opportunity was quite narrow, in 1914 or 1924 such an attack would be suicide, in 1920 it had a good chance of success.

Back to Top
kotumeyil View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 21-Jun-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1494
  Quote kotumeyil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 16:54
Originally posted by akritas

kotumeyil is right as about the correct form. But he is arong as about the period . Greece After gaining independence in the 1820s, Greece pursued an irredentist Panhellenic policy, known as Megali Idea which aimed at unifying all Greeks from Macedonia until Ionia.

I know that it has a much longer history. Those dates I've given belongs to the collapse of  Megali Idea. 

[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">
Back to Top
strategos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 09-Mar-2005
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1096
  Quote strategos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 16:59

The megalo idea was the idea of unifying all greeks under one greek government.

The reason the greek army lost in asia minor was because of unkept promises of western allies. The Soviet help to the new turkish also gave the turkish army much more equipment than they would have otherwise.

http://theforgotten.org/intro.html
Back to Top
cebeci View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 121
  Quote cebeci Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 17:45

akritas

was ankara confined to ionia?

where ends ionia?

history is just a repetation of itself
Back to Top
DayI View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
  Quote DayI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 17:50
Originally posted by strategos

The megalo idea was the idea of unifying all greeks under one greek government.

The reason the greek army lost in asia minor was because of unkept promises of western allies. The Soviet help to the new turkish also gave the turkish army much more equipment than they would have otherwise.

wonderfull reason  

Back to Top
strategos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 09-Mar-2005
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1096
  Quote strategos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 22:28
Originally posted by DayI

Originally posted by strategos

The megalo idea was the idea of unifying all greeks under one greek government.

The reason the greek army lost in asia minor was because of unkept promises of western allies. The Soviet help to the new turkish also gave the turkish army much more equipment than they would have otherwise.

wonderfull reason  

Its ok, you dont need to repeat it.

http://theforgotten.org/intro.html
Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 09:25

Judging extremely complicated incidents without adequate knowledge leads to oversimlifications and vague reasoning. The collapse of the Greek front in Asia Minor was a product of purely political and diplomatical incidents and reasonings. Here is a barebone reasoning:

The Entente allies were resolute in their aim to dissolve the Ottoman empire. It was only a question of who is to take the spoils. Entente wanted Greece to act as a stabilizing factor in the Balkans, to overlook their interests. That is why (with the aid of the greatest Greek politician of modern times, Eleftherios Venizelos) they gave us Thrace and Smyrne and let the Greek army (even encourage us, as the Brits did) to sally forth and occupy a much larger area. BUT: With the election of the Right-Wing party and the restoration of the former (Germanophile) King, the Greeks proved to be untrustworthy. This must've been the single most decisive election in Greek history. After this, the French openly (the Italians were already there) and the Brits covert, turned to Kemal, seeing that he was undisputed leader of the ex-Ottomans (so, no election could remove him and he had to live up to his word, unlike Venizelos who was voted out of office and couldn't fulfil his promises to the Entente) and USSR invested heavily on Kemal to gain an ally in the eastern med. Franks and Brits invested even more on Kemal, the Greek political leadership was unable to make a single decent or sound decision, they even removed 2/3s of the Army leadership (while it was on campaing, ferchristsake!) and replaced them with their own cronies... now add another fact: that the (small) population of Greece was practically fighting from 1910 to 1922 nonstop, and the incompetence of the people who were charged with the effort to provide logistic support to the overextended front... and maybe you can understand why Greece lost the war (and much more: Asia Minor, where Greeks have been living for 3.000 years uninterrupted!!!).

Kemal, of course, was a much better commander than anyone we had at the moment, but granted, Turks didn't stand a chance in the million if the Greek people could hold their crap together for another election and didn't  vote Venizelos out and Georgios in. Such stupidity, mon dieu...

[edit]

Forgot to add the single point where the Entente was at fault (in not keeping their promises etc.): In the time the Greek army was marching victorious and the civil strife between Ottomans and Kemalists errupted, at this moment when a Greek offensive would've reached not only Ankyra but most probably ...Ephrates, the allies demanded the Greek army to halt. Obviously they didn't want the fledging Greek Democracy to become too strong (and too much of a nuissance - I mean, why remove the Ottomans just to replace them with the Greeks?) so they stopped the advancement at the very moment it should go on. When they "allowed" us to keep on, Kemal had won, consolidated his power and secured ample support from abroad... game over.



Edited by Alkiviades
If you wanna play arrogant with me, you better have some very solid facts to back up that arrogance, or I'll tear you to pieces
Back to Top
DayI View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
  Quote DayI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 09:45
Originally posted by Alkiviades

Kemal, of course, was a much better commander than anyone we had at the moment, but granted, Turks didn't stand a chance in the million if the Greek people could hold their crap together for another election and didn't  vote Venizelos out and Georgios in. Such stupidity, mon dieu...

If i remember right, papulas or pullas whas brightfull commander. He whas the first one who's said "where gonna loose if go further deep in anatolia", but stratigos and his companion convinced the greek king so it whas like 3 to 1 and he accepted.

Greeks didnt stand a chance if our army (ottoman army) whasnt disarmed and some of the generals where fired or killed by sultan or his mastermind damat ferid.

Dont forget Greek army had much more menpower then the Turkish army and whas well equiped (many gifts of the english) in all conditions then the Turkish one.

We where more in danger because people where afraid to wage a war against the Greeks who where declared "holy" by some people in Ottoman empire and also there whas a declaration of ruler company in istanbul "people cant shoot any bullet against a army without the permission of the Caliph/padishah".

Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 13:27

That is why (with the aid of the greatest Greek politician of modern times, Eleftherios Venizelos) they gave us Thrace and Smyrne and let the Greek army (even encourage us, as the Brits did) to sally forth and occupy a much larger area.

Is it me, or are you proud to be the attack dog of the Imperialists? If so, see you at the Ottoman Empire threads.

After this, the French openly (the Italians were already there) and the Brits covert, turned to Kemal, seeing that he was undisputed leader of the ex-Ottomans (so, no election could remove him and he had to live up to his word, unlike Venizelos who was voted out of office and couldn't fulfil his promises to the Entente) and USSR invested heavily on Kemal to gain an ally in the eastern med.

This is utter garbage. Greece is not the centre of the world, mate. In reality, nobody gave a flying f**k about your elections or German kings.

The French made peace with Turkey, because the guerilla war in the Turkish provinces they occupied was going badly. They agreed to leave those provinces alone, in return for securing their occupation of Syria (Turkey leaves them alone). They didn't really help Turkey, but for Greeks, not attacking Turkey is helping Turkey. 

The Italians actually helped Turkey a bit, because Britain wanted to have weak Greece control the E. Med., rather than the Italians. They were pissed.

USSR significantly helped Turkey to keep Imperialists or their pawns away from their south. But this help was nowhere near the Allied help to Greece.

Now, the Brits helping Turkey is utterly ridiculous. They armed the Greeks to the teeth and pointed at Ankara. When the war got bad, and some allies wanted to quit, Brits pushed forward, because they didn't want the Turkish nationalists to set an example for other nations in their empire by defeating the imperialists. Russia was already bad enough. Britain and Greece, it was true love! Until, of course, Turkish nationalists totally defeated the Greeks. Then they had to sue for peace. At which point Greece stated whining that they were not real allies, and they should attack Turkey and take over the lands, and give it to them, as they've been doing for the last century. Even after Lausanne there was tension between Turkey and Britain. Relations improved only before WWII, for obvious reasons. Of course, by the Greek criteria, British hadn't defeated Turkey and handed over the land to them, so this proves they were helping the Turks.

Also, Greek population was not that small, it was about half of Turkey's. Greek army was competent, much fresher than the Turkish one (Turkey had also been fighting non-stop since 1910, and unlike Greece, it really fought in the World War), with better equipment, good generals. They outnumbered Turks in Turkey! Only in heavy artillery (Greek generals had no World War experience, so underestimated heavy artillery, whereas Turkish ones did everything they could to get theirs to the battle) and cavalry (not that useful in WWI) did the Turks have a numerical advantage.

Kemal, of course, was a much better commander than anyone we had at the moment, but granted, Turks didn't stand a chance in the million if the Greek people could hold their crap together for another election and didn't  vote Venizelos out and Georgios in. Such stupidity, mon dieu...

The only way for Greece to take Asia Minor was the time proven way, i.e. Great Powers defeat the Turks and make them give the land over. Otherwise, even if the Greeks have elected Hitler, they would have to swim back home just the same.

In the time the Greek army was marching victorious and the civil strife between Ottomans and Kemalists errupted, at this moment when a Greek offensive would've reached not only Ankyra but most probably ...Ephrates, the allies demanded the Greek army to halt.

As the Turkish saying goes, 'if my aunt had balls, she would be my uncle'. Imperialists did their best, it just wasn't enough.  

Obviously they didn't want the fledging Greek Democracy to become too strong (and too much of a nuissance - I mean, why remove the Ottomans just to replace them with the Greeks?) so they stopped the advancement at the very moment it should go on. When they "allowed" us to keep on, Kemal had won, consolidated his power and secured ample support from abroad... game over.

Yes, it was yet another evil plot of the world against Greece.

Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Feb-2006 at 08:18

Ah, Bey, you had it coming babe...

Is it me, or are you proud to be the attack dog of the Imperialists? If so, see you at the Ottoman Empire threads.

It is just you and only you suga. And while you are at an anti-imperialist row, say... how'd you define a "nation" that is absorbing-ethnic cleansing-deporting-renaming all ethnic groups inside its borders, to create a "Turkish Nation" which never actually existed? I have a couple of words in mind, let's see what you pick

Greece is not the centre of the world, mate. In reality, nobody gave a flying f**k about your elections or German kings.

Now you are being a bloody wanker, aren't you? You claim not to be nationalist, but I think you are even worst than those. With them, one knows where he's standing (in the middle of a sh*thole). With you... one moment a vivid socialist, next moment a grey wolverine... make up your mind, will ya? EVERYBODY gave a f**k about Greek elections and German kings. Claiming otherwise, just makes you look ignorant, stupid and a solid wanker if I might say so.

As I said before, anti-Greek sentiments are not a valid replacement for historical knowledge. For Turkey, taking Asia Minor was "yet another conquest", for us it was an irredeemable loss. That is why we are rather better informed on the incident than you are.

some incidents: In the aftermath of the elections, the French join the Italians and they both ask for a revision of the Sevre treaty and a halt to the aid to Greece (they don't give a f**k #1). Just before Konstantinos was reinstated, the Note of 8th November from the entente to the Greeks (with love) warns that  "Greece will show to be (if we'd reinstate Konstantinos) Incinsere " and that "the Greek people by putting Konstantinos back to the throne, will be probably confirming the hostile acts of Konstantinos (against Entente)" (they don't give a f**k, #2). And the tumbstone: "This incident creates a new, unfavorable, status in the relationships between Greece and the Allies (Entente) and if it happens, we'd  consider ourselves free to take a new course of actions" (they don't give a f**k #3).  The allies halted aid to Greece the day after the referendum that brought Konstantinos back (they don't give a f**k #4). Italy and France openly come closer and closer to Kemal, and France declares that Turkey should not lose any grounds on Asia Minor in December (they don't give a f**k #5).

These are the diplomatics moves only on December... if we go on, I'll need at least a whole page to fully describe the pro-Turk acts of France and Italy and the "neutral" acts of the UK. Of course "they don't give a f**k", do they?

They armed the Greeks to the teeth and pointed at Ankara. When the war got bad, and some allies wanted to quit, Brits pushed forward, because they didn't want the Turkish nationalists to set an example for other nations in their empire by defeating the imperialists. Russia was already bad enough. Britain and Greece, it was true love! Until, of course, Turkish nationalists totally defeated the Greeks.

This could be nominated utter bullsh*t of the year... Britain had abandoned Greece from April 1921 - after the infamous Churchill notam where he asks his prime minister (he was war minister at the time) to change the Sevres treaty in favor of Turkey... yeah, unconditional love between Greece and Turkey  

Of course, by the Greek criteria, British hadn't defeated Turkey and handed over the land to them, so this proves they were helping the Turks.

More mental masturbation and unhistorical bullsh*t... Greece had fought Britain's war ever since 1917. We entered WW1 while nobody had threaten us, we fought USSR in Crimea, we occupied Asia Minor to cover Britain's weak side, so the Brits could easily dissolve the Ottoman state and place puppets to govern the oil-rich areas... we fought their fegging war for them, you silly git. Is it so hard to understand that?

The only way for Greece to take Asia Minor was the time proven way, i.e. Great Powers defeat the Turks and make them give the land over. Otherwise, even if the Greeks have elected Hitler, they would have to swim back home just the same.

Now you show off your real face, you leftist-pretender... Yeah, that's precisely what one can hear in the Grey Wolves assemblies... you've learned your lesson well. It's as relevent with reality as Socialism with your political leanings, but don't let that stop you

As the Turkish saying goes, 'if my aunt had balls, she would be my uncle'. Imperialists did their best, it just wasn't enough.  

That's a Greek saying...

Yes, it was yet another evil plot of the world against Greece.

You've got a serious case of anti-Greek syndrome, suga. Serious, indeed. Get over it and learn to live with us... the cards are on the different side of the table now honey

If you wanna play arrogant with me, you better have some very solid facts to back up that arrogance, or I'll tear you to pieces
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.