i know its a stupid idea but there are people who live in Turkey today who are native to the land but dont have any rights in it e.g. Kurds, they were born there and thier acestors lived there before the City of Sumeria, that is more than 5000 years ago. some say they are the most ancient people in the world who have continuasly lived in the same land for the past 10000 years. but today Turks who have moved there no longer than 500 years ago claim it thier land and have forced these people to change and speak Turkish language at the point of the sword. this is a very sad thing in my opinion. i think those people should live in freedom. i would like to know what is your opinion? i think the same goes for all the people that have been invaded too, they should all be given thier rightfull freedom which god has blessed them with.
2007-03-25
11:45:57
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Arts & Humanities
➔ History
lickity you have a good point, i understand what you are saying, but not all nations are like USA, in America people have rights, at least today you dont expect to be discriminated against for speaking a different language, looking different from everyone else etc..
but sometimes clever and usefull people vanish simply becouse of political interests, they are not even given a chance to give it thier best shot. that makes away for erational people and governments to rise. its in the interest of one nation but not so good for many others.
2007-03-25
11:58:30 ·
update #1
reason No1. KUrds are very good friends of USA. Proove_ Iraq.
reason No2. Turky is only a good friend with USA while USA is providing them with money and political interests, when USA needs Turkeys help, they will show the middle finger. proove Iraq. (they prevented US army to cross over to Iraq throgh Turky).
i belive Kurds can be a strong power in time, i do not suggest the government and people of turkey suffering in any way, but the truth is both of those two things in Turkey are under the Controll of the Military power. so much for thier so called Democrasy.
2007-03-25
12:22:24 ·
update #2
i am suprised some people think that turks are actually heros, its funny how they have forgoten about the jenocide of the Armenians, sloughtering Romanins on so on. they have a blody history. however my point is not that, i just wanted to know if those native people including Kurds, (not only kurds) have rights to be free, clearly some people dont, maybe we should take thier freedom away and see how they feel.
as answer for how long turks been in turky, they invaded it around 1071, maybe its more than 500 but nothing compairing to 10000.
and finally Kurds are not an indo european people, thats one of thier ancestors, thier main ones are Assyrians, Medians and Gutians being the oldest, its the Gudians are around 10000 years old, other ancestors of the Kurds are Greeks, Romans etc...
the only reason i mention USA here is only becouse someone blamed it on poletics and not having good links with the super powers, thats why i mentioned it.
2007-03-28
09:22:22 ·
update #3
oh and Lekkerdi please do Fu*k-off. your answer means nothing becouse clearly you are turkish and you are narrow minded. there is nothing wrong with my question. you are just interprating it wrong. as you can see many clever people think its a good question. i dont mind criticism (becouse i am not Turkish) but you dont even know what i am talking about, so be quiet.
2007-03-28
09:40:44 ·
update #4
This is an *interesting* question. Does the length of time a people have lived in an area give them a greater right than another people to live there unmolested? No. Refer to Israel/Palestine. Prove to me which ethnic group has been there "longer."
Do people have the right to govern themselves? As an American, I have to say "yes." If the Kurds are trying to participate in Turkish government and are being shut down and oppressed, then they have a right to armed revolt for the creation of a Kurdish state. Just as the Irish had the right to revolt against the English, and the Texans had a right to revolt against the Mexicans.
Should the world consist of nations defined by little ethnic enclaves? This leads to fighting, because people who don't speak the same language simply don't communicate well, and misunderstandings happen. Mature societies should be able to coexist under governments that protects the rights of *all* who live under them...
2007-03-25 11:56:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dr_Adam_Bricker 3
·
2⤊
4⤋
Throughout history, land has always belonged to those that possess it. There are no other criteria. Therefore, I do not consider it valid to claim that the Kurds have more right to it because they dominated the land 5,000 years ago. According to your logic, most countries in the world today would have to yield power to some secondary people within the country.
Having said that, I challenge your numbers. The Kurds are believed to have arrived in the area with the Indo-European invasion of 3,000 years ago.
2007-03-25 14:41:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by Fred 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Regrettably, you can't reason with the Turks, it is not only the Kurds that they subdued, the Armenians have suffered a holocaust in their hands, they killed 1 million Armenians in an effort to have Armenia become part of Turkey. Due to Turkey's important trategic position, the U.S. looks the other way when Turkey violates human rights (and this is a Turkish specialty).
Turkey, has the second largest army in the world, and its so called democracy, is manipulated by the military behind the scenes. I wish that soon the Kurds will gain their independence from Turkey.
2007-03-25 12:06:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Kurdistan, as it has been pleaded many times before, would not only be eastern Turkey, but also parts of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Armenia.
Basically, since the middle ages, there are three powerblocks in the middle east: a turkic, iranian and arabian/egyptian one. With Iraq and Syria as a buffer zone to all. Israel came into the picture only recently (60 years ago).
The disolution of Iraq gives the Kurds a chance to create Kurdistan at last. (They would form a nice buffer between Turkey and Iran. However, they would not be able to stand between Arabia and Iran.)
However, with Turkey a NATO-member and EU-candidate memberstate...it's just not going to happen.
With Israel beeing an american ally and pretty powerfull on it's own; Arabia controlling allot of oil and stocks in the USA; and Egypt beeing fairly stable and controlling the Suez canal...
the only worry of the big powers is Iran.
Turkey can handle Iran on its own. It's Arabia that's scared off them. Kurdistan just wouldn't be able to provide a bufferzone.
Yet another reason why it's not going to happen.
Personally, i would prefer them to get allot of autonomy, but without a country of their own.
2007-03-25 12:12:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Blame the British. They screwed everything up in the Middle East after the Ottoman Empire fell following WWI. I don't have anything against Jews, but couldn't you say the same thing about Israel. The Palestinians have been there continuously as opposed to the Jews, but the West wants to keep Israel, so they will keep it. Unless some major Western powers want to rearrange Turkey, nothing will change.
2007-03-25 11:54:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by invincible 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
read below, (Korean war)
"4500 soldiers in the middle of the firing line have known how to create miracle. The sacrifices of the Turks will eternally remain in our minds." - Washington Tribune
"The courageous battles of the Turkish Brigade have created a favorable effect on the whole United Nations Forces." - Time
"The surprise of the Korean battles were not the Chinese but the Turks. It is impossible at this moment to find a word to describe the heroism which the Turks have shown in the battles." - Abent Post
"The Turks have shown in Kunuri a heroism worthy of their glorious history. The Turks have gained the admiration of the whole world through their glorious fighting in the battles." - Figaro
"The Turks who have been known throughout history by their courage and decency, have proved that they have kept these characteristics, in the war which the United Nations undertook in Korea." - Burner - U.S. Congressman
"There is no one left who does not know that the Turks, our valuable allies, are hard warriors and that they have accomplished very great feats at the front." - Claude Pepper, U.S. Senator
"I now understand that the vote I gave in favor of assistance to Turkey was the most fitting vote I gave in my life. Courage, bravery and heroism are the greatest virtues which will sooner or later conquer. In this matter, I know no nation superior to the Turks." - Rose - U.S. Senator
"While the Turks were for a long time fighting against the enemy and dying, the British and Americans were withdrawing. The Turks, who were out of ammunition, affixed their bayonets and attacked the enemy and there ensued a terrible hand to hand combat. The Turks succeeded in withdrawing by continuous combat and by carrying their injured comrades on their backs. They paraded at Pyongyang with their heads held high." - G.G. Martin - British Lieutenant General
"The Turkish forces have shown success above that expected in the battles they gave in Korea." - General Collings - Commander US Army
"We owe the escape of thousands of United Nations troops out of a certain encirclement to the heroism of the Turkish soldiers. The Turkish soldiers in Korea have added a new and unforgettable page of honor to the customs and legends of heroism of the Turkish nation." - Emanuel Shinwell - U.K. Minister of Defense
"The heroic soldiers of a heroic nation, you have saved the Eighth Army and the IX'th Army Crops from encirclement and the 2nd Division from destruction. I came here today to thank you on behalf of the United Nations Army." - General Walton H. Walker, Commander, Eighth Army
"The Turks are the hero of heroes. There is no impossibility for the Turkish Brigade." - General Douglas MacArthur - United Nations Forces Commander in Chief
2007-03-28 01:51:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
one million out of each and every 4 Christians in the international are Catholic. however the Catholic Church has replaced over the years, purely like the numbers have. some Catholic churches are old-shaped, and a few are extra cutting-part and lenient. that's why maximum folk brake off into Protestant churches. As for the "no faith" human beings, some people who have faith in God elect to not call it a "faith". have you ever heard the asserting "Jesus is my savior. not my faith." It distinctly lots skill worship God the way the bible says to, not the way guy-made non secular communities assist you recognize to. As for the atheist, extra all and sundry is transforming into too clever, and thinking technology is the main to each thing.
2016-11-23 15:18:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
who is the rightful owners? Just because you migrate anywhere doesn't make you an owner. People have to take care of the land, establish a place,town or whatever to survive. When enough others disagree, they revolt or overthrow the old way and start anew. ( and so on, and so on )
2007-03-25 11:53:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by unknown in illinois 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
you really must compare them to the native americans to begin to understand how the world operates. obviously, you haven't a clue.
2007-03-25 11:50:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sad story. You are right, but who will give you your right?
2007-03-25 11:49:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋