0
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,181 Given: 1,363 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 29,829 Given: 24,541 |
Today it is praised but not under Ataturk's rule. Oh, so you deny that Ataturk himself tried to erase anything that links them to the Seljuks and the Ottomans? Gg, you should ask Petros to give you the references on what the man used to do back in the 20's and the early 30's whenever someone said something that is positive about the Ottomans back in the day. Again, the Seljuks were a Turko-Persianate empire, and Ataturk himself hated anything that links them to the middle east. So, please, stop bullshitting me that Kemalism see these Turkic empires that were heavily adopted the Middle Eastern cultures as normal since the fundamental ideas of Kemalism was to fully westernise Turkey by cleansing anything that links them to the oriental world, not the opposite. We got to hand it to Gezim and The Ghostface though since they follow Kemalism to the fullest rather than compromising the ideology as what people like you are doing here. Don't make me laugh.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,722 Given: 1,300 |
Atatürk didnt erase anything about Seljuks and Ottomans. He succesfully erased anything that linked us to MENA culture. Even though criticized, time showed Atatürk was right. Especially after the current influxes from MENA to Turkey, people understand a lot better how Atatürk was right.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 4,971 Given: 7,963 |
They did not erase anything, the only thing they erased was the Ottoman dynasty, which was nothing more than a British puppet at that time. The Seljuks are highly respected by everyone in Turkey. Our education system has been praising them (except for late Ottomans) from the beginning.
Why the hell are you associating Ghostface (=Gizem) with Kemalism? He is not "Kemalist", not at all LOL. The only thing he cares about is lifestyle and shit, he represents a very small segment of Turkish population, true Kemalists are hardcore nationalists. You can't even tell random secular people (like Ghostface) and Kemalists apart.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1 Given: 0 |
lmao @Golden
Egyptians were literally poor and ignorant until they got rid of the Afghan-like Turks
it was France and his highness Napoleaon who made Egypt developed and modern
they brought the printer with them
Turks made sure to leave people in poverty and illiteracy so they don't revolt
and the country came back to where it was under the Turks, thanks to the Islamization and scum brotherhood and Salafists
Copts will rise up one day and clean that filth
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,722 Given: 1,300 |
Last edited by Böri; 11-14-2017 at 09:39 PM.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1 Given: 0 |
lmfao are ya on drugs or somethung, STFU before you make fun of youself
you didn't have an Alphabet even, you had to adopt the Arabs alphabet. . pathetic, you remind us of the sub Saharan niggers Taheee
we have kicked your grandfathers azzes out of Egypt over a century before that actual fall of your savage Sultans
you built nothing but ugly mosques that teach terrorism and if there any leader with balls today he would have demolished them with pride
but it seems it will be only Copts who are going to claim this country back and certainly we will exterminate and slaughter until the last one of the brainless muzzies
Thumbs Up |
Received: 4 Given: 1 |
Egyptian civilization was at its highest and most advanced during the construction of the pyramids. No one remembers Egypt civilization after it was conquered many times.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 13,489 Given: 13,022 |
Mamlukes had little to do with Anatolian Turks lol
My genetic results
1 50% Azeri_Dagestan +50% BedouinA @ 2.879975
One nation and one destiny
Thumbs Up |
Received: 646 Given: 214 |
Tulunids were not Qipchaq. Tulun was of Toquz Oghuz descent. Name and surname Tulun and Tulum are still common in northern Xinjiang.
But one should bear in mind that Qipchaq/Kipchak is a collective image like Scythian, or Türk in medieval ages. Initially ethnonym Qipchaq denoted a distinct people but during medieval times started carrying a collective meaning like Türk or Scythian. Qipchaks in the east were distinct from the ones in the west and did not constitute a single people or entity. Same goes for Cumans, separate stock, different people.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks