i'm turkish, our greatest history went to Austria gates. Europan gates. And i want yours idea? what are you thinking for Turks? :duel:
Printable View
i'm turkish, our greatest history went to Austria gates. Europan gates. And i want yours idea? what are you thinking for Turks? :duel:
Eh, what am I thinking for Turks? They are the masters of the doner kebab on a Friday night.
i honstly think the Turks are the best muslims of all, I'd love to live in Turkey, specially Istanbul
Welcome to the Org Turkish Sipahi :balloon2: :balloon2:
The Turks are renowned for their fierce fighting spirit and toughness. In MTW they have some of the best hybrid troops, archers who can fight, like the Janissary Infantry. They also have one of the best polearm units in the game, the Janissary Heavy Infantry, who can tear through a unit of cavalry quickly.
Have fun with the game and enjoy the forums
ichi :bow:
The Turks: Greatest military power before the US and possbily Germany(WWII), though strategic mistakes and certain technological limitations make me unsure of the second one (Kar 98 was old by then, attacking Russia, supporting Japan).
Awesome troop selection, ranges from heavy infantry to light skirmishers and heavy knight-like cavalry to light steppe style mounted archers. Gotta love guns as well.
Also the Turks were generally tolerant of other peoples and religions and even today Turkey is a great place IMO.
EDIT: Woops. Welcome Turkish Sipah and enjoy the forums! ~:cheers:
The Turks (well the western ones as far as I know) are the nicest people of the Mediterranean.
~Wiz ~:cheers:
Kill everything.
What I think of the Turks? Well, it's like a roller-coaster. Great military power with astonishing dynamics for a great while, but also one of the most degenerated nations ever at the fall of the Ottoman Empire. At the same time that it is one of the more secular places in the middle east, it is also a country of regular humanitarian catastrophies, with a pitch-black record of ethnical cleansing from even a couple of decades before the Armenian Holocaust which was on the same level of evil as the one that would later be performed by Nazi Germany, complete with mass gassing of children. Half of the armenian population of Turkey were massacred, it is considered the second largest and best documented genocide, and sadly, it's completely denied by the Turkish government. The holocaust in Germany was worse, but at least the germans have taken their share of the blame and undergone a collective catharsis afterwards, trying to come to terms with the bloody stains on their history. Turkey, however, hasn't. That, together with the continuous persecution of Kurds and other minorities makes modern day Turkey anything but a place to admire for me, you don't even have to throw in the facts that prisoners are tortured to death on a regular basis or the invasion of Cyprus. So yes, I got a bit surprised that anyone would call current Turkey "a great place". Guess they are not a kurd. Or an armenian. Or a greek-cypriot. Or a political dissident. Or...
So while I've met quite a few nice turks, current Turkey is far from something nice IMHO.
(great faction in MTW, though. Massed formations of troops that can both fire arrows and fight at least decently at melee makes for a kick-ass army, and they usually get great troops from their jihads. Also, the Middle East has some of the best territories when it comes to finances, giving them an easily achieved power base)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_holocaust
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurds#In_Turkey
My knowledge and opinion of the Turks is generally limited to the fact that they're fun to play as in Medieval, and that they should be crushed as quickly as possible if you're anyone else--especially the Eggies or the Byz. ~;)
Being a Byzantophile, my historical opinion of them is not very good. However, I have never known any Turks.
I'm also a Byzantophile, and I also have a quite bad opinion about the Turks....
But, I've met Turks, and they're friendly and hospitaller....
I think the Egyptian caliphate was more awesome, they fought off the Mongols and built loads of universities and represented a large chunk of arabic culture. The Ottomans generally didn't do much for history, except play the colonisation game with the rest of europe and annoy eastern europeans. Militarily though they did great, they were the first to use cannons effectively, Janissaries and Sipahis are by far the most elite middle eastern troops that have ever existed and they started off as an obscure tribe which managed to tear down an empire and turn Byzantium into Turkey.
In doubt wether to move this to the front/backroom or the Monastery.
Expecting more historical discussion, Monastery it is.
Turks as whole group (not as a nationality) were very interesting. I am more interested in the Turks that stayed on the steppes such as the Qipchaqs, Khazars, and many many others, but they all seemed to have the same fighting spirit and martial superiority when it came to horse archery.
The Turks that formed the kingdoms that evauntually formed Turkey, the Ottomans, were farther away from their nomadic roots. More infantry, and less horse archers (as the Jannisaries showed), but they were still certaintly good horsemen, and still had the marshal audor (for a while) of their nomadic predecessors.
Including the Maltese and the corsicans ?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
.
I have enough of them in life, don't need them here at the ORG! :furious3:
Joke. ~;) Welcome to the ORG. :medievalcheers:
Do I know you sir? ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by King Henry V
.
As I am Greek, I 'll probably be a bit prejudiced against the Turks, but I'll try to be as neutral as possible. First of all, the Turks were the military race of Islam, while the Arabs (Egyptians and Persians) were the cultural race. Most Turkish sultans didn't even know to read their holy book, the qum-ran, because they never learned arab, even though they knew how to declare Jihad against Christians...
The Turks jumped out of the steppe a fine morning and decided that their fate, their reason to be, was to conquer the eastern Roman Empire, which ment to become the Empire's imperial race by overthrowing the Greeks who have been the imperial race since the time of emperor Konstantine I.
The truth is that we (the Greeks), have finally got to realize by the end of the 11th century, that being the imperial race is more of a disanvantage than it is a privilege, and that the future belonged to National States, not to empires. The Turks never realized that. They came to Europe in 1453 with horses and carriages, and they left Europe 5 centuries ago with the same horses and carriages... No progress, no nothing.
Fine militants they were, but only militants, their empire cannot even dream to reach the glory of the millenium-lasted Byzantine Empire, the last one to actually deserve the title of the Empire.
They're cool, I know a few from various places, nice and friendly ~:)
Welcome here!
Do you want answers about history or present time?
Good guys. Poland had a friend in Turkey for a long time and there was hardly any hatered between our nations. Of course many people know about all those Polish-Turkish wars, but these were mostly because of some over-ambitious Ottoman leaders who were 'encouraged' to learn never to annoy our country in several battles ~;) :charge: ~D
About the Turks in this forum - there are very helpful, reliable and you can count on their promises. ~:)
Don't you think Mouzafphaerre ~;)
Regards Cegorach :duel:
Present day Turkey? It will be a bit of a worry if the secular tradition insisted on by Ataturk is overthrown by Islamic parties, certainly.
Should Turkey join the EU? Alas, I have to say until her GDP per head, basic legal structure and so on, are more aligned with Europe, I would have to say no. However I would hope that with trading links and other support the EU could help Turkey to a position where that is possible.
Lets face it it would put the wind up the Americans for a start.
I don't know all that much about historical Turkey, I gather that the Ottoman empire was no worse than any other, with all due respect I have to say I am glad the Austrians turned it back to the Balkans, and that, coupled with the fact that Lawrence of Arabia had a rather nasty experence in a Turkish jail, more or less sums up my knowledge.
Welcome to the Org.
what do Turks call themselves?
seeing as the Europeans called nearly all steppe cultures Tatars or Turks, they just ended up accepting that name
two things :Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocatus Sanctis Sepulchris
1. The Persians are not Arabs
2. The turks have control on European land even today (very small one indeed)
:book:
Never met them, so I am hesitant to include them in my not-quite-perfect opinion of certain Western Mediterranean peoples. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
Advocatus Sanctis Sepulchris: I wholly disagree. The Byzantine Empire was a shadow, a very sad shadow, of its former self when the Ottomans launched the final assault upon it. When the Ottomans took over what had once been part of the ancient eastern Roman empire, they reinvigorated it in a way that the decrepid old empire never could have after 1204. There were men that were capable, willing and worthy -- Manuel II Palaeologus comes to mind almost immediately -- but they were simply unable.
Take into account what the beating heart of the old empire was: Constantinople. What was Constantinople in the late Byzantine empire? A mirror of the state of affairs. In that sense, its inhabitants numbered no more than 10,000, it was robbed of all trade, its people were demoralized and tired, and all the while, the nobles and other potentates of the city plotted ceaselessly over nothing -- i.e. whatever remained of the empire.
The Turks took that sad state of affairs and blew life into it. The city of Istanbul of the 16th century was one of the greatest cities in the world, just like it had been in past ages. The Turks created a beautiful culture with great interest in knowledge and the arts (although it must be said some arts were ignored, such as the composing of music). Istanbul may not be the greatest city in the world now (albeit it is one of the largest, and the only to span two continents), but it is a wonderful city and I prefer it to Rome, and find it equal to Rotterdam -- which is quite a feat.
~Wiz ~:cheers:
nice bait :balloon2:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
what kind of question is that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turkish_Sipahi
hmm.... interesting smilie too.. almost got me..
By the way whats the meaning of this thread?
Salaam, Sipāhī ~:)
:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by professorspatula
Not quite. There was first the Gok "Blue" Turks who took over Central Asia and Transoxia. Then they split into the Eastern and Western Khanates, who had little to do with the Byzantines, as the Sassanids were in between them. They were broken by the Arab invasion, then they split into many tribes. Most stayed on the steppe. Only evantually did Seljuq take his tribe and settle in Asia Minor. So they hardly one day decided to take over the Byzantines, as most Turks had no intrest in the Byzantines. Only one tribe (well, then Osman's tribe...) wanted to, take over the Byzantines. And that was only after the breaking up of the larger Turkish Empire.Quote:
The Turks jumped out of the steppe a fine morning and decided that their fate, their reason to be, was to conquer the eastern Roman Empire, which ment to become the Empire's imperial race by overthrowing the Greeks who have been the imperial race since the time of emperor Konstantine I.
Wiz, Orda, feel free to correct my inacuracies, I tried as best as I could to explain how it was, but it is a bit confusing trying to explain the difference between the Turks who occupied what present day Turkey is around, and the Turkish people in general...
How is it bait? It is certaintly a very good interpratation of history. You may not agree, but I see no reason why anyone would be offended, or feel baited.Quote:
nice bait :balloon2:
Indeed, the Byzantine army, such as it was, would never have been as good as it was without the Turks to support them, and influence them. Indeed, at the end of Constantinople, many prefered the rule of the Turks to the Western Catholics.
The Turks were instremental in bringing much advance to Central Asia, the Middle East and Europe. Their military styles were superior to their enemies, and their art and style of dressing was seen in very many places.
I 'm a greek too. It's tough for as to look at turks with neutral eye. Despite this, I'd like to give a bright side of turks, in addition that Wizard quoted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocatus Sanctis Sepulchris
In the last centuries of Byzantine empire, the population ratio of the state was dropping. This fact demostrates the vast poverty of the inhabitants. The feudal system was turning anachronistic, the continuous conflict between the imperial goverment and the regional nobles have led to a non-stop increasing of taxes, which had been collected from both sides, in purpose to fund their military.
The turkish conquest, introduce a new system in feudal Europe the IIRC "Eastern". A strong central goverment (High Gate), non powerful local governors appointed by sultan and viziers, and local administrators like mayors, which were often elected by people. This led, after many centuries, to a population boost in the former byzantine provinces, showing the decrease of poverty. :book:
PS
Welcome to the .org Turkish_Sipahi ~:wave:
1) I used the word "Arabs" to describe all the non-turkish Muslim races. It isn't very accurate, but it is also not all that wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
2) The turks have immence control on european soil today.... Do not forget that Asia Minor was under christian authority untill 1071, wich means it has been christian (and so:european) more time than it has been muslim.
BUT I have used the word "europe" by terms of population, so the turks have been forced to abandon (almost all) the territories inhabitated by europeans(="Europe")
Have no doubt, turkish dresscode was Arabian-style, their stateship Byzantine-made, their fighting skills kurdish-powered (remember Saladin).Quote:
Originally Posted by Steppe Merc
You should read some United Nations GA Resolutions, and then tell me whether the Turks are the nicest people on the mediterrainian.. Or you can ask ask the Cypriots.. Boy, do they know turkish kindness..... :hanged:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
You obviously don't know any Turks. Do I care much for their politics? Yes, enough to be very careful in regard of their wanting to enter the EU. But do I care enough for their politics to point out each and every Turk as barbaric and evil? No.
Open your eyes, if you dare to -- I know Turks from both the west (Edirne, Istanbul) and from the east (Trabzon); developed Turkey (west) and undeveloped, agricultural Turkey (Anadolu, Trabzon, east); and I can easily say they beat any other Mediterranean people hands down, and I know. They just have that great South American latino vibe that no other Mediterranean people has. And, oh, I've lived in South America and the Caribbean half my life, hell, I was born there, so I know what a latino vibe is. ~:)
Please, do not be biased towards people from another culture. It is the lack of this which puts Turks on number one amongst Mediterraneans for me. Although it must be said that Turks from the country (Anadolu, Trabzon) are far more prone to such activity than Turks from the western, developed part of Turkey.
Life is too short to spend hating people based on prejudice rather than experience, my friend.
The historical debate will come later... I have a birthday to enjoy and an EB preview to post first.
~Wiz
Dresscode, incorrect. Most Turks continued to wear the kaftan that they wore on the steppe, and their armor was also steppe style. Some of the upper classes adopted Arabic styles, but most of the horsearchers would have dressed the same as their brethren still on the steppe.Quote:
Have no doubt, turkish dresscode was Arabian-style, their stateship Byzantine-made, their fighting skills kurdish-powered (remember Saladin).
Statesmenship, well each Turkish government was different. As for the Kurds, no way in hell. The Turks were excellent warriors, and again, not all moved into Asia Minor! They were excellent warriors before Sala Al Hadin took over for a brief time, and continued to be. I don't know how the hell the Kurds have much of anything to do with the Turk's military powers...
And I have never understood why people are so close minded about the history of a piece of land that they live on.
I would guess that Turkish Sipahi was asking for thoughts on Turkish military. The political arguements that have followed are Backroom material, not the greatest place for debate on the Org.
The Turks, whether settled or nomadic have a long, enduring history. IMO, I think the spread of Islam robbed them of their culture somewhat but was probably a factor in their military success
......Orda
How can u be so sure I don't know any Turks? The last 4 years I ve been 5 times in Turkey, not that this is any of your business, and I met a bunch of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
U obviously don't know what the words invasion, occupation army, refugees, violation of international law and human rights mean. For you "this is all politics"; well it is not. It is every-day life for 200.000 Cypriots, not to mention Kurds and Armenians, and you 're talking about "latino-vibe" s***. As long as they are latino, they are fine people, is that so? Even though most of them, not all of them, agree with northern cyprus occupation. And what do you say about this? "Je m'en fou, this is all politics, they are latino, let's party!!" ~:cheers: I m not debating any longer with a man who thinks latino-vibe does good for all wrong. Or thinks that another nation's suffering is "JUST politics", for crying out loud....
Happy birthaday thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
Enough. Topic closed.