Nikos
Agentopoulos
Bei uns Hellenen gibt es so eine ähnliche Angewohnheit.
Bei uns arbeiten mittlerweile nur noch Albaner.
-
Herzlich Willkommen im Balkanforum
Sind Sie neu hier? Dann werden Sie Mitglied in unserer Community.
Bitte hier registrieren
Atatürk ein Verbrecher
- Ersteller HauserK
- Erstellt am
Bei uns Hellenen gibt es so eine ähnliche Angewohnheit.
Bei uns arbeiten mittlerweile nur noch Albaner.
Ts61
Kurpfalz
Das muss am Mokka liegen!
A
Amarok
Guest
Nicht Atatürk sondern eher die Jungtürken, die selbst Atatürk tot sehen wollten waren die Verbrecher. Man sollte sich mal ernsthaft darüber schlau machen. Die gibt es bis heute noch und konkurrieren mit der MHP.
Ich bitte zudem den Thread zu schließen.
Ich bitte zudem den Thread zu schließen.
J
JazzMaTazz
Guest
Und soll die doch Pontisch sein, Ponten sind Griechen.
Du bastelst dir was zusammen. Rede lieber offen über deine faschistische Phobie, als die Opferrolle in der du in diesem Namen ständig baden willst.
Sonne-2012
Top-Poster
Die Jungtürken und Atatürk waren beide Verbrecher, lies die Quellen und gehe auf diese ein.
Wenn du wirklich diskutieren willst dann musst du auch auf die Quellen eingehen.
Danke
Sonne-2012
Top-Poster
Weitere Quelle zu den Verbrechen von Kemal Atatürk
Buch: The Great Betrayal
von
Edward Hale Bierstadt (Executive Secretary, Near East Refugees)
The burning and massacre of Smyrna is described by Bierstadt as follows:
In reviewing the history of the catastrophe of Smyrna, there are several points that stand out clearly.
The Powers were warned of what was going to be done while the Turks were denying that they were going to do it.
What actually happened we know, and it has passed into history. But, knowing what they knew, the Powers made no
attempt to restrain the Turks. If the Allied warships at Smyrna had been ordered by their home governments
to act, there would have been no massacre and Smyrna would not have been burned. The four destroyers of the
United States Navy alone could have saved the situation if they had been allowed to do so. The official answer
to this is that such intervention might have meant war with Turkey. To say that wars have been fought for far
less righteous causes is to beg the question, so we may strike to the root of the matter at once by pointing out
that the Turkish Nationalist Government was in far greater need of friends than foes among the Powers, and that,
if the demand had been made upon her that she conduct war in a civilised manner, she had much more to gain than
to lose by complying. There were no belligerents in Smyrna on the 9th of September. What was done was wanton and
deliberate. Kemal had decided that thenceforth Smyrna should be indisputably a Turkish city, and the shortest way to achieve this was to destroy the Greek, Armenian and European quarters. Also, Kemal had no way of rewarding his
troops except by loot, and it is as traditional with the Turk as with the Mongol that looting is an essential
adjunct of war. Finally, to conceal the traces of widespread loot and massacre, the city was deliberately fired.
The point of view of the Turkish Nationalist Government toward the Allied Powers was one of cynical contempt.
They knew well what the Allies wanted, and they knew that as long as this bait was dangled before their eyes
they were safe from interference. That they were entirely justified in their prognosis is evident from the fact
that within three months after Smyrna had been burned they were able to sit across from the Powers at the conference
table and bargain for economic concessions. While the evidence may be both presumptive and circumstantial it can
scarcely be denied.
Then after standing meekly by while Smyrna razed and the Christian Minorities were massacred or deported, the Powers,
France, Italy, the United States, and to some extent Great Britain, did what they could to whitewash the Turks so far
as they were able to do so. Not one of the Allied governments possessed of the real facts gave them to the public.
The first attempt was to belittle the whole matter; it was denied in the French Chamber of Deputies that there had
been a massacre, and the responsibility for the fire was placed upon the Greeks and Armenians.
The great betrayal; a survey of the near East problem, ... . - Full View | HathiTrust Digital Library | HathiTrust Digital Library
Buch: The Great Betrayal
von
Edward Hale Bierstadt (Executive Secretary, Near East Refugees)
The burning and massacre of Smyrna is described by Bierstadt as follows:
In reviewing the history of the catastrophe of Smyrna, there are several points that stand out clearly.
The Powers were warned of what was going to be done while the Turks were denying that they were going to do it.
What actually happened we know, and it has passed into history. But, knowing what they knew, the Powers made no
attempt to restrain the Turks. If the Allied warships at Smyrna had been ordered by their home governments
to act, there would have been no massacre and Smyrna would not have been burned. The four destroyers of the
United States Navy alone could have saved the situation if they had been allowed to do so. The official answer
to this is that such intervention might have meant war with Turkey. To say that wars have been fought for far
less righteous causes is to beg the question, so we may strike to the root of the matter at once by pointing out
that the Turkish Nationalist Government was in far greater need of friends than foes among the Powers, and that,
if the demand had been made upon her that she conduct war in a civilised manner, she had much more to gain than
to lose by complying. There were no belligerents in Smyrna on the 9th of September. What was done was wanton and
deliberate. Kemal had decided that thenceforth Smyrna should be indisputably a Turkish city, and the shortest way to achieve this was to destroy the Greek, Armenian and European quarters. Also, Kemal had no way of rewarding his
troops except by loot, and it is as traditional with the Turk as with the Mongol that looting is an essential
adjunct of war. Finally, to conceal the traces of widespread loot and massacre, the city was deliberately fired.
The point of view of the Turkish Nationalist Government toward the Allied Powers was one of cynical contempt.
They knew well what the Allies wanted, and they knew that as long as this bait was dangled before their eyes
they were safe from interference. That they were entirely justified in their prognosis is evident from the fact
that within three months after Smyrna had been burned they were able to sit across from the Powers at the conference
table and bargain for economic concessions. While the evidence may be both presumptive and circumstantial it can
scarcely be denied.
Then after standing meekly by while Smyrna razed and the Christian Minorities were massacred or deported, the Powers,
France, Italy, the United States, and to some extent Great Britain, did what they could to whitewash the Turks so far
as they were able to do so. Not one of the Allied governments possessed of the real facts gave them to the public.
The first attempt was to belittle the whole matter; it was denied in the French Chamber of Deputies that there had
been a massacre, and the responsibility for the fire was placed upon the Greeks and Armenians.
The great betrayal; a survey of the near East problem, ... . - Full View | HathiTrust Digital Library | HathiTrust Digital Library
A
Amarok
Guest
Wenn du schon hetzen möchtest, dann tue es bitte richtig. Die Jungtürken hatten es selbst auf Atatürk abgezielt und wollten ihn töten bzw. gegen ihn putschen.
Wenn DU diskutieren möchtest, solltest du DEINE Quellen auch mal wirklich Lesen bzw. auch mal auf Offizielle Quellen zurück greifen und nicht auf selbst geschriebene.
Das von mir gesagte, kannst du überall lesen. Atatürk selbst wird nur ein einziges Verbrechen seitens der fanatisch-Religiösen angehängt und das ist der Mord an bestimmten Hocas. Dies wurde ausschweifend von mir und Blacksea im Bildungssituation in der Türkei-Thread diskutiert. Wer von uns recht hat, dies könnte ihr am Ende selbst entscheiden. Aber das was du schreibst, ist völliger Unsinn.
Afro
"Μην τα βάζ
Alles schön und gut, mag sein dass du recht hast, aber eins wollte ich dir noch sagen Atatürk benutzte Giftgas gegen die Kurden.
Sonne-2012
Top-Poster
Hallo Amarok,
Hetzen ist mir unbekannt, falls du es als Hetze siehst dann kannst du es ja melden.
wir sind im Geschichtsthread, hier werden geschichtliche Themen behandelt dazu gehören auch Quellen, das sind Bücher, Zeitungen und damalige Zeitzeugen.
Ob es dir passt oder nicht, Atatürk hat viele Verbrechen begangen.
Nicht ich schreibe es das sind die damaligen und neueren Quellen zum Thema.
Danke
- - - Aktualisiert - - -
Patrida er hat überhaupt nicht Recht, Atatürk gehört zu den größten Verbrechern, war ja auch Vorbild für Hitler.
A
Amarok
Guest
Diese von dir genannten Zeitzeugen sind alle samt bzw. größtenteils schwindler. Das ist hier ist auch kein Geschichtsthread sondern für jeden bekannt als Hetzthread. Eigentlich sollte dieser Thread aufgrund von falsch Informationen sogar geschlossen werden, da man sich hier nur auf persönliche und nicht relevante bzw. teilweise fragwürdige Quellen bezieht.
Ob es dir passt oder nicht, entweder machst du das ordentlich oder lässt es am Ende sein. Denn jedem ist deine Masche hier sehr gut bekannt und das du vor nichts halt machst. Aber soviel Unsinn von dir zu geben und das auch noch in einem Kontext von dem du keine Ahnung hast, da würde ich dir lieber ein paar Bücher empfehlen wobei dies Türkische, Deutsch-Türkische Bücher die sich auf diesem Gebiet spezialisiert haben.
Atatürk war vieles jedoch war er kein von dir hier hingestellter Völkermörder, das bei weitem nicht. Das weiß aber auch jeder, der sich über ihn schlau macht.
- - - Aktualisiert - - -
Oh gott
Einige Kurden kämpften Seite an Seite mit ihm. Bestes Beispiel Ismet Inönü(Kurde) der die Griechen in Izmir schlug.