Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lost Glory of Ottomans
The Washington Times ^ | 11/12/01 | Brian Murphy - AP

Posted on 11/12/2001 9:03:35 AM PST by TimSkalaBim

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:35:58 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

ATHENS About 130 years ago, as Ottoman rulers struggled to hold together their crumbling Muslim empire, a noted writer and political adviser returned from Central Europe with a gloomy report.

"I passed through the lands of the infidels. I saw cities and mansions," wrote Ziya Bey. "I wandered in the realm of Islam. I saw nothing but ruins."


(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: Defiant
foreign relations FOR A CONSERVATIVE means you do not support the creation of empires nor allow your nation to become one.

You may fool yourself with the conservative tag, but only yourself.

21 posted on 11/13/2001 11:55:26 AM PST by Pericles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Defiant
you're no Pericles, you're a Serb. Quit trying to usurp the glory of Greece.

I am not a Serb (not that there is anything wrong with that).

22 posted on 11/13/2001 12:01:46 PM PST by Pericles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pericles
You're not a very good student of history, Pericles. Where did you get the notion that conservative = No empire? Do you recall what the original 13 colonies did to the North American continent? They went out and conquered the part they didn't already own (attacking Mexico and numerous Indian tribes in the process) France, Spain and Mexico sold chunks of land for a pittance rather than have it taken forcibly for nothing. The US soon created a sphere of influence in the part of the world where there could be a regional threat (ever heard of the Monroe Doctrine, circa 1820?).

It is actually the essence of conservatism to create and defend an empire. Ask Winston Churchill. It is liberalism to dismantle one (ask the post-war Labor party), and it is folly and pacifism to refuse to take charge in some fashion of nations from which you are threatened with mass destruction. As we all know from George Orwell, refusal to act in the face of such threats is objectively to favor the other side.

23 posted on 11/13/2001 12:10:07 PM PST by Defiant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Pericles
Whatever you are, you are no Pericles, either. Alexander was a pretty conservative fellow, at least in the sense of desiring to preserve and foster Greek values. Look at the empire he created. Last fellow to conquer and hold Afghanistan, as I recall.
24 posted on 11/13/2001 12:12:13 PM PST by Defiant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Defiant
It was called Bactria back then.
25 posted on 11/13/2001 12:25:05 PM PST by Pericles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Defiant
It was called Bactria back then.
26 posted on 11/13/2001 12:25:16 PM PST by Pericles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: American in Israel
You say that like there is something wrong with a good public amputation. Aren't we rather high on ourselves!

What I would like to hear about is the excesses in which the Saudis live, and how that money is distributed. My understanding is that one, you have to come from the right family, and two, the controlling family has so much money it doesn't know what to do with it. Had a friend who grew up in several oil countries, and while a teenager in UAE, he had a friend who was wealthy prince, and their family had stooopid stuff like gold plated machine guns, gold plated commode seats, and monster truck type Mercedes coupes.

Even though that is kind of the absurd, it illustrates the thinking of the Islamic world in general: the Palestinians, and others deemed displaced or disenfranchised, must be compensated. But not by the Islam, the Arabians, or the Persians, but the West. Same goes for Israel: Palestinians deserve a homeland, but not in Yemen, Saudi, or any other Middle Eastern state, it must come from Israel. Although this thinking is irrational and illogical, and intellectually dishonest, it continues to shape our world.

27 posted on 11/13/2001 12:38:59 PM PST by job
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pericles
Bactia was only one of the parts of Afghanistan that Alexander conquered. The part where Herat is was part of Persia proper, as I recall. The part where Kandahar is was tied in to an Indian kingdom. Some people think the name is derived from Alexander (Iskander in Afghanistan) but most now believe that Kandahar derives from the Indian "Gandahara". Alexander encountered Kafir tribes, too.

Bactrians were an Iranian tribe closely related to the Persians culturally and linguistically. I think Roxanne was Bactrian. Iranians were originally a nomadic people of the steppes. Some migrated south, to India (the Aryans), and some to Iran (Persians, Medes). Some migrated west (the Scythes). There were Iranian tribes in western China. Bactrians were a tribe that held the mountains in northern Iran and Afghanistan, and many of the lush farmland in the valleys. An ancient Northern Alliance if you will.

As I said, Alexander was a conservative. He started out to defeat the Persians to punish them for an invasion that occurred about 100 years early, and which still wounded Greek sensibilities, to free the Greek cities of Anatolia, and to deter future Persian aggression. Just like we protect ourselves from future aggression, by pacifying the lands of our enemies.

I looked up some of your past posts, and you have a keen interest in Balkan affairs, for whatever reason. I don't know if searches go back far enough, but you would see from my posts how harshly I criticized the Clinton Administration during the Serbian air strikes for doing a number of stupid things, including making enemies of former friends, supporting Islam in the heart of Europe, and using the US military to deflect memories from the sting of impeachment. I think that part of this current campaign will involve rooting out militant Islam from the Balkans, and reforming immigration policy in Germany, France, Britain as well as in the US. Nothing is stupider than creating a 5th column in our own back yards.

28 posted on 11/13/2001 12:42:55 PM PST by Defiant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Defiant
I do not question your morality or intelligence (at least I hope I didn't). I only feel that trying to create an "empire" is not in America's interest.
29 posted on 11/13/2001 1:06:24 PM PST by Pericles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Pericles
I took offense at your characterization of my position as one that defined me as not a conservative. I think you use that word in a sense that is incorrect in current parlance. I have no problem with you disagreeing with me on the subject itself, but I think you misuse political terms that do in fact mean something.
30 posted on 11/13/2001 1:10:36 PM PST by Defiant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Defiant; Pericles
"Free trade": (1) finding a bigger profit margin through payoffs to foreign officials, and getting stuff manufactured overseas where there is a bigger margin and more room to hide the margin in offshore bank accounts. (2) Convincing the sheeple that they are getting cheaper stuff in return for exporting their jobs and money. (3) Creating a situation where the nation is not economically self-sufficient, and at therefore at risk to political instability in places with unpronounceable names.

"New Economy": (1) Giving U.S. Government backed loans to political contributors who want to export American jobs and money. (2) Convincing those who lost their jobs that they will be retrained for non-existent dot.com jobs, then forgetting about them. (3) Giving government grants to lefty Econ professors in sandals to tell us how this is good for America. (4) Its all OK as long as we continue to import lots of oil and otherwise continue the status quo.

"Engagement": (1) Convincing the sheeple that the situation that exported their jobs and money must be protected through the meddling of incompetent American beaurocrats, think tankers, and political appointees in the national affairs of places with unpronounceable names. (2) Maintaining the energy status quo at all costs, because Exxon and the Saudi family are "much more important" than the peons that can't find a gas station that sells biomass-based fuels or anything made from natural gas. (3) When (1) fails to achieve the objective, call in the military, or if Congress won't buy-in, NATO or the UN. Do it in a way that gives the sheeple nightly pyrotechnics on CNN until they are convinced the job is done. Under no circumstances should anything be done, such as taking out Hamas or Hezbollah, or anything else that might upset the Saudis. Include a nationally sanctioned group pander to islam.

31 posted on 11/13/2001 4:04:26 PM PST by Hamiltonian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TimSkalaBim
The most illustrious Ottoman leader, Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent, declared himself Islam's supreme caliph, or Islamic leader.

Incorrect. Suleyman's father, Selim the Grim (love that name), declared himself caliph after conquering Egypt and Arabia in 1517.

32 posted on 11/13/2001 4:20:59 PM PST by denydenydeny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson