Some rambling morons have been baiting me over in OD and here in the Library regarding Turks and Ottomans.
Refer to this threadhttp://www.heavengames.com/cgi-bin/forums/display.cgi?action=ct&f=1,338806,,allfor an explanation of why I am posting this....I've snapped!
You blithering buffoons who think your verbal diarrhea on world politics means anything to someone who is obviously superior to your walnut sized brains. You clamber for the truth in your pathetic rhetoric and so called intellectual debates and yet you are unable to handle the truth.
Here is your beloved Turkey or Ottomans you spineless godless heathens:
From as long as currency was used the center of the world has always been the Middle East the center of Eur-Asia. That Eurasian landmass has been given many names but rather than drag the Greek references into the affair such as calling Turkey the Anchor. Let us look at your defiled Germanic bloodlines for answers as to what is Turkey or Anatolia.
Greece: Naval and Military shield for Europe launching point for Eastbound advance.
Spain/Morocco: Control over the Straights of Gibraltar
Egypt/Israel: Control over the Seuz Canal. Launching points for African Domination.
Turkey: Control over the Black Sea, Control over middle East via Land.
Azerbajah/Georgia: Controlling North South passage between Black and Caspian Sea.
South Korea: Shield against Japan
Vietnam: South East Asia and Chinese control
Afghanistan: The approximate central pivot point of the Euroasian Landmass. Lodged Between Iran and China. (pakistan and India to the south.
others include Panama canal, Cuba etc but are non Eurasian. China and Russia were the only two other nations on that landmass that could compete with the USA. But due to the way history played out in the region especially post WWII and the cold war, their power diminished considerably. It wasn't a case of the USA Defeating some major power that brought it to first place but a default situation where the others around them diminished. You could liken it to a row of men and they all step backward leaving one person ahead of the rest.
So what is Turkey? Turkey is a critical landmass and whoever owns it has the potential to control the middle east. Currently the USA controls the Turkish Army through NATO. Turkey is a pawn as much as Greece is a pawn to a bigger game of Greed and Elitist expansions led by the USA minority. I am confident that there would be a swell of supporters for Greece if push came to shove with Turkey. But the reality is USA controls the land bridge between Asia and Europe. Who they would support if any of the two is a guessing game. It would all depend on which offered greater strategic elements.
Had the Germans succeeded in WWII the USA would never had the power it has today and the world powerhouse would be any pick of nations within the Heartland. Russia and China may have never had a chance to expand or even exist. The Japanese would have been a bigger player in Asia than CHina is today. And isntead of Russia Persia or India would have dominated the middle east.
Having put aside all debates of culture so far I would like to point out one thing. The Turks as we know them today have given the world nothing and their existence and support from Protestant nations has always been inline with the Germanic ideology of controlling the heartland. Hitler considered the Eurasian mass as the Lebensraum (Living Space) an extension of Drang nach Osten (March to the East). Both these philosophies had been around since the Crusades and were still relevant in WWII and today.
To restore balance of powers in the world a Greek uprising is desperately needed. If Greece takes Anatolia it will sever completely USA's power in the Middle East. United with Armenia, Italy, Spain and France the central positioning of such a League would be a powerhouse in itself. But it is a given that an Orthodox country like Greece would align with Russia means their combined power would be able to stop actions on an international spectrum such as invasions of sovereign nations.
Another scenario often stated in USA political circles is that Germany should be given control over Europe or atleast facilitated towards such a goal to counter Englands colonies and to form a League that counters Russia and the Middle East. But such a play would leave a Germanic weakness when it comes to controlling the Middle east and Asia. The Geography of Greece lends it to that position but it is also dangerous for the USA to even allow mention of a revived Roma, Byzantium or Greek Empire.
"To love Christ -means not to be a hireling, not to look upon a noble life as an enterprise or trade, but to be a true benefactor and to do everything only for the sake of love for God." —St John Chrysostom
"When one returns to the Greek; it is like going into a garden of lilies out of some, narrow and dark house." -Oscar Wilde.
Refer to this thread
You blithering buffoons who think your verbal diarrhea on world politics means anything to someone who is obviously superior to your walnut sized brains. You clamber for the truth in your pathetic rhetoric and so called intellectual debates and yet you are unable to handle the truth.
Here is your beloved Turkey or Ottomans you spineless godless heathens:
From as long as currency was used the center of the world has always been the Middle East the center of Eur-Asia. That Eurasian landmass has been given many names but rather than drag the Greek references into the affair such as calling Turkey the Anchor. Let us look at your defiled Germanic bloodlines for answers as to what is Turkey or Anatolia.
Harold Mackinder, pioneered the discussion early in this century with his successive concepts of theThis heartland stretches through Anatolia (Turkey), Middle East and Asia. This land mass has the highest GNP, the highest population, the biggest economy, the biggest of every conceivable measure of economy, military and strategic power. The places in the world as a geographic entity that have strategic placement include:
Eurasian "pivot area" (which was said to include all of Siberia and much of Central Asia) and, later, of the
Central-East European "heartland" as the vital springboards for the attainment of continental domination. He
popularized his heartland concept by the famous dictum:
Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland;
Who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island;
Who rules the World-Island commands the world.
others include Panama canal, Cuba etc but are non Eurasian. China and Russia were the only two other nations on that landmass that could compete with the USA. But due to the way history played out in the region especially post WWII and the cold war, their power diminished considerably. It wasn't a case of the USA Defeating some major power that brought it to first place but a default situation where the others around them diminished. You could liken it to a row of men and they all step backward leaving one person ahead of the rest.
So what is Turkey? Turkey is a critical landmass and whoever owns it has the potential to control the middle east. Currently the USA controls the Turkish Army through NATO. Turkey is a pawn as much as Greece is a pawn to a bigger game of Greed and Elitist expansions led by the USA minority. I am confident that there would be a swell of supporters for Greece if push came to shove with Turkey. But the reality is USA controls the land bridge between Asia and Europe. Who they would support if any of the two is a guessing game. It would all depend on which offered greater strategic elements.
Had the Germans succeeded in WWII the USA would never had the power it has today and the world powerhouse would be any pick of nations within the Heartland. Russia and China may have never had a chance to expand or even exist. The Japanese would have been a bigger player in Asia than CHina is today. And isntead of Russia Persia or India would have dominated the middle east.
Having put aside all debates of culture so far I would like to point out one thing. The Turks as we know them today have given the world nothing and their existence and support from Protestant nations has always been inline with the Germanic ideology of controlling the heartland. Hitler considered the Eurasian mass as the Lebensraum (Living Space) an extension of Drang nach Osten (March to the East). Both these philosophies had been around since the Crusades and were still relevant in WWII and today.
To restore balance of powers in the world a Greek uprising is desperately needed. If Greece takes Anatolia it will sever completely USA's power in the Middle East. United with Armenia, Italy, Spain and France the central positioning of such a League would be a powerhouse in itself. But it is a given that an Orthodox country like Greece would align with Russia means their combined power would be able to stop actions on an international spectrum such as invasions of sovereign nations.
Another scenario often stated in USA political circles is that Germany should be given control over Europe or atleast facilitated towards such a goal to counter Englands colonies and to form a League that counters Russia and the Middle East. But such a play would leave a Germanic weakness when it comes to controlling the Middle east and Asia. The Geography of Greece lends it to that position but it is also dangerous for the USA to even allow mention of a revived Roma, Byzantium or Greek Empire.
"To love Christ -means not to be a hireling, not to look upon a noble life as an enterprise or trade, but to be a true benefactor and to do everything only for the sake of love for God." —St John Chrysostom
"When one returns to the Greek; it is like going into a garden of lilies out of some, narrow and dark house." -Oscar Wilde.