Comments by "Samson Soturian" (@samsonsoturian6013) on "SandRhoman History" channel.

  1.  @etuanno  Yes, but it happened over centuries. A big reason was colonial powers were more interested in their enemies not taking Ottoman holdings than they were taking turf for themselves. Like the Crimean War where Britain invaded Russia so that Russia wouldn't take too much Ottoman land. There was a big collapse when the French and Brits seized all of the Turk's Arab holdings during WWI.
    3
  2. Some yes, some no. This was back when wartime looting was both legal and acceptable and it only really ended when strict discipline was enforced giving all captured loot to the state who only stole from official enemies. This is how we pretend that we do not loot in wars.
    3
  3. That's one way to say you don't know a fucking thing on history
    3
  4.  @Nomadicenjoyer31  I don't know about the statistics, but Turks only get the name and a lot of loan words from the central asian nomads that became the ruling elite. The coastal regions have almost exclusively Hellenic origins, the east is mostly Kurds and Armenians, and the central plane is a mix of all that plus Hittites.
    3
  5. @ahmetozkan438  you don't know the first thing about history, do you? Never heard of "sick man of Europe?"
    3
  6. Shut up before we draft you
    3
  7. Shut up
    2
  8. There were Japanese professionals and Africans among them. This was not the nation of China, but men in the employ of a warlord, and the warlord didn't discriminate
    2
  9. Screw that game and everything it stands for.
    2
  10. Excuse me, but to what extent are the sources war propaganda? Because while mercenary companies did attract literal thugs in their work, it sounds like some of this info is coming from Italians that fought said mercs
    2
  11. No amount of money will make men die for you
    2
  12.  @lolasdm6959  It's "stronger" in the way that it's cheap and so the wall can be crazy thick and built by temp workers
    2
  13. Not always. The winds might not cooperate and the first ship never comes in range.
    2
  14. Screw that game
    2
  15. If it sounds awesome, then reality is certainly much more boring than you think.
    2
  16. It's always telling what men do when they finally have their enemies under their power. In this case, open hypocrisy, theft, and literal backstabbing awaited everyone regardless if the Sultan signed a scrap of paper saying otherwise.
    2
  17. Shut up, child
    2
  18. Why were you bullshitting right now?
    2
  19. 11:00 No one called that area Palestine at the time.
    2
  20.  @johnnyboy3410  the Mohammedans changed all the names while the Crusaders either used Biblical names or city names. I.E. The Kingdom of Jerusalem.
    2
  21.  @johnnyboy3410  That’s what the Jihadis called themselves at the time. The Followers of Mohammed.
    2
  22.  @forcea1454  Except none of that has ever happened in practice for about 500 different reasons, Mr. Armchair Strategist.
    2
  23. Like... you?
    2
  24.  @nomanor7987  This was a period when there was no distinction between corporations and governments, and fortresses took months or years to bring down individually. It was actually faster and cheaper to obtain land through dynastic connections or purchase, leading to the Hapsburg comment that men do not conquer land, women do. This allowed for many bizarrely shaped states that wouldn't have survived otherwise.
    2
  25.  @nomanor7987  They would have held them in contempt regardless since the Jannissaries were both paid better and since they were directly loyal to the Sultan they prevented Turkish troops from going rogue.
    2
  26. It's something that only exists in small states. When you're a county sized country with no actual cities, the king is also the sheriff.
    2
  27. That's usually what you get in fiat wars. No one really cares as much as they pretend to.
    2
  28. Mesopotamia has only had one largestcity at a time @theprancingrat 
    2
  29. @fus132  some empires were legal fictions
    2
  30. It was amongst the loot left in the Achaean camp, allegedly
    2
  31.  @cachorrovinagre2979  there's not as much difference between amateurs and professionals as you think
    2
  32.  @AK-hi7mg  the difference between an amatuer and professional soldier is pay, not skill.
    2
  33. The only difference between a merc and a soldier is a middleman.
    2
  34. Of course. Because Muslims marry infidels a helluva lot more than they care to talk about.
    2
  35. There's nothing uniquely Chinese about that and there were Japanese and Africans among them
    2
  36.  @dragonace119  Russia did not have significant iron production at that time and simply used what was available
    2
  37. In the 18th and 19th century, yeah. But more soldiers and people these days are loyal to the Feds. There's also few specific requirements in our treaty organizations for how many men each nation must provide, and a high degree of disobedience is tolerated.
    2
  38. Europe isn't a country
    2
  39. Yes
    2
  40.  @robert48044  No, I was speaking of religious unity, not secular unity. No one had specific plans to screw over the Byzantines. That didn't stop drama from ensuing, though You seem irrationally belligerent to men who are long dead.
    2
  41. Some were, others were not.
    2
  42. To be fair, most Chinese armies in this period were untrained militias on account China wasn't a country at that time
    2
  43. Oddly enough, there seems to have been low will to fight among many Russian units despite fighting on their own soil. The preponderance on the army were auxiliaries and contractors so that's probably why.
    2
  44. Only if you're full of it
    2
  45. The militias were ineffective largely because they were perceived as ineffective. When they were called up it was at the literal last minute and all they could do was grab any weapon on hand and fight generally with no organization or training. This is why Machiavelli always wanted to form a reservist system as he didn't like mercs.
    2
  46.  @latte2475  Don't you have a math test to cheat on or something?
    2
  47. It's actually very common for one place to have two names. The Arabs call Jerusalem "al-Quds," the Egyptians call themselves the Masri, the Fins and Lapps call themselves Suomi, the Greeks call themselves the Hellenes.
    2
  48.  @kuvikina  Cyprus has more DNA in common with Greece than any other country and almost was annexed by modern Greece within living memory.
    2
  49. @ahmetozkan438  Something you must understand in this part of this part of the world is discrimination is mandatory. This means a lot of people will learn the language of the elites and identify with their race regardless of their actual ethnic background. That's why Egyptians call themselves Arabs despite having a greater ethnic connection to black Sudanese than Riyadh. So while Turkey speaks a language related to central Asian Turkish, they have a largely indigenous ethnic background.
    2
  50.  @ahmetozkan438  Even if that were so, it's irrelavent because the idea that every self identified Turk has an uninterrupted line of Turkish fathers is absurd. Heck, no one can confirm or deny any two Sultans were biologically related to each other due to all the sexual irregularities. Peoples, governments, and borders come and go with the decades, no need to get sentimental about them.
    2