Comments by "M.A.B." (@m.a.b.4104) on "An Intense, Searching Conversation With Amjad Iraqi" video.

  1. More civilians died in the Ottoman Empire controlled middle east during WW1 than anywhere else, including western Europe where France copped it big time. The fact that it was a declining empire(was known as the sick man of Europe at the time) enabled negligence and deliberate policies causing widespread famine (said to be worse than Ukraine in the 1930s), forced migration, torture and widespread violence. Saying locals accepted Ottoman rule is a bit disingenuous as like most or all empires there was violent repression of uprisings from start to end.
    4
  2.  @mensrea1251  definitely think it was probably far worse at the end for a number of reasons but like most Empires unless you were an elite, security and limited freedom was not a reality. Most people were peasants who could be taken by force as soldier slaves to fight in wars , protecting your family from lawlessness fell to your tribe with the Ottomans only getting involved if there were invaders etc. Have been doing a deep dive on the history of the area through some Dan Carlin but deeper style podcast. Don't get me wrong, most areas of the world at the same stage of development would've been very similar, it's just that area of the world was much later to the game and because it was forced to catch up at such a fast pace that turmoil, suffering and chaos was probably inevitable. The Ottoman Empire at its peak probably rivaled or exceeded the great empires of history, just think they all were horrible places to live if you weren't an elite compared to modern times. Maybe I've missed the original point or my deep history dive is clouding my thinking at this point in time.
    1