Comments by "Yurichtube" (@yurichtube1162) on "What Happened to the Greeks of Asia Minor?" video.

  1. Accept you did the armenian genocide, and you will be.
    33
  2.  @cloneeja  you killed many Kurds
    17
  3.  @cloneeja  you idiot, you did worse.
    11
  4. It is true. 99% of turkey isn't turk at all, not central asian turk atleast. Ataturk himself wasn't even turk, he was albanian. Yet they called themselves turk to honor their first sultan, who was a turk and to keep unity. Forced assimilation basically, the same is being done to the Kurds even now in 2020. Not much has changed it seems, but one thing I am certain: it is plain diabolical.
    7
  5. They call themselves turks now.
    6
  6.  @e.a9751  armenian genocide killed 300.000 Greeks.
    3
  7. That is also what started the Kurdish resistance. We have been lied to by the greater powers.
    2
  8. @Sultan Abdulhameed II how arrogant. You think that would ever work? You can't turkify anyone, not the Greeks, not the Armenians, not the Kurds.
    1
  9.  @bulkychalky9697  turkey rise? Under the erdogan regime, you will drown in controversy and debt.
    1
  10. @What.Should.I.Say? half Kurd? So you are turk, got it. You can't even speak Kurdish. No need for a half. You can be turk if you want to. And I believe autonomy would be a good for Kurds, like northern Iraq. Kurdish culture and languague needs to be protected.
    1
  11.  @greenforestrs9724  Kurdistan will come. Either as country or as an autonome region, we will never stop fighting.
    1
  12. @What.Should.I.Say? your ethnicity is half laz, so you are half laz. Don't call yourself full Kurd when you admit yourself not to be full. Besides, a Kurd is defined by more then blood. A Kurd loves Kurdish, Kurdish culture, Kurdish people and is all for Kurdish independence or atleast autonomy in South East turkey, with Kurdish schools, parlement, public services, street names etc. We can coexist easy if all sides would agree that Kurdish needs to be recgonised, which is the only right thing to do.
    1
  13.  @greenforestrs9724  my profile pic may be a meme, but my words are true and serious.
    1
  14.  @greenforestrs9724  it will take place in South-East turkey. Idc about your nationalistic feelings. I will fight you 1v1 if you need to get rid of your small brain energy.
    1
  15.  @greenforestrs9724  and besides, if Kurds are your "brothers", proof it and trust us. We are not terrorist, we just don't like to call ourself turk. Simple.
    1
  16.  @bulkychalky9697  the ottomans were in extreme debt and had no allies. And yes, it was very stupid to create more tensions with the west. Besides the millions turkey will lose in revenue and the many jobs lost revolving the museum, he made turkey stand even more embarrased infront of europe and the west. It will potentially cost them alot of tourists too, and tourism is a huge part of turkish economy. They earn billions because of it.
    1
  17.  @bulkychalky9697  the ottoman had a system based on conquest. Once they lost at Vienna, they gave up and decided to be happy with what they had. That was the first of many mistakes. While Europe was exploring the world to find alternate ways to China and India, the ottomans became arrogant and didn't achieve anything. Once America was discovered and conquered, it was already the beginning of the end. Ottomans lost many revenue since nobody was using the old paths to India and China anymore (instead going through constantinople, they sailed around Africa and the America's). The ottomans got in extreme debt in the 17th, 18th and especially 19th century. People blame WW1 for ottoman empire death, but it would have died anyway. It was crumbling from within, with corruption, nationalism and too many enemies. And what do you mean what jobs? The museum workers ofcourse, and the tourism dynamic around it. Also there will be no more ticket sales since it will be a mosque, no more work or revenue from there. It lost its charm, now christians feel threatened since they can't claim the haga sofia as their relic anymore. The haga sofia is turkeys biggest tourist attraction. And yes, turkey is growing but thanks to trade with europe and ties with america. With erdogans shenegans i wonder how long europe will allow him to keep going. Also under trump nato is crumbling. Without nato, we will see how turkey will survive with its behaviour.
    1
  18.  @mckanow  the ottomans success was based on conquest. It thrived on it, during reign of selim the first it was expanding and during his sons period it was at its biggest. His son, Suleyman, was a failed leader who chose to continue warfare instead of inplanting a system that would make sure the empire would grow without conquest. In order to maintain and grow the sultan after him needed to continue conquering (news flash: no sultan after Suleyman ever did). It had reached its peak and didn't grow. It was just there, only thing remaining was decline. If Europe wanted they might have declared war on the ottomans and won, maybe not after suleyman but a century later. But there was a bigger threat in the east: Russia. Just like nato now, you were keeping the russians busy. You were useful. And human rights didn't matter that much, so you were tolerated but never accepted as friend or ally. However Europe softened up and became pro-human rights. Turkey on the other hand refused to change on that, human rights are still violated in turkey in 2020. Europe needs turkey? Think again. 70% of turkeys trade depends on EU. If big daddy USA didn't control EU (they basically do because of nato and most EU nations not paying enough) the relations would be even worse then now. And turkey has second largest nato army, but by no means the strongest. It is a plus to have you, but not with erdogan. Erdogan has proven in november not to care about nato. Despite nato allies disagreeing, he invaded Rojava. From human rights reports, peoples conditions have worsened. Under SDF people were much more safe, arabs, Kurds, turkmen, all were equal. By reading news about Afrin alone, the human rights violations of civillians, the killing and looting and forced assimilation and turkification (basically ethnic cleansing) is unacceptable. Not only has erdogan destroyed the turkish dream of EU membership (which might have helped with that 2023 secret agenda you talk about), he also made middle east more dangerous and put the world a few centuries back. With iran, that makes things alot more dangerous. The leader after him must not come from erdogan, or turkey is doomed.
    1
  19.  @bulkychalky9697  European powers started creating crop in conquered colonies, through slave labor of the indigenous people. Slavery of African people also contributed to the amount of wealth they would achieve. Though unethical, they created a system that would ensure they wouldn't lose wealth and start to decline. Suleyman didn't do enough, he stubbornly was set on the conquering system of his ancestors. He even died in a tent when trying to conquer a city. His lazy drunk son Selim II and his descendants didn't do anything after that. No conquering, no partnership or allying with neighbooring empires. The traderoute to China and India had to go through them, so they earned a large bounty. But then alternative routes were found to India, America was discovered, Africa was discovered. Basically the ottomans lost alot of money. And because the ottomans stopped conquering they declined, they also didn't have slaves or crops they produced (the ottomans also started with slavery of Africans although it was in the late 1700s and it was too late then. Slavery became abolished worldwide shortly after). So yeah, my points stand.
    1
  20.  @bulkychalky9697  the america's were filled with diamonds, gold, silver, cupper and all kinds of valueble metals, furtile land to create all kinds of crop and smallpoxes, meaning there was almost no resistance because the natives died. The spaniards had amounted alot of wealth, alot alot. They were for a long time the strongest empire in Europe. Stronger then England or France. However, mismanagment of money, spending it on pointless wars caused their decline. It caused the netherlands to rebel and after 80 years of a costly civil war the spaniards lost that land too. The power shifted to England and France after that. Africa also has alot of those metals and diamonds, on top of furtile lands for valuable crops like coffee, rubber, tabacco etc. and exotic animals like elephants, which meant ivor. And on top of the crops were produced with slavery, meaning it costed the europeans almost nothing while gaining stupid amount of wealth. They grew, conquered and created a system which would make their colonies useful. The ottomans didn't do that. The ottomans were landlords, collecting tax and enslaving christian boys and make them soldiers serving the ottomans. But they didn't do much else. No matter how inconvenient, the europeans were set on not paying the ottomans to India, so they sailed around Africa to do it, even creating a new nation in the process (South Africa). Their unwillingness to cooperate with the ottomans, the ottomans having no friends or allies and not having an alternative system besides conquering was already the beginning of the end. If the ottomans wanted to survive the europeans they should have conquered africa and enslaved the locals there. It sounds unethical but it would be the only way. Africa might even have been better off, who knows. But it somehow stopped conquering, so they declined. They joined the slavery route like the europeans did and even tried to modernize the empire, but by then it was far too late.
    1
  21.  Yusuf Isa  under talaat pasha, jamaal pasha and another pasha i forgot. Under ottoman government.
    1
  22.  @kanal2123a  strong how?
    1
  23.  Yusuf Isa  telegraphs were found during the event of the genocide, where the sultan gives orders to destroy the armenian race. He believed them to work with Russia and wanted them to be erased. Men, women, children, animals, everything and everyone. They killed around 800.000 armenians, along with 700.000 greeks, assyrians, syriacs and many more minorities. Because most who died were armenians the genocide is called armenian genocide.
    1
  24.  Yusuf Isa  young turk government had orders from the sultan. After the turkish war of independence, ataturk threw the sultan, the young turks, the clerics and nobles out of his new country and called it turkey, after the peasants.
    1
  25.  Yusuf Isa  did you forget the hamiddiye massacres, done in the 19th century? Around 80.000 to 300.000 armenians were killed. It was done to create a pan-islamic and pan-turkic empire and was mainly aimed at christians. Guess what? The armenians achieving succes doesn't mean they weren't presocuted. https://www.npr.org/2017/04/24/525441639/recently-discovered-telegram-reveals-evidence-for-armenian-genocide?t=1595269537791 This intervieuw tells about a telegraph the pashas received. Or this http://www.agos.com.tr/en/article/18348/deciphered-telegram-reveals-the-genocide
    1
  26.  Yusuf Isa  there is no concrete proof, only the word of enver pasha, who blamed the armenians for the loss against the russians.
    1
  27.  Yusuf Isa  refuse because turkey screams at all who dare to recgonise it. For the sake of nato, they give you what you want.
    1
  28.  Yusuf Isa  the ottoman elite never called themselves turk. Turk was a title reserved for the peasants. Only in the 19th century, after seeing the peasants were the only true loyalists, did they call themselves turk too. Ataturk, who was a noble himself, saw that too and in order to honor the peasants who were so loyal he called his country turkey. And kemalist? Wahabist? Don't insult me. I am neither. All are just as bad as the islamists.
    1
  29.  Yusuf Isa  they were released because the ottoman empire was dead short before and a new country was formed. Since there was no ottoman citizens anymore, they were released on technicallity.
    1
  30.  @serdarates6750  it did, you racist. Turkey will never be anything good.
    1