And for some reason, the modern Turkish republic sees him as a Turkish nationalist, and reburied in Turkiye in 1996 and praised for his action, according to the president of that time
What you left out of context here is that the Turkish Empire tried to join the Entante on multiple occasions and they got flat out refused. Turkey had no choice but to approach Germany. The empire would have been divided and destroyed even if it chose not to participate in the war so instead of waiting to die slowly the Triumvirate decided to try their luck with Germany. I don't think Enver Paşa was a good military strategist as Mustafa Kemal Paşa was but he certainly wasn't dumb as bricks and understood politics very well.
Yeah, it's not like the Europeans were craving them up for the past 100 years before that. Surely remaining neutral would have somehow curbed Russia's ambitions...
For a split second I thought you said you were sponsored by Tacitus, the Roman historian. I was about to be hella impressed: Jabzy has a time machine AND his Latin is good enough to get a sponsor in Ancient Rome. :O
Really illuminating about the Armenian genocide. For some reason I wrongly thought it had more to do with the war for Turkish independence, and wasn’t a part of the fabric of the politics of ww1. Very illuminating on such an awful tragedy.
Download Tacticus for free Here -- play.tacticusgame.com/jabzy Also - much of the conflict between the Greeks and Turks will be discussed in more detail in a later video.
@@JabzyJoe Your video contains tons of false,anti-Turkish propaganda claims. The Ottomans did not unfairly blame the Armenians for the failures on the Caucasian front. Armenians in the east were already preparing for a major rebellion and many of them joined the Russians. They wanted to do what the Greeks, Serbians and Bulgarians did in the Balkans: massacre most of the Turks and deport the rest. The only thing that prevented this was the fact that the Ottoman government in 1915 had a more centralized military-police force than the previous ones and were alert enough to know what would happen if they dont. With a rational decision, the troublesome Armenians were exiled and eastern Anatolia, unlike the Balkans, was registered as Turkish territory forever.
I don't know how people even make AI art. I've tried it out and the faces are all contorted or not even relevant. This is "Chiang Kai Shek" --- hotpot.ai/s/share/8/8-uMDWX5CD2Q0Wz5e Or muhammad amin bughra, leader of the East Turkestan Republic ---- hotpot.ai/s/share/8/8-u2jS8IEcI7kDdvH What am I supposed to do with these?
@@JabzyJoe most of them use chatgpt-4 which can make amazing art with only a small prompt... I think AI's like the one you specified will need a huge prompt like where the hands/legs and other body parts will be in the picture. also free AI aren't as good as paid ones.
@@JabzyJoe Playground IA is much better than Hotpsot, and free. Trick is to add terms like "uncanny" or "distorted faces" in the list of things in the request to avoid, the IA will look at what these things look like and avoid them, leaving to much better pictures.
One of the reasons the Ottomans were so insistent of Armenian betrayal was prior to the Ottoman entry into WW1, Dashanks were organizing to side with the Entente powers; forming the Armenian volunteer forces with the aim of fighting the Ottomans. One of the Armenian leaders organizing this army corps was a sitting Ottoman-Armenian deputy: Armen Garo. With the existence of ≈15k Armenian volunteers from the Ottoman Empire organized by a party represented in the Ottoman parliament in the field, sabotage/harassment from Hunchak and Dashnak fedayis and the intelligence that the Armenians in border cities such as Van being armed; the Ottomans feared a general insurrection of the Armenian population in the east would most definitely occur if not pre-emptively destroyed. Although all the legitimacy one can attribute to the Armenian massacres and deportations simply vanish when you consider that the Armenians in western Anatolia too were subjected to deportations.
@user-vo9wd6tx6c not for joining Entente, but for demanding France to carve up Armenian ethnostate in that region. Althought there were cities where Armenians were majority, most of cities demanded were %10-20 Armenian, meaning rest of population there (Turks and Kurds) would be annihilated. That is where animosity came from.
The Ottoman Empire experienced significant loss in life and resources in the Otto-Italian War in 1911 and the Balkan Wars a year later, still, the leadership chose to take on a world powers in WWI....I wonder if there would be a, "Sultan" in Turkey today if there was no involvement in WWI?
WW1 was of such nature that neither the USA nor the Pacific Islands were able to stay out of it. It is difficult to argue that even the Germans or Russians ''chose'' it. Although the Serbians and Austrians chose the crisis that instigated it, neither of them chose the scale of WW1. Nobody particularly chose WW1. But if anyone did, it was only at most the Germans and French who chose for it fall out how it actually did along the trenches of the Western Front. Attempting to chose a smaller conflict and getting sucked into WW1.....happened to everyone.
The mufti of Cairo wrote a letter to the caliph denouncing the Armenian massacres and when he got ignored he ordered a fatwa for Arabs to shelter Armenians
@@ahmedelkhwaga2751 bro look it up. You Turks want to drag us into your mess. You can’t even condemn the three pasha one who hated Arabs and the other was a Zionist
@@ahmedelkhwaga2751 trauma and pain in human beings living those is not fake and unworthy of the turkish honour and values, only the bravest peoples can look at their past and say "we were wrong" even if others don't, I guess they are not yet brave enough.
Thank you for talking about the Assyrian Massacres at this time, this genocide is called Seyfo, it decimated our population, and even today we are still so small in number because of it. You will have to talk about the Simele Massacre in the aftermath of this war in 1933. Thank you so much yet again 🤍🙏
“Why did the Turkish state want to hide that the Anatolian people largely had Greco-Roman roots? What was the reason for this secret? Why were they afraid? Why did they carefully conceal the Greek origin of the large Turkish-speaking masses who were Islamized and due to linguistic assimilation?” - Professor Mehmet Efe Caman
pre-Turkish Anatolia was genetically Native Anatolian i.e Carian, Lycian, Lydian, Colchi,... all who were subjected to Hellenization/colonization thereby Greek-speaking, Greeks had no genetic impact in Anatolia and modern Greeks themselves are mostly Slavic, Vlachic, and Neolithic Anatolian
@@nenenindonu According to the literal first result on google, _"Dr. Mehmet Efe Caman has been working at the _*_Political Science_*_ Department of Memorial University of Newfoundland (MUN) since 2015."_
@@nenenindonu You are first of all missing the large number of Ionian (Greek) cities across western Anatolia, and you are secondly conflating the common Indo-European root as instead being a common population.
@@SuperBadadanaccording to the who? who is bad guys? according to the native americans u are the bad guy according to the white christians muslim turkish conquerors are bad :D lmao
Hi Jabzy I do not say this for this video only but when you are researching for your videos what sources do you use, I would really love to know because I am interested in history . Great content as always
Thank you for the great historical content, I will subscribe to the channel and press the notification button to be able to see the next content on your channel
the caucasus-persian front in ww1 was probably the worst front for the civillian population, loads of massacres and famine that brought death in the millions
Turks and the groups around them cannot begin to heal and work into the future until all of the crimes of the past are spoken about in open air. Turkeiye complains about how it is hated by all its neighbors, and then refuses to admit to ANY of the history as to why, therefore making it impossible for any of their national relationships to move forward, they refuse to start.
The neighbors of Turkiye also never acknowledges their disgusting massacres done by greeks armenians and arabs. The only thing they want is our beautiful 1200 years of homeland.
Turkey needs to withdraw from lands it illegally occupies like Northern Cyprus, small areas of Iraq, bordering regions with Syria and the “Hatay” province before any of its neighbors can even engage with it.
@@dogukan127 To be fair it doesn't help in any other way in the end even if they did it ir not. Those region is alway a hot bed of conflict unlike in Europe. No 100% guarantee that they will be peace amomg them. Heck if not the Turk ultranationalist. The other group will especially when they demanded what the Turk would do is give back territory for each groups. From there i can image another conflict growing especially among them will not accept if another gain more over another. Those reagion will be conflict. Peace is a delusional dream in those region.
@@dogukan127 It not about just self criticism but the other around definitely want make demand too. In which the Turk will not in any position to give. Truly staying out of this region is better than trying to involve in it. Giving it history.
"Turkey, still struggling to achieve its ninety-five-year-old dream of becoming the beacon of democracy in the Near East, DOES EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO DENY its GENOCIDE of the Armenians, Assyrians and Pontian Greeks." Colin Martin Tatz (2003). With Intent to Destroy: Reflections on Genocide. Verso. p. 13.
i already refuted some of the allegations here on another comment but lets pretend they are real. Why does the standard change for turkey here? belgium, uk, usa, sweden and pretty much any powerful european empire has a dark shady past of constant enslavement, exploitation, and continuous genocides of countries, almost literal continents in some cases for centuries. Yet none of them recognize anything like that but i dont see you accounting them for anything. Tell me is it just because of christian white supremacism or you just hate turks or want to use those as a political tool?
@@sonuncu203 Actually we would prefer that all nations admit, recognize and make right as best they can the genocides and ethnic cleansings they committed. You're not special, you're just loud.
@@samwill7259 But they wont because this is an historical matter in the first place. It's not something to be recognized. It's only so when it's politically suitable so you can use it as a political tool benefitting from vague and numerous definitions of genocide. At the end of the day west creates a world where what happened to natives and people of nagazaki or congo or the rest of the western acts are not genocides but the acts of supposed western adversaries like russia's and turkey's are. I am just against double standards. Create a universally accepted clear definition and include all or exclude all and make it a holocaust thing. Whatever is better i dont care just be consistent and dont make it a political tool.
@@sonuncu203 There is a consistent definition of genocide. It's in the ICJ's charter. All of those things you mentioned, save probably for nagasaki, are genocidal in nature and must ALSO be answered for. Turkey si just the main nation these days, along with the US and China, that refuses to even admit to the problem to begin fixing it
A 'Christian genocide' framing acknowledges the historic claims of Assyrian and Greek peoples, and the movements now stirring for recognition and restitution among Greek and Assyrian diasporas. It also brings to light the quite staggering cumulative death toll among the various Christian groups targeted ... of the 1.5 million Greeks of Asia minor - Ionians, Pontians, and Cappadocians - approximately 750,000 were massacred and 750,000 exiled. Pontian deaths alone totaled 353,000." Jones 2010, pp. 150-51: Jones, Adam (2006), Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction, Routledge.
1.2 million with population exchange + 340 thousand remained 150-200 thousand refugees after the capture of smyrna 230 thousand in 1914 deportations these are just the major population movements. i took moderate figures everytime and these alone refutes the greek one. This fairytale was coined in the nineties and greeks were unaware of it due to its nonexistence. when greeks recognized this even The then president of the Synaspismos party Nikos Konstantopoulos and historian Angelos Elefantis objected it and they were called "revisionist historians" by others for telling the truth. assyrian commitee's figures for massacred assyrians in 1922 was 275 thousand, which was a revision of their figures in paris peace conference (which is a conference infamous for maximalist-unrealistic demands and numbers). which was broken down to 100 thousand by wikipedias favourite historians but they still put it at the list of genocides (a list that doesnt include native american genocide and congolese genocide because the perpetrators being white christians) with a figure above 300 thousand! even above the maximalist assyrian claim. Besides in other articles it's even admitted by wikipedia in some sentences that assyrians treatment was different.
I always feel like it all goes on in cycles someone perpetrating attrocities today in the circle of vast time lapses become perpertrated upon... That just was what came to mind when kurds were also mention in what was done to Armenians and today kurds being persecuted ... 😢
At the end of the video, you wondered why upper Asir split from al-idrissi. Allow me to explain. The idrissi family is not native to the region. They came in the middle of the 19th century and established a sufi order in lower Asir. Asir was an independent emirate by that point but fell to the turks in the 1870s. When al-idrissi declared himself Emir, many joined to fight the turks and gain loot, but he had no legitimacy in the eyes of the tribes of upper Asir. So when the turks evacuated Asir, the Asiris declared a descendant of the last Asiri Emir as their own and pushed back the idrissi forces and defeated him. While the two sides were fighting, the tribes of eastern Asir invited Ibn Saud in, and he defeated both. Also, the tribes of upper Asir were more "wahhabi" so they backed Hasan al Ayid and later on Ibn Saud an even better option for them.
My tour guide in Turkey tried to answer this when I was there. There were multiple reasons, but what stuck to me was “Turks and Germans have very close relationship, both our people and governments. We have done things together good and bad.”
if turks didnt expell the armenians prob there would be supporter of Russia with thousands of ethnic armenian soldiers.so 12M turkish muslims vs 100M russians and 1m armenians? this was survival and if we consider according to the 1913 cencus there was only 1m armenians how muslims killed 1.5m people? :D
To think that all of these massacres of the greek, assyirians and armenians could've been avoided if the the brits, the french and the germans didn't intervene to stop the russians from crushing the ottomans every single time during the 19th century.
@@nenenindonu Ilya Ulyanov was from a family of former serfs; Ilya's father's ethnicity remains unclear,[d] while his mother, Anna Alexeyevna Smirnova, was half-Kalmyk and half-Russian.[7]
@@rod9829Lenin was a Chuvash to the bone, his father was an ethnic Chuvash and a renowned scholar who received various awards for his contribution to Tatar and Chuvash schools
Your pointabout Russia not wanting to just defend Armenia is not true. Had the Russians won its very likely Armenia would've been enlarged by quite a lot after WWI but we'll never know thanks to the bolsheviks.
coskun aral visited the Armenian quarters in lebanon where he met a ex ottoman soldier, in Armenian sources they blamed him for massacres with no evidence, dude was living all the way untill the 70s with Armenians he brought south as he was ordered to by the osmanli government
So as I am listening to this series and learning quite a lot. If I understand it, 1. Arabs in the Middle East will never accept Jews before the creation of Israel, in its current state or even a two-state solution. The only solution in the area is to have them removed permantly. 2. While we can blame the modern problems of the Middle East in the USA, UK, and France. They always had issues before. 3. Wow, listening to this video. All the various groups supporting "x" or "y" during WW1 gets confusing.
After Russia's defeat by the Japanese the Turks smelled blood ! They hoped they could re-take historic Turkic lands (Crimea, Azerbaijan, Caucasus, Turkmenistan etc) from a weakened Russian empire.
@@majidbineshgar7156 1300 years of control removes any context of occupation , by that sense all arabic nations are occupiers as they arrived after the islamic invasion in 624.
@@narcick1018 I don't know about Arabic nations , but Turks arrived in the western Asia circa 1100 AD and they were able to fully turkify the region over 19 -20 century AD, regarding Iranian Azarbaijan ( hence my grand parents were from )by virtue of its Persian name and its culture and their having identified themselves as Persians / Iranians throughout history regardless of turkic dialect they used .
How come you said nothing about the bigest genocide that turkey did at that times? Against Greek people. Way bigger numbers if assassinations, and terrible things!!! You are not justified to present yourself as narrating “real history “, avoiding to mention such huge crimes. My god!!!
@@JabzyJoeyes yes philhellenist but funfact: greeks are not greek I don't want you to be sad but it's the truth Greeks are only orthodox union ( mostly slavic people and albanian and also some orthodox Turks)
@@youngturk00 we are speaking about Greek Orthodox, Greek speaking, inhabitants of turkey, theat were defined themselves Romaioi. The ones that built every ancient monument in turkey, and left greek inscriptions on them, always in greek language ( that think that you calll roman is hreek alphabet) They were milions, all around modern turkey in the beginnings of the 20th century, and they were systematically genocided in a pre-planed schedule, just like Armenians and asyrians. We have countless proof about every one of them, names , etc, nd also proof of how, exactly they were assassinated by the Turkish authorities. Also , being economically wealthy, they possessed huge fortunes, that the Turkish state or semibarbaric turks stole from them. We are waiting for justice. Our ancestors were milions. Few of them managed to find refuge in greece when turkey started to mascre them way before ww1. So greek Christians, a specific national population, with distinct characteristics and its impossible to confuse them with others, cause the documents of the era( (otoman archives, mainly) , are specifically written, and they are accessible to be studied by anyone who wants to confirm the things i state above.
"No muslim could perpetrade a genocide" hmmm why is Bosnia from largely Croat and Serbian become majority muslim turkic and arabic? Why did Kosovo from largely Serbian and miniority Croat population become majority Albanian? Why did Anatolia from largely Greek population become only Turkish? Why did Levant region from having no Arabs become only Arabic? How did Egypat from being majority egyptian became mostly Arabic? Idk sounds like genocided to me🤷♂️
Total bs and wrong statemants. 1- bosnia's population was largely bogomil. Bogomilism was unorthodox christian sect which was declared as heresy by both east and west churches. When ottomans took the area, they converted to islam to be priviliged against serbs and croats. Bosniaks have nothing to do with turks or arabs. They are typicall south slavic people. Their language is slavic, their genetics are indistinguishable from their serb and croat neighbours. 2- kosovo was largely serbian until ww2. Albanian collaborators like skanderberg ss massacred serbs in kosovo and caused massive migration. During tito's reign, tito allowed albanians from albania to migrate into kosovo. He wanted to gain the trust of enver hoxha. Nothing to do with ottomans. 3- pre islamic levantines, mesopotamians and egyptians were already semitic people. It was easy to switch to another sister language 4-we sent them to greece in 1923, simultaineusly, greece sent its muslims to turkey. According to 1914 demographic records, %30 of turkeys population was christian. 5- lebanon was mostly shia or christian before 1950's 1947 arab israeli war caused huge migration of sunni palestinians into lebanon and changed demographics completely.
@@shadowsofsunsow3657 Bosnia was mostly orthodox christian or bogomolist. Later it was mostly orthodox christian or catholic. And well after 1995 it became mostly muslim. And somehow Serbs are the ones commiting genocide
There was no Turkish identity back in those days. There was a minority of Turkish speakers in central Anatolian villages but the majority of Muslims were Greekspeaking , Georgianspeaking , ArmenianSpeaking , Bulgarianspeaking, Arabspeaking, Kurdishspeaking, Albanianspeaking, Serbianspeaking etc. During the Ottoman Period, the Christians referred to all Muslim subjects of the Sultan by the term “Turk” with a pejorative connotation, no matter their actual ethnic background. The Ottoman elites, as well as the average Muslim would have in fact felt offended to be called by the same name as some tribal villagers from Central Anatolia. Ataturk was the one that obliged all ex-Ottoman citizens to speak Turkish in a process of forced Turkification. It was not until Ataturk, that the term “Turk" gained the meaning it has today. First he had to convince the citizens that they were “Turks" in a national sense, something which for most of them was not so obvious in the beginning (and for Kurds it still isn't, up to this day). Ataturk created a great nationalist FAIRYTALE even by sticking posters on public walls with the words “Ne mutlu turkum diyene" which in English means: something like “I am so proud to say I am a Turk"...
Well-said , Ottoman elite themselves were not ethnic turkic and refused to be called Turkic therefore The Young Turks movement very much disliked the Ottoman kings and decided to remove them.
type in "1927 census turkey wikipedia" as you can see comments above are spreading misinformation. Besides no nation as a whole can be taught a complete different language by whole. sultans were aware their turkicness and referred themselves like that. Nobody felt offended to be referred to as a turk. examples of usage of derogatory terms against turks are all to turks that were not sedentary who caused trouble for central authority. What Ataturk's nationalism is clear for everyone. It's not based on ethnicity in the first place. anatolian turks, balkan turks and kurds all shared a very similar culture in the ottoman times anyway. besides he spread the turkish language and cultural elements to minorities as well thus it's far from a fairytale by any aspect. This is a proper nation that is a group of people similar language, history, ethnicity, culture, territory and society. And who are you to speak for kurds whose majority votes for turkish parties? kurds acknowledge Ataturk as a great leader and respect him
@@sonuncu203 A 1927 Turkish census is irrelevant pal. The Turkish state had been created by Kemal in 1923, 4 whole years earlier. Forced Turkification took off even prior to world war one and Kemal. But Kemal took it to another level. You really believe this census was a genuine one, while the whole of Turkey was filled with posters promoting "turkishness"?! lol Later on during the 30's if I'm not mistaken all Turkish citizens were forced to change their names from, Greek, Assyrian, Armenian, Kurdish, Arabic etc. to turkish ones. Don't tell me you didn't know this common fact!
@@sonuncu203 If the Kurds are such loyal Turks, then why pkk is considered a terrorist organization by Turkey?! Some religious turkified Kurds are not the majority of Kurds you know...
@@sonuncu203 "It is important to note, however, that the Ottoman state recognised no official differentiation by language or ethnicity among its Muslim citizens: the modem notion of being a "Turk" was until the end of the nineteenth century alien to the Ottoman elites, who regarded themselves as "Ottomans" rather than "Turkish." In fact the term "Turk" had the connotation of being an uneducated peasant." Poulton, Hugh (2000). "The Muslim experience in the Balkan states, 1919‐1991." Nationalities Papers. 28. (1): 47-48.
"Atatürk and the New Turkey were constant reference points for the Nazis as part of their own biography, AS AN EXAMPLE of the perfect Führer story, and as examples of völkisch “good practice” in a variety of aspects." Ihrig, 2014, p. 145: "Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination - Stefan Ihrig | Harvard University Press"
The Zionist Terrorists, Lehi also known as the "Stern Gang" were initially pro National Socialist and Fascist, until becoming Stalinist later in the decade. Funny that nobody talks about that! Additionally Israel supports Azerbaijani-Muslims ethnically cleansing Armenian-Christians in Artsakh just recently!
ihrig tries to revision history with his fringe views then immediately his views are accepted without any scrutinizing. west is thirsty for any anti-turkish content :)
Your video contains tons of flase claims. The Ottomans did not blame the Armenians for the failures on the Caucasian front. Armenians in the east were already preparing for a major rebellion and many of them joined the Russians. They wanted to do what the Greeks, Serbians and Bulgarians did in the Balkans: massacre most of the Turks and deport the rest. The only thing that prevented this was the fact that the Ottoman government in 1915 had a more centralized military-police force than the previous ones and were alert enough to know what would happen if they dont. With a rational decision, the troublesome Armenians were exiled and eastern Anatolia, unlike the Balkans, was registered as Turkish territory forever.
There is no such thing as forever. I can offer you the following example: I am sure you are aware of Germany’s gradual eastward expansion from 1000-1944. Well, all this happened to come undone in the course of less than 1 year, despite the fact that the vast majority of the eastern marches had been fully assimilated to the rest of Germany.
You are very manipulative, i really like how you completely ignore and even leave out that Armenian Dashnaks where Armed by Russia before any mayor battle occurred. You make it sound like Armenian Nationalists where just peaceful when the war started and because Young Turks lost a battle they blamed Armenians? Where no Armenians helping the Russian invading force? Russia used the Armenians decades before ww1 even started and they used them here again. But in a manipulative way you completely leave that out, just give hints to appear neutral.
Do you really think the Armenians would go up against the entire force of the ottoman empire ? Do you honestly believe that or do you not think they were seeking protection against an oppressive racist government.. common human psychology brother
@@gamerk1625seriously, Armenians were so beyond outnumbered. If I were a prideful Turk, I would be ashamed to even suggest such a small population could shake them so much.
🤣😂 Such a funnyy comment! Right now there are well over 10 million Muslims in the Balkans! lol Albanian Muslims alone are over 4 million! Bosniaks count millions! Bulgaria, has a Muslim minority that counts hundreds of thousands! Most other Balkan states have significant Muslim minorities also! lol So, as a matter of fact there are almost double the number of Muslims from one hundred years back in the Balkans.. Now please tell me. How many Greeks, Assyrians and Armenians still remain in Turkey?! I'll tell you.. Less than 40 THOUSAND ALLTOGETHER! Now you realize how rintikulus your comment actually is?!
A lot of them currently live in Bosnia, Albania, Southern Bulgaria and Western Thrace in Greece. A lot were kicked out of Greece, even if they were Greek speakers and had no Turkish blood in them. I would not be surprised if lots of them were treated badly, which is unfortunate. Do you show the same interest when it comes to the Christians of Anatolia and the Middle East?
@@SornGeorge What you wrote above is total nonsense.Half of the 6 million Balkan/Eastern European Turks genocided between 1876 and 1913. Other half moved to Asia Minor with bag and baggage in the same time period.
Demographic engineering with all the population exchanges and migration of muslims truely was a lifeline for the future of Turkish people, superb work for a brief yet crucial period
When I’m in a justifying genocide competition and my opponent is Turkish. I mean if we look at it from an almost callously pragmatic cold point of view the assessment isn’t wrong, but still fuck Turkey for this
Imagine claiming "This video is biased in favor of Turks". The ones who say that are definitely delusional. Jabzy, obviously you have put a lot of effort into this video it seems. Congrats. As you mentioned in video, I would like to see another video regarding the muslims (mostly Turks) who were killed during the period of 10 years between Balkan Wars and Turkish independence war. Much appreciated. As a Turk myself, watched video to the very end and it made me ask questions at some points. In Turkey, the question of Armenian genocide can be a minefield for intelectuals. If you tell something against the current public opinion or state's offical ideology, you won't get jailed actually but you will definitely face a harsh cancellation from media or else, some might try to supress you as well. As you stated in the video, nobody denies the tragic events that took place during WW1 but the debate continues on whether events can be classified as genocide or not. The debate should be more of a historical debate more than political debate. In my opinion, politicians and assemblies of countries have no say on topic. Also I am from eastern part of Turkey, where had considerable Armenian and non muslim population back then. Our elders used to tell such stories to us, touching topic of Armenian genocide. They mostly told, not an exact quote but as main idea "Yes Armenians were killed, but as a recompensation for atrocities they committed against musims before deportation." Regardless, may God show mercy for those innocents who were killed without a reason regardless of their race and religion. Keep up the good work.
" would like to see another video regarding the muslims (mostly Turks) who were killed during the period of 10 years between Balkan Wars and Turkish independence war. Much appreciated." --- Balkans, last video. Independence war, video after next.
@@personaincognita1683He didn't describe it in detail like here, he portrayed it as something everybody did to each other etc. in no way did he go to detail like here or even call it a Genocide. Just like in this Video he used manipulative narrative completely ignoring that Dashnaks where armed by Russia and prepared their invasion before the war even started, he just give hints in quotes from decades before by Russians to appear neutral, very manipulative. He has a clear Orientalist viewpoint on Islamic History and uses very manipulative narrative when he talks about Muslim History.
I don't want to defend the Ottomans, but truth must be told,they did not commit genocide up until they themselves got mass murdered during 1912-1913 war, where 55% of the European Muslim population got massacred. During the 1877 war, another 27% of the European Muslim population died as well. Also, the Genocide of the crimian tatars and circasian caused many muslim in the Ottoman empire to become radicalized. million of refugees fled into Anatolia because of the decline of the ottoman in the 19 century. Many of the people who grew up in the Black Sea and agean regions were refugees themselves. To just sum it up, what the ottomans did was inhuman and terrible, yet the crimes that happen beforehand can not be forgotten from 1820-1922 8 million Muslims were murdered in Europe and in the Middle East. while only 5 million Christians died during the last 20 years of the Ottoman empire.
"Its ok guys, the Ottomans were slower at killing Christian ethnicities then their enemies were at killing Muslim ethnicities" You can point out that both sides were led by genocidal maniacs who egged each other on, without the whataboutisms
@@crocodileguy4319 At least i am not the one in danger of immigrants or being indoctrinated with that lgbt propaganda in every way possible in the west. Furthermore i didnt even start the mentioning of the bulky nature of democratic bureacracy.
It's not bias asking you to admit the shit your history did. No one is blaming you but we can't move forward until you admit the truth of your history.
@@samwill7259 You're right on that. On the other hand, many Turks believe admitting this with lead to restitution. Let's face it, the ones who perpetrated the crimes are dead. And while the average Turk may deny the semantics of the word genocide they will NOT deny that many Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks were indeed massacred. The main contention comes from the narrative that the Turks were genocidal which is often conflated with evil. Anyways, thanks for your time.
@@dev5764 If you're denying the semantics of the word genocide, then you're denying any forgiveness that can be given. Either accept the premise of injustice or don't, you don't get to pick and choose.
@@samwill7259 Ah, but that is where we disagree. There are clear Turkish worries that acknowledgement of the systematic killing and expulsion of the Armenians as "Genocide" could lead to the international community demanding that they surrender much of Eastern Anatolia. These claims have merit, as in 1919 the Treaty of Sevres actually created a rather large Armenian state including several large cities that were (in 1919 and today; less clear about 1913) Kurdish and Turkish majority. The bitterness lasts to this day as Turkish control of (and neglect for) various Armenian historical sites (especially the medieval Armenian capital of Ani, which is besides a Turkish army base and within earshot of the border) and Mt. Ararat is still a sore spot for a lot of Armenians. Additionally, if forgiveness is what the Turks want, then the true Christians already have forgiven them.
Two things: 1) Do you talk about how usa destroyed hundreds of thousands of people instantly or how the rest of them died while sufferring enormously for 20 minutes straight in related videos or it's just because that's a special video and they are very different events that had different perpetrators who happened to be white christians? Also do you call them genocides too? 2) considering your concealment of kurdish participation in most massacres and tryna portray them in a different light, do you consider yourself helpful for broad geopolitical interests of contemporary west in middle east or was it too much of an effort?
1 - I don't cover the USA in a history of the Middle East. That's like arguing that every documentary covering the holocaust should also mention the Rwandan genocide. It's boring whataboutisms. Have I covered genocides committed by white Christians?... yes. In fact i have done in this series. Check the titles of previous videos. Don't be a constant victim. 2 - I mentioned kurdish involvement a lot. Especially in Persia. Do I consider myself helpful for geopolitical interests of the West through 50 min videos presented in a dull manner... no.
@@JabzyJoe Don't be a constant victim. I agree wholeheartedly with that. Speaking of wars and genocides, whenever the topic comes up I am reminded of the scene in Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, where Chief Sitting Bull and Colonel Nelson Miles sit down and have a talk. Here is the transcript: Col. Nelson Miles: Sitting Bull requested this council. We await his words. Sitting Bull: Take your soldiers out of here. They scare the game away. Col. Nelson Miles: Very well, sir. Tell me, then: how far away should I take my men? Sitting Bull: You must take them out of our lands. Col. Nelson Miles: What precisely are your lands? Sitting Bull: These are the lands where my people lived before you whites first came. Col. Nelson Miles: I don't understand. We whites were not your first enemies. Why don't you demand back the land in Minnesota where the Chippewa and others forced you from years before? Sitting Bull: The Black Hills are a sacred land given to my people by Wakan Tanka. Col. Nelson Miles: How very convenient to cloak your claims in spiritualism. And what would you say to the Mormons and others who believe that their God has given to them Indian lands in the West? Sitting Bull: I would say they should listen to Wakan Tanka. Col. Nelson Miles: No matter what your legends say, you didn't sprout from the plains like the spring grasses. And you didn't coalesce out of the ether. You came out of the Minnesota woodlands armed to the teeth and set upon your fellow man. You massacred the Kiowa, the Omaha, the Ponca, the Oto and the Pawnee without mercy. And yet you claim the Black Hills as a private preserve bequeathed to you by the Great Spirit. Sitting Bull: And who gave us the guns and powder to kill our enemies? And who traded weapons to the Chippewa and others who drove us from our home? Col. Nelson Miles: Chief Sitting Bull, the proposition that you were a peaceable people before the appearance of the white man is the most fanciful legend of all. You were killing each other for hundreds of moons before the first white stepped foot on this continent. You conquered those tribes, lusting for their game and their lands, just as we have now conquered you for no less noble a cause. Sitting Bull: This is your story of my people! Col. Nelson Miles: This is the truth, not legend. Crazy Horse has surrendered... with his entire band. And by his surrender, he says to you and your people that you are defeated. And by ceding the Black Hills to us, so say Red Cloud and the other chiefs, who demand that you end this war and take your place on the reservation.
@@JabzyJoe Do you have a video similar to that with the concept of japan, east asia or ww2 that talks about nuclear bombings in the same way? thats what i tried to ask. It's not whataboutism because i did not try to justify massacres with my words. I wanted to point out double standards I wrote the comment after seeing lots of people in the comments quoting excerpts of whatever that can be used against turks like their life purpose so i came off arrogant i admit that for the kurdish involvement, i had skipped some persian parts so if you say so it's on me. i jumped to conclusion saying this is like the others, i apologize. Besides, that was conspiring of me. general tendency to avoit it should be considered more of a result of the propaganda thats stemming from the said geopolitical conflicts
@@sonuncu203 Specifically on the US bombing Nagasaki. No. I've never covered it in any real detail. Holocaust, French in Algeria, Circassian Genocide and a lot more yes. And soon - Italians in Libya. I will spend more on the genocide of the Armenians because of the denialism and anger associated with it. So, to explain the different sides, politics and the likes. While, say with the Circassian Genocide or Italian concentration camps in Libya - I merely state what happened and move on. Do I mention Italian atrocities (which I call a genocide) in Libya for geopolitics? Nope. I don't have a dog in the fight. Why do you think it's mainly Turks who see any mention of the genocide as a complete attack on them? Honestly, I think it comes a point when denialism makes the whole matter even worse for your case.
@@JabzyJoe What about Turkish denalism is so important? Most Turks disagree on the word genocide. A very charged word that brings to mind the atrocities committed by the Nazis in World War 2. Turks do not deny the massacres/the mass killing of Armenians, nor did they vote somebody into office with a vicious anti-Armenian rhetoric like the Germans voted for Hitler. My point is, these nuances are important and go a long way to making stronger, more credible discussions. I do not go to somebody of Mongolian descent and whine about the atrocities commited in the 13th century. That is dishonorable behavior. I do not go to Spain and talk about how horrible the Spanish empire was and demand reparations. Now, if you want to talk about bad acts Turks committed to the minorities I suggest talking about the Varlik Vergisi (Wealth Tax) or the Istanbul Pogroms. And even then those actions have nuance and even the guy behind the latter (Adnan Menderes) was sentenced to be executed (he commited suicide before his execution).
The Ottomans had no intention of conquering Azerbaijan for a "Pan-Turkish" empire. Baku was an oil center even then, and the Ottomans wanted to cripple the allied war plans and benefit from oil by establishing a friendly Azerbajiani government there. Contrary to the ridiculous map you showed, neither the Ottomans nor the Azerbaijani nationalists had any intention of taking Tabriz from Iran; Azerbaijanis already considered Qajar Iran as their own state, and the Ottomans had good relations with the Qajar dynasty since the reign of Abdulhamid. The map you put up as the Pan-Turkish Empire is a complete fraud.
What was called "Democratic republic of Azerbaijan" was never called by that name before 1918, Azerbaijan was always the land in northwest of Iran and north of Aras river. It was only in 1918 that the government in Baku appropriated the name Azerbaijan for itself. What intention other than territorial irredentism could be behind such change? Also to my knowledge Azerbaijan Democratic Republic had no intention of unifying with Iran, the government and its leadership were "Azerbaijani" nationalists and even though some of their leaders like Mahammad Amin Rasulzade once had ties to Iranian liberals, by 1918 they had all went towards unhinged anti-Iranian stuff. Like claiming Azerbaijan has been Turkic for 7000 years and Cyrus was killed by a Turk in Azerbaijan.
@@Ali-bu6lo I didn't even mention about the Republic of Azerbaijan. The video shows a bullshit ''Turan Empire'' map that includes Tabriz. In reality, neither side(Ottomans or Azeris) had such a demand. The aim of the ethnic Turks (modern-day Azeris) living in Russian Baku was to establish a national state, including today's Azerbaijan,Zengazur and Erivan. Tabriz, which was under Qajar control, was not among their land demands. The Turks had already established an ethnic-based caste system in Iran, and the nationalist Azerbaijanis in Russian Empire did not see this state as a foreign power to them. When the Qajar dynasty was overthrown and replaced by the İranic Pahlavi dynasty, the idea of independence of the Turk regions in Iran (southern Azerbaijan as they called) was born.
There were only about 1.5 million Armenians in the empire, how would that even be possible? Not to mention, they were outnumbered by millions and millions of Turks and Kurds.
>turks
ohh nooo our founding fathers weren't genocides, pacifism and bullshit
>mongols
RESPECT THE POWER AND MIGHT OF OUR ANCESTORS
Enver's poor leadership dragged the Ottoman Empire into WW1. For basically the price of 2 battleships.
and they did and it cost em there country
And for some reason, the modern Turkish republic sees him as a Turkish nationalist, and reburied in Turkiye in 1996 and praised for his action, according to the president of that time
What you left out of context here is that the Turkish Empire tried to join the Entante on multiple occasions and they got flat out refused. Turkey had no choice but to approach Germany. The empire would have been divided and destroyed even if it chose not to participate in the war so instead of waiting to die slowly the Triumvirate decided to try their luck with Germany. I don't think Enver Paşa was a good military strategist as Mustafa Kemal Paşa was but he certainly wasn't dumb as bricks and understood politics very well.
Yeah, it's not like the Europeans were craving them up for the past 100 years before that. Surely remaining neutral would have somehow curbed Russia's ambitions...
And the dream of revenge against Russia
For a split second I thought you said you were sponsored by Tacitus, the Roman historian. I was about to be hella impressed: Jabzy has a time machine AND his Latin is good enough to get a sponsor in Ancient Rome. :O
i believe his Latin is good enough :)
Really illuminating about the Armenian genocide. For some reason I wrongly thought it had more to do with the war for Turkish independence, and wasn’t a part of the fabric of the politics of ww1. Very illuminating on such an awful tragedy.
900,000+ greeks too and 300,000+ assyrians.
I was under the same impression
Download Tacticus for free Here -- play.tacticusgame.com/jabzy
Also - much of the conflict between the Greeks and Turks will be discussed in more detail in a later video.
Love your videos!💚
41:00 Hey Jabzy, at this time you show Jamaica and British Honduras as being German in grey and not British. Love your work btw.
Hi there, please consider making a video on the Explusions/Persecution of Balkan Muslims during the Ottoman contraction
@@shzarmai I did. Last episode
@@JabzyJoe Your video contains tons of false,anti-Turkish propaganda claims. The Ottomans did not unfairly blame the Armenians for the failures on the Caucasian front. Armenians in the east were already preparing for a major rebellion and many of them joined the Russians. They wanted to do what the Greeks, Serbians and Bulgarians did in the Balkans: massacre most of the Turks and deport the rest. The only thing that prevented this was the fact that the Ottoman government in 1915 had a more centralized military-police force than the previous ones and were alert enough to know what would happen if they dont. With a rational decision, the troublesome Armenians were exiled and eastern Anatolia, unlike the Balkans, was registered as Turkish territory forever.
It's great how you keep this artstyle and have not fell into the AI art trend...
Love the video!
I don't know how people even make AI art. I've tried it out and the faces are all contorted or not even relevant.
This is "Chiang Kai Shek" --- hotpot.ai/s/share/8/8-uMDWX5CD2Q0Wz5e
Or muhammad amin bughra, leader of the East Turkestan Republic ---- hotpot.ai/s/share/8/8-u2jS8IEcI7kDdvH
What am I supposed to do with these?
@@JabzyJoe most of them use chatgpt-4 which can make amazing art with only a small prompt...
I think AI's like the one you specified will need a huge prompt like where the hands/legs and other body parts will be in the picture. also free AI aren't as good as paid ones.
@@JabzyJoe Playground IA is much better than Hotpsot, and free. Trick is to add terms like "uncanny" or "distorted faces" in the list of things in the request to avoid, the IA will look at what these things look like and avoid them, leaving to much better pictures.
One of the reasons the Ottomans were so insistent of Armenian betrayal was prior to the Ottoman entry into WW1, Dashanks were organizing to side with the Entente powers; forming the Armenian volunteer forces with the aim of fighting the Ottomans. One of the Armenian leaders organizing this army corps was a sitting Ottoman-Armenian deputy: Armen Garo. With the existence of ≈15k Armenian volunteers from the Ottoman Empire organized by a party represented in the Ottoman parliament in the field, sabotage/harassment from Hunchak and Dashnak fedayis and the intelligence that the Armenians in border cities such as Van being armed; the Ottomans feared a general insurrection of the Armenian population in the east would most definitely occur if not pre-emptively destroyed.
Although all the legitimacy one can attribute to the Armenian massacres and deportations simply vanish when you consider that the Armenians in western Anatolia too were subjected to deportations.
@user-vo9wd6tx6c not for joining Entente, but for demanding France to carve up Armenian ethnostate in that region. Althought there were cities where Armenians were majority, most of cities demanded were %10-20 Armenian, meaning rest of population there (Turks and Kurds) would be annihilated. That is where animosity came from.
The Ottoman Empire experienced significant loss in life and resources in the Otto-Italian War in 1911 and the Balkan Wars a year later, still, the leadership chose to take on a world powers in WWI....I wonder if there would be a, "Sultan" in Turkey today if there was no involvement in WWI?
WW1 was of such nature that neither the USA nor the Pacific Islands were able to stay out of it. It is difficult to argue that even the Germans or Russians ''chose'' it.
Although the Serbians and Austrians chose the crisis that instigated it, neither of them chose the scale of WW1. Nobody particularly chose WW1. But if anyone did, it was only at most the Germans and French who chose for it fall out how it actually did along the trenches of the Western Front.
Attempting to chose a smaller conflict and getting sucked into WW1.....happened to everyone.
The mufti of Cairo wrote a letter to the caliph denouncing the Armenian massacres and when he got ignored he ordered a fatwa for Arabs to shelter Armenians
Fake😂😂
@@ahmedelkhwaga2751 bro look it up. You Turks want to drag us into your mess. You can’t even condemn the three pasha one who hated Arabs and the other was a Zionist
@@ahmedelkhwaga2751 trauma and pain in human beings living those is not fake and unworthy of the turkish honour and values, only the bravest peoples can look at their past and say "we were wrong" even if others don't, I guess they are not yet brave enough.
Thank you for talking about the Assyrian Massacres at this time, this genocide is called Seyfo, it decimated our population, and even today we are still so small in number because of it. You will have to talk about the Simele Massacre in the aftermath of this war in 1933. Thank you so much yet again 🤍🙏
Big love to you Assyrians, a wonderful stateless nation. Hope one day you'll recover.
“Why did the Turkish state want to hide that the Anatolian people largely had Greco-Roman roots? What was the reason for this secret? Why were they afraid? Why did they carefully conceal the Greek origin of the large Turkish-speaking masses who were Islamized and due to linguistic assimilation?” - Professor Mehmet Efe Caman
Because it provided them a better rationale for their own actions.
Hahaha dude quotes a random twitter/X troll who doesn't even have anything to do with ethnology or human history, "professor" 😂
pre-Turkish Anatolia was genetically Native Anatolian i.e Carian, Lycian, Lydian, Colchi,... all who were subjected to Hellenization/colonization thereby Greek-speaking, Greeks had no genetic impact in Anatolia and modern Greeks themselves are mostly Slavic, Vlachic, and Neolithic Anatolian
@@nenenindonu According to the literal first result on google, _"Dr. Mehmet Efe Caman has been working at the _*_Political Science_*_ Department of Memorial University of Newfoundland (MUN) since 2015."_
@@nenenindonu You are first of all missing the large number of Ionian (Greek) cities across western Anatolia, and you are secondly conflating the common Indo-European root as instead being a common population.
Thank you for great history content ❤
20:35 At Manzikert Turks 2 : Opposition 0
Don't you just hate it when the bad guys win?
@@SuperBadadanbad guys???
@@SuperBadadan bad guys only because you are born christian and thought to hate.
@@anatolictengristthe Turks in WW1 were the bad guys
@@SuperBadadanaccording to the who? who is bad guys? according to the native americans u are the bad guy according to the white christians muslim turkish conquerors are bad :D lmao
Hi Jabzy I do not say this for this video only but when you are researching for your videos what sources do you use, I would really love to know because I am interested in history . Great content as always
I always find your videos to have a subject really nobody cares to talk about, which makes me watch your content
Your channel info is valuable for our history that often is not thought in our region... Thank you keep doing this good work!
What are the books you recommend I read for this subject? Another great video @Jabzy !
I LOVE THESE VIDEOS. PLEASE MORE
Such great work - this is like a university course speedrun
Thanks for covering a topic I know little about.
Thank you for the great historical content, I will subscribe to the channel and press the notification button to be able to see the next content on your channel
Jabzy you are a very gifted historian.
Please do a video on the history of Kurds
Why should he stop making videos ?
Fake history
This video is so underrated
the quality of these videos is insane... bravo!
Could you share the information of the venzuelan mercenary. I am very interested to learn more.
the caucasus-persian front in ww1 was probably the worst front for the civillian population, loads of massacres and famine that brought death in the millions
Ah, yes, another video, so videoing
Comments are unreal.
17:20 @jabzy you da man 👈👈😎
Turks and the groups around them cannot begin to heal and work into the future until all of the crimes of the past are spoken about in open air.
Turkeiye complains about how it is hated by all its neighbors, and then refuses to admit to ANY of the history as to why, therefore making it impossible for any of their national relationships to move forward, they refuse to start.
The neighbors of Turkiye also never acknowledges their disgusting massacres done by greeks armenians and arabs. The only thing they want is our beautiful 1200 years of homeland.
Turkey needs to withdraw from lands it illegally occupies like Northern Cyprus, small areas of Iraq, bordering regions with Syria and the “Hatay” province before any of its neighbors can even engage with it.
Turkey is too deep into ultranationalism - and like you said, until such self-criticisms emerge, this country will go deeper into darkness
@@dogukan127 To be fair it doesn't help in any other way in the end even if they did it ir not.
Those region is alway a hot bed of conflict unlike in Europe.
No 100% guarantee that they will be peace amomg them.
Heck if not the Turk ultranationalist. The other group will especially when they demanded what the Turk would do is give back territory for each groups. From there i can image another conflict growing especially among them will not accept if another gain more over another.
Those reagion will be conflict. Peace is a delusional dream in those region.
@@dogukan127 It not about just self criticism but the other around definitely want make demand too. In which the Turk will not in any position to give.
Truly staying out of this region is better than trying to involve in it. Giving it history.
"Turkey, still struggling to achieve its ninety-five-year-old dream of becoming the beacon of democracy in the Near East, DOES EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO DENY its GENOCIDE of the Armenians, Assyrians and Pontian Greeks."
Colin Martin Tatz (2003). With Intent to Destroy: Reflections on Genocide. Verso. p. 13.
i already refuted some of the allegations here on another comment but lets pretend they are real. Why does the standard change for turkey here? belgium, uk, usa, sweden and pretty much any powerful european empire has a dark shady past of constant enslavement, exploitation, and continuous genocides of countries, almost literal continents in some cases for centuries. Yet none of them recognize anything like that but i dont see you accounting them for anything. Tell me is it just because of christian white supremacism or you just hate turks or want to use those as a political tool?
@@sonuncu203ah so that makes I ok for the Ottomans to commit genocide, got it.
@@sonuncu203 Actually we would prefer that all nations admit, recognize and make right as best they can the genocides and ethnic cleansings they committed. You're not special, you're just loud.
@@samwill7259 But they wont because this is an historical matter in the first place. It's not something to be recognized. It's only so when it's politically suitable so you can use it as a political tool benefitting from vague and numerous definitions of genocide. At the end of the day west creates a world where what happened to natives and people of nagazaki or congo or the rest of the western acts are not genocides but the acts of supposed western adversaries like russia's and turkey's are. I am just against double standards. Create a universally accepted clear definition and include all or exclude all and make it a holocaust thing. Whatever is better i dont care just be consistent and dont make it a political tool.
@@sonuncu203 There is a consistent definition of genocide. It's in the ICJ's charter. All of those things you mentioned, save probably for nagasaki, are genocidal in nature and must ALSO be answered for. Turkey si just the main nation these days, along with the US and China, that refuses to even admit to the problem to begin fixing it
A 'Christian genocide' framing acknowledges the historic claims of Assyrian and Greek peoples, and the movements now stirring for recognition and restitution among Greek and Assyrian diasporas. It also brings to light the quite staggering cumulative death toll among the various Christian groups targeted ... of the 1.5 million Greeks of Asia minor - Ionians, Pontians, and Cappadocians - approximately 750,000 were massacred and 750,000 exiled. Pontian deaths alone totaled 353,000."
Jones 2010, pp. 150-51: Jones, Adam (2006), Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction, Routledge.
1.2 million with population exchange + 340 thousand remained
150-200 thousand refugees after the capture of smyrna
230 thousand in 1914 deportations
these are just the major population movements.
i took moderate figures everytime and these alone refutes the greek one. This fairytale was coined in the nineties and greeks were unaware of it due to its nonexistence. when greeks recognized this even The then president of the Synaspismos party Nikos Konstantopoulos and historian Angelos Elefantis objected it and they were called "revisionist historians" by others for telling the truth.
assyrian commitee's figures for massacred assyrians in 1922 was 275 thousand, which was a revision of their figures in paris peace conference (which is a conference infamous for maximalist-unrealistic demands and numbers). which was broken down to 100 thousand by wikipedias favourite historians but they still put it at the list of genocides (a list that doesnt include native american genocide and congolese genocide because the perpetrators being white christians) with a figure above 300 thousand! even above the maximalist assyrian claim. Besides in other articles it's even admitted by wikipedia in some sentences that assyrians treatment was different.
Constantinople until 1930!
Cry
23:54
Logic 100
The Ottomans thought they were invincible.
History!
Well now, there you have it. Simple enough.
the most abject capitulation in Britain's History. (until Singapore)
I always feel like it all goes on in cycles someone perpetrating attrocities today in the circle of vast time lapses become perpertrated upon... That just was what came to mind when kurds were also mention in what was done to Armenians and today kurds being persecuted ... 😢
At the end of the video, you wondered why upper Asir split from al-idrissi.
Allow me to explain. The idrissi family is not native to the region. They came in the middle of the 19th century and established a sufi order in lower Asir. Asir was an independent emirate by that point but fell to the turks in the 1870s. When al-idrissi declared himself Emir, many joined to fight the turks and gain loot, but he had no legitimacy in the eyes of the tribes of upper Asir. So when the turks evacuated Asir, the Asiris declared a descendant of the last Asiri Emir as their own and pushed back the idrissi forces and defeated him. While the two sides were fighting, the tribes of eastern Asir invited Ibn Saud in, and he defeated both.
Also, the tribes of upper Asir were more "wahhabi" so they backed Hasan al Ayid and later on Ibn Saud an even better option for them.
My tour guide in Turkey tried to answer this when I was there. There were multiple reasons, but what stuck to me was “Turks and Germans have very close relationship, both our people and governments. We have done things together good and bad.”
if turks didnt expell the armenians prob there would be supporter of Russia with thousands of ethnic armenian soldiers.so 12M turkish muslims vs 100M russians and 1m armenians? this was survival and if we consider according to the 1913 cencus there was only 1m armenians how muslims killed 1.5m people? :D
This video is probably going to be banned in turkey
9:03 if BF1 taught me anything it’s that Fao fortress was no walk in the park
To think that all of these massacres of the greek, assyirians and armenians could've been avoided if the the brits, the french and the germans didn't intervene to stop the russians from crushing the ottomans every single time during the 19th century.
Bruh The Russian empire wasnt going to hold that much land without doing some genocide themselfs like the circassians
Before Ottomans it was the Russian empire and Romanovs that got crushed by Chuvash-Turk Lenin, checkmate of Atatürk ;D
Oh yes. The well known guarentor of minority rights.
Fucking Russia.
@@nenenindonu Ilya Ulyanov was from a family of former serfs; Ilya's father's ethnicity remains unclear,[d] while his mother, Anna Alexeyevna Smirnova, was half-Kalmyk and half-Russian.[7]
@@rod9829Lenin was a Chuvash to the bone, his father was an ethnic Chuvash and a renowned scholar who received various awards for his contribution to Tatar and Chuvash schools
Very accurate , good work Jabzy well done , sorry for the plight of all indigenous Anatolians who have been victims of pan-turks .
Your pointabout Russia not wanting to just defend Armenia is not true. Had the Russians won its very likely Armenia would've been enlarged by quite a lot after WWI but we'll never know thanks to the bolsheviks.
Tsar Nicholas II was a hero for Assyrians and Armenians. Had he remained Christianity would still stand in the Middle East.
Given the frailty of the empire at the time I seriously doubt that
With the ottomans, a history of 1400 years of Islamic rule on earth abandoned for the first time
When it comes to Global politics, the Christiana and Muslim world were not homogenous. Even Jews were caught up on both sides.
when do turks return Constantinople to Greeks? they invaded it 571 years ago, but it doesn't belong to them.
İrish slave
You lost it just move on lmao
@@youngturk00 Turks would rather live in any country but Turkey...Your Greek by your DNA lol
@@artair70the only cope thats left for griks after being owned by Turks for the past 1000 years is labeling them as "you wuz griks n shit" 😂
@@quvy338 I'm not even Greek, let alone from that part of Europe, how's your house in Berlin?
coskun aral visited the Armenian quarters in lebanon where he met a ex ottoman soldier, in Armenian sources they blamed him for massacres with no evidence, dude was living all the way untill the 70s with Armenians he brought south as he was ordered to by the osmanli government
its not ergodan its erdogan
Agha Petros all the way. Hero of Assyria.
So as I am listening to this series and learning quite a lot.
If I understand it,
1. Arabs in the Middle East will never accept Jews before the creation of Israel, in its current state or even a two-state solution. The only solution in the area is to have them removed permantly.
2. While we can blame the modern problems of the Middle East in the USA, UK, and France. They always had issues before.
3. Wow, listening to this video. All the various groups supporting "x" or "y" during WW1 gets confusing.
After Russia's defeat by the Japanese the Turks smelled blood !
They hoped they could re-take historic Turkic lands (Crimea, Azerbaijan, Caucasus, Turkmenistan etc) from a weakened Russian empire.
I found the turk
All these regions you named were actually historically speaking occupied by the Turks and used to be populated by non-turkic peoples .
@@majidbineshgar7156 1300 years of control removes any context of occupation , by that sense all arabic nations are occupiers as they arrived after the islamic invasion in 624.
@@narcick1018 I don't know about Arabic nations , but Turks arrived in the western Asia circa 1100 AD and they were able to fully turkify the region over 19 -20 century AD, regarding Iranian Azarbaijan ( hence my grand parents were from )by virtue of its Persian name and its culture and their having identified themselves as Persians / Iranians throughout history regardless of turkic dialect they used .
The term "Azerbaijan" didn't exist until 1918! Before this they were "Caucasian Tatars"! Both nations 🇹🇷🇦🇿 are predicated upon a lie!
Never attribute to malice, what could be attributed to incompetence.
How come you said nothing about the bigest genocide that turkey did at that times? Against Greek people. Way bigger numbers if assassinations, and terrible things!!! You are not justified to present yourself as narrating “real history “, avoiding to mention such huge crimes. My god!!!
Top pinned comment.
@@JabzyJoeyes yes philhellenist but funfact: greeks are not greek I don't want you to be sad but it's the truth Greeks are only orthodox union ( mostly slavic people and albanian and also some orthodox Turks)
@@youngturk00 we are speaking about Greek Orthodox, Greek speaking, inhabitants of turkey, theat were defined themselves Romaioi. The ones that built every ancient monument in turkey, and left greek inscriptions on them, always in greek language ( that think that you calll roman is hreek alphabet) They were milions, all around modern turkey in the beginnings of the 20th century, and they were systematically genocided in a pre-planed schedule, just like Armenians and asyrians. We have countless proof about every one of them, names , etc, nd also proof of how, exactly they were assassinated by the Turkish authorities. Also , being economically wealthy, they possessed huge fortunes, that the Turkish state or semibarbaric turks stole from them. We are waiting for justice. Our ancestors were milions. Few of them managed to find refuge in greece when turkey started to mascre them way before ww1. So greek Christians, a specific national population, with distinct characteristics and its impossible to confuse them with others, cause the documents of the era( (otoman archives, mainly) , are specifically written, and they are accessible to be studied by anyone who wants to confirm the things i state above.
"No muslim could perpetrade a genocide" hmmm why is Bosnia from largely Croat and Serbian become majority muslim turkic and arabic? Why did Kosovo from largely Serbian and miniority Croat population become majority Albanian? Why did Anatolia from largely Greek population become only Turkish? Why did Levant region from having no Arabs become only Arabic? How did Egypat from being majority egyptian became mostly Arabic? Idk sounds like genocided to me🤷♂️
Total bs and wrong statemants.
1- bosnia's population was largely bogomil. Bogomilism was unorthodox christian sect which was declared as heresy by both east and west churches. When ottomans took the area, they converted to islam to be priviliged against serbs and croats.
Bosniaks have nothing to do with turks or arabs. They are typicall south slavic people. Their language is slavic, their genetics are indistinguishable from their serb and croat neighbours.
2- kosovo was largely serbian until ww2. Albanian collaborators like skanderberg ss massacred serbs in kosovo and caused massive migration. During tito's reign, tito allowed albanians from albania to migrate into kosovo. He wanted to gain the trust of enver hoxha. Nothing to do with ottomans.
3- pre islamic levantines, mesopotamians and egyptians were already semitic people. It was easy to switch to another sister language
4-we sent them to greece in 1923, simultaineusly, greece sent its muslims to turkey.
According to 1914 demographic records, %30 of turkeys population was christian.
5- lebanon was mostly shia or christian before 1950's
1947 arab israeli war caused huge migration of sunni palestinians into lebanon and changed demographics completely.
@@shadowsofsunsow3657 Bosnia was mostly orthodox christian or bogomolist. Later it was mostly orthodox christian or catholic. And well after 1995 it became mostly muslim. And somehow Serbs are the ones commiting genocide
:)
So sad. Turkey is such a beautiful place, its a pitty that Turks live there 😢
Seethe
a white men said this :D Cry boi
@@AhmetTugrulGUL Turks when they find out their DNA is mostly Greek,lul. Enjoy speaking Arabic now xD
@@artair70 so u accepting Turks are superior so assimalited Greeks HAHAHAHAHEHWHAH
please make a video one day on the Persecution of Muslims during the contraction of the Ottomans
The Ottoman Empire itself oppressed Muslim Arabs, so nothing new
There was no Turkish identity back in those days. There was a minority of Turkish speakers in central Anatolian villages but the majority of Muslims were Greekspeaking , Georgianspeaking , ArmenianSpeaking , Bulgarianspeaking, Arabspeaking, Kurdishspeaking, Albanianspeaking, Serbianspeaking etc. During the Ottoman Period, the Christians referred to all Muslim subjects of the Sultan by the term “Turk” with a pejorative connotation, no matter their actual ethnic background. The Ottoman elites, as well as the average Muslim would have in fact felt offended to be called by the same name as some tribal villagers from Central Anatolia.
Ataturk was the one that obliged all ex-Ottoman citizens to speak Turkish in a process of forced Turkification. It was not until Ataturk, that the term “Turk" gained the meaning it has today. First he had to convince the citizens that they were “Turks" in a national sense, something which for most of them was not so obvious in the beginning (and for Kurds it still isn't, up to this day). Ataturk created a great nationalist FAIRYTALE even by sticking posters on public walls with the words “Ne mutlu turkum diyene" which in English means: something like “I am so proud to say I am a Turk"...
Well-said , Ottoman elite themselves were not ethnic turkic and refused to be called Turkic therefore The Young Turks movement very much disliked the Ottoman kings and decided to remove them.
type in "1927 census turkey wikipedia"
as you can see comments above are spreading misinformation. Besides no nation as a whole can be taught a complete different language by whole. sultans were aware their turkicness and referred themselves like that. Nobody felt offended to be referred to as a turk. examples of usage of derogatory terms against turks are all to turks that were not sedentary who caused trouble for central authority.
What Ataturk's nationalism is clear for everyone. It's not based on ethnicity in the first place. anatolian turks, balkan turks and kurds all shared a very similar culture in the ottoman times anyway. besides he spread the turkish language and cultural elements to minorities as well thus it's far from a fairytale by any aspect. This is a proper nation that is a group of people similar language, history, ethnicity, culture, territory and society. And who are you to speak for kurds whose majority votes for turkish parties? kurds acknowledge Ataturk as a great leader and respect him
@@sonuncu203 A 1927 Turkish census is irrelevant pal. The Turkish state had been created by Kemal in 1923, 4 whole years earlier. Forced Turkification took off even prior to world war one and Kemal. But Kemal took it to another level. You really believe this census was a genuine one, while the whole of Turkey was filled with posters promoting "turkishness"?! lol Later on during the 30's if I'm not mistaken all Turkish citizens were forced to change their names from, Greek, Assyrian, Armenian, Kurdish, Arabic etc. to turkish ones. Don't tell me you didn't know this common fact!
@@sonuncu203 If the Kurds are such loyal Turks, then why pkk is considered a terrorist organization by Turkey?! Some religious turkified Kurds are not the majority of Kurds you know...
@@sonuncu203 "It is important to note, however, that the Ottoman state recognised no official differentiation by language or ethnicity among its Muslim citizens: the modem notion of being a "Turk" was until the end of the nineteenth century alien to the Ottoman elites, who regarded themselves as "Ottomans" rather than "Turkish." In fact the term "Turk" had the connotation of being an uneducated peasant."
Poulton, Hugh (2000). "The Muslim experience in the Balkan states, 1919‐1991." Nationalities Papers. 28. (1): 47-48.
"Atatürk and the New Turkey were constant reference points for the Nazis as part of their own biography, AS AN EXAMPLE of the perfect Führer story, and as examples of völkisch “good practice” in a variety of aspects."
Ihrig, 2014, p. 145: "Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination - Stefan Ihrig | Harvard University Press"
The Zionist Terrorists, Lehi also known as the "Stern Gang" were initially pro National Socialist and Fascist, until becoming Stalinist later in the decade. Funny that nobody talks about that! Additionally Israel supports Azerbaijani-Muslims ethnically cleansing Armenian-Christians in Artsakh just recently!
ihrig tries to revision history with his fringe views then immediately his views are accepted without any scrutinizing. west is thirsty for any anti-turkish content :)
usa and their manifest destiny was always a bigger reference point
Your video contains tons of flase claims. The Ottomans did not blame the Armenians for the failures on the Caucasian front. Armenians in the east were already preparing for a major rebellion and many of them joined the Russians. They wanted to do what the Greeks, Serbians and Bulgarians did in the Balkans: massacre most of the Turks and deport the rest. The only thing that prevented this was the fact that the Ottoman government in 1915 had a more centralized military-police force than the previous ones and were alert enough to know what would happen if they dont. With a rational decision, the troublesome Armenians were exiled and eastern Anatolia, unlike the Balkans, was registered as Turkish territory forever.
There is no such thing as forever. I can offer you the following example: I am sure you are aware of Germany’s gradual eastward expansion from 1000-1944. Well, all this happened to come undone in the course of less than 1 year, despite the fact that the vast majority of the eastern marches had been fully assimilated to the rest of Germany.
You means , europeans colonizers in america can be kicked out to europe@@SornGeorge
God bless you @jabzyJoe
You are very manipulative, i really like how you completely ignore and even leave out that Armenian Dashnaks where Armed by Russia before any mayor battle occurred. You make it sound like Armenian Nationalists where just peaceful when the war started and because Young Turks lost a battle they blamed Armenians? Where no Armenians helping the Russian invading force? Russia used the Armenians decades before ww1 even started and they used them here again. But in a manipulative way you completely leave that out, just give hints to appear neutral.
Do you really think the Armenians would go up against the entire force of the ottoman empire ? Do you honestly believe that or do you not think they were seeking protection against an oppressive racist government.. common human psychology brother
@@gamerk1625seriously, Armenians were so beyond outnumbered. If I were a prideful Turk, I would be ashamed to even suggest such a small population could shake them so much.
What happend to 6 million Turks/Muslims in Balkans-Eastern Europe?
Definately not GENOCIDE!
🤣😂 Such a funnyy comment! Right now there are well over 10 million Muslims in the Balkans! lol Albanian Muslims alone are over 4 million! Bosniaks count millions! Bulgaria, has a Muslim minority that counts hundreds of thousands! Most other Balkan states have significant Muslim minorities also! lol So, as a matter of fact there are almost double the number of Muslims from one hundred years back in the Balkans.. Now please tell me. How many Greeks, Assyrians and Armenians still remain in Turkey?! I'll tell you.. Less than 40 THOUSAND ALLTOGETHER! Now you realize how rintikulus your comment actually is?!
A lot of them currently live in Bosnia, Albania, Southern Bulgaria and Western Thrace in Greece. A lot were kicked out of Greece, even if they were Greek speakers and had no Turkish blood in them. I would not be surprised if lots of them were treated badly, which is unfortunate. Do you show the same interest when it comes to the Christians of Anatolia and the Middle East?
@@SornGeorge What you wrote above is total nonsense.Half of the 6 million Balkan/Eastern European Turks genocided between 1876 and 1913. Other half moved to Asia Minor with bag and baggage in the same time period.
@@kuvikina they were invaders and colonizers and shouldn't been there.
@@aero4379 so you support Turkic genocide of Balkans and Eastern Europe?
Demographic engineering with all the population exchanges and migration of muslims truely was a lifeline for the future of Turkish people, superb work for a brief yet crucial period
When I’m in a justifying genocide competition and my opponent is Turkish. I mean if we look at it from an almost callously pragmatic cold point of view the assessment isn’t wrong, but still fuck Turkey for this
"Demographic engineering"
You mean ethnic cleansing.
Turk 🤢🤮
Imagine claiming "This video is biased in favor of Turks". The ones who say that are definitely delusional.
Jabzy, obviously you have put a lot of effort into this video it seems. Congrats. As you mentioned in video, I would like to see another video regarding the muslims (mostly Turks) who were killed during the period of 10 years between Balkan Wars and Turkish independence war. Much appreciated.
As a Turk myself, watched video to the very end and it made me ask questions at some points. In Turkey, the question of Armenian genocide can be a minefield for intelectuals. If you tell something against the current public opinion or state's offical ideology, you won't get jailed actually but you will definitely face a harsh cancellation from media or else, some might try to supress you as well.
As you stated in the video, nobody denies the tragic events that took place during WW1 but the debate continues on whether events can be classified as genocide or not.
The debate should be more of a historical debate more than political debate. In my opinion, politicians and assemblies of countries have no say on topic.
Also I am from eastern part of Turkey, where had considerable Armenian and non muslim population back then. Our elders used to tell such stories to us, touching topic of Armenian genocide. They mostly told, not an exact quote but as main idea "Yes Armenians were killed, but as a recompensation for atrocities they committed against musims before deportation."
Regardless, may God show mercy for those innocents who were killed without a reason regardless of their race and religion.
Keep up the good work.
" would like to see another video regarding the muslims (mostly Turks) who were killed during the period of 10 years between Balkan Wars and Turkish independence war. Much appreciated." --- Balkans, last video. Independence war, video after next.
@@JabzyJoe oops. Sorry I didn't realise. Thank you for your work.
@@personaincognita1683He didn't describe it in detail like here, he portrayed it as something everybody did to each other etc. in no way did he go to detail like here or even call it a Genocide. Just like in this Video he used manipulative narrative completely ignoring that Dashnaks where armed by Russia and prepared their invasion before the war even started, he just give hints in quotes from decades before by Russians to appear neutral, very manipulative. He has a clear Orientalist viewpoint on Islamic History and uses very manipulative narrative when he talks about Muslim History.
gotta be honest, the soft stance on the Armenian genocide you so clearly pained to indue into your script was least imo... cowardly.
Soft stance in favor of who?
I think describing in brutal detail the crimes of the ottomans doesn't qualify as a "soft stance"
I don't want to defend the Ottomans, but truth must be told,they did not commit genocide up until they themselves got mass murdered during 1912-1913 war, where 55% of the European Muslim population got massacred. During the 1877 war, another 27% of the European Muslim population died as well. Also, the Genocide of the crimian tatars and circasian caused many muslim in the Ottoman empire to become radicalized. million of refugees fled into Anatolia because of the decline of the ottoman in the 19 century. Many of the people who grew up in the Black Sea and agean regions were refugees themselves. To just sum it up, what the ottomans did was inhuman and terrible, yet the crimes that happen beforehand can not be forgotten from 1820-1922
8 million Muslims were murdered in Europe and in the Middle East. while only 5 million Christians died during the last 20 years of the Ottoman empire.
"Its ok guys, the Ottomans were slower at killing Christian ethnicities then their enemies were at killing Muslim ethnicities"
You can point out that both sides were led by genocidal maniacs who egged each other on, without the whataboutisms
One crime doesn't justify another crime.
rest in peace to all the innocent dead
@@shade.cinema it dosn't but we should understand what led to those atrocitys.
@@RNB_lovr Yeah Rip to all who died.
Muslims and christians alike, we are all humans at the end.
Dont forget the great genocide of dinasaurs which was applied by ottomans😊
They would have killed the dinosaurs if they could. In the end, the Turks will kill all the peoples of the world and then themselves.
You unironically deserve the country you have 😊
@@crocodileguy4319 At least i am not the one in danger of immigrants or being indoctrinated with that lgbt propaganda in every way possible in the west. Furthermore i didnt even start the mentioning of the bulky nature of democratic bureacracy.
Warning- Lots of anti-turk bias in these comments. I have also reservations about the usage of the word genocide - see the boy who cried wolf.
It's not bias asking you to admit the shit your history did. No one is blaming you but we can't move forward until you admit the truth of your history.
@@samwill7259 You're right on that. On the other hand, many Turks believe admitting this with lead to restitution. Let's face it, the ones who perpetrated the crimes are dead. And while the average Turk may deny the semantics of the word genocide they will NOT deny that many Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks were indeed massacred.
The main contention comes from the narrative that the Turks were genocidal which is often conflated with evil. Anyways, thanks for your time.
@@dev5764 If you're denying the semantics of the word genocide, then you're denying any forgiveness that can be given. Either accept the premise of injustice or don't, you don't get to pick and choose.
Turk won’t accept Turkish crimes, I’ve seen this 80 million times…
@@samwill7259 Ah, but that is where we disagree. There are clear Turkish worries that acknowledgement of the systematic killing and expulsion of the Armenians as "Genocide" could lead to the international community demanding that they surrender much of Eastern Anatolia. These claims have merit, as in 1919 the Treaty of Sevres actually created a rather large Armenian state including several large cities that were (in 1919 and today; less clear about 1913) Kurdish and Turkish majority.
The bitterness lasts to this day as Turkish control of (and neglect for) various Armenian historical sites (especially the medieval Armenian capital of Ani, which is besides a Turkish army base and within earshot of the border) and Mt. Ararat is still a sore spot for a lot of Armenians.
Additionally, if forgiveness is what the Turks want, then the true Christians already have forgiven them.
Two things:
1) Do you talk about how usa destroyed hundreds of thousands of people instantly or how the rest of them died while sufferring enormously for 20 minutes straight in related videos or it's just because that's a special video and they are very different events that had different perpetrators who happened to be white christians? Also do you call them genocides too?
2) considering your concealment of kurdish participation in most massacres and tryna portray them in a different light, do you consider yourself helpful for broad geopolitical interests of contemporary west in middle east or was it too much of an effort?
1 - I don't cover the USA in a history of the Middle East. That's like arguing that every documentary covering the holocaust should also mention the Rwandan genocide. It's boring whataboutisms. Have I covered genocides committed by white Christians?... yes.
In fact i have done in this series. Check the titles of previous videos. Don't be a constant victim.
2 - I mentioned kurdish involvement a lot. Especially in Persia.
Do I consider myself helpful for geopolitical interests of the West through 50 min videos presented in a dull manner... no.
@@JabzyJoe Don't be a constant victim. I agree wholeheartedly with that.
Speaking of wars and genocides, whenever the topic comes up I am reminded of the scene in Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, where Chief Sitting Bull and Colonel Nelson Miles sit down and have a talk. Here is the transcript:
Col. Nelson Miles: Sitting Bull requested this council. We await his words.
Sitting Bull: Take your soldiers out of here. They scare the game away.
Col. Nelson Miles: Very well, sir. Tell me, then: how far away should I take my men?
Sitting Bull: You must take them out of our lands.
Col. Nelson Miles: What precisely are your lands?
Sitting Bull: These are the lands where my people lived before you whites first came.
Col. Nelson Miles: I don't understand. We whites were not your first enemies. Why don't you demand back the land in Minnesota where the Chippewa and others forced you from years before?
Sitting Bull: The Black Hills are a sacred land given to my people by Wakan Tanka.
Col. Nelson Miles: How very convenient to cloak your claims in spiritualism. And what would you say to the Mormons and others who believe that their God has given to them Indian lands in the West?
Sitting Bull: I would say they should listen to Wakan Tanka.
Col. Nelson Miles: No matter what your legends say, you didn't sprout from the plains like the spring grasses. And you didn't coalesce out of the ether. You came out of the Minnesota woodlands armed to the teeth and set upon your fellow man. You massacred the Kiowa, the Omaha, the Ponca, the Oto and the Pawnee without mercy. And yet you claim the Black Hills as a private preserve bequeathed to you by the Great Spirit.
Sitting Bull: And who gave us the guns and powder to kill our enemies? And who traded weapons to the Chippewa and others who drove us from our home?
Col. Nelson Miles: Chief Sitting Bull, the proposition that you were a peaceable people before the appearance of the white man is the most fanciful legend of all. You were killing each other for hundreds of moons before the first white stepped foot on this continent. You conquered those tribes, lusting for their game and their lands, just as we have now conquered you for no less noble a cause.
Sitting Bull: This is your story of my people!
Col. Nelson Miles: This is the truth, not legend. Crazy Horse has surrendered... with his entire band. And by his surrender, he says to you and your people that you are defeated. And by ceding the Black Hills to us, so say Red Cloud and the other chiefs, who demand that you end this war and take your place on the reservation.
@@JabzyJoe
Do you have a video similar to that with the concept of japan, east asia or ww2 that talks about nuclear bombings in the same way? thats what i tried to ask. It's not whataboutism because i did not try to justify massacres with my words. I wanted to point out double standards
I wrote the comment after seeing lots of people in the comments quoting excerpts of whatever that can be used against turks like their life purpose so i came off arrogant i admit that
for the kurdish involvement, i had skipped some persian parts so if you say so it's on me. i jumped to conclusion saying this is like the others, i apologize. Besides, that was conspiring of me. general tendency to avoit it should be considered more of a result of the propaganda thats stemming from the said geopolitical conflicts
@@sonuncu203 Specifically on the US bombing Nagasaki. No. I've never covered it in any real detail.
Holocaust, French in Algeria, Circassian Genocide and a lot more yes. And soon - Italians in Libya.
I will spend more on the genocide of the Armenians because of the denialism and anger associated with it. So, to explain the different sides, politics and the likes. While, say with the Circassian Genocide or Italian concentration camps in Libya - I merely state what happened and move on.
Do I mention Italian atrocities (which I call a genocide) in Libya for geopolitics? Nope. I don't have a dog in the fight.
Why do you think it's mainly Turks who see any mention of the genocide as a complete attack on them? Honestly, I think it comes a point when denialism makes the whole matter even worse for your case.
@@JabzyJoe What about Turkish denalism is so important? Most Turks disagree on the word genocide. A very charged word that brings to mind the atrocities committed by the Nazis in World War 2. Turks do not deny the massacres/the mass killing of Armenians, nor did they vote somebody into office with a vicious anti-Armenian rhetoric like the Germans voted for Hitler.
My point is, these nuances are important and go a long way to making stronger, more credible discussions. I do not go to somebody of Mongolian descent and whine about the atrocities commited in the 13th century. That is dishonorable behavior. I do not go to Spain and talk about how horrible the Spanish empire was and demand reparations.
Now, if you want to talk about bad acts Turks committed to the minorities I suggest talking about the Varlik Vergisi (Wealth Tax) or the Istanbul Pogroms. And even then those actions have nuance and even the guy behind the latter (Adnan Menderes) was sentenced to be executed (he commited suicide before his execution).
The Ottomans had no intention of conquering Azerbaijan for a "Pan-Turkish" empire. Baku was an oil center even then, and the Ottomans wanted to cripple the allied war plans and benefit from oil by establishing a friendly Azerbajiani government there. Contrary to the ridiculous map you showed, neither the Ottomans nor the Azerbaijani nationalists had any intention of taking Tabriz from Iran; Azerbaijanis already considered Qajar Iran as their own state, and the Ottomans had good relations with the Qajar dynasty since the reign of Abdulhamid. The map you put up as the Pan-Turkish Empire is a complete fraud.
It was not the Ottomans, it was the CUP government that took over Ottomans that wanted it
What was called "Democratic republic of Azerbaijan" was never called by that name before 1918, Azerbaijan was always the land in northwest of Iran and north of Aras river. It was only in 1918 that the government in Baku appropriated the name Azerbaijan for itself. What intention other than territorial irredentism could be behind such change?
Also to my knowledge Azerbaijan Democratic Republic had no intention of unifying with Iran, the government and its leadership were "Azerbaijani" nationalists and even though some of their leaders like Mahammad Amin Rasulzade once had ties to Iranian liberals, by 1918 they had all went towards unhinged anti-Iranian stuff. Like claiming Azerbaijan has been Turkic for 7000 years and Cyrus was killed by a Turk in Azerbaijan.
@@Ali-bu6lo I didn't even mention about the Republic of Azerbaijan. The video shows a bullshit ''Turan Empire'' map that includes Tabriz. In reality, neither side(Ottomans or Azeris) had such a demand. The aim of the ethnic Turks (modern-day Azeris) living in Russian Baku was to establish a national state, including today's Azerbaijan,Zengazur and Erivan. Tabriz, which was under Qajar control, was not among their land demands. The Turks had already established an ethnic-based caste system in Iran, and the nationalist Azerbaijanis in Russian Empire did not see this state as a foreign power to them. When the Qajar dynasty was overthrown and replaced by the İranic Pahlavi dynasty, the idea of independence of the Turk regions in Iran (southern Azerbaijan as they called) was born.
Cheap propaganda, it's a shame.
Are you turk? 😂
@@fiude Ofc he is look at his username
turks are armenian greek arab mongol mix
@@julianr4375 Bla bla bla :D
@@fiude So?
Title is hella racist man it reeks 🤢
Racist against who?
Watta dead channel!!
Man, is it Turks or just ☪️ in general???
@@bobdollaz3391huh
Are you a salty Turk lol?
@@bobdollaz3391 everyone
@@bobdollaz3391 don't associate me with these imbeciles
1 million Turkish civilians killed by brutal armanian gangs.
There were only about 1.5 million Armenians in the empire, how would that even be possible? Not to mention, they were outnumbered by millions and millions of Turks and Kurds.
Guys i think we can all agree "muzzys" is the cutest slur for muslim people?
I call them Mohematens
Turks would never fight for Arabs. because they have lawrence