135 replies to this topic

[asal-main]

Bro, Musharaff couldnt offer anything concrete to Israel

I dont see the issue here. Musharraf told Israeli leaders nothing will happen without settlement of Palestine. It enforces the importance of the issue in the minds of israeli leaders face to face. It also gives a chance to understand israel's words and long term intent.
Its a sin to misrepresent someone, and unsmart to misjudge bigger strategy. Erdogan had been talking to israel, just like major arab leaders trying to make peace. Someone has to talk and mediate for that. Its called showing leadership. Pakistan is no longer seen as a leader or a player. Its too internally unstable for that.

[asal-main]

whereas a country that still maintains hostile relations , full economic embargo with israel and finance Palestine and supports its resistance with billions for so long , its leader gets called a dog ?

This is because Saudi arabia can maintain this for the next thousand years. Its not an achievement of goals. Israel can live with it. West will continue to supply expensive weapons to Arabs as long as its meant to be used on Arabs and Muslims.

Strategy and thinking has to be modified or enhanced as environment, situation, threat, increases or decreases.

[Volcano-X]

A selam

what you mean apka matlab ?


BTW I hate also all our leaders have write something about them in other topic..;)

salamualikum

well bro i said that 2 leaders of muslim world

AND SAUDI Arabian.. i really hate ur monarchy and Pakistan's so called leaders.. sorry but when israels were killing in gaza did u block the oil? we have the nukes and can kill israel but sorry our leaders dont have balls and so does urz ...maintaining the enemy relations is nt enuff ..

Allah Hafiz

[SaudiArabian]

sorry but when israels were killing in gaza did u block the oil?

KSA has a full trade and economic embargo with israel.

unless you're talking about blocking oil from world markets which would be pointless and useless.

[meengla]

I have to agree with our SaudiArabian friend here.
While Erdogan's gesture was bold and needs to be applauded the 'strategic' relationship between Turkey and Israel will remain the same. Why is the relationship 'strategic' when Turkey buys Israeli weapons and Israel buys Turkish water? The $3billion trade between the two directly gets used to pounding the helpless Palestinians.

On the other than, except for Jordan and Egypt, none of the Arab countries have any meaningful relationship with Israel. Some of them can only rant and rave (Libya, for example) because they don't have borders with Israel; while others with borders are hostile but powerless (Lebanon and Syria). Jordan is too weak militarily while Egypt is being bribed for peace. Iran does not have borders but has done more for Palestinians than any other country anywhere because it has, through Hizbollah, 'wiped off' the fake invincibility aura of Israel. That was the first step for Israel's Waterloo, as history is likely to judge it.

And I don't think at all that Turkey is the 'natural leader' of the Islamic world. With a powerful, psychopathic military which indulges in fancies of being European and 'white' it is almost impossible in near future for Turkey to lose its 'strategic' relationship with Israel. The natural leader of the Islamic world remains KSA; they need to throw off the self-serving despots first though.

I know there can be arguments about a need for 'dialog' between Israel and Turkey. But I think Turkey does not need Israel even half as much as Israel needs Turkey; the latter doing a Venezuela will be a HUGE blow to Israeli morale.

[Ababeel]

Meengla, you bring up good points but I guess we are all happy about this development because its a change from Turkey's status quo. Whereas natural leader of Muslim world, KSA, has remained silent throughout recent ordeal and maintained status quo. From its perspective best option is to maintain status quo, to do anything else would be useless and pointless.

Turkish people have come along way from Tayyip Erdogan spending time in Jail to lead AKP and win election. I see more and more Turkish people turning toward Islam, and parties like AKP. Where as KSA has gone from King Faisal to King Fahd to now King Abdullah. No doubt Turkey has a long way to go, but change is not going to come from heaven it will start with nation themselves who have dignity, and who are not dead. Turkey might not be leader of Muslim world, but there is a strong push among its population to turn toward its Islamic roots.

On the other hand Arab street is dead. They can only speak to defend their leaders and their miserable current state. Take the example of Egypt. Egypt is the most populace Arab nation, but its leaders have opted to lick Israel's behind because they fear a functioning Hamas lead government on its borders would have serious ramifications for Egypt and its government. Egyptian Arab street is busy dancing to Sha'abi music and is oblivious to the fact that its government is raping them.

Same is true with our nation, we can come out on the street for a noble cause like restoring CJP, but we are quite when it comes to our National Security. We helplessly watch as US bombs our territory while our leaders nod their heads "we have no such agreements" wink! Wink!

[SaudiArabian]

Whereas natural leader of Muslim world, KSA, has remained silent throughout recent ordeal

says who ? :s

KSA's govt issued almost daily condemnation statements (go to SPA if you want) . how come you or anybody else accuse us of "silence" ?

but thats not what matters. what matters are the actions. KSA pledged 1 Billion $ to reconstruct Gaza and now has a +5 Billion $ special fund for Gaza. in addition to aid and support of Palestine's resistance. those are the actions that matters.

its so weird when someone accuses KSA of silence or not doing anything forgetting where Hamas gained its funding in the first place. it makes whoever said this seems to be as if he's watching nothing during the Gaza war.

[meengla]

Ababeel,
Yes, KSA is ruled by insecure despot who think they are going to be politically secure by buying expensive toys from Washington which they will probably not be able to use effectively. But I also think the rulers of KSA know that their involvement in any major war will engulf a vast region in a major war and that is not a trivial point. Let's avoid that point if possible. No one will be winner. No one except death and destruction. The lethality which even 3rd world countries now possess will make a World War III even more catastrophic for the world than the 2nd World War. However, if Obama does not become a true 'honest broker' than I think it would be better for the regions of around Palestine to unite and kick out every single vestige Western influence from those regions. In the long term every ascending civilization has to pay a heavy price but no civilization can prosper if it has imperialistic forces directing their policies. South American continent is a good, tentative example of a turning of tide.
About Pakistan's rulers being so 'cowardly', let me tell you something: In Pakistan's entire history, not a single American bomb (in a hostile action, at least) ever fell on Pakistan's soil until sometime in the mid 2000's--under an all-powerful military president. So before the apologists for Pakistan's military rule bash the current civilian leadership too much they may want to establish some perspectives, some undeniable 'facts' to inform them better. Bottom line is that Pakistan is too economically weak, too dependent upon Western economies, to pose any challenge to the drone attacks. Unless Pakistanis unite and willing to 'eat grass' the drone attacks are likely to happen.

[Saqr]

A KSA run by Islam is a different story, it would be one of the world's strongest and largest countries, just as any other Muslim country that decides to take that path.

[platinum786]

Saudi Arabia's words carry weight. Whilst the comments from the Turkish PM are welcome, we need Turkey to take actual steps to place a noose around Israel's neck. At the same time, the point of your comment is nonsense. So you don't do trade with Israel, big deal, thing is you could have done more to harm Israel and it's interests and you didn't.

Turkey is lauded for breaking away from status Quo at this point. the arabs are condemned as we have seen no reaction from them.

[asal-main]

I have to agree with our SaudiArabian friend here.
While Erdogan's gesture was bold and needs to be applauded the 'strategic' relationship between Turkey and Israel will remain the same. Why is the relationship 'strategic' when Turkey buys Israeli weapons and Israel buys Turkish water? The $3billion trade between the two directly gets used to pounding the helpless Palestinians.

I dont agree with this point. The reason is historical.
Turks fought and bled for Muslims for a thousand years. They need no introduction.
Arabs however in 20th century decided for whatever reason they are being discriminated, and invited British Kaafir and others to destroy Turkish and Muslim power. Israel's creation is a direct result of this. Israel's creation is a result of the replacement of Turkish Muslim power in middle east, with British and French power, whom the Turks were fighting and the Arabs supporting. Then why should Turkey not have had relations with Israel??? Atleast they also maintained relations with the backstabbing Arabs. If it was me, I might not have had relations with Arabs at all. Once the western crusaders and colonizers had taken over, they naturally refashioned middle east the way they wanted to fulfill a variety of their interests which included creation of Israel and other Arab states.

[meengla]

I dont agree with this point. The reason for that is historical.
Turks fought and bled for Muslims for a thousand years. They need no introduction. Arabs however in 20th century decided for whatever reason they are being discriminated, and invited British Kaafir and others to destroy Turkish and Muslim power. Israel's creation is a direct result of the replacement of Turkish Muslim power in middle east, with British and French power, whom the Turks were fighting and the Arabs supporting. Then why should Turkey not have had relations with Israel??? Atleast they also maintained relations with the backstabbing Arabs. If it was me, I might not have had relations with Arabs at all.

AsalMain,
You have a superficial view of the Ottoman Empire of the early 20th century. And it is not only you and but several others in this Forum. The Ottoman Empire, like any other empire, was in its death bed by early 20th century and it was only a matter of years, if not months, around the First World War, where the Ottoman Empire would implode. I don't blame Arabs for standing up for their rights as sovereign entities. Even in this Forum, most of the times people Pooh-Pooh ideas of a 'Caliphate'. Hypocrisy when they wish to talk about a Caliphate in early 20th century. Also, at that time, for better or worse, there was no 'Arab' voice except a few tribal armies/leaders, opposing Turkey around Palestine. The 'Arab World' is a huge place, stretching from the Western shores of Africa to the Persian Gulf and to condemn it in one stroke shows a lack of understanding of geography but also a lack of nationalist movements across the world. Yes, 'nationalistic', same as 'Pakistan First', which many of this Forum members, rightly or wrongly, worship.

Also, this may burn your's and a few others' wings: What Pakistan did to the Taliban in late 2001 cannot be looked upon by millions others without pondering about 'Muslims, backstabbing another Muslim'. By the way, I think what Musharraf did was the right thing in 2001, but for un-informed people that would look like 'betrayal'. But to a superficial, uniformed person that would certainly appear like a Muslim backstabbing another one.

Finally, I know you are one of those confirmed 'Arab Haters' on this forum. And I don't particularly pull punches when criticizing the leadership in some Arab countries myself. But I, unlike you and some others, try to establish a historic perspectives to nations' actions.

Read up more. It will help you to recognize there are forces out to destroy the Islamic world on one excuse or another. You, like some others, are a quite willing pawn in their hands.

[asal-main]

meengla, you have a habit of getting personal. 'Arab hater'? Superficial knowledge? My knowledge or your knowledge might be debatable, but I dont think I took a history exam in your class. Ottoman empire was on the decline therefore naturally Arabs had to attack Turks. How stupid of me. When British and French attacked, many Arab groups were getting aid and training, attacking Turks. There were some Arabs who were still fighting for Turks, but these were mostly religious Arabs. Turks very nearly lost big chunks of Turkey including Istanbul. Massive western allied army had landed in Turkey. They were attacked by Greeks, Armenians, Arabs internally. Islamically, it can be called betrayal by Arabs. Thats the standard I go by. Since then Turkey has progressed and become a modern state without oil. From secular or nationalist point Arabs could ofcourse do whatever they want. But then they should not expect other Muslims to fight for their causes. I fight because Arabs also lost Jerusalem, a holy city to all Muslims. It is an Islamic cause. Btw who invited Western forces to fight Iraq? Which country has headquarters of Central Command? Whose ideology kills one American and twenty Muslims? Pointing out reality and facts is not hatred. In an inability to deal with it, might be.

[*Zarrar Jareeh*]

Have to agree with asal-main here. The arabic betrayal of the Muslim Ottoman empire still influences how Turkey views them. Even now when Israel was attacking Gaza, Egypt kept it's border closed with Gaza while the rest of the Arabas just sat back and watched as they are too weak to actually do anything concrete. Let's face it, Muslim world is disunited and fragmented (in direct contradiction to the instructions of Allah in the Quran) and the enemy exploits this weakness.

[meengla]

meengla, you have a habit of getting personal. 'Arab hater'? Superficial knowledge? My knowledge or your knowledge might be debatable, but I dont think I took a history exam in your class. Ottoman empire was on the decline therefore naturally Arabs had to attack Turks. How stupid of me. When British and French attacked, many Arab groups were getting aid and training, attacking Turks. There were some Arabs who were still fighting for Turks, but these were mostly religious Arabs. Turks very nearly lost big chunks of Turkey including Istanbul. Massive western allied army had landed in Turkey. They were attacked by Greeks, Armenians, Arabs internally. Islamically, it can be called betrayal by Arabs. Thats the standard I go by. Since then Turkey has progressed and become a modern state without oil. From secular or nationalist point Arabs could ofcourse do whatever they want. But then they should not expect other Muslims to fight for their causes. I fight because Arabs also lost Jerusalem, a holy city to all Muslims. It is an Islamic cause. Btw who invited Western forces to fight Iraq? Which country has headquarters of Central Command? Whose ideology kills one American and twenty Muslims? Pointing out reality and facts is not hatred. In an inability to deal with it, might be.

AsalMain,
Yes, you are an 'ArabHater' especially since you fail to recognize that there was never a single 'Arab' voice in early 20th century at all in any political sense. At best, there were a few tribal leaders in very few 'Arab' countries surrounding Jerusalem who 'betrayed' the Ottoman. To paint a group of people as diverse from the western shores of Africa to the Persian Gulf in one stroke of brush shows crass ignorance of history and what drives historic events.
As to those who think Turks feel betrayed by Arab 'backstabbing' of Turks, well Boo Hooo! The Ottoman Empire was going to be history, just like any other Empire in human history. And Turks themselves have systematically seen to be more 'Europeans' and 'White' than what Arabs could have done. Is that also 'Arab' fault?
Again, the hypocrisy in this Forum is laughable: It is convenient to Pooh-Pooh any mention of a 'Caliphate' now but not when it came to the few tribal 'ARAB' leaders in early 20th century it was okay, right?

[meengla]

I would like to add a first hand experience which may, or may not relate to this Topic; this happened within last few months
I was having a good discussion with a Turkish friend who, after getting frustrated with me, asked, 'Have you ever met an Arab you could trust'?. It was in the context of Israel-Arab war. I retorted: 'Have you ever met an Israeli you could trust?'. His mother, sitting next to us, seeing that a Pakistani and Turkish friend were about to be too frank, said that: 'Yes, you cannot trust any of them'.

[Saqr]

Recognizing/legitimizing Israel, and failing to restore the Caliphate...blame falls upon all actors involved.

[MoThSmOkE]

I hope Edrogan backs up his statement by atleast minimizing Turkey's contacts with Israel. There needs to be a start somewhere. If Turkey could provide the leadership, then countries like Qatar, Egypt could be forced to follow.

As I said earlier, Turkey and Iran are the two countries that can lead us.

[asal-main]

AsalMain,
Yes, you are an 'ArabHater' especially since you fail to recognize that there was never a single 'Arab' voice in early 20th century at all in any political sense. At best, there were a few tribal leaders in very few 'Arab' countries surrounding Jerusalem who 'betrayed' the Ottoman. To paint a group of people as diverse from the western shores of Africa to the Persian Gulf in one stroke of brush shows crass ignorance of history and what drives historic events.
As to those who think Turks feel betrayed by Arab 'backstabbing' of Turks, well Boo Hooo! The Ottoman Empire was going to be history, just like any other Empire in human history. And Turks themselves have systematically seen to be more 'Europeans' and 'White' than what Arabs could have done. Is that also 'Arab' fault?
Again, the hypocrisy in this Forum is laughable: It is convenient to Pooh-Pooh any mention of a 'Caliphate' now but not when it came to the few tribal 'ARAB' leaders in early 20th century it was okay, right?

I use Arabs as a generic word. You dont know any better way yourself. Most of the people in the middle east are called Arabs.
Who was blowing up Turkish passenger trains and rail lines with the help of British money and weapons? Arabs were. These are the people who grew influential and became leaders. Obviously not all Arabs. Hardly matters.

I am not saying Turkey should maintain relations with israel no matter what. I am saying it is the logical outcome of past events which makes perfect sense from Turkish point of view. Such a thing takes time to change.

[SaudiArabian]

.. Obviously not all Arabs. Hardly matters.

actually it does matter. especially when you or anyone else points the finger at "Arabs" and accuse them of betrayel. when you generalize the actions of the corrupt sharif of hejaz , who was a common enemy of the Ottomans and Saudis , on all Arabs then accuse us of betrayel .. that is arrogance.

[asal-main]

http://hnn.us/readco...7371&bheaders=1
" The Saudi relationship with the USA, however, is an offshoot, or the child if you will, of the Saudi-British entanglement of the Ottoman period and after that empire’s demise. The USA merely took over the British role at the close of WWII.
The Saudi regime was imposed by the British in the waning days of the Ottoman Empire when they favoured them over Hussein’s Hashemite tribes, the former sheriffs of the Holy Sites, who were the original prodigal sons of British Arab policy during and after WWI. We must bear in mind, like it or not, that Arab culture, and Muslim areas in general are organised, governed and influenced by tribal allegiances. Nation states are a very modern development imposed after WWI. (The Hussein Hashemite clan was given part of Palestine, what is now Jordan, as compensation for not getting all of Arabia and Syria after WWI, as the UK had promised). "

[Felicius]

There are many actions that depict intentions.
Silence is one of those actions.

And when you say something, then change your statement after a few days, says a lot more than silence.
It's time The Arab League Walked The Talk.

About the Ottoman, it's all history, get over it guys, just a chapter in the history books.
Today and tomorrow, that's what counts really.

[asal-main]

yaar, ottoman empire is history, but all it did was replace empires to british then american after world war II. It is impossible to analyze today's middle east without knowing what happened.
One has to wonder what were arab groups and tribes thinking when Turks were trying to protect them, holy lands, and Muslim honor from british and french imperialism. For the first time sons of crusaders came in political, religious and economic control of the Holy land that included far more than Palestine and Jerusalem. Now Damascus, Baghdad, Cairo, Riyadh, Makkah, Madinah came under. British were sending troops from India to middle east, even to Makkah. How in the world did so called Muslim and Arab come under the spell of slavery so willingly in the heart of Islam. Many say Israel may not exist without America. Thats not the only state that could be in jeopardy. If we want to understand why King of Jordan always talks in soft, sweet and pleasant tones toward America then we have to understand that history. If we want to understand why King of Saudi Arabia says thank God U.S. is the only superpower then we need to understand that part of history.

[Felicius]

yaar, ottoman empire is history, but all it did was replace empires to british then american after world war II.

If the discussion, about the defunct Ottoman empire, concentrates around Where & When, it's interesting.
Once you get into the the Who & What, it becomes a khichri, the blame game doesn't benefit any debate.

What I had originally meant earlier was that history has no significance except for a chapter in the history books.
Whether the Persians succeeded, or the Arabs were better, or the Ottomans did the right thing, who gives a damn?
We can talk about the Moguls, British Empire, Hitler all our lives, finger pointing's not going to benefit the Palestinians in any way whatsoever.

Turkey has skipped generations, so has the Persians, so have the Arabs, history doesn't pertain to them any longer, just as much Moghul era pertains to our way of thinking either.
What happens tomorrow and who does it, is what counts from today.

[asal-main]

well, empires come and go. The question is what do they want in the middle east. I am not sure. Many states and people dont or cant let go of america. They are also opposed to israel and american support of israel but themselves need america. They will be happy if america stops supporting israel but that is not going to happen. Hence the conflict and dilemma, which plays out far beyond the arabian region. It even affects us as individuals and muslims in different ways.

[Felicius]

True, but today's actions can't be judged by what that region did few hundred years ago.
Education, environment, life, events, changes the thought process.

Ottoman's (or Turkish) are not the same today.
They'll sell the Ummah if tomorrow EU says welcome onboard.
Talk to expat Turks about Gaza, Palestine, etc., and they're biased pro Israel.
Talk to them about Iraq, they're biased pro-USA.

Arabs today are a lot better than the Turks.
However, they have vested interests as well, and even though we are friends at government level, we need to be wary at lower levels.

Iranians, as compared to both today, are the best, and making the most strides and progress.
Who cares if yesterday's Persians were loud mouths, today they assist Hamas/Hizbullah openly defying all UN sanctions, and Arabs are the loud mouths of today.

It's tomorrow that counts and will be judged by the living, the dead don't tell tales any more than history books do.

[asal-main]

On a religious and cultural level, Arab govts are better than Turkey govt. But I have also seen large and deeply religious Turkish communities in many western countries that you wont find among Arabs. In the 90s one of my dutch colleagues was complaining, "I dont understand, when I see Turkish TV they look, dress western but when I see Turks in Holland they are Islamic and religious". My uncle spent four years in Ankara during late 80's, plus he also spent many years in gulf. In Turkey, he said he could not tell it was Eid and Ramzan from the lack of familiar and festive govt and cultural environment. It was as if he was in a western country but they did have Eid holidays. This is a result of that time too we are referring to. As we know Attaturk tried to "modernize" Turkey by forcing Islam as much as possible out of public. The people who came to power developed hatred for Arabs and Muslims because of those events we are talking about, many became atheists. I knew Turkish atheists, who had religious grandparents. Many educated religious were silenced or killed. But as my uncle said most of the people from outside couple of main cities, from small towns and villages were always conservative and pro-Islamic, even though they were not well versed in Islamic practise. They are coming to power and changing Turkey in front of our very eyes. So the jury is out. Things change. Its upto Allah.

[truthseeker]

how weird our Muslim world could be.

a country that still maintains military and economic cooperation with israel and recognize it diplomaticly , becomes the hope of Muslims all over the world because its PM made an argument with israel president.

whereas a country that still maintains hostile relations , full economic embargo with israel and finance Palestine and supports its resistance with billions for so long , its leader gets called a dog ?


what Erdogan said is welcomed , but he should make these words real and worthy of something by terminating his military and economic relations with israel.

You don't understand. Turkey benefits from its relations with Israel and the West both technologically, economically and militarily. We will cut ties with Israel when we can in the future, but not at this moment. Turkish leaders are very smart, and they know what they are doing, trust me.

Nobody likes Israel in Turkey. Turkey is becoming a technological powerhouse, the most powerful Muslim nation. An example for other Muslim countries. Turkish military is by far the strongest of all Muslim nations. I wish other Muslim nations were as strong as my country. Thankfully, there is at least Pakistan and Iran!

Unfortunately, I have to say that many Muslim countries, including Turkey, are westernizing in certain aspects. The youth in countries such as Morocco, Turkey, Lebanon and even Iran are heavily influenced by unislamic western lifestyles. Such as alcohol, ZINA etc. !!

It saddens me deeply. This is a huge problem; a MUCH bigger problem than Israel or the US. Why are our people slowly turning away from Islam? Not all, but a part of society. Like I said, this is not only the case in Turkey, but also in Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Lebanon, Iran etc. Islam is in danger. It's under western influence.

[truthseeker]

On a religious and cultural level, Arab govts are better than Turkey govt. But I have also seen large and deeply religious Turkish communities in many western countries that you wont find among Arabs. In the 90s one of my dutch colleagues was complaining, "I dont understand, when I see Turkish TV they look, dress western but when I see Turks in Holland they are Islamic and religious". My uncle spent four years in Ankara during late 80's, plus he also spent many years in gulf. In Turkey, he said he could not tell it was Eid and Ramzan from the lack of familiar and festive govt and cultural environment. It was as if he was in a western country but they did have Eid holidays. This is a result of that time too we are referring to. As we know Attaturk tried to "modernize" Turkey by forcing Islam as much as possible out of public. The people who came to power developed hatred for Arabs and Muslims because of those events we are talking about, many became atheists. I knew Turkish atheists, who had religious grandparents. Many educated religious were silenced or killed. But as my uncle said most of the people from outside couple of main cities, from small towns and villages were always conservative and pro-Islamic, even though they were not well versed in Islamic practise. They are coming to power and changing Turkey in front of our very eyes. So the jury is out. Things change. Its upto Allah.

You are exaggerating. Islam is very powerful in Turkey. Even in the biggest cities the majority of people are very religious. Ankara is where secularism started during Ataturk's time, but even Ankara has changed now, as many people from poorer parts of Turkey have migrated there.

[truthseeker]

True, but today's actions can't be judged by what that region did few hundred years ago.
Education, environment, life, events, changes the thought process.

Ottoman's (or Turkish) are not the same today.
They'll sell the Ummah if tomorrow EU says welcome onboard.
Talk to expat Turks about Gaza, Palestine, etc., and they're biased pro Israel.
Talk to them about Iraq, they're biased pro-USA.

Arabs today are a lot better than the Turks.
However, they have vested interests as well, and even though we are friends at government level, we need to be wary at lower levels.

Iranians, as compared to both today, are the best, and making the most strides and progress.
Who cares if yesterday's Persians were loud mouths, today they assist Hamas/Hizbullah openly defying all UN sanctions, and Arabs are the loud mouths of today.

It's tomorrow that counts and will be judged by the living, the dead don't tell tales any more than history books do.

Turks pro-Israel and US? Perhaps a few idiots, but out of all Muslim nations, Turks hate Israel and the US the most! I can guarantee this.

[truthseeker]

actually it does matter. especially when you or anyone else points the finger at "Arabs" and accuse them of betrayel. when you generalize the actions of the corrupt sharif of hejaz , who was a common enemy of the Ottomans and Saudis , on all Arabs then accuse us of betrayel .. that is arrogance.

Unfortunately, most Turks (almost all) think that ALL Arabs stabbed us in the back during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. It's not true of course, but our people are brainwashed by the secular and nationalist education. Arabs are worse than Israel and the US to some Turks. Nationalism is destroying the world. Nowadays most Muslims are nationalist, what a pity. The most nationalist Muslim countries are Turkey and Iran. I don't know about Pakistan, but I think they are fairly nationalist too?

[truthseeker]

I hope Edrogan backs up his statement by atleast minimizing Turkey's contacts with Israel. There needs to be a start somewhere. If Turkey could provide the leadership, then countries like Qatar, Egypt could be forced to follow.

As I said earlier, Turkey and Iran are the two countries that can lead us.

I agree about Turkey and Iran. They are very rich and old civilizations. There is a strong sense of statehood in both nations. But doesn't Pakistan have any ambitions to "lead" the Muslim world?

[platinum786]

Ambitions Yes. But the leadership of Pakistan is failing us massively.

Right now the Muslim world is the blind leading the blind.

If Pakistani politicans had any say it would be Satan leading the blind, off the edge of a cliff.

Pakistan has massive internal political issues, we have ethnic and secatarian strife which needs sorting, we have illiteracy and poverty which needs tackling, we have a weak economy, we have a lack of justice and corruption througout the police force.

We have bigger fish to fry.

[truthseeker]

By the way, my username should of course be SympatheticTurk, lol. Can this be changed? Sorry for this off topic question.

[truthseeker]

Ambitions Yes. But the leadership of Pakistan is failing us massively.

Right now the Muslim world is the blind leading the blind.

If Pakistani politicans had any say it would be Satan leading the blind, off the edge of a cliff.

Pakistan has massive internal political issues, we have ethnic and secatarian strife which needs sorting, we have illiteracy and poverty which needs tackling, we have a weak economy, we have a lack of justice and corruption througout the police force.

We have bigger fish to fry.

I see, I'm sorry to hear that it's such a mess. Turkey is not perfect either though.

[platinum786]

It's true. I can't change your username, but i'll put in a request to the admins who can.

Stick around on the forum and you'll notice so many members want pan-islamic harmony and want Pakistan to take a leading role. We know the solutions to our problems in general, but anyone who gets into power, has no interests in these solutions as they mean takin power from the leadership class and giving it to the people. Why would they weaken their own positions?

Take a simple issue of land ownership. A large amount of our population lives in rural communities. The land they live on, is owned by major land owners. Often thousands of people will live on land owned by 1 man. These thousands will farm on his land and will be paid in grain, not money. Instantly these people have no freedom, as they have no purchasing power. If they need medical treatment etc, they have to get the land owner to help them. Often if someone dies, they need to wait for permission from the land owner to come home and give permission to bury someone on his land before they can bury the dead.

Then there is the other half of our rural community. The tribal society. these people live in tribal structures and obey tribal leaders. Often tribal leaders will ensure that power is passed along the blood line and to ensure that, make sure people remain uneducated, unskilled and reliant on the tribal leaders for influence outside of their own tribe. These people remain loyal, as they have no choice, nor a need not too.

Now these rural people vote for whoever the land owner or the tribal leader instructs them to vote for. Guess who they askt them to vote for? It should come as no suprise our parliament is full of the very same land owners and tribal leaders.

The army takes power, but does nothing to fix things long term. The people in the cities and towns are more free than rural people, and certainly more educated, bt even then, politics has not natured, people tend to vote for the same old faces. When was the last time a father became leader in turkey and then years later the child of that man was elected leader? Thats what we have in Pakistan. Our politicans have all their siblings and cousins in politics too. It's a circus.

[truthseeker]

^^ wow, I didn't know all that, thank you for the information. It really is a sad situation then and very hard to change

Also, you have a massive population, isn't that a huge problem as well.. although it can also be a big advantage for Pakistan in the future when the country is more developed. You really could become the leader of the Muslim world, if you tackle all those problems. It is also sad that despite Pakistan's massive population, Turkey and Iran have much bigger economies.

[platinum786]

The population is the barkat of Allah on us. Look how Eastern Turkey, the heartland of the aKP, the population is an asset with your manuracturing boom. We could also have the same effect in agriculture, manufacturing etc, but one of the major issues with mass industrialization in Pakistan is a lack of energy. One of the best resources we have for electricity is water and building dams, but these are not built due to ethnic politics. Politicans of different ethnicities will argue whether the province they are from is getting enough royalties for the dam, or whether there is enough compensation for displaced people etc.

The government will ask for it to be built, opposition will oppose it for the sake of opposition. Some of the greivances are valid, but nobody wants to make the sacrfice upon which great nations are built, so many forget the sacrifices their fathers and grandfathers made to create this nation.

[Gökhan]

funny videoo

Angry Turkish Minister R.Tayyip Erdoğan Vs Coward Sionist Peres

[SaudiArabian]

one more i must say .. whats the point of his words if they are not accompanied by actions ?



http://www.jpost.com.....icle/ShowFull

Mar 31, 2009
Turkey, Israel to hold joint exercises

Israel will take part in a joint naval exercise with Turkey this summer despite months of tense relations between Jerusalem and Ankara.

Defense officials said the Israel Navy would allocate at least one missile ship to participate in a search-and-rescue exercise in the Mediterranean Sea in July. Other NATO member countries are expected to join the drill.

The Israeli and Turkish navies have enjoyed years of strong ties and participate annually in joint maneuvers throughout the region.

While there was never a real fear that this year's exercise would be canceled, the possibility was raised due to the strained relations between Turkey and Israel since Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan castigated Israel during Operation Cast Lead, defense officials said.

OC Ground Forces Command Maj.-Gen. Avi Mizrahi also raised Ankara's ire in February when he told a conference of IDF officers at the National Defense College that Erdogan needed to look in the mirror before criticizing Israel.

Mizrahi said Turkey was not in a position to condemn Israeli actions in Gaza when it stations troops in northern Cyprus and massacred Armenians during World War I.

Mizrahi's comments followed Erdogan's harsh criticism of Israel at the World Economic Forum in Davos during a panel with President Shimon Peres.