Turks: The Bad Part

Interesting article. Turkey is one country i really want to visit/live in for a while. MY cousin who lived in the rich district of europeanised turks also mentioned this inferiority complex vis-a-vis europe and embarassment of being muslim amongst such turks.

on the other hand some of the proudest muslims i`ve met have been turks. turkish women can be very beautiful indeed.

Excellent and balanced article.

Would like to know more about what you are studying in Turkey...

...thank you for educating me about turks and their inherent inferiority complex...i was unable to understand why this particular interactor on chowk who claims to be a turk among other things, made fun of arabs, darker pakistani males and homely females who prided about his grandmother`s beauty whose bikini-clad shapely form attracted huge crowds on hawk`s bay beach of karachi in the early fiftys...;)

The article is written clearly and quite well, I have to give you that. However, based on such touch and go contact you cannot caricature an entire people. Your caricature, if I stretch it might apply to a small segment of the Turkish population but not the varying diversity that exists within them. Such ``personal experience`` as you have used in writing this piece is invaluable in directing us in avenues towards research but can never be and should never be taken as the final product.

I tend to agree with #4. I see this as a discussion of the writer`s experiences in college (where everyone seems to be self absorbed) and not much more.

One word for this article-

BS......................

This article belongs to the kiddie section.

What the author says about Turks in this article is of course true. As I have said on this website many times, human beings have the same weaknesses across the globe. I remember Salim Chauhan frequently tried to paint Turks as people who were color-blind in sharp contrast to people from our sub-continent. And many idiot Pakistanis often wax poetic about Turkey. Always brings to my mind the time when one Turkish woman (she was very white, but not very pretty) complained to me how Pakistani men would constantly stare at her and how uncomfortable it made her feel.

Some idiots have to get over their skin-based worldview. But then judging by Pakistanis on this website, that ain`t happening anytime soon.

#1...beauty ..lies in the eyes of the beholder! is all i can say!
If you have a soft corner for turkey ..you will find its women (albeit some only) beautiful!

#3..man! Arabs can be made fun off! They did not all fall from heaven! Havent you read salim chauhans excellent article on ``what not to do when in the US? ..especially if you are of the fundoo variety and muslim?

#4..masadi and #5..two birds of a kind..no! there seem to be $6, #7 flocking together too.

#8..smack on target.

Overall an interesting article!
Bet the Ummah will regret if the turks all enmasse ``become europeans`` !!
The ``reflected glory`` of the ottomans will go away overnight!
Jayen

in other words, then, Turks are like people everywhere else. (except indians on chowk, who have made chowk a cesspool - as evidenced by #8 and #9).

Fenasi,
Thank you for sharing your experiences while studying in Turkey. I must compliment you for your determination because Turkish is not an easy language and Turks can be very chauvinstic when it comes to language. I think that you have summarized quite fairly the dichotomy that is Turkey - a little in Europe, but mostly in Asia; Muslim in religion, but committed to secularism; fasting in Ramadan, but drinking the rest of the year; modesty in the streets, but the latest swimwear on the beach. If Turks are somewhat awed by European superiority, it is because from 1683 to 1917, as you correctly pointed out, they have suffered one humiliating defeat after another at the hands of various European Christian powers - Austrians, Poles, Russians, Italians, British, Serbs, and even Greeks. These defeats were temporarily interrupted by Turkish victories against Russians, Australians, and Greeks. The positive contribution by Ataturk, a European Turk from Macedonia, was the sense of self-reliance, pride, and modernity that he instilled in the Turkish people. Turkey has not lost a war in almost a century now and Ataturk had promised that from now on Turks will only die defending Turkey - the short engagement in the Korean War was a necessary evil to please the Americans.

As far as racism is concerned, I beg to differ with you. With so much diversity in skin color, hair color, eye color, nasal shape, height, and built, Turks really have no racial pecking order. The fact is that many of the blond/blue eyed Turks are the ``mohajirs`` and their descendants from Macedonia, Bulgaria, Bosnia, Serbia, Chechnya, and the Ukraine.

Informative article and some useful feedback, especially the one regarding perception of Arabs. Thanks,

Turks: The Good Part

While there are so many bad things to say about Turks and Turkey, it is a mystery that thousands upon thousands of Germans, British, and French people are buying up beach houses, condos, and vacation/retirement homes in Turkey. As Pakis, Arabs, and Iranians blame Turkey for being too submissive, too servile to Europe, there are Austrians, Serbs, Greeks, and Hungarians who think that Turks are too Muslim, too Eastern, too Asiatic. Meanwhile Turkey, ignoring both the hatred of the Central Europeans and the envy of its ``brethren`` to the east, keeps on moving forward. Without any oil bubbling from the ground or gas emanating from every hole in the ground, Turkey is a more stable, more egalitarian, better educated, more sanitary, and stronger country than the ones whose citizens want to blame Turkey and Turks for everything from the Crusades to the siege of Vienna to the creation of Israel. It would do Pakis a lot of good to clean up their own country, which lacks far far behind Turkey in every aspect except nuclear weapons, satellite telephones, and American choppers.

Turks are still trying to find an identity after Kemal Pasha played havoc with the original one and made them inferior. But they`re a people with their head squarely between their shoulders, and by now they would have realized what the europeans really think of them making excuses and not letting them into their little club with Turks humiliated and bending over backwards and being a Nato member and what not .. Europe will never let them in. That should be a lesson to the modernizers and west-chasers in other Islamic countries.

When their dream of being European is finally shattered and they eventually find an alternative identity, I wonder what it`s going to be. Likely it will be that of the modern educated Egyptian banker I met on 12th September 2001 who commented on the previous day`s events by saying ``It was nothing. There will be much more``.

Turks will be better off grabbing a chunk of Northern Iraq while the pie is still on the table before it`s all gone, and go back to their old empire building-expansionist ways. They will surely have all the Jehadis of the world on their side who are looking for lost glory too ... plus regain their lost identity, plus become an oil producing country ....

#8, Ramanujan {``Always brings to my mind the time when one Turkish woman (she was very white, but not very pretty) complained to me how Pakistani men would constantly stare at her and how uncomfortable it made her feel.``}

Ram Bhayya,
She must have felt very secure confiding in you as you sat next to her in your high-heeled shoes, your shocking pink shirt and pea green pants, while you waved your polished fingernails to shoo away the Paki gawkers.

Re: #11
[As far as racism is concerned, I beg to differ with you. With so much diversity in skin color, hair color, eye color, nasal shape, height, and built, Turks really have no racial pecking order. ...]

In that case they must be DISTINCTLY different from all their neighbors surrounding them. A Lebanese classmate who was dating an American girl used to boast to us that his girlfriend was blonde. The fact that she was blonde was UNDENIABLY a big deal with him.

Now I haven`t done any opinion surveys in that region (and frankly I`ll never go to any Islamic country, or a country with an Islamic majority, although middle easterners mostly don`t know/don`t care about the India/Pakistan thing, but then there could be someone ``misinterpreting`` some verse or another and ``eliminating`` me in the process), but my experience has been that people from that part of the world MOST DEFINITELY have their likes and dislikes aligned along the expected lines - where blond/blue eyed is most coveted etc. This is not the ``bad part`` about Turkey, and neither is it racism, but just shows they are like everybody else.

#14 by Salim_Chauhan

[Ram Bhayya,
She must have felt very secure confiding in you as you sat next to her in your high-heeled shoes, your shocking pink shirt and pea green pants, while you waved your polished fingernails to shoo away the Paki gawkers. ]


I would rather not go into the details of HOW I was sitting next to her.

``....Turks have a freewheeling animosity towards Arabs. Arabs are seen as a dirty, uneducated, chauvinistic, intolerant, extremely religious, totalitarian, hypocritical and bigoted..........``


This is how Afghans see Pakis...with one addition - Cowards

---

many even call Pakis Hindus

---

bcs of their conversions.

Turks you met seem to be just like people in all other countries to the dot.

Not bad. You missed their ``attitude`` towards the greek. Is there a parallel between tuki-greek relationship and paki-hindu? ottomans were kind of outsiders who came to anatolia and conquered byzentine (eastern roma) empire like the mughals and the greeks, with their stubborn old civilization held on to their ways (no, i am not talking about love of lambs)

[
#10 by tahmed32 on March 18, 2006 10:51am PT
in other words, then, Turks are like people everywhere else. (except indians on chowk, who have made chowk a cesspool - as evidenced by #8 and #9).
]

The dung beetle has spoken.

Re: # 13 zeemax {``...Turks ... have realized what the europeans really think ... not letting them into their little club with Turks humiliated and bending over backwards ... Europe will never let them in...``}

Europeans, particularly central Europeans, are indeed racists in this regard. But NEVER is a very long time and its also a very strong word. I would modify it to say ``for the time being`` instead of ``never``... Reality has a way of raising its ugly head and the reality of Europe is its impossible demography. European Union has no choice but to eventually let Turkey in... If they don`t do that the EU cannot and will not survive even to the end of the century. Turkey, with its young population, is the only choice an aging EU has in order to survive. Austria`s continued refusal to let Turkey into the EU is simply unsustainable for longer than another decade at most. To keep Turkey out much beyond that is a mathematical impossibility. To do so will spell the end of EU.

...SR

#13 zeemax
u make it sound so easy. Empire building aint gonna work anymore not even for the USA.

Fenasi,

Kizilbash (regardless of their current geographic location) don`t consider Sunni Turkish very civilized or westernized at all. Turks are considered one narrow minded bastards. You guys are called ``Turke budzad`` among Kizilbash community. I am a third generation Pakistani Kizilbash.

haideri

good article -- with factual analysis

Turks are ``Adhay teetar Adhay batair`` -- neither Europeans nor Asiatic -- this is what happens to country that straddles the two continents -- and depends more on Brawn than on Brain........

Turks are enamored and enchanted by the technology of POWER of the west but never cared for the values that made the West what it is today -- their Sultans were nothing more than the annual plunderers of Europe --

every year during summer the Turkish Sultans will assemble an army of fortune hunters and head westward on the annual expedition to invade plunder and catch slaves -- all over Europe -- no wonder the East Europeans especially the Greeks the Bulgars and the Serbs despise them to this day -- because they bore the brunt of their conquests and reconquests every year --

in the Arab world and the Muslim world -- up to the last Sultan Abdul Hamid -- the Turks enjoyed their position as Khalifatul-Muslimeen of all Islamic countries and Muslims in general all over the world -- considered themselves the custodians of Kaaba -- ruled Egypt and Middle East like medieval colonial power -- doing nothing to improve the lot of the people of those countries except using the brute force....

....because the Turks themselves were medieval....

the Greeks and the Arabs rightly complain that the country responsible for the decline of their culture, scholarship and past grandeur -- were the Turks -- they claim that where ever the Turks went they deprived those countries of their civilization, education, fine arts and scientific progress.....

because unlike the Western colonialists the backward Turkish colonials had nothing to offer to the colonized countries towards modernity......

Kemal Ataturk`s greatest contribution was that he secularized the once deeply religious country -- separated religion from State with the zeal that bordered on almost fanaticism --

but in the very hasty process Ataturk threw the baby with the tub water -- he threw thousand year history and culture and traditions of a very traditional community and made the Turks a past-less history-less community overnight......floating anchorless between the two very traditional and different continents..

...a little like post 47 Pakistan --

and that was Ataturk`s greatest folly -- that sowed the seeds of the failure of Turkish society to neither assimilate with the West nor with the East.......a shallow community with no past and no future.....except plenty of brawn not much of brain.....

......returning BACK to Islamism rather than going forward to essence of Europeanism...

i have asked this question a few times to urstruly. the middle eastern countries blame western colonization for their current siege mentality and general angst. ottomans colonized the entire populance from basra to berberistan until 1918 for 400 years...so that influence ought to be a more lasting legacy. why is this legacy ommitted in the narration of the middle-eastern hagiography according to the ummah.

#21 by SR

SR I acknowledge your argument fully re the `greying populations` of EU and the apparent impossibility of meeting social welfare commitments with retirees with less and less taxpayers in the long term. This problem is not only of EU but all of developed world including Japan outside of USA (immigration policies, low-birth rates, falling apart family systems and so forth). But my dear SR, they have other alternatives to solve this problem. Let me make the following points:

1) Globalisation ensures unchecked (indeed welcomed) outsourcing of the lowest value-added, labour intensive, generic, and mass produced but necessary goods and services for the developed world to countries with large pools of low/semi skilled, low paid labour force; while the capital intensive, highly value-added, proprietary production is handled in-house by small pools of a highly skilled, highly paid labour force. Generous investments in R&D at the same time retains Europe`s cutting edge, while globalisation at the same time ensures that such value addition cannot now take place anywhere else.

2) The continuous value addition and wage growth means higher fiscal revenues for the EU countries. Every single knowledge worker of EU contributes more to the tax base than a hundred waiters imported from Turkey in, say, Germany, and thus to the retirement plans of a greying population.

3) Take Japan which has the most serious problem of them all. Japan is hit not only by one of the lowest birth rates in the world ... but ... also the highest life expectancy. Today, Japan`s proportion of elderly, at 19%, is the highest in the world, but, forecast to reach almost 30% by 2025. So what did Japan do to compensate for this? What it actually did is a lesson in long-term strategy. It willingly handed over ALL it`s captive world market for low-end consumer electronics, household white goods and automotive products ten years ago to Korea and China, while it moved up yet further in the high-end value addition chain. It didn`t import any workers from anywhere to keep making the cheap stuff; it just either outsourced it to Malaysia or Thailand or simply abandoned the low-end market. Thus, One container load of merchandise from China or Korea is of less value now than a small consignment from a Japanese worker. And they started with making plastic toys remember? It wasn`t that long ago.

The name of the game is value-addition. Globalisation effectively monopolises that.

Above are merely the economic realities. There is another factor which I consider overriding above them all ... and that is the mindset. I have occasion to meet with the senior ECB officials from time to time. Whenever asked the question of Turkey`s membership of EU, their body language is sufficient answer.

Thus, the lure of Europe is a carrot dangled only to keep Turkey from drifting towards Ialmaic radicalism, which they have and always had a high propensity of doing, and never really meant anything other than that.

Rgds

#24 by nasah

Nasah you are right. Ata-turd threw out the baby with the bath water ...

Re: # 25 Turks are inferior to Pakistanis and Indians.
Pakistan is not white still major Nato friend of USA while Turkey just carrying weight of Europeans.
They still do not know making atomic bombs. Even though white still they want to be Wanabe European and they drink alcohol and eat pork and lard pig fat mixed breads. It is strange they are white still backward. They have history , they went up to Vinnena and put terror in hearts of white chritians so much there the famous music ( westen) symphony, Turkish death March. They are full of envy and lasosy and greed of Arabs where american presidents go on begging for black liquid gold. They are not liking Arabs as they kicked them and they are filthy rich. Turks are recist against Africans while Arabs are mix of turks and dark skined africans so they like dark colored people and got great strength like blacks of America. Now even white iranian have lots black blood as one can see habashis in Abadan and they are considered inferior Iranis.
I wonder why to go to backward country like turk from Pakistan I think many feel to just find gora chamadi wife as he feels his daughters will have no hard time to find nice husband. They are white and that is advantage but how one can become white just going to turkey land. Anyway its not good weather there too hot and cold. They hate mr. Hussain as he used to have lots of oil but he will be dead soon as brave tiger but Turks have become slave of usa.
IRP has done much better in human rights, industry, war industry and is able to put up with India on equal basis though they have more people. But Pakistan has racial advantage of being cream colored compared to Indians. Also mighty warriers blood mixing has made a special man in pakistan who is sturdy and and hard working. Even though has not got gifts from USA like turkey is more advanced for sure. Pakistan has produced nobel prize and scientists like Dr. Khan turkey is no where.

I just wonder what turks think about indians a dark brown race of polygot people who are dark like rats but far advanced than turks. It is some times shock to see turks not advanced as dark Indians. Real white people have some good intelligent people who control world by intelluctual power . In between is problem. Even in India cream colored+ little coal mix north Indians are generally no good in brain dept. Like afghan are no like European but darker they are jungi people and they are in state of mind. While dark colored people have no complex of darkness they are at ease with their color and so their brain works better. Pakistan+North Indian are agricultural people with culture as agricultural that is reflected in like flying kite or holi etc or Bhangara as music. All Turkey to North India people hyas not ``color`` problem and Turkey land must have accute problem so these retards and just waste time in childhood how to marry whiter skinned person and when parents all time wasted in how to find whiter boy for dark daughter and and raise color cream complexion by mixing whiter blood. All stupid time goes in feeling they are white monkeys. No do not blame me but at heart pakistani expak marries white buffolow from usa but will not marry dark colored wheatish beautiful boy or girl beautiful like dear with dark dovey eyes. Real pakistani and India at heart wants his daughter or boy marry white person person so grand children are milk white. And many time results are not good as children still look like deshi and people can easily find blood mixing as dark deshi color has more dominence and mixture is dark chakolate. Any way India will go ahead as they have dark colored [people and they have spared from such complex so they mind is free to think about things. As these people smart and that can definitely has Indian advantage. Even in our country we know all important people are Indian urdus with dark color and all retards dominate in feudal cream colored Punjabis and sindhis and they just want to punish them as their retard children can not stand against MQM followers so retards started Urban and rural divide to punish dark people. Our country lost last chance when we lost dark skinned bengalis, that was last hope but retards wanted to get them out out so retards will be lords of country. I like General he has shopwn place to retard gora prime minister. General should whip retards if he wants to improve avaerage IQ. Any way India has dark people and has advantaged on creamy racist retards. It is sad but true.

#28 by ahmedmadani

C`mon. Don`t get stuck up in colours. Rainbow is all different colours but starting from the same place, going in the same direction, and ending up in the same place. There`s no difference.

Rgds

Fenasi,

Thank you for the article. Interesting perspective from someone who has studied there. I have been doing a lot of research on Turkey lately because my family and I are taking a vacation there this summer. I have always found Turks to be pleasant and cultured, right from the bakers in Saudi Arabia to classmates in the USA. Unfortuantely these encounters have been brief and not sustained, something I hope to rectify this summer. Having said that, I think Ataturk did a great thing by trying to westernize his country by changing the script, separating mosque and state etc. It must have taken extreme foresight and courage to change traditional Turkish society from being protector of worldwide Islam to a society for the Turks. Many fundoo Muslims are against Ataturk because reportedly he decreed that the Quran be read in Turkish instead of Arabic. I do not know if this is true, but if this is, just imagine the tremendous vision and courage of the man in going against orthodoxy. This would have enabled Turks to really understand the Quran unlike the vast majority of non-Arab Muslims and grasp the essence of Islam instead of blindly following the lead of mullahs. I think Turkey is reaping the benefits of Ataturk`s leadership and vision today.

From what I have read, their economy is not doing too badly. Though cities like Bursa are losing their quaint charm due to industrialization, I think Turkey will come through for the better. Turkish cities have been able to absorb rural migrants, avoiding the scenario in developing countries where rural labor settle and erect sprawling slums leading to increase in crime and other societal problems. Poverty of the like found in many Muslim countries is not found in Turkey. They are self sufficient in food and have a booming tourist industry. How many other 97+% Muslim majority countries have such a booming tourist industry? It is a reflection of the sense of security tourists feel in exploring Turkey. I am sure other Muslim majority countries are just as hospitable but the prevailing political situations do not inspire the same confidence among tourists. All credit to Turkey then.

regards

Nicely written article here. But I need to ask something about what you wrote:

Recently, I bought a Toyota Corolla and a large number of Turks told me that I should have bought either a Renault, Citroen, Opel or some other European car for the same price. After a while I gave up explaining that Toyota had better reliability, comfort and safety ratings than the brands they recommended.

Did they recommend Volvo or and Audi? ^_^

#28 ahmedmadani ...
Man! Your Long and informative essays make my day! :)
No doubt most will agree?
Keep it up!!
Jayen

#30 by kabuliwallah

A$$hole only thing they have is tourist industry. Do you want it to become a Thigh-Land and capital of a Bangcock?

Turkey - an evening coffee house to relax for both the sides; Europe and Arabs.
With no oil means it tends to go at its own pace; the pace of the smoke of a sheesha; all settled and billowing with a rested calm.

Nonetheless, Turkish people are one of the hygiene-maintaining people on earth. They crave to carve out a clean mirror out of every clean thing glaring with neatness.

Entry into the EU -[referring to a comment down there - without Turkey EU is suffocated] - even if its a conspiracy against and EU is desperate; to avoid Turkey, England can hop in the bandwagon get the EU ticket and shove off Turkey for a while.
While commerce is stable in Turkey as is its climate, but economical impact in the region by Turkey is no more than a fluttered imagination.

P.S - the piece of writing is indeed comprehensive but quite basic; indeed it has endowed in the wishlist to visit this country and imbibe the breeze passing through olden structures that still stand today.

zeemax brother: i just saw this on the modernity board from you:
You write:

#88 by tahmed32/#89 by Kulharee
You a$$holes ... you`re here for nothing else than feel-good stuff looking at your own posts. You don`t know anything.
So ... fcuk off.


Now then!! I am getting very worried about you. Are you feeling alright? I thought you were the future nobel prize winner in economics. You havent taken to the bottle have you???

madani #28 madani jee, why do you make such meaningless statements as ``Turks are inferior to indians and pakistanis``. What kind of racist lafangbaazi is this, i ask you?? and dont say that to a Turks face, or else he will say: ``Uglupulmacip!! hayaoku warokuu madani!!`` and then he will hang you upside down.

Re: # 26 zeemax

I agree with everything you wrote in #26 ... no disputing the facts. But on the question of mindset, I submit to you that what you say is true today. In the years to come, as the old foggies die out, the attitude of the younger generation is going to be different and in a decade or two things will change sufficiently to where Turkey will be accepted... that is to say IF the European Union survives in its present form. I have a feeling that the EU may not last and may be reduced to a common market rather than become a United States of Europe. Their common currency, the Zero (popularly known as the Euro), is a fiasco and was implemented in the most absurd manner...(more about that another time)... and the so-called EU constitution is another disaster... its simply a nice thought that is being played out as a series of bad policies and I don`t see it going too far. Unlike the 1789 experiment of the United States, this EU nonsense cannot survive two centuries unless these old stupid European attitudes change radically.

So, in conclusion, I believe we are saying the same thing more or less. In an EU that has the present mindset Turkey is out. But if this mindset does not change the EU will also die. Conversely, if the attitude changes over time, as I believe it may, then EU may also have a longer term future. And if that happens, Turkey will also be in.

...SR

SR: your projections assume everything else equal, particularly on the technology front. that assumption is not realistic. e.g. the japanese seem to be relying on robotics and automation to deal with an aging population, rather than dealing with millions of neurotic immigrants from the third world (like the europeans tried to do). if they succeed, the europeans may follow the same route.

Re: # 8

Mr. Ram I am told there no real blonds in USA. All women in USA are blond wanabis. Herd dark colored black and vietnamys etc all ar blond in usa. One expak in Karachi told me nonblonds are rare women in USA.

Re: # 29
You have good point.
Color is not important real problem is discrimaination based on look. But its better to be father of fair daughters than dark as its hard job.
Ugly people are discriminated all time. If you look at top places most are good looking and ugly looking people are not liked for no reason but being ugly.

Re: # 36

If you feel turks or not inferior to pakistanis or indians then I need to be corrected.

TURKS are superior to pakistanies and indians.

#41 there is a third alternative to turks being superior or inferior.

that alternative is: no one is superior or inferior because of his/her nationality, religion, race. I suggest you give some thought to this possibility.

#37 by SR on March 19, 2006 4:58am PT

” IF the European Union survives in its present form. I have a feeling that the EU may not last and may be reduced to a common market rather than become a United States of Europe.. the so-called EU constitution is another disaster … this EU nonsense cannot survive two centuries unless these old stupid European attitudes change radically”


Back in late 80s when I use to travel a lot, I congratulated a British colleague on EU/Euro since now they will be able to successfully compete with USA and finally be free from US domination :). He was a Scottish gentleman who pointed out that after centuries of union with England, they still had different legal system in property rights and some other areas unlike pretty uniform legal system across USA with 50 states. His point was that how are all the new EU countries going to have uniform legal system in the areas of corporate governance, people property rights etc. so essential for forging a single new identity?

On the other hand, 7-8 years back, there was an article in Forbes by a noted British historian that predicated that in the next 40-50 years, all Anglo countries (USA, Canada, UK, Australia, and New Zeeland) will merge with USA, with Washington and London as joint capital to rule the world. His point was that identical legal systems, similar world view and urge to merge in order to compete effectively is a must and odds of success are much higher if you come from common background as opposed to physical proximity. He even had the number of states/senators that UK will get in the new union.

Obviously, my English friends did not like this prediction. I guess they love their Kings and Queens. On the other hand, did not UK and Australia cooperate fully with USA, whenever needed?

Inferiority or superiority is in the eye of the beholder -- but one things goes for the Turks -- they are fiercely impendent people and great soldiers -- may be the world`s greatest --

Napoleon the megalomaniac used to say if I had the Turkish army instead of the effeminate French I would have conquered the world --

Turks feeling of pride is justified -- they were NEVER colonized -- and it was pure guts and extreme courage --

Churchill tried his best to conquer the Turks -- but met his Waterloo in Gallipoli -- the British abominable defeat by the starving Turkish soldiers -- despite the tough Australian soldiers -- was so thorough and complete and humiliating -- that it should have ended the career of Churchill for life -- as a strategist and as a colonel in the British army -- with a court martial -- but well -- later on of course Churchill emancipated his soiled reputation against the Germans --

(if only the Germans had the Turks in their army that they have now -- things might have been different...for that diehard colnialist Mr. Churchill.....:) --

anyway after Gallipoli nobody dared to even think of invading the Turks........until the Americans...:)

nasah: I doubt that your comment on Napoleon`s high regard for the Turkish army is based on something he actually said. I say this because (as I read in a book on the ottoman empire), when Napoleon was a rising star in France he was offered a job to help modernize the Turkish army. Napoleon turned that down in favor of a better opportunity - to lead the French armies in Italy.

The resounding success of his Italian campaign paved the way for Napoleon`s rise to power in France, the high point being when he crowned himself emperor - kind of like Musharaff crowning himself as Supreme National Leader - only Musharaff`s Kargill campaign was not exactly at par with Napoleon`s Italian campaign. :-)

further to #45: but that is not to belittle the personal courage of the individual turkish soldier. indeed, in the crimean war - while the brits sang (rightly) about the ``Charge of the Light Brigade``, what they ignored was equal courage shown by Turks (who were allies of the brits in the Crimean war against Russia) in the same battle against the Russians.

But nevertheless, that is neither here not there. The bottom line is that after their defeat from the Russians in 1775, the Ottoman were on a downhill course for the next 150 years. And also, Gallipoli had as much to do with lousy british generalship (putting men on a beach while ignoring the high ground surrounding the beach from which the Turks wreaked havoc on the aussies and new zealanders) as with ataturk`s strong generalship.

tahmed -- against the lazy Italians -- anybody could have a resounding success.......:)

#30, Kabuliwallah,
Thank you, sir, for restoring some balance into the discussion. Having been a great world power for almost six centuries, Ottoman Turkey carried substantial excess baggage, enmity, and backwardness into the 20th century. Of course, such an empire could not have prevailed for so long without some positive elements of courage, discipline, organization, administration, tolerance, and sheer determination. All great and decaying things must come to an end so that even better and livelier successors may emerge.

Today, Turkey wants to be known for its glorious mountains, spectacular beaches, graceful minarets, and thousands of miles of pristine coastline. Turks want to be seen as pleasant, hospitable, friendly, and tolerant people, who wish to dominate no one. Turkey is genuinely one of the most secular countries in practice that I have ever seen.

Quite a few Pakistanis are having a field day in bashing Turkey in this forum. I just want to remind them that the democratically-elected Turkish government, despite being offered billions in aid by Washington, decided not to allow the use of its territory and airspace for the unlawful invasion of Iraq. This is in contrast to the pusillanimous policies of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and yes, Pakistan. People should clean the garbage in their own houses before complaining about the decor in their neighbor`s house. I think that you get my point.

By the way, Mr./Ms. Zeemax, there is no ``d`` in Ataturk. I think that you had a genuine typo in your reference to that great man, who set Turkey on the right path. Too bad, Mushy is no Ataturk.

Re: # 43 Perdesi

The idea of a fully functional ``European Union`` is, no doubt, very attractive on paper. But I suspect its got one huge hurdle in its way that may never let it happen. That hurdle is ``human nature.``

Only by force of arms can such diverse peoples and cultures be cemented under a monolithic central authority. European people would not want to be subject to yet another bureaucratic layer of a super-government. It has been done before to varying degrees, covering much of the continent at times, such as under the Romans, Charlemagne, Hapsburgs, Napolean, Hitler and you could also say, partially, under the Soviets.

Europe`s strength is in its diversity. That diversity can best be co-opted through mutual cooperation and common markets, not through this nonsense of creating yet another monstrous United States. (God knows one such giant is bad enough, the world cannot afford another.)

Tomorrows world, if it to be more free and florishing than today, will need to see diminishing central governmental authorities and more local autonomy with cooperation amongst neighbors rather than bigger and bigger governmental monstrosities.

As for the idea of all English speaking countries forming a block, its certainly viable. But I doubt if it will be at the governmental level. I believe it will happen but at the level of global corporations. English speaking based multinationals cooperating and competing against, say, Chinese and/or Japanese or others. The real power is gradually shifting away from the nation state and towards corporate conglomurates. The real governments of tomorrow are most likely multinational commercial empires, not state based entities. They will have all the same trappings of power, law enforcement, military force, massive bureaucracies etc, etc, but they will not be answerable to parliaments and voters. They will be answerable to boardrooms and stockholders. This one-man one-vote democracy is a luxuary tomorrows world will not have except at the Town Hall level. The dog catchers and fire fighters will be the province of democracies. International Affairs and top level Power Politics will go on in board rooms or in places like Jackson Hole and Davos. English speakers will be the big daddys for some time to come but they`ll be just as likely to reside in Fiji and Litchenstein than in London or New York.

...SR

Cyprus is in Europe, Turkish Thrace is not. Georgia and Armenia are in Europe, Azerbaijan in not. Soon Israel will be in Europe, but Istanbut will not. I don`t care what the EU do and how its citizens decide, I just have a problem with this redefinition of geography from how this subject has been taught to me. It is bad enough knowing where Myanmar is or what part of New Guinea belongs to Argentina.

re: #48

Chauhan bhai,

people dissing Turkey are just jealous that their own countries do not enjoy the success and fair name of Turkey...by leaving their Islamic Ummah baggage, Turks have been able to better themselves without having access to oil. Turkey will probably be the only developed country in the Islamic world when the oil reserves get depleted in the middle-east. They are willing to learn from the west and all the while, from what I have read, have not forgotten their Turkish roots and culture, the operative word there being Turkish and not necessarily Islamic. In fact they seem to be very proud of it. Having said all that, Islam is in no danger of being eclipsed in Turkey as the overwhelming majority of Turks still identify themselves as Muslim. Women especially in the rural areas and migrants to cities wear the hijab and observe all the practices and rituals of traditional Islam. On the other hand women who don`t wear the hijab are allowed to wear and do what they like without a fatwa over their heads. Their family structures are very strong as evidenced by their almost reverent love for children. They are basically having the best of both worlds, traditional and modern. That is in my opinion true enlightened moderation.

regards

``On the other hand women who don`t wear the hijab are allowed to wear and do what they like without a fatwa over their heads.``(Kabuliwala)

as far as I know -- hijab is not allowed -- in school or universities, not in government work place neither in the legislative assemblies....hijab is forbidden in government institutions according to Turkish very tough secular laws....

ahmedmadani #28

If dark skinned people are discriminated against it is an incentive to work harder and come up in life

#52 by nasah

[as far as I know -- hijab is not allowed -- in school or universities, not in government work place neither in the legislative assemblies....hijab is forbidden in government institutions according to Turkish very tough secular laws.... ]


Muslims can be unrelentingly, uncompromisingly and mind-bendingly ``secular`` when they constitute 99.6% of the population.

Re: # 46

tahmed:

in the crimena war, the turks would have have been defeated by the russians had the british and the french didn`t fight against the russians.

also, wasn`t a german the military advisor to the turks during WW1

#35 by tahmed32

No. Actually I`m still waiting for my promised consignment from SR ! I do admit though the general tone of some responses had got to me. The ouburst is regretted.

#21 by SR

[European Union has no choice but to eventually let Turkey in... If they don`t do that the EU cannot and will not survive even to the end of the century. Turkey, with its young population, is the only choice an aging EU has in order to survive. Austria`s continued refusal to let Turkey into the EU is simply unsustainable for longer than another decade at most. To keep Turkey out much beyond that is a mathematical impossibility. To do so will spell the end of EU. ]

I think Europeans need to decide which way they want to go.

One way is to attempt to preserve their culture and identity, and find ways around the population growth issue. The other way is to let the Trojan horse of Turkey in. Now that would be as fatal as a cancer of the pancreas. With the rights accorded to the EU member countries, which include unrestricted rights of travel and employment throughout the Union, the cancer would swiftly metastasize to all parts of Europe. The Europeans would begin to comprehend what us long-suffering Indians have been talking about all these years.

But it would be too late. The beards would be multiplying like magic. The rot would set in swiftly. First there would be a few complaints and clashes about blaring prayers five times a day over the loudspeakers, then there would be small fights breaking out at Christian religious processions passing through/near majority Muslim neighbourhoods, then bigger fights - Muslims condemning Christians as non-secular and communal, abductions, forced marriages - the usual stuff.

Slowly Europe would transform itself into another Muslim majority area, and Evil would have gained yet another foothold in this world. Ironically, in such a scenario, the lefties - the natural allies of the Islamists - would be the first to be finished off.

This is a scenario that should seriously scare the hell out of any right-thinking person, but lefties and Islamic apologists would try to soothe any concerns.

America and China (and maybe Australia) could be the last strongholds of Good (in the case of China, that`s a relativistic evaluation) fighting the satanical forces of Evil.

I hope Europe wakes up and realizes what it is toying with.

Dear Fenasi

Many thanks for your interesting window on Turkey. Never been there but as a student of History always fascinated by it. Straddling not continents but cultures and bearing the burden of an Imperial past, modern Turkey sounds like a kichdi (a mixture) and perhaps therein lies their sucess in being represented as ``good muslims`` in a world that increasingly eyes with fear and suspicion anyone with a beard!

As for their so-called inferiority complex, i think you have answered the question yourself..all nations and people are racists to a degree. The caste system, as you restrained from pointing out, is founded in colour ( classifying particular types of labour as menial, I suspect, came later). Let me digress, there are four types of Jews in India.

1) the Konkani Jews, aka Bene Israel were perhaps the oldest of all the Jewish communities in India. They dressed in the traditional Maharashtrian style, with the women wearing the nine-yard sari. Its is believed that they migrated to India at a very early stage and have intermarried with other communities which is why they do not have the typical semitic features. Their religious practice involved only certain rituals bore only a vestigeal resemblance to traditional jewish religion.

2) The Cochin jews were traders who came after the destruction of the temple and stayed on to contribute to the flowering of cosmopolitan culture in that part of the world, with jewish , the first muslim and christian in India mingling with the indigenous population. Till today there is a ``Jew town`` in cochin.

3) the last migratory group was the Baghdadi Jews, a catch all name to refer to Jews coming from the mid-east. the most famous of them were the Sassons, who created a business empire stretchin from Bombay to Shanghai. they have left behind the sassoon library (beautiful building) and the Sasoon dock in Bombay.

4) the fourth group are the most curous of them all, Manipuri Jews. Around 10years back a small tribe in manipur in NE India declared that they were one of the lost tribes of israel. The jury is still out and the israelis arte themselves not sure of how to deal with them..in the mean time some of them have migrated to Israel (and serving in the army acc. to Israeli law) causing some heartburn to the missionaries in the NE.

Now, why this little history lesson?

Well as you pointed out racisim is endemic. Of all the jews listed here (lets exclude the Manipuris for the moment), the Baghdadi Jews were your archetype Jew, fair and semitic in appearence. the average Cochin or konkani Jew, looked more indian than anything else and the latter even more so. And it is they who have suffered racism in Israel where I suspect the desire to build and maintain the state, means steamrolling over cultural hybridity. Its sad when a people whose history has been one of persecution ends up doing the same. (I`ll give the Ottomans this..when they occupied Jerusalem, there was no persecution and no matter what the Arabs and other say, Ottoman rule, though decadent and feudal was also lenient in some other ways).

Moral of the story..why blame the Turks for being racist? as they say in Hindi, when you point one finger, three others point back at you!

would love to go to Istanbul.......

regards

aditya

p.s. Read ``The Historian`` ..a fantastic, if a bit Dan Brown-ish , account of Ottoman and Eastern Europe political relations.

Dear Aditya,

The Israelis were first happy to find out that the few thpusand Manipuri tribals were Jews. Reckoned that their emigration would boost Israeli manpower. But on further enquiry they found that there are 75-100 million tribals in India and after this discovery, they are rather less enthusiastic about Indians claiming Jewish origins.

Regards

Ref adityapant #58

[....... 2) The Cochin jews were traders who came after the destruction of the temple and stayed on to contribute to the flowering of cosmopolitan culture in that part of the world, with jewish , the first muslim and christian in India mingling with the indigenous population. Till today there is a ``Jew town`` in cochin.]

Kerala itself had both its ``white`` Jews and its ``black`` Jews. The ``black`` Jews are thought to be local people who were slaves. When a Jewish person purchased a slave, he set him free and offered him conversion to Judaism. The ``white`` Jews are probably those who fled Europe`s Inquisition in the 15th and 16th centuries. Both migrated to Israel after 1948 leaving very few Jewish residents in Kerala.

There are about 60,000 Jews of Indian origin in Israel today.

Read about them in the book ``The Jewish Heritage of India``.

netizen #55 true on both points. In fact, not just the crimean war but the entire 19th century is a story of the brits and sometimes the french keeping the russian tsar from overrunning the ottoman empire. as for the german advisers, there was indeed a strong german contingent (under general von sanders) that prepared turkish armies prior to the war. while ataturk made his mark at gallipoli and is rightly credited with that victory, the over-all command of the turkish army at gallipoli was with von sanders. and in fact ottomans by then had spent over a century with french, german, british military advisers being brought in to try an modernize the ottoman military.

While turkey is often held as an example of a ``moderninzing muslim`` country, i think that is a red herring. i think it is much more imporant for muslim countries to study why turkey fell so far behind (socially, economically, culturally, militarily, politicaly) the western world with whom it used to be at par a few centuries ago.

zeemax #56 ``The ouburst is regretted.``

the outburst is forgotten. cheers!

turks coolest achievement was maintenance of their turkish identity and language inspite of being rulers of an arabic empire. in that sense they were similar to the mughals..offcouurse mughals came into india and the turks ruled arabic lands by using proxy governors and being kalifas, so it was easier for them. so may the mughals were the real overachievers.

Thanks for this interesting article. There really needs to be much more information available about peoples lives from countries like Turkey, Iran, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, India, Pakistan. Here is where our colonization and subsequent backwardness plays a role. We know a lot about trivial stuff from the west and only little about the shared struggle to modernize from these countries.


One of things that is interesting to me is that the Turks were able to *somehow* get rid of the old superiority complex versus Europe and make some kind of healthy synthesis. This is in striking contrast to certain other countries and cultures. Yes, it is a mess and this business of no religous symbols is a little loony, but yet it more or less works.

The Turks did refuse to get involved in the Iraq invasion and this was very healthy as well. Not surprisingly, there is very little of the nonsensical and horrible islamist terrorism coming from turket and turks. It helps to have a healthy and relatively free culture (vs. egypt, saudi, pak etc).

Much has been said about the Turks colonizing Arab lands. I guess in a way African Americans did manage to ``colonize`` the New World and then dominated its music, sports, and manual labor aspects. You see, Turks were first brought to the Middle East from Central Asia as military slaves in the 9th and 10th centuries by the Arabs. Turkish tribes used to sell their sons who were considered good warrior material by the Arabs. By the 11th century and 12th centuries, descendants of these slaves were running the military affairs of the Abbasids and were establishing Sultantes in Delhi, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt.

The Ottomans took most of the Arab world in the early 16th century under Selim I (Selim Yavuz or Salim the Grim). Colonization means taking a country, settling it with your own people and exploiting its resources for the mother country. Australia, America, New Zealand, South Africa, and Israel are real examples of colonization. The Turks conquered the Arab lands, garrisoned them with Turks, provided Turkish administration, but left the people and land pretty much to local control. Turkish never replaced Arabic in any of the conquered territories. In fact, if it were not for Turkish intervention, all of North Africa would have fallen into Christian hands following the Reconquista of Spain in the 15th century. Prior to that, it was the Turkish Mamelukes who stopped the Mongols from reaching Egypt by handing them their first major defeat in what is today Israel. Also, it was the Turkish Sultan Baibars who finished off the Crusaders` last strongholds in Syria and Lebanon.

What the Ottoman Turks provided for their Arab subjects were 400 hundred years of stable rule, with very little bloodshed, hardly any civil wars, and freedom from foreign invasion. Christian Arabs and Armenians, who were the at forefront of the anti-Turkish Arab nationalism, at the behest of Christian European powers, have termed these four centruries as the Age of Stagnation. Apparently, Arabs have a hard time with peace, harmony, and stability.

Fenasi Kerim {``Why is it surprising then that the Arabs grabbed the opportunity to be free? It is pointless to argue whether or not they would have been better off with the Turks. The important question is, why cannot the Turkish public understand the simple desire of people to be free? Turks think that the Arabs were treated with complete fairness and justice under the Ottomans.``}

Fenasi,
You are right. The Turks should not blame the Arabs for joining the British and wanting their freedom - having Hashimite rulers over Transjordan, Syria, Iraq, and Hijaz provided immense freedom to the Arab masses living there. Also, the British gave the Arabs total freedom through the Balfour Declaration. The French split off Lebanon, a gerrymandered slice of Syria to provide a Manorite Christian majority state, to add to more Arab freedom. Iraq is going through its third stage of western democracy and total freedom. Saudi Arabia and Egypt are the cornerstones of Arab democracy. Please give us a break from your illogical assertions. Thanks,

#65 so, arab whine about imperialism is right or wrong about less than 50 years of west? you are one of the best white-washers of history, empires like ottomans provided military muscle to minority tribes to control larger masses, case in point the current iraq. right thing to say is colonialization is not a new or western concept...there were different kinds of colonozations in various power vaccums thats all.

let us be fare, just like turks get kudos for providing stability, they get the kudos for leaving these regions with lack of institutions and modernity and weak politics while the neighboring europe became modern. as a result the french and the english could do as they pleased with surprisingly small militaries.

Jang, #67, {``... you are one of the best white-washers of history, empires like ottomans provided military muscle to minority tribes to control larger masses...
let us be fare, just like turks get kudos for providing stability, they get the kudos for leaving these regions with lack of institutions and modernity and weak politics while the neighboring europe became modern. as a result the french and the english could do as they pleased with surprisingly small militaries. ``}

Jang,
Both the Turks and Arabs suffered from falling behind Europe in developing dynamic institutions and modernizing their affairs. As soon as the Turks were able to separate religion from government, they were able to develop modern institutions, learn to practice tolerance, and embark upon universal education for both males and females. To accuse Turks of colonialism against Arabs is not accurate. Perhaps Turks were imperialists, especially when it came to ruling over the Christian Greeks, Serbs, Bulgars, Ukrainians, Romanians, and Hungarians. But being part of the Ummah, the Arabs were not deprived of the same institutions that governed the lives of Muslim Turks. In fact, speaking of institutions, to this day Muslim Istanbul, and not Christian Athens, is the seat of the Greek Orthodox Church. The conquest of North Africa by the French, Italians, and the British happened in the 19th century - when the local Arab leaders in each were nominally under the influence of the Sultan in Constantinople. Turkey lost Libya to the Italians along with the Dodecanese Islands.

The fact of the matter is that, unlike Ottomans, Kamal Ataturk was not interested in empire building. He could have taken all of Macedonia, his birthplace and a province with a sizable Turkish population, from the Greeks, who had just been thoroughly routed in Anatolia in the 1920s. If Ataturk wanted he could have redeemed the Dodecanese Islands, some visible from the Turkish mainland, that Italy turned over to the Greeks. Just before WWII, Ataturk cautioned Ismir Inonu not to get involved in the great war that would consume Europe. He emphasized that Turkey should stay out of the upcoming war, which is what the Turks did. Had they wanted to fish in troubled waters, they could have joined the Nazis and took care of the Balkans and southern Russia with who knows what outcome. The fact remains, thanks to Ataturk, that Turkey is no longer a predator nation nor an easy prey. That is exactly the point of modern Turkey. No amount of Jihadi rhetoric, EU carrot, or American hegemony is going to change that.

salim i agree that atatruk was a smart guy.. he did spectacular things like re-importing of roman script the eastern roman empire, purge arabic from turki, get turkey to recognize the real enemy (the arab ;-) ) and ensure that turkish developed a pretty good state, get me some very nice turki frends who i will cherish for ever..i heard recently they even allow the murderous khurds to celebrate the pagan Navroz. that is something. most importantly as you pointed out, he made turks more insular to the benefit of everyone. i love the turkish tradition of washing guests hands with eau-de-cologne in these days of the bird flue.

here is an anecdote about ``blonde`` hair...the eyranians in the US love blonde hair even more. so much so that one indian lady did a more extreme highlight, and she was considered to have gone eyeranian by rest of the indian communiy LOL...in a huff she now calls her baingan bhurta Kashke Bademjan, and frequents the Caspian Cafe for tips on how to make the Dough.

#70, Jang,
With that attitude and hair color, your desan friend will make lots of dough. :)
The Kurds are nice people and there are many many Kurds in Istanbul. It`s the ones close to the Syrian and Iraqi borders that think they should have a country of their own - and the funny thing is that they are more Sunni than the Turks. :) Another amusing situation is that, because Urdu borrows from Farsi and Kurdish is quite close to Farsi, I, with no Kurdish roots, find it easier to understand Kurds better than Turks. LOL

Mr or Mrs Fenasi Kerim


``In Pakistan, Punjabis are extremely chauvinistic towards other ethnic groups ``





This is what ENCARTA, which is by all means very neutral has to say about Pakistani Punjabis.(Under the heading `cultural groups in Pakistan`

``Punjabis constitute 58 percent of the population. They have diverse origins, but over the centuries they coalesced into a coherent ethnic group in the historic Punjab region and developed a common language, Punjabi. Today most Punjabis prefer to read and write in Pakistan’s official language, Urdu, and their language-based ethnic identity is relatively weak``.

This is UNLIKE Pathans and Sindhis or for that matter any other ethnic group in Pakistan.
I therefore refute your idea that Punjabis are predominantly chauvinists.

x-entric: jazakallah!!

when someone stereotypes one community of people (as the writer is doing for panjabis), that is clear sign that the man has the brains of a goat. and obviously, from evidence presented on chowk, the subcontinent has herds and herds of goats.

Kemal Ataturk was a great man and a hero for all of Islamic World.... he ushered the Muslim world into an era of Republican democracy and modernised Turkey...

Pakistanis who are bashing Kemal Ataturk must know that Muslim League used to commemorate Ataturk on November 18 ... as ``Kemal Day``... and his wonderful successor... the great Ismet Inonu was a close confidant of our young republic...

Re: # 72

Rolling on the floor and holding my sides ...a brialliant diatribe!

Mantolives, #73, {``Kemal Ataturk was a great man and a hero for all of Islamic World.... he ushered the Muslim world into an era of Republican democracy and modernised Turkey... ``}

Manto,
Thank you for recognizing the contribution of Ataturk Mustafa Kemal Pasha. It is well known that when the great leader died he had something like $28 in his bank account. Lack of corruption, indomitable determination, clear vision, cool courage, and a genuine concern for the welfare of his people are what he is remembered for. Those who get emotional about his much-needed reforms in altering script, discouraging old-fashioned rituals and modes of dress, and instituting secularism, need to study this man objectively. Thanks again.

Good to know some of you enjoyed the article. Clarification: The views expressed are mine alone. This is what I experienced, not what I concluded after hardcore research.


# 2, I studied engineering in Ankara.

#4 and #5, Like I said, this is all based on personal experience, not research. I lived there for seven years.

#6-7, I cant please everyone.

#18, {Turks you met seem to be just like people in all other countries to the dot.} I agree, up to a point. Turks are extremely nationalistic, more so than your average country. Only the armenians I have met are as bad.

#66, Everyone wants freedom, whatever ``freedom`` is. I do not claim that the Arabs are better off now then they would have been under the Turks. Muslims of south asia wanted freedom from the British and a separate homeland from the Hindus, and they got it. (With hindsight) I would have opposed the division of India but I would submit to the popular will. Is that too hard to understand?

I do intend to write another piece discussing the good qualities amoung Turks.

#71, {I therefore refute your idea that Punjabis are predominantly chauvinists.}

Perhaps I have had the misfortune to have met only the chauvinists. But I agree with you that the same can be said for the other ethnic groups.

Fenasi #76 and #77
{``Perhaps I have had the misfortune to have met only the chauvinists``}.
You must have some really bad luck. :)

{``...This is what I experienced, not what I concluded after hardcore research. ``}
You could have fooled most of us. :)

{``... Like I said, this is all based on personal experience, not research. I lived there for seven years. ... ``}
Must you be so persistent about this?

{``I cant please everyone. ...``}
That`s the first complete truth from you so far.

{``Turks are extremely nationalistic, more so than your average country. Only the armenians I have met are as bad.``}
So, there is a group that is almost as bad as Turks - in your opinion?

{``..I do intend to write another piece discussing the good qualities amoung Turks. ``}
We can`t wait. Is this one going to be based on ``hardcore research?`` Will you now tell us how sweet is the taste of good baklava?

Re: # 78 {We can`t wait. Is this one going to be based on ``hardcore research?`` Will you now tell us how sweet is the taste of good baklava?}

No one is asking you to read it. If I wanted to write something based on real research, I would write on applied mathematics and vehicle dynamics (but you might not understand all that with your MBA). And just so you know, good baklava is not very sweet, unlike the stuff you get in Istanbul (which is probably what you had at your wedding).

#79, Fenasi,
I disagree with many of your subjective comments. I do however support your right to write as you please and to proclaim your envy of the nation that hosted you for seven years - after all you can take a Paki out of Pakistan but you can`t take the personality out of the Paki.
Anyway, thank you for your observations. I hope that your Turkish hosts felt a lot better about you than you did about them.

Fenasi,
I have noticed that ever since 9/11 there has been a rapid decline in support for Pakistan among many Turks. They see Pakistan as a blight on the name of Islam and Muslims. Turks are sick of the bearded, nasty, in-your-face Islamists from Pakistan, who make it their business to tell all Muslims how to be good Muslims - just like their masters, the Saudis. It is sad to see this new sense of dislike for Paki behavior - at the same time, it appears that Turks are admiring India for its economic performance, its democratic ways, and secular environment. Just leave it to Pakis to turn off their most ardent supporters.

i had the fortune of having many turki friends in the us...so much so that i even understood some of their language and attended several turki expat functions. only thing natinalistic about them was they spoke turki amongst them..indians would NEVER do that (we would speak hindi and english mix). as a result i learned a lot of turkish..i even know how to say i wanna pee.

we did not have any paki grad students but one bangali beardo, who always tried to pursuade the turki girls to be good muslimas and not to go swimming with us (boys) and keep rozas etc. turks i knew were very friendly to indians and generally had a great impression..but my mates were the grad-school types (both hard sciences and liberal arts types). they were slightly lefty and had some amount of amrica-phobia..they felt amrica uses their land for operating NATO bases and its uncool. many came from middle-class background..kids of civil-servants and some were civil-servants on some kind of scam scholarships, and their middle-class seemed to have same kind of living style and standard as indian middle-class based on pictures and discriptions.

did not notice any bigotary.. but alrhough they were civil to the greeks, they were not friendly with them, inspite of common food and booze.

Re: # 80 {I do however support your right to write as you please and to proclaim your envy of the nation that hosted you for seven years}

What envy?
Ethnically, I am half-Turkish afterall. Even if I wasn`t, why envy?

#83, Fenasi,
The point I am making is that a lot of your complaints about the Turks` behavior is of the ``sour grapes`` sort. You accuse them of tyring to be European - FYI, Thrace is in Europe. You accuse Kemal Pasha of all sorts of cultural destruction, the fact is that his efforts raised literacy in Turkey. You accuse Turks of being racist, the fact is that Turks are among the most diverse people in terms of race - Mongoloid, Semitic, Roman, Slavic, Hellenistic, and even some African descendants, live among them. You accuse them of being colonizers of Arab lands, the fact is that they did not settle the Arab provinces with Turks. However, it is your article and you have every right to express your personal opinion. I do support your right and please allow me to disagree with your generalizations.

An absorbing article.
In a lighter vein, talking of Turks, I remember a friend commenting that the only good Turk is a dead one.

#85, Muqaddam, {``In a lighter vein, talking of Turks, I remember a friend commenting that the only good Turk is a dead one. ``}

On a serious note, have you heard what some English people say about Pakis? :)