Is Turkey a Western country ?

''''''''''''Western countries are those with common historical and cultural roots springing from Roman civilization. Christianity, the Roman alphabet, our languages, our scientific and philosophical traditions all spring from that one source.
With Japan and many other Asian countries, the root of their culture, religion, science, philosophy and language is in China. They are completely seperate ''''''''''''''''

Yes I totally agree with you. Let's just not confuse 'Western' with being advanced. Just because Japan is equally advanced in all fields, to the countries of the Western world i.e. influenced by the Greek Roman civilization and Christianity (but also from Enlightment) doesn't mean it is a Western country.

That might be YOUR definition of "Western". You don't need to be a Christian country to be "Western"- Albania and Bosnia are western to me.

You don't need to have a Roman heritage to be western - Iceland and Finland have no Roman history I'm aware of.

You can be a western country even if you write with Cyrillic, not Roman, script.

We don't all speak languages with common roots. Basque, Hungarian, Finnish and Estonian are not Indo-European languages.

So, what IS your definition of "Western" when it's clear your first try doesn't work.
 
Agreed. But there's a great difference. The Catholic Church have apologized several times for some of those historical events... I've never seen a muslim authority doing autocriticism about Islam and its imperialistic ways through History, on the contrary...

Nonsense, the Catholic church hasn't even apologised for the Crusades or the Inquisition.
 
I think that is the point he is trying to make too :rolleyes:
Well I thought primarily on the culture,because determining someone's 'westerness' on genetics sounds a bit racist to me,but anthropologically,to be honest,most Turks look foreign to European eyes.
 
A large portion of Turkey has populations that are not phenotypically European, no question. However, what is really most alien to Europe is Turkish culture and norms.
 
A large portion of Turkey has populations that are not phenotypically European, no question. However, what is really most alien to Europe is Turkish culture and norms.

Then define those "norms". Define what is unquestionably European about the culture of all "European" nations that is different from Turkish culture. And stop using the language of genetics. You'll see that between 5 and 30% of the genetic make-up of every European nation is not "autoctonous". Around 15% of British citizens have no Anglo-saxon or Celtic DNA. Does that make them not British? Not European?

People who live in Europe, who have European citizenship, are European. That's all they need. Turkey is in Europe, ergo they are European. Frankly, speaking historically, the Ottoman empire was demonstrably a more "European" empire than the British empire. You could easily and justifiably argue that Turks, given interbreeding and historical culture are more European than the British.
 
Nonsense, the Catholic church hasn't even apologised for the Crusades or the Inquisition.

I think you need to read properly: I said they have apologized for SOME of these events. And nevetheless the Catholic Church do have RECOGNIZED all their pasts mistakes.

In the Crusades the muslims take what they asked for, btw. The Church shouldn't apologize for that.

Then again, I've never seen an islamic authority apologizing for Islam attemps to take over Europe... for example. But when you look at how Turkey still deny the armenian genocide you can't expect too much "mea culpa" from the muslim world.
 
In reality, Turkic is a language group that includes various populations in the same way that Indo-European does.

The Turkic speaking populations in and around Europe cluster genetically with Europeans and not with Turkic speaking Asians. You will notice that the people of Turkey cluster with Europeans while Turkish Cypriots cluster closely with Thracian Greeks.

genetic-cluster-turkish.gif


Associated with: Population history of the Dniester-Carpathians: evidence from Alu markers.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17387576

Genetic studies show that the ancient Greek genetic signature is as strong in western Turkey (less so in the Kurdish east) as it is in Greece.

greekcolonization.jpg


http://dienekes.50webs.com/arp/articles/greekadna/

Compare with map of Byzantine Empire

Image: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Byzantine_Empire_animated2.gif

The border between Europe and Turkey is a religio-political construct of the last 500 years and it has no bearing on race.

It is now becoming clear that the 'Turkic' invasions of Europe were later waves of R1a ex-IE speakers from central Asia, which is why geneticists have been surprised with regard to Hungarians and Bulgarians. All R1a came to Europe from central Asia. R1b came through Anatolia and R1b is still present at over 25% through most of Turkey, which is a higher R1b level than anywhere SE of Austria.

It appears that Turkic quickly replaced the Scythian and other Iranian dialects all over Central Asia. Other migratory waves brought more Turkic speakers to Eastern and Central Europe, like the Khazars, the Avars, the Bulgars and the Turks (=> see 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe). All of them were in fact Central Asian nomads who had adopted Turkic language, but had little if any Mongolian blood. Turkic invasions therefore contributed more to the diffusion of Indo-European lineages (especially R1a1) than East Asian ones.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#Turkic
 
Actually in your map, turks do not cluster with Europeans. Also you can see here in this cluster based on haplotype data ;

plot2uz3.jpg
 
Actually in your map, turks do not cluster with Europeans. Also you can see here in this cluster based on haplotype data ;

You are misrepresenting the map that I produced. The whole purpose of the map is to show that speakers of Turkic languages in and around Europe cluster genetically with Europeans. Do you get that bit?

I repeat, the people of Turkey cluster with Europeans and the Turkish Cypriots cluster closely with the Thracian Greeks as the detailed study that I cited above shows and with which the map above is associated.

Population history of the Dniester-Carpathians: evidence from Alu markers.

Varzari A, Stephan W, Stepanov V, Raicu F, Cojocaru R, Roschin Y, Glavce C, Dergachev V, Spiridonova M, Schmidt HD, Weiss E.

The area between the Dniester and the eastern Carpathian mountain range is at a geographical crossroads between eastern Europe and the Balkans. Little is known about the genetics of the population of this region. We performed an analysis of 12 binary autosomal markers in samples from six Dniester-Carpathian populations: two Moldavian, one Romanian, one Ukrainian and two Gagauz populations. The results were compared with gene frequency data from culturally and linguistically related populations from Southeast Europe and Central Asia. Small genetic differences were found among southeastern European populations (in particular those of the Dniester-Carpathian region). The observed homogeneity suggests either a very recent common ancestry of all southeastern European populations or strong gene flow between them. Despite this low level of differentiation, tree reconstruction and principle component analyses allowed a distinction between Balkan-Carpathian (Macedonians, Romanians, Moldavians, Ukrainians and Gagauzes) and eastern Mediterranean (Turks, Greeks and Albanians) population groups. The genetic affinities among Dniester-Carpathian and southeastern European populations do not reflect their linguistic relationships. The results indicate that the ethnic and genetic differentiations occurred in these regions to a considerable extent independently of each other.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17387576

genetic-cluster-turkish.gif
 
Of course the people of Turkey cluster with Europeans.

You can draw the circle where you like but scientific facts are scientific facts as the detailed study that I cited above shows. :rolleyes:
In your study Turkey does not cluster with European countries, you can't interpret a map or what ? Plus there are only a few european countries to be considered representative, there are no northern nor western european countries to see how really is the cluster position of Turkey
 
In your study Turkey does not cluster with European countries, you can't interpret a map or what ? Plus there are only a few european countries to be considered representative, there are no northern nor western european countries to see how really is the cluster position of Turkey

I don't see the European clustering either. The map is very poorly structured.
 
Last edited:
Nonsense, the Catholic church hasn't even apologised for the Crusades or the Inquisition.


Nor should they. It was a response to Islamic invasion.
 
Lol really? Actually it was just a bloody religious war organized and ordered by the Pope of the Catholic Church against the Muslims and to expel them from Jerusalem which they have lived in along with the Jew for thousands of years, it didn't belong to Christians then and it doesn't belong to them now. Also what about the Byzantine, Roman and other empires and states that dominated, invaded, conquered and ruled over Muslim lands for centuries? Was that not Christian invasion? Please be open-minded and don't prejudge Muslims, accept that Christianity in the Medieval ages committed great crimes against humanity and move on.
 
For one thing there was more than just the one Jewish person in Jerusalem (writing or talking about “the Jew” is a dead giveaway about a persons views on the subject) and for another how come the Mohammedans were in Jerusalem in the first place?

Wasn’t there a little matter of a siege involved?

Anyway what matters is that Turkey is NOT wanted as a member by the majority of people in the EU as a poll on this forum shows.
 
Actually both Jews and Muslims have lived in and occupied Jerusalem for thousands of years, there have been no major European or Christian presence there and the Catholic Church used that as an excuse to attack Muslims. Medieval Christianity killed just as much if not more people than what people claim the Islamic empires did. Anyway what matters is that this is one of many forums and even if many EU countries reject Turkey`s accession many other factors economic, military, political and diplomatic will prevail over what EU claims as good reasons to reject Turkey. It will happen sooner or later, we will see in 10 or so years.
 
Actually both Jews and Muslims have lived in and occupied Jerusalem for thousands of years.

Actually since Mohammed wasn’t born until 470 BCE, and didn’t even start to invent Islam for forty years, to claim that Mohammedans have lived in Jerusalem for thousands of years is poppycock.

At the very least get historical facts correct.

There have been no major European or Christian presence there and the Catholic Church used that as an excuse to attack Muslims.

No major Christian presence there? You really do need to buy your text books from a better source.

The Catholic Church in the form of Pope Urban the second initiated the first of the crusades with his call for Christians to re-take Jerusalem in 1095.

Jerusalem, the once and always capital city of Jewish people, was a hugely important city to Christians and Jews alike. To have our most holy of cities stolen and occupied by an invading force who were now rapeing and pillaging across our lands was simply unacceptable to the people at that time.

The cause celebre for the first of the Crusades was to re-take Jerusalem from what Christians see as a ‘religion’ that is heretical to the point of being the forces of the anti-Christ incarnate.

(and if the Book of Revelations is read, along with some of the sayings of Christ there is more than good justification for such being their belief)

What should not be overlooked is that the popularity for the Crusades was they were a means of focusing the fight back against the invasion of Europe by Muslims who were imposing Islam where it was not wanted, not needed, and generally greatly hated.

Medieval Christianity killed just as much if not more people than what people claim the Islamic empires did.

Nonsense.

Anyway what matters is that this is one of many forums and even if many EU countries reject Turkey`s accession many other factors economic, military, political and diplomatic will prevail over what EU claims as good reasons to reject Turkey. It will happen sooner or later, we will see in 10 or so years.

It is essential that the EU commission and Parliament ignore any economic, military, political and diplomatic pressure, and heed the will of then majority of the people of the EU. This is one case where an EU wide referendum is essential because most people really do see it as being a “bridge too far” to bring Turkey into the EU.

Turkey has NOTHING that we want or need.
 
Last edited:
Well said, Gwyllgi... When you add it all up, Turkish membership in the EU has far more negatives than positives. Turkey clearly is not majority Western on any level.
 
Last edited:
Actually since Mohammed wasn’t born until 470 BCE, and didn’t even start to invent Islam for forty years, to claim that Mohammedans have lived in Jerusalem for thousands of years is poppycock.

At the very least get historical facts correct.

No major Christian presence there? You really do need to buy your text books from a better source.

Yes I may have sounded ignorant myself when I said that but it just pisses me off how the murderous Catholic Church conducted its Crusades against Muslims using their religious background in the city as an excuse.

The Catholic Church in the form of Pope Urban the second initiated the first of the crusades with his call for Christians to re-take Jerusalem in 1095.

Jerusalem, the once and always capital city of Jewish people, was a hugely important city to Christians and Jews alike. To have our most holy of cities stolen and occupied by an invading force who were now rapeing and pillaging across our lands was simply unacceptable to the people at that time.


The cause celebre for the first of the Crusades was to re-take Jerusalem from what Christians see as a ‘religion’ that is heretical to the point of being the forces of the anti-Christ incarnate.

(and if the Book of Revelations is read, along with some of the sayings of Christ there is more than good justification for such being their belief)

What should not be overlooked is that the popularity for the Crusades was they were a means of focusing the fight back against the invasion of Europe by Muslims who were imposing Islam where it was not wanted, not needed, and generally greatly hated.


Nonsense.



It is essential that the EU commission and Parliament ignore any economic, military, political and diplomatic pressure, and heed the will of then majority of the people of the EU. This is one case where an EU wide referendum is essential because most people really do see it as being a “bridge too far” to bring Turkey into the EU.

Turkey has NOTHING that we want or need.

Actually the presence of Muslims in Jerusalem predates Prophet Muhammad and his message of Islam. First of all Muhammad was born in 570 not 470 and ur the one telling me to get my facts straight. Second call Muslims Mohemmadans, do I call u Christians Jesuits? , read this I'll copy and paste what the internet says so it's more clear and u won't claim I'm making it up:

"Jerusalem in Islam refers to the status of Jerusalem in the Muslim religious tradition. The al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem is considered the third holiest site in Islam, after the mosques of al-Haram and al-Nabawi. [1]
  • It is strongly associated with people regarded as Prophets of Islam - in particular, David, Solomon, and Jesus;
  • It was the first qibla (direction of prayer) in Islam, before the Kaaba in Mecca;
  • Muhammad is believed to have been taken by the miraculous steed Buraq to visit Jerusalem, where he prayed, and then to visit heaven, in a single night in the year 620. The Qur'anic verse (17:1) is interpreted by all widely used tafsirs (commentaries) as referring to this journey, with the term "the farthest Mosque" (al-masjid al-Aqsa) referring to the Noble Sanctuary in Jerusalem, where the mosque stands:

The name "Jerusalem" is a compound of two Semitic roots, "s-l-m" meaning wholeness, peace,[17] harmony or completeness, and "y-r-h" meaning to show, direct, instruct, or teach. Jerusalem means "Teaching of Peace", or "Whole or Complete Instruction".[citation needed] A city called Rušalimum or Urušalimum appears in ancient Egyptian records as one of the first references to Jerusalem.[18] These Egyptian forms are thought to derive from the local name attested in the Amarna letters, e.g.: in EA 287 (where it takes several forms) Urusalim.[19][20] The form Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) first appears in the book of Joshua. This form has the appearance of a portmanteau (blend) of yerusha (heritage) and the original name Shalem and is not a simple phonetic evolution of the form in the Amarna letters. Some believe there is a connection to Shalim, the beneficent deity known from Ugaritic myths as the personification of dusk.[21] Another suggested etymology is Jerū-šālēm, the first part of which possibly means "settlement" or "fortress" (thence "The Abode of Shalim").[22]
Typically the ending -im indicates the plural in Hebrew grammar and -ayim the dual thus leading to the suggestion that the name refers to the fact that the city sits on two hills.[23][24] However the pronunciation of the last syllable as -ayim appears to be a late development, which had not yet appeared at the time of the Septuagint. In Greek and Latin it is transliterated Hierosolyma (Ιερουσαλήμ). To the Arabs, Jerusalem is al-Quds ("The Holy"). "Zion" initially referred to part of the city, but later came to signify the city as a whole. Under King David, it was known as Ir David (the City of David).[25]

Ceramic evidence indicates the occupation of Ophel, within present-day Jerusalem, as far back as the Copper Age, c. 4th millennium BCE,[5][26] with evidence of a permanent settlement during the early Bronze Age, c. 3000–2800 BCE.[26][27] The Execration Texts (c. 19th century BCE), which refer to a city called Roshlamem or Rosh-ramen[26] and the Amarna letters (c. 14th century BCE) may be the earliest mention of the city.[28][29] Some archaeologists, including Kathleen Kenyon, believe Jerusalem[30] as a city was founded by West Semitic people with organized settlements from around 2600 BCE. According to Jewish tradition the city was founded by Shem and Eber, ancestors of Abraham. In the biblical account, when first mentioned, Jerusalem (known as "Salem") is ruled by Melchizedek, an ally of Abraham (identified with Shem in legend). Later, in the time of Joshua, Jerusalem was in territory allocated to the tribe of Benjamin (Joshua 18:28) but it continued to be under the independent control of the Jebusites until it was conquered by David and made into the capital of the united Kingdom of Israel (c. 1000s BCE).[31][32][v] Recent excavations of a large stone structure are interpreted by some archaeologists as lending credence to the biblical narrative.[33]

According to Hebrew scripture, King David reigned until 970 BCE. He was succeeded by his son Solomon,[34] who built the Holy Temple on Mount Moriah. Solomon's Temple (later known as the First Temple), went on to play a pivotal role in Jewish history as the repository of the Ark of the Covenant.[35] For over 450 years, until the Babylonian conquest in 587 BCE, Jerusalem was the political capital of firstly the united Kingdom of Israel and then the Kingdom of Judah and the Temple was the religious center of the Israelites.[36] This period is known in history as the First Temple Period.[37] Upon Solomon's death (c. 930 BCE), the ten northern tribes split off to form the Kingdom of Israel. Under the leadership of the House of David and Solomon, Jerusalem remained the capital of the Kingdom of Judah.[38]

When the Assyrians conquered the Kingdom of Israel in 722 BCE, Jerusalem was strengthened by a great influx of refugees from the northern kingdom. The First Temple period ended around 586 BCE, as the Babylonians conquered Judah and Jerusalem, and laid waste to Solomon's Temple.[37] In 538 BCE, after fifty years of Babylonian captivity, Persian King Cyrus the Great invited the Jews to return to Judah to rebuild the Temple.[39] Construction of the Second Temple was completed in 516 BCE, during the reign of Darius the Great, seventy years after the destruction of the First Temple.[40][41] Later, in ~445 BCE, King Artaxerxes I of Persia issued a decree allowing the city and the walls to be rebuilt.[42] Jerusalem resumed its role as capital of Judah and center of Jewish worship. When Macedonian ruler Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire, Jerusalem and Judea fell under Macedonian control, eventually falling to the Ptolemaic dynasty under Ptolemy I. In 198 BCE, Ptolemy V lost Jerusalem and Judea to the Seleucids under Antiochus III. The Seleucid attempt to recast Jerusalem as a Hellenized polis came to a head in 168 BCE with the successful Maccabean revolt of Mattathias the High Priest and his five sons against Antiochus Epiphanes, and their establishment of the Hasmonean Kingdom in 152 BCE with Jerusalem again as its capital.[43]

Jerusalem is considered Islam's third holiest city after Mecca and Medina. Among Muslims of an earlier era it was referred to as Bayt al-Maqdes; later it became known as al-Quds al-Sharif. In 638 the Islamic Caliphate extended its dominion to Jerusalem.[54] With the Arab conquest, Jews were allowed back into the city.[55] The Rashidun caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab signed a treaty with Monophysite Christian Patriarch Sophronius, assuring him that Jerusalem's Christian holy places and population would be protected under Muslim rule.[56] Umar refused to pray in the church, so that the descendant Muslims would not request converting the church to a mosque. He prayed outside the church, where the Mosque of Umar (Omar) stands till the present time. According to the Gaullic bishop Arculf, who lived in Jerusalem from 679 to 688, the Mosque of Umar was a rectangular wooden structure built over ruins which could accommodate 3,000 worshipers.[57] When the Muslims went to Bayt Al-Maqdes for the first time, They searched for the site of the Far Away Holy Mosque (Al-Masjed Al-Aqsa) that was mentioned in Quran and Hadith according to Islamic beliefs. They found the site full of rubbish, they cleaned it and started using it for prayers thereafter. The Umayyad caliph Abd al-Malik commissioned the construction of the Dome of the Rock in the late 7th century.[58] The 10th century historian al-Muqaddasi writes that Abd al-Malik built the shrine in order to compete in grandeur with Jerusalem's monumental churches.[57] Over the next four hundred years Jerusalem's prominence diminished as Arab powers in the region jockeyed for control.[59]

In 1099, The Fatimid ruler expelled the native Christian population before Jerusalem was conquered by the Crusaders, who massacred most of its Muslim and Jewish inhabitants when they took the solidly defended city by assault, after a period of siege; later the Crusaders created the Kingdom of Jerusalem. By early June 1099 Jerusalem’s population had declined from 70,000 to less than 30,000.[60]
In 1187, the city was wrested from the Crusaders by Saladin who permitted Jews and Muslims to return and settle in the city.[61] Under the Ayyubid dynasty of Saladin, a period of huge investment began in the construction of houses, markets, public bathes, and pilgrim hostels as well as the establishment of religious endowments. However, for most of the 13th century, Jerusalem declined to the status of a village due to city's fall of strategic value and Ayyubid internecine struggles.[62]
In 1244, Jerusalem was sacked by the Khwarezmian Tartars, who decimated the city's Christian population and drove out the Jews.[63] The Khwarezmian Tartars were driven out by the Ayyubids in 1247. From 1250 to 1517, Jerusalem was ruled by the Mamluks. During this period of time many clashes occurred between the Mamluks on one side and the crusaders and the Mongols on the other side. The area also suffered from many earthquakes and black plague.

"
Hahahhaah lol and the Christian Crusaders were bringing flowers and treating people with great respect like angels right u delusional ****.
And who`s opinion is that yours. How do u think the local population felt about brutal Christian Crusaders killing and pillaging anything and anyone not Christian or related to Christianity. There were many Muslims there not just Jews and Christians stop being ignorant.

"Proponents of Turkey's membership argue that it is a key regional power[30][31] with a large economy and the second largest military force of NATO[32][33] that will enhance the EU's position as a global geostrategic player; given Turkey's geographic location and economic, political, cultural and historic ties in regions with large natural resources that are at the immediate vicinity of the EU's geopolitical sphere of influence; such as the East Mediterranean and Black Sea coasts, the Middle East, the Caspian Sea basin and Central Asia.[34][35] According to the Swedish foreign minister, Carl Bildt, "the accession of Turkey would give the EU a decisive role for stability in the eastern part of the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, which is clearly in the strategic interest of Europe."[36] One of Turkey's key supporters for its bid to join the EU is the United Kingdom.[37]Turkey has the world's 15th largest GDP-PPP[41] and 17th largest Nominal GDP.[42] The country is a founding member of the OECD and the G-20 major economies."

"Turkey has a secular constitution, with no official state religion.[60] Nominally, though, 99% of the Turkish population is Muslim[61][62] of whom over 70% belong to the Sunni branch of Islam. A sizeable minority, about over 25% of the Muslim population, is affiliated with the Shi'a Alevi branch.[63] The Christians (Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Gregorian, Syriac, Protestant) and Jews (Sephardic, Ashkenazi) were formerly sizable religious minorities in the country. Turkey would be the first Muslim-majority country to join the European Union, although Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo are also Muslim-majority, and have been recognized as potential candidate countries.[64] Official population census polls in Turkey do not include information regarding a person's religious belief or ethnic background due to the regulations set by the Turkish constitution, which defines all citizens of the Republic of Turkey as Turkish in terms of nationality, regardless of faith or race.[65]
There is a strong tradition of secularism in Turkey. The state has no official religion nor promotes any, and actively monitors the area between the religions.[66] The constitution recognizes the freedom of religion for individuals, whereas religious communities are placed under the protection of the state; but the constitution explicitly states that they cannot become involved in the political process (by forming a religious party, for instance) or establish faith-based schools. No party can claim that it represents a form of religious belief; nevertheless, religious sensibilities are generally represented through conservative parties.[66] Turkey prohibits by law the wearing of religious headcover and theo-political symbolic garments for both sexes in government buildings, schools, and universities;[67] the law was upheld by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights as "legitimate" in the Leyla Şahin v. Turkey case on 10 November 2005.[68]"

Danish-Turkish relations:

  • The relations date back 250 years and actually started in the field of trade in 18th century. On 14 October 1756, an Agreement of Friendship and Trade was signed by the Sultan Osman III and the King Frederick V. In 1758, Denmark has appointed an extraordinary representative to the Ottoman Empire.
  • Today, Denmark has an embassy in Ankara and an honorary consulate in Istanbul.[6]
  • Turkey has an embassy in Copenhagen.[7]
Finnish-Turkish relations:

  • Turkey recognized the independence of Finland on February 21, 1918.
  • Finland has an embassy in Ankara and an honorary consulate general in Istanbul and other honorary consulates in Belek, Bodrum and Izmir.[8]
  • Turkey has an embassy in Helsinki.[9]
German-Turkish relations:

Based on good Turkish-German relations from the 19th century onwards, Germany promoted a Turkish immigration to Germany. However, large scale didn't occur until the 20th century. Germany suffered an acute labor shortage after World War II and, in 1961, the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) officially invited Turkish workers to Germany to fill in this void, particularly to work in the factories that helped fuel Germany's economic miracle. The German authorities named these people Gastarbeiter (German for guest workers). Most Turks in Germany trace their ancestry to Central and Eastern Anatolia. Today, Turks are Germany's largest ethnic minority and form most of Germany's Muslim minority

Italian-Turkish relations:

Italy has an embassy in Ankara, a general consulate in Istanbul, a consulate İzmir and 3 honorary consulates in * Turkey has an embassy in Rome and a general consulate in Milan.[14]


Portuguese-Turkish relations:

Turkey's 161 years of political relations with Portugal date back to the Ottoman period when Viscount de Seixal was appointed as an envoy to Istanbul. Diplomatic relations ceased during World War I and were re-established in the Republican period in 1926. A resident embassy was established in 1957. Portugal has an embassy in Ankara.[16] Turkey has an embassy in Lisbon. Both countries are full members of NATO.

Swedish-Turkish relations:



Turkey-United Kingdom relations:

Both countries currently maintain relations via the British Embassy in Ankara[23] and the Turkish Embassy in London.[24]
Turkey and the United Kingdom maintain strong bilateral relations.[25] The President of Turkey Cevdet Sunay paid a state visit to the United Kingdom in November 1967.[26] The President of Turkey Kenan Evren paid a state visit to the United Kingdom in July 1988.[26] HM Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom paid state visits to Turkey in October 1971, and in May 2008.[27] Britain and Turkey are both members of the G20, and Britain supports the accession of Turkey to the European Union.

This is an article I found online on Turkey:

`This blog mostly has discussed the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China) as the main rising powers of the world. One often overlooked rising power is Turkey. Turkey has been an important bridge between the East and West for centuries (as the modern Turkish state and previous national and imperial incarnations). In the 21st century, Turkey has proved valuable as an interlocutor, serving as a value-add to both the West and to its more anti-West neighbors.
Most recently, Turkey, as a third party, brokered indirect talks between Syrian and Israeli officials, seeking for a peace deal. The talks have stalled, and the new Israeli government led by conservative Binyamin Netanyahu is unlikely to want to rekindle them, at least in the open. What is interesting is that Israelis and the international community seem to have nearly forgotten Turkey’s strong words for Israel over its Gaza war and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s walk-out from the World Economic Forum’s Davos summit following an altercation with Israeli President Shimon Peres. Even when Turkey has not been host to talks, it has served as a consultant to negotiations, as is the case for Egypt during Hamas-Israel peace efforts and Palestinian reconciliation attempts. Indeed, some have even referred to Turkey’s “obsession” with mediation.
The Obama administration has been quick to capitalize on a positive relationship with Ankara. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to Turkey this past weekend was friendly and encouraging, and even resulted in the discussion of Turkish-brokered talks between the US and Iran. Although the talks remain simply a possibility, it is apparent that both Tehran and Washington have reached out to Turkey to be the interlocutor. Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan put it most succinctly when speaking about negotiations run by Ankara:
“The term mediation is used at times. This will only be realized if a concrete request is made by both sides. We could contribute to the furthering of relations between the two nations to a positive level.” Read more here.
If Turkey does succeed in bringing the US and Iran to the table, it will have accomplished a great deal. Nevertheless, it will still have a lot left to accomplish.`
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Islam did not exist as a religion, belief or anything like that until Mohammad claimed to be seeing and hearing things in a cave. He then pinched all the jewish prophets and claimed they were really Muslims along with identlifying a pre-islamic god as a another form of Yahweh.
Allah had three daughters in pre-islamic mythology. Hardly the montheistic deity that Mohammad turned him into.
Load of bollocks and as bad as the christians claiming all the jewish prophets were really christians. Moses was a jew, Abraham was a jew, Jesus was a jew. They followed jewish lore, jewish scripture and jewish tradition. You are as bad as the Mormons trying to claim that all people are really mormons and just haven't seen the way correctly yet.
 

This thread has been viewed 296793 times.

Back
Top