Greece and Turkey

[buzz]

We have other serious problems and should focus on solving them in time, like Kurdish issue, full implementation of human rights, relaxation of army influence etc. They are all related anyway.

i'm glad to hear it

[jorje]

Qiangdade, I think the only real problem between Greece and Turkey is the Cyprus issue. Maybe a little, the Aegean sea. The current things I mean.

If the hatred still continues about 1000 years past, such as the invasion of asia minor (and later balkans etc), it's extremely silly. People should get over it, but I think some powers needs people to hate us still because of that, refreshing the memories or making up stories etc. You know, it's quite funny when i hear other people from Balkan states talk about a certain 1489 (random date), and still hold grudge against Turkish about it. And they expect you to know the event as well. Even in Hungary they have big pictures and statues of heroes who claimed to resist or fight one Turkish leader. It's so fucking trivial that I'm sure nobody in Istanbul even heard of that in that date. But by default everybody hates Turkish today.

So, Turkey is the most convenient enemy for whole Europe. They are invaders, they are ethnically least related, and most importantly, they are muslim. So any country who needs a story to unite its people, do not look far, here is the bloody Turkish story. Always sells.

Ordinary Turkish hates Greeks because he thinks you tried to invade our country 1920s, and failed so it's not a problem, BUT you still do everything in your power to realize that dream one day. So every little movement is suspicious . And millions of stories how Turkish people in Thrace got massacred etc, might be used to fuel the passion if needed... usual stuff...

Through internet, many things have changed imo. People are not so easily fooled any more.

I agree that the most important issue is Cyprus.
Aegean or Thrace is not an issue at all as long as Turkey does not have any claims for Greek land or sea and recognizes these places as parts of Greece.
I am sure that the vast majority of Greeks do not wish war or restoration of Byzantine Empire.We don even have that dreams.
However,Some facts are not so old , the pogrom in Istanbul some decades ago.For example those Greeks lost violently their houses and business, should there be a arrangement at least for those people?
Cyprus is a whole big issue to start talking.
But you know that the northern part is illegally occupied according to the international law and no country or international organization in the world has ever recognized this entity.

[Levenspiel]

I'm at the airport and not quite comfortable at the moment, but just to pass little notes:

- many Turkish don't agree with me at all, so my ideas relates to me only.

- istanbul pogrom. yes, we have to sincerely apologize to hurt parties, if we didn't do, so far. I can write more about this later, but it's another story of inner power struggles, in essence not related to Greeks.

- Cyprus.. heavy topic... not well-informed myself.

[jorje]

I'm at the airport and not quite comfortable at the moment, but just to pass little notes:

- many Turkish don't agree with me at all, so my ideas relates to me only.

- istanbul pogrom. yes, we have to sincerely apologize to hurt parties, if we didn't do, so far. I can write more about this later, but it's another story of inner power struggles, in essence not related to Greeks.

- Cyprus.. heavy topic... not well-informed myself.

Fair enough,
Have a nice trip, i guess you are flying to somewhere

[Adon]

I can't say that I love the villagers who live westward of Evros more than the villagers who live eastwards. The only form of patriotism I can understand,is the effort to make your country a better place. Democracy,reason(ancient Greeks were famous rather for their logic than for their passion!),justice,respect of citizen rights,social and economic evolution and mainly the fight for humanistic rights and ideals.

So,I've come to the conclusion that the "enemy" for every patriot exists in his own country.(At least when there is peace.A war can change dramatically this theory)
The "enemy" could be the nationalism, the religious fanatics, the government (in many cases), the injustice, the propaganda, the false collective identity based on lies (very common),the stupidity (!!!),the Establishment,the impostors (usually disguised as patriots-politicians are the worst of them) etc

So, Turkey is the most convenient enemy for whole Europe. They are invaders, they are ethnically least related, and most importantly, they are muslim. So any country who needs a story to unite its people, do not look far, here is the bloody Turkish story. Always sells.

Unfortunately,patriotism is defined (usually) as the aggressiveness toward an external enemy. Turks and Macedonians,for different reasons,are the totems of this kind of aggressive patriotism for Greeks.

Ordinary Turkish hates Greeks because he thinks you tried to invade our country 1920s, and failed so it's not a problem, BUT you still do everything in your power to realize that dream one day. So every little movement is suspicious . And millions of stories how Turkish people in Thrace got massacred etc, might be used to fuel the passion if needed... usual stuff...

Yes,this a historical fact.Our allies had given us "something" but our patriots tried to get "much more". It was an invasion and we got punished severely. That traumatic experience,imo,created a peaceful consciousness in Greek population. After that, no sane Greek wanted an offensive war against anyone else.
"We don't want to get "land" from anyone,we don't give "land" we own to anyone" could be an oversimplification of our approach to war.

Btw expenses for weapons are totally idiotic.Many "good patriots" Greeks and Turks are getting rich(er) because of our tolerance. A strict non-agression pact between our countries would be mutually beneficial for the people but not for certain "patriots".

[buzz]

the propaganda, the false collective identity based on lies

Macedonians

"slavmacedonias" could be a much more appropriate name for their nationalism propaganda...
anyway as you like

[s-e-e]

Now i have a couple of questions.

-What do turkish people feel about the istanbul pogrom?
-What about the invasion of Cyprus?
-How do turks see the policies of the turks in the Ottoman empire towards christians and greeks?
-How do turks feel about the fact that the majority of the lands turkey holds today was once populated by greeks and important cities like Istanbul (the most glorious of greek cities) and Izmir where greek founded?
-What is the stance on being conquerors of foreign lands and oppressors of the local populations that existed in those lands before them (as it is taught in greek schools)?
-In greece there are almost daily reports that turkish jet fighters are entering greek air space. Anything on that in Turkey?
-In greece they say that according to international law greece has the right to extend the nautical borders to 12 miles and holds the exclusive rights to an extended zone in the sea where turkish ships are exploring for oil, gas etc illegally.
-The Imia incident where Turkish commandos took the greek flag down from an islet and put a turkish one in its place.
-And again as i asked in the first sentence what fuels the hate of the turks towards greeks? what is taught in turkish schools?


I am not taking any sides here, i am stating the general greek feeling and my questions derive from that.

- The pogrom in Istanbul is a source of shame in Turkish history. No doubt about that. It had a reason though, a reason far away from justifynig the evidence. The majority of even the natioanlist side admits the reality and feel sorry for the pain innocent people had to suffer.

- Cyprus is a hard topic, too many things to be said. Firstly Turks never take it as invasion. We simply do not bother how the entire world prefers to see it.
Turks and Greeks used to live in peace under a united Cyprus, governed by Greeks. That was until 60sor maybe beginning of 70s when eoka started to get in action to serve their stupid ideology, enosis. Some Turks were murdered including children. As Turkey realised the developments are going nowhere but to merging Cyprus to Greece, the goverment took a serious desicion which we all know. Still too many things to be said about Cyprus, it would take pages and pages to write everything briefly. The only thing that makes me sad about the current situation is that , out of the 4 nations involved (greece, turkey, cypriot turks, cypriot greeks), the only ''pure innocent'' side is cypriot turks. A nation which is curently in doubt itself for its own identity.

- We are talking about long time ago. It's a fact that things weren't as smooth and circumstances were very much different compared to today. To be honest I'm not an expert on history. In fact I'm terrible at it. All I can say that if Ottomans were as rude and intolernt as western people exaggerate, at least the balcans would have been very much different today, in all meanings. I live in Izmir, a touchy place for both nations. This is a city which the greek culture is involved with highest amounts, compared even to Istanbul. Today we still use some greek origined words in daily life (asfalya, paramana etc.) which noone in Turkey besides Izmirians understand. We, as a nation, earned our entire marine culture from Greeks. This is a fact. Many fish names in turkish come from greek. I'm sure all greek friends will understand when I say ''çipura, levrek, sinarit, kefal, orfoz, barbun, kalamar'' or even ''paragat''. Oooops, started to get off topic. About the departure of greeks in Turkey in 20s, this is a very unfortunate development for both nations. I think it is been thaught as a one sided movement in greek education system, the fact is it was an unfortunate desicion taken by both greek and turkish goverments in Lousanne in 20s (I think). According to that aggreement, all turks in Greece except for the ones in Thrace had to move to Turkey, and vv for the Greeks except for the ones in Istanbul. I wish Izmir too was left excluded. FORZA PANIONIOS

-The truth is past is in the past. Not many people care about who these lands should belong to and who first started the civilaztion over it. The lands where Turkish republic is set on has been ruled by turks for centuries. So what, the US should give its lands back to indians and mexicans, the Swedes should leave Sweden and let only its real natives live on it. Pfff, nosense. As I said I'm not good at history but let me say one thing. Unlike it is been told in greek education system, the origin of turkish race comes from Huns, not Mongolians. Turks who entered anatolia was just one group of many which decided to move west for some reasons. And guess where the name Hungary comes from. I can't take myself from thinking, it should be only the religious preferences that irritate europe so much.

-Aaaaa no. Jet flights over the aegean sea is not a very common or popular topic in turkish media. But I want to advice something to both greek and turkish friends, that is, do not rely on such news because most of them are just bs. The fact is dogfights over the aegean sea is very common, in fact I believe they sometimes to it for training. But in most cases it is very unlikely that the millitary stuff reflects on media unchanged. The medias of both countries love to show the evidences as the other side is an evil enemy violating something and their own millitary is a bunch of heroes. This goes for both sides. I remember a turkish fighter jet being announced in turkish media as ''crashed into the sea due to technical failure, pilot not survived'' long time ago. The confession from the turkish millitary was made years and years later that the jet was actually shot down on purpose by a greek jet. And this time the turkish media chose to give the news in a patriotic mood, showing the greek jet with the amblem drawn on its side by the pilot symbolising it's shot down an ''enemy'' plane. And we all were to hate the greek pilot. You're never allowed to see things as exactly how they are. Especially if millitary is involved. And I would serioulsly reccomend to both greek and turkish friends not to believe in every bs you see on media.

- As far as I know international laws about nautical borders say (not sure though, might be wrong) when a sea is shared by 2 or more countries the border limits are to be decided by those countries involved. One thing that matters Turkey a lot about the nautical borders is that when Greece extends its borders to 12 miles, there's simply no international corridor left between the southern islands. The greek see blocks everything. Say a turkish ship in İstanbul is planning to go to Italy, it either has to enter greek waters or has to follow a real long route. The same is for the air zone. I think this is what that bothers turkish goverment the most, besides the oil stuff. Actually, with lack of knowledge about exactly what the international laws say it really is meaningless to comment to this topic.

-Imia or Kardak as we call it, the most stupid conflict between the 2 countries. To be objective I believe both nations has the right to declare the isles as their own. As far as I know (again, might be wrong) the islands have been grouped into three, based on their sizes. The first two groups with greater sizes are owned by Greece except for two near Dardanelles. This is insured by the agreement between Turkey and Greece. Here comes the tricky part, the third group that includes the smallest sized isles is not mentioned anywhere. There are several similar geograpic areas, all around the turkish coast. Some such isles belong to Greece, some to Turkey. It really is hard to determine which belongs to who. Some time in some way which I have no idea about, the owner has been determined. There are so many of them. I have been to Kaş 2 years ago for scuba diving (best place in Turkey for it) which faces the greek island Megisti. No words to say, please use google earth to see all the small isles in between. Try to estimate which isles are greek and which are turkish. You'll understand what I'm talking about. Kardak-Imia is a very well known fishing area by both Turkish and Greek fishermen. The reason is, it is the main reproduction area for the common aegean fish çipura-tsipoura. When it's time, that's winter time, fishermen of both countries use the area frequently. When politics are involved, things change all of a sudden.
Alternative solution: Island on the west to greeks, island on the east to turks. Free access to both islands for fishermen.

[qiangdade]

Qiangdade, I think the only real problem between Greece and Turkey is the Cyprus issue. Maybe a little, the Aegean sea. The current things I mean.

If the hatred still continues about 1000 years past, such as the invasion of asia minor (and later balkans etc), it's extremely silly. People should get over it, but I think some powers needs people to hate us still because of that, refreshing the memories or making up stories etc. You know, it's quite funny when i hear other people from Balkan states talk about a certain 1489 (random date), and still hold grudge against Turkish about it. And they expect you to know the event as well. Even in Hungary they have big pictures and statues of heroes who claimed to resist or fight one Turkish leader. It's so fucking trivial that I'm sure nobody in Istanbul even heard of that in that date. But by default everybody hates Turkish today.

So, Turkey is the most convenient enemy for whole Europe. They are invaders, they are ethnically least related, and most importantly, they are muslim. So any country who needs a story to unite its people, do not look far, here is the bloody Turkish story. Always sells.

Ordinary Turkish hates Greeks because he thinks you tried to invade our country 1920s, and failed so it's not a problem, BUT you still do everything in your power to realize that dream one day. So every little movement is suspicious . And millions of stories how Turkish people in Thrace got massacred etc, might be used to fuel the passion if needed... usual stuff...

Through internet, many things have changed imo. People are not so easily fooled any more.

Thanks for a couple of answers. But as you now i am more german than greek so the "you" doesn't apply to me if it was directed towards me and i guess it wasn't. About realizing the dream, that is not the case in greece, i have never heard of a greek that would have any such aspirations (except far right people, as in any other nation). It is common sense that those cities/lands will never be greek again. Yes Istanbul is called Constantinople in greece, but it is viewed as a turkish city. So i don't get the whole hate by turks. One invasion in the 20's and some (false) "aspirations" to annexe turkish lands??

[qiangdade]

First of I would like to clarify again that i am basing my questions on what the greek consensus is and not on my own opinions/views on anything. My post and questions had no personal feelings whatsoever.

- The pogrom in Istanbul is a source of shame in Turkish history. No doubt about that. It had a reason though, a reason far away from justifynig the evidence. The majority of even the natioanlist side admits the reality and feel sorry for the pain innocent people had to suffer.

What was the reason? And don't tell me it was the bomb on Kemal's birth house in Selanik... More likely it had to do with Cyprus.

- Cyprus is a hard topic, too many things to be said. Firstly Turks never take it as invasion. We simply do not bother how the entire world prefers to see it.
Turks and Greeks used to live in peace under a united Cyprus, governed by Greeks. That was until 60sor maybe beginning of 70s when eoka started to get in action to serve their stupid ideology, enosis. Some Turks were murdered including children. As Turkey realised the developments are going nowhere but to merging Cyprus to Greece, the goverment took a serious desicion which we all know. Still too many things to be said about Cyprus, it would take pages and pages to write everything briefly. The only thing that makes me sad about the current situation is that , out of the 4 nations involved (greece, turkey, cypriot turks, cypriot greeks), the only ''pure innocent'' side is cypriot turks. A nation which is curently in doubt itself for its own identity.

It is a known fact that the junta in greece was planning to annex Cyprus. It is known fact that Eoka did do bad things. It is a known fact that turkish invading forces commited atrocious acts violating human rights (possiblt like the eoka). What is really odd is that turkish forces are still occupying about 40% of the country even though the northern state is only recognized by Turkey and no other country or organization in the world. Cyprus is a sovereign modern state with no aspirations whatsoever to ever merge with greece. Imo there is no turkish or greek cypriot nation. Greeks and Turks live on an island that history had be a sovereign state and foreign forces be it greek or turkish have no place on. Same goes for what i think is still a law in cyprus that the head of the cypriot military has to be a mainland greek. The division of the island is an occupation. Afaik the government of the island is printing their money on both greek and turkish, same goes for passports and many other things and is viewing the country as a whole.

- We are talking about long time ago. It's a fact that things weren't as smooth and circumstances were very much different compared to today. To be honest I'm not an expert on history. In fact I'm terrible at it. All I can say that if Ottomans were as rude and intolernt as western people exaggerate, at least the balcans would have been very much different today, in all meanings. I live in Izmir, a touchy place for both nations. This is a city which the greek culture is involved with highest amounts, compared even to Istanbul. Today we still use some greek origined words in daily life (asfalya, paramana etc.) which noone in Turkey besides Izmirians understand. We, as a nation, earned our entire marine culture from Greeks. This is a fact. Many fish names in turkish come from greek. I'm sure all greek friends will understand when I say ''çipura, levrek, sinarit, kefal, orfoz, barbun, kalamar'' or even ''paragat''. Oooops, started to get off topic. About the departure of greeks in Turkey in 20s, this is a very unfortunate development for both nations. I think it is been thaught as a one sided movement in greek education system, the fact is it was an unfortunate desicion taken by both greek and turkish goverments in Lousanne in 20s (I think). According to that aggreement, all turks in Greece except for the ones in Thrace had to move to Turkey, and vv for the Greeks except for the ones in Istanbul. I wish Izmir too was left excluded. FORZA PANIONIOS

This is pretty much irrelevant to my question, but yes i understood every "greek" word you mentioned, even though i am not sure they all derived from greek. But these words are used in greece also (Tsipoura, lavraki, sinagrida, kefalos, rofos, barbouni, kalamari, paragadi)

-The truth is past is in the past. Not many people care about who these lands should belong to and who first started the civilaztion over it. The lands where Turkish republic is set on has been ruled by turks for centuries. So what, the US should give its lands back to indians and mexicans, the Swedes should leave Sweden and let only its real natives live on it. Pfff, nosense. As I said I'm not good at history but let me say one thing. Unlike it is been told in greek education system, the origin of turkish race comes from Huns, not Mongolians. Turks who entered anatolia was just one group of many which decided to move west for some reasons. And guess where the name Hungary comes from. I can't take myself from thinking, it should be only the religious preferences that irritate europe so much.

The only difference being that those cities where actually thriving cities for centuries and not a bunch of tents, so you must understand the sentiment of having lost them, especially Istanbul, which was the most important and glorious greek city and would be the greek capital if under greek rule. Many civilizations have conquered foreign lands and occupied them for centuries, but i have no example in mind of making a foreign city the capital of th eempire and staying there (best example Austria-Hungary). In the greek education system it is not taught that the turks are mongols. Nor the huns. It is taught that they came from Asia (at least when i went to school). And the Hungarians do not call their country Hungary. They call it Magyarorszag, which has nothing to do with "hun" if this is any relevant...

-Aaaaa no. Jet flights over the aegean sea is not a very common or popular topic in turkish media. But I want to advice something to both greek and turkish friends, that is, do not rely on such news because most of them are just bs. The fact is dogfights over the aegean sea is very common, in fact I believe they sometimes to it for training. But in most cases it is very unlikely that the millitary stuff reflects on media unchanged. The medias of both countries love to show the evidences as the other side is an evil enemy violating something and their own millitary is a bunch of heroes. This goes for both sides. I remember a turkish fighter jet being announced in turkish media as ''crashed into the sea due to technical failure, pilot not survived'' long time ago. The confession from the turkish millitary was made years and years later that the jet was actually shot down on purpose by a greek jet. And this time the turkish media chose to give the news in a patriotic mood, showing the greek jet with the amblem drawn on its side by the pilot symbolising it's shot down an ''enemy'' plane. And we all were to hate the greek pilot. You're never allowed to see things as exactly how they are. Especially if millitary is involved. And I would serioulsly reccomend to both greek and turkish friends not to believe in every bs you see on media.

possibly so. i have no reason or evidence to doubt what you say.

- As far as I know international laws about nautical borders say (not sure though, might be wrong) when a sea is shared by 2 or more countries the border limits are to be decided by those countries involved. One thing that matters Turkey a lot about the nautical borders is that when Greece extends its borders to 12 miles, there's simply no international corridor left between the southern islands. The greek see blocks everything. Say a turkish ship in İstanbul is planning to go to Italy, it either has to enter greek waters or has to follow a real long route. The same is for the air zone. I think this is what that bothers turkish goverment the most, besides the oil stuff. Actually, with lack of knowledge about exactly what the international laws say it really is meaningless to comment to this topic.

Not an expert on international law, but turkish ships would be able to enter greek waters with no problems just as aircrafts (except military) greek airspace. This is no excuse. But as i said not an expert.

-Imia or Kardak as we call it, the most stupid conflict between the 2 countries. To be objective I believe both nations has the right to declare the isles as their own. As far as I know (again, might be wrong) the islands have been grouped into three, based on their sizes. The first two groups with greater sizes are owned by Greece except for two near Dardanelles. This is insured by the agreement between Turkey and Greece. Here comes the tricky part, the third group that includes the smallest sized isles is not mentioned anywhere. There are several similar geograpic areas, all around the turkish coast. Some such isles belong to Greece, some to Turkey. It really is hard to determine which belongs to who. Some time in some way which I have no idea about, the owner has been determined. There are so many of them. I have been to Kaş 2 years ago for scuba diving (best place in Turkey for it) which faces the greek island Megisti. No words to say, please use google earth to see all the small isles in between. Try to estimate which isles are greek and which are turkish. You'll understand what I'm talking about. Kardak-Imia is a very well known fishing area by both Turkish and Greek fishermen. The reason is, it is the main reproduction area for the common aegean fish çipura-tsipoura. When it's time, that's winter time, fishermen of both countries use the area frequently. When politics are involved, things change all of a sudden.
Alternative solution: Island on the west to greeks, island on the east to turks. Free access to both islands for fishermen.

Yes Kardak. I had forgotten how they were called in turkish. Treaty or no treaty it is a pretty bold move to just jump on an island with a bunch of commandos, take off a flag that's been there for a long time and plant your own. It is no sane move, not even if just to make a statement that "this island is not necessarily yours". And yes both parts would have way more to gain if they collaborated in those matters, especially for the oil as the way the situation is right now nobody has any gain.

You have to view my statement and my questions as a foreigner's who lives in greece. under no circumstances am i having any significant attachment to those issues, i was just curious to hear the other side on some matters that are being a subject here.

Greek and Turkish scholars should sit down and write the history school books of both countries together so a common line is taught, that's my opinion for the first step towards better relations. No exaggerations and propaganda, but then again this is probably too much to ask for...

[jorje]

EOKA and EOKA B are two different organizations.
The first was against the British rule in the island-liberating one.
While the second was about Enosis-Union with Greece and i agree that they did atrocities against Turks in the island and Greeks who did not admit their ideology.The same thing TMT did, the only difference was its goal.
There was only a very short period of independence in Cyprus.
And even if the first invasion was legal( let's say) the second one was illegal
And the continuation of occupation for over 30 years is undoubtedly a crime.
Not to mention what happened-rapes-murders in cold blood of old people and children......
We do not have dreams about Turkish land-at least the majority of Greeks.

Cyprus is a whole different story, because it's not part of Turkey.

For the sea borders, just please some Turk explain me why Turkey expanded its sea borders to 12 miles in the northern seas.
Why the rule should apply to Turkey but not to Greece?
It's an international rule.
The sea route of a ship is not an excuse , because international trade follows some rules again.
So there is no problem.
As for the small uninhabited islands is just part of this story, and of course oil is always very important.

[s-e-e]

What was the reason? And don't tell me it was the bomb on Kemal's birth house in Selanik... More likely it had to do with Cyprus.

As far as I know the relations were already tensed due to developments in Cyprus. I'm talking about the social structure in Istanbul. Greeks in Istanbul were thought to be helping eoka, not sure if it's true though. But such news were taking place on turkish media that time. The bombing evidence was just the freaking point. Such a shame in our history.

It is a known fact that the junta in greece was planning to annex Cyprus. It is known fact that Eoka did do bad things. It is a known fact that turkish invading forces commited atrocious acts violating human rights (possiblt like the eoka). What is really odd is that turkish forces are still occupying about 40% of the country even though the northern state is only recognized by Turkey and no other country or organization in the world. Cyprus is a sovereign modern state with no aspirations whatsoever to ever merge with greece. Imo there is no turkish or greek cypriot nation. Greeks and Turks live on an island that history had be a sovereign state and foreign forces be it greek or turkish have no place on. Same goes for what i think is still a law in cyprus that the head of the cypriot military has to be a mainland greek. The division of the island is an occupation. Afaik the government of the island is printing their money on both greek and turkish, same goes for passports and many other things and is viewing the country as a whole.

This very much depends on from which side's point of view you want to look at. What I can say is, yes cyprus had a chance be united. And in all the aggreements made to form a single united cyprus you can see Turkey's involved. We were fine with the idea greeks governing the island. But things that happened wasted all the trust. Now the entire world expect us to feel the same trust again, like nothing has happened. I don't think this is very likely to happen, at least in short terms. I insure you that, if the millitary operation was never made, today cyprus was one of the greek islands and all turks would have been either killed or asimilated. The turkish on money and other stuff does not prove anything to me. We gave another chance though, under totally democratic circumstances, for a united cyprus. It surely didn't totally satisfy either side, but looked to be fair. The majority of cypriot greeks voted no, and here we are right in the beginning again.
I have to admit that during the millitary operation many human rights violations were made. I was very surprised when I first heard the number of ''lost or missing'' greeks were greater than turks. But we also have to consider that the millitary operation was a state of war. Real war. That surely is not an excuse, but such violations happen in every similar situation.

The only difference being that those cities where actually thriving cities for centuries and not a bunch of tents, so you must understand the sentiment of having lost them, especially Istanbul, which was the most important and glorious greek city and would be the greek capital if under greek rule. Many civilizations have conquered foreign lands and occupied them for centuries, but i have no example in mind of making a foreign city the capital of th eempire and staying there (best example Austria-Hungary). In the greek education system it is not taught that the turks are mongols. Nor the huns. It is taught that they came from Asia (at least when i went to school). And the Hungarians do not call their country Hungary. They call it Magyarorszag, which has nothing to do with "hun" if this is any relevant...

The origin of turkish and hungarian race are the same. They just followed a differet route during the big migration, from north of caspian sea. Many of the ex soviet nations to the east of Turkey were also other groups of the big migration. Don't think I'm a racist or something, just trying to inform Today's Turkey consists of nearly 20 different communities, so we are a very cosmopolitic nation. My mother comes from a native Izmirian family. Which means I might have some greek part as well.
And yes I agree that loss of Istanbul and Izmir must be different and not comparable to other examples.

Yes Kardak. I had forgotten how they were called in turkish. Treaty or no treaty it is a pretty bold move to just jump on an island with a bunch of commandos, take off a flag that's been there for a long time and plant your own. It is no sane move, not even if just to make a statement that "this island is not necessarily yours". And yes both parts would have way more to gain if they collaborated in those matters, especially for the oil as the way the situation is right now nobody has any gain.

As far as I know the greek flag was brought by some civilians including a greek priest right after the problem broke up, but before the greek commandos arrived. This is just about who the real owner should be legally. Both say it's theirs. And I think both have the rights to say so.

Greek and Turkish scholars should sit down and write the history school books of both countries together so a common line is taught, that's my opinion for the first step towards better relations. No exaggerations and propaganda, but then again this is probably too much to ask for...

I think some developments have already been made. In school books the parts that might source hatred are removed or changed in both countries. Might be wrong but that's what I heard. Still, a long time needs to be passed to expect some good developments. With the current problems in between it will not be an easy process. But I'm optimist for the long term.

[Adon]

"slavmacedonias" could be a much more appropriate name for their nationalism propaganda...
anyway as you like

Who cares how they want to name themselves?
I don't feel any real threat from those Slavs and their illusions about history.Let them be,they are harmless

[Adon]

The only difference being that those cities where actually thriving cities for centuries and not a bunch of tents, so you must understand the sentiment of having lost them, especially Istanbul, which was the most important and glorious greek city and would be the greek capital if under greek rule.

There is an academic-and very interesting- debate about what was the meaning of the word "Greek" through history.
Byzantine Empire used the greek language.Many high officials considered themselves being of greek origin,although at the same time the word "Greek" meant "idol worshiper".
Was there a Greek nation those times,or the Greek nation was created -as a consciousness- much later ,at the years before the revolution? (1821)

Language is an important factor but he have to remember that Byzantine Empire was the East Roman Empire. Mainly through the violent christianization, Byzantine destroyed a great part of ancient greek culture.

Cretans,Macedonians,Thracians were not Greeks-according to ancient greek historians.When did Thrace and Konstantinoupolis become greek territory and why?

(edit some spelling errors)

[janos]

National identity,the way we consider it nowadays, is the product of the failure of the type of colonialism that was practiced until the 19th century.
Don't forget that up until then it was multicultural empires that covered the face of the planet for the most part.With the rise of nationalism,after the end of WW1 each newly formed "national state" faced the task of unifying its citizens under one banner or a flag if you prefer.The amount of work needed to do that varied, as did the methods utilized to achieve said unification.
In culturally mixed areas as the Balkans the leaders of the newly founded states had their work cut out for them.
In particular Greece and moreso,Turkey had to incorporate populations of different cultural and, most importantly, religious backgrounds.Greece took care of that by utilizing extreme nationalistic propaganda through the educational system (Sth like 30 hrs of one-sided history lessons 20 hrs of religious instruction etc in the weekly schedule of elementary schools), forcing slavic minorities to leave the country by pushing them to extreme poverty and finally by exchanging populations with Turkey as dictated by the Lausanne treaty.
Turkey on the other hand, had much,much bigger problems to face.Hosting huge minority populations, finding itself on the defensive end against powerful countries like England and France and in the end being caught between worlds (hated by both the christian Europeans and the muslim arabs) resorted to a government type that had all the features of a dictatorship (their transition to "democracy" is not yet complete) which has made the relationships of the two countries tense.
Later on , as you people have already mentioned comes the invasion of Cyprus and the endless arms race as well as the competition for which country will be the one favored most by the US in the strategic region of the Balkans.
Anyway, most of you people know these things.
I just wanted to point out that the first reason for the everlasting tension in the relationship of these manufactured imho ETHNIC states is exactly that; the fact that they are manufactured.

Edit: @ Adon Very well said my friend.

[buzz]

There is an academic-and very interesting- debate about what was the meaning of the word "Greek" through history.
Byzantine Empire used the greek language.Many high officials considered themselves being of greek origin,although at the same time the word "Greek" meant "idol worshiper".
Was there a Greek nation those times,or the Greek nation was created -as a consciousness- much later ,at the years before the revolution? (1821)

Language is an important factor but he have to remember that Byzantine Empire was the East Roman Empire. Mainly through the violent christianization, Byzantine destroyed a great part of ancient greek culture.

Cretans,Macedonians,Thracians were not Greeks-according to ancient greek historians.When did Thrace and Konstantinoupolis become greek territory and why?

(edit some spelling errors)

so when byzantine empire was established greeks were exterminated off the face of the earth??
it is different to say greeks (and of course all the other nations)didn't realize their nationality(at least until 13-14 century as many scholars says)and prefer to look at theirselves as "romioi" than saying greeks came to earth at 1821...
just to mention that all empires(ottoman empire,soviet union ,roman empire etc) are multiethnic patterns...it is the people that live at the centre of the empire that gives the character to an empire..so according to this, greek imperium(as this empire was named by the westerns for their own reasons)was a greek orthodox empire because the people that lived in constantinople,thessaloniki,old greece,west and north minor asia ,islands etc were greeks with a new faith(orthodox)...nothing more nothing less

yes new faith changed their minds a lot(i would say this is good)...you have to study byzantine empire to realize that it was not just the language that gave to this empire its greek identity... for example medieval greek young people(romioi) studied homer,aristotles,socrates at school..the three great hierarchs studied greek philosophy at famous "universities"...anyway we have to realize that new faith just separated the wheat from the chaff,didn't cancel at once the great ancient past...we must not confuse the whole byzantine society with few fanatics,vandals(were all societies have)or with acts of revenge...and finally we have to realize that ancient greek glory was an event of the past..the marriage between new faith and greek civilization revitalise greeks and gave to humanity a great new civilization...byzantine glory was the birth of this agonizing marriage...




moreover, the majority of well known historians(for example hammond) do recognize that macedonias was a dorian(that means greek) tribe...i agree that thracians were not greeks,(that's why you emphasized only this word)

cretans (speaking for the people of 15 bc century)is another story and it is premature to name them greeks or not ....i will just remind you the case Myceneans...it was the decoding of the linear b that changed some scholar's minds and finally recognized them as greeks