Elective Quran course approved for military schools

[cloud]

I can't read the whole thread, nor interested much , but why the religious teaching in ARMED forces?? What are the the parents for?? Why one grow up in home? I don't understand why people support their kids to be brainwashed(or whatever you call it) by someone else? Why can't they teach the religious teaching and human values by themselves?

 

[LegionnairE]

Hit a nerve did i muppet. Lol

You're talking that there wouldn't be Turkey today if it wasn't for Ataturk/Kemalists, well here is some news for you there would't be no Ataturk if it wasn't for the Ottomans as you'd all be the children of Byzantium. NOT TURKS.

What can i say? French would speak German if not for Americans. Red would be orange if it had some yellow in it.

One of the most retarded comebacks in defence.pk history.

We were soldiers, always soldiers. If the Ottoman state didn't become an empire and didn't conquer half the Europe, North Africa, Arabia... We'd still be soldiers. It's a national thing, I do realise Pakistanis hardly ever talk about nationality i knew ones who deny it but sure you heard about it right?

There isn't a chance for a Turk not being a Turk.. just lol

 

[TurAr]

Hit a nerve did i muppet. Lol

You're talking that there wouldn't be Turkey today if it wasn't for Ataturk/Kemalists, well here is some news for you there would't be no Ataturk if it wasn't for the Ottomans as you'd all be the children of Byzantium. NOT TURKS

I actually admire Ataturk and the Turkish state, he had some good attibutes and turkey is a great nations that other muslim nations should aspire to but you idiot kemalists make me laugh you think today's turkey is only what it is because of kemalism. Quite a lot of your population thinks otherwise.

You only know the last 100 years of Turkey so quit preaching what i do and don't know. I couldn't give 2 sh11ts about your current politics but i am aware the vast majority voted in an "islamist" party which says alot about what Turks think of kemalism.

Few corrections, AKP have 50% of the votes. And many of its voters supporting it because of economical reasons. So labelling half of the Turkey as "Islamist" is wrong, just like considering other half as non-religious.

The important thing here is majority of the Turkish people have embraced secularism. Our secularism is the actual reason why you and many other Muslim countries are admiring Turkey either with or without knowing it.

There are many different types of Kemalists, and loving and respecting Ataturk does not necessarily make one a Kemalist. I believe vast majority of AKP voters are loving and respecting, or just respecting Ataturk.

Now go and kiss a photo of ataturk and them come back and reply muppet.

You need to do more than that if you want to hit a nerve. We've just had enough of those non-Turkish posters, acting like Turkish intellectuals without knowing anything.

 

[TheCommander]

Hit a nerve did i muppet. Lol

You're talking that there wouldn't be Turkey today if it wasn't for Ataturk/Kemalists, well here is some news for you there would't be no Ataturk if it wasn't for the Ottomans as you'd all be the children of Byzantium. NOT TURKS

I actually admire Ataturk and the Turkish state, he had some good attibutes and turkey is a great nations that other muslim nations should aspire to but you idiot kemalists make me laugh you think today's turkey is only what it is because of kemalism. Quite a lot of your population thinks otherwise.

You only know the last 100 years of Turkey so quit preaching what i do and don't know. I couldn't give 2 sh11ts about your current politics but i am aware the vast majority voted in an "islamist" party which says alot about what Turks think of kemalism.

Now go and kiss a photo of ataturk and them come back and reply muppet.

Unfortunately, thread turned to flame war again and the topic again hit secularism/kemalism and religion. I really wonder when we really truly understand each other? Why for some extreme secular or extreme kemalist there is no place for religious people in the army or police or judiciary system? Likewise, why for the extreme religious people there should be no place in the same institutes for not religious or secularist etc.? If we continue to ignore each other or try be dominant in every place or cannot stand those who think different than us, how could next generations live together in peace and harmony?

For those who do not know our country well, let me tell you something. In our country there are some minority groups in both side who are extremist okay. For them, they must dominate the society or everyone must think, live as they wish or believe.
And I agree with @TurAr

There are many different types of Kemalists, and loving and respecting Ataturk does not necessarily make one a Kemalist. I believe vast majority of AKP voters are loving and respecting, or just respecting Ataturk.

And once again, this country belongs to everyone. Our grandparents fought together and beat the enemies shoulder to shoulder. But, no need any foreign invader today, we already fell out with each other and ready to expel one another. It seems we need a hundred year to learn how to live together.

 

[TR.1]

...........

 

[LegionnairE]

I couldn't help but agree with you guys @TheCommander and @TurAr

We can't maintain republic with each political party that takes power trying to install it's own hegemony over the state. This is very problematic. It also has communal consequences.

You can't keep a nation together by constantly polarizing it.

I hate kemalist but love Atatürk. I hate erdogan type Muslims but I'm Muslim.

and an attention wh0re

 

[LegionnairE]

Your continously getting owned and your still talking

you are 'continuously' getting banned but keep coming...

 

[TheCommander]

There would be no Turkey, like it is today, if there were no so called Kemalists.

You're talking that there wouldn't be Turkey today if it wasn't for Ataturk/Kemalists, well here is some news for you there would't be no Ataturk if it wasn't for the Ottomans as you'd all be the children of Byzantium. NOT TURKS

Just I want to say to both of you, if you look at the history of turks, you will see 16 turkish states. And there was all the time a leader who was either Mete Khan or Attila, or Bumin Qaghan, or Alp Tigin, or Seljuk Bey, or Osman Bey, or Ataturk. We all the time were able to and are able to reveal a great leader. The logic is wrong, if he (you name whoever you want) was not exist, we would not be. The history of turks proved that there would be someone else to lead, other claims in my opinion is insult to our history and turks.

Having said that, none can underestimate those great leaders.

 

[LegionnairE]

^you know how they say... "devlette devamlılık esastır" "permanence is a basis of a government."

How could we proudly talk about Ottoman victories if we became a British colony in the end? We couldn't.

It's all about adapting to the world's realities. If Ottoman Empire gave up theocracy after the French revolution there would be no need for Atatürk's nationalist movement. And there would be no territory loss. But then again ironicaly, French revolution was triggered by the immigration of E. Roman scholars to the west after Ottoman conquest of Constantinople.


It's all speculative history.

 

[TheCommander]

^you know how they say... "devlette devamlılık esastır" "permanence is a basis of a government."

How could we proudly talk about Ottoman victories if we became a British colony in the end? We couldn't.

It's all about adapting to the world's realities. If Ottoman Empire gave up theocracy after the French revolution there would be no need for Atatürk's nationalist movement. But then again ironicaly, French revolution was triggered by the immigration of E. Roman scholars to the west after Ottoman conquest of Constantinople.


It's all speculative history.

Ottoman Empires made a lot of mistakes and they paid the result. In fact, when Ottomans had golden age, the west was having dark age. Especially the role of Church had played a lot for the dark age. That is why the west decided to separate the state and religion and they reduced the power of Pope. After the pressure of church got rid of, the west had started Renaissance and after reforms. In my opinion, although the scholars who went to Rome after conquest of Constantinople played role in the Renaissance and reform the main reason, the pressure of the church was lifted on the society. some may not agree with that but many scholars agree with that and as you said

It's all speculative history

 

[TheCommander]

double post...

 

[p4kistan]

Turk brothers weather secularist, kemalists, akp etc do not take any of my comments as insults to your history or turks as stated i am a great admirer of your leaders and nation. I merely highlighted that your history is not on the basis of only one idea, you have a vast and proud history in which weather you like it or ISLAM was a huge part of.

Yes the ottomans had flaws which ultimately led to their demise but they also had one of the greatest empires in the world. We could go on all day talking about what was the main reasons for the empire and its demise. I admit that Ataturks securalism is what made Turkey what it is today, however you also have to look at how ISLAM was, is and will be your future.

When EU was in the darks ages, you were thriving with ISLAM.

Why can't this be the case today. Don't look at all other so called muslim/islamic nations as i will tell you there is not one no matter what they say.

I will agree to disagree in order to stop any more bickering.

 

[Alienoz_TR]

P4kistan, off topic.

What do you think of Ottoman surpression of Turkish revolts during 16th and 17th centuries?

 

[Targon]

If not Ataturk, we would be mandate of either USA or Britain, thats the reality, has nothing with political stances, Ataturk still had strong opposition from the intellectual class who were thinking state should be under mandate of a super power there is no other way to protect territorial integrity, he barely gathered/influenced some people supporting him and managed that, majority of the intellectual class was hesitant.

p4kistan

EU was actually in Renaissance when the Ottoman golden age started, they got forward with the decline of religious fanaticism, religion not effects the advancement of a civilization, but generally slow downs it or completely blockades it, advancements in a is civ completely seperated from religion.

 

[TR.1]

If not Ataturk, we would be mandate of either USA or Britain, thats the reality, has nothing with political stances, Ataturk still had strong opposition from the intellectual class who were thinking state should be under mandate of a super power there is no other way to protect territorial integrity, he barely gathered/influenced some people supporting him and managed that, majority of the intellectual class was hesitant.

p4kistan

EU was actually in Renaissance when the Ottoman golden age started, they got forward with the decline of religious fanaticism, religion not effects the advancement of a civilization, but generally slow downs it or completely blockades it, advancements in a is civ completely seperated from religion.

You actually must be really dumb go and read your first paragraph again