Instead of Turkic Union

[mehmeTcc]

Turkic Union is not a dream but a reality. No one is dreaming for a single Turkic state but for a united Turkic community acting together in international arena. in this circumstances, we already have a union, only thing we must do is strengthening its position.
And, I don't want to share my state with guys living in the middle ages. There is big differences between Turkish and other Muslim communities. I feel like brothers with Turkics, but I can't say that for Arabs, I can understand Azeris or Turkmens, my Kaxakh brothers are singing Turkish March for me. What ties do connect me to Arabs? Absolutely nothing.

 

[XTREME]

Turkic Union is not a dream but a reality. No one is dreaming for a single Turkic state but for a united Turkic community acting together in international arena. in this circumstances, we already have a union, only thing we must do is strengthening its position.
And, I don't want to share my state with guys living in the middle ages. There is big differences between Turkish and other Muslim communities. I feel like brothers with Turkics, but I can't say that for Arabs, I can understand Azeris or Turkmens, my Kaxakh brothers are singing Turkish March for me. What ties do connect me to Arabs? Absolutely nothing.

Hope that would change your stance.

Nationalism is Haram (Prohibited) (unlawful) According to Islam | Facebook

It was narrated by al-Tabaraani in al-Awsat, al-Haakim, al-Bayhaqi in Shu’ab al-Eemaan and others that Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Love the Arabs for three reasons, because I am an Arab, the Qur’aan is Arabic and the speech of the people of Paradise is Arabic.”

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Similarly, Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn ‘Abd-Allaah al-Haafiz al-Koofi, who is known as Mateen, told us: al-‘Ala’ ibn ‘Amr al-Hanafi told us: Yahya ibn Zayd al-Ash’ari told us: Ibn Jurayj told us, from Ibn 'Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he said: the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Love the Arabs for three reasons: because I am an Arab, the Qur’aan is Arabic, and the language of the people of Paradise is Arabic.”

BTW, I am an Arab descendant.

 

[Ayush]

not possible.

 

[Serpentine]

Economic union is possible, but a military or ideological or political one, impossible.
For example, Iran and Turkey have one of the largest economic trades among Muslim countries, but they barely agree on any political matter.Wasn't it for sanctions and Syrian issue, the trade between 2 countries would be twice as it is today.An economic partnership seems more plausible than a Union.This whole Muslim unity is a joke, forget about it.

 

[what]

Hope that would change your stance.

Nationalism is Haram (Prohibited) (unlawful) According to Islam | FacebookBTW, I am an Arab descendant.

Some people are not religious mate, you're assuming that everyone's Muslim, but some members and some Turks are not. But as religious members have stated before in this thread it's highly unlikely.

You're looking for something in common when you're founding such an organisation. And I can't see a single thing that all those countries could agree on. Not even Islam.

I was all for the steps the AKP took in the pre Arab spring like free trade with certain countries like Syria or Jordan, defacto creating some kind of economic union. But history teaches us that you need stability in order to grow something and stability is something that is not given in the entire Muslim world.

We should do it Atatürks way and not join or format any organisation but simply try to be good with many countries.

 

[Neptune]

No way. most of those countries (Iran,Afghanistan,Syria,Egypt,Libya) are hostile acting states against nato which Turkey is a member of it. Honestly, for our own interests; it's better with that way. (Ex: Patriot Deployements, Acces to high technology, being the only muslim country who can produce advanced naval vessels and aircraft "F-16". It also has disadvantages like being a puppet but anyway. ) Of course everyone has the right to believe whoever or whatever he wants. But Military a.k.a War shouldn't be in the same box with religion. It's not just for Islam. It's for all. It's against the main purpose of the term "War and Warriors". While being a EU candidate and a dialogue partner of SCO, it also would be stupid to create an economical alliance

P.S: Our EU problem is completely another animal. It's better to keep it outta the topic.

 

[T-123456]

Hi!

Recently Iran has proposed an idea of building up IMO Islamic Military Organization. So, why don't Turkey put the first brick for IU Islamic Union instead of planning for Turkic Union?


Thank you!

There will never be a turkic or a islamic Union.
The turkic nations are not independent on foreighn policy(Russia,China)
The islamic nations cant stand each other.
So both are wishfull thinking!

 

[AKINCI]

Habsburg-Persian alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fresco of the Persian embassy to Europe (1609–1615) visiting Pope Paul V in Rome, painted in 1615-1616. Sala dei Corazzieri, Palazzo del Quirinale, Rome.

Persian embassy to Europe (1599
The objective of the mission was clearly to establish a Christian–Persian alliance against the Turks.

Emirate of Jabal Shammar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Emirate of Jabal Shammar was established in 1836, and throughout most of its existence was in feud with the House of Saud over control of Nejd. The Rashidis, rulers of Jabal Shammar, had succeeded in ousting the Saudis from Riyadh in 1891 following the Battle of Mulayda. This resulted in the abolishment of the Second Saudi State, the Emirate of Nejd, and incorporation of its territory into Jabal Shammar.

As the Saudis were out of the picture, exiled in Kuwait, the House of Rashid sought friendly ties with the Ottoman Empire to its north which, during the course of the 19th century, became less and less profitable as the Ottomans lost influence and legitimacy.

In 1902, Abdulaziz Ibn Saud succeeded in capturing Riyadh back for the House of Saud, and began a campaign to reconquer the region - a campaign, which turned out to be highly successful for the Saudis. After several clashes, the Rashidis and Saudis engaged into a full scaled war over the region of Qassim, which resulted in painful defeat of the Rashidis and death of the Rashidi emir Abdul Aziz ibn Mitaab al-Rashid. Ibn Saud also allied with the British Empire as a counterweight to Jabal Shammar being defended by the Ottomans. Since the death of the Emir, Jabal Shammar gradually went into decline, being further pressed with the demise of its patron in World War I.

Arab Revolt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Until Gulf Arabs and Iran go to hell, Ummah alliance just a daydream. Look Iraq,Syria,Bahrain...

 

[explorer9]

If you study the history of human civilization then you would found that total cohesion of people within a group of same belief (ethnic, religious, linguistic) is near to impossible, the only thing is making a broad based unity where majority of people within the group having identical vision. That is possible amongst the Sunnite Muslim states and I think they are going in the same direction.

Syrian civil war and Iraqi turmoil has opened the Pandora box in already divided Middle East in to Sunnite and Shiet blocks, Iran is playing cultural card and in my view cultural card has its own limitation and it cannot supersede the religious bond. Iran, Iraq and Hezbollah are on the same page, Azerbaijan is on the fringe and its future course ethno-linguistic or religious is vital for both Turkish and Iranian geopolitics.

 

[Aegis DDG]

Some people are not religious mate, you're assuming that everyone's Muslim, but some members and some Turks are not. But as religious members have stated before in this thread it's highly unlikely.

You're looking for something in common when you're founding such an organisation. And I can't see a single thing that all those countries could agree on. Not even Islam.

I was all for the steps the AKP took in the pre Arab spring like free trade with certain countries like Syria or Jordan, defacto creating some kind of economic union. But history teaches us that you need stability in order to grow something and stability is something that is not given in the entire Muslim world.

We should do it Atatürks way and not join or format any organisation but simply try to be good with many countries.

LOL a union based on creationism in the 21st century!

 

[Ir.Tab.]

Hi!

Recently Iran has proposed an idea of building up IMO Islamic Military Organization. So, why don't Turkey put the first brick for IU Islamic Union instead of planning for Turkic Union?

Thank you!

Turkic Union is a term like The League of Arab States commonly called the Arab League. It is not a barrier for long awaited never happened dream called "Islamic Union".

 

[Jamaal Yelmaaz]

Turkic Union is a term like The League of Arab States commonly called the Arab League. It is not a barrier for long awaited never happened dream called "Islamic Union".

best comment related to this thread....unions founded on common culture, language, heritages, beliefs, history and so on...are not mean that a military pact or expantionism of somthings..The leage of Arabs not Pan-Arabism..So an possible Unions ofTurkic is will not be panTurkism as well.....

As for Union of islam..establishing an union between 1.6 billions of a multi-national community isnot possible in near future..but understanding of Ummah always be alive among muslim society

So establishing of unions or pacts of between not entire muslims but some leading muslim countries like Turkey, Pakistan and Egypt is quite possible in near future and even inevitable..
Forexam..NATO is an military union of western...yet dont cover all cristian countries..

 

[Wright]

Turks have other Turkics, Iranians have other Iranics, Arabs have other Arabs. Pakistanis are not so fortunate, thus they seek membership into any club.

 

[al-Hasani]

Now this is the military part of the problem. Northern Iran, especially Tabriz and it's surroundings are natural Turkish populated areas of centuries. Normally I wouldn't bring this up but recent acts of Iran, their suport to Armenia and PKK in particular have switched our view. I personally thought of Iran as a potential ally in the region. Now I don't give a sh.t about ther territorial integrity. We find ways and means to get this done. Politically solving differences between Uzbek, Turkmen and Kazakh states is a more important challenge at this moment.

We must be extremely careful, any hostile act could fvck up the whole future of the Turkic unity. We must be friendly instead of manipulative. In this modern world trust is hard to come by.

Even sunni or shia arabs in seperate groups can't unite. Sad truth is they are not in a civilization level that can support such an idea.

Also I don't like them but that's not the point We don't discriminate people

What a ignorant comment. You do realize that the Arab history is much older than Turkic right? That our Semitic history is the oldest in the world? From Egypt, Iraq, Yemen to the Levant and Hejaz. It's where civilization arose. You really come out as a big ignorant. Before there was anything called Ottoman Empire us Arabs ruled the Caliphate for nearly 1000 years and had bigger empires that stretched from Spain in the West to Indonesia in the East. Including the Golden Age of Islam. As soon as the Ottomans ruled it went downwards. Also thanks to the Mongolic/Turkic/Tartar people who destroyed Baghdad. Also what kind of culture did Turkic people have? I don't know any important culture from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and such countries, LOL. No offense but you did deserve such a reply with your idiotic comment.

Also I have nothing against Turks and like them but not ignorants like you.

 

[Wright]

What a ignorant comment. You do realize that the Arab history is much older than Turkic right? That our Semitic history is the oldest in the world? From Egypt, Iraq, Yemen to the Levant and Hejaz. It's where civilization arose. You really come out as a big ignorant. Before there was anything called Ottoman Empire us Arabs ruled the Caliphate for nearly 1000 years and had bigger empires that stretched from Spain in the West to Indonesia in the East. Including the Golden Age of Islam. As soon as the Ottomans ruled it went downwards. Also thanks to the Mongolic/Turkic/Tartar people who destroyed Baghdad. Also what kind of culture did Turkic people have? I don't know any important culture from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and such countries, LOL. No offense but you did deserve such a reply with your idiotic comment.

Also I have nothing against Turks and like them but not ignorants like you.

Since Arabs come in all colors and races, it woudl be safe to say those places were semitic, yes. Arabic? No, not at pre islamic times.

In fact the Jews are also semetic, does not mean they are Arab.