Why didn't Hitler invade Turkiye?

Discussion in 'History' started by Overdose, May 5, 2004.

  1. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,289
    IMHO, there's no such thing as an Islamic moderate state today. I just will sit back in ringside and watch the west learn the hard way while they perform heil Hitler salues at the UN to maintain their oil deals. America's decline is a result of calling Nazi states her allies and national interest - it got Osama - oops, I mean Obama - to desecrate the world's most sacred office.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    Can we just ban this fucker for making no fuckin sense?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,289
    Rocket science: Todays Nazi HQs is not in the Afghan hills.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. anatolian Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    - Cultural Power:
    Physical and Cultural Geography of World : Hitler might have been looking a map during war and might have understood to fight against Turkey has not meant to invade Istanbul only.
    Hitler was not prepared and otivated to fight against a culture he did not know and he has not been enemy of yet. He would be an "auslander" in Anatolia in all the time.
    Although Turkey was not the city of Hilafet at those times, Revolution in Turkey was very new in historical aspect, and an invasion would make a deep impact in islamic world and Hitler would loose the control of war. he would not have prefered to put his hand into a beehive also there was no treat from Turkey to him also. Only Turkey has invited many expelled Gews. He might have most probably postponed this idea, as it is also given that, Austrians had/have most hostile historical feelings against Turks.
    But Hitler was a believer of 19th and 20th centuries' semi-illiterate phylospohies more than historic ones.

    social-psychology:
    - Crazy guys have only one idea! : Hitler was not a christ fanatic to fight against both Gews and Muslims.
    - Hitler/Germans was also foreigner in European mentality and had inferiority complex against that. it would not be a direct step of his victory.
    An invader is not an enemy of another invader, they might be competatives. when a crazy meets another crazy, he hides his rod.
     
  8. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    I sense a punch line...

    I'd rather ban you. Try and be civilized if you can.
     
  9. Pinwheel Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,424
    True, its under a pile of rubble deep below Berlin.
     
  10. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801
    We have a saying here.
    "Jim, hurry I caught a Turk, I caught a Turk ... and he does not want to let me."

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. Shadow1 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,160
    also, tunisia and other maghreb countries, accepted jews, and also many christians, not only turkey, anyway, nazies did came to tunisia, it's a part of that cukltuer you're talking about, and they are muslims
     
  12. NCDane Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    155
    The lifeline was closed tight during WW1 when Turkey entered the war
    on the side of the Central Powers. It remained shut to Russia for the
    rest of the war.

    During WW2 the straits were closed for the duration because approach
    was barred by Axis occupation of mainland Greece, the Aegean islands,
    and Crete.


    Fortunately for the Allied cause the port of Murmansk does not freeze
    in the winter, compliments of the tail end of the Gulf Stream.

    As for the question raised by the threadstart, the number one goal
    of Hitler's foreign policy was eventual conquest of most or all of the
    European USSR. A Turkish operation would have diverted resources
    from this operation, with no clearly offsetting advantage.

    Hitler was impatient to embark on his Eastern war of conquest. He
    was overconfident due to easy victories and the poor USSR's showing
    in war against Finland. The time seemed ripe to strike, and the place
    to strike is always at the heart, if the heart is within striking distance.
     
  13. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    Were did you study your history?????

    Um, let see, -----

    Lebanon as a independent nation didn't exist until 1943, and French troops didn't leave the Country until 1946, add to that the fact that Lebanon was under the control of France during the war and thus controlled by the puppet Vichy government, until Lebanon was wrested from Vichy France by Allied forces during the Syria-Lebanon campaign. De Gaulle declared Lebanon independent on November 22, 1943, thought French Troops didn't leave until 1946.

    Iraq was a League of Nations mandate under the control of the British until 1932, and in 1941 when the Government of Iraq was over thrown, by the pro German Rashid Ali al-Gaylani and members of the Golden Square, and attempted negotiations with the Axis Powers, Indian troops consequently invaded in late April 1941, The United Kingdom forced Iraq to declare war on the Axis in 1942. British forces remained to protect the vital oil supplies. British and Indian operations in Iraq should be viewed in conjunction with events in neighboring Syria and Persia the British occupied the country until 1947.

    Iran/Persia...Reza Shah, refused to remove German Nationals, giving the British and Russians to question the Neutrality of Iran, the British and Russians, gave a final warning about removing the German workers in Iran, and then in 1941 the British and Russians in a joint operation (Operation Countenance) invaded and replaced Reza Shah, and occupied Iran until January 1946.

    Syria was much the same as Lebanon, a French Mandate, which fell under control of the Vichy Government, it never declared war on Germany, and for cooperating with Hitler, Germany, and the Nazis, was invaded and occupied until after WWII was over.

    Now for Egypt, it was in negotiations with the German Government about the prospect of Egypt joining the Axis should the British be defeated, officially it remained neutral for most of the war.

    Saudi Arabia severed diplomatic contacts with Germany on September 11, 1939, and with Japan in October 1941, and was officially neutral.
     
  14. anatolian Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    Britains , Frenches and Italians had already invaded northern africa and Eurper had experince to do that. And In histrory, northern affrica has never become a center of islam. tunisia was only a city at those times and it was mediternian more than african. Turkey had been alone after ww1 against all alias. what happend to modern British navy and Churchill against a deadly empire?
    I think Hitler has studied history. But, he must knew very well that "if you want to be Caeser! You must occupy the Rome!" I mean Latest Rome! he must have had a plan to do it, when he was ready to do it.
     
  15. Shadow1 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,160
    .

    true
    libya= by italy
    egypte=by britain
    tunisia, morroco, and algeria= by france
    muritania= i have no idea

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    besides the nazies
    and apparently, you don't know nothing about that history
    and, i didnt know that there was a country or empire called islam :shrug:

    a city? lol, no, who told you that? :/
    hmm, medeterrenian and arabic, almost not african

    ok here's i agree, because at that time, turkey was the center of the othman empire that expanded on all the arab world, well, most of it, and it's the capital of that empire
     
  16. anatolian Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    do you know any ottoman that has fighted against any arab to "invade" arabic country ?
     
  17. Shadow1 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,160
  18. anatolian Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    sorry, Naturalism is very very far "invention" as to the nature of those times and also human-being
     
  19. anatolian Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    just read Hayreddin Barbarossa on wikipedia!

    he was ottaman and was born in Greece and more on those he was muslim and in addition to those he had given his power ro emr'ul mu'minin, and he was honered as become thre great admiral and now he is lying down to neighbor to my home.

    Ottomans has expanded over many lands and combined many nations, but there was no superiority of any nation to another one. At those times, history was taught from the creature of Adam and inquiry of Abraham.

    Many things might be told about them. Serbians, Hungrians, Greeks, Romans, Russians, Polishes, Ukrainians, Bulgarians... may gossip against them, Arabs can not!

    to understand why it is, just look at ottoman language, cloths, literature, even fables...
     
  20. anatolian Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    your slander is derived from the same reson why we are talking in English. After the participation of Empire between the nations.
     
  21. anatolian Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    "Devlet-i ʿAliyye-i ʿOsmâniyye" is there any turkish word in these words?
     
  22. anatolian Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    Ottaman times was the only time in history which there was a "heaven" in the Middle East and only times Sia and sunni live together in islam. In the East, they have fight against ony Irani Sahs (those were all turkish!) , and Fatimi ( those we memluks and semi-turkish caucasians) the word "Hadim'ul Haremeyn" was created by Ottamans, before those times, arabs called themselves "Hakim'ul Harameyn". Ottomans has blended many good things for the evolution of human-being, they have occupied the center of world and taken that palace from the latest Ceaser! they have nothing before else for a belief and a tribe. Just look the maps of its starting, there is only one more map in history. May be you can resample.
     
  23. desi Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,616
    Muslims in the middle east are considered aryans so the German's, Hitler, viewed them as blood brothers. Hence, he didn't need a formal agreement with them. They also had worked together since the time of the Ottoman Empire and the Muslims did not like the British Empire's meddleing in their affairs. The closeness of the Nazis with middle eastern countries is evident in the films Raiders of the Lost Ark and the one about the Holy Grail.
     

Share This Page