Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

The Ottoman Empire

1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 7:48:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I probably have already mentioned this, but I believe that if the Ottomans remained in power today (and decided not to join WW1) we would have a more peacful Middle East. For all their faults the Ottomans weren't on some Jihad most of their life. They picked allies and new it is better to do business with Europe and people of other religions. I have debated this before, although against a weak debater.

http://www.debate.org...
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
Atheist-Independent
Posts: 776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 5:13:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 7:48:32 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
I probably have already mentioned this, but I believe that if the Ottomans remained in power today (and decided not to join WW1) we would have a more peacful Middle East. For all their faults the Ottomans weren't on some Jihad most of their life. They picked allies and new it is better to do business with Europe and people of other religions. I have debated this before, although against a weak debater.

http://www.debate.org...

Unlikely, because the Ottomans were bound to fall, and WWI just sped up the process.
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2014 3:05:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 7:48:32 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
I probably have already mentioned this, but I believe that if the Ottomans remained in power today (and decided not to join WW1) we would have a more peacful Middle East. For all their faults the Ottomans weren't on some Jihad most of their life. They picked allies and new it is better to do business with Europe and people of other religions. I have debated this before, although against a weak debater.

http://www.debate.org...

The Ottoman Empire was called the sick man of Europe prior to WWI. It was corrupt and rotten to the core, with overt insurgencies and rebellion wracking much of the Empire. The only thing that kept the Empire alive was the inability of the Great Powers to agree on how to carve up the Empire - The Sykes Picot agreement, much maligned today, is the result of WWI's solving of the question about the Empire's division.

That this retention of 'Empire' by Europe's Great Powers, much less corrupt and much more ably administered, lasted only three decades is paramount. Indeed, the ENTIRE COLONIAL system unraveled in the century - and its incredibly doubtful that Ottoman Rule would have fared any better than Syria or Iraq today. The Jews would still have come to Palestine after WWII. The combined weight of Arabia could not dislodge Israel, and the Ottomans could not have either. Had the Ottoman Empire made peace with Israel? The resulting 'religious' challenge to the Caliphate would have resulting in the sick man's crumbling.

There is a reason that Ataturk retained a rump Empire in modern Turkey, a relative ethnic and Nationalistic strength that cut loose the strings of decay and rebellion that were sucking the Empire dry - just as Europe's far flug colonies were doing to metropolitian Europe.

I daresay that the upheavel of the ME would sacrcely have been different if the Sick Man of Europe were simply allowed to die rather than be carved up.