Arab-Israeli Conflict, v2: What the UN Jerusalem vote mean for Israel, the U.S, and Palestine

[The Merchant]

Yeah Jannisaries were created by Murad I who's rule started in 1362 not 1342, such a terrible embarrassment my memory failed me by 20 years when the context was pointing out it happened 700 years ago.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

I wish I could hold it against anyone but the US, but Abbas has a lot of good reason to never trust our leadership again.
Our agreements are meaningless, our diplomacy is one sided.

 

[lfd0311]

Actually i do, it's tellign you fuck off from the conversation then re-appear hours later and your only defense is,well i don't believe you. Again I have the book out and await instruction, if you actually have any.

Well, first of all, the author of the book is ROGER Crowley, not Robert Crowley. You also needlessly through in there that he was British to try and give your claim that you knew who he was more credence, though it did the opposite. You also claimed you were familiar with the book a single post after claiming that the Jannissaries went out of existence in the 1340's despite the fact that the bulk of the final assault, and thus the bulk of the book you just claimed to have read (that takes place 110 years after you claimed the Jannissaries ceased to exist, P.S.) was carried out by the Jannissaries. They were the cream of the Ottoman Infantry. They were made up of slave children taken as tribute from subjugated Christian lands who were then raised as Muslims dedicated to fighting for the Sultan. They were the first proffesional army in Europe. They didn't even come into service until the 1360's, and lasted into the 1800s. So you not only outed youself as a liar, but as completely ignorant of the history you're pretentiously pretending to be an expert on. I actually do own the book. Roger Crowley is one of my favorite authors. I'm not some goofball trying sound intelligent, claiming to own a book I didn't even know existed until yesterday to give my story some sort of credibility. I mean honestly, who does that? Sadly enough, I figured this was where this was going. You're pathetic.

Read Crowley, got the book in my hand now. what is the quote inside you think i should read that will change my opinion.

Constantinople the last great siege 1453 by the Brit Robert Crowley, got it open and ready lets get some references in the book

LOL, give it up, bro.

 

[The Merchant]

I have given you a way to falsify my claim, use it. Writing walls of text mean nothing.

Ah when i say the jannissaries were done that means created. Seems Scottish-english doesn't travel as well as i assumed.

 

[The Merchant]

When did you make that cake, i done it last night.

If you're thinking i thought they were disbanded by 1342/62 then i can see why you're saying i'm talking pish.

 

[lfd0311]

Going to break this down by colour.If you think i'm wrong just supply the quote of me saying it, my contention is these things only exist inside your skull..

Oh boy, I missed this gem

No one said any of the red shit, you just made that up for reasons only you know,maybe.

Objective facts and history said that. You keep going on and on about their being "no mechanism" in place to accept a peace deal. Palestine isn't a country. It isn't going to be a country any time soon. Please try and follow along.

Lime green: I've never made any comment on this at all. Certainly not to say whether it is good enough or not.

Again, that is a statement made by an objective examination of history. If you don't even know basic history that occured in our lifetimes, please go back and familiarize yourself with it before being a pretentious hack on the internet.

Blue. That's not the point i was making, Palestine couldn't make any peace treaties as it wasn't named in them till much later. 1988 for UN282 for instance. Also when they do elect leaders Israel refused to negotiate so again of course they can't make a peace deal. You're using sophistry to try and make out that Palestine has always had the means to make peace and have chosen not too. Which is true to some extent but my views are nuanced and as such lost on you.

The agreement was made with the Palestinian Liberation Organization. the PLO and Israel's agreement formed the Palestinian Authority. You literally have no ground to stand on on this point.

Pink: where did i classify them as "stateless, rebellious criminals" again this is your mind playing tricks on you, check the board I never once said that quote, that was you. Basically i can say what i want and you'll just have to get more agitated and make up more conversations with me that never happened. "We"? So it's you and voice that tells you what i wrote, except i didn't write it.

Dude, I said that. You'r reading comprehension is flat out awful. Try and read my post, in relation to your post really, really slowly and see if you can figure out what I just said. Maybe I'm jsut giving you credit for being more intelligent than you are.

Now you'll have to forgive me, i've spent enough time "debating" your delusions.

I mean, you are getting crushed, so I'd take this road too. P.S., this is that tactic of acting superior when getting owned that I was talking about earlier, are you getting it yet?

 

[The Merchant]

Of all Ottoman innovations none was perhaps more significant than the creation of a regular army. The enthusiastic bands of gazi warriors were too undisciplined to fulfil then ow growing ambitions of the
Ottoman sultans; besieging well-defended cities required patience, methodology and a particular set of craft skills.Towards the end of the fourteenth century Sultan Murat I formed a new military force, comprised o fslaves captured from th eBalkan states. A levy of Christian youths was taken at regular intervals, converted to Islam and taught Turkish.Removed from their families,these new recruits owed their loyalty only to the sultan.They were his private force:the ‘slaves of the Gate’. They were organized into infantry units, the Yeni Cheri or Janissaries

Roger Crowley.

Just copied the Janissaries part directly from the book, since you seem to be going about laughing at shit to avoid having to discuss the real issues.

 

[lfd0311]

Yeah Jannisaries were created by Murad I who's rule started in 1362 not 1342, such a terrible embarrassment my memory failed me by 20 years when the context was pointing out it happened 700 years ago.

Nice try, that's not what you said.

Jannissaries were done in 1342. We really using modern day morals to look upon 14 century empire? Name me 3 objective histories then and i'll read them, which books do you suggest?

Yeah we dont see them through the same lens. i'm putting on my 700 year old glasses when i look, you're acting like it happened next door yesterday.

God forbid they were lynching christians and chasing them with dogs only 70 years ago.

You claimed the Jannissaries "were done" in 1342. Not that they were created in 1342. Just stop, you aren't going to get away with lying to me.

 

[Bald1]

I'm sure somewhere along the line in the 800 year history the ottoman empire did some terrible killing and shit. Like the Roman empire the Mongol one and the British one. But they weren't really super expansionist/ proselytizing , in fact they got invaded by Europe first in the Balkan wars predating world war I. We encroached on their territory not the other way round.

Lol. Wtf is this? I'm legit laughing over here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_wars_in_Europe

 

[The Merchant]

Nice try, that's not what you said.



You claimed the Jannissaries "were done" in 1342. Not that they were created in 1342. Just stop, you aren't going to get away with lying to me.

Yes "were done" means created for me. If you can't appreciate that different cultures have their own patois then what hope have you for understanding even more diverse cultures? You're ludicrous.

 

[The Merchant]

Lol. Wtf is this? I'm legit laughing over here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_wars_in_Europe

It's in the context of other empires. I.E. as muslim empire isn't any worse than a roman or christian one.

You guys may live in a world of absolutes, where every point is distinct and has no relation to another, but i was building a nuanced argument over a series of posts, just coming in picking one out of context then applying an absolute context on it. Of course it's not going to make sense.

Like if i walk in on you pissing on someone it is weird , but then if i find out you were stung by a jellyfish that provides context and explanation.

 

[tramendous]

Did the Spanish or the Portugese collectively rape small children and send them into their King's harem? Did they demand a yearly tribute of young boys from countries they subjugated?

Boys that became elite troops of the sultan, were educated and became the most powerful order in the empire?

The spanish raped plenty of people and enslaved millions in the new world. The ottomans were fairly tolerant and pragmatic for the times. Almost every area other than anatolia that the ottomans conquered have their religion, their language, their culture. Nothing but ruins and and old buildings remain of the people conquered by spain.

I dont even think you read 1453 by crowley if you dont see how pluralistic the ottomans were for the time.

 

[Bald1]

It's in the context of other empires. I.E. as muslim empire isn't any worse than a roman or christian one.

You guys may live in a world of absolutes, where every point is distinct and has no relation to another, but i was building a nuanced argument over a series of posts, just coming in picking one out of context then applying an absolute context on it. Of course it's not going to make sense.

Like if i walk in on you pissing on someone it is weird , but then if i find out you were stung by a jellyfish that provides context and explanation.

The paragraph I quoted came straight out of your ass and is full of inaccuracies. There's no nuance there, just falsehoods. My favourite being this turd: "But theyweren't really super expansionist/ proselytizing , in fact they got invaded by Europe first in the Balkan wars predating world war I."

It was a pretty decent back and forth until then. But come on. Try to draw between the lines when making a point. To say the Ottomans weren't expansionist, or they did it as some sort of a retaliatory move is just false. Lol. Oh brother. Nuance! I'm still laughing.

 

[lfd0311]

Yes "were done" means created for me. If you can't appreciate that different cultures have their own patois then what hope have you for understanding even more diverse cultures? You're ludicrous.

I'll accept this. So what you were trying to say was that the Jannissaries were created in the 1300s and we shouldn't judge something from the 1300s by the standards of today?

 

[lfd0311]

Boys that became elite troops of the sultan, were educated and became the most powerful order in the empire?

The spanish raped plenty of people and enslaved millions in the new world. The ottomans were fairly tolerant and pragmatic for the times. Almost every area other than anatolia that the ottomans conquered have their religion, their language, their culture. Nothing but ruins and and old buildings remain of the people conquered by spain.

I dont even think you read 1453 by crowley if you dont see how pluralistic the ottomans were for the time.

You should look up "the Black Legend" of Spain. I'm almost certain you and I have had this exact conversation before, yet you're still putting forth this exact argument even though you know it isn't true.

And the Jannissaries were the product of a tribute paid from specifically christian lands. Boys who were deemed "pretty" enough were put into the Sultan's harem. I'm sure you know what that means.

 

[lfd0311]

It's in the context of other empires. I.E. as muslim empire isn't any worse than a roman or christian one.

You guys may live in a world of absolutes, where every point is distinct and has no relation to another, but i was building a nuanced argument over a series of posts, just coming in picking one out of context then applying an absolute context on it. Of course it's not going to make sense.

Like if i walk in on you pissing on someone it is weird , but then if i find out you were stung by a jellyfish that provides context and explanation.

How and why did the Ottoman Empire come to be, and why was it created? Why did Constantinople became Istanbul? Second time I've asked you this.

EDIT: P.S. the link you provided about the Ottoman-Venetian wars? They were started by Mehmet the II. Do you know what his name amongst the Turks is? Mehmet the Conqueror. He's clearly the victim of unfair aggression on the part of.... all those people that he conquered.

 

[lfd0311]

I wish I could hold it against anyone but the US, but Abbas has a lot of good reason to never trust our leadership again.
Our agreements are meaningless, our diplomacy is one sided.

Like.... shut up you communist

 

[The Merchant]

You should look up "the Black Legend" of Spain. I'm almost certain you and I have had this exact conversation before, yet you're still putting forth this exact argument even though you know it isn't true.

And the Jannissaries were the product of a tribute paid from specifically christian lands. Boys who were deemed "pretty" enough were put into the Sultan's harem. I'm sure you know what that means.

Greeks had catamites and they set the foundation for western civilisation. What makes them qualitatively worse than any other empire. It's a power thing not a religion thing.

Is it cause it's two men, is that what bothers you?

Look at Hollywood today that's a cess-pit.

Does anyone outside the Spanish believe in the veracity of the "black legend" and how does it stack up against the archaeological record that shows the total destruction in the new world.

 

[The Merchant]

I'll accept this. So what you were trying to say was that the Jannissaries were created in the 1300s and we shouldn't judge something from the 1300s by the standards of today?

What am i saying is, The Ottomans are not any more dangerous than any other group/empire in history. In fact they preserved the conquered better than other empires and worse than others.

 

[The Merchant]

How and why did the Ottoman Empire come to be, and why was it created? Why did Constantinople became Istanbul? Second time I've asked you this.

EDIT: P.S. the link you provided about the Ottoman-Venetian wars? They were started by Mehmet the II. Do you know what his name amongst the Turks is? Mehmet the Conqueror. He's clearly the victim of unfair aggression on the part of.... all those people that he conquered.

None of these falsify my claim i have the book though, i can just google the answer. I was wanting to prove i have the book. Hence asking for specific passage question. Although it's approaching 5 here and i want a few beers rather than discussing Ottoman history.