Atatürk’s creation

Discussions on the final era of the Ottoman Empire, from the Young Turk Revolution of 1908 until the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923.
User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Atatürk’s creation

Post by Peter H » 28 Apr 2007 03:37

http://www.newcriterion.com/archive/18/ ... romkin.htm
In defeating the Greeks, Kemal displayed strategic genius. He personally took responsibility—when nobody else would—for ordering his Turkish armies to abandon strategic locations in order to retreat deep into the interior of the country to give battle where he chose, with backs to the wall.
Kemal was supremely disciplined in his approach to politics. In making peace with the Allies in 1922–23, he resisted the temptation to raise his demands when he won. Early on, he had outlined the terms he felt he needed, and never wavered from them. In this he was the statesman that Talleyrand wanted Napoleon to be—and that Napoleon never was.
It says much for the enduring value of his legacy that, despite his great flaws as a human being and the dark side of his dictatorial and often vindictive politics, his army remains loyal to him. Nearly eighty years after he led them to victory, his troops still would follow him to the ends of the earth.

Tosun Saral
Member
Posts: 4041
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 19:32
Location: Ankara/Turkey

Post by Tosun Saral » 28 Apr 2007 15:31

In defeating the Greeks, Kemal displayed strategic genius. He personally took responsibility—when nobody else would—for ordering his Turkish armies to abandon strategic locations in order to retreat deep into the interior of the country to give battle where he chose, with backs to the wall.

It was the most hardest and crital moments of Turco Greek War. Greek armies were advancing. The two armies come againts along the River Sakarya. Greeks had much men power and material. It was very hard for the Turks to resist such a force. Mustafa Kemal ordered his men to retead to east of River Sakarya and defend their postions.
On the other hand the MPs at parliament were againts such a plan. They said no need for a retead. Mustafa Kemal come to the desk and offered commandership of the armies and all rights of the Parliament on his person. Protests. he said his historic speevh to the MPs. and ended his speech. "Hattı Müdaffa yoktur, sathı müdafaa vardır. Bu satıhta bütün vatandır." (There is no line of defence, there is an area of defence. And this area is whole homeland.)

Mustafa Kemal come to front, took the command, after a fight of 22 days and nights The Greek Armee began to retead. During the Battle the horse of Mustafa Kemal coused an accident. He fall down and broke his ribs. After the victory the Turkish Parliament promoted thim with the title "Ghazi/Gazi" the highest tittle given to a Turkish soldier.
Gazi Mustafa Kemal Paşa



http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:O97_ ... cd=1&gl=tr

http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:r5_J ... cd=4&gl=tr

http://www.google.com.tr/search?q=Battl ... arya&hl=tr

Tosun Saral
Member
Posts: 4041
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 19:32
Location: Ankara/Turkey

Post by Tosun Saral » 28 Apr 2007 16:30

Atatürk created a nation called "Turks".
For a long time Turks were called Seljuks or Ottomans. Every enemy or friend called us Turks but we called ourself "Seljucks or Ottoman"
Aftre 84 years of proclamation of Turkish Republic, today a fundamentalist islamist party supported bu USA's Bush administration is ruling Turkey. They are slowly turning bright civilized path of secular democratic Turkish Republic into dark ages.
On April 17th 2007 more then one million Turks protested the ruling fundamentalist islamic party around Moseluem of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GETQq663 ... ed&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1cuHJsr ... ed&search=

Yesterday on April 27th the Grand national Parliament of Turkey summoned to select the new president of Turkish Republic for 7 years. There was only one candidate who nemed him self at the last moment Mr. Abdullah Gül the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The opponent part CHP Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (The RPeoples Republican Party which was founded by Atatürk himself, protested the nominee Gül because he is one of the architects of fundamentalist movement. CHP refused to enter into Parliament. For that reason the parliament cound opened. The President of the parliament who was one of the brains of the fundamentalist movement, who shoud stay as nautral, supported the ruling part and declared the Parliament open. CHP brougt the case in the Court.

That night at 23.30 Turkish General Staff declared a memorandum againts the ruling part.
lets wait and see.
Long live secular, democratic Turkish Republic.

User avatar
Mr Holmes
Member
Posts: 1009
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 12:14
Location: Australia

Post by Mr Holmes » 01 May 2007 16:08

According to this link supplied by Mr Saral http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:O97_ ... cd=1&gl=tr, Greek forces are said to have numerical superiority (120,000 Greeks as opposed to 95,000-105,000 for Turkey, although combatants are roughly equal). How can this be? (I know generally what happened, but next to nothing of these tactical considerations)

Tosun Saral
Member
Posts: 4041
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 19:32
Location: Ankara/Turkey

Post by Tosun Saral » 01 May 2007 20:33

The Greeks had 88.000 rifles, 700 MG, 300 artillary guns, 1300 swords and 20 airplanes On the other hand Türks had 40.000 rifles, 700 MG, 177 artillary guns and 2 planes.
http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache:KL ... cd=7&gl=tr
The rifles of Those who got killed or wounded were given to soldiers who had no rifles.

User avatar
Mr Holmes
Member
Posts: 1009
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 12:14
Location: Australia

Post by Mr Holmes » 02 May 2007 13:46

Hello Mr Saral,

I guess I should ahve been clearer in my previous post. In terms of actual manpower, I am surprised to see that the Greeks had the numerical advantage, especially since there was penetration into Turkish territory. Was mobilisation of Turkish men not entirely succesful?

NikosV
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 30 Jan 2007 20:19
Location: USA

Post by NikosV » 02 May 2007 13:55

Before the final battle of Afyon Karahissar that proved the disaster for the Greek military a British general meet with Kemal and gave him exact details of the Greek army: "On their military maps were plotted the positions of all the Greek forces: regiment by regiment, division by division". So for that final battle it was easy for the Kemalists to achieve total local superiority since they knew where everything was and even the Greek general staff plans due to British treachery.

See:
Housepian, Marjorie. The Smyrna Affair. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc. (New York; 1971) p. 84-85.

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 02 May 2007 14:11

Unfortunately Housepian's book has no footnotes so her reference is vague and cannot be checked.

Who then was the British General?

NikosV
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 30 Jan 2007 20:19
Location: USA

Post by NikosV » 02 May 2007 14:25

I know but what she says cross checks with Chanak Affair another work also with no footnotes says on pages 142-144 and 166-168. It does not confirm that British general going to see Kemal but with most other details it jibes well with Housepian's work.

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 02 May 2007 15:21

So Housepian used the 1969 Chanak Affair book then as her basis?.A poor historical paper trail leading to another book with no sources.It makes you wonder where the truth lies.

Why would a British General aid the Turks?Just as the French and Italians aligned themselves more with the Turks after 1921,it could have been symphaty for a cause that was fighting against an invading army.

Tosun Saral
Member
Posts: 4041
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 19:32
Location: Ankara/Turkey

Post by Tosun Saral » 02 May 2007 15:47

My late father Major General Ahmet Hulki Saral took part in the Chanak Affair as an officer cadet. Mustafa Kemal Pasha insisted after he took Izmir that British should abonden the Canakkale Region, The Dardanelles. The British refused to abondon the Straits. Mustafa Kemal ordered his men to move towards British defences. On a spot the Turks stopped. let their weapons put aside. and marched againts the British bare and single handet. It was already a few meters to british trenches. The British hesitated to fire or not. At the last moment a white flag from British side waved. Turks stopped. My father was amoung that soldiers moving towards the British. The spot were he walked with his company was Saraltepe the Saral Hill. After the new law for surnames he took "Saral". I heard him saying that the earned his surname againts a mighty empire single and bare handed.

To NikosV No story can ever ruin the reputation of Mustafa Kemal.

NikosV
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 30 Jan 2007 20:19
Location: USA

Post by NikosV » 02 May 2007 16:30

Peter H, I am saying that those cited pages of Chanak Affair help to verify/cross-check what Housepian said in her narrative is generally true. When I have enough time I will OCR the relevant passages from both works and start a new thread.

Tosun Saral, sorry to you and most Turks but history is not what you think. You cannot make any claims supported with "official history" and then expect others to swallow. History leaves enough of a paper trail known as the "historical record". The Turkish "official history" is full of so many holes imposed upon the historical record.

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 03 May 2007 08:53

Until you can provide evidence of the British General assisting the Kemalists(plus his identity) I take the whole story as only being falsehood and rumour.

As previously stated even if true,the General was most likely supporting a just cause i.e the defence of Turkey from a foreign invader.

Even then as ULTRA proved in WW2 knowing enemy dispositions does not always win battles.

The Greek saga in Turkey 1919-1922 reeks of adventurism and blunder.How were 8 million Greeks supposed to conquer 18 million Turks?And people call Hitler's invasion of the USSR foolhardy.

No Official History is flawless.Bean, the Australian historian, is said to have mellowed his accounts of Australian cowardice,mistakes,and the ordeal of the common soldier:

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/stor ... 24,00.html

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 03 May 2007 08:57

A lasting legacy of Kemal should also be the practical,realistic appraisal that his later followers took in not getting Turkey involved in WW2.

Tosun Saral
Member
Posts: 4041
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 19:32
Location: Ankara/Turkey

Post by Tosun Saral » 03 May 2007 10:36

Sepp Dietrich wrote:Hello Mr Saral,

I guess I should ahve been clearer in my previous post. In terms of actual manpower, I am surprised to see that the Greeks had the numerical advantage, especially since there was penetration into Turkish territory. Was mobilisation of Turkish men not entirely succesful?
Hello Mr. Dietrich,

We left behind millions of Turks after Balkan Wars in Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece. We left behind millions of Turks in Iraq, Syria after WW1. many young men were killed or wounded or taken POW during WW1. The remaining rest were fighting againts French in Cilicia, Urfa, Antep, Marasch and were fighting againts Armenians at East Turkey under the command of Kazim Karabekir Pasha. After the Treaty of Ankara with French Mustafa Kemal was able to enlist the National Forces into regular Army againts Greeks. After the defeat of Armenians and the peace with Georgians in Gümrü the 15th AC under the command of Kazim Karabekir were able to join the forces of Mustafa Kemal. With this new reinforcements he was able to defeat the Greek at Afyon Karahisar-Dumkupinar battle on August 26 1922.

Ah pardon me. I am very sorry. Mustafa Kemal defeated the Greeks with the plans given by a British General :P :P

On the 10th Anniversary of the proclamation of the Turkish Republic on 1933 there were only 15 million Turks within the Turkish borders.

Return to “The end of the Ottoman Empire 1908-1923”