Greece invaded Izmir and started Greco-Turkish War 107 years ago today. How is this war seen in your country?
Posted by Yarrrak31@reddit | AskBalkans | View on Reddit | 180 comments
No_Idea_479@reddit
It's actually very interesting how properly behaved Greece was in Smyrna in three years of occupation, after all the initial ruckus and violence:
From here.
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
Israei historian that co-authored the book in 2019 for the Palestinians:
I've seen some of his comments, he's seeing world as Muslim vs non-Muslim so in that case Turks in Anatolia were Muslims and any act against them is justified. I'd rather not judge how Greeks were treating Turks in the occupied Izmir based on this guy's book.
No_Idea_479@reddit
Okay? So what? Objectively, he said nothing wrong. For example, the Population Exchange between Greece and Turkey in 1923 was a case of justifiable ethnic cleansing from both sides. Genocide was the other option.
And regarding the veracity of the work: He quotes contemporaries.
There's nothing being justified here?
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
Let me phrase it better, Turks in Anatolia were Muslims, any act against them is justified so whatever Greeks do, it's fair, they deserve the worst.
Also the "contemporaries" mentioned in the book is George Horton, a US diplomat. Regarding his book that was referenced:
He was married to a Greek women from Izmir in 1909, I'm sure an US.diplomat, with Greek wife from Izmir would say anything bad about Greeks occupying Izmir.
No_Idea_479@reddit
But he isn't the only source...
British Lt. Colonel A. Herbert
Alfred Harmsworth
Two examples. Horton, as anti-Turkish as he might've been, wasn't wrong there.
I don't think this is in dispute.
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
Could you please share the resoueces for these quotes, especially the second one.
No_Idea_479@reddit
Just copy-paste the quotes onto Google man... I cba.
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
I wouldn't be here if it wormed, right?
No_Idea_479@reddit
You're right, here you go:
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1919-06-04/debates/08ab55b8-ead7-4087-b4c7-8464507ead96/Smyrna(AllegedGreekMassacres)
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1919/jul/21/smyrna
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
Thanks, I have nothing to say against the first one, as for the second one its 2 months after the landing, his words about the first 2 months of occupation about a 3.5 years of occupation is not significant. There 40 more months to cover.
Open-Employ3158@reddit
Greece and israel being best buddies like they have been lately
Gazdanadam@reddit
What another commenter pointed out does raise some eyebrows. Also this is probably only in relation to the city of Smyrna, as there is very clear documentation of violence even in towns around the city.
Also, there might have not been a clear cut policy of expulsion (people were still displaced) but there was a policy of settlement. Fate of Smyrna was meant to be decided in a referandum 5 years later, and there was a clause of Sevres that specifically allowed Greece to settle "displaced refugees" in Smyrna. It should be noted that per the Ottoman census the city had a Turkish plurality and the province was overwhelmingly Turkish, so i don't think it's too hard to see where this is going.
No_Idea_479@reddit
So basically Northern Cyprus, but more humane... Considering that one happened in "barbaric" 1922 and the other in "civilized" 1974, this is what raises some eyebrows.
Gazdanadam@reddit
Don't mistake no "clear cut" for none :p
Greeks carried out massacres across western Anatolia with the express purpose of decimating the Turkish population. Yalova massacres are a clear example of this. So is the massacre at Menemen which happened only 4-5 weeks after the Greeks landed in Smyrna, and it was in the Smyrna zone.
I think it is well within reason that the Greek State, which had pursued a policy of expulsion/ethnic cleansing against the Turks in both the Greek War of Independence and the Balkan Wars would continue to pursue the same policies in Anatolia.
If there's anything about Turks massacring entire villages in cyprus, please do share.
int23_t@reddit
The main reason is that governor which is a legend.
A singular person in charge that's good can change a lot of things, but sadly that is something everybody lacks in modern world.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
It was not an invasion. It was an administrative order issued by the Allies during World War I to the defeated Ottoman Empire for the protection of the Greek population.
Greeks in Smyrna made up more than half of the city’s population.
Gazdanadam@reddit
Some might say a special military operation even.
Per the Ottoman census, Greeks made up 35% of Smyrna city center, and made up 33% of the entire Izmir Sancağı. They were the majority in Urla, Çeşme, Foça and Karaburun.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
If this picture looks like a special military operation to you, I don't think I understand what I'm seeing.
I'm not referring to what happened next in Anatolia.
Do you have any idea how the Ottomans conducted their censuses?
House by house (hane). What does that mean?
It means this: If both the man and the woman are alive, on average that many. If the woman is widowed, on average that many fewer.
We’re talking about a grocery store census.
Gazdanadam@reddit
You're right, it isn't a special military operation. It is a straight up massacre. (painting work of Vittorio Pisani, an Italian artist who witnessed these first hand. This is the day of the Greek landing in Smyrna.)
You have a slight mistake.
You're correct to point out that Ottomans didn't include women, but that was only in the early censuses. By 1914 they absolutely were including them.
Infact, they specifically included widowed women with a home.
"Tahrir books were arranged in different ways depending on the purpose of use.
One of these, the detailed cadastral registers, usually has an introduction and the law at the beginning, while the last classical cadastral registers have an index at the beginning.
From now on, starting from the central district of the sanjak, districts, townships and villages are divided into districts. sorted; information about various places in the region and adult men, tax-free Exempt groups and widows who owned households were recorded."
Source in Turkish search for "dul"
So, the Ottoman census was pretty comphrehensive. If you have a better source, you're free to present it.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Yeah! He didn't take a picture of it because he didn't have the means, so he painted it.
There was that incident with Stergiadis, who beat up Greeks because they were speaking rudely to Turks.
Forget it, man. Go watch an episode of Suleiman the Magnificent. They got into a fight in the harem over who would sleep with him in the next episode.
Gazdanadam@reddit
Yeah, how stupid of him to not use his smartphone to snap a quick photo.
The events aren't up for debate, man. Read up. Page 8.
Alright, 300 Spartans.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Okay «Gavur Izmir». It was invasion not a mandate. 🫣
Gazdanadam@reddit
I guess Gavur Gölü also needs liberating. Obviously most of the fish there are Greeks since it has gavur in the name.
FYI, Gavur Izmir comes from before the 15th century when the upper city was controlled by the Turks while the lower city was controlled by crusaders. Hence the distinction :p
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Until before the Asia Minor Catastrophe as we call it in 1922, Smyrna (the city alone) had 370,000 inhabitants, of which 165,000 were Greeks, 80,000 Ottoman Turks, 55,000 Jews, 40,000 Armenians, 6,000 Levantines and 30,000 various other foreigners.
There is a reason for the nickname.
The Allies did not just decide to hand over the management to Greece.
And Stergiades discriminated against the Greeks in order to have a Christian administration in the city.
Not to mention what happened next with the church of Agia Fotini, a monument of incredible beauty and value.
The massacres and atrocities need not even be mentioned.
Ujemegaz@reddit
Who gives a shit about a building, really.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
We give a lot. Got it?
If not, you know what to do.
Ujemegaz@reddit
Turks killed you all over there, you care about a building 😂
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
It’s a way to not be ashamed to say who you are and to answer, “I’m Italian.”
Ujemegaz@reddit
Italian ? 🤣
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Italian, Greek, Swiss, German, Turkish.
Choose and take
Ujemegaz@reddit
I choose Greek 🤣
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
No! Only decent people from Albania come in Greece.
Gazdanadam@reddit
Per the 1914 Ottoman census, the city of Smyrna had 211,013 people. 100.356 muslims, 73.676 Greeks, 10.061 Armenians, 24,069 Jews and 2,851 listed as "other".
Yes, the allies did indeed give Smyrna to the Greeks because of the large Greek population (also to balance out the Italians). But that doesn't mean it was justified, as Turks held a clear majority in the total population of the region given to Greece.
Yes, what happened to Smyrna in 1922 is deeply saddening, regardless of who is to blame for it. Same with atrocities against the Greek population.
On a side note, i've been fascinated by how the Smyrna Greeks built essentially a mini-Smyrna in Athens with i think exact replicas of the churches. Remarkable stuff i think.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Thank you for acknowledging the situation.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
This is an Invation and committed by your country
Gazdanadam@reddit
Yeah, it is an invasion. You can call it that.
And this is something far beyond what the word "invasion" conveys. (Ruins of Alaşehir)
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
A year after the army landed at the port of Smyrna, nothing had happened. Then the advance began.
Gazdanadam@reddit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menemen_massacre
Just 4-5 weeks after. and this is a named example i know from personal connections. It'd be too cumbersome to go through everything village by village.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
I didn't know that. Something preceded that. It doesn't excuse it, however.
Gazdanadam@reddit
What preceded it was Turkish militias ambushing Greek forces in Bergama.
Thank you for the last bit.
Dramatic-View-7792@reddit
Man I’m Turkish heritage but I live in Greece, so all of these topics are a whirlwind and I’m going to get attacked no matter what I say. We all did awful things, but I do find it funny with my Turkish side cause it’s kinda like… the Greeks were here far before the literal year of 0 you guys. So let’s just all chill and just drink something and do breathing exercises together.
Old_Pool_6723@reddit
I am Romanian and I will support Hellas forever. Those of you, based in EU or not, do not mean much, really. Also, my family name is Vlad.
Early-Show2886@reddit
aha so you want expelled the turks and tatars and muslim gypsys from dobruja in romania?
Dapper-Bullfrog-4766@reddit
what awful things did we turks do as the defenders of our country against greek invaders, in the greco turkish war in 1920s?
PrinceZero18@reddit
Massacred civilians, sent them to death camps, which started years before the Greco-Turkish War?
Dramatic-View-7792@reddit
Erdogan got a Reddit!
Dapper-Bullfrog-4766@reddit
if I was erdogan i would say something like “ i wish greeks won”
jaunmilijej@reddit
As someone in the same situation feel ya bro
InfuriatingLeisur081@reddit
And llellegs were in Manisa and İzmir far before Aiols and Iols migrated there. History don't work like that.
AmbitiousSympathy665@reddit
What is llelleg supposed to mean?
No_Idea_479@reddit
It's a new Turkish curse. Llellellelleg.
Kitsooos@reddit
I'm gonna guess that "Aiols" is "Aiolians" and "lols" is "Ionians".
No_Idea_479@reddit
Lols is a good alternative tbh.
Kitsooos@reddit
We don't speak Attic-Ionian Greek. We speak Attic-Lols Greek.
InfuriatingLeisur081@reddit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leleges
AmbitiousSympathy665@reddit
That's one big meh. Turks trying to claim anatolian people will never stop being funny. Greeks have much more right to claim the cultural legacy of those people than turks. Phrygians, one of the most widespread people in Anatolia, outright spoke a Hellenic or hellenic related language. The others like Lydians also have much more relation to Greeks.
InfuriatingLeisur081@reddit
Funny how you preferred to commence ever nationality with capitals yet optd out Turks.
Thank you for your most valued inputs. I am sure Prof. Sina (originally a Greek) of Ancient Western Anatolian and Greek History and you would have very fruitful conversation.
If an exhausted "pillager" from afar comes to your long held house and claims it on his name while you bow down, you were never the name holder of this house.
Dramatic-View-7792@reddit
Yawn 🥱
InfuriatingLeisur081@reddit
Kapat ağzını da daha fazla Yunan siki girmesin
Dramatic-View-7792@reddit
Yikes
Gazdanadam@reddit
>the Greeks were here far before the literal year of 0 you guys
"This land was promised to us 3000 years ago"
Dramatic-View-7792@reddit
Aww you were dropped on your head as a child 🥺
Archaeopteryx111@reddit
Did you move to Greece or were born there?
BamBumKiofte23@reddit
Şerefe
Annual_Jackfruit2892@reddit
You turks keep never mentioning that the ottomans were the ally of pre-nazi germany. Started comminting ethnic clensing against christians ottomans. That is why the allies in the end invaded the axis power todays Turkey, just like they invaded NAZI germany during ww2 to end the war.
lovinGamin@reddit
And ethnic clensed west Türkiye?
No_Idea_479@reddit
"It's just war, you mad bro?"
"WAAHH YOU ETHNICALLY CLEANSED AND GENOCIDED AND BURNED ME YOU DIRTY GRIK"
This is the average Turkish logic. It's cognitive dissonance with a sprinkle of paranoia.
(source for numbers).
herhangibirperson@reddit
Turkish casualties: "Deserved, Turkish propaganda, didn't happen, it was decolonization, it was liberation, Turks do not belong here, it went both sides, but what about x"
Greek casualties: "WAAAAAH TURKS ARE BARBARIC BARBARIAN GENOCIDAL TURKS TURKEY MUST PAY DIRTY GREEK"
Average Greek logic. You all carry the mindset of people like Nikos Sampson. You will never change
No_Idea_479@reddit
No Greek ever claim it went both sides (it didn't, you disproportionately killed Greeks).
You just took a piss headwind with the rest of your comment. You failed spectacularly at copying me.
herhangibirperson@reddit
True, you are right, I was wrong, you claim that Greeks never killed any Turks and that Turkish casualties are always "just accidents, but also deserved"
Thanks for correcting me and proving you are infact worse than what I claimed
VisibleReport5008@reddit
Rudolph J. Rummer is known for his high numbers and isnt taken seriously for the most part. He has no proper sources for those numbers. Look his name up.
No_Idea_479@reddit
So less than 15,000 Turkish civilians died? I can accept that mate.
Gazdanadam@reddit
My man just the cities you torched and massacred in Manisa alone (not including smaller towns and villages) added up to a population of over 361K. What do you think?
No_Idea_479@reddit
You're retarded, since you're assuming that people died in torched cities... They didn't, they just fled. The torched cities were to stop Turks from getting Greek properties.
Gazdanadam@reddit
Thank you, but i believe your kind words describe you better since you think that in fires that consume up to 90% of the city everyone is ablebodied, has a great sense of direction, doesn't get caught up in the blazing flames and doesn't literally die of asphyxiation. Oh and also no Greek locks them up in a mosque or their house.
That is, of course, disregarding the massacres which left the population of Manisa so terrified that people who sheltered at Mount Sipylus began commiting suicide after mistaking the Turkish Army for the Greek one :p
4000+ people are thought to have died in Fire of Manisa alone.
>The torched cities were to stop Turks from getting Greek properties.
Is that why you also killed cattle and burned crops and poisoned wells? Sounds an awful lot like scorched earth done by the army to me.
«Ο Κατσαμπάς ήταν μια μεγάλη και πολύ εύφορη πόλις, αλλά κατά την οπισθοχώρησιν των ελληνικών στρατευμάτων επυρπολήθη και κατεστράφη ολοσχερώς Πριν μπούμε στην πόλη, επροπορεύθησαν οι [Τούρκοι] αξιωματικοί και δεν ξεύρω πώς, έπεισαν τον συσσωρευθέντα εκεί τουρκικόν πληθυσμόν να μην μας πειράξουν» (Ανδρούτσος 1997, σ.91).
and to be clear, Greek civillians absolutely torched their own homes too.
Από την επομένη, ενώ ακόμη δεν είχε δοθεί καμιά διαταγή για σύμπτυξη και υποχώρηση, οι έλληνες κάτοικοι της πόλης Άϊδίνι ώς και άλλοι χριστιανοί, ανέβαιναν στους σιδηροδρομικούς συρμούς που αναχωρούσαν για τη Σμύρνη , παρατώντας στο χώρο του σταθμού τα υπάρχοντά τους και το χειρότερο βάζοντας φωτιά στα σπίτια των για να μη τα βρουν ακέραια οι τούρκοι. (Βασίλης Γ. Διαμαντόπουλος)
No_Idea_479@reddit
I'm not clicking in Turkish Wikipedia Trojan viruses. But nothing you stated here goes against what I said.
Turkish civilians were not killed en masse during the scorched earth, though I won't rule out individual cases, such as individual Greeks doing crimes or Turks being unable to leave, as you said. This was a side-effect and just wasn't the policy.
Gazdanadam@reddit
The Greeks massacred people during scorched earth, and massacre is by definition en masse killing of people. There not being a clear "policy" saying "kill all Turks" doesn't mean it didn't happen. Even before the scorched earth Greeks were carrying out massacres (Menemen massacre, Yalova massacres, etc.)
VisibleReport5008@reddit
Arnold J. Toynbee's western question of Turkey pg 284.
https://dn710308.ca.archive.org/0/items/cu31924027921778/cu31924027921778.pdf
Stanford Shaw From Empire to Republic: The Turkish War of National Liberation, 1918-1923.
Some of the big cities:
Alaşehir, approximately 4,300 buildings out of 4,500 were burned to the ground. He notes that the town was essentially "erased from the map."
Manisa, approximately 14,000 houses in the city, only about 1,400 remained standing.
Turgutlu, 90% of the town was destroyed, with over 6,000 houses burned.
Sources used like Osmanlı Dahiliye Nezareti(interior ministry), ATASE which contains damage reports of the cities after the war, British foreign office etc.
Most historians dont give exact number though it is stated as hundreds of thousands. Estimates are 450k-600k.
Annual_Jackfruit2892@reddit
Yes, it is always the same.
They basicaly come with ,
being allied of germany at that time was not bad.
The turkish education system needs serious reforms and is a scary one.
imagine if germans were teaching their children Nazi is ok in 2026...
_lavoisier_@reddit
No education needs to be changed in that respect. Yeah “it’s always the same” as you can’t even argue based on historical facts or even simple logical reasoning like your comical “nazi” thing lol but simple slogans to show your one sided opinion on Turks and their history.
Annual_Jackfruit2892@reddit
There you have the example of the todays Turkish core.
That is why i used a relevant and related german example, which strangely many of you argued posetively for.
This is why most people may have a negativ view of many Turks, very few other people have such collective fascistic tendencies.
Most others would stress , bad things from the past.
Luckily this is not us today, this we are gratefull for.
atrixospithikos@reddit
Armenians were at least 1500000 killed. Turks erased their 2000 year presence in anatolia
No_Idea_479@reddit
This is post-WW1 only. Most Armenians died during WW1.
lovinGamin@reddit
“You killed more of us hence I am right, also always righteous civil brits and French were with me hence I am good guys when you are monsters.”
Lothronion@reddit
There was no policy of ethnic cleansing, to the point that the Greek High Commissioner (Hypatos Armostes) of the Smyrma Zone, Aristeides Stergiades, was specifically hand-picked by Greek Prime Minister Eleutherios Venizelos for his impartiality, and he was so impartial that local Anatolian Greeks hated him and would accuse him for being Pro-Turkish.
Gazdanadam@reddit
There was infact a policy of ethnic cleansing and settlement. Sevres included a clause which allowed greece to settle "displaced refugees" into Smyrna. Very convenient given that a referandum would take place 5 years later.
I'm not even going to touch on the hundreds of massacred carried out during the Greek occupation and the scorched Earth policy during the Greek retreat.
Lothronion@reddit
That clause was about the 400,000-500,000 Greeks that had been ousted from Eastern Thrace and Western Anatolia. It was specifically about returning them back to their homes. That is not ethnic cleansing, it is in fact the opposite of it, a cancellation of the one having been conducted by Turkey since 1913 AD, concurrently with the Greek Genocide.
Gazdanadam@reddit
That's a really innocent reading of the treaty. There was a referendum to be held in 5 years, and the city per the Ottoman census had a Turkish plurality and the province had an overwhelming Turkish majority. You can clearly read the underlying intend, and it wasn't so chivalrous.
Furthermore, Greeks carried out massacres across western Anatolia with the express purpose of decimating the Turkish population. Yalova massacres are a clear example of this. So is the massacre at Menemen which happened only 4-5 weeks after the Greeks landed in Smyrna, and it was in the Smyrna zone.
I think it is well within reason that the Greek State, which had pursued a policy of expulsion/ethnic cleansing against the Turks in both the Greek War of Independence and the Balkan Wars would continue to pursue the same policies in Anatolia.
Pretty much everything that is discussed following 1913 is framed as being done by irregulars which were supposedly being directed by the government. In the case we consider this organized ethnic cleansing, then the Greek Government is equally responsible with organizations such as Filiki Eterya and the associated societies such as Kardos and Pontic society which also carried out attacks against Turkish civillians as irregulars.
The "Greek Genocide" is a whole other debacle which i think is beyond the scope of the current discussion. However i'd say calling it a "genocide" is at the very least a gross misrepresentation of events and statistics, but i digress.
VisibleReport5008@reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/HEickpAizb
there was a policy of it
Lothronion@reddit
That whole comment is a copy-paste from Wikipedia, on various topics.
VisibleReport5008@reddit
I dont if it is from wikipedia. But the sources are there and shows the systematic destruction of the greek army while invading and reatreating from anotolia.
Lothronion@reddit
It is just a list of bibliography. That alone does not say much, and it is not as if there are links to read what they say. Am I supposed to buy or find all such documents and then read them? In essence that is gish gallop, and there is no discussion to be had (in a discussion forum, at that) if people just toss bibliography on one another.
VisibleReport5008@reddit
My other comment on this post, There is pdf of toynbee's book. The other books pdf wasnt avaible at full scale, I found parts of şt about the topic.
Arnold J. Toynbee's western question of Turkey pg 284.
"The destruction of villages and the disappearance of the Muslim population [in the Yalova-Gemlik Peninsula]... was not a series of accidents but a deliberate and systematic policy."
https://dn710308.ca.archive.org/0/items/cu31924027921778/cu31924027921778.pdf
Stanford Shaw From Empire to Republic: The Turkish War of National Liberation, 1918-1923.
"In all, over 250 villages were burned to the ground and more than 30,000 houses and other buildings were destroyed by the retreating Greek army in its flight to the sea."
Some of the big cities:
Alaşehir, approximately 4,300 buildings out of 4,500 were burned to the ground. He notes that the town was essentially "erased from the map."
Manisa, approximately 14,000 houses in the city, only about 1,400 remained standing.
Turgutlu, 90% of the town was destroyed, with over 6,000 houses burned.
Sources used like Osmanlı Dahiliye Nezareti(interior ministry), ATASE which contains damage reports of the cities after the war, British foreign office etc.
Most historians dont give exact number though it is stated as hundreds of thousands. Estimates are 450k-600k of total death count.
Lothronion@reddit
Well I agree with that, Prince Andreas was a bastard who did his own thing and without orders from the Greek High Command. It is not a surprise that he was designated as the 7th member of the Trial of the Six, which featured Greek politicians and generals, and he would have been shot for war crimes, had he not fled Greece. He was specifically trialed for "found guilty of "disobeying an order" and "acting on his own initiative".
These actions were conducted during the retreat of the Greek Army, hence presenting them as acts of ethnic cleansing is illogical, as there is no point in doing so in territory you are actively abandoning, and inevitably would be resettled by Turks either way. That was just the enforcement of a common military tactic, that of the scorched-earth policy, where a retreating military is destroying everything, their enemy might use against them. Here the objective was simple, to buy enough time for the Greek Army to retreat, so that it would avoid encirclement, and that it could continue the war elsewhere (it was still not understood as ending the conflict, and up till the peace treaty it was in fact deemed possible to repeat the Anatolian Campaign, or continue the war from Eastern Thrace, despite how that would have been senseless). In essence, it is like genocide, the point is whether there is the intent for the action one is being accused, and here it is apparent that it was not there (and had it been there, then the same would have taken place in Eastern Thrace, but nothing of the sort happened, the Greek Army just packed and left, with caravans of fleeing East Thracian Greeks).
VisibleReport5008@reddit
I didnt know Prince Andreas was executed. The tree pashas were executed aswell after the rebuplic was formed.
And that other part just comes up how you define ethnic cleansing. The fact that greek army was reatreating and the purpose wasnt settling them with greek people doesnt effect the things done.
While we dont know most of the damage on the villages were done during the attack or the reatreat, the more extensive report at Yalova-Gemlik suggest it was done at 1921 April. And the reatreat was at 1922
The report was singed in 1921 May 23.
Lothronion@reddit
He was not executed, he fled from Greece.
It matters regarding the intent, as ethnic cleansing is about ousting a population from an area that you are holding and want to alter its ethnographic landscape. If you are fleeing, there is no such possibility.
The Yalova-Gemlik massacres were led by Prince Andreas.
VisibleReport5008@reddit
And at toybee's book there are reports specificly about yalova-gemlik cities.
"Report of the Inter-Allied Commission of Inquiry upon Atrocities Committed in the Districts of Yalova and Guemlek"
Filed under British Foreign office FO 37/6513
_lavoisier_@reddit
That’s what I think as well. I don’t think there was such a government policy in both sides, but it’s a war after all, and there are always bad people on both sides that take advantage of this chaotic situation and these tragedies happened. I’m from rural place near Izmir, my grandparents told such stories happened in our village, we have records as well and there are publications released by academicians. Anyway It’s bad but it’s passed no hatred against Greeks in general as I have friends there as well. Gosh, genetically I’m personally even more closer to Aegean island greeks as it seems like my ancestors are islamized anatolian greek/rums, meaning my family line was always in this territory, and we have more things in common than some folks imagine.
Lothronion@reddit
Well, there was no ongoing Greco-Turkish War for much of the duration of the Greek Genocide. It began in 1913 AD, and Greece only joined the Entente in 1917 AD, while Greece and Turkey were basically allies in the Second Balkan War, against Bulgaria. Only for the period of 1919-1922 AD can someone make a case of there being an active Greco-Turkish conflict, which does not include the final phase of the genocide, in 1922-1923 AD, after the ceasefire and the peace treaty.
That there were horrible Greek war crimes in 1919-1922 AD is undeniable, though I am not sure they warrant considering them a systemic and systematic act of ethnic cleansing. Either way, Greece did officially accept doing them as war crimes, and Turkey acknowledged that status, accepted Greece's official apology and Greece's proposed reparations.
I personally wish Greco-Turkish relations went back to how they were in the 1930s, which were so good that in 1941 AD Nazi Germany was nervously explaining Turkey that its invasion of Greece was only for the sake of deposing the Pro-Allied Greek government with a Pro-Axis one, as opposed to attacking the country (given the Greco-Turkish defense pact at the time).
_lavoisier_@reddit
I don’t deny there were mass slaughter Greeks as well as Turks have done, in Balkans too especially against Turks/Muslims. I’m from western Anatolia and we know Greeks mass killed Turkish population in rural places, they burned some houses with people alive as well. No one is innocent, though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_exchange_between_Greece_and_Turkey
Ok-Elephant-9075@reddit
Calling 1910s Germany pre-Nazi Germany is asinine in my book. I do not understand how becoming allies with Germany instead of UK, or any other country for that matter can be construed as Turks allying with pre-Nazi Germany? States make alliances according to their interests, and if your interests align with Germany, you will ally with Germany. How do you expect the Turkish administration at that time to know the German government would evolve into Nazis 20 years later? Do you think they are fortune tellers?
I think this is a poorly made attempt to associate Turkey with a genocidal state (Nazi Germany), with which she was never allied. You can make more compelling arguments man, try better. I mean, so what Turkey was allied with Germany in 1910s (pre-Nazi as you put it) a lot of people were allied with them at the time (Bulgarians, Italians for a short while, Austrians, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Croatians, Slovenes and Bosnians as part of Austria Hungary). Do you also fault them for allying with Germany?
Also, correct me if I’m wrong but pre-Nazi Germany is mainly used to describe inter-war period, Weimar Republic.
Annual_Jackfruit2892@reddit
This is over 100 years ago, why are you so defensive and avid supporter for the instigators of this centurys worst wars in Europe.
What is insane is the common Turkish need to defend the Germanic WW1 and WW2 instigator of the time. "They were not bad".
Also , totaly ignoring the reason for the allied intervention in Yesterdays Turkey like this post....
The allies of germany which was the ottoman administration of the time was just as bad.
Followed by some oficials of the early formed new republic of turkey, which continued ethnic cleansing of their christian populations.
These things are ok to you, but Ataturk even apologized and tried to have the main instigator arrested afterwards which died.
This was what world war 1 became about, and it had been on news papers and debates for years before an intervention came.
How can todays Turks spend so much time to disprove that these things happened, and that whole communities of people dissapearing is okay.
In Europe we dont learn our children to argue for the Germans innocence of the time, like many of todays Turks do for them and past administrations.
This makes you on a similar level to the Nazis, and i'm sure today Jews would be a very hot topic.
I would say it is very scary that turkish people seem to share your opinions, at the same time many are wanting or choosing to live in Europe.
Most modern europeans would agree about this being extreme except the neo-Nazis and other marginal fascist groups.
The joke on you is that these extremist groups todays turk seem to share many fascist opinions with would probably enjoy if the same happened to Turkish persons.
Gazdanadam@reddit
Calling ww1 Germany "pre-nazi Germany" is genuinely unhinged
Elsek1922@reddit
Of course we have the "It was all fun and good in Europe everyone was happy and lived together then evil Turks invented genocide and Nazis copied them" here
WooddieBone@reddit
You might wanna start a support group with the Americans 😄
_lavoisier_@reddit
There’s definitely no shame to be ally with Germany as there were no nazis whatsoever as well at that time, and this “pre-nazi” thing and the way you interpret history is ridiculously stupid.
Annual_Jackfruit2892@reddit
the way you paint the Germans instigators of World War 1 and 2 says more about yourself. It tok a long time before the allies intervened in both wars, for you maybe ok with christian ottomans "dissapering" , just like the Jews in ww2.
Open-Employ3158@reddit
Average reddit comment
_lavoisier_@reddit
Dude, you are super one-sided due to your lack of knowledge. There is no sudden disappearance lol there happens a population exchange agreement between Turkiye and Greece after the war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_exchange_between_Greece_and_Turkey
No_Idea_479@reddit
I agree, but Germany was a horrible war criminal in WW1 too.
_lavoisier_@reddit
The historical fact is that Ottoman Empire first tried to be ally with England and England rejects this idea due to their plans to invade oil-rich territories in middle east where Ottomans ruled at that time, then Ottomans felt obliged to get closer to Germany to save the empire as a last resort.
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
So much wrong information in one comment. When they invaded Turkey, war was already over. There were no resistance from the Ottoman Empire, Sultan was sending Mustafa Kemal to calm the public down while the occupation was taking place. Invading Nazi Germany and invading a country called "the sick man of Europe" before the war that became practically "the paralyzed man of Europe" is not even close.
What is wrong with being an ally of the pre-Nazi Germany, that's basically Germany, lol.
bruhmanbruuh@reddit
Turks in 1974 in Cyprus : Peace operation, liberators
Greeks in 1919 : Bad invaders
And the Turkish fairytale goes on...
Gazdanadam@reddit
Cyprus is called that because it stopped ethnic cleansing against the TC's and stopped the ethnic violence on the island.
But sure, i have no qualms with calling Cyprus an invasion. But you have to be insane if you think what the Greeks did in 1919 was liberation.
bruhmanbruuh@reddit
Smyrni is called that because it stopped ethnic cleansing against the Greeks and stopped the ethnic violence in the Ottoman Empire.
But sure, i have no qualms with calling 1919 war an invasion. But you have to be insane if you think what the Turks did in 1974 was liberation.
xD
Gazdanadam@reddit
Your snarky remark might not be as good of a comeback as you think. Last i checked by 1919 there wasn't an organized campaign in Turkey to destroy the entirety of the Greek population so that they might unite with whatever country. Greece invaded İzmir per a post war treaty and were supposed to conduct a referandum in 5 years to unite with Greece. Sounds familiar?
bruhmanbruuh@reddit
> Last i checked by 1919 there wasn't an organized campaign in Turkey to destroy the entirety of the Greek population so that they might unite with whatever country. Neither did the Turkish troops in 1974 put vast swathes of Cyprus to the torch and massacre everything from cattle to children
Amele tabularli , death marches etc etc.
Gazdanadam@reddit
You think Turks weren't conscripted into amele taburları? For example, in the Bolu 2. Labor Battalion there were 602 Muslims, 102 Greeks, 54 Armenians and 2 Jews.
Citation needed for death marches.
Eitherway, by 1919 Ottoman Empire had surrendered and was in no position to be able to enforce any policy of ethnic cleansing.
bruhmanbruuh@reddit
>Eitherway, by 1919 Ottoman Empire had surrendered and was in no position to be able to enforce any policy of ethnic cleansing
Of course. It was the round for the National Assembly and the pre-Turkish republic.
>You think Turks weren't conscripted into amele taburları?For example, in the Bolu 2. Labor Battalion there were 602 Muslims, 102 Greeks, 54 Armenians and 2 Jews
And of course every section was like that, right? Also, per capita? xD
Gazdanadam@reddit
>Of course. It was the round for the National Assembly and the pre-Turkish republic.
The National Assembly which, *checks notes* didn't exist until April 1920? Sure.
>And of course every section was like that, right? Also, per capita? xD
Who knows, perhaps you can enlighten us with your source that states only the poor Greeks were conscripted into the batallions and the 600 Turks accidentally wound up there.
Dapper-Bullfrog-4766@reddit
maybe u guys shouldn’t have tried to genocide the turks in cyprus
CryptographerTop4469@reddit
"Invaded"
int23_t@reddit
That's literally what happened though lol, Greek army marched all the way to Ankara, what do you call that? "Defended Ankara"?
Tinenan@reddit
The greek army doesn't conquer it LiBeRaTeS as per greek textbooks
int23_t@reddit
Same as Turkish army and textbooks sadly, fuck education ministries spreading propaganda.
They just a few days ago (I think) decided to rename "Pontus Situation"(which didn't even have genocide mentioned anywhere in curriculum) to "Unbased Pontus Claims", same for "Armenian Situation", also rename Aegean to "Islands sea".
They also did rename Byzantium to Eastern Rome in education but like, does it matter much?
So yeah, fuck every education system spreading any sort of propaganda. Militaries, wars, killing people is never justified. Fuck governments. Fuck people who try to make people fight each other.
ronweasly9@reddit
I am not even Greek but I would call it a war of liberation rather than invasion
Gazdanadam@reddit
Ah yes, liberating the 33 Greeks in Eşme by torching the town of 23,500 people. How liberating
Fickle-Sell1553@reddit
A great oportunity that was heavily mishandled.
Embarrassed_Egg9542@reddit
It was the Allies (Entant) that invaded, not "Greece". Greece was used by the British to force Kemal into giving up Mosul and the oil rich fields of Iraq to them
Gazdanadam@reddit
>Greece was used by the British to force Kemal into giving up Mosul and the oil rich fields of Iraq to them
That'd be Sheikh Said. Greece were in it by their own will
Embarrassed_Egg9542@reddit
It is typical in Greece and Turkey to avoid seeing the big picture.
Greece had its own interests and thought they were a colonial power, but they didn't move be themselves, they were ordered by the British
AmbitiousSympathy665@reddit
Not true. Greece had their own motivation, not motivated by some mosul territory lol. Allies invaded Istanbul. And they all folded, like France and Italy, while Greece fought on.
Embarrassed_Egg9542@reddit
Greece had their own motivation, but didn't move without orders of the Allies Central Command
Gazdanadam@reddit
First of all i'm sure this will be a completely civil thread with reasonable takes.
The War of Independence is essentially seen as an existensial struggle which saved Turkish presence in Anatolia and laid the footwork for the creation of an independent and modern republic. It's viewed as a time of great pain and suffering inflicted upon us by victors of WW1 (primarily Greece). It is also viewed as a time of great unity and joint struggle against foes, with the people taking up against the foes despite the Ottoman Government practically siding with them.
BamBumKiofte23@reddit
Lothronion@reddit
Greece only took over Smyrna and the surrounding area in 1919 AD. That was 6 years after the start of the Greek Genocide in late 1913 AD, and 3 whole years after 1916 AD, when Greece was still trying to solve the matter diplomatically, through political pressures on Turkey and internationally, and already being burdened with 400,000 East-Thracian and Anatolian Greeks that had fled to Greece (about 10%+ of the population). If the Venizelist Greek government did not intervene, it would have been a deliberate choice to ignore all the Greeks in Western Anatolia, that were being butchered en masse, despite being Ottoman citizens.
BoringKick5331@reddit
You act like this was all unilateral Turkish action, when it was often bilateral. Greece also pursued unilateral expansion (union of Crete, the Megali Idea) and committed its own atrocities in the same period, like the expulsion of the Cretan Muslims, which you lie about (by omission).
You are cry-bullying.
No_Idea_479@reddit
Saar, you expelled Cretan Muslims saar. I have to kill 1 million Greeks and Armenians now saar... You forced me to do this!!!
What happened is, the Cretan Muslims left during and after the revolt in 1897. Please find me one source claiming that the Greek government had a policy of expulsion towards them.
In fact, in 1919, Greece earned the trust of Cretan Muslims in Smyrna successfully after Venizelos dispatched an obscure Cretan politician by the name of Makrakis in Smyrna. They accepted Greek rule and were living just fine... Until 1922, that is.
BoringKick5331@reddit
You mistakenly assume I am a Turk.
No_Idea_479@reddit
I don't care, change "you" to "they" if you want to. Any proper reply to my comment?
BoringKick5331@reddit
The 1923 Lausanne Convention, Article 1: "there shall take place a compulsory exchange of Turkish nationals of the Greek Orthodox religion established in Turkish territory, and of Greek nationals of the Muslim religion established in Greek territory." Signed by the Greek government. Compulsory. That is the definition of a state policy of expulsion.
Source: A. Lily Macrakis, Cretan Rebel: Eleftherios Venizelos in Ottoman Crete, PhD Dissertation, Harvard University, 1983, p. 51.
You are an ignorant troll who lies about plain facts.
Lothronion@reddit
Indeed, it was ethnic cleansing from the part of the Greek State, but if there is anyone to blame for this, that would be the Turkish State, either the Ottoman phase of it, or the Republican one. This is because there was a very specific reason that Greece saw the need to do that, being how there was immediate and urgent need to financially integrate about a million Greek refugees from Eastern Thrace and Anatolia, who, if their livelihood was not ascertained, then they would perish in extreme poverty. In other words, the only other solution was that the Greek Genocide would continue, albeit in Greece, with hundreds of thousands of Greek refugees starving to death, with all the ramifications that would have to internal politics and societal cohesion. The properties of the Muslims in Epirus and Macedonia were seen as a means to at least alleviate the problem, by having the Greek refugees settle in them.
Personally I am of the view that it would not be a terrible idea to reverse this ethnic cleansing, in the sense that now that this urgency is long in the past, the Greek State could perhaps allow for the return of the descendants of the Muslims of that area, if they want to do so, which would be a good thing for their demographics as well.
I am not sure what the numbers in the table are supposed to represent. If that is about Crete, then you can see yourself that the decline is long before Greece even got ahold of the island, so she has nothing to do with it. If it is about some territory in Greece, one must always keep in mind how in some parts Muslims / Turks were left to live, with rights and even representation (e.g. Thessalian Muslims could vote decades before Ottoman Greeks could), but despite this they practically “ethnic cleansed themselves”.
BoringKick5331@reddit
Hopeless blame shifting, whataboutism, and fanaticism.
People like you are why Greece is in the condition it is in today.
Lothronion@reddit
It is easy to toss around such terms, the difficult part is arguing with evidence.
No_Idea_479@reddit
You're counting the Population Exchange as an atrocity... You can't be serious.
Lothronion@reddit
The reason Greece pushed for expansion into Epirus and Macedonia in the 1890s-1910s was because there had been many local Greek revolts, seeking union with Greece, followed by massacres on the local population by the authorities, while also there was great concern over plans of the Turkish government to supplant Circassians into the area for the sake of rendering the Greeks into a minority. As for Crete, the place had been in constant war due to the various revolts, and the Ottomans had responded with heavy massacres on civilians.
BamBumKiofte23@reddit
Were there other, non-humanitarian reasons for Greece to intervene?
CockamouseGoesWee@reddit
I'm East Thrakian/Anatolian/Macedonian decent so my opinions on this war are quite a bit different because my family is only alive because of it. But the Greek Genocide was also made in retaliation to it, which killed off all of my family's village that had been there for 600 years at least.
ThickCaterpillar9867@reddit
Slaves so recent??I did not know that was a thing
CockamouseGoesWee@reddit
Unfortunately yes, slavery wasn't ever abolished in the Ottoman Empire
ThickCaterpillar9867@reddit
I did not know there were slaves in the balkans in the 1920s
CockamouseGoesWee@reddit
If you include human trafficking, slavery still very much exists in the Balkans and the rest of the world today
ThickCaterpillar9867@reddit
Not the same ,slavery was regulated and has its own definition while human trafficking is illegal almost anywhere in the world.
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
Could you please give more context about the slavery?
CockamouseGoesWee@reddit
Sure. My family on that side were primarily sailors and shipbuilders. I have family that managed to buy their freedom and went off to Columbia (we have no idea if anyone is still alive on that side). Some went to the US too, specifically in Virginia during the 1890's.
The shipbuilders were almost always state-owned. The sailors were chattel slaves.
Far_Country_1629@reddit
Sorry, Columbia ? as in the one in the states ?
CockamouseGoesWee@reddit
Nope, the country
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
Ah, that makes sense, thank you. If they were already sailors before they were probably captured. Unfortunately a common practice in the Mediterranean.
I'm glad they were able to free themselves.
Lothronion@reddit
How can you retaliate to something that began in 1919 AD, by merely continuing what you were doing since 1913 AD?
Yarrrak31@reddit (OP)
Greece committed horrible atrocities during the war and was ordered to pay reparations after its defeat but Turkey refused it after seeing Greece was broke as fuck
Young_Owl99@reddit
Not so different from we attacking and gaining their land years ago. Until 1945 it was a legit way to gain territory at war. They failed so they couldn’t.
Ujemegaz@reddit
It is not seen at all.
Archaeopteryx111@reddit
Not our neighborhood, not our problem.
CryptographerTop4469@reddit
Ignore this guy , he's the ostrich with the ass up and head buried in the sand.
Archaeopteryx111@reddit
What could Romania have done at that point in time? We were busy fighting the Hungarians.
Kitsooos@reddit
CryptographerTop4469@reddit
Ignore this guy , he's the ostrich with the ass up and head buried in the sand.
Kitsooos@reddit
"Good idea, bad execution." is pretty much the sum of it.
Embarrassed_Egg9542@reddit
It was never a good idea, said not me, but Ioannis Metaxas
silentpirate1899@reddit
It was the perfect chance for Greece to settle things with Turkey once and for all but we messed up especially with the help of our dear "allies".
peepmet@reddit
One of the biggest fuckups amd missed opportunities of the 20th century and that's up against stiff competition.
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
I guess they should've stopped at Izmir.
Iapetus404@reddit
Ankara campaign was not annex Ankara but defeat Turks and end the war. because Turks never implemented the Treaty of Sevres, just as they do not implement the Treaty of Lausanne.
From there it seems that the Turks are not honest people who honor their words and their signature.
btweenthatormohammad@reddit
Lol, Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. On the contrary, Turks fought with honor to defeat the Greeks which joined the WW1 in the last year of the war and as greedy opoortunists they are, tried to take as much as they can from Turkey by invasion.
AmbitiousSympathy665@reddit
It's a do or die situation. Having Greece and trying to hold a coastal slice of anatolia is a matter of time before they sweep you out. So you try to invade the heartland to try to force them to at least accept you having the coastal part. But that provokes an even stronger response in turn. So it's a lose lose. Greeks decided to go out with a bang I guess you can say.
Belgraviana@reddit
I doubt they could have held Izmir even if they didn’t massively overextend in the Ankara push. Holding Thrace was way more realistic
ZapruderFilmBuff@reddit
90% haven’t heard of it and the other 10% have, but don’t give a shit.
Checky_3rd@reddit
My current country? Hellenes are sad for all the Greeks that died by the Turks. My home country? Moldovans and subsequently the Romanians probably don't care that much, maybe some educated historians are disappointed that more Turks didn't die in that war lol, but other than that, Romanians really couldn't care less.
situmaimesdemain@reddit
Greeks thought we were weak, decided to grab whatever they could. Which was stupid. Even if they won the initial war they never had the power to hold anything in Anatolia once we bounced back. Thrace would be more realistic.
Moist-Park-4781@reddit
In Greece it's seen as a complete and unmitigated disaster that knew no bounds.