Saturday, February 09, 2008

The Sudeten Turks?

After the Great War, under the Treaty of Saint-Germain in 1919, several million ethnic Germans living in a region known as the Sudetenland (a part of Bohemia and Moravia) were included in the new state of Czechoslovakia. The relations between the Sudeten Germans and the Czechs remained a bone of contention during the interwar years.

Adolf Hitler appointed himself the protector of the Germans in the Sudetenland, and various incidents — some real, some manufactured — were used to inflame German public opinion about the oppression of the Sudeten Germans by the Czechs. The growing tensions culminated in the Munich Agreement in September of 1938, in which Czechoslovakia surrendered the Sudetenland to Germany under pressure from Britain and France. Czechoslovakia was fatally weakened by the loss of the Sudetenland, and the entire country was occupied and annexed into the Reich in March of the following year.

I bring all this up because the current situation of ethnic Turks within Germany bears an uncanny similarity to the Sudeten crisis. The parallels are not exact — the Germans had been resident in the Sudetenland for centuries, whereas the Turks have been in Germany for less than fifty years — but still, the analogy is compelling.

Erdogan and the fire
(Photoshop by Europe News; original by Cox and Forkum)

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has set himself up as the protector of German Turks, and the Turkish government and the news media in Turkey have whipped up the Ludwigshafen fire into a crisis in Turkish-German relations. The recent DDOS attack against Europe News and various German blogs was trumpeted by the Turkish nationalists who did the hacking as revenge for the fire.

Henrik of Europe News sends the following summary of the Ludwigshafen fire:
- - - - - - - - -
Excessive Turkish reactions to the fire in Ludwigshafen

While Denial of Service attacks and cracking into servers is annoying, what is more sinister is the background and the behavior of the Turkish press and politicians. They reacted to a bit of graffiti on the burned-out building, as if graffiti weren’t everywhere in Germany, and jumped to the conclusion that this would most likely be the beginning of a new wave of racist attacks on Turks in Germany, like the racist arson attack in Solingen in 1993.

By reacting in this way, however fickle the evidence, the Turkish politicians are posing as the protectors of Turks in Germany, disregarding the fact that Germany has a fine legal system. That includes the Turkish prime minister Erdogan visiting the place of the fire, holding a joint press conference with Angela Merkel and lots of press articles recalling the, implying that now a new wave of racist attacks against Turks is looming. Indicative of the distrust from the Turkish side, a Turkish investigation team was sent to the site as well — Germans should be perfectly able to examine the site themselves.

This spectacle by the Turkish politicians ignores the fact that the fire-fighters were doing a marvelous job (no ‘racism’ here), that the cause of the fire is still unknown after four days of investigation and might be simply bad electric circuits. Also ignored is the context that the 1993 attack was extensively exploited by Turkish investment groups to discourage Turks in Germany from investing their hard-earned money in Germany. Later these Turkish investment groups went into bankruptcy, losing €25 billion in a network of AKP-connected businessmen (and probably AKP itself). The potential gains by creating another Solingen-like crisis are impressive.

Finally, the performance of the Turkish politicians posing as the protectors of Turks in Germany is a divisive move eerily similar to the events that eventually led to the division of Cyprus. This is counter-productive to integration but fits well with the “special role” Erdogan assigns the Turkish diaspora in Europe. We are on the edge of insurgencies in many places, most recently in Cologne.

What we would like to see from the German politicians, instead of the nice photo-ops, is a clear statement that there is no need to assume racist motives for the fire, no need for ministers of foreign nationality to intervene in the matter, and that the German authorities are perfectly capable of investigating the matter on their own. The Turkish government is already much over the top on this matter and can use a polite lesson on respectfully abstaining from meddling in the internal affairs of other countries and on the primacy of the Rule of law.

Then, suitably, apply that lesson to Turkey proper, where violence against non-Muslims is a significant problem, much more so than any graffiti-based rumors of arson.

The latest news report from Spiegel indicates that arson was unlikely to be the cause of the fire. The testimony of two little girls (the primary source of the arson rumors) contradicts the physical evidence, the testimony of other witnesses, and even each other. John Rohan at Shield of Achilles has more details.

The claim of arson at Ludwigshafen is a thin reed on which to build a crisis in international relations. But mere plausibility has never gotten in the way of ethnic demagoguery, as the events of the 1930s showed all too well.

It’s instructive to remember the ultimate fate of the Sudeten Germans: after their incorporation into the Reich, followed by six years of war, they were forcibly and brutally expelled from Czechoslovakia under the Beneš decrees.

Are the Turks in Germany willing to bet that the Sudeten analogy is not complete?

19 comments:

Afonso Henriques said...

I don't think the comparison is a good one.

I think the leaders of the third world have the legitimate right to protect their citizens abroad. Sad to see that some "Germans" need to be protected by the Turks. It is the offering of Nationality á Americana, as if it was an idea(l), that is bringing this problems to Europe.

I don't believe the fire to be racist motivated. Tough I understand the Turk's game. I don't blame them.

Off topic - - - - -
People, GoV community, do you want to see how will Europe's biggest cities be in fifty years?

See Tropa de Elite
It is an excellent Brazilan moovie, as only Brazilians can do.
I heard that L.A. is becoming like it pretty fast, maybe in thirty years if the trends continue this way. Seriously, you got to see it. It is based on a veridic story.


Download it and apreciate it. We are fighting against the "Third Worldalisation" of our societies.
The city of Rio de Janeiro was once known as "Cidade Maravilhosa" (The Wonderful City), it was considered to be the paradise on Earth, now it is what it is. Europe is going towards it...
See it and think about what world you want your children to live in.
Sorry for the propaganda.

druu222 said...

Alfonso, I'm not gettin' you. The first half of your post says pretty clearly that the "Third World" has a right to bring it's influence to bear inside of Western nations when "it's citizens" (by blood, religion, what?) are affected.

Your second half seems to lament that very thing. WTF???

I alluded to Germany's once claimed right to act in the interests of "Germans" wherever they might be in an earlier comment yesterday. If that led to this posting, yay me.

But Alfonso, what you advocate, ("I think the leaders of the third world have the legitimate right to protect their citizens abroad") is a CATEGORICAL rejection of Westphalia, the idea that the nation-state is the primary authority, and citizenship, not blood, relations, God, ideals, or anything else, is the basis of our relationship to it.

What is the slightest difference with European nations taking a specific interest in whites, and only whites, in Africa or anywhere else, not because they are human, but because they are white? That cool with you?

I cannot emphasize enough the catastrophe that would follow your logic. Think Beirut in the 80's on a global scale, or, more to the point, the Balkans, with tribes cutting each others throats, and multiple nuclear powers on the outside acting on their "legitimate right to protect their citizens abroad".

The victims of this fire are either German citizens or guest residents of the German state. Unless they are travelling Turkish citizens TEMPORARILY and legally in Germany, it's none of Turkey's or anyone else's G-D- business.

Saying anything else is a road to racial bloodshed big time, that Western Civilization will lose because we are unwilling and unable to act on "racial superiority" the way our adversaries do without hesitation. If we did, we woould not be Western Civilization, so we cannot.

That non-Western nations all know this is a reason we are seeing more and more of this kind of racial politics on an international level, a horribly abominable and retrograde trend.

Bretwalda Edwin-Higham said...

Can you see Turkey declaring War on Germany?

Rich Rostrom said...

Any nation has a duty, if not a right, to protest oppression of its expatriates, or emigrants, or even historic diaspora. This of course can be abused. Deliberately fomented Turkish paranoia is an abuse.

I wonder if Turkey is not "projecting" here. If there ever was a sovereign Kurdistan, Turkey's brutal repression of its Kurdish minority would be exposed and publicized.

Steen said...

I doubt whether Afonso Henriques reads german, but if he does, he would know that lately germans (why the quotation marks?) that need protection from certain turkish youths.

irek said...

I am an USA citizen born in one of
the so called"communist country' in central europe and I see the same in America-narcotic El Presidente of Mexico,Calderon calls illigal aliens from Mexico,his people and Mexico,s right to defend them whereever they are.

Henrik said...

"I think the leaders of the third world have the legitimate right to protect their citizens abroad."

As druu222 noted, this is a very dangerous trend. It disrespects national borders and the well-run German state, and counters integration of immigrants.

"Sad to see that some "Germans" need to be protected by the Turks."

As far as we can see, there's no protection here. It's all a Turkish propaganda ploy.

A fire like this could happen anywhere. Low-educated Turks are more at risk, as they're more prone to do unqualified nasty tricks with the cabling of the house and set off the fire in the first place.

What the Turkish government does offers no protection. It's just projecting its power into Europe on the _pretext_ of protection.

In a way, the Turks have much better politicians than we do. They know the tricks of projecting their power and gaining undue advantages for their country, while we in Europe mostly have petty administrators who care more about abiding to the EU rules and getting enough votes next time.

ENGLISHMAN said...

This is meerely an extension of the turks plan,destabilisation,they already adversely affect the elections in several european countries,by telling the turk population which way to vote,and the Germans should not even have entertained the intrusion into thier country by a foreign leader,one day soon we are going to have to fight these invaders,before they destroy us,and while we talk and talk and talk,they organise our downfall,we have done talking!

spackle said...

Let us not forget the Ottoman empire. Aggression is in their blood.

Dymphna said...

Rich Rostrum said--

If there ever was a sovereign Kurdistan, Turkey's brutal repression of its Kurdish minority would be exposed and publicized.

Fat chance of Turkey or Iran ever allowing that. Iraq? Maybe. In some ways, they have a little piece of Kurdistan there.

But in Turkey, the Kurds are discriminated against and oppressed. They may not speak their own language -- at least in public -- and their children may not be given Kurdish names...lots of other insults, but those two are so fundamentally unfair...

...oh, dear, I feel an anti-Turkish rant coming on...

Henrik said...

"Let us not forget the Ottoman empire. Aggression is in their blood."

I think the Turks are worse. Actually, 'Turk' was a derogative until a century or so ago until Turkish nationalism became the antidote to the crumbling of the Ottoman Empire. Turkey is born out of the blood of innocents. The Armenian genocide is the worst of these, but a million or more other non-Turks went the same way, like at the torching of Smyrna. It is no coincidence that the share of non-Muslims in Asia Minor has been reduced from 25 % to 1 precent over a century - and most of the decline is from 'other causes' than population exchange...

Laine said...

A friend traveling in the Mid-East Arab states was told that a sheik is the ruler of his citizens wherever they go so his jurisdiction is not bound by geography.

I wonder whether this is true of all Arab and Turkish tribes. This may be another critical difference that makes certain cultural groups incompatible with Western ways and that has not been publicized enough.

This would be a potential double disloyalty to any non-Muslim country that an Arab Muslim lives in. It is certainly true that devout Muslims owe prime loyalty to their world community of Muslims and Allah, which trumps loyalty to whatever country they colonize (it is incorrect to call them mere immigrants when their aim is to overthrow the host country's government and substitute sharia law).

The test of acceptability should be those Muslims who do not wish to live under sharia law, who actively join the Muslim organizations that publicly work against sharia law.

Those who want sharia law should be unacceptable as citizens in any western democracy.

Incidentally, the Steen site also described sharia law already being used in the UK, in a knifing of a Somali Muslim by a Somali Muslim. The male relatives of the attacker paid some kind of fine and that was it.

I think Brits don't know how far their government has already gone in allowing sharia with the collusion of their elites including the media. Hopefully the Archbishop's foolishness in going public will be the straw that breaks the camel's back and exposes the multicult poison killing the host culture.

Esther said...

The issue here is not of conquest, but of money. Emigration countries like Turkey and Morocco have an interest in keeping their emigrants connected to the homeland since a significant amount of the national income comes from money sent back 'home'.

In the case of Turkey, Turkey keeps a watch on its citizens also through the religious department, which runs all Turkish mosques abroad and which makes sure that these mosques are run according to the Turkish religious way.

Homophobic Horse said...

This thread is on that slippery slope. Baron warned you.

-

But anyway, I think Erdogan is exploiting this for his own bizarre psycho-political ends. He recently called integration of Germanys Turks "a crime against humanity" ergo, he believes integrated Turks would lose their humanity ergo Germans are not human..

I didn't want to, but I can't help but recall the "Authoritarian personality".

James A. Donald said...

"But Alfonso, what you advocate, ('I think the leaders of the third world have the legitimate right to protect their citizens abroad') is a CATEGORICAL rejection of Westphalia, the idea that the nation-state is the primary authority, and citizenship, not blood, relations, God, ideals, or anything else, is the basis of our relationship to it.

Westphalia has had its day. Westphalia was a reaction to the success of the nation state in defeating the turks, and the horrors of holy war between Christians.

Holy war is upon us, like it or not, and the nation state does not seem very capable of dealing with it. Increasingly, we will have to rely on the use of force by non state entities

Rich Rostrom said...

Dymphna:
Fat chance of Turkey or Iran ever allowing that. Iraq? Maybe. In some ways, they have a little piece of Kurdistan there.

Exactly. If there is a sovereign Kurdistan anywhere Turkey is threatened. It would be like a seed crystal dropped into a supersaturated solution. However this is an ethnic rather than a religious problem.

Afonso Henriques said...

Well, my comment has caused some reactions.. I will try to answer you all, but I do not have much time so...

First, to druu222: I am not ALFonso, I am AFONSO HENRIQUES, go google it if you want!

"Alfonso, I'm not gettin' you. The first half of your post says pretty clearly that the "Third World" has a right to bring it's influence to bear inside of Western nations when "it's citizens" (by blood, religion, what?) are affected."

Yes, I think that the Third World has the legitimate right to deffend the interests of their "citizens/Nationals", just like Europe or America.
Dude, you have to see a Nation-State as a group of people. The purpose of the Nation its to protect/defend itself, which is every single individual that is part of the Nation.

Some months ago in Portugal a popular Anglonan football player whose name is Mantorras was arrested because he was driving with an Angolan license, which is not valid in Portugal.
The next weeks, Angolans authorities started "haunting" white drivers troughout the country. Now, what do you think of it?
Such cowardness, consisting in picking on defensless "individuals" in one's country is much less desirable than bringing some influence on the country in which the "case" took place in order to relieve "our interests or people".
Also, such influences are desirable in a way that it helps and empowers a otherwise maybe defensless individual.
I hope I made myself clear, my English is far from perfect.

"it's citizens" (by blood, religion, what?)"

By whatever they want.
May it be cultural atachment, blood, etc. A Turk with German Nationality will never be seen as a German, nor will an half German by blood, specially with a non European, be seen as a German in Germany. That weakens the individual and as so, that other help from Turkey is good at an individual level.
Also I am against the offering of Nationality as if it was only an agreement between the State and the People. In Europe and much of Asia, States are more than that, they are Nations. Only when the people of a Nation can not differenciate an individual with themselves is that the given individual is ready to be fully integrated in the Country and as so, being part of the Nation.
When I mean diferentiate its not only racial, it is much more cultural and it should be even more in the "spiritual level" and I don't mean religion, religion its cultural, not spiritual.

"Your second half seems to lament that very thing. WTF???"

As I tried to explain earlier on this comment, my second part was lamenting the atribution of Nationality (sorry but) as if European States were America. They give Nationality, which should be the base of the Nation, as if they were doing buisness.
That's why I am sorry, I am sorry that the Turkish State feels compeled to get into German ground over some "officially German Nationals" who are, in fact, Turks.
That's all Germany's fault. And the Turks are only protecting Turkish interests and the Turkish Nation by "protecting" their people. Can you get it?
There are many Turks in Germany who are German only in paper... and Turkey has all the right to protect those people as they are part of the Turkic Nation.

"I alluded to Germany's once claimed right to act in the interests of "Germans" wherever they might be in an earlier comment yesterday."

That was during the good old days and I agree with Hitler on that issue. The troubles were not caused by this principle.

"But Alfonso, what you advocate, (...) is a CATEGORICAL rejection of Westphalia"

Maybe, to be sincere, I don't know exactly what the Westphalian Order is. I tought it had to due with the primacy of the Nation State over Empires, specially multi-ethnic Empires where it is much easyer for some peoples to be treated in a less dignifying way.
In this sense, I am not rejecting the Westphalian concept because I don't think Turkey has the right to get his nose in internal German issues, it has that right only when Turkey issues are concearned. Those peoples had divided loyalties and as so, it is understanable that Turkey thinks of it as a National issue.
The very aim of this progressive post-modernist practice of "Nationalise People" in a free and cheap way evoking the Globalisation, the Human Rights, this and that is, truly the destabilisation and weakening of the Nation States. It is called Multiculturalism. That is because USA is not a Nation-State, it is, at best, a National-idea(l) shared by people under a government which makes it more or less like a Nation, but not a Nation.

"citizenship, not blood, relations, God, ideals, or anything else, is the basis of our relationship to it."
In a Nation, blood and God are pre-requisites to Citizenship or at least Nationality. It is the shared culture, interest, ancestry/blood/race/ethnicity whatever you want, homeland, and spiritual almost metaphisical conection between the people that makes a Nation. (All have the same Heroes, different local secrets/misteries/traditions/legends that apear are unifying, have the same Histories with regional differences, etc)

"What is the slightest difference with European nations taking a specific interest in whites, and only whites, in Africa or anywhere else, not because they are human, but because they are white? That cool with you?"

Yes, of course it is. Actually, not because they are white but because they are part of the Nation. British will not necessarily have to help Germans in Africa but they have the moral duty to defend the Anglo population there. What happen in Mugabe's Zimbabwe for exemple was deplorable to all of Europe, but for the United Kingdom it should have been a casus belli. Britain should have gone to Zimbabwe instead of Iraq because "Britanicity" was being atacked in Zimbabwe, not Iraq.

"I cannot emphasize enough the catastrophe that would follow your logic."

We are much worse now, I can't really see it coming...
So, are you tryingto tell me that recently reunified Germany did helped and eventually led all the Western World to help Croatia and Slovenia to break out from Yugoslavia because they were good folks? Better than the Macedonians and the Hungarians of Vojvodina?

Or was it because both Croats and Slovenians have been under German (Austrian) rule for more than 300 years. And because that "Germanism" defines them and an independent Croatia and an independent Slovenia are good news to German influence in the region?
Don't be all that naive, Germans helped Croats and Slovenes because they were "more German" than Serbs, Hungarians or whoever and because they are considered as potencial special allies by both Germany and Austria. Why did Swedes heleped Estonia to break away from the USSR but are/were silent over Azerbaijan, Armenia, Abekazia or Ossetia?

Politics is runned this way, even today. That's why, in the long turn, France will support Walonia and the Netherlands or even Germany will support Flanders if Belgium desintegrates (which I think will happen in less than 20 years).

"Think Beirut in the 80's on a global scale, or, more to the point, the Balkans, with tribes cutting each others throats, and multiple nuclear powers on the outside acting on their "legitimate right to protect their citizens abroad"."

But it is what is happening right now. Look to Islam! Look to the Balkans! Look to the Caucasus! Even in Latin America, the Bolivarian/Communist Ideas are flourescing where there are less Europeans and more "historical disadvantaged peoples". Colombia will implode in the next five years having the FARC in the South, Chavez in the West and the new allies of Chavez Peru and Equador in the East, the North is Water and the U.S.A. but we all know how well the U.S.A. treats its Latin American allies. With a growing poor population and a elite of some one fifth whites the situation in Colombia is explosive. Even in Brazil, the North is already controled by Indigenous driven Communist/Boivarian ideologies whereas the South is undecided. But Cuba, for instance will become "one of ours" as soon as Fidel is gone...
Beirute itself is falling to Teheran... The Iraq insurgency is nothing more than a fight between Persians and Arabs to see who is going to own Iraq when the States are gonne...

Mad World we're living in!

"The victims of this fire are either German citizens or guest residents of the German state. Unless they are travelling Turkish citizens TEMPORARILY and legally in Germany, it's none of Turkey's or anyone else's G-D- business."

That's where I disagree. The Germans looked to those people as Turks, the Turks looked to them as Turks and those people:
Here we have a joke that may elucidate you:
"Does the (choose foreign ethnic group living in the country) feel really to be (Nationality owned by them)? It depends on which answer they will profit from."
For exemple, that British Pakistani Bishop, despite apearing to be a very nice person is not, will never be, and even his children will never be really English. Neither to the English nor to themselves. Now, if the bishop felt to be in line with Pakistan, it don't matter what document he has, Pakistani he would be.

"Saying anything else is a road to racial bloodshed big time, that Western Civilization will lose because we are unwilling and unable to act on "racial superiority" the way our adversaries do without hesitation. If we did, we woould not be Western Civilization, so we cannot."
You are being too Western.
It is how it is going to be because the other side see this as an advantage. It will be a bloody mess, it will be soon (in my lifetime) and it ain't gonna be pretty!

" a horribly abominable and retrograde trend."
I think the opposite. We are the ones who are abominable, not the ones who are deffending and strenghtenning their cultures. We are the evil moster here.

Sorry, but really sorry for my horrible English.

Afonso Henriques said...

I will highlight the comment of Rich Rostrom:

"Any nation has a duty, if not a right, to protest oppression of its expatriates, or emigrants, or even historic diaspora. This of course can be abused. Deliberately fomented Turkish paranoia is an abuse. I wonder if Turkey is not "projecting" here."

He's absoluteley right! Despite Turkey's actions are legitimate it is abuse, but is that kind of abuse that will only get Endorgan's popularity even higher. Who can blame him... I would do the same in his position.


Now, answering to Steen:

"I doubt whether Afonso Henriques reads german, but if he does, he would know that lately germans (why the quotation marks?) that need protection from certain turkish youths."

Unfortunateley, I do not know German, I am planing to learn it. But that's not reason to not know that Germans are constantly arrested by Turks, specially German women as the cowards always go after the women first.
The quotations marks are for highlighting that "Germans" are not really Germans, are Turks with "German" Nationality. Clear?
It does not take away the legitimacy of the Turkish government actions and concearns...

"America-narcotic El Presidente of Mexico,Calderon calls illigal aliens from Mexico,his people and Mexico,s right to defend them whereever they are."
Irek, that's because those Mexicans are in fact much more Mexican than Calderón himself. It is not a paper, a frontier or a border, much less some vague ideals that will make them less Mexicans than the ones in Mexico city. Those are the same factors that make Calderón less Mexican than them and Obama, in my view, a foreigner trying to conquer a country. I would like to know who votes in the primaries anyway... your system is quiet odd...


Henrik said:
""I think the leaders of the third world have the legitimate right to protect their citizens abroad."
As druu222 noted, this is a very dangerous trend. It disrespects national borders and the well-run German state, and counters integration of immigrants."

It does but it does not "counter" the "integration of immigrants" it get them more power as individuals, powers that should never be taken away from them:
Support for their homeland.
Right to their cultural specifications.
A diplomatic assistence.
And many others as unity and representativeness in somewhere.
Rights that they don't have in Germany. But Germany likes to give them everything... (maybe I did not said what I meant)

"As far as we can see, there's no protection here. It's all a Turkish propaganda ploy."
I agree and i have already explained that that protection is legitimate just because some "Germans" are Turks and not really Germans. Not that Turks need special protection. Do you understand what I am trying to say, it's 2:00 of the night, my head is not functioning very well by now, I hope I am being clear.


"In a way, the Turks have much better politicians than we do."
See Henrik, that's why I like your comments, you and me don't differ a lot. It must be the Germanic nick thing... Henrik, Henriques means son of Henrik, the father of the Historical figure I am evoking was a Burgundian nobel warrior who came hear to crack some muslim heads. He was so good they gave him an entire County that he could expand all the way South as he wanted, cracking the moors skulls. Actually, one of the symbols of our special troops here is the bloody head of a decapitated "darkie" muslim in a white nobel muslim costume (like the ones the Saudis use today). Wait for the E.U. to find it...


"Iraq? Maybe. In some ways, they have a little piece of Kurdistan there."
Dymphna, I don't know if you know it or not but that little piece of Kurdistan is now being heavily bombed by Turkey, the same country that wants to get into the E.U.. Kurdistan will not happen soon.


Also, as Esther noted, it's not difficult to understand the "interests":

"The issue here is not of conquest, but of money. Emigration countries like Turkey and Morocco have an interest in keeping their emigrants connected to the homeland since a significant amount of the national income comes from money sent back 'home'."

Money that will financiate conquest in a near future, not of Germany but of Cyprus, Kosovo, maybe Bulgaria (which is 10% Turk) and some Greek Islands.


"But anyway, I think Erdogan is exploiting this for his own bizarre psycho-political ends. He recently called integration of Germanys Turks "a crime against humanity" ergo, he believes integrated Turks would lose their humanity ergo Germans are not human.."

No Homofobic Horse, the thing is force a muslim Turk to be integrated in a Western Society and to behave like a Western is a "crime against Humanity" and I think he is right. Who has the right to order a man to get rid of his own culture? Only a muslimonster.
Seriously, they are right here.


James Donald said:
"Westphalia has had its day. Westphalia was a reaction to the success of the nation state in defeating the turks, and the horrors of holy war between Christians."

Come on James, I am with Westphalia! Bringing Turks to Germany is what is really against Westphalia because it weakens the Nation State which is only composed of Germans, Turks are not part of the Nation.
So long live Westphalia!

Anonymous said...

EOKA GREEK TERRORISM & GENOCIDE of OVER 12,000 Turkish Cypriot Children, Women & Men from 1955-1974