161–170 of 283 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> hosting content on their own servers that offends you It's not about offense in the parent comment, it's about theft. I see this as a reasonable response, given no additional context.
When you steal something it means the owner doesn't have it anymore. How is this theft?
"... a 26 December 2019 ruling by the Constitutional Court of Turkey that the more than two and a half year block imposed by the Turkish government was unconstitutional." Your takeaways: 1) Turkey has a Constitutional Court. 2) Turkey has a constitution. 3) The court makes rulings and they are carried out. 4) Erdogan did something and it was "checked" and "balanced." Sounds an awful lot like a nation of laws, ruled b…
Sure, after 2.5 years. And after being blocked in the first place.
without wiki i don't know how i would have solved my problem sets in grad school. let's see how the academic performance improves in turkey.
if you're smart enough to be in grad school, you're smart enough to have a VPN
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The US eventually did win the space race They did _because they started a new round_. What the US did is equivalent to losing badly and then screaming "Last goal wins" repeatedly until you score the last goal. Yes, US sources claim a US victory. That doesn't mean they actually won. > The US view is that they did all the heavy lifting, The Soviet Union was responsible for ~80% of german casualties. The Soviets made…
> The Soviet Union was responsible for ~80% of german casualties. None of which would have been possible without the extraordinary industrial might of the US that kept the USSR supplied. They had no capacity to fight minus being supplied. Do you know how much territory the European allies had reclaimed in the years of fighting prior to the US invasion of Europe? None. There is no scenario where Nazi Germany gets defe…
This sentence is nonsense. They publicly (not privately) thanked the US for their aid.
Besides, your framing of the war is obviously false. The allies had lost the war up until about ~1943, where they started gaining momentum. A turning point I'd like to point out is the Battle of Kursk, in which the Germans for the first time cancelled a major operation. Sure, the invasion of Sicily played a role in their decision, but the battles weren't even on the same scale (14k casualties vs 370k in Kursk).
Also the lend-lease is a false equivalence. Yes, the "industrial might" played a role, but the US hadn't lost 25 million men to the war. Their capacity for production was higher because they weren't sending everyone to their death. The US even saw population growth during the war. The Soviet Union only saw their loses replaced during the mid-50s.
The US played their part, but make no mistake in the difference between 11 billion USD and 25 million men.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not clear. The elections were widely reported to be fraudulent and voter intimidation and violence were widely reported. A meaningful portion of the world’s imprisoned reporters are in Turkey. It is trivial to find articles and reports on this.
He has half of the country's full support. I can easily see that.
How? By what methods are you measuring that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The Soviet Union was responsible for ~80% of german casualties. None of which would have been possible without the extraordinary industrial might of the US that kept the USSR supplied. They had no capacity to fight minus being supplied. Do you know how much territory the European allies had reclaimed in the years of fighting prior to the US invasion of Europe? None. There is no scenario where Nazi Germany gets defe…
>There is no scenario where Nazi Germany gets defeated without the US supplies and invasion and the USSR leadership openly admitted exactly that privately. Without the USSR involved in the war, US supplies would be unable to help stop the Germans and the German forces would not be spread thin enough for an invasion to be feasible. Both were necessary, but the Soviets gave up much more to secure the victory.
Normandy was June 1944. The US had nukes by August 1945. The Germans signed their surrender in May of 1945. The Germans were done. Period. The war in Europe was over one way or another and soon.
Within one year of the US invading at Normandy, all that Nazi territory in the prior map I posted was gone, whereas none of it had been reclaimed in the prior five years before the US invasion. It's not a coincidence. Churchill recognized that once the US joined on to invade Europe, the war was won.
There's a reasonable argument that the Soviets helped delay the possibility of the Nazis developing nuclear weapons. Historical evidence suggests the Nazis were nowhere close to developing a nuclear weapon though and they had largely abandoned the project in early 1942. Most likely, with or without the Soviet effort between January 1942 and May 1945, the US was going to bring Nazi Germany to capitulation with nuclear weapons.
There is a big difference in the stakes however: the US didn't need to win the war in Europe to survive. It could have stepped back, relatively safe with its nuclear position. And the Soviets would have treated Western Europe very differently without the US there to safeguard territorial lines from further Soviet expansion and influence west.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can leave out the 'potentially'. There is no way that any coup would justify putting this many people in jail.
Somehow most western supported military coups and regimes persist, in South America, Africa, middle East and East Asia. And most of these coups have wide spread support in a wider political panorama. So military coups or uprisings seem to destabilize and stabilize third world. Yet ongoing demonstrations in France and England are usually ignored and violently suppressed without support from elites. I'm curious why
Say what? AFAIK, Cuba and Venezuela, the only remaining "military regimes in Latin America" are not "western supported".
"... a 26 December 2019 ruling by the Constitutional Court of Turkey that the more than two and a half year block imposed by the Turkish government was unconstitutional." Your takeaways: 1) Turkey has a Constitutional Court. 2) Turkey has a constitution. 3) The court makes rulings and they are carried out. 4) Erdogan did something and it was "checked" and "balanced." Sounds an awful lot like a nation of laws, ruled b…
After 2.5 years... Let's not pretend like this is some major success. It's a failure by all accounts that luckily ended up OK.
"... a 26 December 2019 ruling by the Constitutional Court of Turkey that the more than two and a half year block imposed by the Turkish government was unconstitutional." Your takeaways: 1) Turkey has a Constitutional Court. 2) Turkey has a constitution. 3) The court makes rulings and they are carried out. 4) Erdogan did something and it was "checked" and "balanced." Sounds an awful lot like a nation of laws, ruled b…
>Sounds an awful lot like a nation of laws, ruled by principles and such. Beautiful strawman here. Let's let Turkey go on denying genocide, murdering Kurds, destabilizing the region, and arresting political opponents and holding them without charges, because gosh darn it, they let wikipedia in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is neither new nor first. Turkey has a court tradition that spans, at this point, more than seven hundred years (excluding Eastern Roman law with Corpus Iuris Civilis , which if included would bring it to 2500, an unbroken chain from whence it came, Rome) - to the point that it customarily allowed every sub-nation of the Ottoman Empire to have their own court and apply their own laws. For example, if you were Ch…
While we’re talking history: I’ve heard that the system of laws codified under Justinian in the Byzantine empire ended up forming the basis for most Western law systems to this day. My math is probably off here, but is the current Turkish court system a continuous descendant from that system?
Up until 1851 the largest minority in the Empire were Muslims at 45% of the population, followed by Christians at 35%. You could argue that it's an unbroken lineage because 35% of the population still followed Roman law which was still valid and in full force, or you could argue that the most populous minority didn't, therefore a broken lineage.
In either case, the reality is more shades of grey, of course: all jurisdictions of accepted law evolved side by side with some crosstalk over time. Ultimately though, Turkey terminated the application of muslim law, removed it entirely from its code and completely switched to a western code after World War I, roughly coincident with the collapse of the Empire and the foundation of the current, modern Republic.
It's subject to both European Court of Justice, and the European Court of Human Rights as the ultimate courts of appeal, both of which, I believe, have some presiding Turkish judges.
(My knowledge in this field is very superficial — if someone knows better, please feel free to correct!)