It should be "TURKS", not OTTOMANS

[blitzkrieg1980]

You really do think Pearl Harbor came out of the blue. Yet another comment on the state of American education.

If the purpose of American intervention was to prevent the slaughter of innocents - instead of to cause it - then they quite clearly should have sided with the Germans. The Soviets had already killed millions and the Brits had their campaign well underway while, even according to the official story, the Germans had not even started. Perhaps they wouldn't have if the Americans had not intervened. As you say, who can know? Just don't pretend that American motives were any more noble than those of anyone else, or that it had anything to do with preventing the slaughter of innocents. Quite the contrary. They killed millions, just like every other one of the major powers in the war.

Such a quintessentially American rant. However, this has nothing to do either with pacifism or history.

Way to make up history, pal. You are a Nazi sympathizer, aren't you. I think you should be banned for this. As far as my "American ranting" and "poor education", your moronic ignorance seems to forget how Hitler ran through Europe, taking it over, and erradicating non-Aryans from the land. Stalin did not take over other nations and erradicate them of a certain group. He was a cruel dictator who caused the death of his own people (like most dictators throughout history).

I have a great idea. Maybe no one should have contested Hitler's military spread. We should have all just let him do his thing because then innocents would have been spared. You idiot. WTH has your system of education taught you? Are you some kind of neo-nazi, facist, white-supremist? No, you're probably just an ignoramus.

I like how you mask your rediculous points in anti-Americanism. Because that's a real intelligent way of getting your point across.

EDIT: Oh, and that statement had everything to do with pacifism. In your little world, a pacifist is against any violence, including that of defense or assistance, it seems.

PS: wars end up killing people. that's how they work. innocents will always die in war. but that's okay, because the Germans wouldn't have attacked if US didn't intervene, right?

 

[Abegweit]

@Abegweit

what does any of this have to due with Turks and Ottomans? this is completely off topic

Nothing, of course. Beyond the dueling nationalisms of blitzkrieg and the OP, who thankfully has left the scene. I didn't bring it up, though. They both demonstrate the fundamental - and dangerous - irrationality behind nationalism.

FWIW, the OP was off-topic right from the beginning. Who cares whether it's Ottomans or Turks? Or whether America is a proper civ (another question which comes up repeatedly)? Only someone who gloms unto myths. It's just a game, after all.

In truth, Ataturk was irrelevant outside his own country and Roosevelt was a bloodthirsty mass murderer. That undoubtedly is why he is in the game and Ataturk isn't. Roosevelt fits right in with the rest of them. From Alexander the Great to Mao Zedong, they were all the same. Even the sainted Gandhi caused the deaths of a million Indians and the total disruption of the lives of many millions more. I don't know how he would have reacted had he lived to see the fruition of his dream. Only Asoka seems to have regretted what he did, and his country fell apart in consequence. A sad commentary on the human condition.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Nothing, of course. Beyond the dueling nationalisms of blitzkrieg and the OP, who thankfully has left the scene. I didn't bring it up, though. They both demonstrate the fundamental - and dangerous - irrationality behind nationalism.

FWIW, the OP was off-topic right from the beginning. Who cares whether it's Ottomans or Turks? Or whether America is a proper civ (another question which comes up repeatedly)? Only someone who gloms unto myths. It's just a game, after all.

In truth, Ataturk was irrelevant outside his own country and Roosevelt was a bloodthirsty mass murderer. That undoubtedly is why he is in the game and Ataturk isn't. Roosevelt fits right in with the rest of them. From Alexander the Great to Mao Zedong, they were all the same. Even the sainted Gandhi caused the deaths of a million Indians and the total disruption of the lives of many millions more. I don't know how he would have reacted had he lived to see the fruition of his dream. Only Asoka seems to have regretted what he did, and his country fell apart in consequence. A sad commentary on the human condition.

And you are a Nazi sympathizer with a large vocabulary and a great deal of ignorance.

 

[Abegweit]

Way to make up history, pal.

You have no clue about history. You came on to this thread claiming the Americans won WWII and had no idea that it was mostly fought between the Soviets and the Germans.

You are a Nazi sympathizer, aren't you.

In any case, Godwin's Law applies. You lose

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

You have no clue about history. You came on to this thread claiming the Americans won WWII and had no idea that it was mostly fought between the Soviets and the Germans.
In any case, Godwin's Law applies. You lose

You child. Learn how to read English before making a sweeping broad statement that is incorrect. I could care less if I "lose", it doesn't change the fact that you are simply here to flame and be a general a*sh*le. I'm done with this rediculous argument. I have no idea about history? yeah, the Germans wouldn't have continued their invasion if the U.S. sat idly.

 

[Wodan]

I have never committed mass murderer. I rather doubt that you haven't either. It makes a President or a King to do such things.

That's a famous quote, I forget from whom. "Kill one person, you're a murderer. Kill a million, you're a statesman."

However Wodan claimed that it was necessary to avoid a million American deaths and you quoted him approvingly.

Umm, no. That was Kristian95, from Denmark.

I personally do not think that killing and destruction advance the human condition. It is shocking to find out how many people do.

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing.

Wodan

EDIT: Blitzkrieg, chill out dude. Try to refute without attacking the person.

 

[Swedishguy]

This is getting rediculous! If I'm swedish I ain't automatically blond, as less I automatically is a nationalist in Swedens name!

 

[Kristian95]

I think that WWII might have ended with Nazi victory if the US hadn't entered the war, I know and acknowledge the huge effort made by the red army, but also know that both England and USSR recieved substantial assistance through the Lend lease laws, which granted, were working even before the US entered the war.

As for atroceties, I never said I think it is "good" that the bomb was dropped on Japan, but on the other hand, when you allow your regime to become so vicious as the Japanese was at that time, bad things alas happen.... I think if the Japanese had not started the war they of course wouldn't have had the nukes land in their cities. I am not saying the nukes were good, but I think we all have to remember all the (forgotten) victims of the Japanese horror regime around east and south east Asia!
Btw, when the USSR is praised so much for their WWII effort, remember that Stalin was responsible for as many deaths as Hitler, it's just not as well known among many people mainly due to many of the victims being Soviet.

Ok, now some on-topic stuff:

I think that it is ok for Firaxis using ther term Ottoman empire instead of Turkish empire as the name Turkey is of much younger date (has been said before, so I guess I'll just say I concur with that)

 

[Swedishguy]

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[eric_]

Stalin was responsible for as many deaths as Hitler

Actually, he was possibly responsible for more than 3 times as many deaths as Hitler (estimated at 20M).

I think a big difference, and one that makes him slightly less notorious, is that Stalin killed a great number of his victims less directly than Hitler killed almost all of his (mostly Stalin starved his people, which isn't to belittle the visciousness with which he suppressed opposition).

As for Roosevelt and our involvement in WWII, I am of the opinion that our (AKA US) intentions were no less noble in 1941 than they were in 1861 (the civil war was more about state v federal power than anything else). I mean, we had Japanese internment camps on the west coast, turned away at least one boatful of Jewish refugees, etc.

Call me a Nazi sympathizer if you want, blitzkrieg, but it won't stick, considering my Jewish ass lost family in the German camps. The fact is, we Americans write our own American history books, and war is a painful thing to reflect on.

As for the original topic, I find it interesting that the OP wants an empire that encompassed such a vast area and range of ethnicities and races renamed after only the predominant ethnicity. That would be like arguing for renaming America WASPland.

 

[Swedishguy]

Hitler was a german soldier, so it's possible he killed a great deal to.

 

[eric_]

I think that it is ok for Firaxis using ther term Ottoman empire instead of Turkish empire as the name Turkey is of much younger date (has been said before, so I guess I'll just say I concur with that)

Turkey is the most recent nation in a long line of nations run by or at least comprised primarily by Turks (an ethnic group). The OP was arging for a Turkish empire on the basis of the history of the Turks, not on the existence of modern-day Turkey (which is indeed far younger than America).

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

That's a famous quote, I forget from whom. "Kill one person, you're a murderer. Kill a million, you're a statesman."


Umm, no. That was Kristian95, from Denmark.


All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing.

Wodan

EDIT: Blitzkrieg, chill out dude. Try to refute without attacking the person.

True, Wodan. You are right. Sorry. He is just very insulting and, in my opinion, quite ignorant. But I concede. I must chill out

 

[Abegweit]

That's a famous quote, I forget from whom. "Kill one person, you're a murderer. Kill a million, you're a statesman."

True. But only if you win. All sides killed by the million: Germans, Russians, Japanese, Brits, Americans and both Chinese factions. But the crimes of the Nazis are endlessly paraded in front of us and those of Tojo come up too (although Hirohito is curiously exempt from criticism). In contrast, those of the Russians and Chinese are largely forgotten while, as we see here, those of the Americans and the British are even lauded.

Umm, no. That was Kristian95, from Denmark.

My apologies. You are right.

 

[eric_]

While all players most definitely committed atrocities (especially when you consider how the Russians handled dissention in their ranks due to extreme cold and starvation), I don't think you can fairly compare anyone with Hitler. I mean, firebombing a city is absolutely awful, but the Nazi camps are just unthinkable. Even the Japanese internment camps, which are absolutely awful, can't be compared with those (imo).

 

[Swedishguy]

Your opinion is good, but it's the ultimate form of torture to you, right?

 

[eric_]

Your opinion is good, but it's the ultimate form of torture to you, right?

Huh? If you're saying that because I'm Jewish I'm more sensitive to Nazi atrocities than other atrocities, well, yeah, I'm aware of that bias.

But at the same time, American, British, Russian, etc, and even Japanese assembly lines were geared primarily towards building a war machine to inflict mass casualties against an enemy combatant nation. German assembly lines were geared towards that, but also towards killing as many innocent German nationals (and innocents from other countries as well, and not just Jews) as possible as quickly as possible.

[EDIT]Oh, also, Stalin committed his atrocities over the course of 25 years. Hitler committed his over the course of 6. So Hitler killed about 1.2M a year, while Stalin killed about .8M or so.[/EDIT]

 

[aelf]

Appeasement does not work. Maybe that's propaganda, but not all propaganda are false. Going by the pacifist logic flying around here, if North Korea nukes and invades South Korea, the moral thing for Americans to do is sit by and watch. Why participate and do evil things like kill people? It's none of your business anyway. Let the Koreans kill each other on their own, there will be fewer people dead that way.

The day such a mentality prevails, I hope I'm long dead.

 

[Abegweit]

I think that WWII might have ended with Nazi victory if the US hadn't entered the war, I know and acknowledge the huge effort made by the red army, but also know that both England and USSR recieved substantial assistance through the Lend lease laws, which granted, were working even before the US entered the war.

I don't know about the British, beyond the fact that they are still paying it off today. I have researched the Soviet case. Over the course of the war it amounted to about 15% of materiel, most of it delivered long after the war was won. Mao found it quite useful, of course.

As for atroceties, I never said I think it is "good" that the bomb was dropped on Japan, but on the other hand, when you allow your regime to become so vicious as the Japanese was at that time, bad things alas happen.... I think if the Japanese had not started the war they of course wouldn't have had the nukes land in their cities. I am not saying the nukes were good, but I think we all have to remember all the (forgotten) victims of the Japanese horror regime around east and south east Asia!

The Japanese did not start the war with the US. And one set of atrocities does not justify another.

Btw, when the USSR is praised so much for their WWII effort, remember that Stalin was responsible for as many deaths as Hitler, it's just not as well known among many people mainly due to many of the victims being Soviet.

As has already been pointed out, he was responsible for far more. This has little to do with who won the war.

 

[eric_]

There's no way for America to avoid getting involved in a Korean war.

[EDIT]Unless of course we just sit there and let our tens of thousands of S. Korean-based troops get annihilated.

Also, Pacifism does mean no fighting, period. If you fight back, you are not a pacifist.[/EDIT]