Macedonia - A Naming Issue (split off from Altered Maps XVI)

[r16]

of course it would . Every country that joins to NATO gets a warm wellcome and stuff , which then joins the preparations for getting former Soviet Republics into NATO , which greatly slurs them Russians , who have an absolute right to be wary of the West . Poster knows of the times when the Baltic Republics were guaranteed to be Neutrals with make-no-mistake American presence , too .

 

[HoloDoc]

Russia definitely has legitimate interests in the affairs of other states, particularly Slavic neighbour states. It has a rather nasty habit of going too far in advancing those interests though. One need only look at the military invasion of Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea.

 

[Yeekim]

Russia definitely has legitimate interests in the affairs of other states, particularly Slavic neighbour states. It has a rather nasty habit of going too far in advancing those interests though. One need only look at the military invasion of Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea.

No-no, you've got it all wrong.
It has been established beyond all doubt that the invasion of Ukraine:
1) was completely essential to protecting legitimate Russian interests,
2) was entirely unavoidable and 100% fault of Western Imperialists,
3) never happened.

 

[HoloDoc]

No-no, you've got it all wrong.
It has been established beyond all doubt that the invasion of Ukraine:
1) was completely essential to protecting legitimate Russian interests,
2) was entirely unavoidable and 100% fault of Western Imperialists,
3) never happened.

I was once accused of breaking a neighbour's vase. I defended myself on three grounds;

1. I never had the vase.

2. It was already broken when I borrowed it.

3. It was in perfectly good condition when I returned it.

Magistrate must have been on the take.

 

[Cheetah]

Seriously, the Greeks are in the wrong here. It makes absolutely no difference to Greece what one of their neighbouring states is called [...]

No, they're not!

When some Bulgarians call themselves Macedonians, live right next to proper Macedonia and claim that Alexander the Great was theirs, of course Greece should care!

Personally I think «North Macedonia» isn't much better, but if the Greeks are okay with it, I'm not gonna object too loudly...

 

[HoloDoc]

No, they're not!

When some Bulgarians call themselves Macedonians, live right next to proper Macedonia and claim that Alexander the Great was theirs, of course Greece should care!

Personally I think «North Macedonia» isn't much better, but if the Greeks are okay with it, I'm not gonna object too loudly...

I can move next to some Poles, call myself Polish, and claim that Jozef Pilsudski is really my grandfather, and it won't make a goddamn bit of difference to anyone. The Macedonian Govt. has never exactly been the most stable or rational of Govts., but they have no territorial claims over Greek territory, nor do they claim any sort of rights towards Slavic minorities in Greece - since the Greeks like to pretend Slavic migration just magically stopped at their border - so there is no rational reason for the Greeks to complain. But the Greek Govt. makes the Macedonians look positively Vulcan in their logic, so it is really no surprise.

Personally, I think the Macedonians are being saints to bother with this unnecessary name change.

 

[FriendlyFire]

I was once accused of breaking a neighbour's vase. I defended myself on three grounds;

1. I never had the vase.
2. It was already broken when I borrowed it.
3. It was in perfectly good condition when I returned it.

Magistrate must have been on the take.

Thats Ivan logic for you
The irony is that Hitler did exactly the same thing with hes territorial demands, If Germany started making noises about uniting AYRAN countries under their own banner the Russians would be screaming facisim non stop.

 

[HoloDoc]

Thats Ivan logic for you
The irony is that Hitler did exactly the same thing with hes territorial demands, If Germany started making noises about uniting AYRAN countries under their own banner the Russians would be screaming facisim non stop.

We are well overdue for a German attempt to conquer Europe. If they conquer the Balkans this time, everyone can shut up about naming rights.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I am not super versed on the issue but other than using a name the Greeks don't like, what have the Macedonians done to Greece to deserve being denied entry into the EU and NATO?

 

[Broken_Erika]

I am not super versed on the issue but other than using a name the Greeks don't like, what have the Macedonians done to Greece to deserve being denied entry into the EU and NATO?

They used a name that they had no right to use. Therefore; As a matter of principle, the Greeks must oppose everything they do as punishment for the heinous crime of daring to exist!

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I mean based on the bit of reading I've done on this subject that appears to be the gist of it and I'm like but why tho?

 

[Cheetah]

I am not super versed on the issue but other than using a name the Greeks don't like, what have the Macedonians done to Greece to deserve being denied entry into the EU and NATO?

The Greeks feel that a neighbouring country which calls itself the same as one of their provinces (which is right across the border), pretends Alexander the Great was their ancestor and otherwise seems to «borrow» names and historical people from them, will possibly start claiming some rights to their territory in the future.

Personally, I'm not even Greek, and I find it insulting that they're borrowing the name and historicity of Macedon and Alexander.

And if Russia suddenly started to refer to Murmansk as Finnmark, I'd be rather upset, and somewhat worried too.

 

[HoloDoc]

I am not super versed on the issue but other than using a name the Greeks don't like, what have the Macedonians done to Greece to deserve being denied entry into the EU and NATO?

Macedonia looked at Greece funny in a bar once. Also, in high school, Macedonia asked out a cute guy that Macedonia totally knew Greece was into. Macedonia is so basic.

The Greeks feel that a neighbouring country which calls itself the same as one of their provinces (which is right across the border), pretends Alexander the Great was their ancestor and otherwise seems to «borrow» names and historical people from them, will possibly start claiming some rights to their territory in the future.

Personally, I'm not even Greek, and I find it insulting that they're borrowing the name and historicity of Macedon and Alexander.

And if Russia suddenly started to refer to Murmansk as Finnmark, I'd be rather upset, and somewhat worried too.

Yes, how dare a state name itself after its historic region. They should have invented a completely new name for their country.

Claiming that Alexander was a Slav is stupid. Almost as stupid as claiming that he was Greek. Dude was from Macedon, which was a state north of Greece that conquered Greece and imposed its leadership upon the peninsular. He spoke Greek, but so did Nero, and Indiana Jones.

Regarding Russia; if Russia was a small, weak state which achieved independence under thirty years ago and had a population of about two million I'd say you were being a scared little sissy about it. When Macedonia conquers half of Eurasia and builds a nuclear arsenal, we'll talk.

 

[Silurian]

I am not super versed on the issue but other than using a name the Greeks don't like, what have the Macedonians done to Greece to deserve being denied entry into the EU and NATO?

Basically the Greeks do not like people who live in what was called Macedonia calling themselves Macedonian.

Well it all depends on what a Macedonian is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popul...ce_and_Turkey#/media/File:DeportaLausanne.jpg

The border between Macedonia and Greece is more or less the stop lines of the Serb and Greek armies in 1913.

The people who were living in the area called Macedonia that was split by the moved border called themselves Macedonian.
VMRO -Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization was founded in 1893 in Salonika/ Thessalonike.

After the war of 1919-22 between Greece and Turkey there was a population exchange.
Much of the non Greek population was removed from the Greek province of Macedonia and replaced with Greeks from Turkey

As other people note it is strange that the Greeks think that the people who happened to live where the armies happen to stop in 1913 was an ethnic boundary and the people lived north of the new border had no link to the people who had lived 2000 years before but those south of it did. When Greece, Bulgaria, Montenegro and Serbia agreed to attack the Ottomans in 1912 the agreed stop line between the Serbs was further north. The Greek army was pushed back by the Ottomans near Bitola, so the Serbs took more land than was agreed. I suppose if the border had ended up 12km north of Bitola the Greeks would have been quite happy with the people who lived there calling themselves Macedonian but there not because it is 12km to the south.

From Wiki

Heraclea Lyncestis

, also spelled Herakleia Lynkestis (Greek: Ἡράκλεια Λυγκηστίς; Latin: Heraclea Lyncestis; Macedonian: Хераклеа Линкестис),[1] was an ancient Greek city[2][3][4] in Macedon, ruled later by the Romans. Its ruins are situated 2 km south of the present-day town of Bitola, Macedonia.[5] It was founded by Philip II of Macedon in the middle of the 4th century BC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclea_Lyncestis

It is improbable that all Macedonians north of a line 12km south of Bitola were wiped out but those south of it survived..

Before the Greeks invaded in 1912 the area was called Macedonia, as noted above VMRO was set up in 1893 in what is now Greece. Why can't you continue to call yourself after the place you live after the area is invaded and split apart. Twenty Six states in the USA have names linked too Indian tribes, is this wrong.

 

[Patine]

Basically the Greeks do not like people who live in what was called Macedonia calling themselves Macedonian.



As other people note it is strange that the Greeks think that the people who happened to live where the armies happen to stop in 1913 was an ethnic boundary and the people lived north of the new border had no link to the people who had lived 2000 years before but those south of it did. When Greece, Bulgaria, Montenegro and Serbia agreed to attack the Ottomans in 1912 the agreed stop line between the Serbs was further north. The Greek army was pushed back by the Ottomans near Bitola, so the Serbs took more land than was agreed. I suppose if the border had ended up 12km north of Bitola the Greeks would have been quite happy with the people who lived there calling themselves Macedonian but there not because it is 12km to the south.

From Wiki



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclea_Lyncestis

It is improbable that all Macedonians north of a line 12km south of Bitola were wiped out but those south of it survived..

Before the Greeks invaded in 1912 the area was called Macedonia, as noted above VMRO was set up in 1893 in what is now Greece. Why can't you continue to call yourself after the place you live after the area is invaded and split apart. Twenty Six states in the USA have names linked too Indian tribes, is this wrong.

Perhaps a much more ethnically and historically accurate name for the nation in question would be "Western Bulgaria." The current name is obviously a platform for irredentist claims with no actual historical backing. I know if Montana were one day renamed "Southern Canada," and Alaska to "Western Canada," I, living here in Canada, would be fully expecting it to be a setup to a justification to annex Canada wholesale and make it look good (except for the fact that I don't actually believe the U.S. government is that subtle or clever anymore, but still...).

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Joining the EU and NATO is not conducive to hostile annexation of a neighboring country's lands. Much less a fellow EU and NATO member.

 

[Patine]

Joining the EU and NATO is not conducive to hostile annexation of a neighboring country's lands. Much less a fellow EU and NATO member.

Well, the Eurosceptic Parties seem to the portray the EU ITSELF as hostilely annexing ALL of it's member country's lands, even if by more insidious means than military conquest. I've read a lot of their rhetoric, and while I'm not a strict partisan loyalist to any political party on the globe or a strict ideological purist to any socio-political or economic ideology, and I believe such unbending, inflexible, and compromising loyalty to party and ideology uber al, even above the actual real, empirical good of the people and nation you live in, is destroying utterly, or at least ruining and corrupting, politics and governance in almost every nation and polity in the world today, I do think most such ideologies, and a large number of such parties, each have some good points that, in and of themselves, should still be considered.

 

[HoloDoc]

Perhaps a much more ethnically and historically accurate name for the nation in question would be "Western Bulgaria." The current name is obviously a platform for irredentist claims with no actual historical backing. I know if Montana were one day renamed "Southern Canada," and Alaska to "Western Canada," I, living here in Canada, would be fully expecting it to be a setup to a justification to annex Canada wholesale and make it look good (except for the fact that I don't actually believe the U.S. government is that subtle or clever anymore, but still...).

Jesus Christ. It's the name of the historic region Macedonia exists in. Obviously, Germany needs to change its name, since that name is the name of a region that once comprised parts of other states, including entire states like Austria and Czechia. And the Belgian state of Luxembourg is in permanent danger of the irredentist dreams of the Grand Duchy to the south. And Georgia could invade the US any day now.

Does no one else notice the stupidity of this "Western Bulgaria" argument? "You can't name yourselves after one of our regions. Name yourself after this other country instead. That's far more reasonable. No, it's pronounces Hippocrates, not hypocritical. Silly Western Bulgarians."

Well, the Eurosceptic Parties seem to the portray the EU ITSELF as hostilely annexing ALL of it's member country's lands, even if by more insidious means than military conquest. I've read a lot of their rhetoric, and while I'm not a strict partisan loyalist to any political party on the globe or a strict ideological purist to any socio-political or economic ideology, and I believe such unbending, inflexible, and compromising loyalty to party and ideology uber al, even above the actual real, empirical good of the people and nation you live in, is destroying utterly, or at least ruining and corrupting, politics and governance in almost every nation and polity in the world today, I do think most such ideologies, and a large number of such parties, each have some good points that, in and of themselves, should still be considered.

Your last sentence is 119 words long. Not paragraph; sentence. It kind of undercuts your point, whatever it was, because it's next to impossible to keep up with something that long and incoherent.

 

[Patine]

Your last sentence is 119 words long. Not paragraph; sentence. It kind of undercuts your point, whatever it was, because it's next to impossible to keep up with something that long and incoherent.

Well, I guess you can cross off most of the great classics of 18th and 19th Century literature and academic writings of the English language (or most other heady tomes from that era in their official English translations), except for Scripture and any but the most high-minded, upper-class, preparatory educational children's books of your reading list if the presence of a single sentence of longer than then the norm of 21st Century English so disturbs you and makes the written text utterly unreadable.

 

[Arakhor]

A 120-word sentence is still excessive, even by the standards of Maryatt, Dickens, Doyle and Twain.