![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I've removed significant POV from a small part of the article. Turkish Armed Forces did not bomb Kurdish villages. It was an attack on PKK camps coordinated with and observed closely by the US military in the region. There is no official source proving that attacks were on villages/villagers. Any and all reliable sources (e.g Turkish and US government sources) state that the attacks were on PKK camps. -- Dcelasun ( talk) 20:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Also phrases like "With such an unsavory cast of characters" is not encyclopedic. So that is removed as well.
Finally, if you (whoever wrote that part) is claiming that the National Security Council itself sanctioned contract killers, please produce evidence. -- Dcelasun ( talk) 20:15, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Turks did indeed bomb and pillage and scorch Kurdish villages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jewnited ( talk • contribs) 22:41, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
This article is about Kurds in Turkey, isn't it? Why are you changing "Famous Kurds in Turkey" to "Famous Kurds in Turkish Kurdistan"? No room for idealogical expressions here. It is within Turkish borders, Turks decide what it is called and I don't remember a Kurdistan province within Turkish borders, deal with it. -- Kagan the Barbarian 21:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This article needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. |
I heard on NPR today that the strife in southeastern Turkey has gotten worse in recent months. There is not much information in the article about events after the invasion of Iraq. -- Beland 00:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Just noticed "unique ethnic identity has been harshly repressed" while skiming the article. I am sure there are other examples of non-neutral content.
I do not see how "Turkey's first female pilot and the adopted daughter of Atatürk, took part in the bombing raids against the Dersim Kurds" is relevant to topic either...
-- Cat out 05:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
The lead seems to be irrelevant to the rest of the article. The lead basicaly explains how much kurds are oppressed (which is a contraversial issue) and the remainder explains rebellions. -- Cat out 16:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
In the section on the post 1970 history, the sentences "PKK's chairman, Abdullah Öcalan, was proud of being from humble origins." implicitly suggests Öcalan's origins were humble. This also does not seem to be neutral.[[[User:Tjswaine78|Tjswaine78]] ( talk) 13:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I wonder why the topics related with Turkey are tried to be disputed all the time. Somebody is trying to make their own propaganda by exaggerating figures and facts or doing controversial statements without any reliable references.
You know, I dont want to get into this discussion but, I feel that some of the posts here are not cool.. I would also like to reply to something that Ozgur said about Turks, Turkics, Turkish etc.. You know (I hope that I am not going to be called a nationalist for pointing out something so obvious) there is a big difference between Turk as an ethnicity, and Turkish as how you define yourself. You can call this assimilation or whatever you like.. You can say that it was because Turkish butchers killed everyone, but the fact of the matter is that what is important is how people define themselves.. Kinda like the USA for example.. There are 50 million people of german descent in the US, but they all define themselves as americans.. Please let's get over this archaic definitions of categorizing people.. A Turk, as of today, is someone who calls him as such, doesn't matter if he is black or Chinese or whatever.. I have met quite a few Russians who have become Turkish citizens and call themselves Turks! Similar to France and et al.. There are many immigrants who have become French citizens and call themselves French, so therefore they are French.. Baristarim 05:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
As for Laz, Cerkez, a similar argument can be found in France and Italy.. In france, until last century many people didn't speak French, they spoke Norman, Provençal, Oil etc. Now they all speak French and define themselves as French.. And a similar argument is also true with the French as well: Franks that gave their name to France were a germanic tribe that invaded those lands - like the Turks with Anatolia et al.. There are very few germans left in France right now, but these people still call themselves as French because they choose to.. Everyone knows that there are very few ethnic central asian turks in Turkey right now, maybe 5 percent. But what is important is with whom people want to associate themselves - people's origins are completely irrelevant: Ozgur, I remember you telling me once that you were British and etc. Well, in the light of what you have been saying I can also say that you are not English coz you are not German (Eng-land - Angle-land - Anglo-Saxon - a German tribe), you see? Baristarim 05:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
You can define yourself as Kurdish, I have utter respect for that.. But pls don't say things like 40 million out of a population of 65 million is Kurdish, then u r also offending those people: they have a right to define themselves in anyway they want.. Nobody can tell them: u r not Turkish coz u r ethnically Kurdish, that also wouldn't be fair even if there were 40 million ethnically Kurds.. Be my guest to talk about how this happened, assimilation, massacres etc. But please note that being Turkish today doesn't imply at all any neccessity to be an ethnic Turk - a black person cannot become Turkish if he wishes? a black cannot become French if he wishes? I have met blacks who call themselves Turks.. They have no right to say so? To imply the opposite is just fascism, pls realise this.. Turkish of today is a mix of all the ethnicities that has lived in anatolia for the last 5000 years, even though ethnic central asian turks only came one thousand years ago, similar to French of today, American of today etc.. If someone chooses to define themselves as such, they therefore are.. If someone says they are Kurdish, they are, even if they are originally Chinese.. Baristarim 05:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I am also extremely disappointed because of some really lame ad hominim and degrading attacks that took place above.. I thought some users here were better than this.. Baristarim 05:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC))
I was thinking that maybe the title should be change from Kurds in Turkey to Kurdish people in Turkey per Kurdish people article.. I don't know if there was a discussion that has taken place before or a particular opposition, so I thought I would ask for people's comments before moving it... Baristarim 21:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
You know, I don't want to get ahead of myself here, but I cannot help to notice that the whole article is about wars, wars, wars and some more wars.. That we know.. We ended up with the fact that the subject matter has absolutely no relation to the title, I think in its current state we can change the title to Turkish/Kurdish wars or History of Kurdish seperatism, since not much has been talked about the Kurds as people..
I definitely don't want to get into a debate about who did what and if Turks killed Kurds or Kurds killed Turks, however, I would like to go one step further and analyze this negativity in another angle, even though it might irk a few people, if some people are going to keep this article 100 percent negativity: I find no mention of honor killings for example, where r they?? Honor killings in Turkey happen almost exclusively among the Kurdish population, I think if we are going to ride on this wave of negativity, let's close the circle.. I am a really democratic person, I have no problem with negative but true stuff being mentioned, however it pisses me off when people don't act the same way for themselves.. 150, and almost exclusively Kurdish, girls have been forced to commit suicide by their families in the small city of Batman in a year alone just because they brought shame on family honor, and when some girls tried to demonstrate against this, guess how many people showed up? NINE (9).. I think that deserves to be mentioned too, no? But no. When there is something negative about Kurds, it is Turks' fault, when there is something good about the Kurds, however, it is Kurds' doing... When there is a famous writer who is Kurdish, wa say hooray, but when a peasant girl gets murdered by her family, we overlook the fact that she is also Kurdish.. Why do these girls kill themselves?? It is the barbaric Turks' fault of course for not building enough schools! Well, I have yet to see a statement or a grass-roots campaign by any Kurdish party, DTP, PKK or whatever, to solve this problem - it is only the Turkish state trying to find a solution to this.. How about the Aga and asiret system?? I don't see any Kurdish parties tackling these issues.. The real problem lies there, and all Kurdish intellectuals know this, am I wrong? You know, come to think of it, I will add sections about the feodal aga and asiret system, as well as the honor killings in the article under a section like lifestyle of Kurds in Turkey.. Leyla Zana is much less important than hundreds of innocent teenage peasant girls being murdered.. I hope that we can agree on that..
So, to stop this article from becoming a 100proof Absolut Negativity, I call on all contributors to this article to improve it by mentioning something more than wars and conflicts, that's the only way we can actually get somewhere.. No mention of Turkish artists of Kurdish origin, Newroz or anything to do with culture, only culture here is the culture of war.. good job.. Do we actually deserve a better future? Baristarim 01:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you, Özgür, Barış, and E104421, lets do these. deniz 05:36, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I had to remove "merge" proposition: there is no discussion anywhere about a merger of articles... Please open a discussion first with arguments, and then propose a merger. thanks :) Towsonu2003 06:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I removed the following text from this section:
The text is removed because it gave an unbalanced picture of the reasons for depopulation. Poverty and the PKK share responsibility with the Turkish state. The text I placed in the article is copied from the Kurdish people#Kurds in Turkey article, and has an academic journal as source. Anthon.Eff 18:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
This source apparently has begun some mischief over population numbers:
On Page 19, footnote 53, MacQuarrie writes: "13.8 million Kurds in Turkey by 1990, or 25% of the population, 19 million in 2000 (29%) and an expected 32.8 million by 2020, or 38% of Turkey’s population. (Population Reference Bureau, 2002, World Population Data Sheet, Washington, DC)." Unfortunately, he's an unusually sloppy thesis writer, since the cited source Population Reference Bureau, 2002, World Population Data Sheet, Washington, DC contains no mention of Kurdish population.
It's very likely that the sloppy Mr. MacQuarrie is ultimately responsible for all of the confusion Wikipedia displays regarding the number of Kurds in Turkey. The CIA Factbook numbers therefore should be accepted as the best available estimate. Anthon.Eff 17:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
In the section titled "Turkish-Kurdish uprising, 1970s-current" the first paragraph reads "After Özal's suddent death, the Turkish military adopted a dirty war approach which consisted of death squads that killed community leaders and human rights activists and massive evacuation of thousands of villages" The references for this statement are listed as:
http://rastibini.blogspot.com/2007/10/turkish-army-commits-massacre-in.html
http://www.kurdmedia.com/article.aspx?id=14131
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article2631279.ece
All three are references regarding events in Iraq and Beytussebap in 2007. These articles say nothing about events within Turkey in 1993 when Özal died. Please provide proper references for this claim. If none can be provided, please change this sentence to something that can be supported. Tjswaine78 ( talk) 15:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I would like to thank you all for the ineterst you are showing in Kurdish issues. However please do not copy and paste stuff from other articles into this one. I have removed lots of stuff that could be found elsewhere like in Kurds, Kurdish literature articles. Just a link to those articles at the end would suffice. And please if you add something, please make sure that it has reliable source. Thanks. Heja Helweda 21:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Your arguments imply that this page is unnecessary, I disagree.
deniz
22:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Khoi, please at least use the edit summaries.. Read what I also said in the talk page of Turkish language. CIA Factbook is not a serious source - no academic source would use a perfectly rounded 80-20 number. It exists only as a "source of last resort" - when there are no other reliable sources. That survey is ten times better. The funny thing is, in the commentaries in the Turkish newspaper websites, readers were saying that the percentages were inflated - how ironic that some people here think that they were trying to downplay it. Funny, innit? In fact, that survey gives slightly lower numbers of native Turkish speakers than the Eurostat survey.. In fact, I find it orientalist to say the least that a nation-wide survey involving 50,000 people done my major Turkish universities and NGOs this month is less reliable than rounded CIA Factbook numbers from a decade ago. Why? Just because they are Turkish we are assuming that they are skewing the results or something? Funny, Eurostat survey gives higher numbers of Turkish speakers than that survey, the world must be turning the other way around I suppose.. So, what seems to be the problem, really? Baristarim 04:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
That survey is more reliable than anything out there - it was the first time that such a major nation-wide and precise survey was carried out in Turkey, and it was not just about the Kurds or ethnicity either. It also includes data on other ethnicities and languages spoken in Turkey, its numbers are precise unlike the rounded werid CIA figure of 80-20, its methodology is clearly set out unlike any of the other "sources" which are nothing more than wild guesses. Plus see the comments above. Let it be known for future reference: those numbers are the most correct numbers out there, whether people like it or not. When the survey results came out, in the commentaries by readers in Turkish newspaper sites some readers were saying that the numbers were inflated, here it is just the opposite. really funny, innit? The latest version's lead is precise, NPOV and sourced + it looks more encylopedic since it attributes the sources correctly. Baristarim 03:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I have a German source based on provincial statistics that puts it at 20 million. Note Turkey like many government of the middle east and caucus is an ethnic based state (and I mean the government and I have many close Turkish friends). So that is why a NPOV like CIA factbook or Encyclopedia Britannica should have precedence although sometimes these even mistake by reporting official government numbers. Can you give at least a provincial break down first of the population? Here is my source: Dieter-Scheuer, Amke: Möglichkeiten der Konfliktlösung in der Türkischen Republik. ,Deutsches Orient-Institut Hamburg, 1999. ISBN 3-89173-051-9. ISSN 0177-4158 prepared by the German government parliment members. Also my Turkish is not good enough to fully understand your source but from the German government source, the population of Kurdish inhabited provinces in 1990 was 12 million. (Not counting Istanbul, Ankara and etc.) -- alidoostzadeh 03:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
The survey says:
So, among adults, 82 percent of the population are Turks, 13 Kurdish+Zaza, the rest Caucasian etc (obviously this was about self-identification, not genetic testing) And no, half the Turkey is not Kurdish or Albanian :)))
As for assimilation:
+ 1.38 percent has Arabic as first language even though 0.7 percent self-identifies as Arab, and there are more Arabs than Zaza.
There is more info in the survey, but those ones were interesting. Those percentages are included in the general self-identification survey. It also includes info on Lausanne minorities.
As far as the language goes, 85 percent have Turkish as a first language, 12 Kurdish, 1 Zaza, 1.38 Arab, Turkic and Balkan languages 0.25 percent each, Laz 0.12 percent, Armenian and Caucasian languages 0.07 percent each, Greek 0.06 percent.
Funny thing is, the latest Eurostat survey gives the number of native Turkish speakers in Turkey at 93 percent [ [5]]. Funny, eh? I guess it is the Europeans who are trying to screw the Kurds more than the Turks. (?!) So much for all those lame amalgames about "mountain Turks", I am sorry to say. Please... Turkey is not some sort of rogue state where the government sticks its hand in everything, contrary to what it is made out to be in some countries. That survey is more reliable and precise than anything out there, failure to see it is un-Wikipedian if our intent is to have the best encyclopedia possible. Also see the other user's comments above about the reliability of CIA figures.. Baristarim 03:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
We should remove culture section since it does not belong to this article and it has its own articles. This artic is supposed to be about Kurds in turkey. Asoyrun 05:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Please improve them, especially if you are Turkish Kurdish. There are no articles about the culture of Turkish Kurds. deniz T C 07:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
What is the picture about? deniz T C 10:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Asoyrun, I am having hard time assuming good faith after having checked your recent additions to the main page. deniz T C 10:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Tweaked the intro a bit, but I also wanted to leave a note here for future reference for the article. There needs to be a clear distinction between "Kurds" and "Kurdish political movements" (ie political movements that put the "Kurdish identity" to the forefront of their activities). This is very important since this confusion leads many outsiders to wrongly consider that there is some sort of Nazi-like hunts going on. There have been two presidents of full/partial Kurdish descent. What is at cause are political movements who put the modern national identity at cause, not ethnic origins themselves. This is also important since Kurds are not forced to wear yellow stars on their clothing or anything.
Propagation of Kurdish-based politics is what is perceived as a threat to national unity, since, obviously, all of them lead up to, no matter what road is taken, an ideal for a full/partial secession of some part of Turkey's territory to form a different political structure. Yes yes, there can always be the criticism "but is it right to be assimilating different ethnicities into a single national identity?" - but that is a much different and complex question that concerns much deeper philosophical and social reflexions.. At the end of the day, what is important in Turkey is not the "origins", but "political choices". The article still needs some proofreading at certain instances to make this distinction more clear.
The second paragraph in the intro still needs to be worked on, there are still some weasel words and "defensive" statements, but they need a closer look. Baristarim 05:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Kurdish people in Turkey are not just some descendants of some Iranian peoples who have rebelled several times for mostly religious reasons. I believe Kurdish people have lived after 1937 as well, which is 70 years of the total of 84 years of republic. Apparently nobody is against a tiny bit inclusion of culture anymore, maybe I should thank you all for that. I really want to get comments of some Turkish Kurds. deniz T C 05:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
The article introduce's itself by;
You cant consider Turk orginated and Kurd originated people as cleary apart.Because there doesnt exist a strong line betweeen Kurdish ethnicity and Turkish ethnicity in Turkey.There exists at least 5 million marriages between Kurds and Turks. But if you are that much curious about the contribution of Kurdish ethnicity on genetic origins of Turkish community, inspect ethnic statistics for finding Kurdish tribes in Ottoman archives established for tax collecting from the local citizens. You will see that most of tribes calling them as Kurdish now are Turkmen tribes assimilated by Kurdish local landlords in Ottoman Empire.Thanks. Butoprak —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.226.232.10 ( talk) 00:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
What kind of a wikipedia page is that! Is it some kind of brain washing activity for showing the situation in Turkey like Kurdish originated people are under heavy pressure? Calling editors to write the facts. Write the financial background and support given to Kurdish seperatists, write that every body is equally defined in the constitution of Turkey. Write that (O. Baydemir)the president of Diyarbakır municipality supports seperatists. Write that there doesnt exist an ethnic definition about the people living in Turkey. Write that flags of seperatist leaders are displayed at some Newroz celebrations to turn celebrations into seperatism and racism. I've lost the respect for this page. Just a propaganda page.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.226.232.10 ( talk) 01:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
So you accept that Kurds can genetically connect them to pre-Indo-Iranian inhabitants of Zagros. But the example of Turks is not a good analogue. The so called assimilated Turks did not preserve their original identity, while lets say Egyptians or Azerbayjanis did. Azerbaijanis although lost their Iranic language but preserved their Azeri identity, therefore we easily can connect them to the early inhabitants of Atropatene. The term Kurds and its variants at least partly has been always used to Kurdistan or its inhabitants even under Assyrians. It was used Under Greeks, Romans, Sassanid and Islamic era. In addition to identity Kurds have preserved therancient tribal culture. similar to tribes mentioned in remote times. A poet educated in Safavid court identifying Kurds with Bizhan and Gudarz also is not good example. Kurds even once idebntified themselves as decendants of islamic Arab generals such as Khalid ibn Walid and others. even tody all claim descent from Abraham or Noah. Should we say Kurds have a pure Semitic identity? Brusk u Trishka 09:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Yep, actually there are 70 million Kurds in Turkey but the authorities are keeping it as a secret :) The percentage of Kurds in Turkey is given as something like %12-15. Why are you so obsessed with numbers? There shouldn't be a difference between "millions" and "hundreds". In both cases, people must be free to use their constitutional rights. Also, how many of these Kurdish citizens stay as "Kurds" and not getting integrated into the Turkish identity? Let us leave the last one to another discussion :) Deliogul 12:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
This section is missing several citations as to the nature of the PKK. It seems also to enjoy a lack of neutrality. Specifically:
PKK's chairman, Abdullah Öcalan, was proud of being from humble origins.
This implicitly posits that his origins were "humble". This is not a matter of fact but of opinion.
Due to these tactics that target civilians 37,000 have died in the still ongoing conflict
This sentence is phrased an placed in a way that suggests that Turkish millitary's tactics target civilians to be killed. If the anticedant is the PKK tactics the group of sentences should be rewritten. Either way this needs a citation.
... the Turkish military adopted a dirty war approach which consisted of death squads that ...
Without proper documentation describing Turkish military units that as "death squads" seems non-neutral. Even should the documentation show that they killed people as described, this may not warrant the term.
Someone more familiar with the literature than myself should provide the citations and rephase this section. I will check back on this in a couple of weeks. [[[User:Tjswaine78|Tjswaine78]] ( talk) 14:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering how come the history of a nation could only start at 1920's ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.105.65.240 ( talk) 14:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
There was a reference to http://pollmark.com.tr/Haberler.aspx?ID=76, a text interpreting a poll. I corrected the citation and made a reference to the poll:
Please note, that the citation in the referenced text was also not completely correct.
The poll has a lot of interesting material, which could be cited here. The interpretations from
might give ideas. But beware: there are some issues:
-- Tomdo08 ( talk) 21:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
The following report has some interesting material about the return of the displaced Kurds:
{{
cite journal}}
: Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)-- Tomdo08 ( talk) 23:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
I do not see why there should be two different articles for. Kurds of Central Anatolia are in Turkey anyway. If there was a lot of academic work on Kurds of Central Anatolia then I would not object to two different articles but there clearly is not. Turco85 ( Talk) 11:56, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Template {{Kurdish independence movement}} is not appropriate for this article. It's impossible to prove that most people of this group are interested in their independent movement. Takabeg ( talk) 17:19, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
the population of kurds in turkey is almost 8,6 million. that is the result of a widespread poll made by the independent agency KONSENSUS. this number is also relfected by the elections where the kurdish party bdp got 2,5 million votes.
http://haber.mynet.com/turkiyede-nufusun-kaci-turk-kaci-kurt-607596-guncel/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.192.210.168 ( talk) 12:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Kurds008.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Kurds008.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 17:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
This article is deeply biased against Turks and Turkey... We can see it, for example, in the section named "Racism and intolerance"... The name itself is deeply biased!! For anyone who is a little informed about Turkey or had been living there, it´s absolutely NONSENSE to say that there is any kind of racism against Kurds living in Turkey, and of course nothing about "Apartheid".... There are many politicians and deputies in the parliament from big political parties, like the AKP or the CHP, who openly consider themshelves as "Kurds", and this does not constitute any problem in Turkey. The Agriculture minister itself, Mehdi Eker, is a Kurd, and many times has openly said it (see: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/default.aspx?pageid=438&n=minister-calls-bdp-to-8216discuss-everything8217-autonomy-could-be-discussed-in-parliament-2011-07-21). The previous vice president of ruling party AKP was a Kurd, too; the president of main opposition party CHP, Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, has also Kurdish origins... This is very normal in Turkey, Turks and Kurds do not live in "ghettos" or something like that... It´s very very common in Turkey to find Turks and Kurds mixed in families or married (note that in fact, in Turkey the term "Turk" refers in the Constitution to a "citizen of the Turkish Republic", no matter its ethnic origin, religion or beliefs). The second president of the Republic of Turkey after Atatürk was itself a Kurd... So, there is no "Apartheid" or racism or discrimination against Kurds in Turkey, this is completely absurd. The problem is with violence, the same as in Spain a big majority of Basques live together with other Spaniards and do not follow ETA ideas, but there is a minority supporting that terrorist group who frecuently talk about "discrimination" from the Spanish State about Basque people to justify their violence and separatist ideas. In fact, only a little minority of Kurds (6%) want autonomy or independence from Turkey, really few compared with the Basques (36%) or Catalonians (51%) in Spain, as recent polls show: http://www.todayszaman.com/news-285061-poll-kurds-want-to-live-together-peacefully-with-turks-in-turkey.html
Other related articles: http://www.lavanguardia.com/20110722/54189569400/el-55-de-los-vascos-no-desea-la-independencia.html http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20120627/54317853266/51-1-catalanes-votaria-si-independencia-referendum.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.97.144.6 ( talk) 13:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
ماڵەوە 24.133.24.230 ( talk) 19:02, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I've removed significant POV from a small part of the article. Turkish Armed Forces did not bomb Kurdish villages. It was an attack on PKK camps coordinated with and observed closely by the US military in the region. There is no official source proving that attacks were on villages/villagers. Any and all reliable sources (e.g Turkish and US government sources) state that the attacks were on PKK camps. -- Dcelasun ( talk) 20:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Also phrases like "With such an unsavory cast of characters" is not encyclopedic. So that is removed as well.
Finally, if you (whoever wrote that part) is claiming that the National Security Council itself sanctioned contract killers, please produce evidence. -- Dcelasun ( talk) 20:15, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Turks did indeed bomb and pillage and scorch Kurdish villages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jewnited ( talk • contribs) 22:41, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
This article is about Kurds in Turkey, isn't it? Why are you changing "Famous Kurds in Turkey" to "Famous Kurds in Turkish Kurdistan"? No room for idealogical expressions here. It is within Turkish borders, Turks decide what it is called and I don't remember a Kurdistan province within Turkish borders, deal with it. -- Kagan the Barbarian 21:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This article needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. |
I heard on NPR today that the strife in southeastern Turkey has gotten worse in recent months. There is not much information in the article about events after the invasion of Iraq. -- Beland 00:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Just noticed "unique ethnic identity has been harshly repressed" while skiming the article. I am sure there are other examples of non-neutral content.
I do not see how "Turkey's first female pilot and the adopted daughter of Atatürk, took part in the bombing raids against the Dersim Kurds" is relevant to topic either...
-- Cat out 05:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
The lead seems to be irrelevant to the rest of the article. The lead basicaly explains how much kurds are oppressed (which is a contraversial issue) and the remainder explains rebellions. -- Cat out 16:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
In the section on the post 1970 history, the sentences "PKK's chairman, Abdullah Öcalan, was proud of being from humble origins." implicitly suggests Öcalan's origins were humble. This also does not seem to be neutral.[[[User:Tjswaine78|Tjswaine78]] ( talk) 13:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I wonder why the topics related with Turkey are tried to be disputed all the time. Somebody is trying to make their own propaganda by exaggerating figures and facts or doing controversial statements without any reliable references.
You know, I dont want to get into this discussion but, I feel that some of the posts here are not cool.. I would also like to reply to something that Ozgur said about Turks, Turkics, Turkish etc.. You know (I hope that I am not going to be called a nationalist for pointing out something so obvious) there is a big difference between Turk as an ethnicity, and Turkish as how you define yourself. You can call this assimilation or whatever you like.. You can say that it was because Turkish butchers killed everyone, but the fact of the matter is that what is important is how people define themselves.. Kinda like the USA for example.. There are 50 million people of german descent in the US, but they all define themselves as americans.. Please let's get over this archaic definitions of categorizing people.. A Turk, as of today, is someone who calls him as such, doesn't matter if he is black or Chinese or whatever.. I have met quite a few Russians who have become Turkish citizens and call themselves Turks! Similar to France and et al.. There are many immigrants who have become French citizens and call themselves French, so therefore they are French.. Baristarim 05:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
As for Laz, Cerkez, a similar argument can be found in France and Italy.. In france, until last century many people didn't speak French, they spoke Norman, Provençal, Oil etc. Now they all speak French and define themselves as French.. And a similar argument is also true with the French as well: Franks that gave their name to France were a germanic tribe that invaded those lands - like the Turks with Anatolia et al.. There are very few germans left in France right now, but these people still call themselves as French because they choose to.. Everyone knows that there are very few ethnic central asian turks in Turkey right now, maybe 5 percent. But what is important is with whom people want to associate themselves - people's origins are completely irrelevant: Ozgur, I remember you telling me once that you were British and etc. Well, in the light of what you have been saying I can also say that you are not English coz you are not German (Eng-land - Angle-land - Anglo-Saxon - a German tribe), you see? Baristarim 05:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
You can define yourself as Kurdish, I have utter respect for that.. But pls don't say things like 40 million out of a population of 65 million is Kurdish, then u r also offending those people: they have a right to define themselves in anyway they want.. Nobody can tell them: u r not Turkish coz u r ethnically Kurdish, that also wouldn't be fair even if there were 40 million ethnically Kurds.. Be my guest to talk about how this happened, assimilation, massacres etc. But please note that being Turkish today doesn't imply at all any neccessity to be an ethnic Turk - a black person cannot become Turkish if he wishes? a black cannot become French if he wishes? I have met blacks who call themselves Turks.. They have no right to say so? To imply the opposite is just fascism, pls realise this.. Turkish of today is a mix of all the ethnicities that has lived in anatolia for the last 5000 years, even though ethnic central asian turks only came one thousand years ago, similar to French of today, American of today etc.. If someone chooses to define themselves as such, they therefore are.. If someone says they are Kurdish, they are, even if they are originally Chinese.. Baristarim 05:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I am also extremely disappointed because of some really lame ad hominim and degrading attacks that took place above.. I thought some users here were better than this.. Baristarim 05:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC))
I was thinking that maybe the title should be change from Kurds in Turkey to Kurdish people in Turkey per Kurdish people article.. I don't know if there was a discussion that has taken place before or a particular opposition, so I thought I would ask for people's comments before moving it... Baristarim 21:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
You know, I don't want to get ahead of myself here, but I cannot help to notice that the whole article is about wars, wars, wars and some more wars.. That we know.. We ended up with the fact that the subject matter has absolutely no relation to the title, I think in its current state we can change the title to Turkish/Kurdish wars or History of Kurdish seperatism, since not much has been talked about the Kurds as people..
I definitely don't want to get into a debate about who did what and if Turks killed Kurds or Kurds killed Turks, however, I would like to go one step further and analyze this negativity in another angle, even though it might irk a few people, if some people are going to keep this article 100 percent negativity: I find no mention of honor killings for example, where r they?? Honor killings in Turkey happen almost exclusively among the Kurdish population, I think if we are going to ride on this wave of negativity, let's close the circle.. I am a really democratic person, I have no problem with negative but true stuff being mentioned, however it pisses me off when people don't act the same way for themselves.. 150, and almost exclusively Kurdish, girls have been forced to commit suicide by their families in the small city of Batman in a year alone just because they brought shame on family honor, and when some girls tried to demonstrate against this, guess how many people showed up? NINE (9).. I think that deserves to be mentioned too, no? But no. When there is something negative about Kurds, it is Turks' fault, when there is something good about the Kurds, however, it is Kurds' doing... When there is a famous writer who is Kurdish, wa say hooray, but when a peasant girl gets murdered by her family, we overlook the fact that she is also Kurdish.. Why do these girls kill themselves?? It is the barbaric Turks' fault of course for not building enough schools! Well, I have yet to see a statement or a grass-roots campaign by any Kurdish party, DTP, PKK or whatever, to solve this problem - it is only the Turkish state trying to find a solution to this.. How about the Aga and asiret system?? I don't see any Kurdish parties tackling these issues.. The real problem lies there, and all Kurdish intellectuals know this, am I wrong? You know, come to think of it, I will add sections about the feodal aga and asiret system, as well as the honor killings in the article under a section like lifestyle of Kurds in Turkey.. Leyla Zana is much less important than hundreds of innocent teenage peasant girls being murdered.. I hope that we can agree on that..
So, to stop this article from becoming a 100proof Absolut Negativity, I call on all contributors to this article to improve it by mentioning something more than wars and conflicts, that's the only way we can actually get somewhere.. No mention of Turkish artists of Kurdish origin, Newroz or anything to do with culture, only culture here is the culture of war.. good job.. Do we actually deserve a better future? Baristarim 01:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you, Özgür, Barış, and E104421, lets do these. deniz 05:36, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I had to remove "merge" proposition: there is no discussion anywhere about a merger of articles... Please open a discussion first with arguments, and then propose a merger. thanks :) Towsonu2003 06:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I removed the following text from this section:
The text is removed because it gave an unbalanced picture of the reasons for depopulation. Poverty and the PKK share responsibility with the Turkish state. The text I placed in the article is copied from the Kurdish people#Kurds in Turkey article, and has an academic journal as source. Anthon.Eff 18:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
This source apparently has begun some mischief over population numbers:
On Page 19, footnote 53, MacQuarrie writes: "13.8 million Kurds in Turkey by 1990, or 25% of the population, 19 million in 2000 (29%) and an expected 32.8 million by 2020, or 38% of Turkey’s population. (Population Reference Bureau, 2002, World Population Data Sheet, Washington, DC)." Unfortunately, he's an unusually sloppy thesis writer, since the cited source Population Reference Bureau, 2002, World Population Data Sheet, Washington, DC contains no mention of Kurdish population.
It's very likely that the sloppy Mr. MacQuarrie is ultimately responsible for all of the confusion Wikipedia displays regarding the number of Kurds in Turkey. The CIA Factbook numbers therefore should be accepted as the best available estimate. Anthon.Eff 17:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
In the section titled "Turkish-Kurdish uprising, 1970s-current" the first paragraph reads "After Özal's suddent death, the Turkish military adopted a dirty war approach which consisted of death squads that killed community leaders and human rights activists and massive evacuation of thousands of villages" The references for this statement are listed as:
http://rastibini.blogspot.com/2007/10/turkish-army-commits-massacre-in.html
http://www.kurdmedia.com/article.aspx?id=14131
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article2631279.ece
All three are references regarding events in Iraq and Beytussebap in 2007. These articles say nothing about events within Turkey in 1993 when Özal died. Please provide proper references for this claim. If none can be provided, please change this sentence to something that can be supported. Tjswaine78 ( talk) 15:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I would like to thank you all for the ineterst you are showing in Kurdish issues. However please do not copy and paste stuff from other articles into this one. I have removed lots of stuff that could be found elsewhere like in Kurds, Kurdish literature articles. Just a link to those articles at the end would suffice. And please if you add something, please make sure that it has reliable source. Thanks. Heja Helweda 21:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Your arguments imply that this page is unnecessary, I disagree.
deniz
22:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Khoi, please at least use the edit summaries.. Read what I also said in the talk page of Turkish language. CIA Factbook is not a serious source - no academic source would use a perfectly rounded 80-20 number. It exists only as a "source of last resort" - when there are no other reliable sources. That survey is ten times better. The funny thing is, in the commentaries in the Turkish newspaper websites, readers were saying that the percentages were inflated - how ironic that some people here think that they were trying to downplay it. Funny, innit? In fact, that survey gives slightly lower numbers of native Turkish speakers than the Eurostat survey.. In fact, I find it orientalist to say the least that a nation-wide survey involving 50,000 people done my major Turkish universities and NGOs this month is less reliable than rounded CIA Factbook numbers from a decade ago. Why? Just because they are Turkish we are assuming that they are skewing the results or something? Funny, Eurostat survey gives higher numbers of Turkish speakers than that survey, the world must be turning the other way around I suppose.. So, what seems to be the problem, really? Baristarim 04:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
That survey is more reliable than anything out there - it was the first time that such a major nation-wide and precise survey was carried out in Turkey, and it was not just about the Kurds or ethnicity either. It also includes data on other ethnicities and languages spoken in Turkey, its numbers are precise unlike the rounded werid CIA figure of 80-20, its methodology is clearly set out unlike any of the other "sources" which are nothing more than wild guesses. Plus see the comments above. Let it be known for future reference: those numbers are the most correct numbers out there, whether people like it or not. When the survey results came out, in the commentaries by readers in Turkish newspaper sites some readers were saying that the numbers were inflated, here it is just the opposite. really funny, innit? The latest version's lead is precise, NPOV and sourced + it looks more encylopedic since it attributes the sources correctly. Baristarim 03:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I have a German source based on provincial statistics that puts it at 20 million. Note Turkey like many government of the middle east and caucus is an ethnic based state (and I mean the government and I have many close Turkish friends). So that is why a NPOV like CIA factbook or Encyclopedia Britannica should have precedence although sometimes these even mistake by reporting official government numbers. Can you give at least a provincial break down first of the population? Here is my source: Dieter-Scheuer, Amke: Möglichkeiten der Konfliktlösung in der Türkischen Republik. ,Deutsches Orient-Institut Hamburg, 1999. ISBN 3-89173-051-9. ISSN 0177-4158 prepared by the German government parliment members. Also my Turkish is not good enough to fully understand your source but from the German government source, the population of Kurdish inhabited provinces in 1990 was 12 million. (Not counting Istanbul, Ankara and etc.) -- alidoostzadeh 03:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
The survey says:
So, among adults, 82 percent of the population are Turks, 13 Kurdish+Zaza, the rest Caucasian etc (obviously this was about self-identification, not genetic testing) And no, half the Turkey is not Kurdish or Albanian :)))
As for assimilation:
+ 1.38 percent has Arabic as first language even though 0.7 percent self-identifies as Arab, and there are more Arabs than Zaza.
There is more info in the survey, but those ones were interesting. Those percentages are included in the general self-identification survey. It also includes info on Lausanne minorities.
As far as the language goes, 85 percent have Turkish as a first language, 12 Kurdish, 1 Zaza, 1.38 Arab, Turkic and Balkan languages 0.25 percent each, Laz 0.12 percent, Armenian and Caucasian languages 0.07 percent each, Greek 0.06 percent.
Funny thing is, the latest Eurostat survey gives the number of native Turkish speakers in Turkey at 93 percent [ [5]]. Funny, eh? I guess it is the Europeans who are trying to screw the Kurds more than the Turks. (?!) So much for all those lame amalgames about "mountain Turks", I am sorry to say. Please... Turkey is not some sort of rogue state where the government sticks its hand in everything, contrary to what it is made out to be in some countries. That survey is more reliable and precise than anything out there, failure to see it is un-Wikipedian if our intent is to have the best encyclopedia possible. Also see the other user's comments above about the reliability of CIA figures.. Baristarim 03:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
We should remove culture section since it does not belong to this article and it has its own articles. This artic is supposed to be about Kurds in turkey. Asoyrun 05:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Please improve them, especially if you are Turkish Kurdish. There are no articles about the culture of Turkish Kurds. deniz T C 07:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
What is the picture about? deniz T C 10:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Asoyrun, I am having hard time assuming good faith after having checked your recent additions to the main page. deniz T C 10:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Tweaked the intro a bit, but I also wanted to leave a note here for future reference for the article. There needs to be a clear distinction between "Kurds" and "Kurdish political movements" (ie political movements that put the "Kurdish identity" to the forefront of their activities). This is very important since this confusion leads many outsiders to wrongly consider that there is some sort of Nazi-like hunts going on. There have been two presidents of full/partial Kurdish descent. What is at cause are political movements who put the modern national identity at cause, not ethnic origins themselves. This is also important since Kurds are not forced to wear yellow stars on their clothing or anything.
Propagation of Kurdish-based politics is what is perceived as a threat to national unity, since, obviously, all of them lead up to, no matter what road is taken, an ideal for a full/partial secession of some part of Turkey's territory to form a different political structure. Yes yes, there can always be the criticism "but is it right to be assimilating different ethnicities into a single national identity?" - but that is a much different and complex question that concerns much deeper philosophical and social reflexions.. At the end of the day, what is important in Turkey is not the "origins", but "political choices". The article still needs some proofreading at certain instances to make this distinction more clear.
The second paragraph in the intro still needs to be worked on, there are still some weasel words and "defensive" statements, but they need a closer look. Baristarim 05:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Kurdish people in Turkey are not just some descendants of some Iranian peoples who have rebelled several times for mostly religious reasons. I believe Kurdish people have lived after 1937 as well, which is 70 years of the total of 84 years of republic. Apparently nobody is against a tiny bit inclusion of culture anymore, maybe I should thank you all for that. I really want to get comments of some Turkish Kurds. deniz T C 05:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
The article introduce's itself by;
You cant consider Turk orginated and Kurd originated people as cleary apart.Because there doesnt exist a strong line betweeen Kurdish ethnicity and Turkish ethnicity in Turkey.There exists at least 5 million marriages between Kurds and Turks. But if you are that much curious about the contribution of Kurdish ethnicity on genetic origins of Turkish community, inspect ethnic statistics for finding Kurdish tribes in Ottoman archives established for tax collecting from the local citizens. You will see that most of tribes calling them as Kurdish now are Turkmen tribes assimilated by Kurdish local landlords in Ottoman Empire.Thanks. Butoprak —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.226.232.10 ( talk) 00:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
What kind of a wikipedia page is that! Is it some kind of brain washing activity for showing the situation in Turkey like Kurdish originated people are under heavy pressure? Calling editors to write the facts. Write the financial background and support given to Kurdish seperatists, write that every body is equally defined in the constitution of Turkey. Write that (O. Baydemir)the president of Diyarbakır municipality supports seperatists. Write that there doesnt exist an ethnic definition about the people living in Turkey. Write that flags of seperatist leaders are displayed at some Newroz celebrations to turn celebrations into seperatism and racism. I've lost the respect for this page. Just a propaganda page.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.226.232.10 ( talk) 01:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
So you accept that Kurds can genetically connect them to pre-Indo-Iranian inhabitants of Zagros. But the example of Turks is not a good analogue. The so called assimilated Turks did not preserve their original identity, while lets say Egyptians or Azerbayjanis did. Azerbaijanis although lost their Iranic language but preserved their Azeri identity, therefore we easily can connect them to the early inhabitants of Atropatene. The term Kurds and its variants at least partly has been always used to Kurdistan or its inhabitants even under Assyrians. It was used Under Greeks, Romans, Sassanid and Islamic era. In addition to identity Kurds have preserved therancient tribal culture. similar to tribes mentioned in remote times. A poet educated in Safavid court identifying Kurds with Bizhan and Gudarz also is not good example. Kurds even once idebntified themselves as decendants of islamic Arab generals such as Khalid ibn Walid and others. even tody all claim descent from Abraham or Noah. Should we say Kurds have a pure Semitic identity? Brusk u Trishka 09:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Yep, actually there are 70 million Kurds in Turkey but the authorities are keeping it as a secret :) The percentage of Kurds in Turkey is given as something like %12-15. Why are you so obsessed with numbers? There shouldn't be a difference between "millions" and "hundreds". In both cases, people must be free to use their constitutional rights. Also, how many of these Kurdish citizens stay as "Kurds" and not getting integrated into the Turkish identity? Let us leave the last one to another discussion :) Deliogul 12:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
This section is missing several citations as to the nature of the PKK. It seems also to enjoy a lack of neutrality. Specifically:
PKK's chairman, Abdullah Öcalan, was proud of being from humble origins.
This implicitly posits that his origins were "humble". This is not a matter of fact but of opinion.
Due to these tactics that target civilians 37,000 have died in the still ongoing conflict
This sentence is phrased an placed in a way that suggests that Turkish millitary's tactics target civilians to be killed. If the anticedant is the PKK tactics the group of sentences should be rewritten. Either way this needs a citation.
... the Turkish military adopted a dirty war approach which consisted of death squads that ...
Without proper documentation describing Turkish military units that as "death squads" seems non-neutral. Even should the documentation show that they killed people as described, this may not warrant the term.
Someone more familiar with the literature than myself should provide the citations and rephase this section. I will check back on this in a couple of weeks. [[[User:Tjswaine78|Tjswaine78]] ( talk) 14:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering how come the history of a nation could only start at 1920's ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.105.65.240 ( talk) 14:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
There was a reference to http://pollmark.com.tr/Haberler.aspx?ID=76, a text interpreting a poll. I corrected the citation and made a reference to the poll:
Please note, that the citation in the referenced text was also not completely correct.
The poll has a lot of interesting material, which could be cited here. The interpretations from
might give ideas. But beware: there are some issues:
-- Tomdo08 ( talk) 21:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
The following report has some interesting material about the return of the displaced Kurds:
{{
cite journal}}
: Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)-- Tomdo08 ( talk) 23:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
I do not see why there should be two different articles for. Kurds of Central Anatolia are in Turkey anyway. If there was a lot of academic work on Kurds of Central Anatolia then I would not object to two different articles but there clearly is not. Turco85 ( Talk) 11:56, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Template {{Kurdish independence movement}} is not appropriate for this article. It's impossible to prove that most people of this group are interested in their independent movement. Takabeg ( talk) 17:19, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
the population of kurds in turkey is almost 8,6 million. that is the result of a widespread poll made by the independent agency KONSENSUS. this number is also relfected by the elections where the kurdish party bdp got 2,5 million votes.
http://haber.mynet.com/turkiyede-nufusun-kaci-turk-kaci-kurt-607596-guncel/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.192.210.168 ( talk) 12:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Kurds008.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Kurds008.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 17:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
This article is deeply biased against Turks and Turkey... We can see it, for example, in the section named "Racism and intolerance"... The name itself is deeply biased!! For anyone who is a little informed about Turkey or had been living there, it´s absolutely NONSENSE to say that there is any kind of racism against Kurds living in Turkey, and of course nothing about "Apartheid".... There are many politicians and deputies in the parliament from big political parties, like the AKP or the CHP, who openly consider themshelves as "Kurds", and this does not constitute any problem in Turkey. The Agriculture minister itself, Mehdi Eker, is a Kurd, and many times has openly said it (see: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/default.aspx?pageid=438&n=minister-calls-bdp-to-8216discuss-everything8217-autonomy-could-be-discussed-in-parliament-2011-07-21). The previous vice president of ruling party AKP was a Kurd, too; the president of main opposition party CHP, Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, has also Kurdish origins... This is very normal in Turkey, Turks and Kurds do not live in "ghettos" or something like that... It´s very very common in Turkey to find Turks and Kurds mixed in families or married (note that in fact, in Turkey the term "Turk" refers in the Constitution to a "citizen of the Turkish Republic", no matter its ethnic origin, religion or beliefs). The second president of the Republic of Turkey after Atatürk was itself a Kurd... So, there is no "Apartheid" or racism or discrimination against Kurds in Turkey, this is completely absurd. The problem is with violence, the same as in Spain a big majority of Basques live together with other Spaniards and do not follow ETA ideas, but there is a minority supporting that terrorist group who frecuently talk about "discrimination" from the Spanish State about Basque people to justify their violence and separatist ideas. In fact, only a little minority of Kurds (6%) want autonomy or independence from Turkey, really few compared with the Basques (36%) or Catalonians (51%) in Spain, as recent polls show: http://www.todayszaman.com/news-285061-poll-kurds-want-to-live-together-peacefully-with-turks-in-turkey.html
Other related articles: http://www.lavanguardia.com/20110722/54189569400/el-55-de-los-vascos-no-desea-la-independencia.html http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20120627/54317853266/51-1-catalanes-votaria-si-independencia-referendum.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.97.144.6 ( talk) 13:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
ماڵەوە 24.133.24.230 ( talk) 19:02, 14 June 2022 (UTC)