European Union - General discussion

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by fanoff

albania is going to take its place in EU in 2010.Its not a big problem for some but the ones who think we should be an Eu member cant stand that a little country that will always be futrher to follow the eu standarts is joining that community sooner than us.Turkey doesnt even have a date ahead.Greeks and Cypriot greeks have the weapon not to agree the membership.but our prime minister is not that convinced by them.anyway well wait and see whats gonna happen

What? 2010?? No f'in way, make that 2020 minimum
Greece will endorse the membership of Albania and all other neighbours be 100% about that. Why wouldn't we agree the membership, Just think about the huge issues with illegal or semi illegal immigrants and how the problem will be sorted by magic for the Greek governments. Or the business prospects ( Albania are already literally depended upon Greece, so does Macedonia, I mean Yugo republic of freddie ).
As for Turkey, yeah they want them too and you're not even European. Go figure.
Need to keep quiet and stop escalating incidents in the Aegean though ( like the last time )
The Greeco-Turkish relations are heating up again because of it. We should do the same, diffuse the situation. The status-quo is the Aegean is not going to change.
But Greek Cyprus is different. They will have to be forced to agree to Turkey's membership. Unless the island is unified and they get reimbursed for the losses of their properties in North Cyprus - you can't bring the dead back - they're not going to agree.

[haku]

Originally Posted by fanoff

albania is going to take its place in EU in 2010.Its not a big problem for some but the ones who think we should be an Eu member cant stand that a little country that will always be futrher to follow the eu standarts is joining that community sooner than us.

I highly doubt that Albania will become an EU member by 2010, negociations have just started and it will be a long road for Albania to reach EU standards.

However, Albania and Turkey are not at all in the same situation. Albanian people are ethnically and culturally European, and Albania is clearly on the European continent, so there's no debate about whether the country should even join, it's only a question of *when* it will join.
Turkish people on the other hand are neither ethnically nor culturally European, and most of the country is not even on the European continent, so many European people consider that Turkey has no right to become an EU member and they will do everything they can to block the process and prevent that from happening ever. Expanding the EU to the Middle East is just going one step too far for many European people.

And i really don't see why it's so hard to understand for Turkish people, aren't you taught your own history in school? Aren't you taught that Turkic people originate from Central Asia and invaded Anatolia only 9 centuries ago, and that's for the Asian part of modern Turkey, the small European part was invaded by Turkey only 5 centuries ago.
And massacring the Byzantine people to take their land did not make Turkish people European in any way. Turkey should try to create a Community with its other Turkic cousins in Central Asia, not with us Europeans, you have much more in common with them than with us.

[spyretto]

Yah we know your stance on Turkey joining the EU, haku, but I don't think it has much to do with the people's origins themselves. There's no European "race" as such, as all Indo-european races came from the East - if I'm not mistaken - and the Ottomans were in direct ahem...liaisions with Europeans ever since they descented in that area and captured Constantinople 6 centuries ago. I think history may be a lesson but not a hindrance for progress, so I can't foresee a future where the Turks will be conquering Europe one way or another. However, the problem for me lies with the geography of Turkey. Only a small part is at the borders with Europe, only a small part is Westernised ( though I wouldn't call Istanbul European myself as it's more Americanised...the rest lies in the depths of Asia. Their capital is in Asia as well. If Turkey then why not Tukmenistan?
The other problem I see is Turkey now exceeding 85 million when 20 years ago it was 50 million. Their demographics resemble more of a thrd world country demographics.They're breeding fast.
There are of course obvious other issues with democracy ( STILL, and despite some changes the country is essentially run by the armed forces ), the economy ( inflation is huge ) human rights ( Kurds in the East ) the status quo of Cyprus and many others. For all these reasons I can't see how Turkey will join the EU any time soon.
As for Albania, joining the EU is the only way forward.

[haku]

Originally Posted by spyretto

There's no European "race" as such, as all Indo-european races came from the East

Well, i don't really believe in the concept of human 'races', but there are undeniably human ethnic groups. And there is a specific European ethnic group.

All modern European people are a mix of Indo-European genes (from the Eastern invaders) and Pre-European genes (from the indigenous European population). Pre-Europeans had very specific and unique genetic markers because that population was reduced to a small isolated group during the last ice age with no contacts with other human groups until the Indo-European tribes arrived. Those Pre-European markers are present in all modern Europeans, a typical European person has a 60% Pre-European / 40% Indo-European gene mix.

Indians and Iranians, our Indo-European cousins, don't have a single trace of Pre-European genes of course.
As for Finns, Estonians and Hungarians who don't speak Indo-European languages and have little trace of Indo-European genes, they show a large percentage of Pre-European genes as any other moden Europeans (indicating that Finno-Hugric invaders were probably very little in numbers and mixed largely with the indigenous European population while imposing their languages on them). So despite having a non-Indo-European origin, Finns, Estonians and Hungarians are closely related to other European people through the Pre-European heritage.

Turkic people on the other hand belong to a totally different and unrelated ethnic group, they don't have Indo-European or Pre-European genes at all, they have mainly Altaic genes like people in Central Asia and speak Altaic languages, they have nothing in common with European people.

[fanoff]

haku,once convince yourself that you dont want Turkey on EU because of the high population and you're afraid we will get a power when we get into it.Stop making up reasons like the european part conquered 5 centuries ago or non-european culture or anything and dont make people's minds confused.and spyretto,i cant understand why you changed your previous post and make the idea of it turn 180 degrees.I dont even want to talk and bother myself about it cos you are just like the politicians,makin up funny reasons.If they dont want Turkey in the EU,why wouldnt they just say that were not gonna join them?they are afraid to say it because EU will loose the belief in itself and they will loose such a big associate.Also theyre afraid to say this because of USA.They seem to support us in the way.

[freddie]

Originally Posted by haku

Well, i don't really believe in the concept of human 'races', but there are undeniably human ethnic groups. And there is a specific European ethnic group.

All modern European people are a mix of Indo-European genes (from the Eastern invaders) and Pre-European genes (from the indigenous European population). Pre-Europeans had very specific and unique genetic markers because that population was reduced to a small isolated group during the last ice age with no contacts with other human groups until the Indo-European tribes arrived. Those Pre-European markers are present in all modern Europeans, a typical European person has a 60% Pre-European / 40% Indo-European gene mix.

Indians and Iranians, our Indo-European cousins, don't have a single trace of Pre-European genes of course.
As for Finns, Estonians and Hungarians who don't speak Indo-European languages and have little trace of Indo-European genes, they show a large percentage of Pre-European genes as any other moden Europeans (indicating that Finno-Hugric invaders were probably very little in numbers and mixed largely with the indigenous European population while imposing their languages on them). So despite having a non-Indo-European origin, Finns, Estonians and Hungarians are closely related to other European people through the Pre-European heritage.

Turkic people on the other hand belong to a totally different and unrelated ethnic group, they don't have Indo-European or Pre-European genes at all, they have mainly Altaic genes like people in Central Asia and speak Altaic languages, they have nothing in common with European people.

Yeah see, that's all true, European nations probably do have some sort of a genetic bond, but why would that aspect hold any significance when deciding on new member states? It's not like we're an unon of genetically related people. We're first and foremost a political union, brougth together (primarily) for economic reasons. Yes there are other reasons why EU exists in the first place, but I find none of them a significan tenough reason to ban Turkey from joining. This genetic theory (though it may not have been intended this way) reeks of subliminal racism. And even if you go with this genetic theory there are basic flaws in it. Look at Israel... from the mass exodus of European jews after WW2 I wouldn't be surprised if their genetic structure would be pretty much equal to ours, while I bet many people living on Iberian peninsula (I won't name them Spaniards due to the high ethnic diversity in Spain) are partially arabic genetically - from the Moors invasion in the 8th century.
So you see the whole genetic/ethnic issue is very vague in this day and age, not to mention that (imo) EU could really use a touch of cultural non-indoeuropean refresher. I mean why would that hurt us in any way? Would it stir our genetically homogenous union? Interfear with our herritage? I don't understand.

On the other hand I do agree that there are other significant hurdles which Turkey is yet to overcome. First and foremost the Kurd minority issues. They can't even think about joining till that's settled once and for all. Then there's a small thing of getting in military/teritorial disputes with a EU member (namely Greece), which is also not really something that'd boost their membership hopes. Their economy's not exactly perfect but it's on a steady rise (a great emerging markets opportunity much like the Balkan area minus Slovenia where stocks are overinflated by now). And from what I know automotive industry is absolutely adoring Turkey (DaimlerChrysler built a van factory, so did Ford and Renault has a car factory... so I'd reckon the future prospects are pretty bright as they seem to be opened to foreign investors.

As far as Albania is concerned, I'd say that while yes it definitely has to become a member at certain point, but 4 years is way too little. I'd take an economic miracle of enormous proprotions. Lets not forget Albania is pretty much the poorest country in Europe to date. I'd be suprised if they got in before 2020.

[dradeel]

(I haven't read all the posts, but I'm writing from what I understand after the last couple of posts: )
I think it's dangerous and more than anything wrong to divide people according to genes. Culture is a better way, as that can actually create real issues when cultures are mixed and when cultures are standing up against eachother.

Now, I haven't really made any stand when it comes to Turkey and membership in the EU, but as they have become recent NATO-members, and tactically it's a very important country, and is undoubtebly the most western country "down there" (if you can say that) , then I think it's important for EU to work for some kind of solution, even tho it would be hard, and it will take quite a long time ... but then again things happens so fast nowadays, and noone can tell what the future will bring us. But saying that Turkey should never join EU even tho the situations allows them to or shouldn't join simply because genetically they haven't got the same history as "us" are both unaccaptable conclusions to make imo.

[haku]

Originally Posted by freddie

This genetic theory (though it may not have been intended this way) reeks of subliminal racism.

There is nothing racist in what i said, racism is about thinking that one race is superior to others, i never said that i think that Europeans are superior to others, all i said is that European people do exist (and are different from Indo-Iranian people, Turkic people, or Semite people). But you're free to think that my opinions are racist.

All i'm saying is that the European Union should be limited to *gasp* European countries, i disagree that the European Union should expand to Central Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, the European Union is not an empire and was never meant to expand indefinitely over the world, we are not building some kind of new Roman/British Empire where the Sun will never set.

I don't think it's racist to want the European Union to have a clear limit and not expand beyond the European continent. expanding the EU to Central Asia, the Middle East and North Africa makes absolutely no sense to me and i don't see how anyone can think it will work.

In my opinion, building such a deepy integrated confederation can only be done with people who share a common heritage, a common history, common values and live on a coherent geographical area. Adding an alien entity like Turkey to the mix can only lead to failure because Turkey do not share any of the values of the European Union. Just look how difficult it is for the Turks to implement even the most basic democratic reforms, that's because it's not part of their culture and goes against everything they believe in. They do not embrace democracy or human rights, they see it as a painful chore that has to be indured to access European money. And look how the Turks reacted to the caricatures of Mohammed, the Turks did not support freedom of expression, they sided with Muslim extremists and cheered at European buildings being set on fire. Do we really want that kind of extremists in the EU parliament making EU laws for all of us to follow.

Originally Posted by freddie

not to mention that (imo) EU could really use a touch of cultural non-indoeuropean refresher. I mean why would that hurt us in any way? Would it stir our genetically homogenous union? Interfear with our herritage? I don't understand.

That's where we differ, you see Turkey as a 'refresher', something that is going to take us forward, and you support an unlimited enlargement to other continents.
I on the other hand see Turkey as a threat to European culture and values, something that is going to take us backward, and i oppose any enlargement outside of Europe.
Backward because Turkey do not believe in equal rights for women, Turkey do not believe that homosexuality should be allowed, Turkey do not believe that religion should be separated from the state (their current Prime Minister is the leader of a Muslim extremist party)… If Turkey joins, it will be the most populated and most powerful country in the EU (and ironically the capital of the most powerful EU state will be in Asia). That power plus the huge number of deputies Turkey will have in the EU parliament thanks to its huge population will allow Turkey to lead Europe in whatever direction they want and take us one big step backward to the Middle Ages and ultra conservatism.

PS:

Originally Posted by freddie

from the mass exodus of European jews after WW2 I wouldn't be surprised if their genetic structure would be pretty much equal to ours

I doubt it, European jews ultimately came from the Middle-East, and Jewish people almost exclusively marry other Jewish people (precisely to keep the Jewish line pure and prevent contamination from other human groups), so i'm thinking modern Jewish people in Europe or Israel are pretty close to being genetically pure Semites.

[dradeel]

Originally Posted by haku

I don't think it's racist to want the European Union to have a clear limit and not expand beyond the European continent. expanding the EU to Central Asia, the Middle East and North Africa makes absolutely no sense to me and i don't see how anyone can think it will work.

I do agree with haku here. And I didn't think what he wrote was racism, but I don't think genetics should matter either way. One can't use that as an argument, even how true it might be

But I agree that expanding outside the borders of Europe is kinda weird since it's the _European Union_. You have to draw the line SOMEWHERE, and along the European border is the most fair and square imo. However, many people includes Turkey in Europe and the european maps and so on, but I dunno if it's just to fill a void down in the lower right corner tho, since Europe reaches out on the north-side of "the black sea" that is (is it called "the black sea" in english? That's the name for it in norwegian at least... ).

Originally Posted by haku

I on the other hand see Turkey as a threat to European culture

That's the very essence... culture. Opposing cultures will create problems. One might disagree on some fundamental values and issues, which could stir up big problems. Just look at the problems something as simple as the muhammad-drawings caused. Now, I know that there is a huge number of muslims living in EU today, but as big as Turkey is, and how many people are living there and so on, we are looking at great cultural differences. Some issues much bigger than the drawings might occur, and that could be hard to deal with if Turkey were an EU-member. On the other side, if we were able to handle such problems, and the cultural differences became smaller, then I think a Turkish EU-membership could have many benifits.

[haku]

Originally Posted by dradeel

You have to draw the line SOMEWHERE

Exactly. "Where is it going to stop?" is the main concern of many European people at the moment, they keep hearing of enlargement again and again but nobody is telling them exactly *where* it will stop and this has caused people to become extremely worried.
From the creation of the EC to maybe 10 years ago, European people were not worried at all by enlargements because the EU was expanding to countries that felt totally European and people could see the "final limit", but now, with a country like Turkey we are crossing a continental border and entering Asia and there's no longer any clear "final limit", where will it stop? Iran? India? China? None of this sounds European at all to people anymore and they've come to think that the whole thing has gone totally out of control.

European people are now demanding a clear final border for the EU, they need to know where the expansion will stop permanently.

For many people, including myself, this is what the final borders of the EU should look like. It's big enough to be a major player on an international level and compete with China, India or the US, but it's still limited to a group of people who have a lot in common culturally and historically, and it's limited to a coherent geographical area that EU citizens can immediately recognize as being *Europe* and identify with.
Anything bigger than that will look like an out of control expansionist empire with undefined borders and will end up collapsing under its own weight.

[marina]

Could anyone be so kind to explane me 3 or more main reasons as to why Turkey wants so much to be a part of EU. Thank you

[haku]

Originally Posted by marina

Could anyone be so kind to explane me 3 or more main reasons as to why Turkey wants so much to be a part of EU. Thank you

Main reasons are:

1. EU structural funds. The richest EU members give money to the poorest EU members, it's one of the basic principles of the EU. When a country becomes an EU member and is poorer than the EU average, it is entitled to millions of Euros every year to boost its development until it reaches the EU average. Of course the more populated a country is, the more money it gets, with its very large population Turkey would be entitled to massive amounts of money.

2. EU citizenship. Every EU citiizen can live and work wherever they want within the EU, there is no borders and no limitations of any kind. If Turkey became a member, millions of Turkish people would move out of Turkey to work in Europe with no limitations.

That's basically it, Turkey wants money and free access to the EU market for its workers, nothing more, it doesn't share any of the ideals of the founding members of the EU: prevent a new continental war and build a unified Europe with a common society based on values of democracy, freedom and human rights.

[dradeel]

Originally Posted by haku

For many people, including myself, this is what the final borders of the EU should look like.

Where did Iceland go?

I'm not sure if that should be the _absolute final_ border of EU. I know it's been discussed earlier, and I don't want to drag that up again, buuut Ukraine... I know I know, the economy-thingie with Russia and all that, but even so, we DO NOT KNOW what the future will bring. Saying that a country like Ukraine could _never_ join isn't wise. First, it's in Europe, second and most important for me: a competitable "bread basket" to the american one. The Ukrainian soil is actually as rich as - if not richer than - the american one. With the technology and money we'd be able to have two "bread baskets". If it were to be included in the EU-market EU could be a much larger exporter of food and crops. I think that's very important. We'd compete with japan on fish, with the middle east and usa on oil and with usa on food. There are many factors that should be taken into consideration. As for now (and many years ahead), I must agree that the borders you gave an example on there are good (if it included iceland that is. hehe). Perhaps as close to the final border as we can get, but we should never say never. Things might happen and things could change... That's all

Originally Posted by haku

That's basically it, Turkey wants money and free access to the EU market for its workers

Aye... With Turkey in the EU, businesses might grow up in Turkey more than before, since weather in Turkey is hot, and work force is plenty and cheap. That way they'll be able to trade much more than before ... export and import and stuff And what would that result in? Less businesses in the cold north with fewer inhabitants and the need for central heating?

[marina]

haku, thank you very much for answering my question .

[freddie]

Why would Turkey be "the most powerful" EU member? It's definitely not economically as advance as any of the old members (and quite a few new members are economically better developed as well). Because it has 80 million people? So does Germany. And that number is more a burden to them than an advantage. Yeah sure, they'll have a lot of members in teh parliament, but the EU parliament differs vastly from national parliaments. I does not have a legislative function on it's own. It's function is mainly consultational (EU commission is the one coming up with new legislature proposals originally). While it's true that EU commission has to come to agreement with the parliament and council as far as new laws are concerned it's still the one who proposes new ones (in case EU parliament has veto power over new legislature and it uses it's veto right that doesn't mean it can then come up with a new law on it's own... what it needs is a new recommendation from the Commission). And the EU council always has the last word. So as far as that's concerned - I think there're no real worries Turkey's role might be too important within the EU and it's institutions (Poland was a good example - many skeptics were sure it'll be a major force to reckon with, given it's huge populace - but as of now 2 years after the expansion it turned out Poland with it's 60 million people is not really politically any more important than Slovenia with 2 million.

Saying Turkey doesn't share our values is a bit extreme imo. Basically all people pretty much share the same values when it all comes down to it. We all want to prosper, be free and happy. I personally don't see them as a threat to democracy or something like that. EU made it clear that they'll have to sole ALL issues regarding gender equality and minority rights. It's not like we're knocking on their door. They're knocking on ours. If they want in they'll adapt. If not then so be it. That's pretty much what it comes down to. It's not like teh EU will accept Turkey at all cost. I think most European leaders were pretty firm on the stance that they'll be accepted ONLY if all issues get resolved. And once they do we won't be able to say "we share different values" anymore.

And what about Russia? What if they decide one day to stop playing a super-power and want in? Russia certainly shares common herritage and history with all current EU members. If Russia gets in it'd mean EU would expand almost towards Japan, covering a large chunk of Asia. And what about Ukraine? Belarus? Moldova? All those share our common European herritage, but it's still mean expanding the lmits of the Union further than some would like them to be.

And from what I understand a part of Turkey IS in Europe so admiting Turkey wouldn't automatically mean letting any other Asian or Middle-Eastern country - because they are infact not in Europe and have nothing to do with it whatsoever (except maybe Israel, but that's another story).

[fanoff]

ooh,still,i want to thank all of the members that wrote here lately,they made me laugh so much.It was nice to see how they are so thrilled and try to say bad things about the people they dont even have an idea.i still think Turkey should be a member of EU and you will all see well be fucking one of them.you made me want it more.

[haku]

Originally Posted by freddie

Because it has 80 million people?

And 120 million in a couple of decades (and up to 150 million), one third more than Germany, twice more than France or the UK, one sixth of the total EU population… That will give Turkey an overwhelming weight in EU decisions, Turkey will be in control of the EU and that's an insane risk to take.

Originally Posted by freddie

And what about Russia? What if they decide one day to stop playing a super-power and want in? Russia certainly shares common herritage and history with all current EU members. If Russia gets in it'd mean EU would expand almost towards Japan, covering a large chunk of Asia. And what about Ukraine? Belarus? Moldova? All those share our common European herritage, but it's still mean expanding the lmits of the Union further than some would like them to be.

I don't see Russia becoming an EU member ever, and for many reasons.

- I doubt current EU members would agree on Russia's membership. That would totally unbalance the Union, Russia is just too big and massive, the EU can't admit a country that is several times bigger than the entire current EU.
- The cost! The entire EU budget would not be enough to finance the billions of Euros Russia would be entitled to as part of the structural funds, Russia's membership would bankrupt the EU.
- The Western public opinion. People have reached their maximum level of acceptance, The Western public opinion wouldn't accept an enlargement going as far as Japan, and people are in no mood to pay more taxes to finance a huge country like Russia.
- Russia has other plans, Russia wants to be at the center of something, not just a part among other parts. Russia has already created a 'state-union' with Belarus and Russia is thinking of creating a Eurasian Union grouping many Central Asian countries.
And i say good for them, there is room for a Eurasian organization, and it makes much more sense than expanding the EU across Asia.

As for Ukraine, well, whatever they might say, Ukraine remains closely linked to Russia (it's a CIS member), and i don't trust Ukraine as an EU member. It's better if Ukraine stays with Russia in whatever Eurasian organization Russia will create.

Originally Posted by freddie

And from what I understand a part of Turkey IS in Europe

Yes, unfortunately we were unable to regain Constantinople at the fall of the Ottoman Empire, a critical historical mistake which we are paying now.

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by fanoff

...and spyretto,i cant understand why you changed your previous post and make the idea of it turn 180 degrees.I dont even want to talk and bother myself about it cos you are just like the politicians,makin up funny reasons.If they dont want Turkey in the EU,why wouldnt they just say that were not gonna join them?they are afraid to say it because EU will loose the belief in itself and they will loose such a big associate.Also theyre afraid to say this because of USA.They seem to support us in the way.

What do you mean I changed my previous post and made the idea turn 180 degrees. I changed my post because at first I thought we're talking about Albania, not Turkey, so I had to change the post accordingly. Albania is a whole different proposition. In any case, I didn't express personal opinions I was just trying to outline the reasons why it will be very difficult for the EU to admit Turkey and I believe those reasons are valid. Haku has stated his own reasons. As I said earlier, Greece do want Turkey in the EU because they believe many problems between the two countries will be solved, but Cyprus don't wanna hear about a possible entry because of your invasion to the island in 1974 and the illegal occupation of 1/3 of the island. Now I can't see where the problem is with what I said, I thought I was quite clear.
If you asked me, I wouldn't care if Turkey joined Comecon or even Conmebol. It's all the same to me

[fanoff]

Originally Posted by haku

Yes, unfortunately we were unable to regain Constantinople at the fall of the Ottoman Empire, a critical historical mistake which we are paying now

why am i discussing this with the people who still announces ISTANBUL as constantinople?they showed that their minds are still in the back 1453,when we conquered ISTANBUL(and it will always be Istanbul not the fucking BYzantine name).

[haku]

Originally Posted by fanoff

when we conquered ISTANBUL(and it will always be Istanbul not the fucking BYzantine name).

It was not just a conquest, but a butchery, Byzantine soldiers were executed, civilian men were enslaved, children were slaughtered, women were gang-raped. A great military day for the Turks. But it was not enough, they had to even erase the name of the city to complete its destruction.

Originally Posted by fanoff

they showed that their minds are still in the back

My mind is stuck in the past? Not at all. I acknowledge the past, which is totally different, instead of like you pretending that it never happened.

The mention of the previous name of Istanbul should not make you angry in any way, it's history, it happened. Here in France many cities have three names (or more), one Celtic, one Roman and one French. Nobody will be angered by the mention of any of those names, quite the contrary, the inhabitants are proud of the long history of their cities and acknowledge all of it. The city of Marseille for example is often referred to as Phocée, from its Greek name Phocaea (Marseille was originally a Greek colony), and the inhabitants of Marseille don't hesitate to call themselves Phocéens, they embrace their entire history, from the Greek colony of Phocaea, to the Roman town of Massilia, to the French city of Marseille.

But if you mention Constantinople to the Turks, you get an angry response, like the past history of Istanbul is a shame and should be erased, like the city was actually founded by the Turks, like St -Sophia (i'm sorry, i don't know the official Turk name as i'm sure calling it by its original name is also considered offensive) was actually built by the Turks, like anything that ever happened before the Turkish conquest has no value whatsoever. You should be proud of the long history of that city instead of being offended by the mere mention of its pre-Turkish past. How do you cope with the ancient ruins of Greek cities on the Turkish Western coast, have you also renamed them with Turkish names so you could pretend you're the ones who actually built them?

It's a general characteristic of Turkey to have trouble dealing with the past, coping with history, the general attitude is to pretend that many things never happened even if it's right there in your face. The Armenian genocide? It never happened. Kurdistan? It doesn't exist. And of course the illegal occupation of northern Cyprus is a myth, Cyprus has always been a Turkish land (even though in reality most Turks currently living in Cyprus were brought there a few decades ago) and for Turkey the Greeks that have been living in Cyprus for over 2000 years do not exist, Turkey won't even recognize the existence of the Cypriot state which is right there next to them and they invaded 30 years ago. So we are now in the ludicrous situation to have Turkey that want to become an EU member, but won't recognize that one of the current EU members even exist!

So no, i'm not stuck in the past, like i said, i acknowledge it, which is a much healthier attitude than pretending that it never happened. It's time for Turkey to realize that history is not a menu à la carte where you can pick and choose what happened and what didn't happened.