entire ethnic groups throught the existence of it, well into WWI. Like, the nazis

committed the same vs the Jews in Europe. No peace.

B. Again, emoting one, they only abolished slavery of caucasions. They still committed

the atrocities vs those ethnic groups, still had widespread sex slavery, etc. It just didn't

occur sometimes by individuals, it was condoned as legal BY THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE.

C. You are really wrong. Doing the tippie-toe flippity-flippity isn't helping you.

D. Here ya go:

http://calvinandhobbes.wikia.com/wiki/Calvinball

@calfoxwc said:

so, Os, your claims are still wrong. They apparently abolished Christian boy slavery,

but slavery was a huge part of who they were, always.

So, there ya go. You're wrong. Atrocities towards segments of it's own people, sex slaves...

nah. There's no peace, Os. They weren't good guys who lost their empire and then

war broke out between the states. Nope.

Now, you can just sing the "I'm so sorry" song, and we're all good.

You will get no song. My original point was they had long periods of time when they were not at war with anyone. You said they didn't. That point still stands.

Furthermore, the Ottoman Empire abolished slavery like I said, which made it illegal. Even if there was illegal slavery up until 1908, that means that from then until WW1 they still had a period of time that meets both definitions of peace.

Are you going to claim that any society that has crime is not at peace? In that case, there has NEVER been peace on Earth anywhere on that planet.

but slavery was a huge part of who they were, always.

So, there ya go. You're wrong. Atrocities towards segments of it's own people, sex slaves...

nah. There's no peace, Os. They weren't good guys who lost their empire and then

war broke out between the states. Nope.

Now, you can just sing the "I'm so sorry" song, and we're all good.

you ignored.

Just trying to explain to you, Os, that you are wrong about your assertion of Ottoman

Empire "peace".

it was not. The two aspects of the definition work in conjunction with each other.

Furthermore, to buoy up my claim further...

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

" While the Empire was able to largely hold its own during the conflict, it was struggling with internal dissent, especially with the Arab Revolt in its Arabian holdings. Starting before World War I, but growing increasingly common and violent during it, major atrocities were committed by the Ottoman government against the Armenians, Assyrians and Pontic Greeks."

@calfoxwc said:

Holy crap, you just stepped in it now. You said:

"Well, I gave you facts, but you are doing the liberal tippy-toe dance around

what facts you don't want to include in the discussion."

And yet you deliberately excluded the full definition on the lookup you just did:

The Ottoman Empire abolished slavery and the slave trade in 1847. Therefore, even by your definition, the Ottoman Empire had periods of peace. After this, they were also not at war with other nations from 1879 to 1893 and had literally dozens of other periods where they weren't at war with anyone after the abolition of slavery. Therefore, they had periods of time that met BOTH definitions of peace. Pack your bags, you are wrong. You lose.

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

what facts you don't want to include in the discussion.

I call YOU biased, because on a simple lookup, at the top of the page,

here is the other part of the defination:

peace

Now, when the nazis took over and oppressed entire countries, they weren't at war with them.

But the lives in that country were oppressed, great disturbance, no tranquility, and war crimes.

They had no peace.

Now, the fact that the ottoman empire had Christian boys as slaves, etc etc etc etc, means

they were not at peace at all. No more cherry-pickie, Os. You're just wrong.

@calfoxwc said:

Don't get too dizzy from all that spinning, Cal. Peace as I am defining it and as dictionaries define it is being in a state absent of war. There isn't a country or empire on the planet or in history that doesn't have "inter-communal tensions and strife" constantly. All you have to do to get that is put 100 people on an island together.

And yes, I call you biased, because you refuse to believe factual information because it doesn't agree with your preconceived notions. Slavery regardless of the religion of the slaves is unjust, it's inhumane, unethical, and repulsive but it isn't war. Seems like a pretty simple logical concept to me.

@osiris said:

Here's facts straight from wikipedia:

"The period of defeat and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire (1908–1922) began with the Second Constitutional Era with the Young Turk Revolution. It restored the Ottoman constitution of 1876 and brought in multi-party politics with a two stage electoral system (electoral law) under the Ottoman parliament. The constitution offered hope by freeing the empire’s citizens to modernize the state’s institutions and dissolve inter-communal tensions.^[1]"

^{So, during your interstate peace, was inter-communal tensions and strife. The Turk Revolution was launched to restore their Constitution,}

^{and their rights. You call it "peace" when Christian boys were slaves? And you call ME biased???}

@diehardbrownsfan said:

True enough, but we can hardly be held accountable today for things our ancestors did.

@calfoxwc said:

I implied no such thing. There were few internal wars between middle-eastern states during the Ottoman Empire's rule. Facts are facts, dude. In fact, the period of peace from 1740 to 1768 in the Ottoman Empire lead to their military falling behind in technology which had consequences in future wars. I'm sorry that historical facts don't validate your bias against Muslim nations.

@gftchris said:

Just fkg with you. I have ancestors I'm sure were part of it. Nothing can be done about the past. And nothing can be known about the future.

was a time of peace and cookies until it fell.

nope.

@calfoxwc said:

None of which has any bearing on the point I was addressing. We were talking about wars, not injustice. America had slavery from 1619 to 1863. That doesn't mean America was at war for 244 years continuously.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

I'm with you in this case. The british from 1800 to maybe the 1990s were a bunch of cunts in terms of imperialism and fucking over other countries. Not alone in doing so mind.

@osiris said:

Fucking British.

@osiris said:

bullhockey. The Ottoman Empire used Christian boys for slaves, and taxed

others different than them at a very high tax rate....

nah. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/06/middle-east-turmoil-nostalgia-ottomans

@gftchris said:

so, it perpetuated itself for thousands of years, but it's out fault that now it

keeps perpetuating itself....

the craziest things come out of kids' mouths nowadays...

@brownskidd said:

The Middle East had periods of peace when it was unified under the Ottoman Empire. That also wasn't millennia ago. That was up until WW1. When the Ottoman Empire lost in that war, the lands it ruled in the Middle East were partitioned by the British and French. This laid the foundation for much of the conflict that goes on there today.

@brownskidd said:

I'm pretty sure the west has something to do with perpetuating it for the benefit of the war/oil machines.

There will be no peace in the middle east. They have been fighting for multiple millennia and will continue to do so. Both Israel and the Muslims feel they have a right to the land and their religious ideologies is the foundation for the conflict. Not sure we will ever see it happen, ever.