"It is evident that countries not governed by the laws of the Sheriat cannot survive."

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Jun 26, 2012 at 18:57

Mozere wrote :

> Ottomans, like the Chinese,were a pre enlightenment empire, both empires decayed due to lack of technological progress.<

And what "technological progress" were the Ottomans responsible for in the first place in the years before their decay? You mean maybe Hungarian renegade engineer Urban who built the great cannon that made a breach in the walls of Constantinople? Or are "janissaries" a "technologiocal progress'?

The Ottomans were much more sincere than you. Like today's neo-Ottomans they saw the cause of their decline not in technology but in not being Islamic enough. So their reforms aimed at first restoring Islam ! The Noble Edict of the Rose Chamber" proclaimed in 1839 by Sultan Abdul Mejid I which started the Tanzimat period of reforms, a period remarkable for their comic failure , explains :

"All the world knows that since the first days of the Ottoman State, the lofty principles of the Qur'an and the rules of the Sheriat were always perfectly observed. Our mighty
Sultanate reached the highest degree of strength and power, and all its subjects [the
highest degree] of ease and prosperity. But in the last one hundred and fifty years,
because of a succession of difficulties and diverse causes, the sacred Sheriat was not
obeyed nor were the beneficent regulations followed; consequently, the former strength
and prosperity have changed into weakness and poverty. It is evident that countries not
governed by the laws of the Sheriat cannot survive."

>However,starting from 1700 it took 300 years for it to expire,so they were not totally powerless against European powers.They did play one European power against the others did the other powers.<

They were dependent on and protected by France and Britain as they are now by the US and did nothing without their consent and help! In all battlefields we see French or British advisors and military arming,instructing and leading the Turks. To no avail! The allies were in due course betrayed and bitten by the very dog they had protected and cared for so lovingly.

> Therefore just as it is absurd to say Waterloo was a Prussian victory because the Prussians were England's allies so it is absurd to say Kut etc. were German victories because the Germans were the Ottomans' allies.<

And can you tell us who the commanders-in-chief at the battle of Kut and Gallipoli were and what role the German troops played there ?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".