Let's talk about the Crimean tatar issue....

[Avitohol]

Yes, they are non-slavic. Yes, we-the danube bulgarians are a mixture of proto-bulgarians and slavs.
The modern language of the danube bulgarians is more slavic, but there are still hundreds of words which we kept from the founders of the state-The bulgarians of khan Asparukh. It is suggested that most of them were onogurs.
The most words we kept fromthem are- bashta-father, batko-big brother, biser-pearl, hala-dragon, beleg-sign, babrek-kidney etc.

The volgo bulgarians are direct succesors of khan Kotrag.
Khan Kotrag was a son of khan Kubrat, the founder of "Great Bulgaria" in 7th century. After the khazars attacks and Kubrat's death the state was about to fell. So, the oldest son Bayan( Bat Bayan) stayed in Phanagoria. He became a feodal of the khazars and his people were known as "the black bulgarians". They were part of the Khazars Khaganate.
The second son. khan Kotrag led his people to the north and creat Volgo Bulgaria. The youngest son, khan Asparukh led his people to where nowadays is Bulgaria. Despite tha the country at his time was from the two side of Danube, not only in the south of it.
Until the fall of the first bulgarian state in 11th century there were connections between the two bulgarian states. IN recent times many of the volgo bulgarians moved to the Danube Bulgaria. So, there isn't differen lineage between the danube bulgarians and the volgo bulgarians.

It's funny that despite the KPSS decision to change their nationality the soviet historicians said that it is a complete mistake. They said that it is wrong to call the volgo bulgarians- tatars.

[akhmetbek]

You must be a very lonely little boy.

[akhmetbek]

The term "Tatar" was used by historians to discibe ALL the peoples, subgected by the Great Horde under Chingisied dinasty in about 15 century (even though the Great Horde dissintegrated by the time).So, many nations,with different ansestory,are called "Tatars" today.Crimean Tatars,Kazan Tatars,Astrakhan Tatars,Siebirian,Kasimov's,Nogay,Bashkir- they all geneticly different.But is it worth our time to fix 600Year-old mistakes? Salam.Krimean Tatar.

[1-0_to_the_Arsenal]

"No Armenian Genocide"?????
Stalin comitted genocide on Tatars, Ukrainians, Ingush, Chechens and many more races during the deportations but those Armenians just happened to die of natural causes yeah?

Even though Hitler referred to it when he was proposing slaughtering the Poles and it was one of the reasons Lemkin INVENTED the f***ing word genocide - no, you know more than the people who were there

For f***s sake will you lot grow up and admit it - the Ottomans were provoked into it, it was war, they were fighting for their country's existance, and they DID IT!

Yeah I know - the three cowardly faggots Chirac, Clinton & Blair refused to recognise it - those three would kill their grandmothers if it suited them.
The people who carried it out are all dead, what's done is done, but you can't be selective about which genocide should be recognised, otherwise your stooping to the level of some of the Armenians (and Israelis) who make a career out of playing the victim and use it to justify themselves doing atrocities.

[KLange]

Originally posted by Tebriz-will-Rise
I don't think Crimeans had much of anything to do with the Greeks. You must take into consideration that historical nationalists always portray false history to justify their occupations, conquests, imperialistic claim to lands and peoples etc.

I do however agree that they related a lot with the gothic community.

before the 19th century people rarely fought over racial issues in order to ethnically erase other races. Languages in schools meant nothing back then to most.

Greeks are another story. They have more turkic blood in them then they do "greek". they are in no way related to the ancient greeks. but hey, if they wanna class themselves as pure "greeks" then more power to them.

I think everyone in caucasia (including Crimea) has a mixture of Caucasian/Turkic blood and to a lesser extent arabic blood.

Well there were Greek settlements in Crimea, were there not? Isn't it safe to assume that they contributed to the Crimean Tatar genetic stew, at least to some degree?

[prawda]

http://www.geocities.com/ai320/facts.htm
Crimean Facts and History



and arsenal armenian genocide happen just try n accept..why so important for u it didnt if u didnt participate...some of my best friend is Syriac/Aramenian Christian from Turkey in kurdistan area..and they get killed,tortuerd,raped make them become muslims or killed etc..Kurds complain about being mistreated by Turks but Kurds treat Syriac minorety in Kurdistan like **** just as Turks did...

there was many diferent tribes and nations that inhabit Crimea very mixed..there was both roman and greek settelment and trade..Gothic..Mongol/Tatar..Byzantine..Genovese..Greek..Roman..Turkey..Russia..Ukraine etc

[bisserk]

slavs need to accept their greek ancestry

there was no proto slavic ape, we know that germanic is most dominant language in north asia before slavs, thats why india got invaded by germanics not slavs. slavic is a southern branch, the greek branch.