The gentlemen are more than correct to emphasize that the Greek state was a protectorate of the Great Powers and is still a protectorate of the collective West/GAE. And has also been a very willing useful idiot, always to its detriment. The Austrian historian Anton von Zischka in his book "Ölkrieg, wandlung der weltmacht öl" Leipzig 1939 describes in detail how Greece was encouraged to attack inland. Used to pressure Kemalist forces and once Britain and its partnering oil companies secured the Mosul oilfields, Greece was abandoned and Kemal was allowed to do as he pleased. This agreement happened in June 1922. The few times Greece acted independently, ruin quickly followed. Venizelos sent military to support the White Army in the Crimea, under guise of helping the large Greek population against the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks did not forget this slight and were more than willing to help Ataturk with weapons and support. Likely the most important factor in this war. The historian Meletis Meletopoulos describes these events in minute detail. Bravo, gentlemen.
I can't claim to have read Zischka, though he was technically a journalist (and a propagandist for the third Reich btw), but last I checked Meletopoulos was a sociologist/economist who also happens to be a huge Metaxas fanboy trying to vindicate his idol's career, which is why I would take everything he has to say about WW1/interwar period with a big grain of salt cause I've sadly seen him promote unsubstantiated claims as fact before. I also don't think, from my research at least, that Greece's support for the Whites had much of an influence in the overall turko-soviet alignment (and imo it certainly played no role, as is sometimes claimed, in the later persecutions of Greeks among other ethnic groups suspected of being "capitalist") but I respect different views on these matters.
Greeks , in 1821, revolted, against ottoman empire, without any help from abroad, and gained its independence. England, France and Russia, were forced to “help” the Greeks , in the end, cause they didn’t want not to have a chance to influence the new born state of Greece. Actually English economy, managed to give loans to the new greek state , years before it even was fomed, to be sure it could influence it afterwards. Lots of anxiety about the greek state. Lots of obstacles from British in the future ( eg cyprus island), lots of worry about Greece not geting strong. This anxiety It still obvious
Meletopoulos is making some absurd statements without giving any evidences and avoiding anything that doesn't fits in his narrative. According to him, Metaxas was pro-British during WW1(yes, he says exactly that in some of his lectures). and all of his efforts during the National Schism of 1915 were towards that direction!!
1) Germany helped and organised, along with new turks the genocides of greek , armenian and assyrians , long before ( since 1910), greece “ invated” to save as many greek from slautering. . 2) lenin was the first to supply kemal with guns and all, so to be able to defeat greeks. After followed france, betraying its “ ally “ Greece. 3) it’s estimated that 30-40% of the population of what we call turkey today were ethnic Greeks. They never made it to greece, at least most of them. What happened with them. Do you call imperialism, trying to save the lives of you lr fellow Greeks?
Among the best eye-witnesses's accounts of Smyrna's Catastrophe is "The Blight of Asia" by George Horton. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to understand the big picture in relation to these tragic events and, in general, the post ww1 period in Asia Minor, from the Aegean coast to the Armenian highlands.
Regarding something you mentioned at 3:13:00 , I don't think turkish surnames necessarily show Turkish(or "Turcopole") origins, a lot people in Anatolia turkified or adopted "turkish surnames" and quite recently(18th-19th century) either because in some cases they did speak turkish(without necessarily being or considering themselves Turks) or very often for let's say "social" reasons. Even today many Greeks in Turkey use a fake official Turkish name(even first name) in their dealings with the state or their Turkish neighbors (for example I knew a guy from Istanbul whose real name is Giorgos but all his neighbors knew him as "Mustafa"... I've also heard this is true for some of the Jews living there) ...By the way, actually most Turks/Muslims didn't even have surnames until the 1930s and the Turkish "Surname Law" which is why if you examine them closely most of the "turkish surnames" that are found among Greeks or Armenians or some other Balkan countries bear no connection to the surnames carried by actual Turks today, because the latter were invented in the 20th century...(and also why there's virtually zero Turks today with non-turkish names, not even Kurds...unlike Balkan nations /Greece where surnames indeed tend to be etymologically diverse)
Romania did NOT participate in the first Balkan war against the Ottomans. They only entered the second Balkan war at its latter stages when they realized that Bulgarian territory was up for grabs.
If I did say that, it was a slip of the tongue in an extemporaneous near 4hr conversation. When covering the First Balkan War we discussed the specific contributions of Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece and Montenegro - not Romania (obviously).
My family owns a rusty, officer's pistol, that used to belong to my great-grandfather. He was wounded on the outskirts of Ankara. He seldom called himself a Hellene, he preferred the term Rhomaios.
Well my friend, out of our nearly 1000 years of history of inter-mingling, the one thing we have learned is that to never again to trust people of other religions and ethnicities. I must say, Greeks and Serbians have truly killed the modern multi-cultural countries.
1:37:22 -- "Sèvres" is pronounced as if it were written _Sevr'._ The first three letters are pronounced as normal to an English speaker, making up the first syllable -- but the second syllable is just a French rolled "R," the hint of a vowel sound following it, and then it ends, barely even being pronounced.
Remember That Dude perhaps not haveing a significant portion of their population expelled from their historic homeland? Remember ionia was Greek, ethnically and culturally untill they were forced out in the 1920s.
@@rememberthatdude848Yes it is, but a much smaller Greece without Eastern Thrace and Constantinople, without Ionia and Smyrna and without Northern Epirus, Cyprus and Pontus. Nonetheless Greece's Megali Idea was not a failure. 1832, 1864, 1881, 1913, 1920/1923(Western Thrace) and 1948 were still quite impressive moments for a small poor nation-state.
43:27 *Croatia-Slavonia. I assume this was a slip of the tongue since there appear to be quite a few throughout the course of this episode. It naturally leads one to ask what the cause of the unusual deconcentration was, though.
When the allied forces entered Thessaloniki and the wider geographic territory of Macedonia, Greece was in a state of a quasi-civil war with two governments one in Athens under the leadership of the king and another in Thessaloniki under the leadership of Venizelos who was a staunch supporter of an alignment with the Entente and of entering the 1st world war. The largest part of the population in northern Greece were fanatically pro Venizelos whom considered their savior and thus definitely not against his decision to actually himself invite the allied forces in Thessaloniki and push for a Greek involvement on their side during the war! It's obvious that you have a very good general knowledge of history but there are still many inaccuracies and half-truths in your narrative.
How does this in anyway disprove the notion that the Entente violated Greek Sovereignty? This was our contention. It is obvious that the Entente had sympathisers during the National Schism - without which the coup against Constantine would not have been possible. So what? They didn't exercise sovereignty until 1917.
@@ApostolicMajesty The Entente were in fact INVITED at Thessaloniki by Venizelos while he was STILL the prime minister and that is actually the main reason the King dismissed him (as he had the right to do so by the contemporary constitution) very shortly after. Look it up. You never mentioned this very important historical fact and generally never made even a small mention that half of Greece and one of the greatest - if not the greatest - Greek politicians of the 20th century actually wanted and even invited the Entente forces in the region. You promote a false narrative as if the Anglo-French forces just came out of nowhere and did whatever they wanted within Greek territory, when as a matter of fact at least half of the population and its most successful politician of the era were all for it and thousands of pro-Venizelos Greeks actually volunteered in the Entente forces even before Greece was officially an ally!
Constantinople belonged to the Romanoi Greeks and to Christendom for 1100 years. Since then it has been held by the Turks and Islam for some 570 years. Both the Greeks and the Russians still dream of hearing Mass in St Sophia. Who can really say that it will never happen? It could have happened several times already. For example, if the English and French had not betrayed Christendom during the Crimean War by saving the Turks from defeat and thwarting a Russian conquest of Constantinople. At the end of WW1 when the Ottoman state collapsed, the British and French occupied the city. They did not need to give it up and they should never have handed it back to the Turks. The Turks could have been expelled from their limited European territories and Constantinople today would be a wonderful Christian city..
Would that the Greek army had not overextended into Anatolia and lost all holdings therein, their claims requiring too great (i.e. more than a token) commitment from the 2 Western powers for their war-weary populations to tolerate. (Though I'm sure we could what if back to Manzikert, our dreams will likely remain forever that).
@@Dave0G Greek army never lost Constantinople and Thrace whatsoever. It was actually ceded to Turkey on behalf of Britain. Also such defeatism doesn't help Greece. Just like Turkey clings to their territorial claims to this day, Greek should reembrace the Megali Idea. Don't listen to the Western Europeans, who scold Greeks for their still existent nationalism yet supply the Turkish army (like the US, Ukraine and Turkey) and freely trade with them. They are all hypocrites. I wish Greece Godspeed, because if she doesn't get that, then that is the true end of Greek history.
@@Dave0Git wont happen soon. History is long and we are talking centuries, so anything can happen, but for now Turkiye is MUCH stronger than Greece. Now, Russia, while successful in Ukraine, has many more pressing problems. Plus, Turkiye has a growing demography while Greece and Russia are declining significantly.
Ever since Napoleon campaigned in Egypt the engineers assured him that the Suez Canal could be opened. Since then the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire was deemed necessary by the Great Powers, because otherwise it would control the canal. The problem for England and the whole West was to break up the Ottoman Empire without benefiting Russia. Mavrokordatos, a Phanariote, had assured England in a known letter (1824) , that the new Greek state would ally with Turkey to close the Aegean to Russia. The Greek Revolution was therefore limited and controlled and the Balkans were led to multiple divisions for this reason.
The Greek's took advantage of a power vacuum but with the Ottoman Army in Anatolia remaining intact (in accordance with the Mudros armistice) it was only a matter of time before the Turk's were able to regroup and overwhelm them
Everyone had illegitimate claims except Greece. The entente used Greece as a playball against their Ottoman rivals and the Turks continued their massacres of Greek Christians not yet liberated by Greece. One could claim that Greece was fighting a 2 front war one militarily and one politically. Based on what they suffered and the fact that their former homeland comprised 70% of Turkey. Am I saying that they would have conquered Turkey up to the Euphrates? No, but with loyal allies, no schisms and less harsh Turkish concessions. Greece could have retained Ionia and Thrace (+ Constantinople) easily.
I'll say that Greece's territorial conquests from 1820 to 1920 were unprecedented compared to anyone else of the same time period (for a relatively small country like Greece).
Before the balkan wars Serbia was supposed to get most of Albania and Bulgaria was supposed to get Macedonia. But again the intervention of the Great Powers, especially Austro-Hungary and Italy created a problem. They denied Serbia the rights over Albania, which they then founded as a country. Serbia compensated this loss by occupying the whole of North Macedonia, which Bulgaria was supposed to get, and this was a direct cause of the Second Balkan war.
Anyone listening to your streams has food for thought about our own times. Too much reporting on current international affairs lacks considered historical perspective. I listen to your streams while walking the dogs.
I think a lot of people don’t research when Greeks tell that smyrna was majority Greek. Researches show that other than the city itself none of the area is Greek majority in the maps. Which negates all their claims of occupation.
Wtf Montnegro contributed more than Greece?! Without the Greek navy and the legendary armored cruiser Averof winning all the major naval battles in the Aegean and thus blocking all sorts of Ottoman supplies from Anatolia, the outcome of the first Balkan war might have been very different. Clueless...
Before you insult me actually listen to my comment where I said very clearly that Montenegro committed more on a PER CAPITA basis which is objectively true considering that anywhere between 15% and 20% of the population of Montenegro were committed to the war.
Αδερφέ.. αυτό που λέει ο "κουτόφραγκος"(φυσικά αστειεύομαι) είναι αληθές. Ο Ελληνισμός θα κατακτούσε τη θέση που του αξίζει αν δεν υπήρχαν οι αντιβενιζελικοί. Ξεκίνησα ως αντιβενιζελικός στα 17-18 μου έτη και διαβάζοντας μανιωδώς ελληνικές και αγγλικές (πρωτογενείς και μη)πηγές, κατέληξα στα 42 μου φανατικά Βενιζελικός!
If you enjoyed this video, please like and leave a comment. It helps the channel a lot. Many thanks.
The gentlemen are more than correct to emphasize that the Greek state was a protectorate of the Great Powers and is still a protectorate of the collective West/GAE. And has also been a very willing useful idiot, always to its detriment. The Austrian historian Anton von Zischka in his book "Ölkrieg, wandlung der weltmacht öl" Leipzig 1939 describes in detail how Greece was encouraged to attack inland. Used to pressure Kemalist forces and once Britain and its partnering oil companies secured the Mosul oilfields, Greece was abandoned and Kemal was allowed to do as he pleased. This agreement happened in June 1922.
The few times Greece acted independently, ruin quickly followed. Venizelos sent military to support the White Army in the Crimea, under guise of helping the large Greek population against the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks did not forget this slight and were more than willing to help Ataturk with weapons and support. Likely the most important factor in this war.
The historian Meletis Meletopoulos describes these events in minute detail.
Bravo, gentlemen.
I can't claim to have read Zischka, though he was technically a journalist (and a propagandist for the third Reich btw), but last I checked Meletopoulos was a sociologist/economist who also happens to be a huge Metaxas fanboy trying to vindicate his idol's career, which is why I would take everything he has to say about WW1/interwar period with a big grain of salt cause I've sadly seen him promote unsubstantiated claims as fact before. I also don't think, from my research at least, that Greece's support for the Whites had much of an influence in the overall turko-soviet alignment (and imo it certainly played no role, as is sometimes claimed, in the later persecutions of Greeks among other ethnic groups suspected of being "capitalist") but I respect different views on these matters.
Greeks , in 1821, revolted, against ottoman empire, without any help from abroad, and gained its independence. England, France and Russia, were forced to “help” the Greeks , in the end, cause they didn’t want not to have a chance to influence the new born state of Greece. Actually English economy, managed to give loans to the new greek state , years before it even was fomed, to be sure it could influence it afterwards. Lots of anxiety about the greek state. Lots of obstacles from British in the future ( eg cyprus island), lots of worry about Greece not geting strong. This anxiety It still obvious
Meletopoulos is making some absurd statements without giving any evidences and avoiding anything that doesn't fits in his narrative. According to him, Metaxas was pro-British during WW1(yes, he says exactly that in some of his lectures).
and all of his efforts during the National Schism of 1915 were towards that direction!!
Interesting theory, the British did force Greece to abandon East Thrace, even though it wasn't yet occupied by Turks.
1) Germany helped and organised, along with new turks the genocides of greek , armenian and assyrians , long before ( since 1910), greece “ invated” to save as many greek from slautering. . 2) lenin was the first to supply kemal with guns and all, so to be able to defeat greeks. After followed france, betraying its “ ally “ Greece. 3) it’s estimated that 30-40% of the population of what we call turkey today were ethnic Greeks. They never made it to greece, at least most of them. What happened with them. Do you call imperialism, trying to save the lives of you lr fellow Greeks?
Among the best eye-witnesses's accounts of Smyrna's Catastrophe is "The Blight of Asia" by George Horton. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to understand the big picture in relation to these tragic events and, in general, the post ww1 period in Asia Minor, from the Aegean coast to the Armenian highlands.
We came damn close
Epic stream! Smyrna reminds me of Medieval Palermo.
Regarding something you mentioned at 3:13:00 , I don't think turkish surnames necessarily show Turkish(or "Turcopole") origins, a lot people in Anatolia turkified or adopted "turkish surnames" and quite recently(18th-19th century) either because in some cases they did speak turkish(without necessarily being or considering themselves Turks) or very often for let's say "social" reasons. Even today many Greeks in Turkey use a fake official Turkish name(even first name) in their dealings with the state or their Turkish neighbors (for example I knew a guy from Istanbul whose real name is Giorgos but all his neighbors knew him as "Mustafa"... I've also heard this is true for some of the Jews living there)
...By the way, actually most Turks/Muslims didn't even have surnames until the 1930s and the Turkish "Surname Law" which is why if you examine them closely most of the "turkish surnames" that are found among Greeks or Armenians or some other Balkan countries bear no connection to the surnames carried by actual Turks today, because the latter were invented in the 20th century...(and also why there's virtually zero Turks today with non-turkish names, not even Kurds...unlike Balkan nations /Greece where surnames indeed tend to be etymologically diverse)
Great topic Apostolic, good job. Episode on Reconquista or Spanish civil war would be GLORIOUS. Greetings to best history podcast on YT
Romania did NOT participate in the first Balkan war against the Ottomans. They only entered the second Balkan war at its latter stages when they realized that Bulgarian territory was up for grabs.
If I did say that, it was a slip of the tongue in an extemporaneous near 4hr conversation. When covering the First Balkan War we discussed the specific contributions of Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece and Montenegro - not Romania (obviously).
My family owns a rusty, officer's pistol, that used to belong to my great-grandfather. He was wounded on the outskirts of Ankara. He seldom called himself a Hellene, he preferred the term Rhomaios.
*Ankyra my friend
very interesting .... What would your great- grandfather have called his own ethnicity if his home area had been Achaea, do you think?
Well my friend, out of our nearly 1000 years of history of inter-mingling, the one thing we have learned is that to never again to trust people of other religions and ethnicities. I must say, Greeks and Serbians have truly killed the modern multi-cultural countries.
1:37:22 -- "Sèvres" is pronounced as if it were written _Sevr'._
The first three letters are pronounced as normal to an English speaker, making up the first syllable -- but the second syllable is just a French rolled "R," the hint of a vowel sound following it, and then it ends, barely even being pronounced.
The hope and dream of every Grecophile that never came to fruition.
Never came to fruition? Greece is an independent and democratic country. What else does it need?
Remember That Dude perhaps not haveing a significant portion of their population expelled from their historic homeland?
Remember ionia was Greek, ethnically and culturally untill they were forced out in the 1920s.
How can you speak like this? What nation are you coming from?
@@rememberthatdude848Yes it is, but a much smaller Greece without Eastern Thrace and Constantinople, without Ionia and Smyrna and without Northern Epirus, Cyprus and Pontus.
Nonetheless Greece's Megali Idea was not a failure. 1832, 1864, 1881, 1913, 1920/1923(Western Thrace) and 1948 were still quite impressive moments for a small poor nation-state.
*Philhellene
Incredibly informative discussion as usual. I'm impressed by your overview and understanding of not just a single topic but the entire chronology.
I love this channel
43:27 *Croatia-Slavonia. I assume this was a slip of the tongue since there appear to be quite a few throughout the course of this episode. It naturally leads one to ask what the cause of the unusual deconcentration was, though.
41:20 small correction, the Despotate of Epirus wasn't a Latin-led country, but Greek
Eletherios Venizelos should not have called an election in 1920
ty AM
When the allied forces entered Thessaloniki and the wider geographic territory of Macedonia, Greece was in a state of a quasi-civil war with two governments one in Athens under the leadership of the king and another in Thessaloniki under the leadership of Venizelos who was a staunch supporter of an alignment with the Entente and of entering the 1st world war. The largest part of the population in northern Greece were fanatically pro Venizelos whom considered their savior and thus definitely not against his decision to actually himself invite the allied forces in Thessaloniki and push for a Greek involvement on their side during the war! It's obvious that you have a very good general knowledge of history but there are still many inaccuracies and half-truths in your narrative.
How does this in anyway disprove the notion that the Entente violated Greek Sovereignty? This was our contention. It is obvious that the Entente had sympathisers during the National Schism - without which the coup against Constantine would not have been possible. So what? They didn't exercise sovereignty until 1917.
@@ApostolicMajesty The Entente were in fact INVITED at Thessaloniki by Venizelos while he was STILL the prime minister and that is actually the main reason the King dismissed him (as he had the right to do so by the contemporary constitution) very shortly after. Look it up. You never mentioned this very important historical fact and generally never made even a small mention that half of Greece and one of the greatest - if not the greatest - Greek politicians of the 20th century actually wanted and even invited the Entente forces in the region. You promote a false narrative as if the Anglo-French forces just came out of nowhere and did whatever they wanted within Greek territory, when as a matter of fact at least half of the population and its most successful politician of the era were all for it and thousands of pro-Venizelos Greeks actually volunteered in the Entente forces even before Greece was officially an ally!
Constantinople belonged to the Romanoi Greeks and to Christendom for 1100 years. Since then it has been held by the Turks and Islam for some 570 years. Both the Greeks and the Russians still dream of hearing Mass in St Sophia. Who can really say that it will never happen? It could have happened several times already. For example, if the English and French had not betrayed Christendom during the Crimean War by saving the Turks from defeat and thwarting a Russian conquest of Constantinople. At the end of WW1 when the Ottoman state collapsed, the British and French occupied the city. They did not need to give it up and they should never have handed it back to the Turks. The Turks could have been expelled from their limited European territories and Constantinople today would be a wonderful Christian city..
Would that the Greek army had not overextended into Anatolia and lost all holdings therein, their claims requiring too great (i.e. more than a token) commitment from the 2 Western powers for their war-weary populations to tolerate.
(Though I'm sure we could what if back to Manzikert, our dreams will likely remain forever that).
@@Dave0G Greek army never lost Constantinople and Thrace whatsoever. It was actually ceded to Turkey on behalf of Britain.
Also such defeatism doesn't help Greece. Just like Turkey clings to their territorial claims to this day, Greek should reembrace the Megali Idea.
Don't listen to the Western Europeans, who scold Greeks for their still existent nationalism yet supply the Turkish army (like the US, Ukraine and Turkey) and freely trade with them. They are all hypocrites.
I wish Greece Godspeed, because if she doesn't get that, then that is the true end of Greek history.
@@Dave0Git wont happen soon. History is long and we are talking centuries, so anything can happen, but for now Turkiye is MUCH stronger than Greece. Now, Russia, while successful in Ukraine, has many more pressing problems. Plus, Turkiye has a growing demography while Greece and Russia are declining significantly.
Not to mention that Daddy USA supports Turkey and not Greece or Russia
Cope lmao
Ever since Napoleon campaigned in Egypt the engineers assured him that the Suez Canal could be opened. Since then the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire was deemed necessary by the Great Powers, because otherwise it would control the canal. The problem for England and the whole West was to break up the Ottoman Empire without benefiting Russia. Mavrokordatos, a Phanariote, had assured England in a known letter (1824) , that the new Greek state would ally with Turkey to close the Aegean to Russia. The Greek Revolution was therefore limited and controlled and the Balkans were led to multiple divisions for this reason.
The Greek's took advantage of a power vacuum but with the Ottoman Army in Anatolia remaining intact (in accordance with the Mudros armistice) it was only a matter of time before the Turk's were able to regroup and overwhelm them
Which side were the 'good guys' in this war?
I would say both sides had legitimate aims and illegitimate aims.
Everyone had illegitimate claims except Greece. The entente used Greece as a playball against their Ottoman rivals and the Turks continued their massacres of Greek Christians not yet liberated by Greece.
One could claim that Greece was fighting a 2 front war one militarily and one politically.
Based on what they suffered and the fact that their former homeland comprised 70% of Turkey. Am I saying that they would have conquered Turkey up to the Euphrates?
No, but with loyal allies, no schisms and less harsh Turkish concessions. Greece could have retained Ionia and Thrace (+ Constantinople) easily.
When you say "kamalism", I've been hearing "kamalaism". I pray to God that we never know how "kamalaism" might manifest
I'll say that Greece's territorial conquests from 1820 to 1920 were unprecedented compared to anyone else of the same time period (for a relatively small country like Greece).
and now it is time to revert Greece back to its original borders...
@@kuvikina from the shores of Spain till Crimea?
@@t30dore59 Yep
From Southern Italy to Euphrates? I understand that you're a huge Philhellene but be serious mate. @@kuvikina
Took 3 years from Izmir to Ankara and only 3 days all the way back to the sea.
What do you call this?
Before the balkan wars Serbia was supposed to get most of Albania and Bulgaria was supposed to get Macedonia. But again the intervention of the Great Powers, especially Austro-Hungary and Italy created a problem. They denied Serbia the rights over Albania, which they then founded as a country. Serbia compensated this loss by occupying the whole of North Macedonia, which Bulgaria was supposed to get, and this was a direct cause of the Second Balkan war.
Anyone listening to your streams has food for thought about our own times. Too much reporting on current international affairs lacks considered historical perspective.
I listen to your streams while walking the dogs.
They're not Greeks, they're ROMANS.
One does not exclude the other.
I think a lot of people don’t research when Greeks tell that smyrna was majority Greek. Researches show that other than the city itself none of the area is Greek majority in the maps. Which negates all their claims of occupation.
Wtf Montnegro contributed more than Greece?! Without the Greek navy and the legendary armored cruiser Averof winning all the major naval battles in the Aegean and thus blocking all sorts of Ottoman supplies from Anatolia, the outcome of the first Balkan war might have been very different. Clueless...
Before you insult me actually listen to my comment where I said very clearly that Montenegro committed more on a PER CAPITA basis which is objectively true considering that anywhere between 15% and 20% of the population of Montenegro were committed to the war.
Αδερφέ.. αυτό που λέει ο "κουτόφραγκος"(φυσικά αστειεύομαι) είναι αληθές.
Ο Ελληνισμός θα κατακτούσε τη θέση που του αξίζει αν δεν υπήρχαν οι αντιβενιζελικοί.
Ξεκίνησα ως αντιβενιζελικός στα 17-18 μου έτη και διαβάζοντας μανιωδώς ελληνικές και αγγλικές (πρωτογενείς και μη)πηγές, κατέληξα στα 42 μου φανατικά Βενιζελικός!