Okay, there are those who are eager to divide, and it is not known whether there is another society that is so ready to be divided.
Even a channel topic has divided us into two.
Those who say that the Canal Istanbul should be built are Canalists, and those who oppose them are Anti-Canalists. Very few who think intellectually, investigate the matter, and listen to the words of scientists. If the leader you follow says that 'it will be built', you pass to the 'Canalists' side, and if the leader you follow says 'it shouldn't be built', you pass to the 'Anti-Canalists' side and start to scream. This is an astonishing situation.
If the society became too campy on this subject, we had to say some things, that is to say, to enter the Canal.
Exactly on this issue, while the dispute, the late Aytunç Altındal revealed a disclosure. The summary is that the United States cannot send a comfortable navy to the Black Sea due to restrictions in Montreux. It wants to overcome this restriction by building a channel and to take control of strategic spaces including the oil regions from the Black Sea. The construction of the channel is a submission to a US orientation.
We believe that these words of the late Mr.Aytunç, whose ears are sensitive to underground sounds, can be respected.
One excuse by the Canalists is the damage the oil tankers have done to the bosphorus in the past. There is something to consider when discussing this issue. Oil and natural gas is increasingly being transported by pipelines. Tens of thousands of kilometers of pipelines are likely to be expanded. The downward trend of tanker transport seems to weaken the canalists' excuses. And shouldn't it be taken into account that this kind of catastrophe in the canal would be more damaging than the dangers that might be in the throat?
Another point is, how are we going to convince the transport sector managers who act with the capitalist mind?, While Montreux has the advantage of passing through the bosphorus without the need to even get a guide?
The concerns expressed in recent days for those who serve the re-imagination of Byzantium in Istanbul will develop as in the examples of Fener, Balat and Sur, what will be the attitude of the European Union and should these issues not be discussed?
Why are no positive or negative assessments put forward by the authorities on issues such as environment, geological, ecological, statistics, living lives, geographical, military, economic, rent-sharing, water resources, international relations and world balances? Public science is not informed by data, it is not understandable. Some of the leaders of 180 degrees to the opposite view, another 180 degrees after three years to add more than the incidents of canal cutting.
Shortly, the Canalist, which is the abbreviation of Canal Istanbul, has also been introduced as a term that divides the nation into two. Tough, menacing, and not at all pleasing styles, mutual controversy further intensifies this division.
If the canal is to be built in Istanbul, our nation should not be divided, it should be informed and convinced that a job should be done by adopting. To make this work stubbornly intervening the citizens, it was not a profitable behavior to take the decision to make with the finished. Otherwise, these ambitions should be given up if our future is to be obscured. Especially if there is a US imposition, and if it is to obey or oppose it, an honorable state behavior should be abandoned when the road is close.
SHOWY FEAT AND INVESTMENT
The investment has nothing to do with showy feat,
Do not spend a lot of money on sand and cement;
Take care of this land, this green,
The grass can't be trample down to bullock!