Why didn't the Ottoman Empire ever send explorers to the New World after 1492?

For the majority of human history I'd rather live in Syria than what is now Venezuela.

So Famine or Civil War?

At least Syria isn't run by Commies

Because Spain would have cucked them at Gibraltar.

They would have needed to conquer Morocco and then have built a huge port and fleet at Rabat or Casablanca.

Then it would have been glorious.

ok then, why didn't Morocco sail west? They were ideally situated and definitely the strongest of the maghreb states.

Ottomans would have had to colonize African coast from Red Sea coast or explore Asia. Since Spaniards were blocking exit from Mediterranean.

exactly because they were the strongest.

because history is not a turn based strategy game

and the ottomans wouldnt know what to do with america even if they knew about it back in 1300ed, firstly because they were buisy with things like taking constantinopole, secondly because they werent a nation of sailors, they just sort of had a fleet as they controled a lot of coastline, thirdly because they just wouldnt know what the fuck to do with it, its to far away to send 70000+ army to invade, its nowhere close enough to be a threat, at best they would trade with them, or basicaly just give them all smallpox and flue, and then europeans would settle there

Because trading with India and China was much more profitable

By the time they learned about it, and knew how to build ocean-faring ships, America was pretty taken.

>Imagine how the world would be if the Ottomans started to establish their own colonies there.
You'd see the first independent new world nation very quickly.
They had a history of insubordinate governors taking over provinces, imagine what a janissary would do to get appointed to a colony. You'd have New Bosnia ™ in the blink of an eye.

If it existed, would an Italian colony in the New World be considered part of Latin America like the Spanish and Potruguese colonies are?

The Spanish went to fuck with their neighbours, then their neighbours went to fuck with them, and then continued to go to fuck each other
who was Morocco to fuck

Well I mean Italian sounds about as dopey as spanish and portugese, so yes

Italy was divided politically and Italian states were making money the same way the Ottomans were: by controlling Mediterranean trade.

Colonization was achieved by states that were trying to navigate around Ottoman and Venetian trade dominance.

The Spanish didn't set out initially to colonize the new world, they set out to form their own trade routes with India.

Thank God they didn't. They trash.

A lot of factors but it simply boils down to this:

-Ottomans always fighting

-Fighting costs money

-Colonies costs money

-Since Ottomans love war they choose fighting

Wars were really expensive and devastating and Ottomans were almost always involved in some conflict also they did do a lot of exploring and mapping (check Piri Reis's map, only a certain section of the map remains but it is said to have contained the whole worlds map accurately)

NEW BOSNA NEVER

You don't know what you are talking about.

In a way they logistically supported those who were going out and colonizing with their slave trade.

Greater than the groups doing the colonizing would be the group that enabled them to do so.

You are born in the Sub-Saharan African colony of America

you live for 18 years
trying to farm, but you don't know how to,
so you're given food, money and everything you need by Europe,
but then the next-door village neighbour came into town, and saw that you refused to suck the daily cow vagina, and decides to cook and eat you

The only colonies which have ever been successful is those where the population is either replaced by europeans or where there's no current population and europeans settle the land

or where euro's manage and control absolutely everything like rhodesia or south africa, but the moment they stop managing everything, it turns to shit