In Syria

[Paul G.]

 

Why the hell is turkey still in NATO.

 

Look at a map of the region.

 

All the best

 

Andreas

 

 

Yep, the cold war is over. And they have chosen new sides.

[Panzermann]

 

 

 

 

Why the hell is turkey still in NATO.

Look at a map of the region.

 

All the best

 

Andreas

Yep, the cold war is over. And they have chosen new sides.

Or we thought. There seem to be enough nostalgics around that like to brew the cold war up again at the moment.

 

Then Turkey is also conveniently placed near Iran on the map, not only Russia. And not to forget US interest in Mesopotamia.

[firefly1]

 

 

 

Yep, the cold war is over. And they have chosen new sides.

 

.

 

No. Turkey may not be the biggest or most active member of NATO, but its help and assistance has really helped operations in the Middle East and Afghanistan and Iraq especially.

 

HOWEVER, they do have their own interests (which they are quite open about) and expect some sort of "quid pro quo" which, unfortunately, the US (and other NATO members) have often overlooked (not to say trampled all over).

 

Even now Turkey aren't necessarily sacrificing their neighbouring Kurds, but their terms ( attacks on the Syrian regime ) don't chime with what the USA and NATO can get past their general populations.

 

Now I much prefer the Kurds to the Syrian regime (not exactly a difficult choice) - but I realise what the British population would think of open British aerial attacks on Syria - so some proper, serious diplomacy is called for, not the typical mindless short-termism of the standard US fare.

 

.

[Paul G.]

 

 

 

 

Yep, the cold war is over. And they have chosen new sides.

 

.

 

No. Turkey may not be the biggest or most active member of NATO, but its help and assistance has really helped operations in the Middle East and Afghanistan and Iraq especially.

 

HOWEVER, they do have their own interests (which they are quite open about) and expect some sort of "quid pro quo" which, unfortunately, the US (and other NATO members) have often overlooked (not to say trampled all over).

 

Even now Turkey aren't necessarily sacrificing their neighbouring Kurds, but their terms ( attacks on the Syrian regime ) don't chime with what the USA and NATO can get past their general populations.

 

Now I much prefer the Kurds to the Syrian regime (not exactly a difficult choice) - but I realise what the British population would think of open British aerial attacks on Syria - so some proper, serious diplomacy is called for, not the typical mindless short-termism of the standard US fare.

 

.

 

 

Yes they do have their own interests, and should be free to pursue them outside of any international security agreement with the US. Erdogan's government is an enemy to the West.

[Marcello]

Now I much prefer the Kurds to the Syrian regime (not exactly a difficult choice) - but I realise what the British population would think of open British aerial attacks on Syria - so some proper, serious diplomacy is called for, not the typical mindless short-termism of the standard US fare.

 

It is pretty simple: blowing up Assad will mean that most of Syria will be up for grabs by IS, with all that comes with that. Unless the turks go all in with ground troops of course, but I doubt even they can put something resembling a state back together. Most of the players in the regions are backstabbing SOBs of course but Erdogan is looking especially bad at the moment, so I would not trust him to honor his part of any such deal.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Marcello

[DKTanker]

 

 

 

 

It was heavily reported in the US, western and Turkish press, just not "officially" confirmed.

 

Trying to squirm out of reality doesn't work.

 

The only worm here is you with your childish half assed claims. Sorry your panties got all twisted up when I called you on your fictional story, next time try staying with reality you can prove, not the Dan Rather notion of reality.

[swerve]

 

 

Why the hell is turkey still in NATO.

 

Look at a map of the region.

 

All the best

 

Andreas

 

 

Yep, the cold war is over. And they have chosen new sides.

 

I thought Turkey has always been on Turkey's side - just like the USA has always been on the USA's side.

[Daan]

Desperate sounding Kurds against advancing ISIS T-55 and infantry, pretty wild:

http://youtu.be/_Qt28qs02pw

 

ISIS infantry advancing through the streets of Kobane:

http://youtu.be/ywK_XB8LOFg

Edited October 8, 2014 by Daan

[DKTanker]

 

I thought Turkey has always been on Turkey's side - just like the USA has always been on the USA's side.

 

Remember when you told me Turkey wouldn't take the opportunity to attack the Kurds because the regime needed Kurdish votes? You were right, I was wrong. They aren't fighting the Kurds, they're merely corralling and pushing them into the killing arms of ISIS.

[Paul G.]

 

 

 

Why the hell is turkey still in NATO.

 

Look at a map of the region.

 

All the best

 

Andreas

 

 

Yep, the cold war is over. And they have chosen new sides.

 

I thought Turkey has always been on Turkey's side - just like the USA has always been on the USA's side.

 

 

No not just like. Erdogan's government has been rolling back democracy and secularism in favor of a psudo-Islamic government.

[Stargrunt6]

Fighting close to Turkish border.

 

https://news.vice.com/article/battle-for-kobane-rages-as-protests-against-turkeys-inaction-end-in-kurdish-deaths?utm_source=vicenewsfb

[swerve]

 

 

I thought Turkey has always been on Turkey's side - just like the USA has always been on the USA's side.

 

Remember when you told me Turkey wouldn't take the opportunity to attack the Kurds because the regime needed Kurdish votes? You were right, I was wrong. They aren't fighting the Kurds, they're merely corralling and pushing them into the killing arms of ISIS.

 

Corallig? Pushing? It looks to me as if the Turks are doing exactly nothing. That's not 'corralling' or 'pushing'. It's no more than the USA did to the Iraqi Shi'a in 1991. I think it's wrong, as I did back then (& note that it caused the US military a lot of trouble after 2003), but it's a long way from what you're claiming. At least the Turks are letting refugees cross the border - albeit reluctantly.

 

I was wrong because I thought Erdogan would do something against IS, now it's obvious (or should be) that it's a threat to Turkish security.

[Brian Kennedy]

I think it's different from the Shia in '91 because 1) it's a few miles from the Turkish border -- this is like an impending massacre in Tijuana (for us USAians) or something -- 2) it would be cheap and easy for the Turks to at least fire some arty (so they can't argue that it's impracticable), and 3) most of the other NATO countries are begging them to intervene. I mean, it's blatantly obvious that the Turkish gov. wants Khobane to fall to ISIS, or at the very least really doesn't care.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Brian Kennedy

[rohala]

Erdogan's government has been rolling back democracy and secularism in favor of a psudo-Islamic government.

Erdogan has won repeatedly the popular vote, and with great margins. Turkey was never a proper democracy, certainly not under pseudo-secular governments.

[Brian Kennedy]

I guess it's always more depressing watching people who are fighting as hard as they can get whacked.

[Sikkiyn]

From the open-source articles I have been reading, the ISF, Peshmerga, and Shi'a militias, have been holding their own against ISIS. The video where ISIS is using a T55 in NE Diyala, the Peshmerga ended up repelling the attack, with IA aviation making an appearance to stop ISIS from cutting off the water supply to Diyala.

I would like to see Turkey get involved simply to see if they are worth a damn in a conflict. They can have machismo all day long, but machismo doesn't make an Army worth a damn.

[Simon Tan]

Actually they are preventing the Kurds from reinforcing Kobane. Which is exactly the same as helping ISIL. Who got most of their foreign volunteers and hardware via Turkey until they captured so much from the Iraqis. 51% is not a great margin and he has pretty much gutted the Turkish Army, Police and Judiciary along the way. I really hope the contagion blows into Turkey, right good and hard given their role in formenting it.

[rohala]

51% is not a great margin and he has pretty much gutted the Turkish Army, Police and Judiciary along the way. I really hope the contagion blows into Turkey, right good and hard given their role in formenting it.

In Greece's politics we often hear the notion of attrition from governance. Whenever a party wins the elections it steadily loses popularity until it loses the elections. Erdogan's AKP seems to do the opposite. Using the relevant wikipedia articles we see that

in 2002 AKP got 34.28% of the votes while the second party got 19.4%

in 2007 AKP got 46.66% of the votes while the second party got 20.85%

in 2011 AKP got 49.83% of the votes while the second party got 25.98%

Erdogan stepped down from Prime Minister and was elected as President in 2014 with 51.79% from the first round. If there had been a second round he may well have won two thirds of the votes.

So, yes Erdogan and his party have won with comfortable margins from the opposition, which addmiteddly seems to slowly rally against them. Agreed, Erdogan did gut the army and the such, but the reason was that these institutions were heavily politicized and with a long history of coup d'etats.

[firefly1]

.

 

It's amazing how people seem to forget that the whole mess of ISIS has been caused by the meddling of Gulf States (and/or rich individuals therein) and Western States interfering in Syria and giving extremists a spring board into the area.

 

Any states admitting their mistakes ?

 

.

[WRW]

Actually they are preventing the Kurds from reinforcing Kobane. Which is exactly the same as helping ISIL. Who got most of their foreign volunteers and hardware via Turkey until they captured so much from the Iraqis. 51% is not a great margin and he has pretty much gutted the Turkish Army, Police and Judiciary along the way. I really hope the contagion blows into Turkey, right good and hard given their role in formenting it.

I think it will cross over but hope not - I live there and do not fancy having to evacuate (done it once) or wtaching my back on the streets

[Roman Alymov]

Gov army promo video with interesting vehicles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adqHba6Oojw&feature=youtu.be

[bojan]

.

Any states admitting their mistakes ?

 

.

It is not a mistake if it was planned so from day 1.

[Brian Kennedy]

Interesting slideshow from Rudaw.net --

 

http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/091020141

 

Check out http://rudaw.net/Library/Assets/SK20141009001-(6).jpg

 

http://rudaw.net/Library/Assets/SK20141009001-(15).jpg

[Schwarzie]

.

It's amazing how people seem to forget that the whole mess of ISIS has been caused by the meddling of Gulf States (and/or rich individuals therein) and Western States interfering in Syria and giving extremists a spring board into the area.

 

Any states admitting their mistakes ?

 

Im not a state but i would say it was a mistake from the beginning to not support Assad (who is not his father, just look at his biography) against the Terrorists and gain concessions in the return (like the exact position of one or more of his more insane siblings he got as leftovers from his fathers regime for a convinient drone mistake). Then the civil war in Syria would be already a footnote in history and IS would never have gained such a big foothold.

[DKTanker]

Im not a state but i would say it was a mistake from the beginning to not support Assad (who is not his father, just look at his biography) against the Terrorists and gain concessions in the return (like the exact position of one or more of his more insane siblings he got as leftovers from his fathers regime for a convinient drone mistake). Then the civil war in Syria would be already a footnote in history and IS would never have gained such a big foothold.

 

 

In fact the initial position of the Obama regime, while it was actively undermining Qaddafi, was that Bashar Assad was a benevolent reformer and his continued existence should be supported. As I recall that all changed upon the death of Qaddafi, then it was "Bashar Assad must go."