Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Cimarron29414 · 06-02-2010, 11:05 AM

Idyllic,

No worries. Generally, Turkey is our friend. Some further insight into our strained relationship with Turkey. Turkey is a member of NATO and has the second largest military in NATO. The following is a Turkish perspective, I am just repeating it. I don't really know the Kurdish side of this issue, but I recognize that there is one: The Turks also have a "terrorism problem" in the Kurds. Much like the Palestinians, the Kurds want self-rule. Through the technique of geographic ethnic concentrations, they are attempting to carve out a piece of land in eastern Turkey, northern Iraq and Western Iran (there are some other countries up there which are included, Armenia and such) and create a nation called Kurdistan. Generally, this term is already being accepted by world media. When the concentration is high enough and the Kurds hold enough power in local governments, they will break away and form their own country, thus taking land away from those countries. The Turks know this and resist losing their territory. Saddam knew this and put unspeakable acts of violence against the Kurds (chem attacks).

If you recall, in the 2003 Iraq invasion, the US made nice with the Northern Alliance of Iraq (Kurds) in order to have those guys do a lot of the land battles in the north, taking the pressure off of our troops. We guaranteed them a degree of autonomous rule and control over the northern oil fields (thus giving them a huge bank roll for their future country.) This was an offense to Turkey, because the Kurds were doing suicide bombings into eastern Turkey much the way the Palestinians do in Tel Aviv. So, to Turkey, we were choosing their enemy over our NATO ally. This is why the Turkish parliament rejected our use of their land and air space to raid Iraq from the north. Consequently, if you recall, all of our ships in the Med and Black Seas had to drive all the way around, delaying the battle by weeks.

Now back to my opinion. This was the start of the degradation in relations between the US and Turkey. I believe it was a mistake by the Bush administration to disrespect their NATO ally and the only Muslim nation in NATO during that battle. One could never know the rationale behind this decision, obviously the Northern Alliance brought something compelling to the table. I personally believe that your treaty partners must always come before other deals.

So, what does all of this have to do with the thread?

1) Turkey is a NATO ally and we publicly humiliated them in 2003.
2) Turkey is a victim of terrorism from muslims and has empathy for us and Israel.
3) Turkey is/was a friend to Israel.
4) If we side with Israel on this, it is going to be considered further disrespect to the Turks.

I'm inclined to let Israel sort this one out on their own. I seriously doubt they called the WH before performing this operation, so they should face the consequences alone. They could defuse this situation with the least amount of mea culpa. The fact that they are not, is strategically a poor choice, in my opinion.

06-02-2010, 11:05 AM	#78 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	Idyllic, No worries. Generally, Turkey is our friend. Some further insight into our strained relationship with Turkey. Turkey is a member of NATO and has the second largest military in NATO. The following is a Turkish perspective, I am just repeating it. I don't really know the Kurdish side of this issue, but I recognize that there is one: The Turks also have a "terrorism problem" in the Kurds. Much like the Palestinians, the Kurds want self-rule. Through the technique of geographic ethnic concentrations, they are attempting to carve out a piece of land in eastern Turkey, northern Iraq and Western Iran (there are some other countries up there which are included, Armenia and such) and create a nation called Kurdistan. Generally, this term is already being accepted by world media. When the concentration is high enough and the Kurds hold enough power in local governments, they will break away and form their own country, thus taking land away from those countries. The Turks know this and resist losing their territory. Saddam knew this and put unspeakable acts of violence against the Kurds (chem attacks). If you recall, in the 2003 Iraq invasion, the US made nice with the Northern Alliance of Iraq (Kurds) in order to have those guys do a lot of the land battles in the north, taking the pressure off of our troops. We guaranteed them a degree of autonomous rule and control over the northern oil fields (thus giving them a huge bank roll for their future country.) This was an offense to Turkey, because the Kurds were doing suicide bombings into eastern Turkey much the way the Palestinians do in Tel Aviv. So, to Turkey, we were choosing their enemy over our NATO ally. This is why the Turkish parliament rejected our use of their land and air space to raid Iraq from the north. Consequently, if you recall, all of our ships in the Med and Black Seas had to drive all the way around, delaying the battle by weeks. Now back to my opinion. This was the start of the degradation in relations between the US and Turkey. I believe it was a mistake by the Bush administration to disrespect their NATO ally and the only Muslim nation in NATO during that battle. One could never know the rationale behind this decision, obviously the Northern Alliance brought something compelling to the table. I personally believe that your treaty partners must always come before other deals. So, what does all of this have to do with the thread? 1) Turkey is a NATO ally and we publicly humiliated them in 2003. 2) Turkey is a victim of terrorism from muslims and has empathy for us and Israel. 3) Turkey is/was a friend to Israel. 4) If we side with Israel on this, it is going to be considered further disrespect to the Turks. I'm inclined to let Israel sort this one out on their own. I seriously doubt they called the WH before performing this operation, so they should face the consequences alone. They could defuse this situation with the least amount of mea culpa. The fact that they are not, is strategically a poor choice, in my opinion. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly." Last edited by Cimarron29414; 06-02-2010 at 11:30 AM..