NationStates Jolt Archive

By right of conquest it is now my OP

Turkey's army chief said Thursday the military had launched several "large scale" offensives against rebels in the predominantly Kurdish southeast, and he asked the government for approval to launch an incursion into neighboring northern Iraq.

Turkish general pushes for cross-border incursion into Iraq (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/12/europe/EU-GEN-Turkey-Military-Iraq.php)

The army is extremely influential in Turkey, and prime minister Erdogan cannot afford a clash with the army this close to the new presidential elections (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/14/europe/EU-GEN-Turkey-Secularism.php). Perhaps the army is attempting to block his presidency... the current president issued a warning (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/13/europe/EU-GEN-Turkey-Islam.php) against rhe rise of Islamism...

Any thoughts?

Turkey's army chief said Thursday the military had launched several "large scale" offensives against rebels in the predominantly Kurdish southeast, and he asked the government for approval to launch an incursion into neighboring northern Iraq.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/04/12/ap3605792.html

Thoughts?

A warning should be given to Turkey right away. Nip this idea in the bud. Turkey would do nothing good in Iraq. You think they treat the Kurds bad in Turkey. Wait until they arrive in Iraq where there will be no holds barred.

Also want to add that the Turks had the chance to join the coalition in the begining. They could have already been in Iraq as a coalition partner.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/04/12/ap3605792.html

Thoughts?

Turkey better becareful. The last thing we need is yet more upheavel.

And Kurdish Iraq is the only place that's going well!

The only thing that Turkey would do is kill them off.


PS:Question, What side does Turkey take in the Israel\Palestine situation?

Guess what I'm implying.

Turkey must be terrified at the faint possibility of a Kurdish state at its border.

And Kurdish Iraq is the only place that's going well!

The only thing that Turkey would do is kill them off.


PS:Question, What side does Turkey take in the Israel\Palestine situation?

Guess what I'm implying.
What are you implying?

its all part of the inevitable disaster that is iraq.

turkey cant put up with an independant kurdistan on their border. its too encouraging to the turkish kurds.

if turkey invades iraq, they are on the US shit list and should be on the EU shit list. no EU membership for turkey eh?

this pushes turkey away from the secular west and into the arms of the fundamentalist islamic nations.

can george bush work up the diplomacy necessary to stop turkey? he doesnt have much of a diplomatic track record so far.

There's only one way to settle this...Capture the flag.

Turkey starts from the north, Israel from the west, Iran from the east, Saudi Arabia from the south, and the US will try to hold the flag in Baghdad. Winner gets Iraq.

What are you implying?
Same thing that everyone implies that Israel should do.

Two state solution.

what good will that do the kurds when turkey invades?

Maybe the EU could actually...I dunno...stop them?

Same thing that everyone implies that Israel should do.

Two state solution.

what good will that do the kurds when turkey invades?

what good will that do the kurds when turkey invades?

I'm saying that TURKEY should give up land.

Maybe the EU could actually...I dunno...stop them?

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The EU do something?! You have to be kidding! Thats the funniest thing I have seen in a while on NS! The EU wouldnt/couldnt say boo to a goose let alone a Turkey...

I'm saying that TURKEY should give up land.

Why?

Maybe the EU could actually...I dunno...stop them?

maybe there is some diplomat in the EU who could drop by ankara and suggest to the turks that it is not the best thing to do. maybe they can convince turkey that eventual EU membership is more important than slaughtering kurds.

they wont do anything militarily.

maybe there is some diplomat in the EU who could drop by ankara and suggest to the turks that it is not the best thing to do. maybe they can convince turkey that eventual EU membership is more important than slaughtering kurds.

That's all that's needed, but I get the feeling the U.S. is going to be expected to jump in regardless.

"Dude, you started this mess."

"Come on man I just got out of there, why can't you do it?"

"I'm busy!"

"Doing what?"

"Improving social welfare, transportation, etc."

*laughs* "oh yeah, well I'll be there soon."

That's all that's needed, but I get the feeling the U.S. is going to be expected to jump in regardless.

"Dude, you started this mess."

"Come on man I just got out of there, why can't you do it?"

"I'm busy!"

"Doing what?"

"Improving social welfare, transportation, etc."

*laughs* "oh yeah, well I'll be there soon."


its a tough spot for the US. turkey is a long time ally. the kurds of iraq are our one shining spot of victory.

lets hope that EU guy gets there soon.

lets hope that EU guy gets there soon.

We will be waiting a long time

We will be waiting a long time

maybe bush will send bill clinton. he could get the turks to see the light.



just trying to make you laugh again

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The EU do something?! You have to be kidding! Thats the funniest thing I have seen in a while on NS! The EU wouldnt/couldnt say boo to a goose let alone a Turkey...

Yeah man. The European Union is a group of pussies...please forgive my vulgarity.

Yeah man. The European Union is a group of pussies...please forgive my vulgarity.
Nah, actually, the kind of people who are pussies are people who rise to terrorist attacks and go and kill hundreds of thousands of people with no connections to them around the world, all because they're too scared to evaluate the why as well as the how.

Forgive my vulgarity.

Nah, actually, the kind of people who are pussies are people who rise to terrorist attacks and go and kill hundreds of thousands of people with no connections to them around the world, all because they're too scared to evaluate the why as well as the how.

Forgive my vulgarity.

I assure you I am not in support of the Iraq war. I am more concerned with the potential Genocide of the Kurds. The EU bastards did NOTHING in Yugoslavia therefore I have no faith in them. And try pulling the "The US didn't do anything at first either!" BS. Try it. As far as I'm concerned we did it because the EU wouldn't. Its not our continent. Not our responsibility. But we did eventually end it.

Regardless that is besides the point, which is that the EU is indeed terrified of conflict (with good reason mind you), but there are times where it is quite necessary.

I assure you I am not in support of the Iraq war. I am more concerned with the potential Genocide of the Kurds. The EU bastards did NOTHING in Yugoslavia therefore I have no faith in them. And try pulling the "The US didn't do anything at first either!" BS. Try it. As far as I'm concerned we did it because the EU wouldn't. Its not our continent. Not our responsibility. But we did eventually end it.
What, pray tell, did the US do that the EU didn't?

Remind me again how the US went into the former Yugoslavia alone or how NATO is a purely american organization and how no EU members participated...

What, pray tell, did the US do that the EU didn't?

Remind me again how the US went into the former Yugoslavia alone or how NATO is a purely american organization and how no EU members participated...

First of all: The US initiated the operation. Second of all, the EU did nothing until the Americans moved. So the war began in....90 I believe? Perhaps '88. The intervention did not begin until about '97-'98. Eight years or so that the EU stood by and did nothing.

I assure you I am not in support of the Iraq war. I am more concerned with the potential Genocide of the Kurds.
Rightio. I still don't entirely see how the EU's going to stop that militarily.

Bring down the government of Turkey, perchance?

Not going to happen. The EU knows what happens when that kind of thing happens, and it's tried to avoid it in the Middle East. Closer to home, it'd be even worse.

Put our own forces in the way of the Turkish ones?

Most Europeans won't see the point, even if it is a good idea, don't want any kind of war in Europe, and it'd be a waste of lives.

Basically, the Kurdish are probably buggered fairly royally, and nothing that the EU or USA says, other than making fairly vain threats about military action, is going to sort it out.
The EU bastards did NOTHING in Yugoslavia therefore I have no faith in them. And try pulling the "The US didn't do anything at first either!" BS. Try it. As far as I'm concerned we did it because the EU wouldn't. Its not our continent. Not our responsibility. But we did eventually end it.

Regardless that is besides the point, which is that the EU is indeed terrified of conflict (with good reason mind you), but there are times where it is quite necessary.


OK, you're wrong on a number of points about the EU -

1) True, the EU had nothing to do with the Yugoslavian conflict, but some of its members did (for example, the UK and France). Although it does rather depend on which one you're talking about, to be honest.

2) The EU has never been a military organisation and indeed was set up to stop another European war (with the sharing of steel and coal to begin with).

It is starting to have some military-esque capability, with the European Gendarmerie Force (which are basically riot police with assault rifles, which can be deployed anywhere in Europe in a matter of hours) and I think that eventually, there'll be a European Union standing army, but that'll be a while yet.

Just remember that it's only been about 15 years since it's been the European Union, with more wide-ranging political power, instead of the EEC, which was more about monetary matters and less about good governance in Europe. It wasn't even the EU when the conflict started - remember that.

Heres a little timeline of the Yugoslav Civil War:


1991

Slovenia and Croatia declare independence. War in Slovenia lasts ten days.
The Yugoslav army leaves Slovenia but supports rebel Serb forces in Croatia. War begins in Croatia.

1992

Vance peace plan signed, creating 4 UNPA zones for Serbs and ending large scale fighting in Croatia.
Macedonia and Bosnia declare independence. Bosnian war begins.
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia proclaimed, consisting of Serbia and Montenegro, the only two remaining republics.
United Nations impose sanctions against FR Yugoslavia and accepts Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia as members.

1993

Bosniak-Croat conflict in Bosnia begins.
Fighting begins in the Bihać region between Bosnian Government and Bosniaks loyal to Fikret Abdić.

1994

Peace treaty between Bosniaks and Croats arbitrated by the United States.

1995

Srebrenica massacre reported, 8,000 Bosniaks killed.
Croatia launches Operation Flash and Operation Storm, reclaiming all UNPA zones except Eastern Slavonia, and resulting in exodus of Serbs from the zones. War in Croatia ends.
NATO launches a series of air strikes on Bosnian Serb artillery and other military targets.
Dayton Agreement signed in Paris. War in Bosnia and Herzegovina ends.

1996

FR Yugoslavia recognizes Croatia and Bosnia & Herzegovina.
Following a fraud in local elections, hundreds of thousands of Serbs demonstrate in Belgrade against Milošević regime for three months.

1998

Fighting breaks out between Serbian forces and ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.
Eastern Slavonia peacefully reintegrated into Croatia.

1999

NATO starts the military campaign Operation Allied Force in Kosovo. Control of Kosovo is given to the United Nations, but still remains a part of Yugoslavia's federadion.
Franjo Tuđman dies. Shortly after that, his party loses the elections.

2000

Slobodan Milošević is voted out of office, and Vojislav Koštunica becomes new president of Yugoslavia.

2001

Brief Conflict in Southern Serbia between Albanian militants and Serbian security forces.
Conflict between Albanian militants and government in Macedonia.

Rightio. I still don't entirely see how the EU's going to stop that militarily.

Bring down the government of Turkey, perchance?

Not going to happen. The EU knows what happens when that kind of thing happens, and it's tried to avoid it in the Middle East. Closer to home, it'd be even worse.

Put our own forces in the way of the Turkish ones?

Most Europeans won't see the point, even if it is a good idea, don't want any kind of war in Europe, and it'd be a waste of lives.

Basically, the Kurdish are probably buggered fairly royally, and nothing that the EU or USA says, other than making fairly vain threats about military action, is going to sort it out.



OK, you're wrong on a number of points about the EU -

1) True, the EU had nothing to do with the Yugoslavian conflict, but some of its members did (for example, the UK and France). Although it does rather depend on which one you're talking about, to be honest.

2) The EU has never been a military organisation and indeed was set up to stop another European war (with the sharing of steel and coal to begin with).

It is starting to have some military-esque capability, with the European Gendarmerie Force (which are basically riot police with assault rifles, which can be deployed anywhere in Europe in a matter of hours) and I think that eventually, there'll be a European Union standing army, but that'll be a while yet.

Just remember that it's only been about 15 years since it's been the European Union, with more wide-ranging political power, instead of the EEC, which was more about monetary matters and less about good governance in Europe. It wasn't even the EU when the conflict started - remember that.

You have a good point about the last few statements, one which I didn't take into consideration (That being the EU not being a military organization so to speak, and rather an economic one). And I did know about a small Foreign Legion (French) unit which did attempt to intervene in the Serbian-Bosnian Conflict, but that really never went anywhere until the later 90s. (I believe the Legion went in in '96, but I am likely wrong about that).

You have a good point about the last few statements, one which I didn't take into consideration (That being the EU not being a military organization so to speak, and rather an economic one). And I did know about a small Foreign Legion (French) unit which did attempt to intervene in the Serbian-Bosnian Conflict, but that really never went anywhere until the later 90s. (I believe the Legion went in in '96, but I am likely wrong about that).
The French and British at the very least were present in Kosovo - a US veteran on the forum talked about it and how the Brits and French were sitting around drinking coffee with the locals and perhaps doing their job as peacekeepers better than the US, who were in full combat gear and riding around in 5t trucks with weapons pointing in every direction.

First of all: The US initiated the operation. Second of all, the EU did nothing until the Americans moved. So the war began in....90 I believe? Perhaps '88. The intervention did not begin until about '97-'98. Eight years or so that the EU stood by and did nothing.

Ok, I'm sorry, but it's simply ignorant to think that the european community did not try to do anything with the situation in the former Yugoslavia - but the problem was that they couldn't do much except negotiate between the different parties. Nothing could be done without a UN mandate seeing as it was an internal affair...

The US did not single-handedly "save the day". It was a joint effort.

Oh, and the intervention began with Operation Deny Flight back in 1993.

Ok, I'm sorry, but it's simply ignorant to think that the european community did not try to do anything with the situation in the former Yugoslavia - but the problem was that they couldn't do much except negotiate between the different parties. Nothing could be done without a UN mandate seeing as it was an internal affair...

The US did not single-handedly "save the day". It was a joint effort.

Oh, and the intervention began with Operation Deny Flight back in 1993.

Don't be sorry mate, just a friendly discussion :D One which I too made certain errors.


Anyhow, back to Turkey and the Kurds, if there is a genocide, it should come to war. I'd support an all out war against a nation committing genocide (And yes I would gladly fight this war as I am of military age.)

Don't be sorry mate, just a friendly discussion :D One which I too made certain errors.
Cheers :)

Anyhow, back to Turkey and the Kurds, if there is a genocide, it should come to war. I'd support an all out war against a nation committing genocide (And yes I would gladly fight this war)

Is genocide on the horizon? I mean, is genocide happening in Turkey today? If not, is there an imminent fear of it happening in Iraq? If yes, why wait to do something?

Cheers :)


Is genocide on the horizon? I mean, is genocide happening in Turkey today? If not, is there an imminent fear of it happening in Iraq? If yes, why wait to do something?

Very true. I had written a long response about how Iraq was in a Civil War already and other things....but I deleted it all and decided to say this instead: Iraq is doomed to failure (I'll say it for you all too "THanks Captain Obvious!") but I felt it needed to be rererererererererererererereiterated.


I think a possible solution is dividing the nation into three separate countries: Shiistan, Sunnistan, and Kurdistan for default working names. Divide the oil wealth up in proportion to the populations so that no one single nation is any wealthier than the other, and then appoint a sort of council to overview this (Whether it be Foriegn or Domestic people doing the watching I haven't decided), and then let it be. But that whole idea itself brings up problems....

maybe bush will send bill clinton. he could get the turks to see the light.

Sitting down and having a beer with Clinton? I myself would spare the Kurds for that opportunity. :D

Sitting down and having a beer with Clinton? I myself would spare the Kurds for that opportunity. :D

"And then I had Monica do THIS!" - Bill Clinton speaking before a crowd of astonished Kurds. 2007

I think a possible solution is dividing the nation into three separate countries: Shiistan, Sunnistan, and Kurdistan for default working names. Divide the oil wealth up in proportion to the populations so that no one single nation is any wealthier than the other, and then appoint a sort of council to overview this (Whether it be Foriegn or Domestic people doing the watching I haven't decided), and then let it be. But that whole idea itself brings up problems....
Yeah. The problems essentially being an invasion from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey, all at the same time, really.

Yeah. The problems essentially being an invasion from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey, all at the same time, really.

Yep. That and the possibility of the Shiistan (being the largest population-wise) invading the others to exploit the oil wealth for itself.

I agree Wanderjar, we should not let the Kurds get screwed over again because we refused to help them.

The way Turkey is going, if turkey does dissolve into a radical Islamic state, the Kurds in turkey will be the only muslim true allies left. That and that Iranian terrorist group that's living with them. Everyone else either hates us, or likes us for our money yet secretly still hates us.

Are you people seriously demented enough to think the Kurdish minority in Turkey are friends of yours?

I was going to write a long reply, but.. The stupid is too intense for me. I suggest you all read up on the hstory of the various factions, including your own.

If we give them their own country Similization.

Though the Iraqi Kurds ARE more or less our allies.


This made me realize, Iran who complains about Israel occuping 'Palestine' yet continues to hold the Kurdish part of Iran, who are terrorists because they want their own country, are hyprocrites.

Yep. That and the possibility of the Shiistan (being the largest population-wise) invading the others to exploit the oil wealth for itself.

IIRC the Sunni areas wouldn't have any oil fields in them. I think we'd be more likely to see the Sunni area attacking the Kurds.

The reason why nobody seriously supports an independent Kurdistan is a matter of practicality of keeping the peace. Kurdistan would be our one good ally in the region, but it would spark separatist uprisings in Turkey and Iran. The Kurdish populations there are already brutally oppressed because of fears of a declaration of independence.

The Kurdish areas are fairly rich in oil and gas – as such both Turkey and Iran will fight tooth and nail to keep them. Were Kurdistan to be declared, it will be immediately attacked by both Turkey and Iran. NATO would be obliged to join in on the side of Turkey (a NATO member) and thus we are put in an untenable situation.

Those pointing out that NATO only has an obligation to defend, not join in an attack, should realize that there will be an ‘attack’ by Kurds on Turkey. Most likely separatists based in Kurdistan will be launching terrorist attacks on Turkey (whether or not it actually happens – the Turkish government will yell and scream about being under such an attack and be forced to respond in self defense).

This is why a federalist solution is being pushed by the US rather than letting the de facto independent Kurdistan actually become independent.

The reason why nobody seriously supports an independent Kurdistan is a matter of practicality of keeping the peace.
Not like it's peaches and cream now.


Kurdistan would be our one good ally in the region, but it would spark separatist uprisings in Turkey and Iran. The Kurdish populations there are already brutally oppressed because of fears of a declaration of independence. Giving them MORE justification to be independent.

The Kurdish areas are fairly rich in oil and gas – as such both Turkey and Iran will fight tooth and nail to keep them. Were Kurdistan to be declared, it will be immediately attacked by both Turkey and Iran. Thusly the REAL reason comes out.

NATO would be obliged to join in on the side of Turkey (a NATO member) and thus we are put in an untenable situation. If it was true NATO would have sent troops to the Falklands.


Those pointing out that NATO only has an obligation to defend, not join in an attack, should realize that there will be an ‘attack’ by Kurds on Turkey. The way you said 'attack' means faked. And when everyone realizes that turkey pulled what Germany did in WWII to poland, Turkey will be the one in the fryer.

Most likely separatists based in Kurdistan will be launching terrorist attacks on Turkey. Why would they continue to launch attacks on Turkey when the whole reason they are attacking is to gain independence?
Get Independence= No reason to attack.

(whether or not it actually happens – the Turkish government will yell and scream about being under such an attack and be forced to respond in self defense). Which would have nothing to support it.


This is why a federalist solution is being pushed by the US rather than letting the de facto independent Kurdistan actually become independent.
But they're proceeding on a path to become independent anyway, with or without us.

Not like it's peaches and cream now.
It is a matter of degrees. Turkey and Iran are not in open war against Iraq, so it could easily be worse.

The way you said 'attack' means faked. And when everyone realizes that turkey pulled what Germany did in WWII to poland, Turkey will be the one in the fryer.
Not necessarily - it all depends on how well it is spun. The Kurdish separatist movement in Turkey has been sufficiently troublesome for them to give it quite a lot of credence. There is already a problem with separatists attacking from Iraq right now. All they have to do is take the kernel of truth and exaggerate it a bit - it would take less work and be far more credible than the arguments the US made for invading Iraq.

Why would they continue to launch attacks on Turkey when the whole reason they are attacking is to gain independence?
Get Independence= No reason to attack.
Northern Iraq becoming Kurdistan means independence for those living in northern Iraq - those living in Turkey would fight all the harder to secede to join Kurdistan. Thus an independent Kurdistan would incite rebellion (which would obviously receive support from Kurdistan) throughout southeastern Turkey. Not to mention northwestern Iran would agitate for separation as well.

But they're proceeding on a path to become independent anyway, with or without us.
They have been de facto independent for a while, but the legal facade of being part of Iraq keeps the wider ethnic Kurdistan from open rebellion against Turkey and Iran. So long as that facade is maintained, Turkey and Iran can be better kept out of the one stable part of Iraq.