RugbyRebels

OptimisticJock wrote:

rowan wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: It's a very long way of saying you don't know. I know fine, I just think that for all your bluster you've barely a baldy notion of what's going on in Syria, but the left wing narrative of "America bad" is a seductive one, and easy to parrot on social media.

The behaviour of Turkey in this action appears to be getting worse, and they appear to be acting in cooperation with (non-existent) ISIS to cut off the two bridges over the Euphrates that the SDF use as supply routes for their forces centered around Manbij.

You begin your second sentence by agreeing with the sentiment of the paragraph I wrote which you initially disagreed with, after having the audacity to suggest I don't know what I'm talking about.

Well, I have lived in Turkey for the past dozen years, and have written for both the local and international press on this issue. You, meanwhile, are located where - Britain, I believe ??

I can only deduce from this that you somehow imagine being British means that you have a superior grasp of all matters in the world. But your history of warfare, colonization, murder, brutality, bloodshed, rape and torture does not make you superior in any manner or form. Conversely, it makes you inferior in terms of moral judgement - essential to balanced understanding.

He's been a busy lad.

rowan wrote: So spare the arrogance and pig-headed comments. You have clearly been confused out of your wits by the propaganda which accompanies all such operations - because you are easily misled when it suits your ego - and have no idea what is going on at all.

Fancy someome sitting on his arse in Britain telling someone in Turkey he doesn't know what the Turks are doing in Syria. That would be like me telling you you have no understanding of Brexit. But I wasn't raised in a culture which encourages such arrogant behavior - Mashallah.

Well apart from you on and display it pretty much everywhere in your post.

rowan wrote: 'ISIS' is simply a Western apellation (nominally associated with a religion it actually has nothing to do with) for those factions of the US/Saudi-backed rebels who have run amok and turned to terrorism. This was no accident. It has since become a free pass for the involvement in Syria of various NATO members, including the US itself, along with France and Britain - and now Turkey. But not one of them was invited, which makes their presence illegal under international law - and every innocent person they have killed (and there have been many) was a victim of their state terrorism.

So while NATO and Saudi and their proxies are systematically destroying Syria, as they'd been planning to do for decades, and confusing people like you, you want to speak in the very abbreviations and acronyms their own propagandists invented as cover and pretend that you actually have some clue as to what's going on. Clearly you don't.

Why no mention of the many many more innocent people killed by the regime, the Russians, the non existent isis?

FFS, it's because the killers are not British, obvs, so they aren't doing anything wrong, or at least if they are its pretty insignificant next to the genuine evil committed daily by the UK and everyone in it.

Its all very clear to me, altho I have had many conversations with rowan to lead me to this point.

The fact you think the Russians have killed far more people than NATO, Saudi and their proxies is precisely what I'm referring to. All you can do in your far off little island is regurgitate what you see in your notoriously biased media, and somewhat ironically you are convinced this provides you with a superior view. The fact you seem to actually believe in 'ISIS' as some rampaging, Islamic monster capable of striking anywhere in the world and determined to destroy Western civilization as we know it is indicative of a childlike naivety - reminiscent of those who believed Bush Jrs WOMD claims, Bush Srs claims of Iraqi soldiers throwing babies out of incubators, claims that America fought to defend Vietnam from the Commies, claims that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed to bring a quick end to the war, and claims that the native Americans really were marauding savages bent on killing all the noble white men.

In reality, 'ISIS' is another invention of the American media to justify their involvement in Syria, and after all that has gone before you would have to be really, really gullible to believe it. Their vehicles and weapons were supplied by America, their video clips look like they were filmed in Hollywood studios, and their uniforms belong in a Kung Fu movie. But as a direct result of this propaganda the US and its NATO allies have able to get involved in Syria directly in support of the proxies they sent in to destabilize the country in the first place. Ideally they would like to force another regime change and bring Syria into their growing sphere of influence in the region. But failing that they would be quite content just to destroy the nation, no matter how many millions they have to kill, cripple, traumatize, displace and disenfranchise along the way.

The US is estimated to have killed over 10 million Muslims during the past 25 years, and more than 20 million civilians in total since WWII with approaching 100 foreign interventions, including direct invasion. & all the Americans and British can do is point the finger at the Russians, who they have been brainwashed to hate (as a diversion from their own nations' horrific list of war-crimes), and say 'What about them?' Well, guess what, they were actually invited by the recognized government of Syria to help defend the country from the terrorists the US and its allies sent in. Did you think that was going to involve skipping around and throwing flowers in the air?

SEE?

You appear to be forgetting the cultural standards which you were raised with.

As for the irony statement you appear to be lacking in self awareness.

Turkey's invasion is just another move on the Syrian chess board, and Erdogan has America's undivided support all the way, regardless what you might read in the press. He has done so since 2003, in fact. That was the year the army refused to play ball on the invasion of Iraq, so their NATO masters in Washington came to the conclusion that if they could not control a democracy they would turn it into a dictatorship. Terrorist attacks targetting mostly Kurds have been attributed to the American proxy dubbed 'ISIS,' while a pathetic excuse for an attempted coup has been attributed to the Gulenists, former partners of the CIA in Africa and the Middle East. It's all been much too convenient, and many people here know it.

rowan wrote: The US is estimated to have killed over 10 million Muslims during the past 25 years, and more than 20 million civilians in total since WWII with approaching 100 foreign interventions, including direct invasion. & all the Americans and British can do is point the finger at the Russians

That number seems oddly high, is that taking pretty much all combat deaths and saying the US killed them by dint of direct and indirect actions? Also when you arrive at a figure like that and blame the USA and say all others can do is claim Russia isn't responsible would you per chance be including deaths in Afghanistan and putting all those on the USA and none on Russia? If so it's a barking mad thing to lay indirect deaths only at one door.

OptimisticJock wrote:You appear to be forgetting the cultural standards which you were raised with.

As for the irony statement you appear to be lacking in self awareness.

A touch harsh on Rowan given there's no history of a brutal colonisation in NZ.

Digby wrote:

rowan wrote: The US is estimated to have killed over 10 million Muslims during the past 25 years, and more than 20 million civilians in total since WWII with approaching 100 foreign interventions, including direct invasion. & all the Americans and British can do is point the finger at the Russians

That number seems oddly high, is that taking pretty much all combat deaths and saying the US killed them by dint of direct and indirect actions? Also when you arrive at a figure like that and blame the USA and say all others can do is claim Russia isn't responsible would you per chance be including deaths in Afghanistan and putting all those on the USA and none on Russia? If so it's a barking mad thing to lay indirect deaths only at one door.

It's a figure that gets tossed around for want of any more accurate statistics on the carnage, and a lack of interest on the part of the West in obtaining any. Is it true that the Nazis killed 20 million Soviets? Didn't most of them freeze or starve? Well, they wouldn't have done had the Nazis not invaded. & didn't a similar number of Native Americans perish during the European colonization of the Americas, even though many are claiming now that the vast majority died of diseases? Like the Soviets in Afghanistan, who were attempting to defend a progressive socialist government (that gave women equal rights, btw) against the ravages of the US-backed Muhajideen, the Russians have been invited by the Syrian government to help root out the US-backed rebels and terrorists who are now holed up in residential areas. I described this earlier as trying to get the cream out of a sponge cake, and America knew it would come to that all along. So having been responsible for the deaths of untold thousands already, it cranks up the old propaganda machine to shift the blame and demonize the old enemy which has thwarted its aims.The only ones buying this are those so conditioned through a lifetime of brainwashing and indoctrination into a murderous ideology.

A touch harsh on Rowan given there's no history of a brutal colonisation in NZ.

By the British, you mean? I don't consider myself a New Zealander anyway, btw. I just support the Canes and Wellington Lions in domestic rugby is all. But I don't support the All Blacks, nor NZ at anything at all, really, and never actually did.

rowan wrote:
By the British, you mean? I don't consider myself a New Zealander anyway, btw. I just support the Canes and Wellington Lions in domestic rugby is all. But I don't support the All Blacks, nor NZ at anything at all, really, and never actually did.

So your view doesn't have to be driven by the culture of your origin but it will be for others, leaving you morally superior and others inferior?

As mentioned before, if we were discussing Brexit, I wouldn't be trying to tell the Brits their business. But when it comes to what Turkey is doing in Syria, the Brits want to tell me my business even though I am living here, speak the language, read the news in Turkish every day and am watching the TV news in Turkish even as I write this, of course. Not only that, I actually write the occasional opinion piece for the press on these matters myself. & the first person to start slinging the 'don't-know-what-your-talking-about' accusations was not me, but Stones of Granite. Let's get that straight. But all anyone in Britain can do is regurgitate what they read in their own notoriously biased press, even as their own country contributes to the carnage, that's why they believe in the American propaganda machine's invention of 'ISIS,' and that's why they perceive the Russians as the villains in the piece when they have actually been invited by the recognized government of Syria to help get rid of the proxies the US and Saudi et al have sent in there. & when there's civilian casualties, they scream blue murder even though they are mostly silent when (uninvited) members of NATO and their allies were destroying the country, as they'd planned to do for a very long time. That kind of hypocrisy is the result of an enormous amount of brainwashing and is clearly indicative of an inferior moral perspective. & you may be interested to know that a leaked US intelligence report actually praised the efficiency of the Russians in Syria.

rowan wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

rowan wrote:
Look it up and educate yourself for a change. I'm not your Google search engine.

It's a very long way of saying you don't know. I know fine, I just think that for all your bluster you've barely a baldy notion of what's going on in Syria, but the left wing narrative of "America bad" is a seductive one, and easy to parrot on social media.

The behaviour of Turkey in this action appears to be getting worse, and they appear to be acting in cooperation with (non-existent) ISIS to cut off the two bridges over the Euphrates that the SDF use as supply routes for their forces centered around Manbij.

You begin your second sentence by agreeing with the sentiment of the paragraph I wrote which you initially disagreed with, after having the audacity to suggest I don't know what I'm talking about.

Well, I have lived in Turkey for the past dozen years, and have written for both the local and international press on this issue. You, meanwhile, are located where - Britain, I believe ??

I can only deduce from this that you somehow imagine being British means that you have a superior grasp of all matters in the world. But your history of warfare, colonization, murder, brutality, bloodshed, rape and torture does not make you superior in any manner or form. Conversely, it makes you inferior in terms of moral judgement - essential to balanced understanding.

So spare the arrogance and pig-headed comments. You have clearly been confused out of your wits by the propaganda which accompanies all such operations - because you are easily misled when it suits your ego - and have no idea what is going on at all.

Fancy someome sitting on his arse in Britain telling someone in Turkey he doesn't know what the Turks are doing in Syria. That would be like me telling you you have no understanding of Brexit. But I wasn't raised in a culture which encourages such arrogant behavior - Mashallah.

'ISIS' is simply a Western apellation (nominally associated with a religion it actually has nothing to do with) for those factions of the US/Saudi-backed rebels who have run amok and turned to terrorism. This was no accident. It has since become a free pass for the involvement in Syria of various NATO members, including the US itself, along with France and Britain - and now Turkey. But not one of them was invited, which makes their presence illegal under international law - and every innocent person they have killed (and there have been many) was a victim of their state terrorism.

So while NATO and Saudi and their proxies are systematically destroying Syria, as they'd been planning to do for decades, and confusing people like you, you want to speak in the very abbreviations and acronyms their own propagandists invented as cover and pretend that you actually have some clue as to what's going on. Clearly you don't.

You live in a near dictatorship where the media is under at least some government interference, if not control. There are plenty sources of information out there that I access regularly - mostly it has some sort of agenda, but you can find out what you are looking for if you take care. If you believe completely what the Turkish government is telling you, then you are clearly more of a fool than even I thought.

I'm not going to bother responding to the rest of your hysterical drivel, I seem to have touched a nerve and you've gone off on one.

rowan wrote:As mentioned before, if we were discussing Brexit, I wouldn't be trying to tell the Brits their business. But when it comes to what Turkey is doing in Syria, the Brits want to tell me my business even though I am living here, speak the language, read the news in Turkish every day and am watching the TV news in Turkish even as I write this, of course. Not only that, I actually write the occasional opinion piece for the press on these matters myself. & the first person to start slinging the 'don't-know-what-your-talking-about' accusations was not me, but Stones of Granite. Let's get that straight. But all anyone in Britain can do is regurgitate what they read in their own notoriously biased press, even as their own country contributes to the carnage, that's why they believe in the American propaganda machine's invention of 'ISIS,' and that's why they perceive the Russians as the villains in the piece when they have actually been invited by the recognized government of Syria to help get rid of the proxies the US and Saudi et al have sent in there. & when there's civilian casualties, they scream blue murder even though they are mostly silent when (uninvited) members of NATO and their allies were destroying the country, as they'd planned to do for a very long time. That kind of hypocrisy is the result of an enormous amount of brainwashing and is clearly indicative of an inferior moral perspective. & you may be interested to know that a leaked US intelligence report actually praised the efficiency of the Russians in Syria.

But you'll happily instruct Americans as to whether they should stand up or not for an anthem.

You live in a near dictatorship where the media is under at least some government interference, if not control. There are plenty sources of information out there that I access regularly - mostly it has some sort of agenda, but you can find out what you are looking for if you take care. If you believe completely what the Turkish government is telling you, then you are clearly more of a fool than even I thought.

I disbelieve practically everything they tell me. You only have to go back to the beginning of this thread to see that. But living here for a dozen years and speaking the language is a huge advantage. However, I also read news from around the rest of the world, including in French and Spanish. That happens to be one of my main interests, in fact - reading international news in different languages. The mainstream American news is without question the biggest pile of garbage on the planet, but they do have some excellent alternative news sites - undoubtedly for this very reason. Turkey also has its alternative new sources, but you need to be able to understand Turkish as most of them don't have English language versions.

I'm not going to bother responding to the rest of your hysterical drivel, I seem to have touched a nerve and you've gone off on one.

I don't mind other people having different opionions, we're here to discuss and debate, after all. What I did object to is being told I don't know what I'm talking about, and especially when we are discussing something which is going on right in my own neighborhood.

But you'll happily instruct Americans as to whether they should stand up or not for an anthem.

No, but I'll happily have an opinion on it, which is what forums are for. I will not, however, tell someone they are not entitled to an opinion because of their nationality. I don't subscribe to that kind of nationalist thinking.

I was listening to some Russians only yesterday, they were being detained and even arrested by the police for statements and/or demonstrations in public. Some of these public acts involved walking down the street with a sign in support of the constitutional right to free speech, and that was one person just walking without chanting/shouting anything. An act like that in public could in theory now cost one up to 5 years in jail as you're supposed to get a permit to 'protest' and if you're applying to say anything that isn't supportive of Putin you'll not get approval

One might question why Russian authorities and police consider support for the constitution a protest, but it's not much of a question given it's not much a a democracy and people can be killed for citing corruption in public life.

Not sure what that's got to do with a thread about Turkey, but similar comments could be made of many countries outside of Europe, including America if you're not white. I worked in Russia for a short time and have no wish to defend that nation's politics, but neither do I see any reason to single it out for demonization - especially in the international arena where America has been far and away the biggest protagonist in the modern era, having taken the baton from Britain, which remains its most faithful side-kick.

rowan wrote:As mentioned before, if we were discussing Brexit, I wouldn't be trying to tell the Brits their business. But when it comes to what Turkey is doing in Syria, the Brits want to tell me my business even though I am living here, speak the language, read the news in Turkish every day and am watching the TV news in Turkish even as I write this, of course. Not only that, I actually write the occasional opinion piece for the press on these matters myself. & the first person to start slinging the 'don't-know-what-your-talking-about' accusations was not me, but Stones of Granite. Let's get that straight. But all anyone in Britain can do is regurgitate what they read in their own notoriously biased press, even as their own country contributes to the carnage, that's why they believe in the American propaganda machine's invention of 'ISIS,' and that's why they perceive the Russians as the villains in the piece when they have actually been invited by the recognized government of Syria to help get rid of the proxies the US and Saudi et al have sent in there. & when there's civilian casualties, they scream blue murder even though they are mostly silent when (uninvited) members of NATO and their allies were destroying the country, as they'd planned to do for a very long time. That kind of hypocrisy is the result of an enormous amount of brainwashing and is clearly indicative of an inferior moral perspective. & you may be interested to know that a leaked US intelligence report actually praised the efficiency of the Russians in Syria.

There's that arrogant behaviour and lack of self awareness again.

OptimisticJock wrote:

rowan wrote:As mentioned before, if we were discussing Brexit, I wouldn't be trying to tell the Brits their business. But when it comes to what Turkey is doing in Syria, the Brits want to tell me my business even though I am living here, speak the language, read the news in Turkish every day and am watching the TV news in Turkish even as I write this, of course. Not only that, I actually write the occasional opinion piece for the press on these matters myself. & the first person to start slinging the 'don't-know-what-your-talking-about' accusations was not me, but Stones of Granite. Let's get that straight. But all anyone in Britain can do is regurgitate what they read in their own notoriously biased press, even as their own country contributes to the carnage, that's why they believe in the American propaganda machine's invention of 'ISIS,' and that's why they perceive the Russians as the villains in the piece when they have actually been invited by the recognized government of Syria to help get rid of the proxies the US and Saudi et al have sent in there. & when there's civilian casualties, they scream blue murder even though they are mostly silent when (uninvited) members of NATO and their allies were destroying the country, as they'd planned to do for a very long time. That kind of hypocrisy is the result of an enormous amount of brainwashing and is clearly indicative of an inferior moral perspective. & you may be interested to know that a leaked US intelligence report actually praised the efficiency of the Russians in Syria.

There's that arrogant behaviour and lack of self awareness again.

Is that really the best you can do? Accuse others of your own traits? That's elementary school stuff.

rowan wrote:

OptimisticJock wrote:

rowan wrote:As mentioned before, if we were discussing Brexit, I wouldn't be trying to tell the Brits their business. But when it comes to what Turkey is doing in Syria, the Brits want to tell me my business even though I am living here, speak the language, read the news in Turkish every day and am watching the TV news in Turkish even as I write this, of course. Not only that, I actually write the occasional opinion piece for the press on these matters myself. & the first person to start slinging the 'don't-know-what-your-talking-about' accusations was not me, but Stones of Granite. Let's get that straight. But all anyone in Britain can do is regurgitate what they read in their own notoriously biased press, even as their own country contributes to the carnage, that's why they believe in the American propaganda machine's invention of 'ISIS,' and that's why they perceive the Russians as the villains in the piece when they have actually been invited by the recognized government of Syria to help get rid of the proxies the US and Saudi et al have sent in there. & when there's civilian casualties, they scream blue murder even though they are mostly silent when (uninvited) members of NATO and their allies were destroying the country, as they'd planned to do for a very long time. That kind of hypocrisy is the result of an enormous amount of brainwashing and is clearly indicative of an inferior moral perspective. & you may be interested to know that a leaked US intelligence report actually praised the efficiency of the Russians in Syria.

There's that arrogant behaviour and lack of self awareness again.

Is that really the best you can do? Accuse others of your own traits? That's elementary school stuff.

Wrong way round buddy. I hadn't accused you of anything other than hypocrisy and only after you climbed on your high horse.

This is one of the best perspectives on the current situation in Turkey I've recent recently:

Post-coup Turkey has been one great celebration of the nation’s victory over the coup plotters who were out to overthrow the government. The slogan hakimiyet milletindir, meaning “sovereignty belongs to the nation,” is everywhere. It can be seen on posters and banners at countless bus stops, street lights and overpasses, on massive billboards and on TV screens in public transport.

Bright red Turkish flags adorn cars, shop windows and public buildings. For several weeks, people gathered every night for so-called “democracy watches,” playing Ottoman marches, waving flags and shouting “God is great!” at regular intervals. A popular soundtrack of these gatherings is a song praising the President with the catchy chorus: “Reee-ceeep Tay-yiiip Erdoğan.”

On the night of July 15, when the coup attempt was in full swing and still had a chance of succeeding, President Erdoğan appeared on TV to call upon the people to “gather in the squares” to “protect democracy.” He took a risky bet that could easily have ended with the deaths of thousands of people. The call was heard by millions, and in hindsight this was the moment the fate of the attempted coup was sealed. As long as the president was free to rally his supporters to the streets, the coup plotters would never be able to gain enough public support to establish control over the country without starting a civil war.

The bet paid off. Despite almost 250 civilian deaths in clashes with the military, “the people” were victorious. Tens of thousands responded to Erdoğan’s call and flocked to the streets to confront the soldiers. Their active resistance played a decisive role in crushing the attempted coup.

The resistance against the attempted coup has since been turned into a national myth of how a heroic nation rose to the challenge to protect its homeland. Polarization in society — already quite extreme before the coup — has reached unprecedented levels, whereby every opponent of the ruling party can be considered an enemy of the state, and treated as such. The country’s leadership has cleverly exploited the narrative of a “nation’s victory over evil” to lay the foundations for a new balance of power that does not bode well for those who refuse to march to the beat of the president’s drum.

FIGHTING THE INTERNAL ENEMY

“Turkish coup resistance was ‘Second Independence War’” read a recent front page headline of the Anadolu Post, the English-language newspaper of Turkey’s state-run press agency. One might smirk and write it off as a case of illusory superiority. But this is exactly how the events of July 15 have since been presented: the Turkish people have defeated their enemy, broken their chains and brought great honor to the nation — or so the story goes.

The “First” Independence War was directed against foreign occupying powers. It was famously led by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who would afterwards continue to found the Turkish Republic in 1923. The 2016 “war”, on the other hand, is fought against internal enemies — traitors and turncoats who are out to sabotage Turkey’s imagined destiny as a twenty-first century superpower.

Who these internal enemies are depends on who you ask and when. Friends turn into foes, fiends into fellows — this is the common thread that runs through the history of Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), from how it came to power to how it expanded its influence — and now, finally, to how it entrenches its rule.

A large share of the tens of thousands of state employees who were sacked, detained or arrested in the wake of the coup are soldiers and police; the very same individuals who until recently were applauded by the government for their respective roles in fighting Kurdish militants and crushing civil dissent.

During the countrywide Gezi protests in the summer of 2013, Erdoğan, still prime minister at the time, praised the ultra-violent police crackdown on peaceful protesters as a “heroic saga.” Now, many of the same police who were all too eager to crack a few çapulcu skulls have themselves become the subject of another crackdown. This shows how easy it is to fall from grace in Erdoğan’s Turkey: one minute you are a hero of the people, the next an enemy of the state.

Some of the many thousands of people who were caught up in the post-coup purge may have had relations with or sympathies for the Gülen movement, whose leader is accused of masterminding the coup attempt from his home in Virginia — a claim he himself denies. But even if these people adhered to Gülen’s ideas, chances are slim that all of them were involved in plans to overthrow the government.

Whether it was Gülen himself or merely his followers who were behind the coup remains to be proven. Some of the evidence certainly points in the direction of the wider movement, but the speed and certainty with which the Turkish government and affiliated media outlets have propagated this version of events leaves little room to question this premature judgment. In fact, even expressing doubt about the guilt of any of the individuals who have been suspended from their jobs, detained or arrested in relation to the coup would suffice to be marked a suspect oneself.

What we are witnessing is a purge of what the AKP perceives to be its internal enemies — meaning everyone who has not yet blindly committed themselves to the party’s cause. Over the course of its years in power, the AKP has faced many enemies on as many different occasions, some more real than others: from separatists, the “deep state” and the çapulcus to a dreamed-up international “interest rate lobby.” And since at least 2012, Gülenists have featured prominently on this list, too.

What all these “enemies of the state” have in common is that their denominations are vague enough to be applicable to a wide range of groups and individuals, yet precise enough to instill fear and make people accept far-reaching security measures that severely limit civil liberties.

SOVEREIGNTY BELONGS TO WHOM?

The state-sanctioned slogan of the successful defeat of the attempted coup — “sovereignty belongs to the nation” — is a good example of the AKP’s use of propaganda to manipulate the population’s perception of social reality in Turkey. The slogan effectively does two things. First, it sends a false message to the people that it is they, as opposed to the political and financial establishment, who are really in charge. And second, it makes a clear distinction between those who belong to the Turkish nation and those who do not.

The slogan implies that the Turkish nation has successfully imposed its will on the country when it defeated the coup plotters. It suggests that “the people” are in control; that without their approval, no political change is allowed to pass. There is, of course, an element of truth in this — certainly in regards to the attempted coup, which could count on only very marginal popular (and no political) support. The coup was condemned across the board, from the leftist HDP to the ultra-nationalist MHP.

But to draw a parallel between the popular resistance against the coup and the locus of political sovereignty is to take the events out of context and misrepresent the actual power relations in the country. Sovereignty belongs to “the people” only insofar as the popular will happens to align with the AKP’s strategic interests. Emphasizing the instances when the two coincide is simply a cheap trick to create the illusion that the party is but a humble servant of the people.

The AKP has tactfully refrained from claiming any ownership over the popular actions that contributed to the coup’s defeat. It merely promotes the narrative that “the people” heeded the call of their president to stand up for “democracy.” Despite a notable lack of AKP party flags and symbols among those who continue to take to the streets and squares every night to participate in the “democracy watches,” the majority of these people are in fact supporters of the ruling party, as a recent public survey has shown.

Yet flags, scarves and portraits bearing the image of the president himself are prominent — and significantly outnumber the images of Kemal Atatürk. This is a prominent sign of where the country is headed: with the AKP supposedly left out of the equation, what remains is “the people” on the one hand and their president on the other — a president who casts himself as the embodiment of the “national will.”

Following from the idea that nothing in this country happens unless it is condoned by “the people,” the logical conclusion is that whatever does happen — whether it is the destruction of Kurdish towns, the construction of a third airport in Istanbul, or the shutting down of critical media — carries the consent of the nation. By implication, the same nation is also free to take matters into its own hands, instilling great fear of violence among minority groups like the Kurds, Alevis, LGBTQ+ and leftists. The concerns of those on the margins are not echoed by “the nation” and can therefore easily be ignored or repressed.

All of this serves as a powerful reminder that in twenty-first century Turkey, democracy is understood as the legal dictatorship of the majority. Whoever collects the most votes is now free to rule as they see fit, with no accountability to anyone but their own constituency.

SERVING AND SHAPING THE NATIONAL WILL

One of the strengths of the AKP is that over the past fifteen years it has managed to attract support from an eclectic mix of social, religious and ethnic groups: from nationalists to Islamists, big business to the urban poor, liberals to conservatives, and from Turkish Kurds to millions of Turks abroad. Each of these groups has seen a different face of the AKP, a familiar and friendly face they trusted and believed in, perfectly adapted to each of their respective beliefs, interests and world views.

Religious Kurds saw a party that was prepared to look beyond ethnicity and to find common ground in a shared faith. Entrepreneurs found a party that was pro-market and pro-business, ready to open Turkey to the world and reap the benefits that came with it. Nationalist Turks recognized in the AKP a party that was determined to “make Turkey great again” and to set it on course to become the world’s first Islamic superpower.

With the AKP having firmly entrenched its rule and the president tightening his grip on power, the party is free to dispose of some of the masks it previously donned to secure loyalty and support. Over the years, the AKP has granted power and authority to party loyalists, meanwhile handing out gifts and favors to others with one simple message attached: what is given can also be taken away. Now the country’s political leadership has come to the realization that carrots and sticks may be appropriate tools to tame an unruly state apparatus, but that they are of little service when bringing a nation to heel. A genuine popular mandate cannot be won by threats and treats alone.

Together with its leader, the AKP has always presented itself as the party that embodies the “national will,” as an expression of the nation’s dreams and desires. But in claiming to represent that national will, it has also played an active role in shaping it. Through firm control over the country’s media and educational curriculums, the AKP has made sure that the nation believes what the party wants it to believe, and that it desires what the party wants it to desire.

The so-called “democracy rally” of August 7, which saw millions of people flocking together in Istanbul, served this exact purpose. It prolonged and exploited the euphoria people felt after bringing down the coup plotters, upholding the illusion that it is the people who pull the strings in this country. Tellingly, party symbols were explicitly forbidden at this rally, which was also attended by the leaders of the CHP and MHP, but flags with the image of president were ubiquitous. The renaming of Istanbul’s Bosporus Bridge and other landmarks after the “Martyrs of July 15” is designed to achieve a similar goal in the long term.

The result of these practices is that certain groups within Turkish society feel emboldened to actively shape their social environment to their liking. Public space has been appropriated by pro-government supporters, and they feel entitled to control and police it in ways they see fit. In the immediate wake of the coup there were reports of groups attacking and intimidating Kurdish and Alevi neighborhoods, of women who are not dressed according to Islamic custom being harassed, and of threats uttered against individuals who refuse to engage with the nationalist frenzy.

One month after the coup, most of the “democracy watches” have ended. Cars no longer loudly honk their horns every night. Despite daily newsflashes of journalists, academics and civil servants being arrested, or schools, businesses and universities being closed, daily life can almost be considered normal again. Nonetheless, it is hard to escape the sense that something has fundamentally changed.

The mobs of AKP loyalists may have cleared from the streets for now, but everyone knows that with a mere snap of the president’s finger they will be out in full force. This is their country now — or so they are made to believe — and henceforth they will set the rules. Walk in line, think in line, speak in line, and you will do just fine. If not, the nation will gladly settle the score.

https://roarmag.org/essays/fabricating- ... up-turkey/

rowan wrote:This is one of the best perspectives on the current situation in Turkey I've recent recently:

Post-coup Turkey has been one great celebration of the nation’s victory over the coup plotters who were out to overthrow the government. The slogan hakimiyet milletindir, meaning “sovereignty belongs to the nation,” is everywhere. It can be seen on posters and banners at countless bus stops, street lights and overpasses, on massive billboards and on TV screens in public transport.

Bright red Turkish flags adorn cars, shop windows and public buildings. For several weeks, people gathered every night for so-called “democracy watches,” playing Ottoman marches, waving flags and shouting “God is great!” at regular intervals. A popular soundtrack of these gatherings is a song praising the President with the catchy chorus: “Reee-ceeep Tay-yiiip Erdoğan.”

On the night of July 15, when the coup attempt was in full swing and still had a chance of succeeding, President Erdoğan appeared on TV to call upon the people to “gather in the squares” to “protect democracy.” He took a risky bet that could easily have ended with the deaths of thousands of people. The call was heard by millions, and in hindsight this was the moment the fate of the attempted coup was sealed. As long as the president was free to rally his supporters to the streets, the coup plotters would never be able to gain enough public support to establish control over the country without starting a civil war.

The bet paid off. Despite almost 250 civilian deaths in clashes with the military, “the people” were victorious. Tens of thousands responded to Erdoğan’s call and flocked to the streets to confront the soldiers. Their active resistance played a decisive role in crushing the attempted coup.

The resistance against the attempted coup has since been turned into a national myth of how a heroic nation rose to the challenge to protect its homeland. Polarization in society — already quite extreme before the coup — has reached unprecedented levels, whereby every opponent of the ruling party can be considered an enemy of the state, and treated as such. The country’s leadership has cleverly exploited the narrative of a “nation’s victory over evil” to lay the foundations for a new balance of power that does not bode well for those who refuse to march to the beat of the president’s drum.

FIGHTING THE INTERNAL ENEMY

“Turkish coup resistance was ‘Second Independence War’” read a recent front page headline of the Anadolu Post, the English-language newspaper of Turkey’s state-run press agency. One might smirk and write it off as a case of illusory superiority. But this is exactly how the events of July 15 have since been presented: the Turkish people have defeated their enemy, broken their chains and brought great honor to the nation — or so the story goes.

The “First” Independence War was directed against foreign occupying powers. It was famously led by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who would afterwards continue to found the Turkish Republic in 1923. The 2016 “war”, on the other hand, is fought against internal enemies — traitors and turncoats who are out to sabotage Turkey’s imagined destiny as a twenty-first century superpower.

Who these internal enemies are depends on who you ask and when. Friends turn into foes, fiends into fellows — this is the common thread that runs through the history of Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), from how it came to power to how it expanded its influence — and now, finally, to how it entrenches its rule.

A large share of the tens of thousands of state employees who were sacked, detained or arrested in the wake of the coup are soldiers and police; the very same individuals who until recently were applauded by the government for their respective roles in fighting Kurdish militants and crushing civil dissent.

During the countrywide Gezi protests in the summer of 2013, Erdoğan, still prime minister at the time, praised the ultra-violent police crackdown on peaceful protesters as a “heroic saga.” Now, many of the same police who were all too eager to crack a few çapulcu skulls have themselves become the subject of another crackdown. This shows how easy it is to fall from grace in Erdoğan’s Turkey: one minute you are a hero of the people, the next an enemy of the state.

Some of the many thousands of people who were caught up in the post-coup purge may have had relations with or sympathies for the Gülen movement, whose leader is accused of masterminding the coup attempt from his home in Virginia — a claim he himself denies. But even if these people adhered to Gülen’s ideas, chances are slim that all of them were involved in plans to overthrow the government.

Whether it was Gülen himself or merely his followers who were behind the coup remains to be proven. Some of the evidence certainly points in the direction of the wider movement, but the speed and certainty with which the Turkish government and affiliated media outlets have propagated this version of events leaves little room to question this premature judgment. In fact, even expressing doubt about the guilt of any of the individuals who have been suspended from their jobs, detained or arrested in relation to the coup would suffice to be marked a suspect oneself.

What we are witnessing is a purge of what the AKP perceives to be its internal enemies — meaning everyone who has not yet blindly committed themselves to the party’s cause. Over the course of its years in power, the AKP has faced many enemies on as many different occasions, some more real than others: from separatists, the “deep state” and the çapulcus to a dreamed-up international “interest rate lobby.” And since at least 2012, Gülenists have featured prominently on this list, too.

What all these “enemies of the state” have in common is that their denominations are vague enough to be applicable to a wide range of groups and individuals, yet precise enough to instill fear and make people accept far-reaching security measures that severely limit civil liberties.

SOVEREIGNTY BELONGS TO WHOM?

The state-sanctioned slogan of the successful defeat of the attempted coup — “sovereignty belongs to the nation” — is a good example of the AKP’s use of propaganda to manipulate the population’s perception of social reality in Turkey. The slogan effectively does two things. First, it sends a false message to the people that it is they, as opposed to the political and financial establishment, who are really in charge. And second, it makes a clear distinction between those who belong to the Turkish nation and those who do not.

The slogan implies that the Turkish nation has successfully imposed its will on the country when it defeated the coup plotters. It suggests that “the people” are in control; that without their approval, no political change is allowed to pass. There is, of course, an element of truth in this — certainly in regards to the attempted coup, which could count on only very marginal popular (and no political) support. The coup was condemned across the board, from the leftist HDP to the ultra-nationalist MHP.

But to draw a parallel between the popular resistance against the coup and the locus of political sovereignty is to take the events out of context and misrepresent the actual power relations in the country. Sovereignty belongs to “the people” only insofar as the popular will happens to align with the AKP’s strategic interests. Emphasizing the instances when the two coincide is simply a cheap trick to create the illusion that the party is but a humble servant of the people.

The AKP has tactfully refrained from claiming any ownership over the popular actions that contributed to the coup’s defeat. It merely promotes the narrative that “the people” heeded the call of their president to stand up for “democracy.” Despite a notable lack of AKP party flags and symbols among those who continue to take to the streets and squares every night to participate in the “democracy watches,” the majority of these people are in fact supporters of the ruling party, as a recent public survey has shown.

Yet flags, scarves and portraits bearing the image of the president himself are prominent — and significantly outnumber the images of Kemal Atatürk. This is a prominent sign of where the country is headed: with the AKP supposedly left out of the equation, what remains is “the people” on the one hand and their president on the other — a president who casts himself as the embodiment of the “national will.”

Following from the idea that nothing in this country happens unless it is condoned by “the people,” the logical conclusion is that whatever does happen — whether it is the destruction of Kurdish towns, the construction of a third airport in Istanbul, or the shutting down of critical media — carries the consent of the nation. By implication, the same nation is also free to take matters into its own hands, instilling great fear of violence among minority groups like the Kurds, Alevis, LGBTQ+ and leftists. The concerns of those on the margins are not echoed by “the nation” and can therefore easily be ignored or repressed.

All of this serves as a powerful reminder that in twenty-first century Turkey, democracy is understood as the legal dictatorship of the majority. Whoever collects the most votes is now free to rule as they see fit, with no accountability to anyone but their own constituency.

SERVING AND SHAPING THE NATIONAL WILL

One of the strengths of the AKP is that over the past fifteen years it has managed to attract support from an eclectic mix of social, religious and ethnic groups: from nationalists to Islamists, big business to the urban poor, liberals to conservatives, and from Turkish Kurds to millions of Turks abroad. Each of these groups has seen a different face of the AKP, a familiar and friendly face they trusted and believed in, perfectly adapted to each of their respective beliefs, interests and world views.

Religious Kurds saw a party that was prepared to look beyond ethnicity and to find common ground in a shared faith. Entrepreneurs found a party that was pro-market and pro-business, ready to open Turkey to the world and reap the benefits that came with it. Nationalist Turks recognized in the AKP a party that was determined to “make Turkey great again” and to set it on course to become the world’s first Islamic superpower.

With the AKP having firmly entrenched its rule and the president tightening his grip on power, the party is free to dispose of some of the masks it previously donned to secure loyalty and support. Over the years, the AKP has granted power and authority to party loyalists, meanwhile handing out gifts and favors to others with one simple message attached: what is given can also be taken away. Now the country’s political leadership has come to the realization that carrots and sticks may be appropriate tools to tame an unruly state apparatus, but that they are of little service when bringing a nation to heel. A genuine popular mandate cannot be won by threats and treats alone.

Together with its leader, the AKP has always presented itself as the party that embodies the “national will,” as an expression of the nation’s dreams and desires. But in claiming to represent that national will, it has also played an active role in shaping it. Through firm control over the country’s media and educational curriculums, the AKP has made sure that the nation believes what the party wants it to believe, and that it desires what the party wants it to desire.

The so-called “democracy rally” of August 7, which saw millions of people flocking together in Istanbul, served this exact purpose. It prolonged and exploited the euphoria people felt after bringing down the coup plotters, upholding the illusion that it is the people who pull the strings in this country. Tellingly, party symbols were explicitly forbidden at this rally, which was also attended by the leaders of the CHP and MHP, but flags with the image of president were ubiquitous. The renaming of Istanbul’s Bosporus Bridge and other landmarks after the “Martyrs of July 15” is designed to achieve a similar goal in the long term.

The result of these practices is that certain groups within Turkish society feel emboldened to actively shape their social environment to their liking. Public space has been appropriated by pro-government supporters, and they feel entitled to control and police it in ways they see fit. In the immediate wake of the coup there were reports of groups attacking and intimidating Kurdish and Alevi neighborhoods, of women who are not dressed according to Islamic custom being harassed, and of threats uttered against individuals who refuse to engage with the nationalist frenzy.

One month after the coup, most of the “democracy watches” have ended. Cars no longer loudly honk their horns every night. Despite daily newsflashes of journalists, academics and civil servants being arrested, or schools, businesses and universities being closed, daily life can almost be considered normal again. Nonetheless, it is hard to escape the sense that something has fundamentally changed.

The mobs of AKP loyalists may have cleared from the streets for now, but everyone knows that with a mere snap of the president’s finger they will be out in full force. This is their country now — or so they are made to believe — and henceforth they will set the rules. Walk in line, think in line, speak in line, and you will do just fine. If not, the nation will gladly settle the score.

https://roarmag.org/essays/fabricating- ... up-turkey/

I didn't read it. Does it mention the UK/US at all?

Not at all. It's getting back to the original theme - Turkey itself. & what I would add is that Erdogan is merely the embodiment of an already prevalent mentality within Turkish society, much as Trump has been described as the embodiment of a prevalent mentality within American society. One of the things which quickly became apparent to me here was the manner in which the European concept of nationhood has been appropriated to marginalize those who do not identify with the prescribed doctrines of the leadership, even though the prescribed doctrines themselves may change wildly dependent on who is in control. Our current glorious leader regularly hails the achievements of the Ottoman Empire, which he strives to revive, yet among them was an acceptance of pluralism, ironically.

There is undoubtedly a prevalent mentality shared by many here that Turkey is about to return to its former glories of bygone centuries and become a key player on the global stage while recognized as the leader of the Islamic World.

A new political party called the “Ottoman Party” has been founded in Turkey with the slogan “Turkey is the Leader.”


http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/new-ot ... sCatID=338

Good perspetive on Turkey & Saudi's military interventions (and America's) here:

VIOLENTLY INTERVENING IN the affairs of other countries has brought the United States much grief over the last century. We are hardly the only ones who do it. The club of interventionist nations has a shifting membership. During the current round of Middle East conflict, two new countries have joined: Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Both have succumbed to the imperial temptation. Both are paying a high price. They are learning a lesson that Americans struggle to accept: Interventions have unexpected consequences and often end up weakening rather than strengthening the countries that carry them out.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2016/ ... nt=event25

Why does it require months for them to come out with this?

In outer facade of the Turkish Parliament building, a symbol of Turkey’s democracy and national unity, there lies a hall scarred by air strikes on July 15, the night of the failed coup attempt.

The government is yet to renovate that place, preserving the area for foreign delegations as a showcase for the savagery of putschist soldiers. Ankara makes sure that every visiting foreign official is making their pilgrimage to the site, through dust and scattered rocks, so that they see firsthand how the mutineering soldiers attacked the Turkish democracy.

Experts are still scratching their head to understand why on earth coup plotters would attack the Parliament, or occupy a bridge, for that matter. How was the military “saving” the nation from despotism when its first act was to bomb the very institution that symbolized Turkey’s democracy since the Ottoman era? Bombing the Parliament after the coup attempt started to crumble on that night raises another set of questions, too.

No one knows why the Parliament was bombed, except arguing that the soldiers on that night were so barbaric that they swore to destroy the country. How did coup plotters expect to rule the country and promise a freer society after bombing the national assembly? There are still many questions that need to be addressed.

For one, anyone who was following what had been going on in Turkey before the coup knows that Turkish leaders buried democracy a long time ago. On July 15, we did not confront the military to “save democracy”, but to “save civilian politics.” As I repeatedly made clear in the past, there was no prospect that the military could have restored freedoms and civil liberties once it took over. We need to battle authoritarian practices on civilian plateau. History shows that democracies are stable, enduring and well-functioning if they’re earned through civilian struggle, not through a foreign intervention or military takeover. Tunisia and Libya are two striking examples.

Since Turkey has become a multi-party democracy in 1950, the single most important factor that undermined Turkish democracy was the military. Besides its several interventions in almost every ten years, the army was also crucial in re-writing Turkey’s laws, designing the judiciary in line with its wishes and engineering a civil society and the media that was sympathetic to its goals. The military was an untouchable institution. It was above and beyond politics. And no matter what it did, Turks held it dearly.

Because the last military intervention in 1997 targeted the conservative government of Necmettin Erbakan, Islamists had this idea that their struggle for power was also a struggle for democracy. For them, democracy came to represent the rule of conservative people and their empowerment. And because they were in majority, they were free to re-fashion the country, the argument was made.

Since the army’s intervention in 1997, the “fight for democracy” was largely focused on curbing the role of military in politics. For this reason, the AKP government started an accession process with the EU. The military was then purged with a series of sham coup trials. And the 2010 constitutional referendum effectively ended the military’s influence in judiciary.

But as the military’s power waned from politics, Erdogan’s desire to become a more powerful leader eclipsed the prospect to become a full-fledged, consolidated democracy. Erdogan, long champion of the underdog, has now become a celebrated autocrat.

On July 15, Turkey was no longer a democracy to be saved. True, it would even be worse if the military successfully took over the government. The failure of the military on July 15 was a welcoming development for Turkish civilian politics, a historic one. But it was far from saving the Turkish democracy, which did not exist on July 15 anyway.

When the Western media focused on the post-coup crackdown rather than the success to thwart the military, Turkish officials were furious. Even adversaries of Erdogan, who loathe Gulenists even more, did not focus on the post-coup purge. It was a rare chance to get rid of Gulenists, alleged mastermind of the July 15 coup.

For the Turkish opposition, highlighting gross human rights abuses in the aftermath of the coup meant to undermine the government’s relentless drive to root out the Gulenists. This is the story of how the entire Turkish society turned a blind eye to the purge and arrest of tens of thousands of people, most of whom are ordinary teachers, without any due process.

There is no doubt that the selective crackdown in Turkey will widen to include other critics of the government. This is not surprising since the failed coup attempt became carte blanche for the government to do whatever it wants. Perhaps Turkish people sent the military to their barracks for good. But building a consolidated democracy with the rule of law is a completely separate matter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/did ... 67131e47b5

Also good:

ISTANBUL —
The arrests of 24 Kurdish teachers, accused of supporting the PKK Kurdish rebel group, has intensified criticism of the Turkish government's use of the emergency powers it introduced following July's failed coup.

Early Sunday, loud banging on the door woke up the Dogan household. Heavily armed anti-terror police stormed into their apartment and arrested Gulizar Dogan, a teacher and a mother of two, including an eight-week-old baby.

At the door were five to six heavily armed police officers with their weapons drawn, said Gulizar Dogan's husband, Zeynel. A few other masked policemen stood behind with shields. Zeynel Dogan says he told the offciers to calm down, and they started beating him and asking this was the home of Gulizar Dogan.


http://www.voanews.com/a/arrests-kurdis ... 25498.html