

Apart from highlighted bit agrees 100%. Korea wasn't a NATO action it was a UN action as shown bt the fact that counties such asrowan wrote:Interesting indeed. We're seeing almost a century of civilization & democracy being unravelled here. I'm not saying it's all bad, but most of it is. When I arrived they had a 'Zero Problems with Neighbors' policy in place and had barely been involved in any wars at all since WWI - with the notable exception of Korea to fulfill their requirement as a proud NATO member. They were also making progress with the Kurds. But all that went flying out the window when the incumbent government failed to win a majority in the last elections, largely due to the inroads made by the Kurdish party - who gained the required 10% threshold for representation in government. There were plenty of signs before this, of course, but the past year has been stupefying.![]()
Not only that, but Turkey wasn't even a member of NATO when it sent the Turkish Brigade to Korea. The Turkish Government responded to UN Resolution 83 on June 29th 1950, and joined NATO on February 18th 1952.belgarion wrote:Apart from highlighted bit agrees 100%. Korea wasn't a NATO action it was a UN action as shown bt the fact that counties such asrowan wrote:Interesting indeed. We're seeing almost a century of civilization & democracy being unravelled here. I'm not saying it's all bad, but most of it is. When I arrived they had a 'Zero Problems with Neighbors' policy in place and had barely been involved in any wars at all since WWI - with the notable exception of Korea to fulfill their requirement as a proud NATO member. They were also making progress with the Kurds. But all that went flying out the window when the incumbent government failed to win a majority in the last elections, largely due to the inroads made by the Kurdish party - who gained the required 10% threshold for representation in government. There were plenty of signs before this, of course, but the past year has been stupefying.![]()
India, Thailand, Philipines, Colombia & S.Africa plus others were invloved
I don't think anyone believes they're only attacking ISIS. It has been fairly widely reported here who the real target is.rowan wrote:Turkey invaded northern Cyprus to protect ethnic Turks being persecuted by the Greek military junta during the Metapolitefsi, yes. That action was supported by the US at the time. Why the island hasn't been reunited again is a different matter. I've been down there, btw, and the northern part is distinctly Turkish - albeit it of the more liberal 'Aegean' variety. The 'Zero Problems with Neighbors' policy is a much more recent phenomenon. It was in fact the political philosophy of the AKP under Erdogan - until very recently. And now suddenly they're at odds with practically all of their neighbors! That's got nothing to do with the military history of the Turkish Republic, but until the past few years the vast majority of their operations were against the Kurds, and for this purpose they have retained mandatory conscription & one of the world's biggest armies. About 40 K people are estimated to have been killed during the conflict with the PKK alone, and we can safely assume the vast majority of them will have been Kurds. What are they doing in Syria now? Attacking "ISIS?" Hmmm
Really? Where is 'here' and who is being reported as the 'real target?' We're still under a State of Emergency' here, you understand, and while I generally read a few stories from both the American and British press every day, we can be pretty sure a lot of stuff is getting filtered out at the moment.Stones of granite wrote:I don't think anyone believes they're only attacking ISIS. It has been fairly widely reported here who the real target is.rowan wrote:Turkey invaded northern Cyprus to protect ethnic Turks being persecuted by the Greek military junta during the Metapolitefsi, yes. That action was supported by the US at the time. Why the island hasn't been reunited again is a different matter. I've been down there, btw, and the northern part is distinctly Turkish - albeit it of the more liberal 'Aegean' variety. The 'Zero Problems with Neighbors' policy is a much more recent phenomenon. It was in fact the political philosophy of the AKP under Erdogan - until very recently. And now suddenly they're at odds with practically all of their neighbors! That's got nothing to do with the military history of the Turkish Republic, but until the past few years the vast majority of their operations were against the Kurds, and for this purpose they have retained mandatory conscription & one of the world's biggest armies. About 40 K people are estimated to have been killed during the conflict with the PKK alone, and we can safely assume the vast majority of them will have been Kurds. What are they doing in Syria now? Attacking "ISIS?" Hmmm
UK.rowan wrote:Really? Where is 'here' and who is being reported as the 'real target?' We're still under a State of Emergency' here, you understand, and while I generally read a few stories from both the American and British press every day, we can be pretty sure a lot of stuff is getting filtered out at the moment.Stones of granite wrote:I don't think anyone believes they're only attacking ISIS. It has been fairly widely reported here who the real target is.rowan wrote:Turkey invaded northern Cyprus to protect ethnic Turks being persecuted by the Greek military junta during the Metapolitefsi, yes. That action was supported by the US at the time. Why the island hasn't been reunited again is a different matter. I've been down there, btw, and the northern part is distinctly Turkish - albeit it of the more liberal 'Aegean' variety. The 'Zero Problems with Neighbors' policy is a much more recent phenomenon. It was in fact the political philosophy of the AKP under Erdogan - until very recently. And now suddenly they're at odds with practically all of their neighbors! That's got nothing to do with the military history of the Turkish Republic, but until the past few years the vast majority of their operations were against the Kurds, and for this purpose they have retained mandatory conscription & one of the world's biggest armies. About 40 K people are estimated to have been killed during the conflict with the PKK alone, and we can safely assume the vast majority of them will have been Kurds. What are they doing in Syria now? Attacking "ISIS?" Hmmm
Meanwhile, in breaking news the leader of the opposition has just been fired upon in the north of the country, but survived without injury. Never a dull moment . . .
The times had a piece on how the Kurds were more of a concern than Isis. Which would explain the timing given the recent Kurdish advances.rowan wrote:Really? Where is 'here' and who is being reported as the 'real target?' We're still under a State of Emergency' here, you understand, and while I generally read a few stories from both the American and British press every day, we can be pretty sure a lot of stuff is getting filtered out at the moment.Stones of granite wrote:I don't think anyone believes they're only attacking ISIS. It has been fairly widely reported here who the real target is.rowan wrote:Turkey invaded northern Cyprus to protect ethnic Turks being persecuted by the Greek military junta during the Metapolitefsi, yes. That action was supported by the US at the time. Why the island hasn't been reunited again is a different matter. I've been down there, btw, and the northern part is distinctly Turkish - albeit it of the more liberal 'Aegean' variety. The 'Zero Problems with Neighbors' policy is a much more recent phenomenon. It was in fact the political philosophy of the AKP under Erdogan - until very recently. And now suddenly they're at odds with practically all of their neighbors! That's got nothing to do with the military history of the Turkish Republic, but until the past few years the vast majority of their operations were against the Kurds, and for this purpose they have retained mandatory conscription & one of the world's biggest armies. About 40 K people are estimated to have been killed during the conflict with the PKK alone, and we can safely assume the vast majority of them will have been Kurds. What are they doing in Syria now? Attacking "ISIS?" Hmmm
Meanwhile, in breaking news the leader of the opposition has just been fired upon in the north of the country, but survived without injury. Never a dull moment . . .
Really?Zhivago wrote:It is surely an act of war
Yes, how is invading a neighbouring country with tanks etc not an act of war?Stones of granite wrote:Really?Zhivago wrote:It is surely an act of war
You don't really do sarcasm, do you?Zhivago wrote:Yes, how is invading a neighbouring country with tanks etc not an act of war?Stones of granite wrote:Really?Zhivago wrote:It is surely an act of war
Who is backing the SDF?rowan wrote:What's really disturbing is that most of the major terrorist attacks in Turkey over the past few years have actually targetted the Kurds (the exceptions being those which have killed mostly foreigners), and now this is being used as a pretext for Turkey to invade another country and attack, er, the Kurds. Adding an even further twist to that, is that the Kurds are the main ones actually fighting the US-backed rebels-cum-terrorists in the region, who the Western media refers to as "ISIS,' and who Turkey (like everyone else involved in destroying Syria) claimed to be going after...
For some truly odd folk it's when Russia sends tanks into UkraineZhivago wrote:Yes, how is invading a neighbouring country with tanks etc not an act of war?Stones of granite wrote:Really?Zhivago wrote:It is surely an act of war
Look it up and educate yourself for a change. I'm not your Google search engine.Stones of granite wrote:Who is backing the SDF?rowan wrote:What's really disturbing is that most of the major terrorist attacks in Turkey over the past few years have actually targetted the Kurds (the exceptions being those which have killed mostly foreigners), and now this is being used as a pretext for Turkey to invade another country and attack, er, the Kurds. Adding an even further twist to that, is that the Kurds are the main ones actually fighting the US-backed rebels-cum-terrorists in the region, who the Western media refers to as "ISIS,' and who Turkey (like everyone else involved in destroying Syria) claimed to be going after...
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.rowan wrote:Look it up and educate yourself for a change. I'm not your Google search engine.Stones of granite wrote:Who is backing the SDF?rowan wrote:What's really disturbing is that most of the major terrorist attacks in Turkey over the past few years have actually targetted the Kurds (the exceptions being those which have killed mostly foreigners), and now this is being used as a pretext for Turkey to invade another country and attack, er, the Kurds. Adding an even further twist to that, is that the Kurds are the main ones actually fighting the US-backed rebels-cum-terrorists in the region, who the Western media refers to as "ISIS,' and who Turkey (like everyone else involved in destroying Syria) claimed to be going after...
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.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.rowan wrote:Look it up and educate yourself for a change. I'm not your Google search engine.Stones of granite wrote: Who is backing the SDF?
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.
He's been a busy lad.rowan wrote: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.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.rowan wrote:
Look it up and educate yourself for a change. I'm not your Google search engine.
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.
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.
Well it's on display pretty much everywhere in your post.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.
Why no mention of the many many more innocent people killed by the regime, the Russians, the non existent isis?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.