UK fighters killing Turks
Discussion
Whilst Kurdish fighters were engaging I.S. in Syria we've been pretty cool about British volunteers active within their ranks.
Now that Turkish Army and Kurdish fighters are engaged in combat said British volunteers will be killing NATO soldiers.
Looking at the way the Turks have treated the Kurds I'd say the British volunteers couldn't kill their soldiers dead enough.
Question is will our government be so understanding.
Now that Turkish Army and Kurdish fighters are engaged in combat said British volunteers will be killing NATO soldiers.
Looking at the way the Turks have treated the Kurds I'd say the British volunteers couldn't kill their soldiers dead enough.
Question is will our government be so understanding.
You seem to be trying to rationalise/make sense of the Syria conflict. I think that's impossible because it's a conflict between svereal different parties, most of whom we don't like to differing degrees.
1. Assad
2. The moderate Syrian rebels (Al qaeda)
3. The extreme Syrian rebels (ISIS)
4. The Kurds (some who are labelled as terrorists by the US)
5. The Iranians (regarded as terrorists by the US and also severely disliked by the Saudis and therefore ISIS)
6. The Russians
7. Turkey (who don't like Assad, ISIS, or the Kurds)
It's a stupid war. We are allying ourselves with stupid people.
1. Assad
2. The moderate Syrian rebels (Al qaeda)
3. The extreme Syrian rebels (ISIS)
4. The Kurds (some who are labelled as terrorists by the US)
5. The Iranians (regarded as terrorists by the US and also severely disliked by the Saudis and therefore ISIS)
6. The Russians
7. Turkey (who don't like Assad, ISIS, or the Kurds)
It's a stupid war. We are allying ourselves with stupid people.
You do have to wonder that if US sf have to call for US top cover to drive of Turkish aircraft who were/were not bombing their positions do we actually need Turkey in NATO? I suppose in does give NATO some leverage but I'd be a lot happier if the US moved their tac nukes out of the country and the EU built a great big wall (Merkel knows all about this)
Tannedbaldhead said:
Countdown said:
4. The Kurds (some who are labelled as terrorists by the US)
Hardly makes them terrorists. Without wishing to spoil anybody's lunch the problem with getting involved in a fight with pigs is that you end up getting covered in pig5hit. The only difference between you and the pigs is they enjoy it!
Disappointing that we don't seem to learn this lesson....
The YPG Kurdish group have freed vast swathes of Syria from ISIS and established functioning councils. The PKK have been just as effective, but have also having to fight Turkish Forces in Turkey itself. Whole towns have been raised to the ground by Erdogan's forces.
There was a ceasefire for years until Erdogan decided he would unleash his dictator style wrath on those that didn't dance to his tune. I don't support the use of bombs by the PKK in any way. I am not convinced they are responsible for all the attacks biome of them have been a bit to 'convenient' for Erdogan.
There was a ceasefire for years until Erdogan decided he would unleash his dictator style wrath on those that didn't dance to his tune. I don't support the use of bombs by the PKK in any way. I am not convinced they are responsible for all the attacks biome of them have been a bit to 'convenient' for Erdogan.
Art0ir said:
The Kurds have been responsible for hundreds, maybe thousands of no warning bombs across Turkey.
Do their sympathisers also support the work of the IRA a few decades back, or is it different when it's in your own back yard?
You say "The Kurds" like you mean the IRA, when really the closest analogy would be "the entire Catholic population of Northern Ireland". They aren't all terrorists by a long way, and a lot of them have been very bravely fighting against Assad, ISIS and Turkey. It's notable that the Kurdish forces are gender integrated too - only a small number of women are on the front line, but they're there, which is a big thing in that part of the world. Do their sympathisers also support the work of the IRA a few decades back, or is it different when it's in your own back yard?
Elroy Blue said:
The YPG Kurdish group have freed vast swathes of Syria from ISIS and established functioning councils. The PKK have been just as effective, but have also having to fight Turkish Forces in Turkey itself. Whole towns have been raised to the ground by Erdogan's forces.
There was a ceasefire for years until Erdogan decided he would unleash his dictator style wrath on those that didn't dance to his tune. I don't support the use of bombs by the PKK in any way. I am not convinced they are responsible for all the attacks biome of them have been a bit to 'convenient' for Erdogan.
Very true. Its easily forgotten that Erdogan was the one who breached the ceasefire with the PKK. The cause of Kurdish autonomy/statehood is nothing new , it was a factor when the British were in the area just post WW1. There was a ceasefire for years until Erdogan decided he would unleash his dictator style wrath on those that didn't dance to his tune. I don't support the use of bombs by the PKK in any way. I am not convinced they are responsible for all the attacks biome of them have been a bit to 'convenient' for Erdogan.
The fact is, the Kurds were better off under Assad , than they have been under nutters like Erdogan. Turkey has startred to look like a mendacious enemy under Erdogan, rather than an ally. Truth be known, I'd rather trust Putin, if I had too.
NATO is redundant and hence downright dangerous.
Since the end of the cold war it has basically become a tool for needling Russia, which is stupid enough in itself. With Turkey assisting jihadist groups in Syria against the relatively benign Assad government the possibility that we will be drawn into this conflict against Iran or Russia, who sensibly back Assad, is very real.
IMO we should simply abandon NATO entirely and replace it with a series of relevant bi and multilateral treaties and alliances which reflect the world we actually live in, rather than one which hasn't existed for quarter of a century.
Since the end of the cold war it has basically become a tool for needling Russia, which is stupid enough in itself. With Turkey assisting jihadist groups in Syria against the relatively benign Assad government the possibility that we will be drawn into this conflict against Iran or Russia, who sensibly back Assad, is very real.
IMO we should simply abandon NATO entirely and replace it with a series of relevant bi and multilateral treaties and alliances which reflect the world we actually live in, rather than one which hasn't existed for quarter of a century.
davepoth said:
Art0ir said:
The Kurds have been responsible for hundreds, maybe thousands of no warning bombs across Turkey.
Do their sympathisers also support the work of the IRA a few decades back, or is it different when it's in your own back yard?
You say "The Kurds" like you mean the IRA, when really the closest analogy would be "the entire Catholic population of Northern Ireland". They aren't all terrorists by a long way, and a lot of them have been very bravely fighting against Assad, ISIS and Turkey. It's notable that the Kurdish forces are gender integrated too - only a small number of women are on the front line, but they're there, which is a big thing in that part of the world. Do their sympathisers also support the work of the IRA a few decades back, or is it different when it's in your own back yard?
AJS- said:
NATO is redundant and hence downright dangerous.
Since the end of the cold war it has basically become a tool for needling Russia, which is stupid enough in itself. With Turkey assisting jihadist groups in Syria against the relatively benign Assad government the possibility that we will be drawn into this conflict against Iran or Russia, who sensibly back Assad, is very real.
IMO we should simply abandon NATO entirely and replace it with a series of relevant bi and multilateral treaties and alliances which reflect the world we actually live in, rather than one which hasn't existed for quarter of a century.
I assume that's a (rather good) parody of Corbyn's ideas for world peace and security? Although describing a government that uses chemical weapons against its own people as "relatively benign" might be taking the joke slightly too far.Since the end of the cold war it has basically become a tool for needling Russia, which is stupid enough in itself. With Turkey assisting jihadist groups in Syria against the relatively benign Assad government the possibility that we will be drawn into this conflict against Iran or Russia, who sensibly back Assad, is very real.
IMO we should simply abandon NATO entirely and replace it with a series of relevant bi and multilateral treaties and alliances which reflect the world we actually live in, rather than one which hasn't existed for quarter of a century.
230TE said:
I assume that's a (rather good) parody of Corbyn's ideas for world peace and security? Although describing a government that uses chemical weapons against its own people as "relatively benign" might be taking the joke slightly too far.
The key term being "relatively." When the alternatives are ISIS, al Quaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood or the abject chaos which came after removing tyrants in Iraq and Libya then the bar for being relatively benign is quite low.Tannedbaldhead said:
Whilst Kurdish fighters were engaging I.S. in Syria we've been pretty cool about British volunteers active within their ranks.
Now that Turkish Army and Kurdish fighters are engaged in combat said British volunteers will be killing NATO soldiers.
Looking at the way the Turks have treated the Kurds I'd say the British volunteers couldn't kill their soldiers dead enough.
Question is will our government be so understanding.
I would hope the foreign fighters helping the Kurds have been given some sort of safe passage to leave before Turkey targeted the Kurds and anyone fighting for them. It's not just British volunteers but Polish, Canadian, American etc have gone to Syria to support the KurdsNow that Turkish Army and Kurdish fighters are engaged in combat said British volunteers will be killing NATO soldiers.
Looking at the way the Turks have treated the Kurds I'd say the British volunteers couldn't kill their soldiers dead enough.
Question is will our government be so understanding.
If Turkey sends more and more troops across into more Kurd held areas then this could get very,very messy
Yipper said:
The West has actively been trying to overthrow the Turkish regime for the past ~3 years, with Gulen and others, so no surprises that Turkey wants to keep the Kurds well away from their southern borders. It's not pleasant, but you can see why the Turks are getting twitchy.
I'd say it's the poor Kurds being bombed who will be twitching.I think we can mostly agree the Arab Spring was a huge mistake, there were some bad leaders that the West wanted gone, but I don't think they did their homework on who the replacements would be.
Unless of course creating a Sunni caliphate was the plan
Now the intent is to turn Syria into another Iraq. Not wanting to be drawn into a land war, expensive and politically unpopular, the US decided to arm the Kurds as proxies. Conveniently ignoring their history. Turkey repeatedly asked the US, please don't arm the Kurds,they were ignored. But the US still wanted to use Turkish air strips. (Damn cheek) Not difficult to understand why the Turks would be a little miffed.
The Turks who have a very large strategically well placed army could have been a great ally.
One who the Arabs do not relish as an adversary.
With regard to any English combatants, I suggest a quick history 101 regarding Turkey, I don't think they had many prisoner of war camps!
Plenty of cemeteries..
Unless of course creating a Sunni caliphate was the plan
Now the intent is to turn Syria into another Iraq. Not wanting to be drawn into a land war, expensive and politically unpopular, the US decided to arm the Kurds as proxies. Conveniently ignoring their history. Turkey repeatedly asked the US, please don't arm the Kurds,they were ignored. But the US still wanted to use Turkish air strips. (Damn cheek) Not difficult to understand why the Turks would be a little miffed.
The Turks who have a very large strategically well placed army could have been a great ally.
One who the Arabs do not relish as an adversary.
With regard to any English combatants, I suggest a quick history 101 regarding Turkey, I don't think they had many prisoner of war camps!
Plenty of cemeteries..
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff