- Joined
- Oct 20, 2014
- Messages
- 12,199
- Reaction score
- 4,082
- Location
- #TrumpWasAnInsideJob
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Russia does not boarder Turkey and no Russian aggression is likely. Meaning less chance of a Russian attack on Turkey than a US attack on Turkey. Overal Russia would be happy with a split between Turkey and the US/NATO. It removes a threat from its South West boarder.
The Turks and Russians are historic foes. Putin doesn't trust Erdogan anymore than anyone in Washington does. You can bet your ass the moment Turkey seems exposed Russia is going to swoop in and carve out a piece their orbit, whether it be in the Balkans or Caucasus. At this point, seeing how Macron among other European leaders have begun to adopt a more conciliatory approach to the Kremlin - if not necessarily 'friendly' - in the wake of Trump's reality TV show presidency/insanity NATO and Russia would be more likely to form a temporary military alliance against Turkish aggression than the US is likely to do anything... like AT ALL.
Furthermore, Russia is supporting the Assad regime against Turkey, and the only countries that openly support Turkey are Azerbaijan, the Central Asian Turkic states and Pakistan:
Yes absolutely. Despite Trump and his supporters being huge fans of brutal dictatorships, America shouldn't be allies with them.
Now, watch a bunch of conservatives defend the honor and character of a Muslim theocratic dictatorship.
The question up for discussion today: Should the United States end its alliance with Turkey?
Following Turkey's attack on the Kurds, supposedly the Kurdish Communist guerrilla faction (the PKK), a moment of realization has crystalized on both the political right and the political left, which has led many to call the American-Turkish alliance into question, some calling for the outright suspension or expulsion of Turkey from NATO (though there is no means to presently do so).
I, personally, am all for it. I used to love Turkey and its secular system of government, but have grown cooler towards it over time since Erdogan has turned himself into an Ottoman Pasha in all but name. NATO should, arguably, be the alliance of law-governed democracies against tyrannical dictatorships. But we have watched as an otherwise law-governed democracy has turned into an illiberal dictatorship right before our eyes. I do not think it is wise to bind ourselves to
What I am NOT asking:
1. I am not asking whether or not we should sanction or punish Turkey over the nation's variegated actual or alleged bad acts.
2. I am not asking whether or not we should aid Turkey's enemies against Turkey, or get into a direct military confrontation with Turkey.
3. I am not asking whether or not we should re-examine our alliance with any other countries other than Turkey. I do not want this to devolve into a "whataboutism" debate about our alliances with other countries which have governments that have done horrible things, or have been accused of doing so, though you can certainly bring it up if the principles which inform your choice are relevant to the discussion.
If you answer "Other," please tell us what you think the other alternative would be.
Were we fighting the Turks in warfare?
Were we close to fighting the Turks in warfare? And Trump backed down or something?
Everyone in the world knew that Trump's threat was an empty bluff when he made it.
Not really the point though.
The point being that shouldn't destroy and obliterate an ally's economy.
Trump needs to fess up that he made a transparent bluff and move on.
Or, get to work removing Turkey from our list of allies before he makes good on his threat.
Imho, when you're playing poker, it's pointless to bluff if everyone can tell you are bluffing.
It just costs you money.
That's what Trump has done.
He bluffed about destroying Turkey's economy even though everyone knew it was a bluff.
Felis Leo:
I voted no. Erdogan isn't Turkey and Turkey plays a vital geographical role in NATO's security. Kick out Turkey and NATO looses the second largest armed forces in the alliance, it looses control of the Bosporus and it looses easy access to the Black Sea. That is just playing into the Russian's/Putin's plans for weakening NATO. Find a way to get rid of Erdogan rather than flushing all of Turkey out with Erdogan's scat-splattered clique. Strangle Turkey's economy and interdict tourism to and from Turkey. Target the Erdogan Government minister's private holdings and pull a Venezuela-style sanctions blanket over Turkey. Erdogan's popularity and re-electability will reduce substantially.
Expel Turkey from NATO and it will further gravitate towards Russia, Iran and China and away from Europe. This strengthens the very foes/rivals which NATO must potentially contend with.
There is no mechanism in the NATO charter by which to expel a member state against that state's government's will.
Keep Turkey but get rid of Erdogan by political and economic means.
Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Yes absolutely. Despite Trump and his supporters being huge fans of brutal dictatorships, America shouldn't be allies with them.
Now, watch a bunch of conservatives defend the honor and character of a Muslim theocratic dictatorship.
Those are Turkish Kurds, not Syrian Kurds. Stop lumping everyone into one convenient basket.
I voted no for same or similar reasons in my post #36.
Your post goes more into specifics which is good.
I stated additionally that another pressure US can place on Erdogan or his successor is to send our generals and admirals through Ankara in a chain of fact slapping visits to further push Turkey back into the alliance as a full partner.
Getting Turkey to keep the S-400 for the US and Nato to autopsy would be good for the good guys and awful for the Kremlin. Nato anyway designates the S-400 as the "Growler" for the noises it makes when Putin turns it on. US can release the Patriot missiles to Turkey in yet another Trump non-deal DepState cancelled recently after a lot of growling by Congress.
It would also be possible to redeploy the F-35 to Turkey. It would resolve too ours and Nato's massive headaches over the B-60 nukes US has deployed at the Incirlik Air Base near the border with Syria (of all places as it turns out) -- all 50 of 'em. I have no doubt Erdogan wants those nukes regardless of heads exploding in Moscow, Tehran, SA, Israel and Washington among other states to include of course the Nato-EU countries. Erdogan doesn't care whose head explodes or how many of 'em do as long as he gets his way.
I invoke the old rule that no matter what it is it's never as bad as it seems. Well, not always and Turkey is no exception. There's also the factor Turkey is in a recession, the Lira has become Parker Bros. money, Erdogan's party lost the mayoral election in Istanbul despite Erdogan cancelling it which only made him lose big on the second vote. Erdogan's still got his room full of mirrors but he's running low on blue smoke while his pump is making a lot of noise.
What should happen to the nuclear weapons they have? Should the US make an enemy of them knowing they could use them?
You and Roddy are dreaming.
Erdogan is using NATO as a "shield of morality" to commit war crimes in northern Syria.
Turkey may have used chemical weapons on the Kurdish civilians Trump left vulnerable
Turkey Accused of War Crimes After Suspected White Phosphorus Use Against Kurds in Syria
Everyone knows Turkey is having militia trail their regular troops and forces to do the dirty work of cleansing.
Everyone also knows Nato has no provisions to expel or suspend a member state. And everyone knows Erdogan is using Trump to execute his malevolent will against the US ally the Kurds. The tragic irony is evident to everyone but Trump.
Neither is Nato minus the United States going to bomb Ankara and Erdogan's palace to save the Kurds. So Turkey being a member of Nato does not implicate Nato in Erdogan's fascist genocide.
It's all on Trump.
And we know Putin pulls Erdogan's chain when he wants to and he also pulls Trump's chain when he needs and wants something big. The US abandoning an ally is big. The US abandoning an ally to genocide is very big. Putin considers he has nothing to complain about in this one. Another one.
You have it backwards. The US isn't abandoning. Erdogan abandoned the US, NATO, and Western liberalism with the supposed putsch.
We should get our nukes out of there asap.
Trump gave no red line or details about what Trump feels is acceptable behavior from the Turks.You sure it was just a bluff? Turkey COULD slaughter 100% of Kurds in their path. Have they? That is what all the warhawks claimed is going to happen unless we go to war against the Turks in Syria.
Yes absolutely. Despite Trump and his supporters being huge fans of brutal dictatorships, America shouldn't be allies with them.
Now, watch a bunch of conservatives defend the honor and character of a Muslim theocratic dictatorship.
Actually, Turkey isn't a Muslim theocracy, the military is actually extremely anti-Islamist. Also, the US does support Turkey and not even due to Trump. This is a decades long situation, mainly revolving around them being a NATO member.
The question up for discussion today: Should the United States end its alliance with Turkey?
Following Turkey's attack on the Kurds, supposedly the Kurdish Communist guerrilla faction (the PKK), a moment of realization has crystalized on both the political right and the political left, which has led many to call the American-Turkish alliance into question, some calling for the outright suspension or expulsion of Turkey from NATO (though there is no means to presently do so).
I, personally, am all for it. I used to love Turkey and its secular system of government, but have grown cooler towards it over time since Erdogan has turned himself into an Ottoman Pasha in all but name. NATO should, arguably, be the alliance of law-governed democracies against tyrannical dictatorships. But we have watched as an otherwise law-governed democracy has turned into an illiberal dictatorship right before our eyes. I do not think it is wise to bind ourselves to
What I am NOT asking:
1. I am not asking whether or not we should sanction or punish Turkey over the nation's variegated actual or alleged bad acts.
2. I am not asking whether or not we should aid Turkey's enemies against Turkey, or get into a direct military confrontation with Turkey.
3. I am not asking whether or not we should re-examine our alliance with any other countries other than Turkey. I do not want this to devolve into a "whataboutism" debate about our alliances with other countries which have governments that have done horrible things, or have been accused of doing so, though you can certainly bring it up if the principles which inform your choice are relevant to the discussion.
If you answer "Other," please tell us what you think the other alternative would be.
Actually, Turkey isn't a Muslim theocracy, the military is actually extremely anti-Islamist.
Trump gave no red line or details about what Trump feels is acceptable behavior from the Turks.
Trump is free to crawfish back as far as Erdogan chases him.
But ask yourself, "Are we actually going to obliterate and destroy the economy of an ally?"
Is that a serious consideration as something America does? Sabotage our allies?
You pivoted from this point a bit ago by suggesting that the threat is just a bluff.
If it's just a bluff, it's a ****ty bluff
It absolutely looks like an empty threat.
There's no red line for Turkey.
That makes it look like Trump is planning on moving the goal post from the get-go.
If you are attempting to bluff, your bluff needs to at least look credible.
You are suggesting that it's not a bluff, now?
As though you think it's likely America will attack and destroy our ally's economy.
You could also decide that the current sanctions have already destroyed Turkey's economy and call it obliterated.
Then, Trump has fulfilled his promise. He tried, but the Turks just would respond to tough guy letters and reason.
Oh, well.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?