Intelligence community raises alarm on Turkey

[TU Curmudgeon]

From United Press International

Intelligence community raises alarm on Turkey
​

WASHINGTON, Feb. 4 (UPI) -- Bolstered by a 2019 yearly threat assessment from the director of national intelligence that warned of the risk posed by Turkey's fraying relationship with the United States, senators have urged action to prevent a deeper strain with the NATO ally.

Yet Congress and President Donald Trump are largely split on how to approach U.S. support for Kurdish militias in northern Syria, a point of contention between the United States and Turkey in light of Trump's December announcement that he planned to withdraw U.S. forces from the country.

It is uncertain how Trump will approach Turkey, a historic ally that has grown friendlier with Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent years.

The relationship between the Russia and Turkey is an important backdrop to the DNI's statements on the state of U.S.-Turkish relations, according to Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

COMMENT:-

I can't see what the problem is, either the Turks do what they are told or they get "liberated" - right?

Who knew that running the whole world could be so complicated?
​

 

[ttwtt78640]

From United Press International

Intelligence community raises alarm on Turkey
​

WASHINGTON, Feb. 4 (UPI) -- Bolstered by a 2019 yearly threat assessment from the director of national intelligence that warned of the risk posed by Turkey's fraying relationship with the United States, senators have urged action to prevent a deeper strain with the NATO ally.

Yet Congress and President Donald Trump are largely split on how to approach U.S. support for Kurdish militias in northern Syria, a point of contention between the United States and Turkey in light of Trump's December announcement that he planned to withdraw U.S. forces from the country.

It is uncertain how Trump will approach Turkey, a historic ally that has grown friendlier with Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent years.

The relationship between the Russia and Turkey is an important backdrop to the DNI's statements on the state of U.S.-Turkish relations, according to Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

COMMENT:-

I can't see what the problem is, either the Turks do what they are told or they get "liberated" - right?

Who knew that running the whole world could be so complicated?
​

Meanwhile, China sits back, getting ever more wealthy and powerful, and watches the show.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Erdogan is the leader with whom Putin has had most official telephone conversations.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Meanwhile, China sits back, getting ever more wealthy and powerful, and watches the show.

Wouldn't you have liked to be a fly on the wall when the President's Daily Briefing got to the "And China is going to be launching nuclear ..." point?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Erdogan is the leader with whom Putin has had most official telephone conversations.

And that could well be because both Russia and Turkey want to see American influence in the area reduced. Of course, there just might be a bit of a difference over whose influence in the area would replace the American influence, eh wot?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Wouldn't you have liked to be a fly on the wall when the President's Daily Briefing got to the "And China is going to be launching nuclear ..." point?

That will likely boost future sales for the MIC. MAGA indeed.

 

[PoS]

If the US wants to keep Turkey as an ally, then there can be no support for the Kurds in any way shape or form.

 

[Fishking]

From United Press International

Intelligence community raises alarm on Turkey
​

WASHINGTON, Feb. 4 (UPI) -- Bolstered by a 2019 yearly threat assessment from the director of national intelligence that warned of the risk posed by Turkey's fraying relationship with the United States, senators have urged action to prevent a deeper strain with the NATO ally.

Yet Congress and President Donald Trump are largely split on how to approach U.S. support for Kurdish militias in northern Syria, a point of contention between the United States and Turkey in light of Trump's December announcement that he planned to withdraw U.S. forces from the country.

It is uncertain how Trump will approach Turkey, a historic ally that has grown friendlier with Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent years.

The relationship between the Russia and Turkey is an important backdrop to the DNI's statements on the state of U.S.-Turkish relations, according to Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

COMMENT:-

I can't see what the problem is, either the Turks do what they are told or they get "liberated" - right?

Who knew that running the whole world could be so complicated?
​

Turkey's government is **** and a threat in itself. We shouldn't have to play nicey-nicey with them to keep them from committing genocide against the Kurds. They should be immediate removed from NATO.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

If the US wants to keep Turkey as an ally, then there can be no support for the Kurds in any way shape or form.

That may well be the case.

Since the Kurds have NEVER been an independent nation, their claim for such tends to be pretty weak. (At least as weak as any claim for a "Black Nation" within the bounds of the United States of America [Native Americans have a MUCH stronger case].)

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Turkey's government is **** and a threat in itself. We shouldn't have to play nicey-nicey with them to keep them from committing genocide against the Kurds. They should be immediate removed from NATO.

The Turks are quite content to stop fighting Kurdish terrorism as soon as the Kurds stop using terrorist tactics.

 

[Fishking]

The Turks are quite content to stop fighting Kurdish terrorism as soon as the Kurds stop using terrorist tactics.

Rofl...Turks have no issue with terrorism. They support it. They also prefer genocide, and really want to commit genocide on the Kurds. Interesting you feel the need to defend such actions.

 

[Phys251]

If the US wants to keep Turkey as an ally, then there can be no support for the Kurds in any way shape or form.

We need to leverage our alliance with Turkey or whatever is left of it to give the Kurds a fighting chance in their struggle to live a peaceful and prosperous life.

Not to say that Kurdish separatists have been blameless in their tactics. But two wrongs do not make a right.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Rofl...Turks have no issue with terrorism. They support it.

I stand ready to be convinced, as soon as you produce something more substantial than "Because I say so.".

They also prefer genocide, and really want to commit genocide on the Kurds.

See above (please do not forget to show how the Turks did, in the past, anything different than the US government did, in the past).

Interesting you feel the need to defend such actions.

I defend any government that is under actual attack by terrorists. I oppose any government that uses pretended attacks to justify killing.

Your position is ...?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

We need to leverage our alliance with Turkey or whatever is left of it to give the Kurds a fighting chance in their struggle to live a peaceful and prosperous life.

Not to say that Kurdish separatists have been blameless in their tactics. But two wrongs do not make a right.

So, if an (let's say) "American White Christian" terrorist group started attacking the US government and was demanding their own "homeland" be carved out of the territory of the United States of America, your position would be that - since two wrongs don't make a right - the US government should give them their "homeland" (despite the fact that they never had one before).

Or would that be a case of "That's DIFFERENT!!!"?

The Kurds can live a peaceful and prosperous life WITHIN Turkey simply by admitting that they are citizens of Turkey and stopping their attempts to dismember the country. The Kurds can live a peaceful and prosperous life WITHIN Iraq simply by admitting that they are citizens of Iraq and stopping their attempts to dismember the country. The Kurds can live a peaceful and prosperous life WITHIN Syria simply by admitting that they are citizens of Syria and stopping their attempts to dismember the country.

In fact "The __[fill in the blank 1]__ can live a peaceful life WITHIN __[fill in the blank 2]__ simply by admitting that they are citizens of __[fill in the blank 2]__ and stopping their attempts to dismember the country." is of universal application.

 

[Phys251]

So, if an (let's say) "American White Christian" terrorist group started attacking the US government and was demanding their own "homeland" be carved out of the territory of the United States of America, your position would be that - since two wrongs don't make a right - the US government should give them their "homeland" (despite the fact that they never had one before).

Or would that be a case of "That's DIFFERENT!!!"?

The Kurds can live a peaceful and prosperous life WITHIN Turkey simply by admitting that they are citizens of Turkey and stopping their attempts to dismember the country. The Kurds can live a peaceful and prosperous life WITHIN Iraq simply by admitting that they are citizens of Iraq and stopping their attempts to dismember the country. The Kurds can live a peaceful and prosperous life WITHIN Syria simply by admitting that they are citizens of Syria and stopping their attempts to dismember the country.

In fact "The __[fill in the blank 1]__ can live a peaceful life WITHIN __[fill in the blank 2]__ simply by admitting that they are citizens of __[fill in the blank 2]__ and stopping their attempts to dismember the country." is of universal application.

Your counterposition is fair.

I feel that the default position should be that separatist movements should be frowned upon, and if one turns to widespread violence against innocent civilians, even put down. But there can be exceptions. The United States, for one. Was not the United States born as a separatist movement?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Your counterposition is fair.

I feel that the default position should be that separatist movements should be frowned upon, and if one turns to widespread violence against innocent civilians, even put down. But there can be exceptions. The United States, for one. Was not the United States born as a separatist movement?

Your position of "NO ONE should be allowed to use violence in a 'separatist' movement - except us, of course." is noted.

PS - Actually the "separatist" bit of the American Revolution was a necessary adjunct to the struggle between the "England based financial elite" and the "Colony based financial elite" over who got to have the biggest share of the spoils arising out of taking land away from the people who already occupied it.

 

[Phys251]

Your position of "NO ONE should be allowed to use violence in a 'separatist' movement - except us, of course." is noted.

PS - Actually the "separatist" bit of the American Revolution was a necessary adjunct to the struggle between the "England based financial elite" and the "Colony based financial elite" over who got to have the biggest share of the spoils arising out of taking land away from the people who already occupied it.

Don't assume that I believe that the American Revolution was a good idea.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Don't assume that I believe that the American Revolution was a good idea.

I do.

The American Revolution showed other countries what could happen if both sides got intransigent and refused to take an honest look at the wishes and aspirations of the other side.

Without the example of the American Revolution, self-government (and/or "responsible government") would potentially have been much slower to spread throughout the British Empire and might have ended up costing many more than the ~50,000 combined British and Colonial deaths (inclusive of deaths from disease [deaths from disease appear to have accounted for around 2/3rds of the deaths]) during the American Revolution. (Battlefield deaths appear to have totalled around 12,000 to 15,000 spread reasonably evenly between the Colonial and British sides.)

 

[Rogue Valley]

In March of 2018, Erdogan and the Turkish military (with the Islamist Ahrar al-Sharqiya militia) invaded (Operation Olive Branch) the far western Kurdish canton of Efrîn (Afrin) in the Syrian Kurd homeland of Rojava. It is unknown how many Kurds were killed, but ~250,000 either fled for their lives or were forcibly expelled. These displaced Efrîn Kurds were then replaced by Sunni Arabs from the (Assad/Putin) destroyed Syrian city of Eastern Ghouta. What we have here is Erdogan engaging in the ethnic-cleansing of the Kurd population in northern Syria. At the moment there is a US military blocking force located at Minbic (Manbij), but this is due to be removed any day now by Trumps orders which will open the way for Turkish forces to invade and cleanse the remainder of Rojava.

These are the Syrian Kurds that have been fighting on the ground against ISIS in Syria for the US since late 2014.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

In March of 2018, Erdogan and the Turkish military (with the Islamist Ahrar al-Sharqiya militia) invaded (Operation Olive Branch) the far western Kurdish canton of Efrîn (Afrin) in the Syrian Kurd homeland of Rojava. It is unknown how many Kurds were killed, but ~250,000 either fled for their lives or were forcibly expelled. These displaced Efrîn Kurds were then replaced by Sunni Arabs from the (Assad/Putin) destroyed Syrian city of Eastern Ghouta. What we have here is Erdogan engaging in the ethnic-cleansing of the Kurd population in northern Syria. At the moment there is a US military blocking force located at Minbic (Manbij), but this is due to be removed any day now by Trumps orders which will open the way for Turkish forces to invade and cleanse the remainder of Rojava.

These are the Syrian Kurds that have been fighting on the ground against ISIS in Syria for the US since late 2014.

That's interesting.

However there is not now, nor has there ever been, such a place as either "Kurdistan" or "Rojava". Not even the government of the United States of America recognizes either "Kurdistan" or "Rojava" as a country.

The Turks sent the Turkish military into SYRIA at the request of the SYRIAN government in order to help put down a TERRORIST REBELLION against SYRIA.

The United States of America has set a precedent as far as the legitimacy of a PART of a COUNTRY (especially a "unitary state") unilaterally "declaring independence" and if you want to know what that precedent is you can find out a lot more HERE.

Should the Kurds have their own country? Possibly.

Should any indigenous group that resides within the territory of an existing country have the right to demand and obtain a portion of that country in order to form their own independent and sovereign nation? Please exercise caution in answering because several Native American tribes might be willing to use your position in order to achieve their own goals.