Turkish troops cross into north Iraq

[PeteEU]

The Kurds hate Israel no less than any other Middle Eastern regime out there Kaya.

And you have proof of this of course?

 

[Apocalypse]

Selective in your information usage...

Delusional in yours.

 

[Apocalypse]

And you have proof of this of course?

Why do I need a proof for something so obvious?

In 1999, some Kurds accused the Mossad of providing information that led to the arrest in Kenya of Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) in the Kurdish areas of Turkey. Kurdish protestors in Berlin attacked the Israeli embassy, and the Israeli security forces shot against the crowd. Hundreds stormed the Israeli Consulate, and this resulted in three protesters being shot to death, and another 16 protesters and 27 police officers wounded.

Taken from Wikipedia.
Quite ironic one would say, considering that the Turks are now blaming Israel for an involvement with the PKK.

 

[gunner]

Huge bull****.
Israel is raiding a non-sovereign territory (Gaza strip) and is targeting militants not civilians.
Turkey is raiding a sovereign territory (Iraq) and is targeting militants not civilians.

Israel doesn't condemn Turkey.
Turkey condemns Israel.

Bloody hypocrisy.

So i take it the 300 children of the approximate 1400 that died in the 2008 Israeli incursion were child combatants?

Paul

 

[Apocalypse]

So i take it the 300 children of the approximate 1400 that died in the 2008 Israeli incursion were child combatants?

Paul

No, you can take it that the civilians who died in the operation were not targeted.
Did Britain target civilians when it got so many of them killed during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? Bloody hypocrisy.

Besides that Hamas has many 15-18 years old in its ranks, who the UN would consider children, but that is another subject.

 

[PeteEU]

Why do I need a proof for something so obvious?

In 1999, some Kurds accused the Mossad of providing information that led to the arrest in Kenya of Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) in the Kurdish areas of Turkey. Kurdish protestors in Berlin attacked the Israeli embassy, and the Israeli security forces shot against the crowd. Hundreds stormed the Israeli Consulate, and this resulted in three protesters being shot to death, and another 16 protesters and 27 police officers wounded.

Taken from Wikipedia.
Quite ironic one would say, considering that the Turks are now blaming Israel for an involvement with the PKK.

So you base your hatred on the fact that the Mossad 11 years ago provided intel on a Kurdish terrorist and that the Kurdish terrorists people got pissed over that and called Israel names? You do know that the PKK is illegal in northern Iraq right and is not part of the ruling coalition right?

 

[Apocalypse]

So you base your hatred on the fact that the Mossad 11 years ago provided intel on a Kurdish terrorist and that the Kurdish terrorists people got pissed over that and called Israel names?

The protests were massive at that time, many Kurds were voicing opposition to it.

And obviously that's not what I base that hatred on, that's merely one example.

 

[PeteEU]

No, you can take it that the civilians who died in the operation were not targeted.

Which has been disproved time and time again. They were at best collateral damage and at worst directly targeted like when the IDF shelled a UN run school. And lets not forget the IDF using human shields during the operation.

Did Britain target civilians when it got so many of them killed during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? Bloody hypocrisy.

Britain never killed 300 children in one operation mate.

 

[Apocalypse]

Which has been disproved time and time again.

The claism that Israel has targeted civilians were disproven a time after time, yes.

They were at best collateral damage and at worst directly targeted like when the IDF shelled a UN run school.

Never was there an IDF command to target civilians.
A soldier now is going to be charged by the IDF with manslaughter for opening fire on Palestinian innocent civilians during the Gaza war, killing two of them, because he thought they're hostiles, it's ****ing ridiculous and pathetic to claim that the IDF has actually tried to kill civilians during that operation.

And lets not forget the IDF using human shields during the operation.

Never happened.
Individual soldiers did, once, and it wasn't really human shielding but a neighbor procedure.
They were punished by the IDF.

Yet more bloody hypocrisy.

Britain never killed 300 children in one operation mate.

That's not an excuse, it has killed way more civilians in a war.

 

[PeteEU]

The protests were massive at that time, many Kurds were voicing opposition to it.

And obviously that's not what I base that hatred on, that's merely one example.

I see.. you base your whole hatred over someone being pissy against Israel 11 years ago before the fall of Saddam and the creation of a semi independent area in Northern Iraq for Kurds.. And because of this you generalize that all kurds hate Israel for giving intel to Turkey (or who ever) so that one of their outlawed and hated terrorists leaders got caught..:roll:

 

[Apocalypse]

I see.. you base your whole hatred over someone being pissy against Israel 11 years ago before the fall of Saddam and the creation of a semi independent area in Northern Iraq for Kurds.. And because of this you generalize that all kurds hate Israel for giving intel to Turkey (or who ever) so that one of their outlawed and hated terrorists leaders got caught..:roll:

Obvious straw man is obvious.

 

[PeteEU]

The claism that Israel has targeted civilians were disproven a time after time, yes.

Yea by the very people who did the targeting.. hardly unbiased :roll:

Never was there an IDF command to target civilians.

Of course not, that could be used against them.

A soldier now is going to be charged by the IDF with manslaughter for opening fire on Palestinian innocent civilians during the Gaza war, killing two of them, because he thought they're hostiles, it's ****ing ridiculous and pathetic to claim that the IDF has actually tried to kill civilians during that operation.

Yea after international pressure.

Never happened.
Individual soldiers did, once, and it wasn't really human shielding but a neighbor procedure.
They were punished by the IDF.

LOL give me a break.. you are the biggest apologist of the IDF ever. They were only punished because they were stupid enough to get caught on camera!

That's not an excuse, it has killed way more civilians in a war.

Which war? Considering the Brits have been fighting wars over 1000 years.. then duh! You claimed Iraq and Afghanistan and I say.. prove that they killed 300 children and 1500+ civilians in one engagement/operation.

 

[PeteEU]

Obvious straw man is obvious.

Not my fault you cant keep your story straight or explain where you base your hatred and accusations on.

 

[Apocalypse]

Never was there an IDF command to target civilians.

Of course not, that could be used against them

So on the one hand you're admitting that there was never such an order, and on the other hand you're claiming that there was such an order.
That's just too ****ing ridiculous. :rofl

Yea after international pressure.

No, not really.
The investigation has begun way before the Goldstone committee was even appointed.
You just can't handle reality so you're making up bullcrap, that's a great way to express the lack of basis for your arguments.

LOL give me a break.. you are the biggest apologist of the IDF ever.

The IDF doesn't need "apologists".
Hamas does.

They were only punished because they were stupid enough to get caught on camera!

Ridiculous, torn-off and baseless as usual, Pete.

Which war?

Afghanistan war.

Considering the Brits have been fighting wars over 1000 years.. then duh! You claimed Iraq and Afghanistan and I say.. prove that they killed 300 children and 1500+ civilians in one engagement/operation.

I compare between the Gaza War and the Afghanistan war, so once more that's not an excuse.
It just shows how unwilling you are to claim that Brits have deliberately killed civilians.
Yet more bloody hypocrisy.

 

[Apocalypse]

Not my fault you cant keep your story straight or explain where you base your hatred and accusations on.

I happen to disagree, it is completely your fault that you're engaging in a straw man argument.

 

[alexa]

It just shows how unwilling you are to claim that Brits have deliberately killed civilians.
Yet more bloody hypocrisy.

We take such things very seriously and have even been known to take up to 38 years to prove this is the case. Now you have claimed that the 'Brits' have been deliberately killing over 300 children in Afghanistan, you had better produce your proof sharpish or retract immediately.

 

[kaya'08]

Turkey continuously condemns Israel when it commits raids in Gaza against Hamas.
That's where the hypocrisy lies at.

Because Israel acts like it owns Gaza and Turkey takes the necessary legal steps before entering Kirkuk.

 

[kaya'08]

Also, i must urge you to see that PeteEU's argument is impartial and is being conducted from a neutral perspective. He is hardly pro-Turkey, especially bub, and we have clashed horns more than once regarding that country. It is why everything he says here should be regarded as credible, and especially more credible than anything i post in this thread.

 

[Apocalypse]

We take such things very seriously and have even been known to take up to 38 years to prove this is the case.

So does Israel, perhaps even way more than Britain considering the means Israel takes (Dropping leaflets, phoning homes), means that Britain doesn't.

Now you have claimed that the 'Brits' have been deliberately killing over 300 children in Afghanistan, you had better produce your proof sharpish or retract immediately.

I've never claimed such thing.
I've simply stated the obvious, if Israel deliberately kills civilians then so does Britain.
There's no way dodging around it, at least not without exposing one's own bloody hypocrisy as you've shown here.

 

[Apocalypse]

Because Israel acts like it owns Gaza and Turkey takes the necessary legal steps before entering Kirkuk.

Israel doesn't act like it owns Gaza.
Turkey violated Iraqi sovereignty, Israel doesn't violate Gaza's sovereignty since it has no sovereignty.

And just to make it clear I believe they have the right to do so if they're attacked by PKK members from that area and Iraq fails to do something about it.
I just find it to be quite obviously hypocritical that Erdogan allows himself to criticize Israel for practicing its self-defense when he does the same while violating sovereignty.

 

[kaya'08]

Israel doesn't act like it owns Gaza.

The incursions are being conducted in accordance with international laws and resolutions. It is why our US allies openly supports our efforts in Northern Iraq and actively provides support and intel from incirlik. Maliki may not like what we are doing, but for as long as NATO men can stamp on Iraqi soil, there is very little he can do, especially without the say so from the Kirkuk administration.

Turkey violated Iraqi sovereignity, Israel doesn't violate Gaza's sovereignity since it has no sovereignity.

How have you deduced such a thing?

 

[Apocalypse]

The incursions are being conducted in accordance with international laws and resolutions. It is why our US allies openly supports our efforts in Northern Iraq and actively provides support and intel from incirlik. Maliki may not like what we are doing, but for as long as NATO men can stamp on Iraqi soil, there is very little he can do, especially without the say so from the Kirkuk administration.

That's still a violation of Iraqi sovereignity, like it or not.

How have you deduced such a thing?

Are you for real?
Are you claiming that the Gaza Strip is a sovereign territory?

 

[kaya'08]

That's still a violation of Iraqi sovereignity, like it or not.

Violation does not equate illegal. That is the fundamental difference here. You claim sovereign is being violated unwantingly or illegally. Are you aware of this? We can both agree on this if you therefore believe that NATO's presence in Iraq and Afghanistan is a "violation" on the whole.

Are you for real?
Are you claiming that the Gaza Strip is a sovereign territory?

I believe any area with its own government, identity, flag and economy is a sovereign territory, mr apoco.

 

[Apocalypse]

Violation does not equate illegal. That is the fundamental difference here. You claim sovereign is being violated unwantingly or illegally. Are you aware of this? We can both agree on this if you therefore believe that NATO's presence in Iraq and Afghanistan is a "violation" on the whole.

First of all post some sources for the legality issues, I haven't seen those so far.
Secondly it could be legal and a violation of sovereignity, yes, as I said I completely support the act and it is justified, I just point out at the obvious hypocrisy presented by Erdogan when he condemns Israel for committing raids in Gaza, saying that it's unjustified.

I believe any area with its own government, identity, flag and economy is a sovereign territory, mr.

Then you're an enemy of reality, since that is far from being the definition of sovereignity.
Gaza is not independent hence not sovereign.
No actual, existing state is owning or claiming the land of the Gaza Strip.

 

[donsutherland1]

FWIW, my views on the various issues raised in this thread are:

1. When Turkey's interests are at stake, especially vital ones concerning security, it will not hesitate to take such actions as it feels are appropriate to defend those interests e.g., crossing Iraq's boundaries. If Iraq fails to address Turkey's security needs, I have no objections to its acting on its own to secure them.

2. Israel, like Turkey and any other sovereign state, enjoys the same inherent right of self-defense. The Erdogan government's double-standard is that even as Turkey demonstrates repeatedly through actions its willingness to defend its core interests and needs, it demands that Israel refrain from doing so. That is an inconsistent standard.

3. Terrorist organizations do not have identical structures nor do they all act alike. Some can be highly centralized, hence an operatio that decapitates its senior leadership effectively brings an end to their operational capabilities. Others are highly decentralized. Some are between those two poles. In terms of operational tactics, the PKK often operates in relatively remote areas. In contrast, Hamas operates in close proximity to civilians. The Taliban do both. Hence, in the latter two cases, civilian casualties are inevitably going to be higher than they would be in the first case.

4. That civilian casualties occur during military or counterterrorism operations does not mean that those casualties are deliberate. All states have a duty to avoid deliberately targeting civilians. However, international law does not assume perfection and it is well understood that targeting military objectives can still lead to civilian casualties. Hence, the standard expected of states is that the anticipated civilian casualties should not be excessive relative to the military advantage expected to be derived from targeting the military objectives.

5. There has been a revisionist tendency to twist that principle of international law into one that the casualties on the enemy side should be roughly comparable to those the enemy inflicts. That perverted definition of proportionality has no basis in international law. Proportionality concerns only whether anticipated civilian casualties are excessive relative to the expected military advantage. Nothing more.

6. Humans err and technology is not infallible. One can, in good faith, make calculations that are consistent with international law. Yet, there could be some unforeseen situation that leads to substantially more civilian casualties than anticipated e.g., unknown to planners, far more civilians were packed into a military objective in a case of human shielding. In that case, responsibility belongs not to the planners who acted in good faith, but those who engaged in the practice of human shielding. Missiles can go astray. Errors in judgment can occur.