-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
- Status
Re:
John Swanson
That article left out an awful lot of information. The Turkish response is due to the US stating that they will set up a 10-20 thousand strong Kurdish militia on Trukey's border. Considering that Turkey has a Kurdish "problem" complete with terrorist attacks, this is kind of like France setting up a fully armed and trained al Qaeda militia in Mexico along the border with Texas. There was no way Turkey couldn't respond. US motives for doing this? They still want to Balkanize Syria, even though the war is pretty much over. And keep their bases inside Syria.movingtarget said:
John Swanson
Re: Re:
No, it isn't. It really, really isn't. The Kurds aren't some random grouping of people the US has decided to fund. They haven't been positioned on the Turkey-Syria and Turkey-Iraq border by some outside force attempting to influence the region.
ScienceIsCool said:
No, it isn't. It really, really isn't. The Kurds aren't some random grouping of people the US has decided to fund. They haven't been positioned on the Turkey-Syria and Turkey-Iraq border by some outside force attempting to influence the region.
to appreciate the ACTUAL motives behind the turkish incursion into syria and to try to sort out the facts from propoganda, the LAST thing an interested observer needs to do is ...to read the western msm 
in brief, leaving out the important yet too inflated and emotional labels of who's a terrorist among the kurds, the gist of the matter is in a fast declining ability of the united states to influence both its official allies and adversaries.
i spent some time yesterday watching the trt and reading the 2 expert portals. it all started, as pointed above, when the us announced the formation of the kurdish border units.
per se, it is not a big deal b/c the kurds ALREADY are patrolling their side of the sysrian border. the spark was generated when the us failed to consult turkey on its intentions. as with the pakistan aid withdrawal, the jerusalem fiasko and many more latest foreign policy decisions, the new twist in the us approach - undoubtedly its trumponian - 'you do what i tell you or else'. it is indeed very stupid given how little was achieved by the ultimatums and the threats of sanctions to russia, china, pakistan, palestine, north korea, iran and now turkey...
long story short, the one-sided, unilateral us decision on the new kurdish policy infuriated erdogan, a well known and touchy authoritarian. there was only one state he was seeking an aproval from for his invasion, b/c they displaced the us influence in the hood - russia. erdogan dispatched to moscow his chief of staff and the military intelligence chief. the permission was obtained and the invasion of afrin was initiated within hours.
curiously, facing the turkish fury and the resoluteness to act regardless of what the us thinks, yesterday mattis started backpedaling: 'turkey has some legitimate security concerns, but...'.
it remains to be seen what the us reaction will be when the turks will move, as they already told everyone, into the kurdish area of manbij where the bulk of us troops and influence is..
as long as russia backs turkey, erdogan has little to fear from either the us, the eu or even the united nations. such is the new balance of local power the us is stubbornly refusing to see.
Turkey upends US Syria strategy with attack on YPG
Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/01/turkey-upend-us-syria-strategy-attack-ypg-aleppo.html#ixzz54vNbGEDN
in brief, leaving out the important yet too inflated and emotional labels of who's a terrorist among the kurds, the gist of the matter is in a fast declining ability of the united states to influence both its official allies and adversaries.
i spent some time yesterday watching the trt and reading the 2 expert portals. it all started, as pointed above, when the us announced the formation of the kurdish border units.
per se, it is not a big deal b/c the kurds ALREADY are patrolling their side of the sysrian border. the spark was generated when the us failed to consult turkey on its intentions. as with the pakistan aid withdrawal, the jerusalem fiasko and many more latest foreign policy decisions, the new twist in the us approach - undoubtedly its trumponian - 'you do what i tell you or else'. it is indeed very stupid given how little was achieved by the ultimatums and the threats of sanctions to russia, china, pakistan, palestine, north korea, iran and now turkey...
long story short, the one-sided, unilateral us decision on the new kurdish policy infuriated erdogan, a well known and touchy authoritarian. there was only one state he was seeking an aproval from for his invasion, b/c they displaced the us influence in the hood - russia. erdogan dispatched to moscow his chief of staff and the military intelligence chief. the permission was obtained and the invasion of afrin was initiated within hours.
curiously, facing the turkish fury and the resoluteness to act regardless of what the us thinks, yesterday mattis started backpedaling: 'turkey has some legitimate security concerns, but...'.
it remains to be seen what the us reaction will be when the turks will move, as they already told everyone, into the kurdish area of manbij where the bulk of us troops and influence is..
as long as russia backs turkey, erdogan has little to fear from either the us, the eu or even the united nations. such is the new balance of local power the us is stubbornly refusing to see.
Turkey upends US Syria strategy with attack on YPG
Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/01/turkey-upend-us-syria-strategy-attack-ypg-aleppo.html#ixzz54vNbGEDN
The point of reading western msm is to know what it’s saying. It’s called discourse. My question had to do with the fact that John’s “missing information” was in fact supplied in the last paragraphs of the article.
Some people trained in history are able to read berween the lines that way.
waning us influence and overuse of the terrorist label are givens and don’t require self congratulatory use of news feeds in several languages. but please, more self important posts of the obvious.
Some people trained in history are able to read berween the lines that way.
waning us influence and overuse of the terrorist label are givens and don’t require self congratulatory use of news feeds in several languages. but please, more self important posts of the obvious.
Re:
John Swanson
Yeah. Putting the most important information in the last paragraphs is a well known tactic. Whatever. Here's a much better article on the subject: http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/01/syria-turks-attack-afrin-us-strategy-fails-kurds-again-chose-the-losing-side-.html#moreaphronesis said:
John Swanson
i dont read your pompous one-liners any longer and thus your post had zero influence on what i posted after john's.
Re:
The fact that as usual you weighed in to post after me with a typically self-aggrandizing and ponderous correction would give the lie there. The content once you get over yourself is as always, I’m sure, helpful to some.
python said:
The fact that as usual you weighed in to post after me with a typically self-aggrandizing and ponderous correction would give the lie there. The content once you get over yourself is as always, I’m sure, helpful to some.
Re: Re:
thanks.
yes, facts come after people have lost interest and switched off.
ScienceIsCool said:
thanks.
yes, facts come after people have lost interest and switched off.
Re: Re:
Ah yes, the Sinaloa cartel, that ethnic group that closely mimics the history of the Kurds, particularly where they have been persistently persecuted against since the fall of the Ottoman empire by several governments wishing to suppress their identity and hopes for an independent state, had their language declared illegal, been arrested for speaking it in public, been the victims of several massacres and massive displacement, all under the extremely complex banner of Turkification in Turkey and Ba'athism in Iraq and Syria.
Yes, that sounds exactly like an international drug cartel that originates from a Mexican state that doesn't even border another nation.
ScienceIsCool said:
Ah yes, the Sinaloa cartel, that ethnic group that closely mimics the history of the Kurds, particularly where they have been persistently persecuted against since the fall of the Ottoman empire by several governments wishing to suppress their identity and hopes for an independent state, had their language declared illegal, been arrested for speaking it in public, been the victims of several massacres and massive displacement, all under the extremely complex banner of Turkification in Turkey and Ba'athism in Iraq and Syria.
Yes, that sounds exactly like an international drug cartel that originates from a Mexican state that doesn't even border another nation.
Frankly, the whole world does not hang on the words of the US. The rest of the world have their own interests and the Turkish attack on the Kurds has been on the cards for years. The Kurds have been consolidating their position during the multi-nation efforts to push out ISIS. At one point, people were not only talking about whether it was time to discuss the issue of a Kurdish state, but also declaring it as a fact on the ground. Turkey would never accept this, and once the fight with IS was concluded it was always going to be time for the Kurds and the Turks to face off.
Re:
The Kurdistan Regional Government of the Iraqi Kurdistan region was established in 1992 and ratified in the most recent Iraqi constitution in 2005. While technically semi-autonomous they are very independent and have been pushing for nation status for much longer, along with incorporating areas of Turkey and Syria (Iranian Kurds seem apathetic towards this at best). This has long proceeded the fight against ISIL, which the Kurds were a major player in and we not really consolidating their position.
macbindle said:
The Kurdistan Regional Government of the Iraqi Kurdistan region was established in 1992 and ratified in the most recent Iraqi constitution in 2005. While technically semi-autonomous they are very independent and have been pushing for nation status for much longer, along with incorporating areas of Turkey and Syria (Iranian Kurds seem apathetic towards this at best). This has long proceeded the fight against ISIL, which the Kurds were a major player in and we not really consolidating their position.
Iraq weren't too happy with them pursuing complete independence recently IIRC (whether or not that was on behalf of Erdogan is another question).
Re:
Kurds have opposed this since it happened which is what has lead to many of the injustices they have experienced. What has been happening recently could be considered comparable to the establishment of a Turkish state from the remnants of the Ottoman empire (and many states before it), but clearly Turkey do not want this as the next logical step for an independent Kurdistan in current Syrian/Iraqi territory would be the extension of territory to include Kurdish majority regions in Turkey.
The issue here is that Turkey are fighting a battle that neither Assad, the USA or Russia (really) want to happen. The Kurds have been an effective force against ISIL in this region and, if Turkey were to win, they stand in the difficult position of either creating a power vacuum in Northern Syria and likely resurgence of ISIL or Al Qaeda if they pull out or a possible confrontation with Assad and Russia if they remain.
No-one is ever too happy about loss of territory, particularly when they think the leaving nation might be hostile due to decades oppression and even genocide. A referendum on independence for Kurdistan was promised under the Treaty of Sevres, but arguments over borders and territorial inclusion delayed any referendum while the Turkish war of independence was fought. This lead to the Treaty of Lausanne where stipulations for a referendum were removed and Kurdish claimed territory was distributed between the French and British mandates for Syria/Lebanon and Iraq and Turkey, on the establishment of Turkish sovereignty.Ferminal said:
Kurds have opposed this since it happened which is what has lead to many of the injustices they have experienced. What has been happening recently could be considered comparable to the establishment of a Turkish state from the remnants of the Ottoman empire (and many states before it), but clearly Turkey do not want this as the next logical step for an independent Kurdistan in current Syrian/Iraqi territory would be the extension of territory to include Kurdish majority regions in Turkey.
The issue here is that Turkey are fighting a battle that neither Assad, the USA or Russia (really) want to happen. The Kurds have been an effective force against ISIL in this region and, if Turkey were to win, they stand in the difficult position of either creating a power vacuum in Northern Syria and likely resurgence of ISIL or Al Qaeda if they pull out or a possible confrontation with Assad and Russia if they remain.
The YPG claims that Erdogan made a deal with Assad, maybe it's just propaganda, but it wouldn't surprise me.
Turkey and Russia seem to get along and durning the last few months they have been pretty close with the Iranians, they have similar interests when it comes to the Kurds, both have had a similar position when it came to the Kurdish referendum in Iraq and Erdogan publicly supported the Iranian regime durning the protests a few weeks ago, so it's not unthinkable that a deal was made.
The Turks are willing to accept Assad, but they get a free hand when it comes to the Syrian Kurds and don't have to worry about controlling the territory long term, if the Assad regime takes over afterwards, but that's just my two cents.
Turkey and Russia seem to get along and durning the last few months they have been pretty close with the Iranians, they have similar interests when it comes to the Kurds, both have had a similar position when it came to the Kurdish referendum in Iraq and Erdogan publicly supported the Iranian regime durning the protests a few weeks ago, so it's not unthinkable that a deal was made.
The Turks are willing to accept Assad, but they get a free hand when it comes to the Syrian Kurds and don't have to worry about controlling the territory long term, if the Assad regime takes over afterwards, but that's just my two cents.
the turkish invasion of nortthern syria is now over a week old...it is the border town of afrin where the turks and their proxy forces said are going to expel the kurds from. it is not clear if they have achieved the objective - most likely not yet - but the turks are escalating big time the conflict...now clearly trying to push the united states. either to completely accept the turkish position or more significantly completely out of syria.
this is the message promoted by the turkish media including the trt i now watch regularly. in essence, it is about the turkish demand to withdraw the us forces from their syrian base in manbij.
it is hugely significant and curious b/c i dont think the us is used to ultimatums, particularly when in their public statements there was a clear attempt by the trump administration to move towards the turkish position...specifically, yesterday it was announced and confirmed the us will NOT supply any more weapons to the sysria kurdish ypg....
what was the turkish reaction to the seeming accommodation by the us ? to pile up more pressure.
1st it was the turkish foreighn minister who said it is yet to be seen if the us is going to follow thru given many of its broken promises. then it was him or another turkish official who repeated that the us should withdraw its forces from manbij...i just saw a clip where the us rep ryan dillon flat out REFUSED to do so.
it is now for all to see whether this will escalate and how far... it is hard to imagine turkey getting so daring without some sort of far reaching agreement with russia and iran. it is my speculation, no more, b/c all 3 would seem to benefit from the us influence shrinking.
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-end-weapons-support-syrian-kurdish-ypg-turkey-says-737621136
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-turkey/turkey-says-u-s-has-promised-to-stop-arming-ypg-warns-washington-on-manbij-idUSKBN1FG0P4?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Reuters%2FworldNews+%28Reuters+World+News%29
this is the message promoted by the turkish media including the trt i now watch regularly. in essence, it is about the turkish demand to withdraw the us forces from their syrian base in manbij.
it is hugely significant and curious b/c i dont think the us is used to ultimatums, particularly when in their public statements there was a clear attempt by the trump administration to move towards the turkish position...specifically, yesterday it was announced and confirmed the us will NOT supply any more weapons to the sysria kurdish ypg....
what was the turkish reaction to the seeming accommodation by the us ? to pile up more pressure.
1st it was the turkish foreighn minister who said it is yet to be seen if the us is going to follow thru given many of its broken promises. then it was him or another turkish official who repeated that the us should withdraw its forces from manbij...i just saw a clip where the us rep ryan dillon flat out REFUSED to do so.
it is now for all to see whether this will escalate and how far... it is hard to imagine turkey getting so daring without some sort of far reaching agreement with russia and iran. it is my speculation, no more, b/c all 3 would seem to benefit from the us influence shrinking.
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-end-weapons-support-syrian-kurdish-ypg-turkey-says-737621136
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-turkey/turkey-says-u-s-has-promised-to-stop-arming-ypg-warns-washington-on-manbij-idUSKBN1FG0P4?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Reuters%2FworldNews+%28Reuters+World+News%29
Re:
This is very possible but it's a fair gamble too. Assuming Turkey can remove the Kurds from that area you then will require a military presence to remain or the Kurds will return/a power vacuum will be created. If Turkey won't accept Kurdish forces in this area you either need a Syrian regime force permanently in this area, the Turkish forces to remain or some international force. I can't imagine Assad would want to see a permanent Turkish/International force in Syria. This is only likely to lead to further clashes with Kurdish forces and mean the Turkish forces push into Syria or Syrian regime forces have to join the battle. They are spread thinly anyway and more fighting could mean another ISIS or resurgence of Al Qaeda which leads to more Western interference. Even if Assad decides to station a force there after the Turkish forces win and leave this could happen. The Kurdish forces are very effective against ISIS, removing this can become problematic.
The issue of a people's right to self-determination is also a factor here, but the UN seem to give little regard to the Kurds in this area.
Mayomaniac said:
This is very possible but it's a fair gamble too. Assuming Turkey can remove the Kurds from that area you then will require a military presence to remain or the Kurds will return/a power vacuum will be created. If Turkey won't accept Kurdish forces in this area you either need a Syrian regime force permanently in this area, the Turkish forces to remain or some international force. I can't imagine Assad would want to see a permanent Turkish/International force in Syria. This is only likely to lead to further clashes with Kurdish forces and mean the Turkish forces push into Syria or Syrian regime forces have to join the battle. They are spread thinly anyway and more fighting could mean another ISIS or resurgence of Al Qaeda which leads to more Western interference. Even if Assad decides to station a force there after the Turkish forces win and leave this could happen. The Kurdish forces are very effective against ISIS, removing this can become problematic.
The issue of a people's right to self-determination is also a factor here, but the UN seem to give little regard to the Kurds in this area.
may be you need to do a tad more reading...it was widely published. the turkish armed forces in syria are mainly in support, using their proxies - the so called free syrian army. the trt put their numbers at 25,000 just around the afrin thetre. they are the ones who are doing the bulk of fighting and the bulk of holding to the syrian territory 'freed' from whoever the turkish masters tell them.
not long ago, the free sysrian army supported by the turkish military fought isis in the operation the turks called the Euphrates shield. once whoever the turks wanted to be removed from their border were pushed out, the turks withdrew back to turky leaving the free sysrian army there.
not long ago, the free sysrian army supported by the turkish military fought isis in the operation the turks called the Euphrates shield. once whoever the turks wanted to be removed from their border were pushed out, the turks withdrew back to turky leaving the free sysrian army there.
Re:
this is a good expansion of why such a deal wouldn't be in the best interests of non-Turkish factions involved in the assault on Afrin, and also why it's very possible Assad and Erdogan have made a deal.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/north-africa-west-asia/omar-sabbour/dont-do-it-why-attacking-afrin-city-would-be-major-blunder-for-s
Mayomaniac said:
this is a good expansion of why such a deal wouldn't be in the best interests of non-Turkish factions involved in the assault on Afrin, and also why it's very possible Assad and Erdogan have made a deal.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/north-africa-west-asia/omar-sabbour/dont-do-it-why-attacking-afrin-city-would-be-major-blunder-for-s
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Liege Bastogne Liege-7 hour monument, Sunday, April 21, 2024- Started by topcat
- Replies: 985
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
-
-
77th Tour de Romandie (2.UWT) // 23rd - 28th of April 2024- Started by Logic-is-your-friend
- Replies: 495
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 24K
Latest posts
-
77th Tour de Romandie (2.UWT) // 23rd - 28th of April 2024
- Latest: Logic-is-your-friend
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram