Turkey Says NO WAY to a Kurdish Kirkuk

[NewsMan]

So... help me understand: Turkey wants this vote delayed... for what? What will be the difference between a vote this year or next? It is clear that regardless of when this vote comes, if it is pro-Kurd, it is unacceptable. Iraq must get the oil-sharing laws established or this issue will get nothing but worse.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070220/ap_on_re_mi_ea/turkey_iraq

[ZaakM433]

They didn't want to let the 4th ID through their country and now they expect us to listen to them?

[Ergnkon]

So... help me understand: Turkey wants this vote delayed... for what? What will be the difference between a vote this year or next? It is clear that regardless of when this vote comes, if it is pro-Kurd, it is unacceptable.

I don't think you can with that unconditional pro-kurd stance of yours....but I'll try anyways.

Since Kirkuk IS firstly an Iraqi city, Turkey wants rest of the Iraq's people in Iraq to be able to decide on the faith of Kirkuk..not just ethnically purized Kirkuk by Kurds.

Now you'll give me that "arabization" of Kirkuk in the past thing, but the reverse has been greatly exagerated by four times. They're even moving kurds from neighboring countries before the referandum....of course no Turkomans are allowed to return to the city by the way.


Iraq must get the oil-sharing laws established or this issue will get nothing but worse.

Tell that to the kurds...they're the ones opposing to such laws.


They didn't want to let the 4th ID through their country and now they expect us to listen to them?

Don't..the times are near you'll be listening very carefully.

The agreement was that; Turks were to enter together with the US forces and contribute 10.000 troops to coalition forces, but the kurds oppsed to that agreement...threatened US by turning around and fighting the Turks entering with the US forces, the US bowed to this thread and deal died.

You've been hearing one sided US propaganda so far.

[Vorian]

Since Kirkuk IS firstly an Iraqi city, Turkey wants rest of the Iraq's people in Iraq to be able to decide on the faith of Kirkuk..not just ethnically purized Kirkuk by Kurds.

And why does Turkey care?


They're even moving kurds from neighboring countries before the referandum....of course no Turkomans are allowed to return to the city by the way.


So you are talking about Kurdish "settlers". Does this word ring any bells? Talking about hypocricy here.



Don't..the times are near you'll be listening very carefully.

The agreement was that; Turks were to enter together with the US forces and contribute 10.000 troops to coalition forces, but the kurds oppsed to that agreement...threatened US by turning around and fighting the Turks entering with the US forces, the US bowed to this thread and deal died.

You've been hearing one sided US propaganda so far.

So Turkey asked to enter with US in Iraq, Why, I ask again? Btw, the agreement also included economical issues and benefits for Turkey. The government probably thought that US would be willing to accept those terms in order to open another front like in Afghanistan, and that they couldn't wage war without them. Well, they probably underestimated the American determination, and the value of the Kurdish factor in this operation.

[Ergnkon]

And why does Turkey care?

Not only Turkey. Many others also cares, but as long as it serves to US interests, they turn a blind eye to the situation.

Finally, the U.N. report helpfully reviews the increasing violence in the contested city of Kirkuk, which indicates an unraveling there--Kurdish militants seeking to ethnically cleanse the city of Turkomen and Arabs in order to win a referendum on Kirkuk's future. Kirkuk accounts for a very high level of oil reserves. Shia militia as well as insurgents are fighting back. It is, as predicted, likely to be a very violent place in the coming months. Let's hope the Times and other news media see fit to pay attention.

http://www.johntirman.com/UN%20report,%20Jan%2007.html

Militias on the Rise Across Iraq
Shiite and Kurdish Groups Seizing Control, Instilling Fear in North and South

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/20/AR2005082001317.html


So you are talking about Kurdish "settlers". Does this word ring any bells? Talking about hypocricy here.

My bad.."moving" was a wrong wording, they're passing out "kurdistan" citizenship to the kurds living in the neighboring countries to come and vote during the referandum.


So Turkey asked to enter with US in Iraq, Why, I ask again? Btw, the agreement also included economical issues and benefits for Turkey. The government probably thought that US would be willing to accept those terms in order to open another front like in Afghanistan, and that they couldn't wage war without them.

Yes..Turkey was asked to join the US forces and it was US's idea to open another front from the north . Turkey liked this offer very much since they planned to deal with the PKK at the same time when they were entering.

Of course there was some economical benefits for Turkey since every time the US starts a war in the region, Turkey gets screwed big time...just like it happened after the first gulf war.

[Vorian]

Again, Turks accusing others for cleansing cities and regions....I don't know. It sounds ironic.

[Ergnkon]

Again, Turks accusing others for cleansing cities and regions....I don't know. It sounds ironic.


Yeah...whatever you say my Greek "friend" ;)

[Vorian]

Of course my dear Turkish "buddy"

[justagoodolboy]

hmm. Bush had to beg everyone else to send in troops, but Turkey just up and "offered" them? Now why would they want to do that?

[NewsMan]

See Ergnkon, you see me as completely pro-Kurd and that simply is not the case. Since you read so much of what I write, I am sure you will find a variety of "pros", including "pro-Turkey" stances and instances.

My question is about the referendeum. If the vote is not to take place as the Iraqi constitution dictates, when will be a better time?

Second question: Why even have a vote when Turkey says a pro-Kurdish vote is unacceptable. In other words, the only agreeable solution for Turkey is that Kirkuk CANNOT become a part of the autonomous region.

Doesn't seem like there's any room for anything else... according to the Turks.

Finally, whether the Kurds like it or not, THE ONLY road to a peaceful settlement is to have oil sharing. IT MUST BE DONE, or there will clearly be no peace.

[LRPV]

hmm. Bush had to beg everyone else to send in troops, but Turkey just up and "offered" them? Now why would they want to do that?

Was that a serious question or a bait for the 'my **** is bigger than yours' posters above?

PS: Bush had to "beg" everyone else? Far from accurate.

It's an interesting topic, lets leave the nationalism out of it. Please.

[Ergnkon]

hmm. Bush had to beg everyone else to send in troops, but Turkey just up and "offered" them? Now why would they want to do that?

hmm..maybe you should try to understand what's been posted already..huh?


My own post above.


it was US's idea to open another front from the north . Turkey liked this offer very much since they planned to deal with the PKK at the same time when they were entering.

BTW, keep in mind that this war wasn't NATO's war.

[Ergnkon]

See Ergnkon, you see me as completely pro-Kurd and that simply is not the case. Since you read so much of what I write, I am sure you will find a variety of "pros", including "pro-Turkey" stances and instances.

So far..no such thing posted by you.


My question is about the referendeum. If the vote is not to take place as the Iraqi constitution dictates, when will be a better time?

First of all; Kirkuk is still an Iraqi town, it's not even inclued in the so called Kurdish region or Kurdistan maps. This gives rest of the Iraq right to particibate in this decision regarding one of their towns. Only this fact is enough to declare the referandum no good.


Second question: Why even have a vote when Turkey says a pro-Kurdish vote is unacceptable. In other words, the only agreeable solution for Turkey is that Kirkuk CANNOT become a part of the autonomous region.

Secondly, when the demographics of this town is forcefully changed by the kurds in their favor, this referandum becomes non legit.

Finally, the U.N. report helpfully reviews the increasing violence in the contested city of Kirkuk, which indicates an unraveling there--Kurdish militants seeking to ethnically cleanse the city of Turkomen and Arabs in order to win a referendum on Kirkuk's future. Kirkuk accounts for a very high level of oil reserves. Shia militia as well as insurgents are fighting back. It is, as predicted, likely to be a very violent place in the coming months. Let's hope the Times and other news media see fit to pay attention.

http://www.johntirman.com/UN%20report,%20Jan%2007.html



You also have the acknowledge the fact even before the arabization of this place by Saddam, the Kurds were not in the majority...but they're now. Like I mentioned above, if they're so sure of their majority at all times, why they're asking the kurds in the neighboring countries to particibate in the referandum?


Doesn't seem like there's any room for anything else... according to the Turks.

Yes there is; I don't know the details, but Turkey suggests a "special status" for Kirkuk.


Finally, whether the Kurds like it or not, THE ONLY road to a peaceful settlement is to have oil sharing. IT MUST BE DONE, or there will clearly be no peace.

That's one of the Turkey's suggestions, but Kurds wants all of the oil for themselves.

[0verbyte]

All I say is this, if the United States can go off invading any country in the world that harbors, supports and finances Al-Qaida. Turkey should be able to do the same against the PKK.

the USA and EU shouldnt be so foolish, the Turks will put national security over any alliances. If it comes down to it NATO can kiss Turkey bye bye.

[0verbyte]

They didn't want to let the 4th ID through their country and now they expect us to listen to them?


maybe if the USA listened to them in the first place, there would be no Iraq War, and thus complete world-wide support in American efforts to eradicate Al-Qaida.

Afghanistan would be 100 times more stable than it is now, and me and my fellow new yorkers would have gotten a chance to piss on Osama Bin Laden's corpse.

[NewsMan]

I thought this was interesting. Yes, it comes from Kurdishmedia.com, but it seems centrist in its approach. This is a very interesting issue that we should all follow. Interesting concept along the wishes of Turkey could be making Kirkuk a city/state. It's a similar idea I promote for Jeruseleum. However, after what I've seen over the past few years, I wonder if it's possible in that area of the world (same problem with my theory applying to Jeruseleum).

Turkey needs constructive engagement with Kurds on Kirkuk

8/14/2006 KurdishMedia.com - By Vladimir van Wilgenburg
''So Turkey is welcome to host many delegations from Iraq, but those of us who know anything about Iraq simply because we spend most of the year there know well that a lack of dialogue with the Turkmens of Erbil or the Kurdish leaders will not get Turkey anywhere in its fight against the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) or on the Kirkuk issue‘‘ wrote Ilnur Cevik [1].

And Ilnur Cevik is right. I earlier wrote that ''Turkmen and Kurds could solve Kurdish issue in Turkey and Iraq’‘. But this can only work when Turkey engages the Kurds on a constructive way. It will not work if Turkey doesn’t invite Turkmens without Turkmen representatives from Hewler (Erbil). Currently Turkey is saying, I quote G?l [2]: ’‘Needless to say that there is a tie between the Turkish Republic and the Turkmen. The Turkmen, Kurds and all other groups in Iraq are our relatives. We have shown sympathy towards all of them’‘.

Abdullah G?l is saying this without inviting representatives of the 200.000 Turkmens in Hewler (Erbil). So it’s clear he isn’t showing sympathy towards all of them. Turkey’s stance towards Kirkuk also doesn’t show their ''sympathy’‘ towards their Kurdish relatives, but more the reverse situation. In the past Turkey threatened to close the oil pipeline between Iraq-Turkey, if Saddam gave the Kurds autonomy. As a result Saddam didn’t accept the demands of the KDP. After the establishment of the safe-haven, one of Turkey’s red lines was the formation of a federal Kurdistan region. But gradually Turkey had to accept the reality. They still like to call the Kurdish region (northern iraq’‘, despite that the Iraqi constitution accepts it as a (Kurdistan region’‘. Although some Turks say that Kurdistan doesn’t exist, it were actually the Seldjuk Turks who created the term Kurdistan in the 12th century.

But to get back to the problem: According to the Turkish government the Kirkuk issue can only be resolved via consensus. ''The point is not to reach unproductive results by holding a referendum, but reaching consensus. [The point] is producing a consensus by which people living there -- all of the Turkmen, Kurds and Arabs -- will be able to live in peace and quiet, and then taking this consensus to a referendum.

Otherwise, a referendum in itself will not be a solution,’‘ Gul said.

G?l states that the results will be unproductive no matter what, this while Turkey doesn’t know the outcome. Or do they know the outcome? Do they know the majority of Kirkuk is Kurdish and that the Arabisation campaign of Saddam changed the ethnic balance in favour to the Arabic inhabitants of Kirkuk? Apparently they do, because they think Kurds are in the majority in Kirkuk.

Earlier elections (2005) have shown that Kurds are indeed the majority in Kirkuk. The Kurdish Alliance received 26 seats in the Kirkuk city council, while the Turkmen front only received 8[3]. According to a census of 1957 49.1% of Kirkuk was Kurdish, 28.7% Arabic and 21.8% Turkmen. In 1977 Kirkuk was 37.53% Kurdish, 44.41% Arabic and 16.31% Turkmen (After Saddam’s new policies)[4]. After this the number of Kurds and Turkmen only decreased.

The report of Turkish Daily News declares:’‘However, with Kurdish settlers arriving in the city from other parts of the country in large numbers, Kirkuk's non-Kurdish residents are concerned that the referendum would only confirm one thing; inclusion of Kirkuk in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region’‘. My point is that these aren’t Kurdish settlers, but Kurdish original inhabitants of Kirkuk, who are returning to their birth place.

And can’t all inhabitants of Kirkuk vote? Isn’t this enough? They can all vote, not only Kurds are voting. A public referendum functions as a tool to judge a community’s consensus on a special project (In this case Kirkuk). Frankly a referendum is a consensus.

But Kurds don’t have to worry, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki[4] said the Iraqi government would support the outcome of the referendum. And because the referendum of 2007 on Kirkuk comes out of the constitution, nothing can be changed.

Even the consulted Iraqi official by Turkey said a result of the referendum would be decisive. Therefore he tries to reach a consensus. He said: ‘‘If Turkmens, Kurds, Arabs all agree on a formula, such as a special status for Kirkuk, and if this formula is put to a public vote, the result may be a resounding ''yes’‘, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. ''But if the people are asked whether they want to be part of the Kurdish region, the result would be divisive‘‘.[5]

One can only conclude that Turkey will have to deal with the inclusion of Kirkuk too. And I suggest to Turkey to take a close look to my earlier article about the solution of Turkmens and Kurds of the Kurdish issue in Iraq and Turkey. And I could now say could solve the problem of an endangered Turkmen identity in Iraq.

Tarik H. Oğuzlu[6]], whom wrote about the endangered Turkomen identity in Iraq, had several conclusions on this issue. Two of them are very interesting. He concluded: First, the Turkish approach towards Iraq in general and the Kurds in particular should be revised so that both Kurds and Turkmens are seen as Turkey's true relatives in the region.

Second, the old policy of balancing the Kurds through the strengthening of the Turkmens should be replaced by the policy of constructive engagement with the Kurds.

Also the Ankara-based International Strategic Research Organization (ISRO)[7] agreed with me. In a report they wrote: (The Iraqi Kurds and Turkmens' interests don't necessarily contradict each other. It's in Turkey's interests to bring the Iraqi Kurds and Turkmens as close as possible. But in Turkey some political groups are deliberately trying to portray differences between the Turkmens and Kurds as being greater than they really are for domestic consumption. But in fact this not only undermines Turkey's interests in Kurdistan (northern Iraq) but also fuels a greater risk of polarization in Turkey between ethnic Kurds and others.’‘

So Turkey please accept a constructive approach towards Kurds, Turkmen and Kirkuk. It looks like the inclusion of Kirkuk in the Kurdistan region is inevitable and as ISRO says (I came to the same conclusion before [8] ) the interests of Kurds, Turkmen and Turkey doesn’t necessarily contradict each other. In fact they can solve each others problems.

Sources:

[1] Ilnur Cevik, (Is Turkey still playing Turkmens card in Iraq?’‘ The New Anatolian, (9 August, 2006)

[2] (G?l: Referendum without consensus offers no solution in Kirkuk’‘, Turkish Daily News,(11 August, 2006)

[3] (Iraqi governorate elections Jan 2005’‘, Wikipedia

[4] Mohammed M. A. Ahmed, Michael M. Gunter, Kurdish question and the 2003 Iraqi War’‘, Kurdish Studies, (Mazda Publishers, 31 December, 2004)

[5] Fatma Demirelli, Turkey seeks Iraqi consensus on Kirkuk before referendum’‘, Turkish Daily News, (10 August, 2006)

[6] Tarik H. Ouzlu, "Endangered community: the Turkmen identity in Iraq ", Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, (Routledge, Volume 24, Number 2, October 2004), pp. 309-325(17).

[7] (Report: Turkey needs plan B to be ready for division of Iraq’‘, The New Anatolian, (8 August, 2006)

[8] Vladimir van Wilgenburg, "Turkmen and Kurds could solve Kurdish issue in Turkey and Iraq", KurdishMedia.com", KurdishMedia.com, (August 04, 2006)

[SPROCKET]

I fail to see why anyone should care what Turkey wants in Iraq. The only thing that should matter is what Iraqis want, an right now it looks a lot like partition, including a mostly autonomous Kurdish state.

Frankly if there is going to be a positive outcome from this Iraq fiasco, it's going to be in the Kurdish north. I'm sure it scares the crap out of Turkey that there would be a Kurdish state protected by international law on it's border. And after the treatment the Kurds have had in Turkey I don't blame them.

[Flamming_Python]

I fail to see why anyone should care what Turkey wants in Iraq. The only thing that should matter is what Iraqis want, an right now it looks a lot like partition, including a mostly autonomous Kurdish state.

Frankly if there is going to be a positive outcome from this Iraq fiasco, it's going to be in the Kurdish north. I'm sure it scares the crap out of Turkey that there would be a Kurdish state protected by international law on it's border. And after the treatment the Kurds have had in Turkey I don't blame them.

Turkey's interests in Iraq matter a whole lot, especially as the independence of Iraq's Kurdistan could provoke Turkey's Kurds to make greater efforts to do the same, this time with a sovereign state supporting them.

All these moral questions are irrevelevant. Whatever get's the middle east on the path to peace quicker should be the primary concern.

[Ergnkon]

I fail to see why anyone should care what Turkey wants in Iraq. The only thing that should matter is what Iraqis want, an right now it looks a lot like partition, including a mostly autonomous Kurdish state.

Frankly if there is going to be a positive outcome from this Iraq fiasco, it's going to be in the Kurdish north. I'm sure it scares the crap out of Turkey that there would be a Kurdish state protected by international law on it's border. And after the treatment the Kurds have had in Turkey I don't blame them.

If it can be important to US, it's more important to Turkey as a heighbor. If you fail to see that, take a look at the world map one more time.

I don't think there is a international law that protects a "state" that harbours and provides safeheaven for terrorist organization that kills the people of the neighboring NATO member country, on the contrary, there IS an int'l law that gives the threatened country right to go after and destroy this terror organization where it's based.

@ Dave,

as you say; It's a Kurdish source. Ilknur Cevik is a "Turkish" businessman who has high stakes in the situation cuz he's making millions of dollars in N. iraq...and KRG does not recognizes PKK as a terrorist organizationa and provides arms and logistics for them.

[justagoodolboy]

Was that a serious question or a bait for the 'my **** is bigger than yours' posters above?

PS: Bush had to "beg" everyone else? Far from accurate.

It's an interesting topic, lets leave the nationalism out of it. Please.

What nationalism? I'm American, I have no nationalist ties to either Turkey or the Kurds. I simply was asking why the Turks were so quick to offer the services to the United States Military, it causes suspicion in my eyes when I look at this and then think back to the relations the Turkish government and the Kurds have traditionally had. Also, I appologize for my inaccurate terminology. I did not mean to imply that Bush literally "begged". I was simply trying to bring to light the fact that the Bush administration did have trouble finding support from the world regarding military commitments, so the Turks being so enthusiastic about volunteering troops to invade a country (Iraq) who has already been deemed harmless by it's neighbors.

My point overall: I seriously doubt the Turkish government voiced interest the distribution of the wealth and authority in Northern Iraq is for nothing more but the sake of equality and representation of all ethnicities in Iraq. I think they just would rather not see the Kurds gain any real power.

[LRPV]

My point overall: I seriously doubt the Turkish government voiced interest the distribution of the wealth and authority in Northern Iraq is for nothing more but the sake of equality and representation of all ethnicities in Iraq. I think they just would rather not see the Kurds gain any real power.

Fair enough. I think the post was open to interpretation and I took it you were 'having a shot'. Thanks for the clarification.

[justagoodolboy]

No problem mate.

[Laworkerbee]

If it comes down to it NATO can kiss Turkey bye bye.

Turkey needs NATO more than NATO needs Turkey, I'm sure the Greeks would party hard if the Turks left NATO.

[Vorian]

Turkey needs NATO more than NATO needs Turkey, I'm sure the Greeks would party hard if the Turks left NATO.

Actually, no since Turkey would become even more aggressive and uncontroled. US, EU and NATO arethe only things that make them behave good.

[neseli]

Turkey needs NATO more than NATO needs Turkey, I'm sure the Greeks would party hard if the Turks left NATO.

l hope that TüRKIYE will left nato and eu...
but it will not stop...l think we will built our own nuclear weapon and long range missile program...l think this would be much bigger headache for usa and eu than iran.:)

[Vorian]

You are happy about it? Ask a little the Iranians what they have to live with.

PS: qonqueror rofl

[neseli]

kurdish peoeple is center point in the 4 big militarized and powerfull country...

iran and syria are half republic dictatorship..

there are 14 000 tanks on these 4 countries..2 times more US..

if kurdish people make a mistake againist these countries end of this story will be sadfull for them...

eventually US AND EU will left iraq...

[neseli]

You are happy about it? Ask a little the Iranians what they have to live with.

PS: qonqueror rofl

l know your pain:lol: :lol: ..29 may 1453.

[Vorian]

Geez, I hope Ergnok comes quickly to shut your mouth up, you embarass the Turks in this forum. I answer perfectly civilised (except the joke I made about your location) and you reply with flamebait.

[Laworkerbee]

l know your pain:lol: :lol: ..29 may 1453.

Mehmet captured a hollow shell that day in 1453.

The real sad part is you have to look back to 1453 to be proud of anything :|

*and yes I'm fallen for flame bait, I usualy get along well with the Turks here*

[Vorian]

Thank God this idiot has been suspended. Back on topic now...

[justagoodolboy]

Does anyone remember the TURKEY STRONG !!!111 thread from a while back?

[LRPV]

Might be a good idea to forget it....p-)

[justagoodolboy]

haha
advice taken.

[NewsMan]

News breaking out of Iraq says Talabani and Barzani agree to, and are pushing oil-sharing revenue law. More to come soon....

[NewsMan]

No Link... sorry -

Kurdish authorities have agreed to back a draft law to manage and share Iraq's vast oil wealth, removing the last major obstacle to approving the measureand meeting a key US benchmark in Iraq.

Approval of the new oil law could help open the way for international oil companies to invest billons to upgrade Iraq's decrepit wells and pipelines.

This was presented during a joint meeting with Talabani, Barzani and Khalilzad.

[exarmyguard]

I think the Kurds have suffered enough and should have their own nation. I hope if that day comes, some of the young men on this forum will help them in their struggle.

[dorian]

I think the Kurds have suffered enough and should have their own nation.

This means war. Iraq kurds should think twice

[magic_flight]

Yes, its about time Kurds enliberate their lands from the Arabs, Turks and Iranians.

It is a good thing that the west understands their will for freedom and helps them...

:D

[dorian]

Yes, its about time Kurds enliberate their lands from the Arabs, Turks and Iranians.

It is a good thing that the west understands their will for freedom and helps them...

:D

You can give land from greece if you want. :lol:

[Vorian]

You can give land from greece if you want. :lol:

rofl

We would then be accused by Turkey for training terrorists, wouldn't we? Besides, since Turkey still has an eye upon some of our lands, if you manage to take them one day, you would have the Kurdish problem all over again...:lol:

[Mahir]

That's why we have one of the strongest armies in the world ^^
to secure our lands from terrorists and countries that support them.

[Vorian]

That's why we have one of the strongest armies in the world ^^
to secure our lands from terrorists and countries that support them.

Turkey strong!!!!

That's it. I am leaving this thread, before I get an infraction.

[annihilation]

Id just give it to Kurds for being the only group not attacking the coalition.

[NewsMan]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070226/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_oil_law

Things for this agreement look promising. Very big step forward. If this law can achieve the ends, it will go a long way in preventing Iraqi Kurdistan from breaking away, which would prevent a Turkish invasion, which would prevent a huge bloodbath, etc....

[Clearday-TRForce]

Dear some Mp.net users in this thread,



As I see, some of yours underestimate (with knowledge or not) Turkish state in the region and the world era. In the face of new challenges, foreign policy strategy has had to evolve in order to move closer to its objectives: security, internal territorial integrity and economic development.

Since the first Iraqi war in 1991, Turkish foreign policy is therefore rearranging and shifting the regional map and geopolitical units. Until 1992, Turkey sought to present itself as the leader of a broader, regional “new world order,” the leading country in a “Turkic front” made up of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzistan.[7] This new Turkic belt placed Turkey as a regional superpower in the eyes of many in the US as well as in Israel. The willingness of Süleyman Demirel to assume political responsibility from the Adriatic to the Great Wall of China highlighted Turkey’s paramount importance to the US.

But if you want to write and read with sense about overall issues of Turkey and his near era, you will more understand what it stands, otherwise you will put yourself with your one-sided and unbacked views from the others. This will be the main and probably the main problem of Bush admin USA. He shows the results and he could accept the failure of his politics...Today World is not more safe place after baseless invasion.

The Iraq Kurds should wake up to the fact that the U.S. support won't help them; it's only making the Kurds a second Israel, without a harbor, surrounded by hostile neighboring countries. The best option for the Iraq Kurds in Iraq is to prevent a civil war. All other options would be a dead end for them once a civil war erupted.

The picture is more complicated than USA was previously assumed. The picture is so big...Islamic Iran (huge problems with Israel), undemocratic Syria (huge problems with Israel), nationalist Kurds (they try to keep Usa as a ally against Turks,Irans,Syrians...) who wants to divide Iraq, ****es Iraq backed by Iran, Sunnies Iraq backed by Arabians...

It would be a total vicious circle for the Kurds to go through a civil war. It won't matter whether U.S. troops are relocated to northern Iraq or pulled out of Iraq completely. In any case, the Kurds would be targeted for their collaboration with the U.S. The U.S. presence in their region means that al-Qaeda would concentrate its attacks on this region. Without the U.S.' presence, al-Qaeda and other Arabs would drag an independent Kurdistan into a civil war. This is the another problem for them...

In the event of a civil war, the only exit for the Kurds is the Turkish border, which has unfortunately, been blocked by the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). The only one and strong country will help Kurds...This is Turkey, not others...And the Kurds now play on the other side with no sense.

So the balance is on a very thin line. Who tries to break that, will show only one thing "Blood"...endless Blood...and other Israelitic problem in the Middle East...So could ME carry another P-I tic problem in the region? So could world carry it? So where is security?



regards,
CDTRF

[magic_flight]

dear clearday...

I would not be afraid of a Kurdish civil war, but a civil war inside Turkey!

For god's sake, Turkey has not managed to beat some barefoot guerillas for 25 years now!
How are you going to beat them if they will get a state with the vastest oil revenues in the world that lie underneath Kirkuk? And how are you going to beat them if the US of A and the European Union supports them?

Kurds IMO, are the most peaceloving people in the area! - they just want to have their own nation, that's all
Doesn't everyone loves freedom afterall?

On the other hand, Kurds are not alone! they got Israelis as an ally!
The most powerful military machine in the area (yes, it is not Turkey as you may think)
And they got the USA, the sole superpower on the planet, as their patron!


This new Turkic belt placed Turkey as a regional superpower in the eyes of many
yea!
the classic TURKEY STRONG!!!111 woot comment..

lol

[theholeinthedonut]

Before Ata Turk the Germans used to call Turkey " Der kranke Mann vom Bosporus" ( The sick Man from the Bosporus) today i'm tempted to change this into " The insane Man from the Bosporus"

[Clearday-TRForce]

dear clearday...

I would not be afraid of a Kurdish civil war, but a civil war inside Turkey!

For god's sake, Turkey has not managed to beat some barefoot guerillas for 25 years now!
How are you going to beat them if they will get a state with the vastest oil revenues in the world that lie underneath Kirkuk? And how are you going to beat them if the US of A and the European Union supports them?

Kurds IMO, are the most peaceloving people in the area! - they just want to have their own nation, that's all
Doesn't everyone loves freedom afterall?

On the other hand, Kurds are not alone! they got Israelis as an ally!
The most powerful military machine in the area (yes, it is not Turkey as you may think)
And they got the USA, the sole superpower on the planet, as their patron!


yea!
the classic TURKEY STRONG!!!111 woot comment..

lol


woot thanks for the same minded posts....

[Clearday-TRForce]

Before Ata Turk the Germans used to call Turkey " Der kranke Mann vom Bosporus" ( The sick Man from the Bosporus) today i'm tempted to change this into " The insane Man from the Bosporus"


what another super good post from you about your biggest ethnic people (over 3 mls) in Germany. Is it easy to write something about whole huge nation just mumbling around about nothing!!!!

insane? yeah you right, there is a little difference between insane and sharp. You are on wrong side of this bosphorus. :)

[theholeinthedonut]

what another super good post from you about your biggest ethnic people (over 3 mls) in Germany. Is it easy to write something about whole huge nation just mumbling around about nothing!!!!

insane? yeah you right, there is a little difference between insane and sharp. You are on wrong side of this bosphorus. :)

Quad erat demonstrandum.

[Ergnkon]

It would be a total vicious circle for the Kurds to go through a civil war. It won't matter whether U.S. troops are relocated to northern Iraq or pulled out of Iraq completely. In any case, the Kurds would be targeted for their collaboration with the U.S. The U.S. presence in their region means that al-Qaeda would concentrate its attacks on this region. Without the U.S.' presence, al-Qaeda and other Arabs would drag an independent Kurdistan into a civil war. This is the another problem for them...

x2...and now that the 3 thousend Kurds (peshmerge) helping with killing the sunnies and shias in Bagdat (so called security crackdown), there is going to be blood feud between them and rest of the Iraq. So before thinking about "expending" to the neighboring countries, the Kurds should worry about defending the piece of land they have for the decades to come.

Kurds reluctant to send troops to Baghdad

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

IWPR

Decision to deploy Kurdish troops in Baghdad as part of new security plan is unpopular in the north.

http://www.kurdmedia.com/articles.asp?id=14131



I would not be afraid of a Kurdish civil war, but a civil war inside Turkey!

If that happens, millions of Turks in Turkey who are sick of 25 years of kurdish terror is ready for it.


For god's sake, Turkey has not managed to beat some barefoot guerillas for 25 years now!

Turkey had break the backbone of Kurdish terror towards the end of '90, but they regrouped and reorganized after the invasion of Iraq by US and when US decided to use these terrorists for destabilazition of the neighboring countries with the safehaven provided by the iraqi Kurds.


How are you going to beat them if they will get a state with the vastest oil revenues in the world that lie underneath Kirkuk? And how are you going to beat them if the US of A and the European Union supports them?

That is the ultimate question for Turks to answer. Will they sit there and let prosporus oil rich Kurds terrorise their people for another 25 years, or will they take all the chances and let the Kurds taste some of their own bad medicine. I don't see any chance Turks will just let the Kurds kill their people ,while Kurds enjoy the oil dollars.


Kurds IMO, are the most peaceloving people in the area! - they just want to have their own nation, that's all

That's what they want you to think by making a "poster child" of them. Int'l media is spending a great effort to keep a lit on the things going on in N. iraq.

Finally, the U.N. report helpfully reviews the increasing violence in the contested city of Kirkuk, which indicates an unraveling there--Kurdish militants seeking to ethnically cleanse the city of Turkomen and Arabs in order to win a referendum on Kirkuk's future. Kirkuk accounts for a very high level of oil reserves. Shia militia as well as insurgents are fighting back. It is, as predicted, likely to be a very violent place in the coming months. Let's hope the Times and other news media see fit to pay attention.

http://www.johntirman.com/UN%20report,%20Jan%2007.html

Militias on the Rise Across Iraq
Shiite and Kurdish Groups Seizing Control, Instilling Fear in North and South

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...082001317.html

...so, the dearms of this "peaceful" people can quickly turn into a nightmare if they continue to export terror to Turkey and keep terrorizing the Turkomans in N.Iraq.

[Clearday-TRForce]

Ergnkon,


Have you seen the latest news? (now) Turkish TVs show huge military activity near Iraq border,they say it is for PKK terrorism...What is happening? p-)


news;
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/6023209.asp?gid=112&srid=3602&oid=2&l=1

[Ergnkon]

Ergnkon,


Have you seen the latest news? (now) Turkish TVs show huge military activity near Iraq border,they say it is for PKK terrorism...What is happening? p-)


news;
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/6023209.asp?gid=112&srid=3602&oid=2&l=1

Yeah..I've seen the pictures on tv yesterday..and I just heard that Iranian forces killed 3 PEJAK leaders today.

I think there is a joint operation against the PKK/PEJAK Kurdish terrorists. :)

[magic_flight]

Quad erat demonstrandum.

haa haa !!!

:)

[Clearday-TRForce]

Yeah..I've seen the pictures on tv yesterday..and I just heard that Iranian forces killed 3 PEJAK leaders today.

I think there is a joint operation against the PKK/PEJAK Kurdish terrorists. :)


I wonder how 240k soldiers on border can only kill some weak terrorists...It must be more than terrorist...hahaha...p-)

[Ergnkon]

I wonder how 240k soldiers on border can only kill some weak terrorists...It must be more than terrorist...hahaha...p-)

So far, they're not crossing the border...just trying to secure it and taking care of the ones on the Turkish side.

[Clearday-TRForce]

So far, they're not crossing the border...just trying to secure it and taking care of the ones on the Turkish side.


who knows? they always cross as I know...meanwhile I crossed three times when I was a soldier in Turkish army. :)

[Ergnkon]

who knows? they always cross as I know...

Shhh...that's supposed to be a secret ;)

[Clearday-TRForce]

In fact, the Turkish General Staff's request to the South Korean government to get ready to withdraw its 3,500 troops from northern Iraq in late December because the Turkish military was preparing for an operation in the region alarmed the Seoul government.

As long as the possibility of a Turkish incursion into northern Iraq is kept on the table by Ankara's power centers -- in particular the military as it warned the Koreans to get ready to withdraw their troops back in late December -- power centers which are understood to be considering this option seriously, we will continue to hold our breath over whether Turkey will engage in such a dangerous game.

As a matter of fact, South Korean Defence Minister Jang-Soo Kim, who is planning to visit Ankara between March 6 and 19, is expecting an answer on the possibility of a Turkish cross-border operation before deciding to evacuate Korean troops, there for humanitarian aid, from northern Iraq.

If we start hearing reports after Kim's visit that South Korea has decided to withdraw its troops from northern Iraq then we could guess that a cross-border operation is imminent as the snow is starting to melt in the region, easing the work of the Turkish soldiers. I sincerely hope that South Korea will not make an announcement on evacuating its troops from northern Iraq with no satisfactory reason. That will mean at least that a possible Turkish operation is not imminent.

zaman p-)




hundreds military trucks near Iraq border...video;

http://video.haberturk.com/Video.aspx?v_ID=7853&k_A=kapital

[Hiroshima]

Huh... all this just because of the Kurds? Somewhat amusing....

[Ergnkon]

Huh... all this just because of the Kurds? Somewhat amusing....

It might look like that from a distance untill one gets to taste the terror himself....than they all screem "war on terror"

Before Al-Qaeda’s fanatics were blowing themselves up in Iraq, members of Abdullah Ocalan’s Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) were terrorizing Turkey in the 1990s.

“PKK suicide attacks were inspired and carried out on the orders of the organization’s charismatic leader Ocalan, who was perceived by the members of his organization as a ‘Light to the Nations.’” Ocalan, also known as Apo, sees himself as a model to be emulated. “Everyone should take note of the way I live and what I don’t do” he told the Turkish Daily News in 1998. “The way I eat, the way I drink, my orders and even my inactivity should be carefully studied. There will be lessons to be learned from several generations because Apo (Ocalan) is a great teacher.” [ii] Like a teacher, Ocalan enjoyed lessons, except he favored bloody ones: in the 1980s, the PKK slaughtered the inhabitants of Kurdish villages in southeastern Turkey who were unsympathetic to its cause in order to coerce other nearby villages into submission. In August 20, 1987 the PKK killed 24 inhabitants of the Kilickaya village of Turkey’s Siirt province, including 14 children. The lesson to the villages around Kilickaya was clear: “either you join Apo or you are dead.”


http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20778

After training in PLO-run international terrorist camps in Lebanon, the PKK opened its military campaign against the Turkish state in 1984, largely from its secure bases in Syria. By 1990-93 it was able to take advantage of the post-Gulf War environment (specifically, the power vacuum created by the de facto creation of an autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan), and it became a real threat to Turkey’s territorial integrity. The PKK engaged in a massive rural insurgency in southeastern Turkey, which, by 1999, resulted in some 30,000 fatalities. These deaths were mostly insurgents, civilians and anti-PKK village guards -- and almost all were Kurds. Indeed, far more Kurdish civilians have been killed by the PKK than Turks, some as reprisals for suspected collaboration with Ankara, others during clashes with rival clans. Kurds in Europe and Lebanon who disagreed with Öcalan were murdered. Throughout the 1990s the PKK in Iraq enjoyed Saddam’s support and regularly engaged in clashes with local Kurdish forces.

At its Fifth Congress the PKK decided to engage in suicide bombings and, by 1997, the group had formed “Suicide Guerrilla Teams.” The early “volunteers” came from the most vulnerable segments of society: young, impoverished, poorly educated women. The group’s ambitions went even further: in November 1996, thirteen PKK members arrested on the Syrian border with the Hatay Province were found to possess antimony, which they thought was uranium.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12016

[Hiroshima]

*shrugs* I'm just saying, Ergnkon... Turkey wants peace, right? And it's acting in the bests interests of itself, correct? So is it in its best interest to occupy Northern Iraq?

[Ergnkon]

*shrugs* I'm just saying, Ergnkon... Turkey wants peace, right? And it's acting in the bests interests of itself, correct? So is it in its best interest to occupy Northern Iraq?


The so called occupation of N. Iraq is a false news spreaded around by the pro PKK int'l media members who are on the payrol of the Kurds. They're doing this to create some kind of int'l reaction to eventuel Turkish attack on the PKK bases located in N. Iraq ;)

P.S. I assume you have better knowledge of PKK now.

[Hiroshima]

o-kay.... what I was suggesting wasn't an out and out claim that Turkey had occupied N. Iraq, but the thought of Turkey occupying N. Iraq.

Let me rephrase my origional statement:
Would it be in Turkey's best interests to occupy Northern Iraq?

[Ergnkon]

o-kay.... what I was suggesting wasn't an out and out claim that Turkey had occupied N. Iraq, but the thought of Turkey occupying N. Iraq.

Let me rephrase my origional statement:
Would it be in Turkey's best interests to occupy Northern Iraq?

...and I said; There is no such thing.

Turkey's first concern is the elimination of the terrorists located on the other side of the border, located in N. Iraq (protected by the Kurds there)

P.S. Seems like these prepaid so called journalists are doing a good job ;)

[Hiroshima]

*just...covers his face*

[Ergnkon]

*just...covers his face*

OK...what part of the "going after terroists" conception you don't understand? or shall we call it "preemtive strike against terror"?

[Hiroshima]

No...what part of 'hypothetical situation' do YOU not understand? My entire question was hypothetical... and you kept going on that one way track. At this rate, I'd love to see the Kurds get their own little country, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria be damned!

[Clearday-TRForce]

No...what part of 'hypothetical situation' do YOU not understand? My entire question was hypothetical... and you kept going on that one way track. At this rate, I'd love to see the Kurds get their own little country, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria be damned!



you are already damned Hiroshima

[Hiroshima]

Okay...like THAT made any sense...

[Ergnkon]

No...what part of 'hypothetical situation' do YOU not understand? My entire question was hypothetical...

Like many here, you sounded more like you were pretty convinced in your "hypoteses" than it was just a 'hypothetical situation'. So assuming being pretty much brainwashed with these kind of allegations, I just used the opportunity to clear some things ;)


I'd love to see the Kurds get their own little country,

Believe me...me too. So the Turks can treat them as a state and not a bunch of tribal clans...and keep them responsable of their actions like any sovreign state would be held of. ;)

[Hiroshima]

Sorry, I didn't mean it to come across like that.

[Ergnkon]

Sorry, I didn't mean it to come across like that.

No prbs. I'm sorry too if I sounded offensive.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to bring out some facts though :)

[Hiroshima]

Well, it's not liek you need an excuse around here :D, so no worries.

[Vorian]

Clearday, long time no see.

The Turkish army has been in the area for months, so stop maaking statements like, "We are going to teach a lesson to PKK", etc. If the US don't give permission you will just stay and watch from the other side of the border.

[Clearday-TRForce]

Clearday, long time no see.

The Turkish army has been in the area for months, so stop maaking statements like, "We are going to teach a lesson to PKK", etc. If the US don't give permission you will just stay and watch from the other side of the border.


Friend, long time I only watch forum...Sorry, but we dont think same as you see...US has no much pocker cards in the area. They wish that we to stay neutral and no attack any one...I very much doubt you will understand the sophisticated issue in the region. There are very mixed and deuce position here.


- Iran
- Sunnies Arap backed by Turkey and Arabs
- Turkomen backed by Turkey
- Kurds backed by USA and maybe a little by Israels
- Shiiets backed by Iran
- Turkey, Iran, Syria, Sunnies elements and shiis against any Kurdish independent state...

:)


regards,
CDTRF

[Vorian]

Friend, long time I only watch forum...Sorry, but we dont think same as you see...US has no much pocker cards in the area. They wish that we to stay neutral and no attack any one...I very much doubt you will understand the sophisticated issue in the region. There are very mixed and deuce position here.


- Iran
- Sunnies Arap backed by Turkey and Arabs
- Turkomen backed by Turkey
- Kurds backed by USA and maybe a little by Israels
- Shiiets backed by Iran
- Turkey, Iran, Syria, Sunnies elements and shiis against any Kurdish independent state...

:)


regards,
CDTRF



I think I understand better than you think. Still you said yourself that US wants you to stay neutral. Pretty much what I said.

[Canadian2urk]

I think I understand better than you think. Still you said yourself that US wants you to stay neutral. Pretty much what I said.



you said Turks need permission from USA before they can do anything..

Wrong!! A cross-boarder operation is perfectly legal according to U.N when a neighboring country is harbouring terrorists who are a threat to the nations security. sooooo yea.... we dont need anyones permission.p-)

There is a limit to tolerance my friend... Turkey was planning a cross-border operation awhillllle ago... but thier ally(USA) insisted they will eliminate the PKK problem in N.Iraq for them.

so what do you do when your ally fails to meet its promise??
just sit around an continue to get picked on?:roll:

[magic_flight]

Wrong!! A cross-boarder operation is perfectly legal according to U.N when a neighboring country is harbouring terrorists who are a threat to the nations security. sooooo yea.... we dont need anyones permission.p-)

to invade to another country, someone needs UN permission.

pre-emtive strikes are not legal by international law.

It is legal to invade to another country without UN clearance ONLY when you have already been attacked by the country's official armed forces - it's called shelf-defence.

terrorists harboring in another country is the problem of the other country.

(according to International Law, of course)

:)

[NewsMan]

Lotsa news coming out of this. Call me pro-Kurd, if you like, but it seems as though everything I stumble across indicates Turkey's made the decision that Kirkuk will not be in the Kurd zone for no other reason than a presummed fear of money-funneling to PKK. As I've said before, it's this fear that justifies Turkey's continual saber-rattling by arguing that Kurds should NEVER have a meaningful destiny... because if a Kurdish area becomes succesful, it threatens Turkish national security. All of this even AFTER Talabani and Barzani AND Khalilzad AND Malaki have expressed guarded optimism that an oil-sharing law will be adopted.

ANKARA (AFP) - Turkish leaders warned Iraqi Kurds Tuesday that their claims to the ethnically volatile, oil-rich city of Kirkuk in Iraq and talk of independence would fuel conflict in the region, Anatolia news agency reported.

Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul accused the head of the autonomous Kurdish region in Iraq, Massud Barzani, of being "irrational" after he told Turkish television that regional countries should accept that Kurds, who live in Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey, have a right to independence.

"Irrational leadership and ... dreaming in the Middle East have always plunged the peoples into trouble," Gul told journalists on a flight back home from Afghanistan, Anatolia reported.

He slammed Barzani's remarks as "either deliberate or an example of irresponsibility at a time when the region, and particularly Iraq, is passing through a critical period and when Turkey is following a constructive policy."

Barzani told the NTV news channel Monday that Iraqi Kurds were extending "a hand of friendship" to Turkey and urged face-to-face talks to end high-running bilateral tensions over Turkish Kurd rebels who have found safe haven in his autonomous region in neighbouring northern Iraq.

Ankara is worried that Kurdish control of Kirkuk's oil reserves will boost what it sees as Kurdish aspirations to break away from Baghdad.

Kurdish independence, it fears, could further fuel a bloody Kurdish separatist insurgency in adjoining southeast Turkey, which has already resulted in more than 37,000 deaths.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan also denounced Barzani's comments.

"Kirkuk resembles a small Iraq and is not the registered property of any ethnic group," Anatolia quoted him as saying late Monday.

"Such an attitude is very wrong with regards to Iraq's future. I believe such an attitude will overshadow peace, love and brotherhood in Iraq," he said.

Both Erdogan and Gul have recently asserted that Ankara was open to talks with Iraqi Kurds to mend fences and discuss ways of curbing the rebels based in northern Iraq, contrary to earlier Turkish threats of a cross-border military operation into the region.

Ankara has grown increasingly impatient with US and Iraqi reluctance to move against the militants of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), listed as a terrorist group by both Ankara and Washington, among others.

Army chief General Yasar Buyukanit has accused Iraqi Kurds of "fully" supporting the PKK and providing it with explosives for bomb attacks in Turkey.

In Monday's interview, Barzani denied that Iraqi Kurds supported the group.

========================================================

ANKARA (AFP) - The president of Iraqi Kurdistan called on Turkey for face-to-face talks to end high-running tensions over Turkish Kurd rebels based in his autonomous region in northern Iraq, in a television interview broadcast on Monday.

ADVERTISEMENT

His appeal coincides with remarks by Turkish officials that they are ready to meet Iraqi Kurdish leaders to resolve the problem, contrary to earlier threats by Ankara of a cross-border military operation to crack down on the rebels.

"Dialogue is the best way to resolve problems and misunderstandings," Massud Barzani told Turkey's NTV news channel. "We must talk face to face to understand each other's position. This will be followed by (discussions on) what should be done and necessary actions.

"We are extending to Turkey a hand of friendship. We will be pleased if Turkey responds in kind," he said.

Ankara has grown increasingly impatient with US and Iraqi reluctance to move against the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK).

Members of the armed separatist group, which is listed as a terrorist organisation by both Ankara and Washington, among others, have taken refuge in northern Iraq.

Earlier this month, army chief General Yasar Buyukanit accused the Iraqi Kurds who run the region of "fully" supporting the PKK and providing it with explosives for bomb attacks in Turkey.

He also objected to any move by Ankara to seek dialogue with them, but both Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said their government would be open to talks.

On Friday, Turkey's National Security Council, which groups the country's top civilian and military leaders, also put the emphasis on "diplomatic efforts" to resolve the row.

Barzani rejected accusations that Iraqi Kurds supported the PKK and said he was "pleased" that Ankara was considering dialogue.

"Threats are not a constructive way to move forward," he said.

The PKK's campaign for Kurdish self-rule in southeast Turkey has resulted in more than 37,000 deaths since 1984.

Ankara and the Iraqi Kurds are also at loggerheads over the future of the ethnically volatile, oil-rich city of Kirkuk. The Kurds want to incorporate it into their autonomous region although the city is also home to Arabs and Turkish-backed Turkmens.

Ankara is worried that Kurdish control of Kirkuk's oil reserves will boost what it sees as Kurdish aspirations to break away from Baghdad.

An independent Kurdish state, it fears, could fuel the PKK's insurgency in adjoining southeast Turkey.

[Ergnkon]

It is legal to invade to another country without UN clearance ONLY when you have already beenattacked by the country's by official armed forces - it's called shelf-defence.

No where it says "attacked by the country's by official armed forces" ;)

Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm

and if you push with that, Barzani considers PKK as a part of his own peshmerge (today, at least a thousend of them killing sunnies and shiias in Bagdat for $400 a month as apart of "security crackdown")

President of Kurdistan: We would not allow any country to attack PKK

2/26/2007 KurdishMedia.com

Masoud Barzani
London (KurdishMedia.com) 26 January 2007: The president of Kurdistan, Massuad Barzani, stated that the Kurdistan government would not allow any country to attack the PKK fighters stationed in southern Kurdistan.

Barzani’s response came, last Saturday, when was questioned by the journalists in the Kurdish city of Sulemani in a press conference, in which the US ambassador and Jalal Talabani, the Iraqi President, were present.

About 5000 PKK fighters are stationed in Qendil mount in southern Kurdistan. Turkish authorities claim that the PKK are a threat to the Turkish national security.

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=14126

[NewsMan]

2/26/2007 KurdishMedia.com

Masoud Barzani
London (KurdishMedia.com) 26 January 2007: The president of Kurdistan, Massuad Barzani, stated that the Kurdistan government would not allow any country to attack the PKK fighters stationed in southern Kurdistan.

Barzani’s response came, last Saturday, when was questioned by the journalists in the Kurdish city of Sulemani in a press conference, in which the US ambassador and Jalal Talabani, the Iraqi President, were present.

About 5000 PKK fighters are stationed in Qendil mount in southern Kurdistan. Turkish authorities claim that the PKK are a threat to the Turkish national security.

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=14126

Wow... quoting KurdishMedia.com. I'd get crucified for quoting that Kurdish propoganda!!


PS - So Because there's a battalion of IA from the north fighting in Baghdad... that's bad? Don't soldiers from Istanbul get to pull duty in the Southeast? Why's this such an issue (personally, I get it... just curious about your thoughts).

[Zerazax]

The PKK is officially listed as a terrorist organization from the US government itself, so I personally find it hypocritical if we are on a war against terror that we'd support htem openly. But then again, I don't really care who you are, if you're a terrorist you're a terrorist!

[Vorian]

you said Turks need permission from USA before they can do anything..

Wrong!! A cross-boarder operation is perfectly legal according to U.N when a neighboring country is harbouring terrorists who are a threat to the nations security. sooooo yea.... we dont need anyones permission.p-)

There is a limit to tolerance my friend... Turkey was planning a cross-border operation awhillllle ago... but thier ally(USA) insisted they will eliminate the PKK problem in N.Iraq for them.

so what do you do when your ally fails to meet its promise??
just sit around an continue to get picked on?:roll:

Everybody knows that these laws are just paper anyway. The strong imposes his wil. And I am sad to tell you my friend that if the US doesn't want it, you won't attack. That simple. If you do, well from a humanitarian point of view, I am sorry cause many people will die. From a diplomatic point of view, it will benefit my country cause the US will put sanctions on you and boost our military. Still I would prefer if you let those poor people have their country.

[Ergnkon]

Wow... quoting KurdishMedia.com. I'd get crucified for quoting that Kurdish propoganda!!

I did it to show those who still belive those "peaceful" kurds in N.Iraq has nothing to do with this terror organization (that includes you also) and of course to show how barzani double talks and contridicts with himself as in the article you posted above.

Barzani's words from that article you posted;


In Monday's interview, Barzani denied that Iraqi Kurds supported the group.


PS - So Because there's a battalion of IA from the north fighting in Baghdad... that's bad? Don't soldiers from Istanbul get to pull duty in the Southeast? Why's this such an issue (personally, I get it... just curious about your thoughts).

No..not bad at all. It's the kurds concern to be mixed in the sectarian killings, not mine. I just have to hope that since they're terrorists themselves, the insurgents eliminates as many as they can from the PKK terrorists mixed in the peshmerges. ;)

[NewsMan]

No..not bad at all. It's the kurds concern to be mixed in the sectarian killings, not mine. I just have to hope that since they're terrorists themselves, the insurgents eliminates as many as they can from the PKK terrorists mixed in the peshmerges. ;)


Oh c'mon... seriously. So if a Kurd is in the IA, they're terrorists? If Kurds **** golden eggs, would you finally like them? Most estimates I can find put the PKK, on Iraqi soil, at around 5,000 terrorists. SO WHY is it that you paint such a broad generalization to all Kurds? Typical attitude I have come across many, many times from folks like you.

[Canadian2urk]

to invade to another country, someone needs UN permission.

pre-emtive strikes are not legal by international law.

It is legal to invade to another country without UN clearance ONLY when you have already been attacked by the country's official armed forces - it's called shelf-defence.

terrorists harboring in another country is the problem of the other country.

(according to International Law, of course)

:)


I think you need to read Article 51 once more time before spreading more misinformation. :bash:
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm




Thanks Ergnkon for the faster reply.p-)

[Canadian2urk]

Everybody knows that these laws are just paper anyway. The strong imposes his wil. And I am sad to tell you my friend that if the US doesn't want it, you won't attack. That simple. If you do, well from a humanitarian point of view, I am sorry cause many people will die. From a diplomatic point of view, it will benefit my country cause the US will put sanctions on you and boost our military. Still I would prefer if you let those poor people have their country.



oh yea? rofl

U.N says its okay... so why would USA put sactions on its 50yr old strategical NATO ally over a completely legitimate intervention?

Bush has no choice but to say yes to a Turkish Invasion at this point in time with the situation he is in. You will understand what i mean within a months time.p-)

[SPROCKET]

See, there would be no problem if the Kurds would just learn to shut the **** up and do as the Ottoman ... err Turkey tells them. rofl

[SOAMERICAN]

Turkey will never be allowed to attack the Kurds. Instead they must be continued to be made to suffer so that other NATO members can continue to benefit from the lesson.

I would class Turkey's mistake in 2003 as equivalent to the failure of the Ottoman Sultans to capture Vienna twice in the 16th century, although it is not apparent now. After all the Kurds have done for us, the reality of an independent Kurdistan is sealed. Now, as before, the future of Turkey is stagnation and eventual defeat.

And the old and treacherous powers of Europe will never admit Turkey.

[Ergnkon]

Oh c'mon... seriously. So if a Kurd is in the IA, they're terrorists?

No Dave. Like I said in my post above "PKK (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20778)"members employed w/in the peshmerge forces by the country that has them on the int'l terror organization list- are still terrorists, even they serve to your interests. It's pretty much known that the "employer" is not strange to this kind of behavior.


If Kurds **** golden eggs, would you finally like them?

No need to go through such a painful efforts. All they need to do is; stop terrorizing the people of Turkey.


Most estimates I can find put the PKK, on Iraqi soil, at around 5,000 terrorists. SO WHY is it that you paint such a broad generalization to all Kurds?

I don't need to. Your buddy barzani does it anyways. He's determined to protect this internationally recognized terror organization "PKK (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20778)". He puts the all kurds in that generalization by protecting them and approving their actions.

2/26/2007 KurdishMedia.com

Masoud Barzani

London (KurdishMedia.com) 26 January 2007: The president of Kurdistan, Massuad Barzani, stated that the Kurdistan government would not allow any country to attack the PKK fighters stationed in southern Kurdistan.

Barzani’s response came, last Saturday, when was questioned by the journalists in the Kurdish city of Sulemani in a press conference, in which the US ambassador and Jalal Talabani, the Iraqi President, were present.

About 5000 PKK fighters are stationed in Qendil mount in southern Kurdistan. Turkish authorities claim that the PKK are a threat to the Turkish national security.

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=14126

Thank God no one needs your understanding and approval of such things. :)

[Argyll]

If Turkey decided to cross into Kurdish occupied Northern Iraq, to be honest, and fair, I don't think the US would be in a position to do anything about it, but the Peshmerga that make up a considerable ammount of the IA would drop everything, and their uniforms, and go back to defend what they view as their homeland, this would in turn cause the entire Iraqi Army to collapse into chaos, and have a huge and significant knock on effect with the current Security Operations".....
The Options are that the US strongly condems Turkish actions, and hopes that it's a limited 2-3 day incursion, that they themselves would need to monitor, by moving troops into the area( Brigade size plus), to prevent Normal Kurds from being potentially massacred.
Or the US Strikes back.....with catastrophic repurcussion s within the Region.....The Kurds, would then pull out of the Iraqi Government, that in turn would collapse, Sadr and his Iranian backed Mahdi Army would then seize the opportunity to move into Government, like Saddam did back in the days, the entire country would disintigrate, as the Kurds in High places abandon their roles wherever they are, and Iraq will be like Dante's Inferno, and the MNF would be stuck in the middle of the biggest shytfest they've been in since WW2.

I can sympathise with the Turkish wanting to eradicate the PKK, but unless they know who these Terrorists are ,bona fide, then the amount of innocent people who will die through their actions, justified or not, will see heads in Governments across the globe bow with shame, at the failure of their own actions, and inactions.......Turkey, just like every other country who has pre-empted against other Soveriegn Nations, has the right in terms of National Interests to do what they have to do, it's just unfortunate that this could very well signal the end for Iraq.

[Ergnkon]

If Turkey decided to cross into Kurdish occupied Northern Iraq, to be honest, and fair, I don't think the US would be in a position to do anything about it, but the Peshmerga that make up a considerable ammount of the IA would drop everything, and their uniforms, and go back to defend what they view as their homeland, this would in turn cause the entire Iraqi Army to collapse into chaos, and have a huge and significant knock on effect with the current Security Operations".....
The Options are that the US strongly condems Turkish actions, and hopes that it's a limited 2-3 day incursion, that they themselves would need to monitor, by moving troops into the area( Brigade size plus), to prevent Normal Kurds from being potentially massacred.
Or the US Strikes back.....with catastrophic repurcussion s within the Region.....The Kurds, would then pull out of the Iraqi Government, that in turn would collapse, Sadr and his Iranian backed Mahdi Army would then seize the opportunity to move into Government, like Saddam did back in the days, the entire country would disintigrate, as the Kurds in High places abandon their roles wherever they are, and Iraq will be like Dante's Inferno, and the MNF would be stuck in the middle of the biggest shytfest they've been in since WW2.

I can sympathise with the Turkish wanting to eradicate the PKK, but unless they know who these Terrorists are ,bona fide, then the amount of innocent people who will die through their actions, justified or not, will see heads in Governments across the globe bow with shame, at the failure of their own actions, and inactions.......Turkey, just like every other country who has pre-empted against other Soveriegn Nations, has the right in terms of National Interests to do what they have to do, it's just unfortunate that this could very well signal the end for Iraq.

Well said Argyll, but one thing though;


but unless they know who these Terrorists are ,bona fide,

The ones who protects them knows exactly who they are, their leaders and where thy're located at...so why don't they do anything about them? ;)

We understand that the US uses them in Iran, Syria and now in the IA also, but is this worth considering what this behavior at the end will cause...just as you described in your post?

I don't think so.

[Clearday-TRForce]

If Turkey decided to cross into Kurdish occupied Northern Iraq, to be honest, and fair, I don't think the US would be in a position to do anything about it, but the Peshmerga that make up a considerable ammount of the IA would drop everything, and their uniforms, and go back to defend what they view as their homeland, this would in turn cause the entire Iraqi Army to collapse into chaos, and have a huge and significant knock on effect with the current Security Operations".....
The Options are that the US strongly condems Turkish actions, and hopes that it's a limited 2-3 day incursion, that they themselves would need to monitor, by moving troops into the area( Brigade size plus), to prevent Normal Kurds from being potentially massacred.
Or the US Strikes back.....with catastrophic repurcussion s within the Region.....The Kurds, would then pull out of the Iraqi Government, that in turn would collapse, Sadr and his Iranian backed Mahdi Army would then seize the opportunity to move into Government, like Saddam did back in the days, the entire country would disintigrate, as the Kurds in High places abandon their roles wherever they are, and Iraq will be like Dante's Inferno, and the MNF would be stuck in the middle of the biggest shytfest they've been in since WW2.

I can sympathise with the Turkish wanting to eradicate the PKK, but unless they know who these Terrorists are ,bona fide, then the amount of innocent people who will die through their actions, justified or not, will see heads in Governments across the globe bow with shame, at the failure of their own actions, and inactions.......Turkey, just like every other country who has pre-empted against other Soveriegn Nations, has the right in terms of National Interests to do what they have to do, it's just unfortunate that this could very well signal the end for Iraq.


I think Vorian and others read Argyll's post. It is easily understandable. USA have nothing to do against Turkey in the region...maybe USA condemns...but not so much...they dont want to risk other sophisticated relations for just only ıraq kurdish issue.

What do you expect from Turkey while Turkey still has send 240k professional soldiers, special units, artillery batallions, hels, cargo planes, at least 3 commando division units and many more...

for you what they think with 240k near Iraq border? hunting some weak terrorists or try to give a message to the rest of world..."I am here" and "I can do anything what cost is or not if you force the situation"...

There is only one Kurdistan in the Iraq...We called it simply "Dream", Dreamland Kurdistan. No any kurds can do anything against a country like Turkey...

what about Iran and syria that you have already forgetten? do you think they like a name like Kurdistan in Iraq?

All the American authorities say, "The constitution will be implemented," in other words that a referendum will be held in Kirkuk. Must it be so? According to the information I compiled from various sources, "Don't be surprised if the US postpones the referendum, stating that conditions are not suitable in Kirkuk, towards the end of the year." :) guess why?


regards,
CDTRF

[Vorian]

Well, future will prove who was right and who was wrong...

[nesesiz]

TURKİYE is a unique state...please mind every one their own land...

kirkuk is not kurdish lands...kirkuk is land of iraq and iraq people...

but if any one wish they can give land to the kurdish people...

..

[achilles]

I'm with the good guys :P