100,000 Turkish Troops on Iraq Border - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

rubecube · 10-22-2007, 12:02 PM

Quote:

SIRNAK, Turkey -- Turkey said on Monday it will exhaust diplomatic channels before launching any military strike into northern Iraq to root out Kurdish rebels, who killed at least a dozen Turkish soldiers in fighting over the weekend.

Turkey has built up its forces along the border with Iraq in anticipation of an incursion against rebel bases but Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan has said he will hold off for a few days to let the United States try to curb the Kurdish separatists.

This could get real ugly.

Lanny_MacDonald · 10-22-2007, 12:09 PM

This is why the American plan of divisioning Iraq is so much BS. The tribes transcend western political borders, so you cannot break them up into non-secular districts and think there will not be major ramifications to the other countries in the region from doing so. The only solution is to let the regional powers assist in the clean up of Iraq, or the whole region could melt down into a war of global powers. Bush may finally be correct that WWIII could be around the corner, but not from Iranian desires to have nuclear power or weapons. It's going to come from the whole region boiling over into a multi-nation/sect war where the west is forced to pick sides.

Juventus3 · 10-22-2007, 12:11 PM

I'm sorry, but this needs to happen. The Kurds in Iraq are just insane. They fight anyone or anything that comes their way without a thought of peace. They're in love with war and need to be taken out.

I feel for the woman and children in the area who will be most affected by the violence.

Resolute 14 · 10-22-2007, 12:12 PM

WWIII will not be caused by this. It could become a major regional war though.

China, Russia, England and the US just are not going to square off against each other militarily over the middle east. The political atmosphere simply won't allow for it.

Flashpoint · 10-22-2007, 12:14 PM

It's only been predicted since 2001. Hell, I predicted it in 2001, and I couldn't find my own ass with both hands.

The only people who are surprised by this are probably the Bush administration.

Turkey will eventually invade, the Kurds will declare an independent Kurdistan, and the UN will wind up with peacekeepers in there for the next half century. Meanwhile the US will pull out of Iraq by 2009, and the Shiae majority will get back to ethnic cleansing against the Sunnis.

Pretty clear right from the get go what a power vacuum would result in.

Flash Walken · 10-22-2007, 12:16 PM

Can't really say this is surprising. They had troops stationed there during the initial stages of the invasion, too...

blankall · 10-22-2007, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juventus3

I'm sorry, but this needs to happen. The Kurds in Iraq are just insane. They fight anyone or anything that comes their way without a thought of peace. They're in love with war and need to be taken out.

I feel for the woman and children in the area who will be most affected by the violence.

I don't think this is a fair statement at all. The Kurds are one of the largest ethnic/cultural groups w/out an independent country. They have been subject to massacre after massacre because of this. To then blame the Kurds themselves entirely for the violence that ensues doesn't really seem fair.

Flash Walken · 10-22-2007, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blankall

I don't think this is a fair statement at all. The Kurds are one of the largest ethnic/cultural groups w/out an independent country. They have been subject to massacre after massacre because of this. To then blame the Kurds themselves entirely for the violence that ensues doesn't really seem fair.

I think most people simply dismissed/ignored that opinion for its absurdity.

That's how I took the (non)response to it.

Lanny_MacDonald · 10-22-2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snakeeye

China, Russia, England and the US could square off against each other militarily over what's under the middle east.

Corrected for accuracy.

The Superpowers are not going to let the region become bogged down in ethnic violence, especially if it interrupts the flow of energy. At some point they are going to be forced to pick sides, especially if the engagement escalates and swallows up other nations. Each of these countries has already picked their favorites to deal with, and an attack of any of those interests could draw one of those powers into the fray, and that could be all it takes. One domino...

octothorp · 10-22-2007, 02:09 PM

It's not just a Turkish concern, either; Iran has a greater Kurdish population than either Iraq or Turkey, and if kurdish rebels are operating in Turkey, it's a pretty good bet that they're operating in Iran, too. I've heard one theory (nothing to support it) that the IEG operatives captured in Kurdish Iraq weren't actually fueling the insurgency, as reported by the US, but instead were trying to undermine Kurdish rebel organizations who were active across the border. I wouldn't be surprised to see Turkey support Iran if the US were to invade Iran (which isn't likely); Turkey would likely see an invasion of Iran as further western support for kurdistan. At the same time, the Kurds would be a valuable ally for any invading force.

Flash Walken · 10-22-2007, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by octothorp

It's not just a Turkish concern, either; Iran has a greater Kurdish population than either Iraq or Turkey, and if kurdish rebels are operating in Turkey, it's a pretty good bet that they're operating in Iran, too. I've heard one theory (nothing to support it) that the IEG operatives captured in Kurdish Iraq weren't actually fueling the insurgency, as reported by the US, but instead were trying to undermine Kurdish rebel organizations who were active across the border. I wouldn't be surprised to see Turkey support Iran if the US were to invade Iran (which isn't likely); Turkey would likely see an invasion of Iran as further western support for kurdistan. At the same time, the Kurds would be a valuable ally for any invading force.

In the case of Iran, I think it really all depends on how the Turks are bargained with. If they're given a big lump sum and told that humanitarian reigns may be loosened, that could be enough incentive to look the other way.

Flashpoint · 10-22-2007, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I think most people simply dismissed/ignored that opinion for its absurdity.

That's how I took the (non)response to it.

Yup. No need to reply to crap like that.

Juventus3 · 10-22-2007, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blankall

I don't think this is a fair statement at all. The Kurds are one of the largest ethnic/cultural groups w/out an independent country. They have been subject to massacre after massacre because of this. To then blame the Kurds themselves entirely for the violence that ensues doesn't really seem fair.

I'm not saying they haven't had a rough go of it. Obviously it's horrible what happened to them during the Iraq-Iran war, and maybe it's unfair of me to think that 25 years is enough to forget the pain they suffered, but my point is that the Iraq kurds don't seem to be too concerned about finding a solution to peace.

Agamemnon · 10-22-2007, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juventus3

I'm not saying they haven't had a rough go of it. Obviously it's horrible what happened to them during the Iraq-Iran war, and maybe it's unfair of me to think that 25 years is enough to forget the pain they suffered, but my point is that the Iraq kurds don't seem to be too concerned about finding a solution to peace.

I think the Kurd's restlessness has more to do with founding a Kurdish state than what happened 25 years ago. 'Peace' = status quo = no Kurdish homeland/state, which is what they've been fighting for for decades. It's not hard to see why Turkey's version of peace doesn't work for the Kurds.

octothorp · 10-22-2007, 03:31 PM

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment, the Kurdish people have been living under the Ottoman/Turkish and Iranian/Safanid empires for around 600 years, and even before that, existed only as a group of loosely allied emirates, as opposed to any sort of unified state. This isn't about returning the political boundaries to some historical configuration; it's about creating a nation that has never existed previously on any sort of political level.

rubecube · 10-22-2007, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by octothorp

This isn't about returning the political boundaries to some historical configuration; it's about creating a nation that has never existed previously on any sort of political level.

You mean creating a nation specifically for an ethnic group in a region where they are notoriously disliked is a bad idea? Whatever would give you that thought?

comrade · 10-22-2007, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by octothorp

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment, the Kurdish people have been living under the Ottoman/Turkish and Iranian/Safanid empires for around 600 years, and even before that, existed only as a group of loosely allied emirates, as opposed to any sort of unified state. This isn't about returning the political boundaries to some historical configuration; it's about creating a nation that has never existed previously on any sort of political level.

Wait, are you of the opinion that the Kurds shouldn't get an independent state because they've never had one before?

Agamemnon · 10-22-2007, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by comrade

Wait, are you of the opinion that the Kurds shouldn't get an independent state because they've never had one before?

It sounds like he's saying there is no basis for a modern Kurdish state given that there isn't a historical one (though I have no idea if there was or not).

Thunderball · 10-22-2007, 05:16 PM

Its a very tough situation. Globally speaking, addressing the Middle East was something that had to be done eventually. However, historically, its been addressed with a sledgehammer rather than with a soft touch.

It has been established that nations within unfriendly states will never stop violence unless one of two things happen: they are given sovereignty, or the host state becomes friendly. I don't see the latter happening for the Kurdish in Turkey/Iraq/Iran.
For that reason, there has to be some type of Kurdistan established.

With that, adding a new state will further destabilize the region. Turkey will react most bitterly. However, the question is how bitterly can they react if the formation of a Kurdish state is an EU backed initiative...

As well, it seems no declaration of borders done diplomatically by foreign state actors has ever ended well.

This is a situation that its almost better to be able to sit back and watch, rather than be tasked to fix it.

CrusaderPi · 10-22-2007, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snakeeye

WWIII will not be caused by this. It could become a major regional war though.

China, Russia, England and the US just are not going to square off against each other militarily over the middle east. The political atmosphere simply won't allow for it.

I'd of thought the same thing but substituting China for Germany, the US for France, and the middle east for Danzig.