Thai Police Bust Multi-Million Baht Sex Toy Smuggling Ring

[webfact]

First Turkish military convoy enters Syria's Idlib

 

Children stand on top of a Turkish Armed Forces vehicle, as a military convoy pass by their village on the Turkish-Syrian border line in Reyhanli, Hatay province, Turkey October 11, 2017. REUTERS/Osman Orsa

 

BEIRUT (Reuters) - A first convoy of the military operation that Turkey is carrying out in Syria's Idlib province crossed into the area late on Thursday, two rebels and a witness said.

 

The convoy included about 30 military vehicles, said Abu Khairo, a commander in a Free Syrian Army (FSA) rebel group based in the area, and it entered Syria near the Bab al-Hawa border crossing, according to a civilian witness.

 

It was heading to Sheikh Barakat, a hilltop that overlooks large areas of rebel-held northwestern Syria, but also the Afrin area held by the Kurdish YPG militia.

 

The convoy was escorted by fighters from Tahrir al-Sham, an alliance of jihadist groups including the former al Qaeda affiliate previously known as the Nusra Front, Abu Khairo said.

 

"The Turkish army convoy is entering under the protection of Tahrir al-Sham to take positions on the front line with the YPG," another FSA official in the area said.

 

Turkey said on Saturday it was carrying out a military operation in Idlib and surrounding areas as part of a deal it reached with Russia and Iran last month to enforce a "de-escalation" zone in northwest Syria.

 

The zone is one of several set up around Syria to reduce warfare between rebels, including groups backed by Turkey, and the government, which is supported by both Russia and Iran.

 

Tahrir al-Sham opposes the de-escalation deal with the government, but its role in escorting the Turkish reconnaissance team on Sunday indicated there might not be any direct military confrontation between its fighters and Turkey.

 

The Turkish military operation in Idlib will also include Syrian rebel groups involved in the Euphrates Shield operation that Ankara launched in Syria last year further to the east, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said on Saturday.

 

Tahrir al-Sham and Euphrates Shield rebels have fought previously and the jihadist alliance has this year battled other insurgents in Idlib and surrounding areas in an effort to consolidate its control.

 

Turkey's decision to launch the Euphrates Shield campaign a year ago was aimed partly at pushing Islamic State from its border, but also at stopping the Kurdish YPG from gaining more sway.

 

Backed by the United States in its battle against Islamic State, the YPG has seized much of northeastern Syria and was trying to link that territory up with its canton in Afrin.

 

Turkey regards the YPG as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) that it is fighting at home, and by gaining a presence in Sheikh Barakat, its forces would surround Afrin on three sides.

 

Several Turkish military vehicles, ambulances and tankers were visible in photographs published by Turkey's Anadolu news agency late on Thursday stationed at a village near Turkey's Reyhanli border gate opposite Bab al-Hawa.

 

(Reporting by Suleiman al-Khalidi in Amman; additional reporting by Tuvan Gumrukcu in Ankara; writing by Angus McDowall in Beirut; editing by Toby Chopra and Jonathan Oatis)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-10-13

[craigt3365]

What a mess.  Hard to keep up with all the changes going on in Syria.

[Grouse]

So the Kurds did all the heavy lifting and now we let Turkey (with Alhalida) get at them from the West and Iraq (brave men) from the South. Such duplicity.

[boomerangutang]

The enemy of my enemy of my enemy of my enemy of my........  oh shit, I've lost track.  I'll just assume everyone is my enemy.   Set up machine guns and shoot in a 360 degree arc.

[Kiwiken]

Erdogan has peeled back most of the Legacy of Ataturk. Turkey is Islamic no longer Secular. Now he attempts to rebuilt the Ottoman Empire. The Turk will not withdraw later. And in time will use an excuse to attack Iraqi Kurdistan. 

[Chris Lawrence]

Who originally stirred the hornets nest? Oil? So where has all the money gone and why aren't they morally responsible? Sad. Makes my stomach churn every time I see a child bleeding in the arms of a parent or sibling.

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, Chris Lawrence said:

Who originally stirred the hornets nest? Oil? So where has all the money gone and why aren't they morally responsible? Sad. Makes my stomach churn every time I see a child bleeding in the arms of a parent or sibling.

Just explain Turkey/Kurdish oil angle again....

[simple1]

Idlib has been a relocation dumping ground for Sunni Islamists for a while, probably going to be another Syrian killing zone in the very near future.

[geriatrickid]

6 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

Erdogan has peeled back most of the Legacy of Ataturk. Turkey is Islamic no longer Secular. Now he attempts to rebuilt the Ottoman Empire. The Turk will not withdraw later. And in time will use an excuse to attack Iraqi Kurdistan. 

+1

[GOLDBUGGY]

12 hours ago, Grouse said:

Just explain Turkey/Kurdish oil angle again....

Well it actually isn't about Oil, per say. It is about Pipelines that will carry Oil & Gas to Europe through Syria and on to the Med Sea, or through Turkey, which is connected by Pipeline to Europe.

 

Arab Countries to the South (mostly Qatar I think) and Russia to the East, both want to build a Pipeline to European Markets. The best route is through Syria. The Syrian President has agree with Russia to build this Pipeline. But obviously if he is not in power anymore, then this agreement is useless.

 

So??? 

[Morch]

16 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

Erdogan has peeled back most of the Legacy of Ataturk. Turkey is Islamic no longer Secular. Now he attempts to rebuilt the Ottoman Empire. The Turk will not withdraw later. And in time will use an excuse to attack Iraqi Kurdistan. 

 

The Turk will not withdraw later.

 

If there's one thing I'd bet on, is that they will. Not in a day or two, perhaps, but no one wants them to get a permanent foothold. And while many go on about Erdogan bringing back the Ottoman Empire etc. so far he's mostly talk. Might work, to a degree, with Western leaders, not so when it comes to regional ones, or Putin.

 

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The Turk will not withdraw later.

 

If there's one thing I'd bet on, is that they will. Not in a day or two, perhaps, but no one wants them to get a permanent foothold. And while many go on about Erdogan bringing back the Ottoman Empire etc. so far he's mostly talk. Might work, to a degree, with Western leaders, not so when it comes to regional ones, or Putin.

 

Much as is the case with Israel, who is in a position to push them out? And if they are, would it be in their interest to do so? The possible establishment of a Kurdish entity, gives the Turks a powerful motivaiton to stay.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

Much as is the case with Israel, who is in a position to push them out? And if they are, would it be in their interest to do so? The possible establishment of a Kurdish entity, gives the Turks a powerful motivaiton to stay.

 

How things will unfold in Northern Syria, and Syria in general, is yet to be seen. There are other players with vested interests, and with some serious clout to back it up. Putin have already shown he can pretty much make Erdogan do whatever. Iran is not a power Erdogan can dismiss as well. Both have no direct interest in seeing Turkey improve its position - unless, perhaps, if it comes at the other's expense. The USA, while having less of a leverage, and no foreign affairs focus to speak of, can make trouble for Turkey even without doing a whole lot (as seen in the consequences of current diplomatic clash between them).

 

Turkish motivations (or rather, Erdogan's) are all very well - but so far there's no Kurdish state, and hence, not much of a justification. Wouldn't be the first time Erdogan felt strongly about something, but made to act contrary to his own fiery statements.

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

How things will unfold in Northern Syria, and Syria in general, is yet to be seen. There are other players with vested interests, and with some serious clout to back it up. Putin have already shown he can pretty much make Erdogan do whatever. Iran is not a power Erdogan can dismiss as well. Both have no direct interest in seeing Turkey improve its position - unless, perhaps, if it comes at the other's expense. The USA, while having less of a leverage, and no foreign affairs focus to speak of, can make trouble for Turkey even without doing a whole lot (as seen in the consequences of current diplomatic clash between them).

 

Turkish motivations (or rather, Erdogan's) are all very well - but so far there's no Kurdish state, and hence, not much of a justification. Wouldn't be the first time Erdogan felt strongly about something, but made to act contrary to his own fiery statements.

They may have not much interest in seeing Turkey improve its position, but their interest in thwarting it doesn't look that compelling either. For Iran, Turkey's moves against possible Kurdish expansion - you do understand that is the real reason why Turkey is moving into that area - actually jibe with Iran's interests. And as for Russia, as long as the Turkish incursion doesn't threaten Assad's potential hold on most of Syria, it might not be that big of an issue.

[Morch]

15 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

They may have not much interest in seeing Turkey improve its position, but their interest in thwarting it doesn't look that compelling either. For Iran, Turkey's moves against possible Kurdish expansion - you do understand that is the real reason why Turkey is moving into that area - actually jibe with Iran's interests. And as for Russia, as long as the Turkish incursion doesn't threaten Assad's potential hold on most of Syria, it might not be that big of an issue.

 

A temporary Turkish incursion aimed at thwarting Kurdish ambitions is one thing, a permanent presence is a different story. Both Russia and Iran may ignore the former, but probably not all that open to the latter. As Russia and Iran also have somewhat different interests when it comes to Syria, supporting or opposing Turkey's moves relates to this power struggle as well.

 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

A temporary Turkish incursion aimed at thwarting Kurdish ambitions is one thing, a permanent presence is a different story. Both Russia and Iran may ignore the former, but probably not all that open to the latter. As Russia and Iran also have somewhat different interests when it comes to Syria, supporting or opposing Turkey's moves relates to this power struggle as well.

 

As we've learned in the case of at least one other ME nation, you don't have to say something is permanent for it to be virtually so. And since Turkey holds the establishment of an independent Kurdish nation as a dagger aimed at its heart, its motivations for putting a halt to it, seem a lot stronger than any Russia might have to oppose it. And of course, as I've pointed out earlier, Iran might actually approve, provided Turkey doesn't challenge its alliance with Assad. After all, the Kurds are also in opposition to Assad.

[Morch]

22 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

As we've learned in the case of at least one other ME nation, you don't have to say something is permanent for it to be virtually so. And since Turkey holds the establishment of an independent Kurdish nation as a dagger aimed at its heart, its motivations for putting a halt to it, seem a lot stronger than any Russia might have to oppose it. And of course, as I've pointed out earlier, Iran might actually approve, provided Turkey doesn't challenge its alliance with Assad. After all, the Kurds are also in opposition to Assad.

 

Rather obvious you're trying to derail the topic with irrelevant comparisons. 

 

Erdogan got a rich history of instances which were pronounced to be of the highest importance to Turkey coupled with a lot of strong language and fiery rhetoric, or even some aggressive moves. The almost inevitable outcome, with regard to anything that's not purely a domestic issue, is Erdogan having to back down at a later stage. Placing too much stock in his outbursts, proclamations and tantrums may not be the most informed approach.

 

Iran's designs with regard to Syria call for further involvement and greater control. Having Turkey on what is seen as Iran's turf, will not be welcome past the point it coincides with Iranian interests. So once more, a temporary incursion is one thing, a permanent one is another. Going back to the first paragraph, most regional players are well aware of Erdogan's issues - hence any cooperation or understandings with him will probably not be deemed very solid to begin with.

 

As for Assad - I don't think he'll be receptive to a permanent Turkish presence , Kurds or no Kurds. As a tool for putting them down, maybe. Assuming he can get the rest of the country under some semblance of control, and with both Iran and Russia's backing, there will be no real reason for Turkey to remain.

Edited October 14, 2017 by Morch

[ilostmypassword]

5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Rather obvious you're trying to derail the topic with irrelevant comparisons. 

 

Erdogan got a rich history of instances which were pronounced to be of the highest importance to Turkey coupled with a lot of strong language and fiery rhetoric, or even some aggressive moves. The almost inevitable outcome, with regard to anything that's not purely a domestic issue, is Erdogan having to back down at a later stage. Placing too much stock in his outbursts, proclamations and tantrums may not be the most informed approach.

 

Iran's designs with regard to Syria call for further involvement and greater control. Having Turkey on what is seen as Iran's turf, will not be welcome past the point it coincides with Iranian interests. So once more, a temporary incursion is one thing, a permanent one is another. Going back to the first paragraph, most regional players are well aware of Erdogan's issues - hence any cooperation or understandings with him will probably not be deemed very solid to begin with.

 

As for Assad - I don't think he'll be receptive to a permanent Turkish presence , Kurds or no Kurds. As a tool for putting them down, maybe. Assuming he can get the rest of the country under some semblance of control, and with both Iran and Russia's backing, there will be no real reason for Turkey to remain.

Erdogan went so far as to attack Kurds working with the Americans. And since neither of us has presented any kind of compellingly conclusive evidence, it's just a matter of wait and see.

Edited October 14, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Erdogan went so far as to attack Kurds working with the Americans. And since neither of us has presented any kind of compellingly conclusive evidence, it's just a matter of wait and see.

 

Erdogan does such things, and will go on doing them until someone smacks him on the nose with a rolled newspaper. That's pretty much how most of his foreign policy looks like. As for "compellingly conclusive evidence" - well there won't be any until things come to a head, obviously. But I daresay that following Erdogan's many debacles, one may observe some reoccurring patterns.