Tillerson meets Turkey's Erdogan for 'open' talks after weeks of strain

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@ilostmypassword

 

US soldiers, especially those deployed in Syria go through extensive training, and enjoy superior equipment. Many are Special Forces, with all that this implies. The SDF had the benefit of being trained by US instructors, that does go a ways. Consider that I did not make the faux counter argument presented, just posited that a label doesn't make the soldier. That you apparently assume anyone dubbed "Islamist" or former-AQ/IS is some super soldier, is not very convincing. Some are, some aren't. Their current performance in the Turkish operation does not suggest otherwise - some are, some aren't. Being a fanatic or a zealot is a different thing. Again, I'm not the one making wholesale assumptions.

 

There was nothing said about air support turning bad troops into good ones. Getting a bit repetitive to ask you not to inject faux claims to the discussion. Similarly, I'll have to question the wholesale  assertions that "pretty much the only non Kurdish rebels who didn't run from a fight were from ISIS and the like". There's some information on "who these people primarily are" - and I don't think it fully matches your notions.

 

You are trying very hard to paint a uniform picture with regard to the composition of these units. If anything, a recent and detailed history of such things (in the context of the Syrian Civil War) would indicate the futility of such wholesale assertions.  Once more spare me your "clearly"'s with regard to what I'm following or not following - even the story linked does not offer full support is not a full support for the wholesale view pushed in your posts.

 

I'm offering a more complex, nuanced take, you seem to favor a simplistic, sensationalist one.

 

"That you apparently assume anyone dubbed "Islamist" or former-AQ/IS is some super soldier, is not very convincing. "

No, the falsehood you indite here is not very convincing. I said no such thing nor implied such a thing.

As for US soldiers, I made my statement about them a general one. Nowhere did I specifically refer just to Special Force in Syria. Stop setting up straw men.

The fact is there is a great deal more information in that article with further links and elsewhere about the role of former Isis and other Islamist troops. Whereas you offer no independent information at all. All you do is make vague references to nuance.

[Morch]

17 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It took too long for what? If he evicts the Kurds after x amount of time it won't count? 

 How many casualties is too many? Why is that number too many?  Given the Turks' tactics, it looks like most of the casualties will be non Turkish shock troops.

As for international pressure...right, Erdogan has shown himself to be pretty much indifferent to international pressure in the past. What's different now? 

 

Spare me the drama, please. Military operations are planned with estimated schedules, casualty figures and so on. In this regard, the Turkish operation is not a success. This does not take away the local's suffering or the destruction netted. Intentionally conflating the two facets is mere spin. To remind, this bit of the discussion was indeed related to assessments of Turkey's (and associated forces) military prowess etc.

 

As far as I'm aware, the military personnel casualty figures published in Turkey pertain to "proper" Turkish units only. And even going by the Turkish count, which is not suspected of being 100% correct (putting it mildly), it's no walk in the park.

 

Erdogan indifferent to international pressure? Not really. As pointed out above, he does fold in the face of credible and determined opposition. Putin, for example, put him in his place in short notice. Most of the bluster and posturing statements he made over the years? Didn't come to pass.

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Spare me the drama, please. Military operations are planned with estimated schedules, casualty figures and so on. In this regard, the Turkish operation is not a success. This does not take away the local's suffering or the destruction netted. Intentionally conflating the two facets is mere spin. To remind, this bit of the discussion was indeed related to assessments of Turkey's (and associated forces) military prowess etc.

 

As far as I'm aware, the military personnel casualty figures published in Turkey pertain to "proper" Turkish units only. And even going by the Turkish count, which is not suspected of being 100% correct (putting it mildly), it's no walk in the park.

 

Erdogan indifferent to international pressure? Not really. As pointed out above, he does fold in the face of credible and determined opposition. Putin, for example, put him in his place in short notice. Most of the bluster and posturing statements he made over the years? Didn't come to pass.

The only important criterion for success is how the majorit Turkish citizen feel about it once it's over. If they're happy with it, Erdogan has no problems. So far, I haven't read of any signs of major discontent. Have you?

So "international" means Russia?. Becasue, as i recall, it was the Russians who greenlighted the Turkish operation by opening up the airspace and withdrawing their monitors, Who else is there who is likely to pressure the Turks in any meaningful way? And Turkey apologized to Russia over something it did not regard as an existential threat. It's quite clear to most of us, that it does regard the YPG as one.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

"That you apparently assume anyone dubbed "Islamist" or former-AQ/IS is some super soldier, is not very convincing. "

No, the falsehood you indite here is not very convincing. I said no such thing nor implied such a thing.

As for US soldiers, I made my statement about them a general one. Nowhere did I specifically refer just to Special Force in Syria. Stop setting up straw men.

The fact is there is a great deal more information in that article with further links and elsewhere about the role of former Isis and other Islamist troops. Whereas you offer no independent information at all. All you do is make vague references to nuance.

 

You have claimed, one way or another, that the non-Turkish units participating in the operation are mostly made out of  Islamists, former AQ/IS fighters. You've also went on about their supposed battlefield prowess. I think that's pretty close to what I've posted. The "point" about differentiating US soldiers in general and Special Forces is irrelevant - I think that most US troops deployed there (whether SF or not) are enjoy superior training and equipment. No straw-men  and no falsehoods.

 

The fact is that three isn't all that much information as you suggest in the article. On the other hand, the Wikipedia page previously linked, does offer such information.

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

17 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Spare me the drama, please. Military operations are planned with estimated schedules, casualty figures and so on. In this regard, the Turkish operation is not a success. This does not take away the local's suffering or the destruction netted. Intentionally conflating the two facets is mere spin. To remind, this bit of the discussion was indeed related to assessments of Turkey's (and associated forces) military prowess etc.

 

As far as I'm aware, the military personnel casualty figures published in Turkey pertain to "proper" Turkish units only. And even going by the Turkish count, which is not suspected of being 100% correct (putting it mildly), it's no walk in the park.

 

Erdogan indifferent to international pressure? Not really. As pointed out above, he does fold in the face of credible and determined opposition. Putin, for example, put him in his place in short notice. Most of the bluster and posturing statements he made over the years? Didn't come to pass.

"And as for military operations are planned with estimated schedules...."

Let me introduce you to a justly famous quote from an eminent German military thinker, Helmuth von Moltke “NO BATTLE plan ever survives first contact with the enemy,” 

[Morch]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

The only important criterion for success is how the majorit Turkish citizen feel about it once it's over. If they're happy with it, Erdogan has no problems. So far, I haven't read of any signs of major discontent. Have you?

So "international" means Russia?. Becasue, as i recall, it was the Russians who greenlighted the Turkish operation by opening up the airspace and withdrawing their monitors, Who else is there who is likely to pressure the Turks in any meaningful way? And Turkey apologized to Russia over something it did not regard as an existential threat. It's quite clear to most of us, that it does regard the YPG as one.

 

"The only important criterion for success is how the majority Turkish citizen feel about it..." - an opinion, not a fact. As for signs of discontent - why would I be expected to provide support for a bogus argument? And to remind, this does not  relate to the what was actually discussed - which was how the operation fares on the ground. Have the goalposts been moved again?

 

International means international. Russia was an example. As discussed earlier, Russia does have conflicting interests and goals in Syria (and the region). So allowing Erdogan some latitude to act is one thing, letting him destabilize Syria or carve parts of it - quite another.  May want to revisit Erdogan's statements before he made that humiliating apology to Russia - not quite a small matter as painted above. The YPG is not an "existential" threat to Turkey, and rhetoric aside, I don't think they truly consider it such.

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

"And as for military operations are planned with estimated schedules...."

Let me introduce you to a justly famous quote from an eminent German military thinker, Helmuth von Moltke “NO BATTLE plan ever survives first contact with the enemy,” 

 

Which would be relevant to the argument made, how?

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

9 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

"The only important criterion for success is how the majority Turkish citizen feel about it..." - an opinion, not a fact. As for signs of discontent - why would I be expected to provide support for a bogus argument? And to remind, this does not  relate to the what was actually discussed - which was how the operation fares on the ground. Have the goalposts been moved again?

 

International means international. Russia was an example. As discussed earlier, Russia does have conflicting interests and goals in Syria (and the region). So allowing Erdogan some latitude to act is one thing, letting him destabilize Syria or carve parts of it - quite another.  May want to revisit Erdogan's statements before he made that humiliating apology to Russia - not quite a small matter as painted above. The YPG is not an "existential" threat to Turkey, and rhetoric aside, I don't think they truly consider it such.

An opinion, not a fact? What other criterion would threaten Erdogan's rule in Turkey? If the Turkish people satisfied with the results of the campaign, what other problem has he got? You keep on maintaining that because the operation is behind schedule, that's significant. But you haven't explained why? And it looks like the Turkish incursion is succeeding. 

And your evaluation of the success of the Turkish campaign is ludicrous

"Overall, the Turkish operation cannot be labeled a success. It is now in its 7th (I think) week, with relatively little to show for it so far."

Given the anguished cries of betrayal bythe Kurds, now besieged in the city of Afrin, given that turks control most of the territory of Afrin, your evaluation is ludicrous.

As for your vaguenesses about Russia having different goals and such. Let me remind you once again. It was Russia that effectively greenlighted the Turkish operation . You don't think the Russians knew what that meant?  

And once again, you're flogging that dead horse about the Turks not considering the YPG an existential threat. I haven't read commentary by any knowledgeable person that agrees with you. Not one. Zero. Nada.  For once, just once, come up with someone solid who backs your contention.

[Morch]

 

@ilostmypassword

 

An opinion, not a fact. And to remind, the previous comments and discussion were more to do with the military or geopolitical situation, rather than Turkey's domestic politics. Introducing "threat to Erdogan's rule" as being key, out of the blue and without direct relevance to previous posts is moving the goalposts (again) - so yet another deflection.

 

I did not see the need to explain and expand every obvious point made, because they seemed....obvious. The significance of the operation not going quite as planned is that carrying out a wider campaign aimed at achieving the goals mentioned by Erdogan, seems less probable. Not when considering stronger opposition ahead, and mounting international pressure the longer it takes and the messier things get.

 

My evaluation of the Turkish operation is far from "ludicrous", and it's been echoed even in some of the links you yourself provided on this topic. Seven weeks, overwhelming air and artillery power, short supply lines and an incursion prepared well in advance - and at this point, what Turkey got to show for it is a tenuous control over parts of Afrin (not effectively as strong all over as you imply), and a delayed siege on the town itself. That at a rather high casualty toll. What comes next, if previous episodes of the same are to be repeated, is a drawn out bloody siege - during which the Turkish forces will not advance, and no good way to come out of this on the world stage. Just another ME quagmire.

 

I'm not in the least "vague" about Russia's goals, these were discussed earlier on this topic as well as on others. And the "point" you make was addressed as well. One of Russia's main goals (if not the foremost) is to stabilize Assad's rule and Syria's territorial integrity. From that angle, it is unlikely that they would accept Erdogan effectively taking over a part of Syria, or the resurgence of Sunni militias. On the other hand, stabilizing Assad's rule and defeating the remaining opposing forces requires cooperation - among others with Turkey.

 

Now, the Kurds and their allies effectively controlling a large tract of Syria, is an obvious problem to the the first goal. But at the same time, Russia is not too keen on a direct military confrontation with the Kurds (lengthy, bloody, plus questionable outcome), which isn't an option anyway, as long as US forces are around. So in the case of the Turkish invasion - I believe that Russia took a course of action fitting its own interests. No immediate showdown with Turkey, a limited "green light", and statements which I think make it clear that no permanent presence/changes will be accepted. 

 

The Turkish forces and their allies would be "allowed" to pound Afrin some, then Putin (probably after the elections) will get "concerned" and one way or the other, Erdogan will announce "mission accomplished", and most of the forces will shove off back across the border. Saying most, because I'm pretty sure he'll secure some joint border patrols or something. Enter Assad's forces, unbloodied and "victorious" to "maintain order" - there will be no Rojava canton in place, and the Kurds would grudgingly take that over the alternative. Discrediting the US is a bonus.

 

And I'm not "flogging a dead horse", rather you're flogging a simplistic misrepresentation of what I'm saying. So once more - the YPG is, realistically, not an "existential threat". Turkish political leaders hyping it as such is another thing. There is no meaningful sense is the YPG an "existential threat" to Turkey, and while I'm well aware many Turkish people have strong feelings about these matters, don't recall it them being on the "existential" level (other than the mandatory loonies, all countries have them).

[Srikcir]

Now with Tillerson replaced by Pompeo, the US may harden its continued presence in Syria.

As secretary of state, Pompeo could "embolden those within the Trump administration who seek to further amplify a more assertive posture within the Syrian crisis,"

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/14/mike-pompeo-statements-on-china-russia-north-korea-iran-and-syria.html

 

[ilostmypassword]

21 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@ilostmypassword

 

An opinion, not a fact. And to remind, the previous comments and discussion were more to do with the military or geopolitical situation, rather than Turkey's domestic politics. Introducing "threat to Erdogan's rule" as being key, out of the blue and without direct relevance to previous posts is moving the goalposts (again) - so yet another deflection.

 

I did not see the need to explain and expand every obvious point made, because they seemed....obvious. The significance of the operation not going quite as planned is that carrying out a wider campaign aimed at achieving the goals mentioned by Erdogan, seems less probable. Not when considering stronger opposition ahead, and mounting international pressure the longer it takes and the messier things get.

 

My evaluation of the Turkish operation is far from "ludicrous", and it's been echoed even in some of the links you yourself provided on this topic. Seven weeks, overwhelming air and artillery power, short supply lines and an incursion prepared well in advance - and at this point, what Turkey got to show for it is a tenuous control over parts of Afrin (not effectively as strong all over as you imply), and a delayed siege on the town itself. That at a rather high casualty toll. What comes next, if previous episodes of the same are to be repeated, is a drawn out bloody siege - during which the Turkish forces will not advance, and no good way to come out of this on the world stage. Just another ME quagmire.

 

I'm not in the least "vague" about Russia's goals, these were discussed earlier on this topic as well as on others. And the "point" you make was addressed as well. One of Russia's main goals (if not the foremost) is to stabilize Assad's rule and Syria's territorial integrity. From that angle, it is unlikely that they would accept Erdogan effectively taking over a part of Syria, or the resurgence of Sunni militias. On the other hand, stabilizing Assad's rule and defeating the remaining opposing forces requires cooperation - among others with Turkey.

 

Now, the Kurds and their allies effectively controlling a large tract of Syria, is an obvious problem to the the first goal. But at the same time, Russia is not too keen on a direct military confrontation with the Kurds (lengthy, bloody, plus questionable outcome), which isn't an option anyway, as long as US forces are around. So in the case of the Turkish invasion - I believe that Russia took a course of action fitting its own interests. No immediate showdown with Turkey, a limited "green light", and statements which I think make it clear that no permanent presence/changes will be accepted. 

 

The Turkish forces and their allies would be "allowed" to pound Afrin some, then Putin (probably after the elections) will get "concerned" and one way or the other, Erdogan will announce "mission accomplished", and most of the forces will shove off back across the border. Saying most, because I'm pretty sure he'll secure some joint border patrols or something. Enter Assad's forces, unbloodied and "victorious" to "maintain order" - there will be no Rojava canton in place, and the Kurds would grudgingly take that over the alternative. Discrediting the US is a bonus.

 

And I'm not "flogging a dead horse", rather you're flogging a simplistic misrepresentation of what I'm saying. So once more - the YPG is, realistically, not an "existential threat". Turkish political leaders hyping it as such is another thing. There is no meaningful sense is the YPG an "existential threat" to Turkey, and while I'm well aware many Turkish people have strong feelings about these matters, don't recall it them being on the "existential" level (other than the mandatory loonies, all countries have them).

Your evaluation of the Turkish stratetic position in Afrin is at odds with the reports I've read. Perhaps you would share the sources you drew on to for your evaluation. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for you to produce them. Here's what sounds like a knowledgeable take on the situation. 

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/turkey-afrin-syria-iran-kurds-ypg-pkk-olive-branch-invasion

 

As for the ultimate outcome of the Turkish incursion, we'll just have to wait and see. There are reports coming in of ethnic cleansing and the settling of Turkmen and Syrian Arabs in formerly Kurdish villages. I haven't seen reports from journalists I consider to be objective about the reality of that cleansing yet

 

Once again, it's you against the world in your evaluation of now the Turks view YPG. To them, YPG and PKK are the same thing. And to their way of thinking, and not entirely unreasonably, that is an existential threat to the Turkish nation as presently constituted. But to fair to you, I'm going to keep looking for some reasonably knowledgeable observer who supports your view. When I find that person, I'll share it with you so your position won't have to be such a lonely one.

[Morch]

18 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Now with Tillerson replaced by Pompeo, the US may harden its continued presence in Syria.

As secretary of state, Pompeo could "embolden those within the Trump administration who seek to further amplify a more assertive posture within the Syrian crisis,"

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/14/mike-pompeo-statements-on-china-russia-north-korea-iran-and-syria.html

 

 

Whether Tillerson or Pompeo, the US wasn't going anywhere anyway. The problem it faces now is more about the Turkey vs. Kurds bind. Haven't bothered digging up what he had to say on that, mainly because I don't think he'll call any shots. At least not important ones. Tillerson had a way of sometimes contradicting Trump, this model has a much improved "Yes, Boss" function. Where there may be change is in rhetoric - more confrontational, more unrealistic, less nuanced.

 

So long as Trump's current military advisors are in place, I'd be less worried about Pompeo (in this context).

[Morch]

37 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Your evaluation of the Turkish stratetic position in Afrin is at odds with the reports I've read. Perhaps you would share the sources you drew on to for your evaluation. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for you to produce them. Here's what sounds like a knowledgeable take on the situation. 

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/turkey-afrin-syria-iran-kurds-ypg-pkk-olive-branch-invasion

 

As for the ultimate outcome of the Turkish incursion, we'll just have to wait and see. There are reports coming in of ethnic cleansing and the settling of Turkmen and Syrian Arabs in formerly Kurdish villages. I haven't seen reports from journalists I consider to be objective about the reality of that cleansing yet

 

Once again, it's you against the world in your evaluation of now the Turks view YPG. To them, YPG and PKK are the same thing. And to their way of thinking, and not entirely unreasonably, that is an existential threat to the Turkish nation as presently constituted. But to fair to you, I'm going to keep looking for some reasonably knowledgeable observer who supports your view. When I find that person, I'll share it with you so your position won't have to be such a lonely one.

 

As pointed out earlier, I'm not that obsessed with treating links to articles and reports and scriptures, nor do I tend to Idolize the authors. Comes from direct, first-hand experience, I guess. And anyway, it would seem to be an exercise in futility, as your reading of even the articles and reports you post is either selective or applies wholesale co-opting regardless of actual content. Case in point the Starfor report. It is "at odds" with my analysis and take on some things, by no means all. In fact, on some issues it says pretty much the same. That you co-opt it as full support for your views or a clear contradiction for mine is all very well, just not well grounded in the actual content. By the way, if you have access to their website, I think that there are parallel (more or less) pieces dealing with other related parties - and reaching somewhat different conclusions. Goes toward showing that there are varying takes on the situation, which is rather complex.

 

And kindly, stop with your "you against the world" etc. nonsense. That you throw about strong generalized statements about how Turkish people see things, is not particularly convincing. Not, at least, for someone with quite a bit of Turkey time under his belt. The usage of "existential" is hyperbolic in this context. And the party line propaganda about YPG and PKK being "the same" is, as pointed out previously, something which came about only a few years ago.

 

[ilostmypassword]

On 3/14/2018 at 8:23 PM, Morch said:

 

@ilostmypassword

 

An opinion, not a fact. And to remind, the previous comments and discussion were more to do with the military or geopolitical situation, rather than Turkey's domestic politics. Introducing "threat to Erdogan's rule" as being key, out of the blue and without direct relevance to previous posts is moving the goalposts (again) - so yet another deflection.

 

I did not see the need to explain and expand every obvious point made, because they seemed....obvious. The significance of the operation not going quite as planned is that carrying out a wider campaign aimed at achieving the goals mentioned by Erdogan, seems less probable. Not when considering stronger opposition ahead, and mounting international pressure the longer it takes and the messier things get.

 

My evaluation of the Turkish operation is far from "ludicrous", and it's been echoed even in some of the links you yourself provided on this topic. Seven weeks, overwhelming air and artillery power, short supply lines and an incursion prepared well in advance - and at this point, what Turkey got to show for it is a tenuous control over parts of Afrin (not effectively as strong all over as you imply), and a delayed siege on the town itself. That at a rather high casualty toll. What comes next, if previous episodes of the same are to be repeated, is a drawn out bloody siege - during which the Turkish forces will not advance, and no good way to come out of this on the world stage. Just another ME quagmire.

 

I'm not in the least "vague" about Russia's goals, these were discussed earlier on this topic as well as on others. And the "point" you make was addressed as well. One of Russia's main goals (if not the foremost) is to stabilize Assad's rule and Syria's territorial integrity. From that angle, it is unlikely that they would accept Erdogan effectively taking over a part of Syria, or the resurgence of Sunni militias. On the other hand, stabilizing Assad's rule and defeating the remaining opposing forces requires cooperation - among others with Turkey.

 

Now, the Kurds and their allies effectively controlling a large tract of Syria, is an obvious problem to the the first goal. But at the same time, Russia is not too keen on a direct military confrontation with the Kurds (lengthy, bloody, plus questionable outcome), which isn't an option anyway, as long as US forces are around. So in the case of the Turkish invasion - I believe that Russia took a course of action fitting its own interests. No immediate showdown with Turkey, a limited "green light", and statements which I think make it clear that no permanent presence/changes will be accepted. 

 

The Turkish forces and their allies would be "allowed" to pound Afrin some, then Putin (probably after the elections) will get "concerned" and one way or the other, Erdogan will announce "mission accomplished", and most of the forces will shove off back across the border. Saying most, because I'm pretty sure he'll secure some joint border patrols or something. Enter Assad's forces, unbloodied and "victorious" to "maintain order" - there will be no Rojava canton in place, and the Kurds would grudgingly take that over the alternative. Discrediting the US is a bonus.

 

And I'm not "flogging a dead horse", rather you're flogging a simplistic misrepresentation of what I'm saying. So once more - the YPG is, realistically, not an "existential threat". Turkish political leaders hyping it as such is another thing. There is no meaningful sense is the YPG an "existential threat" to Turkey, and while I'm well aware many Turkish people have strong feelings about these matters, don't recall it them being on the "existential" level (other than the mandatory loonies, all countries have them).

Syria war: Turkey-backed forces oust Kurds from heart of Afrin

"Turkish-backed forces have taken full control of the centre of the Syrian-Kurdish city of Afrin.

Fighters waved flags and tore down the statue of a legendary Kurdish figure after claiming the city centre on Sunday.

The two-month Turkish-led operation aimed to rid the border region of a Kurdish militia that Turkey considers a terrorist group."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43447624

 

tenuouser and tenuouser 

[JemJem]

I knew that this was inevitable.......the fall of Afrin, I mean.....how could the YPG there (with very limited supply lines and limited major weapons) have held on much longer against a NATO member army with significant air power, aided by thousands of jihadi thugs. But, it was really heartbreaking me for me to read it as having been confirmed.

 

Is NATO proud of all this ? Is Putin proud ? Is the German government (the main supplier of Turkish tanks) proud ? The list goes on......   

 

Big shame to all of them. I am not saying shame to Erdogan and his direct supporters of course, because it is useless, as they have proved, many many times, to be void of decency; and are incapable of feeling any shame.

 

In the following days, we will most probably read and see (via online and TV) sickening news, videos etc. about what the jihadi thugs are doing there. How about this below (from a journalist/analyst) as a start ?! Very upsetting ! I am sure far worse is to come.

 

https://twitter.com/mutludc/status/975425182138593280

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 18, 2018 by JemJem

[blisterpak67]

7 hours ago, JemJem said:

I knew that this was inevitable.......the fall of Afrin, I mean.....how could the YPG there (with very limited supply lines and limited major weapons) have held on much longer against a NATO member army with significant air power, aided by thousands of jihadi thugs. But, it was really heartbreaking me for me to read it as having been confirmed.

 

Is NATO proud of all this ? Is Putin proud ? Is the German government (the main supplier of Turkish tanks) proud ? The list goes on......   

 

Big shame to all of them. I am not saying shame to Erdogan and his direct supporters of course, because it is useless, as they have proved, many many times, to be void of decency; and are incapable of feeling any shame.

 

In the following days, we will most probably read and see (via online and TV) sickening news, videos etc. about what the jihadi thugs are doing there. How about this below (from a journalist/analyst) as a start ?! Very upsetting ! I am sure far worse is to come.

 

https://twitter.com/mutludc/status/975425182138593280

 

 

 

 

 

 

Turkey will almost certainly impose ethnic cleansing. The Turks already make the nonsensical claim that the local population wasn't majority Kurd. They probably plan to colonize Afrin with  displaced Arabs and Turkmen. As China and Israel have demonstrated in Tibet and the West Bank respectively, colonization is one very powerful way to establish control over a territory. This is a disaster. I've also read that The US and Turkey have come to an agreement to expel Kurdish forces from Manbij:

Syria's Kurds Feel Betrayed by Trump. And Assad Will Reap the Benefits

According to Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu, the U.S. and Turkey agreed that they will jointly supervise security in the Syrian city of Manbij, and that the Kurdish troops which captured the city in 2016 will relocate to the eastern side of the Euphrates River...

Admittedly, the Kurds deny that any such agreement was reached, and the U.S. Administration also hasn’t officially announced it. But there’s no reason to doubt Cavusoglu’s statement.

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/.premium-tillerson-s-legacy-in-syria-abandoning-america-s-kurdish-allies-1.5907195

[Morch]

 

@ilostmypassword

 

What's tenuous is the ongoing practice of posting headlines and adding a nothing-one liner, whilst pretending the linked article somehow provides wholesale support or refutation to this or that position. The recent addition is no different.

 

 

[Morch]

 

@JemJem

 

While I understand the sentiment, I don't quite follow the reasoning. On what grounds would NATO act against Turkey? Or rather, what form would such action take? As for "proud" - doesn't really come into it, other than in moral grandstanding. Such are international relations.

[JemJem]

On 19.03.2018 at 1:33 PM, Morch said:

 

@JemJem

 

While I understand the sentiment, I don't quite follow the reasoning. On what grounds would NATO act against Turkey? Or rather, what form would such action take? As for "proud" - doesn't really come into it, other than in moral grandstanding. Such are international relations.

 

Well, I know. I don't expect NATO to be able to do something against Turkey of course. I meant, I was wondering how the NATO folks were feeling, now that Turkey has invaded and captured (and, will control directly and then via mainly-jihadi proxies for a long time to come) significant chunks of territory in N.Syria. And, emboldened by all this, I doubt very much that Erdogan will stop at Afrin.

Edited March 20, 2018 by JemJem

[JemJem]

On 19.03.2018 at 6:00 AM, blisterpak67 said:

Turkey will almost certainly impose ethnic cleansing. The Turks already make the nonsensical claim that the local population wasn't majority Kurd. They probably plan to colonize Afrin with  displaced Arabs and Turkmen. As China and Israel have demonstrated in Tibet and the West Bank respectively, colonization is one very powerful way to establish control over a territory. This is a disaster. I've also read that The US and Turkey have come to an agreement to expel Kurdish forces from Manbij:

Syria's Kurds Feel Betrayed by Trump. And Assad Will Reap the Benefits

According to Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu, the U.S. and Turkey agreed that they will jointly supervise security in the Syrian city of Manbij, and that the Kurdish troops which captured the city in 2016 will relocate to the eastern side of the Euphrates River...

Admittedly, the Kurds deny that any such agreement was reached, and the U.S. Administration also hasn’t officially announced it. But there’s no reason to doubt Cavusoglu’s statement.

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/.premium-tillerson-s-legacy-in-syria-abandoning-america-s-kurdish-allies-1.5907195

I agree with you. Worse is probably to come.

 

Emboldened by all that has happened, I doubt Erdogan will stop at Afrin. Maybe this hasn't made international news, but yesterday he told an audience that he wouldn't hesitate to attack Sinjar (also known as Shingal) either. As you probably know, that is in Iraq ! The guy thinks that he is invincible now.

[Morch]

11 hours ago, JemJem said:

 

Well, I know. I don't expect NATO to be able to do something against Turkey of course. I meant, I was wondering how the NATO folks were feeling, now that Turkey has invaded and captured (and, will control directly and then via mainly-jihadi proxies for a long time to come) significant chunks of territory in N.Syria. And, emboldened by all this, I doubt very much that Erdogan will stop at Afrin.

 

As said, how people (including politicians and generals) personally feel about it is one thing, how international relations are conducted is another. I doubt most of Turkey's Western "allies" are thrilled with Erdogan's rule, and this obviously extended beyond the current Turkish operation in Syria. 

 

I don't know that Turkey will be able (or allowed) to actually "capture" or "control", directly or semi-directly, most of the territory gained. That it will get some form of new security arrangements along the border is almost certain, though - but that was predictable, and generally not strongly objected to.

 

As for not stopping at Afrin? In the current context, the next stop is Manbij. As posted previously on this topic, I think that Erdogan will not risk an outright confrontation with the US, but (similarly to the projected Afrin end result) will try for a more robust security arrangement. It seems that there were already understandings along these lines, so maybe more a case of insisting on them materializing. Further along the Syrian border? There are certain flashpoints, but overall, mounting anything resembling the Afrin operation would imply a clash with the US, so doubt this is on.

[Morch]

11 hours ago, JemJem said:

I agree with you. Worse is probably to come.

 

Emboldened by all that has happened, I doubt Erdogan will stop at Afrin. Maybe this hasn't made international news, but yesterday he told an audience that he wouldn't hesitate to attack Sinjar (also known as Shingal) either. As you probably know, that is in Iraq ! The guy thinks that he is invincible now.

 

Erdogan (and other Turkish officials) voicing intentions regarding possible upcoming operations against the Kurds in Iraq was mentioned earlier in the topic. Turkey mounted such attacks in the past, so not an impossibility. Not sure to what degree the Iraqi government will support/ignore such actions.

[JemJem]

https://anfenglishmobile.com/news/moslem-turkey-entered-afrin-along-with-3-000-isis-members-25689

[Morch]

On 3/24/2018 at 10:47 PM, JemJem said:

https://anfenglishmobile.com/news/moslem-turkey-entered-afrin-along-with-3-000-isis-members-25689

 

That's a Kurdish news source. Not saying that it's necessarily incorrect or wrong, just that it is probably not the most objective.

[JemJem]

49 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

That's a Kurdish news source. Not saying that it's necessarily incorrect or wrong, just that it is probably not the most objective.

 

Overall, I trust the Kurdish sources A LOT MORE than I trust the Turkish ones.

 

Feel free to disagree of course.

[Morch]

35 minutes ago, JemJem said:

 

Overall, I trust the Kurdish sources A LOT MORE than I trust the Turkish ones.

 

Feel free to disagree of course.

 

Feel free to point out anything said in favor of trusting Turkish media sources. This isn't a binary choice.

[JemJem]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Feel free to point out anything said in favor of trusting Turkish media sources. This isn't a binary choice.

No; you must have misunderstood me. I didn't mean to say or imply that you trust Turkish media sources.

 

I just wanted to indicate my own preference.

 

By the way, it is hard to consider this invasion separate from what has been happening within Turkey itself, especially in the last 2-3 years of so. Of course, some stuff that happens in Turkey makes it to international news platforms; but a lot of the stuff doesn't. And, trust me, the situation in Turkey is a lot worse than what many people around the world think. It gets more and more gloomy and depressing as each day passes. As I implied above, the local mainstream media has become one big sad joke; heavily biased in favor of Erdogan and his AKP. The judiciary isn't much different.

 

The whole political system has already changed. It will be a Presidential system rather than a Parliamentary system very soon (ie. from the moment the Presidential ballot takes place. This ballot is expected to take place in November, 2018 the latest, and just like in Russia, it is very easy to guess the outcome of it).

 

The educational system is getting more and more Islamised. 

 

The sad list goes on and on.....

 

The Afrin invasion and then the holding of territory there (and maybe beyond) for possibly many years to come will of course make Erdogan's hand stronger in Syria, make him seem like a hero among the right-wingers in Turkey, weaken the Kurdish movement and deal a blow to various other leftist movements. Erdogan is anti-Kurd ; but he is even more anti, when it comes to left-wing movements (which the YPG is) in general.  For example, just very recently, he has declared his intention to rid a public university (Bogazici University which is in Istanbul) of socialist students. Hardly anyone is surprised at such words because especially since 2-3 years ago, there is no more democracy in Turkey ; only remnants of it. But, it is surprising and sad that the West still 'does business' with Erdogan in many aspects.

 

 

Edited March 26, 2018 by JemJem

[Morch]

 

@JemJem

 

I don't think Turkey will be allowed to directly hold on to much of the territory it gained through this invasion. A more likely outcome is of a security zone along the border, with joint patrols by Turkish and either Russia/Syrian/US troops.

Turkey getting any more than that goes against the interests of all involved parties, and while Erdogan's hold on Turkey is firm, things are different on regional and international arenas.

 

As for "the West" still "doing business" with Erdogan - hardly "surprising". The same would apply to "the West"'s relations with many countries which are not necessarily democratic or possess a great human rights record.