Possible Turkish invasion of Iraq Immienet.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2007-10-10 06:14am

It's actually spelled Imminent, I wish I had Firefox at work

Turkey Seeks Lawmakers' Blessing For Attack on Rebel Kurds in Iraq

By Selcan Hacaoglu
Associated Press
Wednesday, October 10, 2007; Page A12

SIRNAK, Turkey, Oct. 9 -- Turkey's ruling party decided Tuesday to seek parliamentary approval for an offensive against Kurdish rebels based in northern Iraq, a move that could open a new front in the Iraq war and disrupt one of that nation's few relatively peaceful areas.

The government did not say it had decided to launch such an attack, which could jeopardize Turkey's ties with the United States. The Bush administration warned against sending troops across the border and urged Turkey to work with Iraq's government to quell the Turkish Kurd guerrillas.

"If they have a problem, they need to work together to resolve it, and I'm not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.

In the past, Turkish troops have made small-scale raids into Iraq that officials say do not require parliament's approval. The last major incursion against the armed separatists operating out of Iraq's Kurdish region was in 1997.

There are widespread fears that a Turkish offensive would destabilize that region, which has escaped most of the violence and political turmoil afflicting areas dominated by Shiite Muslims and Sunni Arabs.

Iraqi Kurds, who run a semiautonomous government in Iraq's north, have vowed to defend their borders. A spokesman for the Iraqi Kurdish regional government, Jamal Abdullah, urged Turkey on Tuesday to drop the idea of a military attack.

"We call upon the Turkish government to exercise self-restraint and not to turn the region into an unstable one," he said.

Turkey's decision to seek a parliamentary go-ahead was made during a three-hour meeting between Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and officials from his governing Justice and Development Party, according to a leading member of the party who was at the meeting.

The lawmaker, speaking on condition of anonymity, said officials would try to present it to parliament Wednesday.

Earlier Tuesday, the government said it had begun preparations for a military operation into Iraq in pursuit of the rebels after a series of deadly attacks on soldiers in recent days outraged Turks.

Over the past 10 days, more than two dozen soldiers and civilians died in attacks by Kurdistan Workers' Party rebels in the southeast. The group, labeled a terrorist organization by Washington and the European Union, has fought Turkish forces since 1984 in a war that has killed tens of thousands of rebels, soldiers and civilians.

It's gonna be a Hell of a ride!

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2007-10-10 07:49am

"and I'm not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go"

Anyone else's head just explode?

hongi · Post by **hongi** » 2007-10-10 09:48am

Immienet? Is that the internet for immigrants?

Whoowee. As if Iraq couldn't get any more screwed up.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2007-10-10 10:09am

hongi wrote:Immienet? Is that the internet for immigrants?

Whoowee. As if Iraq couldn't get any more screwed up.

You fail at my humor*points at link*

Sidewinder · Post by **Sidewinder** » 2007-10-10 12:10pm

Hopefully, a peaceful resolution will be reached, but it seems doubtful at this moment. Anyone else picture US and Turkish troops shooting at each other?

Chris OFarrell wrote:"and I'm not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go"

Anyone else's head just explode?

The hypocrisy in Sean McCormack's line is astounding.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2007-10-10 12:11pm

I like how we said that Turkey needs to work together with Iraq to bring the Kurdish forces under control. If the Iraqi government can't bring Baghdad under control for all the militias and insurgent cells, what possible influence can they have in Mosul, which is on the periphery of the country and controlled by what is effectively the most powerful militia in Iraq?

Battlehymn Republic · Post by **Battlehymn Republic** » 2007-10-10 01:17pm

I knew it! The War in Iraq is a secret plan by the neocons to screw up in the Middle East so badly that the Turks will have to move in and recreate the Ottoman Empire to secure their borders, hence saving the West the trouble to deal with it! Geniuses!

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2007-10-10 01:58pm

Pablo Sanchez wrote:I like how we said that Turkey needs to work together with Iraq to bring the Kurdish forces under control. If the Iraqi government can't bring Baghdad under control for all the militias and insurgent cells, what possible influence can they have in Mosul, which is on the periphery of the country and controlled by what is effectively the most powerful militia in Iraq?

The Kurds I think are more organised than any of the other militia and by and far have de facto independence from the central Government, which has a sphere of influence of a small corner of Baghdad.

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2007-10-10 02:03pm

I'm not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.

I fully agree. Maybe the US should attack Turkey for attacking Iraq

[R_H] · Post by **[R_H]** » 2007-10-10 02:23pm

Stas Bush wrote:
I'm not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.
I fully agree. Maybe the US should attack Turkey for attacking Iraq

That's hilarious. "I'm not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go". Yet again proving that the best parody comes from Repulitards. The irony is astounding, has he been in a cave since 2003?

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2007-10-10 02:28pm

What happens when two members of NATO go to war with each other?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2007-10-10 02:28pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:What happens when two members of NATO go to war with each other?

Wait and find out.

Ubiquitous · Post by **Ubiquitous** » 2007-10-10 02:37pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:What happens when two members of NATO go to war with each other?

Considering one is Turkey, I wouldn't worry. Hell, it might even convince France to rejoin as a fully-committed NATO member considering how unpopular Ankara is with most EU nations.

Pelranius · Post by **Pelranius** » 2007-10-10 03:05pm

If we attack Turkey for attacking the Kurds, then the Israelis will most likely go apeshit since Turkey is one of their best pals in the Mid East. The mess gets worse.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2007-10-10 03:44pm

Pelranius wrote:If we attack Turkey for attacking the Kurds, then the Israelis will most likely go apeshit since Turkey is one of their best pals in the Mid East. The mess gets worse.

You really think Israel would side with Turkey against the US?

Ubiquitous · Post by **Ubiquitous** » 2007-10-10 03:55pm

Pelranius wrote:If we attack Turkey for attacking the Kurds, then the Israelis will most likely go apeshit since Turkey is one of their best pals in the Mid East. The mess gets worse.

Apeshit? I very much doubt that. Indeed they wont say jack shit if the US is involved, unless directed to do so by Bush.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2007-10-10 03:59pm

Hah. Turkey could invade northern Iraq tomorrow and send a dirty memo to the White House daring Bush to say something and all the US would do is politely ask them to please stop shooting up the Kurds.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-10-10 06:50pm

Isn't it a bit odd that the US is telling someone to stay away from a nation full of terrorist staging grounds? I mean, guys cross the border to fuck up Turkey, so Turkey wants to go get them... na uh, bad Turkey. But Iran sends shit into the part of Iraq the US cares about, and hoo boy...

Kanastrous · Post by **Kanastrous** » 2007-10-10 06:53pm

[R_H] wrote:
That's hilarious. "I'm not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go". Yet again proving that the best parody comes from Repulitards. The irony is astounding, has he been in a cave since 2003?

It's not a 'unilateral incursion' if you bribe/coerce/deceive others into making the incursion with you, I guess.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2007-10-10 07:03pm

Pelranius wrote:If we attack Turkey for attacking the Kurds, then the Israelis will most likely go apeshit since Turkey is one of their best pals in the Mid East. The mess gets worse.

I doubt it. Israel doesn't have much relations with the Kurds anyhow. To them, it's the Turk's business.

PainRack · Post by **PainRack** » 2007-10-10 09:02pm

Kanastrous wrote:
[R_H] wrote:
That's hilarious. "I'm not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go". Yet again proving that the best parody comes from Repulitards. The irony is astounding, has he been in a cave since 2003?
It's not a 'unilateral incursion' if you bribe/coerce/deceive others into making the incursion with you, I guess.

Just how many people still believe in the Coalition of the Willing was larger than the Gulf War bullshit anyway?

Battlehymn Republic · Post by **Battlehymn Republic** » 2007-10-11 01:04am

Eh, it was still pretty potent, at least on paper. U.K., Japan, Spain, Italy, South Korea, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, the Aussies, don't forget the Polish, Singapore, Thailand, etc. Then you realize that most of these nations didn't have more than a token force sent in. But it sure sounds impressive.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2007-10-11 01:28am

Battlehymn Republic wrote:Eh, it was still pretty potent, at least on paper. U.K., Japan, Spain, Italy, South Korea, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, the Aussies, don't forget the Polish, Singapore, Thailand, etc. Then you realize that most of these nations didn't have more than a token force sent in. But it sure sounds impressive.

Well.... compared to the force that even took Iraq in 1991, that's... small.

PainRack · Post by **PainRack** » 2007-10-11 05:11am

Battlehymn Republic wrote:Eh, it was still pretty potent, at least on paper. U.K., Japan, Spain, Italy, South Korea, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, the Aussies, don't forget the Polish, Singapore, Thailand, etc. Then you realize that most of these nations didn't have more than a token force sent in. But it sure sounds impressive.

It just boggles the mind. I had Bryan on SB as well as E1701 claimed that the Coaliton of the willing in Iraq was more numerous than the 1st Gulf War. How on god earth do you get from a combined coalition of nearly 100 nations becoming smaller than 40 nations?
Note that only less than 30 nations in the 1st Gulf War sent troops/support, and there are 40 odd nations in the second coalition...........

Normally, I won't bring this up, but I read a relatively recent news comment about this same bullshit again, about how more countries supported the second gulf war than the first. Its insane.