Dozens dead in Turkey/Iraq border fighting.

Sidewinder · Post by **Sidewinder** » 2007-10-21 09:24pm

If the US doesn't send in 10,000 troops into "Kurdistan" to disarm the PKK, Turkey will. Of course, the latter option is likely to lead to more bloodshed.

I bet the Iraqi Kurds are trying to distance themselves from the PKK, the way the US tried to distance itself from its support of Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2007-10-21 09:31pm

Sidewinder wrote:If the US doesn't send in 10,000 troops into "Kurdistan" to disarm the PKK, Turkey will. Of course, the latter option is likely to lead to more bloodshed.

I bet the Iraqi Kurds are trying to distance themselves from the PKK, the way the US tried to distance itself from its support of Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War.

The trouble is some of the factions amongst the Kurds might be helping them covertly.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-10-21 09:36pm

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
Sidewinder wrote:If the US doesn't send in 10,000 troops into "Kurdistan" to disarm the PKK, Turkey will. Of course, the latter option is likely to lead to more bloodshed.

I bet the Iraqi Kurds are trying to distance themselves from the PKK, the way the US tried to distance itself from its support of Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War.
The trouble is some of the factions amongst the Kurds might be helping them covertly.

Funnily enough, our current foreign policy dogma is on the side of the Turks. It would be interesting to see monkey boy try and condemn their invasion should it come.

Though I think it's far more likely that Captain Retarded will try to pull some "newest member of the coalition of the willing" horseshit.

Jadeite · Post by **Jadeite** » 2007-10-22 02:14am

I'm going to bet that the Turkish forces get the crap kicked out of them in this. Normally this would be unfortunate due to them being a NATO ally and all, but given that they're choosing to deliberately destabilize Iraq (worse than it already is) and are placing us in a difficult diplomatic position in relation to them and the Kurds (the only faction in Iraq that actually likes us), I don't have much sympathy.

There's a lot of better ways they could have gone about achieving retaliation, and if the Turkish army gets its nose bloodied by Kurdish guerillas, well, they had it coming.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-10-22 03:46am

Jadeite wrote:I'm going to bet that the Turkish forces get the crap kicked out of them in this. Normally this would be unfortunate due to them being a NATO ally and all, but given that they're choosing to deliberately destabilize Iraq (worse than it already is) and are placing us in a difficult diplomatic position in relation to them and the Kurds (the only faction in Iraq that actually likes us), I don't have much sympathy.

There's a lot of better ways they could have gone about achieving retaliation, and if the Turkish army gets its nose bloodied by Kurdish guerillas, well, they had it coming.

'Choosing to deliberately destablise Iraq' by attacking people hiding behind the US to attack their country? Are you serious?

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-10-22 04:01am

Stark wrote:
Jadeite wrote:I'm going to bet that the Turkish forces get the crap kicked out of them in this. Normally this would be unfortunate due to them being a NATO ally and all, but given that they're choosing to deliberately destabilize Iraq (worse than it already is) and are placing us in a difficult diplomatic position in relation to them and the Kurds (the only faction in Iraq that actually likes us), I don't have much sympathy.

There's a lot of better ways they could have gone about achieving retaliation, and if the Turkish army gets its nose bloodied by Kurdish guerillas, well, they had it coming.
'Choosing to deliberately destablise Iraq' by attacking people hiding behind the US to attack their country? Are you serious?

Remember, the US and Israel are the only countries that are allowed to defend themselves using military force.

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2007-10-22 08:14am

Stark wrote:
Jadeite wrote:I'm going to bet that the Turkish forces get the crap kicked out of them in this. Normally this would be unfortunate due to them being a NATO ally and all, but given that they're choosing to deliberately destabilize Iraq (worse than it already is) and are placing us in a difficult diplomatic position in relation to them and the Kurds (the only faction in Iraq that actually likes us), I don't have much sympathy.

There's a lot of better ways they could have gone about achieving retaliation, and if the Turkish army gets its nose bloodied by Kurdish guerillas, well, they had it coming.
'Choosing to deliberately destablise Iraq' by attacking people hiding behind the US to attack their country? Are you serious?

Remember Stark, when the Obamas hide behind the Pakis and kill Americans the US should shell the shit out of the Talibans. But when the Kurds do the same to the Turks, Turkey is the bad guy for invading. Why's that? Because it hurts American interests, of course. We've always been enemies with Turkey. We've always been allies with Pakistan. Heil Bush.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2007-10-22 09:39am

Jadeite fancies the world a game of Superpower or something. And as cheerleader for Team USA, he's pissed off with the guy playing Turkey. Don't try to read any kind of refined moral philosophy into it; there isn't any. That reactionary ganglion he calls a brain isn't capable of such higher functions.

hongi · Post by **hongi** » 2007-10-22 09:52am

Remember Stark, when the Obamas hide behind the Pakis and kill Americans

Clones of Obama living in Pakistan?

Aren't there international laws that stop nations from...you know, invading other nations?

Post by **Gandalf** » 2007-10-22 09:56am

hongi wrote:Aren't there international laws that stop nations from...you know, invading other nations?

There are, but like a game of Connect Four with five year olds, not everyone follows the rules and there's not a great deal that can be done.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2007-10-22 10:17am

Turkey sure as shit has a better case for invading Iraq today than the United States had in 2003. They're being attacked by forces from within the country. That was never true in our case, no matter how hard Colin Powell wished it was or George Bush prayed to Jesus.

And look at how (comparatively) level-headed they're being about it. Contrast the Turkish government's behavior with the mass hysteria that gripped America five years ago.

Jadeite · Post by **Jadeite** » 2007-10-22 10:58am

Stark wrote:
'Choosing to deliberately destablise Iraq' by attacking people hiding behind the US to attack their country? Are you serious?

If they choose to invade the Kurdish region of Iraq, they are:

1.) Invading the only stable region in the country.
2.) Attacking the only faction that likes us.
3.) Placing the US, a close ally that has provided them with weapons and support in the past, in a position that forces us to either:
A. Support the Kurds, and piss off a key ally in the region.
B. Support the Turks, and piss off the only faction in Iraq that likes us.
C. Stay out of it, and still probably catch grief and blame for what happens from either side.

Flagg wrote: Remember, the US and Israel are the only countries that are allowed to defend themselves using military force.

Not true. Simply that Turkey chose the most short sighted method of retaliation (rather than simply boosting border security, for example). They are risking a lot of equipment and manpower in this operation, and this could easily turn into a Turkish/Kurdish version of Israel vs Hezbollah. Not only this, but they are leaving themselves open to future political retaliation by the US for placing us in this position. The gains simply don't appear to be worth the risks, but if they were stupid enough to take the gamble in the first place, I have no sympathy if they lose.

They've already lost 12 men and they haven't even moved across the border yet. This increasing to over a hundred dead if they do invade Iraq is probably very likely.

brianeyci wrote:
Remember Stark, when the Obamas hide behind the Pakis and kill Americans the US should shell the shit out of the Talibans. But when the Kurds do the same to the Turks, Turkey is the bad guy for invading. Why's that? Because it hurts American interests, of course. We've always been enemies with Turkey. We've always been allies with Pakistan. Heil Bush.

Actually, I don't think we should have bombed targets in Pakistan, at least not without their government's permission. This isn't out of moral grounds, but rather political sense. Middle Eastern cultures are based around personal image and honor, and by taking out targets in Pakistan without Musharraf's permission, we probably did more to weaken his regime by making him look powerless than whoever we killed.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2007-10-22 11:49am

Jadeite wrote:Not true. Simply that Turkey chose the most short sighted method of retaliation (rather than simply boosting border security, for example). They are risking a lot of equipment and manpower in this operation, and this could easily turn into a Turkish/Kurdish version of Israel vs Hezbollah. Not only this, but they are leaving themselves open to future political retaliation by the US for placing us in this position. The gains simply don't appear to be worth the risks, but if they were stupid enough to take the gamble in the first place, I have no sympathy if they lose.

They've already lost 12 men and they haven't even moved across the border yet. This increasing to over a hundred dead if they do invade Iraq is probably very likely.

Political retaliation from the US? The whole bloody point of the US not going through with the Armenian resolution is not to piss of the Turks. What can the US do in retaliation? If anything, the US ought to be doing its best to mediate the dispute.

And also, the Turkish army is unlike the Israelis, a professional army and they have done border crossings in force from time to time. They aren't going to get beaten silly just like the Israelis. Considering the fact that their people have been attacked again and again prior to this, they have to answer to their electorate somehow. They do have a democracy, ya' know?