TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Turkey invades Iraq?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Turkey invades Iraq?

Thousands of troops invade, not a peep on the subject from American news outlets. Go figure.

Though I guess the rules of "invasion" have been obscured, since apparently we can bomb any country we like (somalia anyone?) as long as we call wolf--I mean--terrorist.

More to come on this one probably, we'll see.

I already mentioned this like a year ago when Turkey started bombing Kurdish positions. But I was rebuffed. Over time, growing evidence suggests that Turks have indeed sent thousands of their finest troops over the border into Iraq to lay the smackdown on the Kurds.

BTW, those focking Turkish government bastards (despite the issue of Kurds) were one of the first to happily support the independent Kosovo. Biggest hypocrites that I've known. Look in the dictionary for the word hypocrite, and you'll see Turkish flag right beside it ...

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I already mentioned this like a year ago when Turkey started bombing Kurdish positions. But I was rebuffed. Over time, growing evidence suggests that Turks have indeed sent thousands of their finest troops over the border into Iraq to lay the smackdown on the Kurds. BTW, those focking Turkish government bastards (despite the issue of Kurds) were one of the first to happily support the independent Kosovo. Biggest hypocrites that I've known. Look in the dictionary for the word hypocrite, and you'll see Turkish flag right beside it ...

Why, because of the genocide of Albanians by the Turks 100 years ago?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Why, because of the genocide of Albanians by the Turks 100 years ago?

You mean the genocide of Armenians? ... the genocide that allegedly didnt happen according to the Turkish government. The 1.5 million Armenians were military casualties.

BTW, thanks to Russian Cossacks who moved in to aid the Armenians, to stop the slaughter ... because the figure could have been much higher ... and thanks to the Cossacks, Armenia today is an independent country (while most of historic Armenia is still within Turkey).

If there was not Russian Revolution, today Armenian holy sites around Ararat would still be Armenian, and so would the ancient Armenian churches and monuments (that have since been converted by Turks to mosques, homes, and warehouses).

Re: Turkey invades Iraq?

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Thousands of troops invade, not a peep on the subject from American news outlets. Go figure.

CNN is carrying it.

Foxnews is carrying it.

MSNBC is carrying it.

Yahoo is carrying it.

...almost 2000 returns on Google news.

wtf do you want dude, and wtf are you implying?

Re: Turkey invades Iraq?

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Thousands of troops invade, not a peep on the subject from American news outlets. Go figure. Though I guess the rules of "invasion" have been obscured, since apparently we can bomb any country we like (somalia anyone?) as long as we call wolf--I mean--terrorist. More to come on this one probably, we'll see.

stop posting conjecture and provide sources. you fail at PDD

Governments for the win!

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium You mean the genocide of Armenians? ... the genocide that allegedly didnt happen according to the Turkish government. The 1.5 million Armenians were military casualties. BTW, thanks to Russian Cossacks who moved in to aid the Armenians, to stop the slaughter ... because the figure could have been much higher ... and thanks to the Cossacks, Armenia today is an independent country (while most of historic Armenia is still within Turkey). If there was not Russian Revolution, today Armenian holy sites around Ararat would still be Armenian, and so would the ancient Armenian churches and monuments (that have since been converted by Turks to mosques, homes, and warehouses).

Yea, armenian.

The Kurds need to chill out. They've got plenty of land in "Kurdistan" Iraq. So why are they trying to screw with Turkey.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Yea, armenian. The Kurds need to chill out. They've got plenty of land in "Kurdistan" Iraq. So why are they trying to screw with Turkey.

I thought you were the fan of self-determination?

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov I thought you were the fan of self-determination?

I am, what's your point?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I am, what's your point?

The Kurds are self-determining.

There are something like 20 million Kurds in Turkey, and only 5 million in Iraq prior to the current instability that has forced many to leave.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov The Kurds are self-determining.

They are not a sovereign state. So therefore, they don't have a right of self-determination. In Turkey at least....

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton They are not a sovereign state. So therefore, they don't have a right of self-determination. In Turkey at least....

Self-determination is the right of a national group to BECOME a sovereign state.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Self-determination is the right of a national group to BECOME a sovereign state.

I would say only a sovereign state has the right of self-determination. Until a nation obtains state status would I say they have a right to self-determination. Until then, that right resides in the state with which they are citizens of.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I would say only a sovereign state has the right of self-determination. Until a nation obtains state status would I say they have a right to self-determination. Until then, that right resides in the state with which they are citizens of.

That doesn't make sense. Self-Determination is the process whereby states come into being.

From the International Covenent on Civil and Political Rights (aka under international law): "Self determination is a principle whereby all peoples have the right [to] freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development."

edit:

Lenin also famously wrote on self-determination:

quote:

[T]he tendency of every national movement is towards the formation of national states, under which these requirements of modern capitalism are best satisfied. ... [T]he national state is typical and normal for the capitalist period. Consequently, if we want to grasp the meaning of self-determination of nations ... by examining the historico-economic conditions of the national movements, we must inevitably reach the conclusion that the self-determination of nations means the political separation of these nations from alien national bodies, and the formation of an independent national state. ...[It] would be wrong to interpret the right to self-determination as meaning anything but the right to existence as a separate state.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/self-det/ch01.htm#v20pp72-395

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov That doesn't make sense. Self-Determination is the process whereby states come into being. From the International Covenent on Civil and Political Rights (aka under international law): "Self determination is a principle whereby all peoples have the right [to] freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development." edit: Lenin also famously wrote on self-determination: http://www.marxists.org/archive/len...htm#v20pp72-395

Well, lebez, you now understand that my interpretation of self-determination is different. I don't believe all peoples have a right to determine their own economic, social, and cultural development. I believe it is a sovereign state's right to such self-determination.

Now, what justifies the creation of a sovereign state?

1. National Identity
2. Functioning social institutions
3. Super-majority support of the separatist nation.

Etc. etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Well, lebez, you now understand that my interpretation of self-determination is different. I don't believe all peoples have a right to determine their own economic, social, and cultural development. I believe it is a sovereign state's right to such self-determination. Now, what justifies the creation of a sovereign state? 1. National Identity 2. Functioning social institutions 3. Super-majority support of the separatist nation. Etc. etc.

That's an even more limited concept of self-determination than the UN operates with. And by that logic even the African states would still be colonial entities. Self-determination incorporates will to govern, not capacity - in fact, rare is the case where a national group is simply given the capacity to create functioning social and political institutions from day one. The concept of self-determination simply allows an attempt at creating such lasting institutions to be undertaken.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov That's an even more limited concept of self-determination than the UN operates with. And by that logic even the African states would still be colonial entities. Self-determination incorporates will to govern, not capacity - in fact, rare is the case where a national group is simply given the capacity to create functioning social and political institutions from day one. The concept of self-determination simply allows an attempt at creating such lasting institutions to be undertaken.

Well, look at what many of these African countries have done with their independence. They are embroiled in constant civil conflicts.

As for 4th world nations such as Kurdistan, Tamil country, and Palestine, they fit my criteria of a nation deserving state status, and thus, self-determination.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Well, look at what many of these African countries have done with their independence. They are embroiled in constant civil conflicts. As for 4th world nations such as Kurdistan, Tamil country, and Palestine, they fit my criteria of a nation deserving state status, and thus, self-determination.

Now I'm just confused.

Are you saying the African states didn't deserve to self-determine their destiny because they had no history of governance?

And are you saying that there ARE superior institutions of political and social significance in Kurdistan? Where is the threshold?

I do see your point, but I don't think it's reasonable - the reason self-determination rose to prominence in the first place is because of minority populations within broader states that were denied any sort of governance, even in localities (this was particularly the case in former colonies and in regions under Ottoman control). Self-determination created a framework whereby these oft-oppressed national groups could achieve self-governance with the support of the international community in order to stave off conflict from the entity they seek separation from.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton They are not a sovereign state. So therefore, they don't have a right of self-determination. In Turkey at least....

OH NO HE DIN'T!

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Now, what justifies the creation of a sovereign state? 1. The People Etc. etc.

corrected for typos

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby corrected for typos

People? National identity binds the "people" together into a nation. What does a Iraq do to a nation who is not loyal to Baghdad? Even Saddam couldn't extinguish the Kurdish national identity. They have their own government, their own flag, their own institutions. The Kurds are even signing oil contracts without the consent of Baghdad.

A national identity is a more better term of peoples uniting into a separate national identity..

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton People? National identity binds the "people" together into a nation. What does a Iraq do to a nation who is not loyal to Baghdad? Even Saddam couldn't extinguish the Kurdish national identity. They have their own government, their own flag, their own institutions. The Kurds are even signing oil contracts without the consent of Baghdad. A national identity is a more better term of peoples uniting into a separate national identity..

Nations are not held together with glue. They're held together with will and words.

back to turkey and the kurds.

I remember reading that the Kurds in Iraq had a 150,000 man standing army. Does any one have confirmation on this?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.