Turkey warns US on Armenia genocide bill

reply to post by Cuhail


No. Russia and Turkey have been pretty friendly actually. Turkey being turned down for EU admission, has rebuked all notions of friendly attitudes from and to the West, including all of the EU and the US. They refuse to aid our war, our regional control and have several times hinted that when America leaves they will attack Iraq. Natural being rejected AGAIN from the EU (I dont blame the EU) they have turned to Russia as a friend. Turkey even rejected a brand new shiny nuclear reactor from the US to spite us .. essentially "we dont need ya"

So, on the flip-side of my earlier post, could it be Turkey pushing our buttons FOR Russia? As of recent news reports, the saber-rattling between Russia and the U.S. has increased as well. How do the Russians see the Turkey-Armenia rhetoric? Could this be the precursor of a conflict between Turkey/Russia and the West?

I'm just throwing it out there.

Cuhail

reply to post by Cuhail


Hmm.. no, I don't think so..

See, the Armenian issue in Turkey is a long standing sore wound. The Turks know it happened, they wouldn't talk about it, but they know it happened. The government will always reject any notion of the blame (like they blame Kurds for the Turks slaughtering them as well) ..

Russia also notes the Armenian issue as genocide, has from the beginning. Turkey, while being pushed away from the West by our administration, is not so needy that it will run to Russia either.

Essentially the Kurds and the Armenians are two issues that Turkish government will always choose themselves first over the two groups. The tiny nation of Armenia deserves, at the very least, for Turkey to take blame for what happened..

But I do not think that Turkey is just trying to piss us off for Russia. No, I think they are pissing us off for sheer ability to piss us off! .. I don't think they like Mr. Bush. According to Bush they are not Western enough, according to the French they are not Christian enough. Just can't win with the west.

Rockpuck, you rock! Thank you for educating me in very simply summarized posts. I've learned much from your posts.
Now, by your estimation, Turkey is poking the growling bear (U.S.A.) because it can? Like having something the schoolyard bully wants, so the shrimp puplically picks on the bully in public because it shows off a certain bravado so as not to make the shrimp so...shrimpy in others eyes?

Ahhh, the layman's terms, eh?

Cuhail

Originally posted by Cuhail

Rockpuck, you rock! Thank you for educating me in very simply summarized posts. I've learned much from your posts.
Now, by your estimation, Turkey is poking the growling bear (U.S.A.) because it can? Like having something the schoolyard bully wants, so the shrimp puplically picks on the bully in public because it shows off a certain bravado so as not to make the shrimp so...shrimpy in others eyes?

Ahhh, the layman's terms, eh?

Cuhail

Everyone hates the United States, but even in the Muslim world few nations have an eternal stick up their ass for almost evey nation they share a border with. Especially perplexing for one claiming to be a modern liberal democracy.

[edit on 11-10-2007 by Firestorm_]

Originally posted by Cuhail
Turkey is poking the growling bear (U.S.A.) because it can? Like having something the schoolyard bully wants, so the shrimp puplically picks on the bully in public because it shows off a certain bravado so as not to make the shrimp so...shrimpy in others eyes?

I don't think that this is the case at all, the Turks have a genuine problem with the PKK. As Rockpuck points out, the Kurd issue is longstanding and it is not going away. The Kurds were and probably still are persecuted by the Turks so the PKK has a real axe to grind and by all accounts have been hitting southeast Turkey quite hard. I don't think their intention is to poke the US, but to contain problems within their own borders.

George Bush is actually in a tough place. Ankara, the government capital, are lobbying hard not only for the genocide issue to go away but also for the right to cross the borber into Iraq in order to 'arrest' PKK rebels. The goverment of Turkey has to work hard because they do not have ultimate control of the country, the military do. The government of Turkey therefore are similarly up against a wall. They need to get permission to go over because they can't hold the military back indefinately and it is their buttons that are being pushed hardest.

The main concern is why given this very tense situation, which could have been abated months ago by intermediary negotiations with the Turks and PKK, has the genocide issue suddenly come to the fore in the US. Possibly as a bargaining chip - it is not a good idea to allow the Turks to engage the PKK in Iraq, so they hold back and the US won't call it genocide? The Turks say that the genocide label will cause major problems at home, given the situation wouldn't it be compassionate to put the matter to one side for now. Aren't the living somewhat more important than the dead?

Russia and the Ottoman empire have long been used against each other, by both the British and Holy Roman Empires. I would doubt that the astute Putin will fall for the same trick and will be keen to keep things neutral with Turkey. He will be aware of its potential against him though.

Turkey is desperate for European membership. Their government does not want to create an international incident by illegally crossing the border, nor do they want it to be known that the military has so much control that it acts without government approval. That will not help its European bid. But then how realistic is that bid, exactly how far does Turkey have to bend over before the good white folks of europe let them in? Perhaps the military have given up on the idea already.

reply to post by Cuhail


This news flash is a multiple entendre in hipocracies of many and various natures....
Comon kiddys, how many hipocracies can you find in this situation?
......
1)It REALLY WAS Genocide!
2)Everybody KNOWS IT!
3)Theyve always known it!
3)The US Govt has appologised for telling the truth!
4)well you can fill in some too......theres plenty left....

reply to post by KilgoreTrout



Thank you. Another very informative post by you, KilgoreTrout. Now if I understand it right, and, in this day and all. Is there a chance of Turkey repeating their transgression against the PKK? I wouldn't think so. But you did mention the Military has more direct power than the government and sometimes the military mindset can be impulsive and tend to overwhelm with shoot first, investigate/ask later.

I hope these are insightful questions. I hate to flaunt ignorance.

Cuhail

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation

But to have a US president lobby to not grant an obvious genocide because of their war on terror relationship with Turkey, it is disgusting. And unfortuanely I am not surprised. This adminstration has ZERO heart of compassion for outsiders.

How about we call it a Holocaust then if Genocide doesn't fit. Nope, it looks like the Jews have sole ownership of that word.

AAC

Since when did "granting genocides" become even possible?

This is nothing more than a transparent attempt by the dems to undermine Bush and the war. What rational reason would the U.S. Congress have to antagonize an important ally in the middle of a war?

How does passing this resolution serve the best interest of the U.S?

After 100 years this all of a sudden becomes an important issue?

It's a disgrace.

politically correct liberals

P.S. Thanks for showing me how to use the uzi smiley!

[edit on 11-10-2007 by jjohns]

reply to post by jjohns



This was just the lead story on CNN International. The House passed the resolution despite the White House and State Dept. objections. So read up and know that America is not so one-sided as ya think.
Here's the Yahoo write-up on it.

Yahoo News

The House Foreign Affairs Committee passed the bill Wednesday despite intense lobbying by Turkish officials and opposition from President Bush. The vote was a triumph for well-organized Armenian-American interest groups who have lobbied Congress for decades to pass a resolution.

Food for the thread.
Cuhail

reply to post by KilgoreTrout

the Turks have a genuine problem with the PKK

The Turks have a problem with any Kurd, but yes, the ones causing disturbances of Turkish life is the political and military arm of the PKK

The Kurds were and probably still are persecuted by the Turks so the PKK has a real axe to grind and by all accounts have been hitting southeast Turkey quite hard.

Yes, the Kurds where suppressed by the Turks, and yes, they are still suppressed by the Turks. The PKK is acting, not so much to assault Turkey at any chance, but fight for an independant Kurdistan (Northern Kurdistan) which would take up all of Turkeys most valuable natural resource. Water. The Kurds hold 90 some percent of the population over about 30% of Turkish territory yet the Turkish army (soviet era weaponry) has the land occupied, mostly for Water.

I don't think their intention is to poke the US, but to contain problems within their own borders.

Turkey did not want the US upsetting Iraq, as Iraq held the Kurds in place. If the Iranians attacked strongholds in their lands, and Iraq allowed the Turks to commit genocide (and yes, they did, they asked Saddam for permission to raid Kurdish villages and cities and Saddam gladly let them) .. and the Turks military held Turkish Kurds down, the Kurds posed no problem to Turkey.. who was trying with all its might to build its state to a point where the EU says its reformed and could join the EU.

But..

We did invade Iraq, we did upset power, and the Kurds have broken away from Iraq.. although our news would never report that.

The Kurds now have what Turkey has long feared. A base, with a standing and growing economy. Centralized population to fuel Kurdish nationalism. A standing and functioning government (Southern Kurdistan has a Prime Minister. It has a formal Judicial and Legistlative branch .... and amazingly .. its never in the news.. because people don't die in Kurdistan. Thats only a Shia Sunni issue)

With this centralized power came that fear that Kurdistan would use its platform to invade Turkish territory. While infact Southern Kurdistan has promised America it will never sponsor any incursion into Turkey or the South of Iraq, it will support the Kurdish nationalist ideas in Turkey and help promote them.

Then came the final problem with Southern Kurdistan and Turkey. It was long suspected someone was aiding Kurdistan .. not economically, all their achievments have been done by them selves, but military wise. The United States needed to free troops, so they took all of their men out of Northern Iraq (Southern Kurdistan) and put them in the south, the Kurdish government established a military arm of the government to protect the borders (possibly the most armed boundry in the world excluding India / Pakistan) The United States gifted Southern Kurdistan several billion dollars in arms to arm their army, and gifted them several military trainers to establish and train the new army. I believe on average we have under 20 US military personel in Northern Iraq. Kurdistan built in a short time a 250,000 man army, fully armed by the United States, trained by the United States (also funded by illegal drug sales, oil theft, and goods smuggling from Turkey) ..

The PKK began launching attacks against Turkey under this new military umbrella. The Turkish government eventually decided to invade Southern Kurdistan.. the result was Turkey invading several times with small groups of soldiers with the Kurdish governments blessing .. they where not going to support unprovoked attacks. But then Turkey put several thousand on the borders.. see how far they can push this new stronghold of Kurds. The result being Turkey found out that a confrontation with the new Kurdish state would lead to thousands dead on BOTH sides.. all because America armed their enemy.. if Turkey lost a significant portion of its forces fighting in Kurdistan a reserection of infighting in the Eastern areas of Turkey would bring about an international incident to say the least..

All of this destroyed the status quoe, and now Turkey really has no idea what to do... it cannot invade Kurdistan, they are already established and to far dug in.. They cannot ignore the problem because eventually the Kurdish states influence will lead to a Turkish civil war, or a war between the two.. When America finally fails at acheieving peace in Iraq (and it will fail) Kurdistan will take in all of the oil revenue that it gives such a significant portion to Iraq, abeling them to build up even stronger arms against Turkey (and Iran) ..

So, Turkey, spited by the West and the EU so many times before, now has a powder keg which people keep flinging matches at.. just waiting for it to blow.. and its all because of a war they refused to help us with because they knew what would happen. Yes, I would say Turkey has little intrest in being buddies right now, and any action against us is just for the sake that they are very pissed off at us.

By the way.

If and when we invade Iran.. Southern Kurdistan will incorporate Eastern Kurdistan under its new military umbrella, bringing with it several new small oil fields as well. When Iran falls, it will only be a matter of time before Northern Kurdistan rebells and all out war takes place between Kurdistan and the base population of Kurds in Turkey.

Turkey has pretty much been screwed by our actions.

Brilliant post Rockpuck I knew only smatterings of that, highly informative.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Turkey has pretty much been screwed by our actions.

So why do you think that this genocide issue has been pushed through now? Surely to have passed this at such a contentious time, they must have had powerful support!!!

I don't think the Kurds on their own represent much of a danger to the Turks, they would though be used to formidable effect against Turkey by the Iranian should the opportunity arise. Which I unfortunately get the sinking feeling it will. The Turks are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They can't become part of the middle-east (they hate the arabs and the arabs hate them), they can't join Europe because they are not European (as archaic as that sounds), Asia has its own problems.

It is not easy being Turkey.

I cannot believe that anyone could be so stupid as to let a bill like this come to the fore at such an inopportune moment and not realise the implications. I am sure a deal could have been struck in order to maintain the status quo - isn't this what politicians and diplomats are paid to do....? Why was nothing done? Who benefits from further exacerbating the situation? The bill has evidently been doing the rounds 'for decades' surely another year or so wouldn't have hurt?

By severing ties,Turkey will absolve the US of its responsibilities. The US certainly seem able to do business with the Kurds...perhaps they don't need the Turks. How important are the supply lines that the Turks are threatening to sever?

Why is it that our governments see a problem coming and instead of cutting it off at the pass they steer it to the point whereby it can do the most damage???

Call me suspicious but if you ask me, for this to go through right now somebody must be making a lot of money out of it.

I personally feel that Europe would benefit from the inclusion of Turkey. I am assured by many that it will never happen. I think it basically comes down to the fact that they don't fit in because no-one wants them to.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout

Brilliant post Rockpuck I knew only smatterings of that, highly informative.

Thank you, Kilgore

So why do you think that this genocide issue has been pushed through now? Surely to have passed this at such a contentious time, they must have had powerful support!!!

This is not a new issue at all! .. Actually, from what I know, it is an agenda every single year that the house pass a non-binding resolution (no action is to be taken) in accord to the Armenian holocaust.

Nancy Polosi acting on behalf of her constituency (California) ensured this time it passes (California has the nations largest ethnic Armenian population)

It did have big backing, even Bush offered support for the resolution, however now that times have changed its the Turks he needs to pander to.

I don't think the Kurds on their own represent much of a danger to the Turks, they would though be used to formidable effect against Turkey by the Iranian should the opportunity arise.

The Kurds represent great danger to Turkey.

Here is why..

The Kurds hold as I said, the Eastern half of Turkey. something around 70-80% of all the water of the Mid East originates INSIDE TURKEY and ironically, almost all of it in Kurdish held lands.

Water is one of Turkey's biggest exports.. they have built dams and reservoirs to manipulate supply and demand (other nations pay for more water released) not to mention they sell the excess energy to other nations as well. Now that the Kurds have Southern Kurdistan, a consolidated economic and military stronghold, turkey has to fear loosing its Eastern half, as well as a horrifically bloody civil war.

If your saying Kurds from Iran may cause problems, not so much, Iranian Kurds fulfill their side by protecting smuggling routes, bringing in tapped Iranian oil and arms from arm dealers (mostly Slavic)

The base population of Kurds, the vast majority, are unarmed and reside inside Turkey, which is why another resurrection of violence would be bad for everyone.

The Turks are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They can't become part of the middle-east (they hate the arabs and the arabs hate them)

Aigh, the Turks are a hybrid breed of Indo European and Semitic peoples, though they are Muslim, their biggest ally in the region is Israel. That alone says where they stand, of course, its all in self intrest.

they can't join Europe because they are not European (as archaic as that sounds), Asia has its own problems.

Mostly the reason why they are denied is because of 2 things.

1. Their government, which I will get to later
2. Their horrific human rights past and present problems, the Armenian slaughter was not the only ethnic cleansing by Turks, and I doubt it will be the last.

France is the only country that refuses to allow Turkey in just for the fact that they are not "Christian" enough.

Of course..... France is a declared secular state!

It is not easy being Turkey.

This comes from Turkeys government.. it is the only government of its kind as far as I know.. It has its standing somewhat democratic government. Then it has its military government. The military leaders can, at any time, dissolve the Turkish government and re-build it. If the social leaders of Turkey stray the wrong direction, the military puts it back on track. While this is actually a good thing in some ways, as all things have a benefit, when it comes to compassion no military is a fit ruler. The military arm of Turkey will defend its existence, even if it means slaughtering Kurds, Armenians, or Turks them selves. Turkey is trying to be as secular as possible, but its military would like to ensure it does not become a pawn of the west.. to conform just enough to gain acceptance, while remaining an individual identity that looks after Turkey first, the West second.

I cannot believe that anyone could be so stupid as to let a bill like this come to the fore at such an inopportune moment and not realise the implications. I am sure a deal could have been struck in order to maintain the status quo - isn't this what politicians and diplomats are paid to do....? Why was nothing done? Who benefits from further exacerbating the situation? The bill has evidently been doing the rounds 'for decades' surely another year or so wouldn't have hurt?

It was one of the largest ethnic cleansing recorded in the 20th century, the total dead is unknown. The fact that no one knows about it is one thing, the descendants know what happened, they know Turkey raped their people then the Soviets had the ability to subject these people when they where weak, and not until 1992 was Armenia freed from the soviet power. They simply want recognition, if you read the history of Armenia, and its people you will see they are accustomed to being pillaged by neighbors.

By severing ties,Turkey will absolve the US of its responsibilities. The US certainly seem able to do business with the Kurds...perhaps they don't need the Turks. How important are the supply lines that the Turks are threatening to sever?

It is a bluff, without the West Turkey has no major trading partners.

Why is it that our governments see a problem coming and instead of cutting it off at the pass they steer it to the point whereby it can do the most damage???

Sometimes the right thing to do won't make certain people happy. The only reason this bill would be defeated is so that we dont have to worry about Turkey closing its airspace, which brings in 70% of all resources to our army into Iraq. I prefer they give the people of Armenia an apology.

Call me suspicious but if you ask me, for this to go through right now somebody must be making a lot of money out of it.

well, the Dems come off as the good guys, and they will get alot of the Armenian vote (maybe, Armenians are typically conservative Christians) but then again Armenians only account for a very, very tiny portion of the population. It is all PR if you ask me.

I personally feel that Europe would benefit from the inclusion of Turkey.

As France would say, they have enough impoverished Muslims in their country. The only major portion of Turks in Europe is in Germany, where Soviets moved them in to do labor work. If Turkey was included Turks would flock to many EU member states, perhaps they are not ready to absorb the shock that would cause local populations.

I think it basically comes down to the fact that they don't fit in because no-one wants them to.

Its impossible for a culture to change its identity and remain who they are. Turkey is right, and it is wrong in many aspects of its argument.

Originally posted by jjohns
P.S. Thanks for showing me how to use the uzi smiley!
[edit on 11-10-2007 by jjohns]

Are you sure that's an UZI? Looks too small.

[edit on 11-10-2007 by Firestorm_]

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
I don't think that this is the case at all, the Turks have a genuine problem with the PKK. As Rockpuck points out, the Kurd issue is longstanding and it is not going away. The Kurds were and probably still are persecuted by the Turks so the PKK has a real axe to grind and by all accounts have been hitting southeast Turkey quite hard. I don't think their intention is to poke the US, but to contain problems within their own borders.

George Bush is actually in a tough place. Ankara, the government capital, are lobbying hard not only for the genocide issue to go away but also for the right to cross the borber into Iraq in order to 'arrest' PKK rebels. The goverment of Turkey has to work hard because they do not have ultimate control of the country, the military do. The government of Turkey therefore are similarly up against a wall. They need to get permission to go over because they can't hold the military back indefinately and it is their buttons that are being pushed hardest.

Sounds an awful lot like Imperial Japan at the time of the Mukden Incident (the spark that started the army's invasion of Manchuria without the civil government's authorization and, ultimately, the Second World War).

Here's another question: what are the odds of political infighting between the PKK and other elements of the militant Kurdish nationalists? I understand that the PKK don't always get along with its fellow travellers, and has even been accused of collaberating with the ruling governments.

[edit on 11-10-2007 by Firestorm_]

reply to post by Firestorm_

Sounds an awful lot like Imperial Japan at the time of the Mukden Incident (the spark that started the army's invasion of Manchuria without the civil government's authorization and, ultimately, the Second World War).

No two incidents are ever the same, after you calculate the economic, social, cultural and various other influences.

Here's another question: what are the odds of political infighting between the PKK and other elements of the militant Kurdish nationalists?

Very great actually... The PKK IS NOT the formal political party of the only established Kurdish government Southern Kurdistan) .. Because of the different ideologies and the fact that the government backed by the US will not support the PKK terrorist actions, you could see a huge rift of the Kurdish peoples.

Now, whether or not that will happen will decide upon how far the SK gov. will help the Turks to destroy PKK members in its territory.

As of now, the US has absolutely failed the SK government, and as thus, the government is slowly building up resentment to the Americans....

We freed them, we armed them, we supplied them, then, when they where strong enough to stand alone we abandoned them.

Why don't we see Kurdistan on CNN, FOX, NBC, ...... because it will entice revolution. We gave them an answer to their cause and abandoned them. Yes. The PKK could even gain political power in SK and use its force to combat Turkey. That would be the worse case scenario. Turkey, as it stands, as an army of some 1.2 million members, the second strongest in the NATO alliance and could put down a to early Kurdish resistance. Kurdistans army NOW could hurt Turkey but never win, if the PKK wins to much support for its cause it will be a disaster, and perhaps that what Turkey wants.

I really don't understand the importance of doing this now, whatever happened it happened almost a century ago.

If they want to do something about genocide, why don't they do something about Darfur where people are dying now?



[edit on 10/12/2007 by djohnsto77]

oops double post

[edit on 10/11/2007 by djohnsto77]

reply to post by djohnsto77


Armenians gave Pelosi campaign contributions while Darfurians didn't?

Originally posted by Firestorm_

Originally posted by jjohns
P.S. Thanks for showing me how to use the uzi smiley!
[edit on 11-10-2007 by jjohns]

Are you sure that's an UZI? Looks too small.

[edit on 11-10-2007 by Firestorm_]

What? You're accusing me of having a too small gun?

I've never been accused of this before, although my ex-boyfriend was.