# Turkish parliament rejects US troops **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 3, 2003, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696 "2003-03-03T02:09:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/21 "2003-03-04T13:25:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\* You can’t make up ironic shit like this. \*\* May I use that as a sig, or is it already claimed? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/22 "2003-03-04T14:58:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > This is ridiculous on so many levels I don’t know where to begin. First, as noted above, a majority of the Turkish Parliament voted in favor of allowing the US to use its territory to launch attacks. Mightn’t they be right?..I think your characterization of Turkey as being “bought” is pretty disengenuous. The grants are undoubtedly a big part of their consideration for supporting war, but it’s not like the money is going to be funnelled into the politicians’ pockets. The money will support defensive armaments to guard against the likelihood of an Iraqi attack against Turkey proper; it will help with the Kurdish refugees sure to come spilling across the border once Hussein launches his promised missile attacks against the Kurds; it will shore up the economy which will take a hit due to the war in a neighboring country; and it’s going to help build infrastructure and shore up an economy affected by the current global economic funk. \*\* Thanks for listing all the reasons Turkey has to think the war is not a good idea, despite the monetary compensation being offered. You’ve made my point for me. Now, why do you think it is so hard to convince them otherwise? If the war will be such a good idea, pacifying and stabilizing Iraq and its neighbors (look at a map), why shouldn’t it be obvious to the Turks that they should contribute their part? Could it possibly be that the people most directly affected know better than Bush what the costs and risks in relation to the benefits might be? Yes, they and Bush might be right, might be wrong - but then what should be the default action plan? To you, it’s whatever Bush says, apparently. I’d rather trust the judgment of the people right there who’d be most directly affected. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/23 "2003-03-04T15:20:18Z")
You mean like Kuwait and Bahrain? Turkey’s main problem with the war is Kurdish refugees, not reprisals from Iraq. Quite frankly, they don’t want them in their country. However, **Elvis** is correct in saying that Turkey doesn’t stand to benefit much from this war. They aren’t really threatened by Hussein due to their large military and lack of large oil and natural gas deposits. It’s only natural that they would should be compensated for use of their territory and that they should receive economic aid so they aren’t stuck with the entire cost of Kurdish refugees (who they don’t want in their country at all). But by your logic, **Elvis** , wouldn’t the country with the most to fear about Hussein and an aggressive Iraq be the one that is “right there” and who would be “most directly affected?” That country is Kuwait, and they are completely on board and supportive of the war. I hope now you’ll recognize how silly that argument is, and I hope you won’t go around repeating it now. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/24 "2003-03-04T15:42:22Z")
**Neurotik** , you’re left with explaining why the argument is silly when it works against you (Turkey) and sound when it works for you (Kuwait). Try a little harder. What _is_ silly is to consider only the consequences you like and to dismiss those you don’t. They’re all going to happen. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/25 "2003-03-04T15:49:27Z")
Read my post again. That’s precisely why I was saying that the argument is silly, because it goes both ways. I find it funny that you are telling anyone to try a little harder after you repeatedly put forth overly simplistic, inaccurate and logically dishonest arguments. I don’t think the war is a really great idea, and I don’t think that the Bush Administration is going to handle the post-war situation well. But you putting forth ridiculous arguments that are so easily punctured and deflating isn’t helping anything. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/26 "2003-03-04T16:46:00Z")
[Kurds notice plans to stab them in the back, again.](http://www.msnbc.com/news/880222.asp?0cv=CB30) ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/27 "2003-03-04T16:50:25Z")
Can’t say I blame them. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/28 "2003-03-04T16:58:08Z")
I wonder how many Turkish MPs were influenced by the recent lecture Chiraq gave to the Eastern Euro countries. They have to know that getting into the EU (a major priority for Turkey) will be pretty much assured if they can get France and Germany to back them and pretty much impossible if those two countries block them. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/29 "2003-03-04T17:22:11Z")
**Neurotik** , you’re not helping yourself with that stuff, kiddo. Please try to address the larger picture: Is Bush’s war going to make the region, and world, a better place or isn’t it? Turkish opinion is that it, for them, isn’t - and you’re dismissing that view for no apparent reason other than its inconvenience to the pro-war argument. Is there, in fact, _any_ country in the region, other than perhaps Israel, which will be faced by dealing with the consequences of this war and still actually _wants_ to go ahead with it? Is that a “silly” thing to think about? Be very careful about accusing one of dishonesty, too, while you’re at it - you’ll have to either explain that or withdraw it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/30 "2003-03-04T17:23:59Z")
**John Mace** , good point there - amazing, or sad, isn’t it that so little actual motivation on anyone’s part seems to exist for larger goals than simply offing Saddam, yet that’s the current purported overarching vision Bush is now proposing. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/31 "2003-03-04T17:37:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves \* > **Neurotik, you’re not helping yourself with that stuff, kiddo.** With what stuff? And don’t call me “kiddo” again. > [@](#): > > **Please try to address the larger picture: Is Bush’s war going to make the region, and world, a better place or isn’t it?** Neither one of us can say for sure, so don’t pretend like you know. Done correctly, it could make the world a better place. Done incorrectly, it could make the world a worse place. > [@](#): > > **Turkish opinion is that it, for them, isn’t - and you’re dismissing that view for no apparent reason other than its inconvenience to the pro-war argument.** No, I’m not dismissing their view. Please show me where I am dismissing that view. You can’t. I even straight up said that Turkey would have not much to fear from Iraq whether Hussein is in power or not. Indeed, the effect of refugees would likely make a war very much worse for them. Hence the need to compensate them for those costs with the aid package. If the Turks don’t feel that the aid package is worth it, then so be it - either do without, make it larger or think of something else. > [@](#): > > **Is there, in fact, _any_ country in the region, other than perhaps Israel, which will be faced by dealing with the consequences of this war and still actually _wants_ to go ahead with it? Is that a “silly” thing to think about?** Kuwait. Bahrain. Both are fully on board with the war. And no, it is not a silly thing to think about. But if you are going to use that argument, you must then consider those states that have the most to fear from a continuing Hussein regime (Kuwait, etc.) and who have decided that war is an option they support. Something which you have not done. Hence logical and intellectual dishonestly. > [@](#): > > \*\*Be very careful about accusing one of dishonesty, too, while you’re at it - you’ll have to either explain that or withdraw it. \*\* I just explained it above. You use half the argument to support your position, and then ignore the flip side that supports going to war using the same logic. Then when someone points out your ill-thought out theory, you accuse them of doing what you yourself did. That’s intellectually dishonest. It’s logically dishonest. ---
**Author:** ![nogginhead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5e9695/32.png) [@nogginhead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nogginhead)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/32 "2003-03-04T18:22:40Z")
People, people. I’m a little lost, here. What’s the argument we’re talking about? I read through all this but I didn’t figure out what you two are arguing. ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/33 "2003-03-04T18:29:13Z")
It looks like they’re arguing about arguing at the moment. ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/34 "2003-03-04T18:31:28Z")
Oh and just to spice things up somewhat. [Kurds’ vow to fight Turkish invaders poses new problem for Bush coalition](http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=383710) ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/35 "2003-03-04T18:39:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by nogginhead \* > \*\*People, people. > > I’m a little lost, here. What’s the argument we’re talking about? > > I read through all this but I didn’t figure out what you two are arguing. \*\* **Elvis** made the argument that since the Turks are right there, that their desire to not participate in the war makes the strong case that the war is not a good idea. I then stated that if you are going to use that logic, then you have to consider Kuwait’s support for the war as an equally strong case that the war is a good idea. I was then accused of using the argument when it supported me but ignoring it when it did not, which is exactly what he did. All I did was point it out to him. ---
**Author:** ![nogginhead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5e9695/32.png) [@nogginhead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nogginhead)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/36 "2003-03-04T18:50:43Z")
Not to come down on one side or another, but the forms of government are relevant, here. I don’t think we can interpret the voice of the government as the voice of the people in any of these countries. Even in Turkey, the government favors the war, assuming siting US soldiersis equivalent to support of the war. And the parliament agrees with them (in quorum, if not absolute majority). But 90% of the populace, in my understanding, is opposed. Just like public opinion just about everywhere. (Not sure about Bahrain and Kuwait.) On the other hand, lots of goverments support the war, including democracies and more autocratic states. So the question maybe is whether the governments know better than the people. As far as who’s right there, most Turks live a long long way from Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/37 "2003-03-04T20:47:20Z")
But a helluva lot closer than we do (well, most of us). They’re the ones in rocket range, not us. They’re going to face the refugee influx (well, a lot more than us). That must count for something, doesn’t it, **nogginhead**?. **Neurotik** , unless you’re willing to state that Kuwait faces the same degree of consequences and their probabilities as Turkey (and you’ve already done a fine job of listing them), then it’s disingenuous and dishonest (your words) to compare them as equals. It is likewise D&D to say that a “country” feels or has decided something when only the leader of the ruling party in the government has done so, unless we’re referring to a dictatorship in a region we’re purportedly setting out to democratize. Along those lines, it’s semi-delusionary to claim that Bush has the support of “Britain”. He doesn’t. He has Blair’s. And that’s only useful for as long as Blair can keep his office, which is an open question in itself if he actually puts troops in harm’s way. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2003, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696/38 "2003-03-04T21:11:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves \* > **Neurotik, unless you’re willing to state that Kuwait faces the same degree of consequences and their probabilities as Turkey (and you’ve already done a fine job of listing them), then it’s disingenuous and dishonest (your words) to compare them as equals. It is likewise D&D to say that a “country” feels or has decided something when only the leader of the ruling party in the government has done so, unless we’re referring to a dictatorship in a region we’re purportedly setting out to democratize.** Look, you put out the argument, you back it up. You prove that Turkey’s objection to the war should count more than Kuwait’s support. You outline the cost/benefits/probablities for this crap. If you cannot or will not do so, please stop using this argument. Second, in terms of international policy, a country feels or has decided something when it’s official international representative has. If Blair supports US action in the Gulf, than for all intents and purposes, Britain supports US action in the Gulf until his backbenchers turn on him. For all intents and purposes, Turkey does not support the US action whether or not a majority voted for it or against it if that vote has no official weight. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/turkish-parliament-rejects-us-troops/158696.md?page=1)