The quite Muslim Moros would likely beg to differ ;).
If hostile acts are being launched against Turkey from within Iraq then its up to whatever regime that is running Iraq to stop them themselves or if the territory that they claim to control is actually not actually within their controlthen they can not complain if the victim (Turkey in this case)takes whatever measures that are necessary to prevent actual harm against themselves.
You cant have it both ways,with sovereignty comes responsibility.
Hahahah…sovereignty! Iraq? That’s too funny…
Whilst I appreciate principles are good:
If hostile acts are being launched against Afghanistan from the US Alliance then its up to whatever regime that is running Afghanistan (the Taliban) to stop them themselves or … they can not complain if the victim (the Taliban in this case)takes whatever measures that are necessary to prevent actual harm against themselves.
I agree with you thats why Iraq(U.S.)should let them get on with it.
To answer glee I dont think that we should have gone in to Afghan and taken over the entire country.
But 9/11 a hostile act against the U.S. was apparently planned,financed and equipped by Bin Laden from within Afghan with the blessing and cooperation of the Taliban,the regime in charge of the country,so that they cant complain when the U.S.takes action to protect itself from harm.
sigh . . . They’re at it again. With ground troops, this time.
I honestly don’t see a difference between what Turkey is doing in Iraq, and what we did/are doing in Afghanistan. Can you spot a philosophical difference, BrainGlutton? How do you think Turkey ought to have responded to attacks from Kurdish militias, when America and the Iraqi government weren’t doing anything to stop them?
I would like to make the point that while all PPK are Kurds not all Kurds are PPK.
If you attack E.T.A. terrorists you are not attacking the entire Basque population.
Also we’re not talking about plucky little freedom fighters armed with minimal weaponry defending their homes from the evil invading army but well armed terrorists who have killed thousands upon thousands of ordinary Turks inside their own country on their many,many forays into Turkey.
Look at the U.S.A.s response to 9/11,the Turks have lost one hell of a lot more dead then the U.S. tragedy,are you saying America is entitled to do something about atrocities committed against it but because Turkey isnt a first world country (though a long term and staunch ally to the west)it literally has to sit by and do nothing while its citizens are slaughtered?
Terrorists are terrorists whatever their nationality or location.
To declare my interests if any I am aqquainted with both the Turks and the Kurds and like and respect them both equally even if thats not the the case with them,themselves.
U.S. SecDef Gates says he wants the Turks to finish up their business in Iraq quickly – “I measure quick in terms of days, a week or two, something like that, not months.” Nothing about what happens if they stay longer. Also significant that it’s only Gates, not the Iraqi government, who is issuing anything resembling a deadline or ultimatum.
Are you actually interested in debating this?
As Informed Comment says:
Philosophical difference? Well, the cause of Kurdish independence – that is, the independence of what is now Turkish Kurdistan – has no analogue in any relations between the U.S. and Afghanistan.
THe PKK are all Kurds,all Kurds are not PKK just as not all Irish are I.R.A. when Ihear the ill considered uninformed words of people who are so very far from the event that they think that their opinion is just as good as the other ones it makes me genuinnly angry.
The Troubles in Northern Ireland were extended by stupid Americans who considered that they were Irish(In their dreams,the real Irish view them with contempt and call them “Plastic Paddies”),while they were indulging in their fantasies about fluffy little Leprachauns fighting against the the Fascist British occupieres we,the British Army were trying desperately to stop the two communities murdering each other,a lot of the time not too successfully.
Funnily enough the Plastic Paddies stopped their support of terrorism when they had their first real taste of it from the receiving end,no the people who did 9/11 weren’t brave little oppressed people fighting back against a superior economy,they were nasty,murdering little little scumbags ,just like the PIRA in fact.
But that’s not what you were asked. You were asked what the different was in Turkey’s response to what is, to them, porecisely the same threat that al-Qaida posed to the United States. The United States was attacked, and its citizens murdered, by a terrorist group (al-Qaida) operating in a state that was unable or uwilling to control them (Afghanistan.) Turkey was attacked, and its citizens murdered, by a terrorist group (the PKK) operation out of a state that was unable or unwilling to control them (Iraq, such as it is.) In the former case it was more unwilling than unable, the later more unable than unwilling, but the problem faced by the US in 2001 and Turkey today is the same. In both cases the state whose citizens were murdered decided that the sovereignty of the other state could be justifiably violated to strike back at terrorists.
What’s the difference? Why would the USA’s actions be justified, but not Turkey’s? You can argue all day that the PKK thinks a Kurdish state should be carved out of Turkey, but what Turkey has is dead citizens and a threat to kill more citizens. Turkey’s security is just as important to Turks as America’s is to Americans. What right does the United States have to tell Turkey not to attend to its own security?
I don’t recall arguing the actions of the U.S. in Afghanistan were justified. I would say they were, but should not have been taken without a formal declaration of war on the Islamic Republic. Stiill, different situation: The U.S. was willing to go to all-stops-out war on Afghanistan. Turkey is not declaring war on Iraq, they’re just claiming the right to disregard Iraqi sovereignty when their own interests are at stake. They have no more right to do that than General Pershing had to chase Pancho Villa into Mexico without the Mexican government’s leave.
Oh, come on. A formal declaration of war justifies a war? Who would they have declared war on, since they didn’t recognize the government of Afghanistan? How does a peice of paper make a war better?
And the United States claimed the right to disregard Afghan sovereignty. The two countries chose to disregard sovereignty to a level appropriate to the response needed to deal with the threat - which is logical and appropriate. If you don’t NEED to invade the whole country, why would you, and why would such an overreaction be justified?
No, it doesn’t justify a war; I just think it should be a required step to keep the warmaking power where it belongs – with Congress, not the president. But that’s a question of American constitutional law and only tangentially relevant.
We had to regime-change Afghanistan to address the problem effectively. But my point is that Turkey is trying to have it both ways – committing what amounts to an act of war against Iraq and claiming it isn’t really an act of war at all. And they can only get away with it because Iraq is too weak to strike back and the U.S. doesn’t want to.
I disagree. They’re “getting away with it” because Iraq and America realize they’re RIGHT. We can’t control the Kurdish attackers. The Iraqis can’t control the Kurdish attackers.
Is Turkey supposed to declare war on Iraq and America just because we aren’t in a position to stop terrorism from within our borders? Or is Turkey supposed to just sit on their hands while their citizens get blown apart by guerilla attacks?
What in the world do you think Turkey should DO here, BrainGlutton? Stop telling us what they shouldn’t do, and tell us what they should.
For starters, ask the Iraqi government’s permission before crossing the border. If they really do know it needs to be done, as you say, they should not hesitate to give their permission.
That’s not true, and you know it. The Iraqi government can’t take the political risk of seeming to welcome yet another foreign invader into their country. The Americans can’t take the political risk of losing their Kurdish support. So, all the sides wink and nudge at each other, give each other empty ultimatums, and then cross their fingers and hope the fucking Kurds would just STOP it already.