Nu pare a fi totul linistitor in Turcia – 9 octombrie 2014
Prospectiv A-z Polonia, Turcia, Romania tot apar in analizele si recomandarile unora ca acest flanc estic al civilizatiei. In Turcia s-a incercat chiar o schema similara DNAului romanesc, tot degeaba, turcii de rand nu viseaza ca romanii la cai vestici pe peretii colibelor de lut.
Acum, vad un articol al colectivului editorial dela oficiosul elitei americane NYTimes, luand din nou pozitie.http://www.nytimes.com/…/turkeys-refusal-to-fight-isis-hurt…
All is not quiet on the Turkish front. Enter Romania?!
The president of Turkey is weakening the fight
against the Islamic State by engaging in cynical political calculations.
nytimes.com|De THE EDITORIAL
BOARD
Prospectiv A-z .
Mai buna analiza obtin citind comentariile dela NYTimes decat incercand sa digerez ore si ore de propaganda in genul celor emise de George Friedman. Nu-s bani in Romania pentru cele care de comun acord le consideram necesare? Ba sunt destui, numai ca sunt papati pe analize/recomandari/programe pe care altii ar trebui sa te plateasca sa le asculti.
_____________________________
Mark Thomason is a trusted commenter Clawson, MI 11 hours ago
"Leading" and "rush tanks across the border" are not at all the same things.
Erdogan's "cynical calculations" are his leadership. He wants specific things, and he's leading a lot of others who want those same things.
Erdogan is not going to give the US what it wants -- free use of the Turkish Army against the ISIS in place of its own -- unless from that he gets much of what Turkey and those in the bloc of nations he leads want too.
The US is fixated on ISIS, but only since they telegenically committed atrocities on a specific known American, Briton, Israeli, and Frenchman. Until then, the US was impervious. Now suddenly, nothing else is important to the US "and the world."
Well, some other things in Syria were important before to Erdogan and the nations he aspires to lead, and still are important, not just ISIS. Erdogan can asprie to lead that bloc in part because it is the Turkish Army the US wishes to use.
What does Erdogan want? He wants to be rid of Assad.
But he wants to replace Assad with an Islamic government of a type he backs. That is not the ISIS type, and not the Saudi type, nor the American fantasy Western liberal democratic government obeying Washington (and Israel).
Erdogan also wants to ensure he won't do this alone, stuck with it.
He also wants to move the refugee crisis back into Syria, out of his country.
Holding back his help until he settles these issues is not a cynical lack of leadership. It is how international leadership is done.
Bryan Barrett is a trusted commenter Malvern, PA 11 hours ago
Your final sentence is profound; the Turks outfoxed their NATO partner, the US, as they once again manipulate their way to suit their own ambition which has been consistent during the Ottoman Empire, and since its defeat almost a century ago, that nothing impedes Turkish policy which they will follow by fair means or foul. Consider that this is the country that still denies their massacre of millions of Armenians a century ago, an enormous crime for which they were never held accountable.
That Turkey would profit from a defeat for the Kurds by ISIL would please them; it would save Turkey the trouble of doing so, which they have been unable to accomplish for the past forty years. That Turkey was ever admitted to NATO has intrigued me and that they would even be considered for membership of the EU is irrational.
Turkey is today the only major state in the Middle East which still supports The Muslim Brotherhood, which supports Hamas, ISIL and assorted other terrorist groups. That the US has been, and still is, so unaware of that political background, despite our vaunted intelligence resources is beyond belief. When they refused cooperation during the 2003 Iraq action we should have made known to them then that the game has changed; we did not then, and we are now being played for incompetents yet again.
Should Kobane fall to ISIL there will be a gross blood letting of Kurdish defenders while Kurds in Turkey are attacked by Turkey for begging for aid. Are they allies or not?
Reply 61Recommend
Mark Thomason is a trusted commenter Clawson, MI 10 hours ago
"Turkey is today the only major state in the Middle East which still supports The Muslim Brotherhood, which supports Hamas"
Yes, Turkey supports the results of good honest elections in both places, which reflect the actual wishes of the voters.
Everyone else supports the military coup in Egypt and the vast numbers of judicial murders by that dictator.
Everyone else also wants to do the same thing in Gaza, tried to do it but failed, and still wants to do it.
If we were not supporting the dictator and murderer, we'd agree with Turkey about Egypt. We did for awhile.
If we were not so totally under the thumb of the Israeli right wing about the Palestinians, we'd not have tried to do the Dahlan coup which created the split between Gaza and the West Bank and the whole current PA mess.
Turkey is right. The Muslim Brotherhood was legitimate, was the moderates among the Muslims who won, and was the government we ought to have backed. Not doing so has made things much worse in the whole region.
Mai buna analiza obtin citind comentariile dela NYTimes decat incercand sa digerez ore si ore de propaganda in genul celor emise de George Friedman. Nu-s bani in Romania pentru cele care de comun acord le consideram necesare? Ba sunt destui, numai ca sunt papati pe analize/recomandari/programe pe care altii ar trebui sa te plateasca sa le asculti.
_____________________________
Mark Thomason is a trusted commenter Clawson, MI 11 hours ago
"Leading" and "rush tanks across the border" are not at all the same things.
Erdogan's "cynical calculations" are his leadership. He wants specific things, and he's leading a lot of others who want those same things.
Erdogan is not going to give the US what it wants -- free use of the Turkish Army against the ISIS in place of its own -- unless from that he gets much of what Turkey and those in the bloc of nations he leads want too.
The US is fixated on ISIS, but only since they telegenically committed atrocities on a specific known American, Briton, Israeli, and Frenchman. Until then, the US was impervious. Now suddenly, nothing else is important to the US "and the world."
Well, some other things in Syria were important before to Erdogan and the nations he aspires to lead, and still are important, not just ISIS. Erdogan can asprie to lead that bloc in part because it is the Turkish Army the US wishes to use.
What does Erdogan want? He wants to be rid of Assad.
But he wants to replace Assad with an Islamic government of a type he backs. That is not the ISIS type, and not the Saudi type, nor the American fantasy Western liberal democratic government obeying Washington (and Israel).
Erdogan also wants to ensure he won't do this alone, stuck with it.
He also wants to move the refugee crisis back into Syria, out of his country.
Holding back his help until he settles these issues is not a cynical lack of leadership. It is how international leadership is done.
Bryan Barrett is a trusted commenter Malvern, PA 11 hours ago
Your final sentence is profound; the Turks outfoxed their NATO partner, the US, as they once again manipulate their way to suit their own ambition which has been consistent during the Ottoman Empire, and since its defeat almost a century ago, that nothing impedes Turkish policy which they will follow by fair means or foul. Consider that this is the country that still denies their massacre of millions of Armenians a century ago, an enormous crime for which they were never held accountable.
That Turkey would profit from a defeat for the Kurds by ISIL would please them; it would save Turkey the trouble of doing so, which they have been unable to accomplish for the past forty years. That Turkey was ever admitted to NATO has intrigued me and that they would even be considered for membership of the EU is irrational.
Turkey is today the only major state in the Middle East which still supports The Muslim Brotherhood, which supports Hamas, ISIL and assorted other terrorist groups. That the US has been, and still is, so unaware of that political background, despite our vaunted intelligence resources is beyond belief. When they refused cooperation during the 2003 Iraq action we should have made known to them then that the game has changed; we did not then, and we are now being played for incompetents yet again.
Should Kobane fall to ISIL there will be a gross blood letting of Kurdish defenders while Kurds in Turkey are attacked by Turkey for begging for aid. Are they allies or not?
Reply 61Recommend
Mark Thomason is a trusted commenter Clawson, MI 10 hours ago
"Turkey is today the only major state in the Middle East which still supports The Muslim Brotherhood, which supports Hamas"
Yes, Turkey supports the results of good honest elections in both places, which reflect the actual wishes of the voters.
Everyone else supports the military coup in Egypt and the vast numbers of judicial murders by that dictator.
Everyone else also wants to do the same thing in Gaza, tried to do it but failed, and still wants to do it.
If we were not supporting the dictator and murderer, we'd agree with Turkey about Egypt. We did for awhile.
If we were not so totally under the thumb of the Israeli right wing about the Palestinians, we'd not have tried to do the Dahlan coup which created the split between Gaza and the West Bank and the whole current PA mess.
Turkey is right. The Muslim Brotherhood was legitimate, was the moderates among the Muslims who won, and was the government we ought to have backed. Not doing so has made things much worse in the whole region.
Prospectiv A-z .
Dairy Farmers Daughter WA State 6 hours ago
i seem to recall that our Vice President Joe Biden was just forced to apologize for saying that one of our biggest problems were our "allies", including Turkey, who have not helped this situation. Mr. Biden was made to apologize. He spoke the truth. Turkey is playing a cynical game, which may well come back to haunt them. Mr Erdogan is more worried about helping the Kurds than he is degrading the Islamic State. Syria is on the Turkish border - they should be more involved, and I don't think it should be up to the Administration to "work out" anything with this guy.
ParagAdalja New Canaan, Conn. 2 hours ago
Your first sentence, quote, "…Erdogan, once aspired to lead the Muslim world. At this time of regional crisis, he has been anything but a leader…"unquote.
Leaders lead, with deep conviction. Mr.Erdogan is doing that. You may think he is sitting out the crisis, but some of us believe he is leading todays muslim world in a precisely charted course…which requires that the ISIS butcher Kurds and Yezdis and Assad.
And it cannot be that the editorial writers are not familiar with Mr.Erdogan's past: the mosque controversy, the church renovation controversy, the surreptitious funding of religion in school, the Haggia Sophia issue, the liquor ban, and on and on all this reported in the news pages of The NYT. So to expect any thing different from Mr.Erdogan is living in denial.
If we had an honest National Sec Team, if the free press and opinion writers were really free (not beholden to Qatar funded Think Tank), we would not be in this situation.
It is not as if no one saw this coming. Some of us did, as Turkey and Qatar joined hands with Clinton and Hague and The Guardian and The NYT and allowed armed shipments early on. When Mr.Obama announced his intention to take on ISIS, on these pages I asked how we would go about it, without first confronting ISIS patrons, Turkey and Qatar.
For those interested, this did not get much play elsewhere:
http://www.independent.co.uk/.../iraq-crisis-how-saudi...
Dairy Farmers Daughter WA State 6 hours ago
i seem to recall that our Vice President Joe Biden was just forced to apologize for saying that one of our biggest problems were our "allies", including Turkey, who have not helped this situation. Mr. Biden was made to apologize. He spoke the truth. Turkey is playing a cynical game, which may well come back to haunt them. Mr Erdogan is more worried about helping the Kurds than he is degrading the Islamic State. Syria is on the Turkish border - they should be more involved, and I don't think it should be up to the Administration to "work out" anything with this guy.
ParagAdalja New Canaan, Conn. 2 hours ago
Your first sentence, quote, "…Erdogan, once aspired to lead the Muslim world. At this time of regional crisis, he has been anything but a leader…"unquote.
Leaders lead, with deep conviction. Mr.Erdogan is doing that. You may think he is sitting out the crisis, but some of us believe he is leading todays muslim world in a precisely charted course…which requires that the ISIS butcher Kurds and Yezdis and Assad.
And it cannot be that the editorial writers are not familiar with Mr.Erdogan's past: the mosque controversy, the church renovation controversy, the surreptitious funding of religion in school, the Haggia Sophia issue, the liquor ban, and on and on all this reported in the news pages of The NYT. So to expect any thing different from Mr.Erdogan is living in denial.
If we had an honest National Sec Team, if the free press and opinion writers were really free (not beholden to Qatar funded Think Tank), we would not be in this situation.
It is not as if no one saw this coming. Some of us did, as Turkey and Qatar joined hands with Clinton and Hague and The Guardian and The NYT and allowed armed shipments early on. When Mr.Obama announced his intention to take on ISIS, on these pages I asked how we would go about it, without first confronting ISIS patrons, Turkey and Qatar.
For those interested, this did not get much play elsewhere:
http://www.independent.co.uk/.../iraq-crisis-how-saudi...
Prospectiv A-z .
Uite ca-s si astfel de opinii. Asta asa sa nu se creada ca avem numai Clausewitzi dezinteresati printre comentatori...
Philip Pompano Beach, FL 2 hours ago
NATO should collectively throw Turkey out. Erdogan has sat by and watched a potential slaughter, failed to join in an effort that other NATO members have joined in, and runs a theocracy. And, its the theocracy that is the problem. Turkey was a much more reliable partner in maintaining world stability before the Muslim Brotherhood took over. If the Western World is starting to get Islamophobia, Erdogan's passive watching of a potential slaughter isn't helping to lessen that feeling.
To make matters worse, Erdogan has allowed his country to become literally a freeway for fighters running to join ISIS, and credible charges have been leveled that corrupt members of Turkey's government have profited off ISIS's sale of stolen oil.
I am begining to wonder if Erdogan does not actually support ISIS with its brutal fundamentalism, and would like to join in that brutality himself if he thought he could get away with it.
Uite ca-s si astfel de opinii. Asta asa sa nu se creada ca avem numai Clausewitzi dezinteresati printre comentatori...
Philip Pompano Beach, FL 2 hours ago
NATO should collectively throw Turkey out. Erdogan has sat by and watched a potential slaughter, failed to join in an effort that other NATO members have joined in, and runs a theocracy. And, its the theocracy that is the problem. Turkey was a much more reliable partner in maintaining world stability before the Muslim Brotherhood took over. If the Western World is starting to get Islamophobia, Erdogan's passive watching of a potential slaughter isn't helping to lessen that feeling.
To make matters worse, Erdogan has allowed his country to become literally a freeway for fighters running to join ISIS, and credible charges have been leveled that corrupt members of Turkey's government have profited off ISIS's sale of stolen oil.
I am begining to wonder if Erdogan does not actually support ISIS with its brutal fundamentalism, and would like to join in that brutality himself if he thought he could get away with it.
Alexandru
Cosmin Codreanu Din
presa vad ca Basescu e mai bun membru NATO ca Erdogan. Matelotul nostru s-a
repezit aprig si degraba lajurnalisti, aratandu-se doritor in ultimele sale
doua luni de mandat prezidential sa sustina lupta impotriva lui ISIS.
Merita mentionat aici ca este suspecta aparitia conceptului de ISIS simultan cu maturizarea tehnologiei de extractie a gazelor de sist, care poate in teorie sa diminueze importanta energetica a resurselor de hdrocarburi din Orientul Mijlociu. In cativa ani Statul Islamic poate cuprinde inclusiv Arabia Saudita, suspecta de a finanta ISIS si justifica o noua interventie militara in zona pe model Iraq.
Odata trecute in maini americane rezervele de petrol saudite, vom afla cu totii cum conform unor studii efectuate de cercetatori britanici a rezultat ca derivatele de petrol sunt mai eficiente si mai ecologice decat gazele de sist.
Pana una alta insa trebuie sa ne speriem cu totii de ISIS. Pentru ca asa ni se spune la TV.
Merita mentionat aici ca este suspecta aparitia conceptului de ISIS simultan cu maturizarea tehnologiei de extractie a gazelor de sist, care poate in teorie sa diminueze importanta energetica a resurselor de hdrocarburi din Orientul Mijlociu. In cativa ani Statul Islamic poate cuprinde inclusiv Arabia Saudita, suspecta de a finanta ISIS si justifica o noua interventie militara in zona pe model Iraq.
Odata trecute in maini americane rezervele de petrol saudite, vom afla cu totii cum conform unor studii efectuate de cercetatori britanici a rezultat ca derivatele de petrol sunt mai eficiente si mai ecologice decat gazele de sist.
Pana una alta insa trebuie sa ne speriem cu totii de ISIS. Pentru ca asa ni se spune la TV.
Prospectiv A-z .
ISIS si Ebola.
Cauta cartea "Imperial Hubris," ai sa vezi acolo o explicatie a conflictului in ME/OA din partea celui care a fost director pe operatii CIA in zona:
1) Petrol;
2) Sprijin regimuri autoritare;
3) Perceptie arabilor despre implicarea SUA in conflictul arbo-israelian.
La acestea ma astept sa se fi adaugat realizarea de catre multiplele factiuni finantate pana alataieri ca problema este alta.
Lumea trebuie sa-si regaseasca parametrii pacii fara Leviathan. Altfel...
ISIS si Ebola.
Cauta cartea "Imperial Hubris," ai sa vezi acolo o explicatie a conflictului in ME/OA din partea celui care a fost director pe operatii CIA in zona:
1) Petrol;
2) Sprijin regimuri autoritare;
3) Perceptie arabilor despre implicarea SUA in conflictul arbo-israelian.
La acestea ma astept sa se fi adaugat realizarea de catre multiplele factiuni finantate pana alataieri ca problema este alta.
Lumea trebuie sa-si regaseasca parametrii pacii fara Leviathan. Altfel...
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu