Turkey Is Launching ThebNext Middle East War With Attacks On Kurds In Iraq And Syria

[edpc]

The U.S. and Turkey have offered conflicting statements as to whether Washington had agreed to allow Ankara to expand its war against Kurdish fighters operating alongside U.S. Special Forces in Syria. Meanwhile, new Turkish airstrikes targeted other Kurdish fighters in Iraq on Wednesday, signaling a new phase of conflict in two nations still reeling from being partially overtaken by the Islamic State militant group (ISIS).

Ibrahim Kalin, a spokesman for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, initially told Al Jazeera on Monday that his government had reached a general agreement with the U.S., one that would allow Turkish forces and their Syrian rebel allies to expand an offensive against Syrian Kurdish fighters across northern Syria. The U.S. has trained and equipped a number of these Kurdish groups, including the People's Protection Units (YPG), in order to fight ISIS as part of the larger Pentagon-backed Syrian Democratic Forces.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/turkey-launching-next-middle-east-212244805.html

[LauraTXNM]

The U.S. and Turkey have offered conflicting statements as to whether Washington had agreed to allow Ankara to expand its war against Kurdish fighters operating alongside U.S. Special Forces in Syria. Meanwhile, new Turkish airstrikes targeted other Kurdish fighters in Iraq on Wednesday, signaling a new phase of conflict in two nations still reeling from being partially overtaken by the Islamic State militant group (ISIS).

Ibrahim Kalin, a spokesman for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, initially told Al Jazeera on Monday that his government had reached a general agreement with the U.S., one that would allow Turkish forces and their Syrian rebel allies to expand an offensive against Syrian Kurdish fighters across northern Syria. The U.S. has trained and equipped a number of these Kurdish groups, including the People's Protection Units (YPG), in order to fight ISIS as part of the larger Pentagon-backed Syrian Democratic Forces.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/turkey-launching-next-middle-east-212244805.html

If we have allowed this, we will be guilty of genocide.

[TomSea]

If we have allowed this, we will be guilty of genocide.

No we won't. And what are we suppose to do? Go to war with Turkey? Anyway, I certainly don't read your statement into what was posted.

US troops may work alongside Turkish troops, to monitor and observe what they are doing, this was as close as we could get to stopping their full-fledged force on the Kurds.

[LauraTXNM]

No we won't. And what are we suppose to do? Go to war with Turkey? Anyway, I certainly don't read your statement into what was posted.

US troops may work alongside Turkish troops, to monitor and observe what they are doing, this was as close as we could get to stopping their full-fledged force on the Kurds.

According to the quote, the Turks asked us if they could extend the fight to our Syrian Kurd allies.  The Turks say we gave them permission.  We could have told them no.

[TomSea]

According to the quote, the Turks asked us if they could extend the fight to our Syrian Kurd allies.  The Turks say we gave them permission.  We could have told them no.

Ok, I see what you are saying now.

Well, as the first  sentence quoted says:

...against Kurdish fighters operating alongside U.S. Special Forces in Syria.

In this instance, it says "fighters", so going after their perceived enemies as being "fighters", I don't see that as genocide.  It's a complex situation. Some Kurdish fighters might operate as "terrorists", one of their organizations is recognized as being terrorist...

Why does the US and EU recognise PKK as a terrorist organisation but don't recognise MEK as one?
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-US-and-EU-recognise-PKK-as-a-terrorist-organisation-but-dont-recognise-MEK-as-one

Okay, just using this as a reference that the Kurd organization PKK is designated as terrorist. I"m not saying I buy that, just that they are by the US and EU.

Genocide would seem to be going after all Kurds, undoubtedly, in ways, Turkey does seem to be doing that... but on the other hand, they are not, there are Kurdish politicians in Turkey, Kurd Governors in at least, the Kurdish region in Iraq.  So we see, this is complex.

The Kurds nonetheless, are a culture, thriving, I don't know but one can read plenty of Kurdish news here:

http://www.rudaw.net/english

And here: https://kurdishquestion.com/mehmet-aksoy/

And here: http://www.kurdistan24.net/en/default

And finally, this too: http://ekurd.net/

[TomSea]

“The same fighters who fought courageously against Daesh (the Arabic acronym for IS group) are today left to the mercy of the Turkish army,” said Khaled Issa, the official representative in France of Syria’s Kurdistan.

“There’s a moral responsibility for the international community in the face of an unjustified and illegal aggression,” Issa told AFP.

“What is happening in Afrin is ethnic cleansing and the great powers are spectators,” he said.

The loss of Afrin has been a huge blow to the Kurdish minority in Syrian Kurdistan, which has been torn apart by civil war since 2011.

http://ekurd.net/syrian-kurds-betrayed-afrin-2018-03-21

All of this is true,  Tillerson worked as hard as he could for peace, now, there might be a real chance, Bolton might want to kick some booty but it is difficult, Turkey is a NATO ally.

[TomSea]

Bolton on Erdogan, I saw this earlier:

On the attempted coup against Turkey's president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, 2016: "Erdogan... wants an Islamic state. The failed military coup was most likely the last gasp of the secular generals. Whether he goes on to declare a Turkish caliphate or not, I don't know, but he has laid the ground."
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/john-bolton-donald-trump-314509430

The problem is there is too much on the platter in that area, do we go to war with Turkey? Nato ally while also, we have great disapproval of Iran and that nuclear deal and Bolton might want to tear that up and he could possibly be going in just to do that?

And as aside, we still prop up Iraq and ISIS is contained, beaten but not 100% so.

[catfish1957]

These turds need to be booted from NATO NOW!!!!!

[edpc]

These turds need to be booted from NATO NOW!!!!!

They're allies in name only.  They wouldn't allow operations from their territory against Iraq in 2003.  They've been sliding further away from us under ErdoÄŸan.

[dfwgator]

These turds need to be booted from NATO NOW!!!!!

NATO needs to be booted, period.

[LauraTXNM]

All of this is true,  Tillerson worked as hard as he could for peace, now, there might be a real chance, Bolton might want to kick some booty but it is difficult, Turkey is a NATO ally.

There will be no peace until the Kurds are dead, basically.  Unless the US is willing to engage.

Right now, the Russians are in control and making deals with the Syrians, the Iranians, and the Turks.  The Syrians are still using poison gas, despite the Russians' assurances that they turned them all in.

About the only things keeping anything in check are Turkey's nominal membership in NATO and the Iran agreement everyone hates so much.  If those two "contracts" are dissolved, there will be nothing preventing an out-and-out alliance.  And Russia just finished warning the world that an attack on one of its allies will result in a Russian strike against the US. 

We need to be strong NOW and work with the UN if necessary to establish a Kurdish "free zone", no only to protect an ally but to demonstrate to the Turks, Syrians, and Russians that we are still a force to reckon with.

[LauraTXNM]

NATO needs to be booted, period.

If you dismantle NATO, you basically abandon Ukraine, the Baltics, and Western Europe.

[edpc]

There will be no peace until the Kurds are dead, basically.  Unless the US is willing to engage.

Right now, the Russians are in control and making deals with the Syrians, the Iranians, and the Turks.  The Syrians are still using poison gas, despite the Russians' assurances that they turned them all in.

About the only things keeping anything in check are Turkey's nominal membership in NATO and the Iran agreement everyone hates so much.  If those two "contracts" are dissolved, there will be nothing preventing an out-and-out alliance.  And Russia just finished warning the world that an attack on one of its allies will result in a Russian strike against the US. 

We need to be strong NOW and work with the UN if necessary to establish a Kurdish "free zone", no only to protect an ally but to demonstrate to the Turks, Syrians, and Russians that we are still a force to reckon with.

Problem is, the PKK are a Kurdish sub-group of the larger nation.  They’ve been designated a terror organization by the US and a number of allies.

[LauraTXNM]

Problem is, the PKK are a Kurdish sub-group of the larger nation.  They’ve been designated a terror organization by the US and a number of allies.

The problem with that, is that the US designated the PKK as a terrorist group in 2008 to bolster its relations with Turkey as part of the larger war on terror in Iraq and the region.  The Turks have used that to more or less terrorize Diyarbakir and the Kurdish region in Turkey ever since, despite and during the ceasefire with the PKK.  Maintaining the PKK on the terror watchlist could be a major bargaining chip in protecting the Kurds as a whole.

[edpc]

The problem with that, is that the US designated the PKK as a terrorist group in 2008 to bolster its relations with Turkey as part of the larger war on terror in Iraq and the region.  The Turks have used that to more or less terrorize Diyarbakir and the Kurdish region in Turkey ever since, despite and during the ceasefire with the PKK.  Maintaining the PKK on the terror watchlist could be a major bargaining chip in protecting the Kurds as a whole.

PKK got their start as a Marxist-Leninist group in the world wide push for socialism.  They only gave up on that label because the Soviet Union stopped supporting the overall movement and eventually collapsed.  They're not people with whom we should be sympathetic.

[truth_seeker]

If you dismantle NATO, you basically abandon Ukraine, the Baltics, and Western Europe.

Western Europe has a combined economy equal to the US, so they can afford their own defense (and offense).

That is one thing Trump has been stating for years; let Europe pick up a bigger share of the military load.

The US (and NATO) once had strategic interests and Turkey provided a location for nuclear based weapons against USSR/Russia.

[LauraTXNM]

PKK got their start as a Marxist-Leninist group in the world wide push for socialism.  They only gave up on that label because the Soviet Union stopped supporting the overall movement and eventually collapsed.  They're not people with whom we should be sympathetic.

@edpc But they do give us some leverage with the Turks.

[LauraTXNM]

Western Europe has a combined economy equal to the US, so they can afford their own defense (and offense).

That is one thing Trump has been stating for years; let Europe pick up a bigger share of the military load.

The US (and NATO) once had strategic interests and Turkey provided a location for nuclear based weapons against USSR/Russia.

@truth_seeker Yes, EU should pick up more of the costs.  But NATO is still important to the US, particularly now with the Russians and the Turks.