Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The incentives I've read about that are being offered to Turkey and Israel to provide cover for oil and gas pipelines originating in the Caspian basin include EU membership for the Turks and NATO for Israel. I'm guessing we won't have to wait too long to find out.I agree with your perspective on the Kurds.Turkey does not share your opinion. Free Kurdistan would be at war with Turkey within hours of becoming an independent state.
That is true. Turkey would invade immediately. But i think it's time for the Kurds to have their Homeland. They've suffered enough. The Arabs, Turks, and Persians have tormented them for Centuries. I'd like to see em finally prosper.
It's just that such nation-erecting commentary takes me by surprise, coming from a Paulite.
I've always operated under the (mistaken?) impression that ya'll are fairly insistent isolationist types, except on the highest macro level(s).
But, an independent Kurdish State may be an idea whose time has come.
It would mean some existing country(ies) or another (Turkey, mostly, I seem to recall) giving-up some land, and it would probably involve some population-transfers from and to various regions, and could probably only be done peaceably via the UN, but it would be an interesting exercise in political creativity.
But nations (Turkey, or anyone else) don't give-up large tracts of land without a whole lot of convincing, and getting them (and others?) to agree might prove... well, let's say... problematic.
Iran will stabilize the Sunni/Shia killing, and oil will solve the Turkish feud with Kurdistan.Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters already hasTry to draw that map...
"The map of the 'New Middle East' was a key element in the retired Lieutenant-Colonels book, Never Quit the Fight, which was released to the public on July 10, 2006.
"This map of a redrawn Middle East was also published, under the title of Blood Borders: How a better Middle East would look, in the U.S. militarys Armed Forces Journal with commentary from Ralph Peters.5
"It should be noted that Lieutenant-Colonel Peters was last posted to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, within the U.S. Defence Department, and has been one of the Pentagons foremost authors with numerous essays on strategy for military journals and U.S. foreign policy.
"It has been written that Ralph Peters 'four previous books on strategy have been highly influential in government and military circles,' but one can be pardoned for asking if in fact quite the opposite could be taking place.
"Could it be Lieutenant-Colonel Peters is revealing and putting forward what Washington D.C. and its strategic planners have anticipated for the Middle East?
"The concept of a redrawn Middle East has been presented as a 'humanitarian' and 'righteous' arrangement that would benefit the people(s) of the Middle East and its peripheral regions. According to Ralph Peters:
"'International borders are never completely just. But the degree of injustice they inflict upon those whom frontiers force together or separate makes an enormous difference often the difference between freedom and oppression, tolerance and atrocity, the rule of law and terrorism, or even peace and war.'"
Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a ?New Middle East? | Global Research
When I say try to draw that map, I obviously mean one that would hold up. that map would have an immediate war with Turkey invading the Kurds and the Shiites attacking the Sunnis over all the Shiite areas it puts under Sunni control. Draw a map that would hold up.
I'm about as ignorant of the Turkish-Kurdish history and present situation as one can be without falling off the intellectual map.That is true. Turkey would invade immediately. But i think it's time for the Kurds to have their Homeland. They've suffered enough. The Arabs, Turks, and Persians have tormented them for Centuries. I'd like to see em finally prosper.
I have Turkish friends who would gleefully see every Kurd wiped out. To them, the Kurds are just murderous thugs who kill women and children with as much joy as they kill male fighters.
I've always thought of the Kurds as another Turkey-Armenians kind of situation, wherein the Turks have been heavily (sometimes, violently) repressing the Kurds for generations, stretching back far into Ottoman times, with the Kurds having a sufficient binding identity and persistence to continue to remain a thorn in the Turkish side for a very long time.
Many Westerners sympathize with the Armenians while still thinking of the Turks as friends and allies.
It's my perception that many Westerners sympathize with the Kurds, too, while still thinking of the Turks as friends and allies.
Albeit with the caveat that the Kurds have taken to terror tactics as a component of their continuing struggle against the Turks, and that Westerners, as a rule, do not approve of terror tactics.
Did I get it right?
I'm a bit confused. It's being reported that 3 battalions from IRAN are going in to fight FOR the government of Iraq.
Iraq needs to be broken up into separate countries, just like we did with Yugoslavia.
One for the Shia, one for the Sunni, and one for the Kurds.
When you do try to draw that map, the Sunnis get screwed.Iraq needs to be broken up into separate countries, just like we did with Yugoslavia.
One for the Shia, one for the Sunni, and one for the Kurds.
Try to draw that map...
Just to be clear, my own soft-and-fuzzy understanding of the Kurds has routinely equated them with the Armenians, vis a vis their relations with the Turks, and I've always been of the opinion that the Turks and Armenians can never co-exist peacefully over the long-haul under the banner of a single nation. Just to be clear...I'm about as ignorant of the Turkish-Kurdish history and present situation as one can be without falling off the intellectual map.I have Turkish friends who would gleefully see every Kurd wiped out. To them, the Kurds are just murderous thugs who kill women and children with as much joy as they kill male fighters.
I've always thought of the Kurds as another Turkey-Armenians kind of situation, wherein the Turks have been heavily (sometimes, violently) repressing the Kurds for generations, stretching back far into Ottoman times, with the Kurds having a sufficient binding identity and persistence to continue to remain a thorn in the Turkish side for a very long time.
Many Westerners sympathize with the Armenians while still thinking of the Turks as friends and allies.
It's my perception that many Westerners sympathize with the Kurds, too, while still thinking of the Turks as friends and allies.
Albeit with the caveat that the Kurds have taken to terror tactics as a component of their continuing struggle against the Turks, and that Westerners, as a rule, do not approve of terror tactics.
Did I get it right?
Most Americans are so ignorant of Kurds that they thing Kurd is something that goes along with whey. Maybe not even that much. They don't care. They (like you) have feelings and the feeling is that everyone could get along. They can't.
The South has a ton of oil, a ton of sand, and basically no population (desert).Kurds to the North...Iraq needs to be broken up into separate countries, just like we did with Yugoslavia.
One for the Shia, one for the Sunni, and one for the Kurds.
Try to draw that map...
Shiites in the Middle...
Sunnis in the South?
If such a thing were attempted... a simple North, Middle and South division, I already know that the Kurds are in the North... are the Shiites in the Middle, with the Sunnis in the South... generally speaking, and allowing for some spillover?The South has a ton of oil, a ton of sand, and basically no population (desert).Kurds to the North...Try to draw that map...
Shiites in the Middle...
Sunnis in the South?
Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters already hasIraq needs to be broken up into separate countries, just like we did with Yugoslavia.
One for the Shia, one for the Sunni, and one for the Kurds.
Try to draw that map...
Since I don't have a TV, I haven't seen Colonel Ralph, but his Wiki makes him sound like a corporate tool, to me.
Ralph Peters is one of the biggest pieces of shit on TV. I've rarely seen bigger assholes on my television.
And his map, like a said a few posts ago, would screw the Sunnis.
It's a ridiculous map: The Shiites get Iraq's massive southern oil fields while the Sunnis get no oil? And he wants to split Baghdad down the middle? Give me fucking break. He's an idiot.
I agree with your perspective on the Kurds.Turkey does not share your opinion. Free Kurdistan would be at war with Turkey within hours of becoming an independent state.
That is true. Turkey would invade immediately. But i think it's time for the Kurds to have their Homeland. They've suffered enough. The Arabs, Turks, and Persians have tormented them for Centuries. I'd like to see em finally prosper.
It's just that such nation-erecting commentary takes me by surprise, coming from a Paulite.
I've always operated under the (mistaken?) impression that ya'll are fairly insistent isolationist types, except on the highest macro level(s).
But, an independent Kurdish State may be an idea whose time has come.
It would mean some existing country(ies) or another (Turkey, mostly, I seem to recall) giving-up some land, and it would probably involve some population-transfers from and to various regions, and could probably only be done peaceably via the UN, but it would be an interesting exercise in political creativity.
But nations (Turkey, or anyone else) don't give-up large tracts of land without a whole lot of convincing, and getting them (and others?) to agree might prove... well, let's say... problematic.
I'm about as ignorant of the Turkish-Kurdish history and present situation as one can be without falling off the intellectual map.That is true. Turkey would invade immediately. But i think it's time for the Kurds to have their Homeland. They've suffered enough. The Arabs, Turks, and Persians have tormented them for Centuries. I'd like to see em finally prosper.
I have Turkish friends who would gleefully see every Kurd wiped out. To them, the Kurds are just murderous thugs who kill women and children with as much joy as they kill male fighters.
I've always thought of the Kurds as another Turkey-Armenians kind of situation, wherein the Turks have been heavily (sometimes, violently) repressing the Kurds for generations, stretching back far into Ottoman times, with the Kurds having a sufficient binding identity and persistence to continue to remain a thorn in the Turkish side for a very long time.
Many Westerners sympathize with the Armenians while still thinking of the Turks as friends and allies.
It's my perception that many Westerners sympathize with the Kurds, too, while still thinking of the Turks as friends and allies.
Albeit with the caveat that the Kurds have taken to terror tactics as a component of their continuing struggle against the Turks, and that Westerners, as a rule, do not approve of terror tactics.
Did I get it right?
Stupid comment is out of context without comparing it to the 151 fighters released by Bush who went back to the battle.No, idiots trade five dangerous mass murderers for one common deserter.
Deserter? Maybe. And we can wait for the results of an Article 32 investigation for that.
Anyone who takes paralegal courses in legal briefing and shepardizing know not to cherry pick cases because the argument will be deflated.
W is not President anymore, Homey. It's time for Democrats to stand up and take responsibility for your own actions and stop blaming everyone else. Obama's been President 5 1/2 years now. You wanted him, you got him, you own him and his actions now.
The terrorists are now marching on Bagdad. The Iraq government is asking for help, should we oblige?
Seems strange to me that we would spend all the money & lives just to let it fall in a matter of weeks/months.
So you think we should throw good money after bad?
It was a bad idea to topple Saddam to start with. We shouldn't continue to invest in a mistake because it was a mistake.
If such a thing were attempted... a simple North, Middle and South division, I already know that the Kurds are in the North... are the Shiites in the Middle, with the Sunnis in the South... generally speaking, and allowing for some spillover?The South has a ton of oil, a ton of sand, and basically no population (desert).Kurds to the North...
Shiites in the Middle...
Sunnis in the South?
Ralph Peters is one of the biggest pieces of shit on TV. I've rarely seen bigger assholes on my television.
And his map, like I said a few posts ago, would screw the Sunnis.
It's a ridiculous map: The Shiites get Iraq's massive southern oil fields while the Sunnis get no oil? And he wants to split Baghdad down the middle? Give me fucking break. He's an idiot.
Syria is Shiite - why not just give the Shiites the western part bordering Syria, which has no oil and where no one wants to live?If such a thing were attempted... a simple North, Middle and South division, I already know that the Kurds are in the North... are the Shiites in the Middle, with the Sunnis in the South... generally speaking, and allowing for some spillover?The South has a ton of oil, a ton of sand, and basically no population (desert).
I would think the Shiites would be in the south and the Sunnis in the west. The problem is the Baghdad region where it's an endless patchwork and neither side is going to agree to be in the other's country.
Ralph Peters is one of the biggest pieces of shit on TV. I've rarely seen bigger assholes on my television.
And his map, like I said a few posts ago, would screw the Sunnis.
It's a ridiculous map: The Shiites get Iraq's massive southern oil fields while the Sunnis get no oil? And he wants to split Baghdad down the middle? Give me fucking break. He's an idiot.
Yes, he is. It would clearly trigger two wars between the Turks and the Kurds and the Sunnis and the Shiites in Iraq.
It's no small leap to see the Iranian Shiites jumping in to support the Iraqi Shiites. Then what happens? Most of the Muslim world is Sunni and they hate Shiites, there would be incredible pressure across the Middle East to help the Iraqi Sunnis. That could lead to an all out Middle East war. Then what happens with Israel? What happens with Russia who are married to the Shiites? At what point does it stop?
That map is the map of someone who has zero grasp of the middle east.
