Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
That Muslim jackass would be running away with his tail between his legs instead of Trump.
which Muslim jackass? Erdogan or Obama? for the sake of argument, let's say Trump took a hard line against Turkey and threatened military strikes against an ally? what would the mainly leftist press make of that? they'd scream their titties off that Trump is a war monger and you fucking know it. If Trump had done that, what next if Erdogan ignores it? The US has limited troops on the ground, not nearly enough to stop a full scale Turkish military action and even with Naval support from a carrier air group in the area no ability to put troops into play in large enough scale to stop Turkey before they succeed in their objectives. to the US, this is not a large scale theater where we have resources to quickly bring to bear and why should we?
the uproar over this is the leftist press and politicians trying to bait Trump into using military force so they can denounce it and use that as yet another so-called reason to impeach Trump. well he sided with an allied NATO nation over a small ethnic group that is basically stateless and while the Kurds oppose ISIS as does the US they are by far less important ine the long game in that region than Turkey is.
in case you didn't know, Turkey is no fan of ISIS/ISIL.they have made many terrorist strikes against Turkish bases and civilian targets and Turkey has retaliated. the Kurds are are an ethnic minority who originally come from Iran and regions in Turkey. this is a political and religious issue of the region that has existed for centuries and it isn't any business of the US to get involved in. if we did, you'd be denouncing it as US war mongering and meddling in foreign affairs.
Turkey is a far more useful and important NATO ally nation than the Kurds. yeah it is that simple of a chose. get over it.
in case you didn't know, Turkey is no fan of ISIS/ISIL.they have made many terrorist strikes against Turkish bases and civilian targets and Turkey has retaliated. the Kurds are are an ethnic minority who originally come from Iran and regions in Turkey. this is a political and religious issue of the region that has existed for centuries and it isn't any business of the US to get involved in. if we did, you'd be denouncing it as US war mongering and meddling in foreign affairs.
are they? show me some news of it. who's money is it? Turkey's direct money or Saudi money transferred using Turkish banks? Turkey has been subject to terrorist attacks by groups claiming to be ISIS factions. if Turkish business and financial interests are sympathetic to ISIS and allowing money to be held and transferred that's not the same as the Turkish Government directly providing money.
I've posted a number of articles about Turkey's relationship with ISIS last 2 years. you've chosen to ignore Turkey's complicity regarding ISIS all because they are a Nato ally.
one thing. Ergodan is an Islamist and has committed to making Turkey more religious. Ataturk military is basically gone.
what was true in the past is not now true.
here's a few articles i'm posting. you really should rethink your support regarding turkey.
Ankara claims to oppose the Islamic State. Its actions suggest otherwise.
By Ahmet S. Yayla, Colin P. Clarke | April 12, 2018, 4:43 PM
The decline of the Islamic State, nearly four years after its emergence, was the result of an aggressive military campaign to combat the group spearheaded primarily by the United States. That has not stopped Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Mevlut Cavusoglu from writing an article for Foreign Policy to take credit for the group’s demise, insisting that Turkey’s actions in northern Syria have helped lay the groundwork for a sustainable peace.
What he neglected to mention is that it was Turkey’s actions, or perhaps the lack thereof, that helped fuel the rise of the Islamic State in the first place. The two most commonly cited factors leading to the growth of the Islamic State are the Syrian civil war and the government of former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and its persecution of Sunni Arabs in Iraq. But another significant part of this story is the negligence exhibited by the Turkish state.
Beginning in late 2013 and early 2014, Turkish border cities became the chief logistical hubs for foreign fighters seeking to enter Syria and Iraq to join the Islamic State and other rebel groups. By all accounts, foreign fighters from around the globe first traveled to Turkey and then on to Iraq and Syria, forming the backbone and striking power of the Islamic State. In 2013 alone, some 30,000 militants traversed Turkish soil, establishing the so-called jihadi highway, as the country became a conduit for fighters seeking to join the Islamic State. By August 2015, Turkey did eventually tighten up its borders and agree to engage in strike missions as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, but by then, the lion’s share of foreign fighters had already arrived in Iraq and Syria.
There are many more examples of Turkey’s passive support to Islamic State fighters, including wounded Islamic State militants treated for free at hospitals across southeastern Turkey. Among those receiving care was one of the top deputies of Islamic State chieftain Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Ahmet el-H, who was treated in a private hospital in Sanliurfa in August 2014.
There were also widespread reports of Turkish officials, including Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s son-in-law, were involved in the purchase of Islamic State oil through front companies — actions that undoubtedly helped fill the insurgents’ coffers and directly contribute to the group’s longevity. Nevertheless, contraband Islamic State oil was consistently sold at points along the Turkish border throughout 2014 and into 2015.Fast forward to early 2018, and there are reports that Erdogan has signaled consent for Turkish forces to enlist the help of former Islamic State fighters in Ankara’s ongoing battle against the Kurds. And according to Conflict Armament Research, an organization partly funded by the European Union that identifies and tracks conventional weapons and ammunition in contemporary armed conflicts, Turkey “is the most important choke point” for components used in the manufacture of improvised explosive devices by the Islamic State.
Despite Turkey’s claim of being responsible for the demise of the Islamic State, the evidence clearly suggests otherwise. But what about Cavusoglu’s assertion that Turkey’s intervention in Syria through Operation Olive Branch, a Turkish military offensive in northern Syria aimed at combating Kurdish militants, is merely aimed at correcting America’s flaws and stabilizing Syria to the point where post-conflict reconstruction can begin in earnest?
The United States works with the Kurds in Syria because they are the most effective fighting force on the ground, and really the only nonstate actor willing to and capable of fighting the Islamic State. In contrast, the Turkish government has been duplicitous in its objectives, nominally supporting the anti-Islamic State coalition while simultaneously engaging in actions that undermine the same coalition.
Cavusoglu maintains that “the territorial integrity of states” is a prerequisite for peace even as Turkey intervenes in Syria, together with other powerful nation-states, including Iran, Russia, and the United States. Like every nation, Turkey has the right to defend its own borders. But Olive Branch was a preemptive strike against the Syrian Kurds for Turkey’s own purposes — it is no secret that Ankara has long harbored ill will against Syrian Democratic Union Party (PYD), Kurds based on their links to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a banned Turkish terrorist group, and their admiration for jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan.
The Olive Branch operation is not only about protecting Turkey from terrorism. There’s good reason to think it’s also an offensive campaign designed to increase Turkey’s leverage in future political negotiations in Syria, where it is working with Iran and Russia to minimize American involvement. Turkey continues to seize control of Syrian territory, administering it and installing its own governing structures.
Flanked by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Russian President Vladimir Putin, Erdogan appeared at a recent press conference to suggest that Turkey, Iran, and Russia are working toward stabilizing Syria, even as Tehran and Moscow enable Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, who just last week once again used chemical weapons on his own people in Douma.
Cavusoglu says the Middle East must be “kept safe from the threat of sectarianism, spheres of influence, resurgent imperialisms” and other destabilizing factors. Ironically, it is exactly Turkey’s continued incursions into Syria and Erdogan’s attempt to portray himself as the savior of all Sunnis, which is reinforcing ethnic divisions by pitting Sunni Arabs against PYD Kurds.
While Turkey may seek to bring an end to the Syrian civil war to resolve a long-simmering conflict on its border, it is also evidently concerned with denying operating space to the PYD, seeking to ensure that Kurdish dreams of autonomy within Syria are dashed. But Erdogan’s militancy comes with a price. Already, there is evidence that Turkey has squandered its soft power in the region, as diplomacy and cultural initiatives have been supplanted by military force and belligerence directed at its neighbors.
But if Turkey’s goal is truly to finish off the Islamic State, as Cavusoglu suggests, then targeting the People’s Protection Units (YPG) is having exactly the opposite effect. With the YPG focused on defending itself from Turkish advances, it is distracted from the ongoing battle to eradicate the last remaining pockets of Islamic State militants from Syria.
For its part, the United States has tried to play both sides of the conflict, signaling support to NATO ally Turkey while continuing to train and equip the YPG in Syria. This has not gone unnoticed in Ankara, where Erdogan recently criticized U.S. President Donald Trump for sending mixed messages on the future American role in Syria following Trump’s comments on a possible withdrawal of U.S. troops from the country in the near future.
Washington would be wise to reconsider a hasty withdrawal from Syria, since any premature departure of American troops would almost certainly ensure that the United States has reduced leverage in future negotiations over the end of the conflict in Syria. And it would likely guarantee that the Islamic State would rise again, despite recent claims by Cavusoglu and Turkey that the Islamic State has “largely been militarily defeated.”
Ahmet S. Yayla is an assistant professor at DeSales University and a former counterterrorism police chief in Turkey. Twitter: @ahmetsyayla
Colin P. Clarke is a Senior Fellow at The Soufan Center and an adjunct senior political scientist at Rand Corp. Twitter: @ColinPClarke
May 4, 2017
by Michael Rubin
One of the most problematic aspects of the war against the Islamic State has been the role of Turkey. On the one hand, diplomats see Turkey as a cornerstone of any diplomatic strategy to counter the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. On the other hand, Turkey—or, at least, elements within the state—appear to back the Islamic State. Indeed, one of the prevailing theories with regard to Turkey’s recent ban on Wikipedia has been because entries informed by Wikileaks explore financial links between Turkey’s leadership and the Islamic State.
Turkey’s defenders push back on such accusations. Turkey may treat rebel commanders in Turkish hospitals, they say, but isn’t that what Israel also does with regard to wounded Syrians? To compare Israel and Turkey is, on all levels, ridiculous. Israel has not become the revolving door through which foreign fighters enter and exit Syria.
The issue is not simply border security—visitors to Istanbul’s international airport say they can overhear travelers openly talking about their time in Syria fighting for radical groups. Nor do members of the Israeli government or the family of Israel’s elected leader appear to have profited from illicit oil trade with the Islamic State.
The notion that Turkey’s treatment and support of the Islamic State is passive, however, is demonstrably false when it comes to new information about Turkey’s support for Islamic State fighters from Libya. The Guardian reported:
The Italian intelligence document states: “Since 15 December 2015, an unknown number of wounded fighters of the Islamic State in Libya have been transported out of the country to an Istanbul hospital to undergo medical treatment.” The bulk of the “false wounded’’ come from the Libyan area of Fataeh, where “elements of the Islamic State would be holed up”, the document states. From there, the fighters are most commonly sent to Turkish hospitals. It claims in one case the fighters showed fake passports to doctors in Misrata and told them they were wounded in Sirte and Benghazi.
It is one thing to provide triage and medical services for enemy wounded who are captured in combat. If Islamic State or al-Qaeda fighters from Syria show up in Turkish border hospitals, it also makes sense to treat them. Under no circumstances does that mean that those receiving medical care should be free to go after their treatment. There is a greater problem, however, when Islamic State fighters from an area of operation more than 1,000 miles and a sea away start showing up in Turkey to receive services. That’s an indication not of passive assistance but rather of active support on the part of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government.
It’s time to recognize Turkey for what it is and dispense with diplomatic niceties: Simply put, Turkey is an enabler of the Islamic State’s global campaign and, as such, has become a state sponsor of terror.
Michael Rubin
Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
Turkey accused of recruiting ex-Isis fighters in their thousands to attack Kurds in Syria
Exclusive: Former Isis fighter tells The Independent that Turkey is using the name of the now defunct, Western-backed Free Syrian Army to conceal its use of jihadi mercenaries
Patrick Cockburn @indyworld
Wednesday 7 February 2018 23:13
Turkey is recruiting and retraining Isis fighters to lead its invasion of the Kurdish enclave of Afrin in northern Syria, according to an ex-Isis source.
“Most of those who are fighting in Afrin against the YPG [People’s Protection Units] are Isis, though Turkey has trained them to change their assault tactics,” said Faraj, a former Isis fighter from north-east Syria who remains in close touch with the jihadi movement.
In a phone interview with The Independent, he added: “Turkey at the beginning of its operation tried to delude people by saying that it is fighting Isis, but actually they are training Isis members and sending them to Afrin.”
An estimated 6,000 Turkish troops and 10,000 Free Syrian Army (FSA) militia crossed into Syria on 20 January, pledging to drive the YPG out of Afrin.
The attack was led by the FSA, which is a largely defunct umbrella grouping of non-Jihadi Syrian rebels once backed by the West. Now, most of its fighters taking part in Turkey’s “Operation Olive Branch” were, until recently, members of Isis.
Some of the FSA troops advancing into Afrin are surprisingly open about their allegiance to al-Qaeda and its offshoots. A video posted online shows three uniformed jihadis singing a song in praise of their past battles and “how we were steadfast in Grozny (Chechnya) and Dagestan (north Caucasus). And we took Tora Bora (the former headquarters of Osama bin Laden). And now Afrin is calling to us".
Isis suffered heavy defeats last year, losing Mosul in Iraq after a siege of nine months and Raqqa in Syria after a four-month siege. The caliphate, declared by its leader Abu Baqr al-Baghdadi in 2014, was destroyed, and most of its experienced commanders and fighters were killed or dispersed.
But it has shown signs of trying to revive itself in Syria and Iraq over the last two months, assassinating local opponents and launching guerrilla attacks in out-of-the-way and poorly defended places.
Isis fighters are joining the FSA and Turkish-army invasion force because they are put under pressure by the Turkish authorities. From the point of view of Turkey, the recruitment of former Isis combatants means that it can draw on a large pool of professional and experienced soldiers. Another advantage is that they are not Turks, so if they suffer serious casualties this will do no damage to the Turkish government.
Isis and Turkey are seeking to use each other for their own purposes. Faraj, 32, an Arab from the mixed Kurdish-Arab province of Hasakah in north-east Syria, says that he does not like the YPG, but he is suspicious of Turkey and believes that it is trying manipulate Isis. “Turkey treats Isis like toilet tissues,” he says. “After use they will be thrown away.”
Turkey is evidently aware that using Isis fighters as the spearhead for the assault on Afrin, even if they relabelled as FSA, is likely to attract international criticism.
Faraj says that Turkish commanders have discouraged Isis from using their traditional tactics of extensive use of suicide bombers and car bombs at Afrin because this would make the Isis-Turkish cooperation too blatant.
He says that the FSA men are “professional in planning car-bomb attacks as they have experience before with Isis in Raqqa and Mosul”.
But he cites Turkish officers as discouraging such identifiable tactics, quoting one as telling an FSA group in training that “we leave the suicide attacks for the YPG and the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party which carries on guerrilla warfare in Turkey), so that the world will be convinced that they are terrorists”.
Turkey has had an ambivalent relationship with jihadi groups since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011. At first, it allowed foreign jihadi fighters and military supplies to cross into Syria, though this tolerance ebbed after the fall of Mosul in June 2014.
Nevertheless, Ankara made clear by its actions during the siege of the Kurdish city of Kobani that it would have preferred victory to go to Isis rather than the YPG.
As the YPG advanced after Kobani with the support of US air power, Turkey’s priority became to reverse the creation of a de facto Kurdish state in Syria under US military protection.
The US is in a particularly difficult position. It was the YPG who provided the ground troops who, backed by US air strikes, have defeated Isis in many battles.
Without them there would have been no victory over Isis as was claimed by President Trump in his State of the Union message. But the YPG is now facing some of the same Isis fighters in Afrin with whom it fought over the past four years. It will not look good if the US abandons its proven Kurdish allies because it does not want a confrontation with Turkey.
Such a confrontation could be just around the corner. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan threatened at the weekend to expand the Turkish invasion to include the Arab town of Manbij, captured from Isis by the YPG in 2016 after a long siege. He said that the Americans “tell us, ‘Don’t come to Manbij.’ We will come to Manbij to handover these territories to their rightful owners.”
The fighting between Turks and Kurds and the growing confrontation between the US and Turkey are all in the interests of Isis. It does not have the strength to recover from its crushing defeats last year, but the opponents it faced then are now fighting other battles.
Eliminating the last pockets of Isis resistance is no longer their first priority. The YPG has been transferring units that were facing Isis in the far east of Syria to the west where they will face the Turks.
Turkey is not in a very strong position militarily almost three weeks after its invasion of Afrin. It can only win by bombing round the clock, and for this it will need Russian permission, which it probably will not get. If it is going to expand its attacks, it will need more combat soldiers and this will provide an opportunity for Isis to join in a new war.
The Turkish embassy in the UK has been approached for comment but had not responded by the time of publication.
Trump is the CIC ... and he was elected as such. I listened to his Secretary discussing events in the Middle East and Trump's awareness of current status of affairs ... Trump seems to have a handle on the realities on the ground there with the backdrop of centuries of tribal conflict. The current reality is:
The U.S. ought not to go to war with a NATO member against the Kurds who have moved beyond the territory the have been inhabiting for the past 1,000 + years. They did a good job for the U.S. et al in the early 1990's through the early 2000's. they were good partners with the ISIS ...
... THE REALITY is in world conflicts: today your enemy is your ally and tomorrow your ally is your enemy.
As for "current events" and all this stupid "collusion" talk:
Wonder why the SocialistLiberalAntiTumpers don't want to persecute the Liberal Democrat sitting in the middle for "colluding" with a MassMurderingSocialistCommie on the LEFT?
"Kurds"???????? You gotta be fucking kidding me!!!! A bunch of whining bitches running around with their asses kicked off trying to "Trump Up" some more bullshit. You all are embarrassing yourselves and are too stupid to realize it.
Posted in another thread, but certainly appropriate here. BTW: History says Churchill was not happy with the "colluding" .... for good reason it seems. The "Russians" were ruthless and savage in Europe.
I've posted a number of articles about Turkey's relationship with ISIS last 2 years. you've chosen to ignore Turkey's complicity regarding ISIS all because they are a Nato ally.
one thing. Ergodan is an Islamist and has committed to making Turkey more religious. Ataturk military is basically gone.
what was true in the past is not now true.
here's a few articles i'm posting. you really should rethink your support regarding turkey.
Nope. i read several articles the other night checking up on it. one appears to be an article you cite. you state that Turkey is playing both sides. all the better reason to let them sort this out. just the other day an article about sanctions stated the Pentagon said that military action was never a viable option in this matter. you know .. those Generals who think Trump is a dummy? well they agreed the troops there couldn't possibly stop a full scale Turkish action. So Trump had them pull out. Trump did the right thing and the top military agrees.
we don't need to get involved directly in a regional matter that has gone on for centuries and will for many years to come. Let them do what they do best .. fuck each other over in the name of Islam.
