Byebye USA

[dilloduck]

This won't happen. The real point of the iraq war to project american influence into the region, for the safety of the west.

and it's working so well.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

and it's working so well.

You sound like a lib! :rotflmao:

 

[Annie]

and it's working so well.

Perhaps better than you think. You do sound like a lib, "US can't get anything right, it's all about lies and corruption":

http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson030306.html

March 3, 2006
Rocks and Ripples
Playing it smart in the Middle East.
by Victor Davis Hanson
National Review Online

Fear in the U.S. of Russian nukes made strange bedfellows during the Cold War, like our relationship with the shah of Iran, Franco, Somoza, and Pinochet. The logic was that such strongmen, unlike Communist thugs, would evolve eventually into constitutional governments, or, unlike elected socialists, they could at least be trusted not to turn their countries into satellites of the Soviet Union.

We paid a price for such realpolitik when the Berlin Wall fell. Few gave us the deserved thanks for bankrupting the Soviet empire, but we did get plenty of the blame for the mess left behind by third-world dictatorships.

Now Middle East autocracies use the same "it's either us or them" blackmail. They hope to survive the tide of democratization by showing off their antiterrorist plumage. The problem is that the defeat of terrorism — like that of global Communism — ultimately rests with promoting freedom, not authoritarianism.

Decades of supporting right-wing authoritarians did nothing to ameliorate a dysfunctional Middle East. Perhaps support for democratic reform will usher in Hamas in Palestine, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, something worse than Gen. Musharraf in Pakistan, and a shaky post-Saddam Hussein government in violence-torn Iraq, but what else is the United States to do?

About what we are doing now: We should keep supporting the process, but not necessarily the result; much less should we subsidize elected anti-Americans. The key is to keep a low profile and promote consensual government, but without bullying or grand moral pronouncements when the odious are elected.

We should praise the relatively free voting that ushered in Hamas, insist that they institutionalize the process that brought them to power, but under no circumstances give such terrorists any American money as long as they pledge to destroy Israel.

Allowing the autocratic Mr. Mubarak to go his own way without any more American largess may well empower the Muslim Brotherhood. Fine. Let the zealots talk all they want about bringing corruption-free government to Egypt at last, and hatred of the United States too. In response, America need only quietly explain that we no longer subsidize dictators — or terrorists who are elected to power through principled American support for democratic elections. I'm sure that after all the invective subsides, the Egyptians can sort out both our logic and idealism.

The key is consistency — and subtlety in expression. That way we avoid the unsustainable paradox that Americans are dying for democracy in the Sunni Triangle while subsidizing its antithesis in Cairo. And by the same token, we need not tour the Middle East demonizing Hamas; that will certainly not result in ostracism of that terrorist organization by "moderates," but it will give rise to the opinion that we behave hypocritically when the Arab street votes in someone we don't like.

After Afghanistan and Iraq, how silly to keep giving aid to the dictatorship in Egypt, either from the ossified idea that our bribe money stops it from starting a war with Israel (a war it would promptly lose), or that the alternative is the terrifying, all-powerful Muslim Brotherhood.

All we are doing instead is fueling all sorts of pathetic mythologies: that the United States opposes the will of the Arab people, or that our pressure alone stops the heroic Egyptian legions from marching into Tel Aviv, or that our support ipso facto stops incompetent Islamic radicals from bringing efficient, modern, and honest government to Egypt.

In a larger sense, the United States, after the necessary and much caricatured task of removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, may find its power enhanced by allowing others to suffer the consequences of their own stupid decisions. Already Hamas is asking the hated West for money — and sputtering that its charter of eternal war against the Jews, well, kinda, sorta means a truce for a while rather than a collision with the IDF.

The United States is finding the same results with the Iranian nuclear negotiations. Europe wanted multilateralism — they got it, and they won humiliation from the Iranians, with the possibility of nuclear weapons apparently now resting in the hands of the Russians, who sold the mullahs much of their nuclear hardware in the first place. Ever so slowly, after the French riots, the bombings in London and Madrid, and the Danish cartoons, the Europeans are learning that for all their anti-American triangulating, nice talk to the Iranians, and money given to Palestinian terrorists, they have won only contempt from the Middle East.

The result? They are coming back around to the United States, in a way that would be impossible had we sent dozens of envoys to London and Paris begging to restore the old Atlantic partnership. Gerhard Schroeder, after all, not George Bush, is now a paid lackey for a post-Soviet state-owned oil company, and Jacques Chirac is blathering in his dotage about using French nukes. The legacy of that sad pair of bystanders is only appeasement, cheap anti-Americanism, and oil deals with Saddam, while the United States has altered the very dynamic of the Middle East.

Iraq, of course, presents an entirely different sort of challenge. But even here, for all the recent furor, Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad's statements that the United States will not in perpetuity subsidize sectarian bickering in lieu of the formation of a coalition government will have a positive effect. We are putting the Iraqi security forces at the forefront, apprising the new government that $300-400 billion in military and civilian outlay may be winding down, and emphasizing force protection of our own troops.

In effect, we are saying that, in a perfect world, we would give Iraq ten years of unlimited American military and civilian aid, but in the messy real landscape of an expensive war against terrorism, four or five since 2003 might just have to do. The reality will be that the new government may soon be more forceful in setting its house in order — a far better scenario than if the Americans lecturing that we must stay until the Iraqis grow up, meet our standards, and can take care of themselves.

These opportunities are not a reaction against the purported unilateralism and preemption that took us to the Middle East in 2001-3, but rather a logical result of just such determination. We have such options precisely because an Assad no longer thinks an American statesman will wait obsequiously on his tarmac. Saudi financiers don't think any more that they can finance killers with impunity. And after the fate of Saddam Hussein, it is no longer possible for Pakistan's Dr. Khan, Libya's Khadafi, or Iran's Ahmadinejihad to count on the benign neglect of their nuclear trafficking.

Long-overdue rocks have been thrown into the stagnant lake of the Middle East, and now we must, with patience, carefully let the ripples of aeration do their work.

 

[nosarcasm]

Turkey will continue to be torn inbetween the west and the Islamic world.

Millions of Turks live and work in Germany and tilt the Turkish oppinion pro
western values. Especially Ataturk and his nationalism , Nationalism being the supreme western Ideology that swept the world like nothing else will
keep the balance between Islamic religiosity and pro western nationalism

If Turkey decides to pay the price of being a member of the Eu it will
position itself as a mediator between the west and Islamic countries
being able to understand both mindsets.

BTW. canavar good that you decided to still participate in the board.

Exchange of oppinions can never hurt.

 

[Gunny]

Why should Sunnite arabs kill Sunnite Turks? Remember when Turkey mediated between US and Sunnites in Istanbul in December before elections.
Sunnite interests do greatly match with Turkey's interests.
Turkey is no vasall of USA. We showed this on March 2003.

Yeah, you sure showed us.

Turkey is giving Palestinanis jobs in Gaza with Turkish businesman while Arabs only please Palestinian hearts.

The difference now is, Turkey manages to get Shias also on its side. Be it politician Jafari or militia Al-Sadr.
And other Iran-backed Shias won't plot against Turkey also. Because Iran will hold them back as Iran needs Turkey for different reasons.

Turkey is trying to treat all Iraqi groups the same. Doesn't favor one over another. With this strategy Iraqi geographical integrity could be saved and will be.

There is only Al-Qaida who will bomb. But This is a different thing bombing Sunnites+Al-Qaida together then bombing Al-Qaida alone.
And it is no secret that part of Iraqi citizens back and maybe assist terrorists. This will also not be the case anymore by Sunnites and Shias.

You, USA understand yourself as christian. So it is no secret that "giving-religion-priority-ARABS" understand you as that what you are.
US-Soldier and Turkish soldier is difference.

You are being understood there as occupiers, we instead are those who didn't allowed you Turkey useing as Attack-base. We will be undesrtood there as those who refused giving you Turkey as attack-base. And of course as a mediator to keep Iraq as a whole with its valid geographic boarders.

Don't you think this a difference between Turks ans Americans?

Really dude .. take off those rose-colored glasses. You will be "understood" as just another Islam-o-state catering to the interests of fundamentist Islamists.

I sincerely doubt the US is going to entertain any such notion anyway. You seem awfully willing to cater to Sunni and Shia, but once again, screw the Kurds. Yeah, y'all sure got a fair deal on the table.

As far as you being a "vassal" of the US, you presume much. Cold War's over bud. Who needs you?

And I know from firsthand experience there's a difference between Turks and Americans. You can turn your back on us.

 

[ekrem]

(...)Turks and Americans. You can turn your back on us.

It has already happened. Good morning.

 

[dilloduck]

It has already happened. Good morning.

So when are Turkish troops moving into Iraq?

 

[Gunny]

It has already happened. Good morning.

Real snappy comeback.

You forgot to address the "Who cares?" part. What Turkey wants means about as much to me as what Hilalry Clinton wants.

 

[ekrem]

So when are Turkish troops moving into Iraq?

First come Sunnite leaders to Ankara, then Al-Sadr. Then we will see.

 

[Gunny]

First come Sunnite leaders to Ankara, then Al-Sadr. Then we will see.

Let's review. We do all the dirty work, and now your country wants to pick up whatever profit they can from it. And YOU are all gung-ho about it and talking trash about the US.

Hell, I hope you get your wish. I'm all for the US leaving as soon as the Iraqis say so. Let's see what you and your 2-bit Nation can accomplish. All you'll really do is use it as an excuse to practice a little genocide on the Kurds.

It isn't going to happen though, so you need not get your ultranationalistic nuts in an uproar over it.

 

[trobinett]

My first hand experience with Turk`s is limited, and goes back to the late 1960`s.

I was stationed in Belgium, Mon`s to be exact, SHAPE, the Military arm of NATO.

All NATO nations, that supplied NATO with troops had people there. The Turks were represented, and I worked with one in the communication intercept division of ACECOMSEC.

His name was Corporal Evench(sp), his family lived in Istanbul Turkey. His father was a diplomat of some importance. I can recall to this day, that Corporal Evench once told me, that the day would come AGAIN when Turkey would once again rule that part of the world. It would be necessary for stability in that region. He was quite certain of this, and relied on imformation from his father, and others in the Turkish government for his opinion.

Wouldn`t bother me to see the Turk`s take control of that region of the world. SOMEBODY, besides us needs to, before the whole place blows up, and a lid can`t be put on it.

The Turkish people are a reasonable, steady people, their history points to peaceful coexistence, unless force is called for.

Turkey is no two-bit nation, and their military is to be respected.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

My first hand experience with Turk`s is limited, and goes back to the late 1960`s.

I was stationed in Belgium, Mon`s to be exact, SHAPE, the Military arm of NATO.

All NATO nations, that supplied NATO with troops had people there. The Turks were represented, and I worked with one in the communication intercept division of ACECOMSEC.

His name was Corporal Evench(sp), his family lived in Istanbul Turkey. His father was a diplomat of some importance. I can recall to this day, that Corporal Evench once told me, that the day would come AGAIN when Turkey would once again rule that part of the world. It would be necessary for stability in that region. He was quite certain of this, and relied on imformation from his father, and others in the Turkish government for his opinion.

Wouldn`t bother me to see the Turk`s take control of that region of the world. SOMEBODY, besides us needs to, before the whole place blows up, and a lid can`t be put on it.

The Turkish people are a reasonable, steady people, their history points to peaceful coexistence, unless force is called for.

Turkey is no two-bit nation, and their military is to be respected.

How "new world order" of you.

 

[sitarro]

If you look closely, you can see tongue.

Is that a scene from the soon to be released film "Brokeback Mohammed"?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Is that a scene from the soon to be released film "Brokeback Mohammed"?

LOL. :cof:

 

[Abbey Normal]

Is that a scene from the soon to be released film "Brokeback Mohammed"?

Or how about "Brokeback Mullahs".

The gripping story of East meets West set in the steamy environs of a Turkish bathhouse.

 

[ThomasPaine]

Or how about "Brokeback Mullahs".

The gripping story of East meets West set in the steamy environs of a Turkish bathhouse.

actions prior to "Iraqi Freedom" won it absolutely ZERO points with the United States. The LAST thing we are going to do is abandon Iraq to this likes of the Turks whose first action would be kurdish genocide. Wake up there Turk we aren't going to leave Iraq completely for a couple of decades... See Western Europe after WWII. We aren't about to give up our hard won victory nor our foothold in the Middle East. You might want to pull your ole Turkish head outta the Ottoman Empire past and grasp reality. Turkey has enough problems of it's own to deal with. I find it frankly laughable that you think the United States would leave Iraq to Turkey.. As was said before the cold war is long over and our need of Turkey with it.

 

[sitarro]

Or how about "Brokeback Mullahs".

The gripping story of East meets West set in the steamy environs of a Turkish bathhouse.

Steamy and a smell that would be overwhelming. . . probably Old Spice mixed with English Leather...