Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
USViking said:archangel said:I saw the exchange.
I don't mind, but it looks like he is taking on
the rest of the forum alone, and sometimes
I pitch in for underdogs even if we have areas
of disagreement.
It does concern me that an Islamic political party
has become I think the most popular in the country,
although I know nothing about its platform other
than that it does not appear to be radical.
Perhaps canavar can comment on that when he
has a chance.
Hello, USViking
Yes, we have an Muslim-Party in Turkey. But Europe has Christian Parties, too. For exmaple The CDU in Germany (Christian Democratic Party)...
The EU has the European Parliament in Strassburg, France...
All European Parties unite there. For Example all Conservative Parties are United as EVP-Party in EU-Parliament...
Liberals are united as "European Liberals" for examples...
And our Muslim-Party is part of this EVP-Party like German CDU or French UMP is...
So, this is a Party who is democratic and respects Turkish Seperation from Religion and Politics... For Example our Primeministers Wife wears a headscarf... She is not allowed to join the Primeminister when foreign Statesguest come. Further she is not allowed to enter Governement-buildings as long she doesn't take that headscarf off... so it is the situation in Turkey... and it will never change as long as Turkish Republic will exist.
Now let me introduce you our Primeminister a little bit more...
In 1990s There was an islamist selected as Primeminister. Erbakan was his name... His first foreign journey was to Iran, not to western... It did npot took months and our military fall him... This was not acceptable....
And Our present Primeminister was a friend of this Islamist, but he has seen, that nobody has the possibility to Turn Turkey into a Taliban-Regime.
Our Military is very anti-islamic and anti-communistic. And oru Military is guarantor that Turkey will always turn with its face to the West like Atatürk wanted...
Now, Why has this Primenister of today has been elected? It is not because Islamist-Turks or so... It is just easy...
Our Primeminister was in the Past Mayor of Istanbul... He made Istanbul to a boom Town. Bild Metro, build a further Bridge which connects Asia with Europe...
So, in other words, he is very good in Economics and so on... He made Istanbul to a shiny City, which it deserves as being the only city lying on 2 Continents...
In 2001 Turkey went bankrupt... All turkish voters were sick of unemployment, corruption and so on... And than there was this Man, who had a excellent Reputation in being Mayor of an 15 mio city and so he was elected. Not because of anything else...
America our Friend gave us credit through IMF. And today we are booming and are investing the same time we decrease our foreign debts...
Turkish Republic is on a very good way. EUropeans honoured this with EU-Talks.
But this muslim-party has done lot of shit in Foreign Policy as you can see in this Thread... And it seems based on surveys that this Party will not again be elected as Government...
But This Government is nevertheless not islamic. They are democrats. Are in the european Parliament and so on...
The only thing they want to change in Turkey is to abolish those headscarf-ban in schools... They argue: "we are a free democracy, every student should give this decision herself, not the state"...
But this is unpossible...
When those government starts making islamic Laws, our Parliament-Opposition will run cracy and our military will fal this government... This is sure...
Anyway this government is not bringing islamic laws into Parliament.
They are democrats respecting Turkeys constitution. A constituton which says: "Religion is private thing, not state-thing"
As isaid before in this Thread: The Turkish Army is the most respected and trusted organization in Turkey because it were Generals building Turkish Republic... Political Parties come and go, but Turkish Army always stays.
There are many surveys in Turkey which show this special Position of Turkish Army in Turkish society... Turkish Army is Turkish Nation.
As an example: in 1990s we had an elected Islamist. Allthough he was elected our Military fall him... Afterwards there was a big Survey in Turkey asking Turkish Nation how they feel about this Military action...
Almost every person said: " We elected this man, but our Military knows better what is better for Turkish mankind. So we stand behind this Military decision"...
So, allthough this man was elected everybody supported our Military in this case.
But the EU says to Turkey: When Turkey wants to join EU, Turkish Military not the right to say anything.
canavar said:Sounds good.USViking said:Hello, USViking
Yes, we have an Muslim-Party in Turkey. But Europe has Christian Parties, too. For exmaple The CDU in Germany (Christian Democratic Party)...
The EU has the European Parliament in Strassburg, France...
All European Parties unite there. For Example all Conservative Parties are United as EVP-Party in EU-Parliament...
Liberals are united as "European Liberals" for examples...
And our Muslim-Party is part of this EVP-Party like German CDU or French UMP is...
Sounds less good. Why should anyone have to wearSo, this is a Party who is democratic and respects Turkish Seperation from Religion and Politics... For Example our Primeministers Wife wears a headscarf... She is not allowed to join the Primeminister when foreign Statesguest come. Further she is not allowed to enter Governement-buildings as long she doesn't take that headscarf off... so it is the situation in Turkey... and it will never change as long as Turkish Republic will exist.
a scarf or a Fez?
Didn't Ataturk forbid both?
Turkey has had much more Peace than most of the rest of the worldNow let me introduce you our Primeminister a little bit more...
since Kemal Ataturk died.
So he assured the life of the people he led at Gallipoli.
Even if no Greek were to set foot in Constantinople ever again
may this Place of Worship named Saint Sophia live unharmed
through all the time of human memory.
They built that Cathedral before your Faith was born, yet it remains, 500 years later, with you.
As monumental a loss as it was, I favor you having it for all time.
I also favor you having your people live in the best way: I swear.
But why might you need to hold on to others who do not want you?
By "semi-Democracy" I meant the detraction of the Coup.In 1990s There was an islamist selected as Primeminister. Erbakan was his name... His first foreign journey was to Iran, not to western... It did npot took months and our military fall him... This was not acceptable....
The Turkish military has been as good as any man to man
going back to the Crusades, and then some.I do not want
any of them to go to war. They are also much better than the
radicals, as in Algeria.
Much as I hate the idea of military government,
the military is my side in Algeria.
Thank you for replying, I'll answer the rest later.
Turkey and the US have agreed on an action-plan to eradicate the Kurdish paramilitary group, the PKK.
The group is thought to have around 5,000 members living in northern Iraq.
Ever since the US occupied Iraq, Turkey has been pressing Washington to crack down on the group which both countries designate as terrorist.
Details of the plan are not clear, but a US official said any military action would be carried out by US troops.
Any large scale Turkish military presence in northern Iraq would be opposed by the Kurdish groups which currently run the area.
This agreement is important for Turkey, as it marks a new stage in its long battle with the PKK.
It is also a sign of improving relations with the US.
The agreement will almost certainly help the Turkish Government in its efforts to persuade parliament to send Turkish troops to help out the US-led coalition.
The parliament will probably consider a request for around 10,000 troops later this month.
Turkey and the PKK fought a bitter war for more than a decade.
More than 30,000 people were killed, and over a million displaced from their homes - largely in the predominantly Kurdish southeastern part of the country.
The PKK have long sought refuge from Turkish troops in the mountains of northern Iraq.
Turkish officials have been increasingly vocal in recent days over their desire to launch cross-border operations to rein in Kurdish fighters from the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK or Kongra-Gel) based in the mountainous areas straddling Iraq and Turkey. After months of what they deemed as stalling on the part of the U.S. and Iraqi governments to deal with the PKK, Turkish officials proposed two new plans. Officials first contended that Turkey would carry out cross-border operations with or without the consent of the Iraqi government. They then suggested at a 19 July meeting of the foreign ministers of Iraq's neighboring countries that Iran, Syria, and Iraq join forces to help eliminate the Kurdish group, which is considered by its supporters a rebel group, and by the governments involved, including the United States, a terrorist organization.
Fighting has escalated between the PKK and the Turkish government since May, leaving at least 24 PKK fighters and 30 soldiers dead, and by some accounts, dozens more. The recent spate of terrorist attacks, claimed by the PKK and groups affiliated with it, have targeted civilians and soldiers....
AMMAN, July 24: Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari warned Turkey on Sunday not to let its troops cross into northern Iraq to hunt Kurdistan Workers Party rebels.
Zebari told Reuters that US forces in Iraq were poised to capture the rebels, who have been waging a violent campaign against Turkey for decades to win Kurdish self-determination, and have bases in northern Iraq.
They are in regions outside the control of the central and Kurdish government. If they move, the American forces can arrest them, said Zebari, himself an Iraqi Kurd.
We have an obligation to Turkey, and to control all non-Iraqi armed groups and prevent activities against neighbouring countries.
We reject any regional military interference in Iraqi affairs, whether Turkish, Iranian or Arab, because it destroys confidence and shifts the focus when our priority is finishing the political process, improving the security situation and providing basic services.
General Ilker Basbug of the Turkish General Staff said last week the United States had given orders for the capture of PKK rebels in Iraq, adding that Turkey had a right to enter Iraqi territory to attack them if no action was taken.
Ankara has repeatedly pressed the United States to act against the PKK in Iraq, where the Turkish military says about 3,000 militants operate in the northern mountains, in a part of Iraq designated as Kurdish-ruled.
Although Zebari welcomed US moves to pursue PKK leaders, the rebels command sympathy among Iraqi Kurds, who see Turkey as having persecuted its own Kurdish population. Iraqis are also wary of what they regard as Turkish territorial ambitions, especially in the oil centre of Kirkuk, which was once mostly populated by ethnic Turkmens, and was included in Iraq as part of a colonial deal between Britain and France.
Zebari said the Iraqi government was not yet capable of pursuing the PKK using its own forces and had to rely on the United States.
We have to be content with this arrangement until we complete the build-up of our own security forces to control the situation, he said.
Turkeys General Staff says the rebels have crossed into Turkey more frequently and in larger numbers in the past year. It has said they now number nearly 2,000 inside Turkey, carrying out attacks on military targets in the mainly Kurdish southeast.
Under Saddam Husseins rule, Turkey had a tacit agreement with Iraq that it could pursue the PKK into northern Iraqi territory.
Turkey has urged Iraq and its neighbours to tighten border security because of rising violence since the PKK ended a unilateral ceasefire in June last year.
More than 30,000 people have been killed in the conflict since the PKK took up arms against the Turkish state in 1984 with the aim of carving out an ethnic homeland in the southeast.
jadone said:Hello all. Ive been watching this along with many other boards for awhile in order to get as many views as possible from all sides.
I think its going to be a long and nasty war (WOT) even if we pull out of Iraq. A lot of the islamic boards that I monitor have some insane and nasty islamic extremists on them. To sum up the postion of some of these wahhabis basically comes down to them saying that this is allahs earth and they have every right to live where they please, and that us infidels are the invaders of allahs earth, and they will fight us until allahs law reigns supreme.
Anyhoo, I remember coming across this article awhile back and thought I would register to share it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3158686.stm
US and Turkey to hit PKK
Thursday, 2 October, 2003
Im not really sure why the US has not assisted or have allowed Turkey into Iraq to hunt these guys down. There may have been further complications that arose since the date of this joint plan.
Turkey has become increasingly vocal on this issue lately:
http://www.payvand.com/news/05/jul/1167.html
7/20/05
Also the Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari has denied Turkey its request to hunt after the ppk.
Dont pursue PKK men in Iraq, Zebari tells Turkey
http://www.dawn.com/2005/07/25/int3.htm
July 25, 2005
The issue is clearly up to the leaders of Iraq at this point....but from the reports I have read, the US has been willing to assist Turkey.
jadone said:Hello all. Ive been watching this along with other boards for awhile in order to get as many views as possible from all sides.
I think its going to a long and nasty war even if we pull out of iraq. A lot of the islamic boards that I monitor have some insane and nasty people on them.
Anyhoo, I remember coming across this article awhile back and that I would register to share it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3158686.stm
US and Turkey to hit PKK
Thursday, 2 October, 2003
Im not really sure why the US has not assisted or have allowed Turkey into Iraq to hunt these guys down. There may have been further complications that arose since the date of this joint plan.
Turkey has become increasingly vocal on this issue lately:
http://www.payvand.com/news/05/jul/1167.html
7/20/05
Also the Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari has denied Turkey its request to hunt after the ppk.
Dont pursue PKK men in Iraq, Zebari tells Turkey
http://www.dawn.com/2005/07/25/int3.htm
July 25, 2005
The issue is clearly up to the leaders of Iraq at this point....but from the reports I have read, the US has been willing to assist Turkey.
Said1 said:Welcome, and great links!
Maybe you could clear this up (for me anyway). I was under the impression that the PKK was more or less allied with other Kurdish independence movements in N. Iraq? If this is the case, shouldn't the goal be eliminating all of them?
As the August 15 deadline for a draft constitution approaches, Iraqs Kurds are locked in an uneasy power struggle with the Shiite majority that could be the precursor to a Kurdish falling out with the Iraqi political process.
The influence of the United States over the constitutional drafting process, which has been considerable, despite American and Iraqi government rhetoric suggesting the contrary, has thus far been unfavorable to the Kurds. One of the chief demands of Kurdish negotiators has been that there should be regional rather than national control over natural resources. This would give Kurds authority over oil-rich Kirkuk, the so-called "heart" of Kurdistan. This is seen as essential by the Kurds, mainly because of their unwillingness to be beholden again to the Iraqi central government for funds. Kurdish supremacy in Kirkuk is also an essential contingency in case Iraqs current instability worsens.
The Americans, on the other hand, are worried that integrating acceptance of regional control over resources into the constitution will encourage those who want to secede in the north, and those who want to ally themselves with Iran in the south. Iran-leaning Iraqi Shiites, like the Sunni Arabs, continue to be unfavorably disposed to American influence over the Iraqi political process, while the U.S. fears that allowing some form of regional autonomy in the south will be to its disadvantage as it seeks to turn Iraq into a stable source of oil.
While the U.S. has made its preference clear on oil-related issues, it has also, much to the dismay of the Kurds, decided to steer clear of other social and political complexities that could plague the nascent Iraqi constitution. Both Kurds and non-Shiite Arabs are alarmed by the supposed desire of the majority to include Iranian-style Islamic features in the constitution. There has even been talk of including a (mostly ceremonial) post of "supreme guide," an idea which makes Iraqs non-Shiites cringe. While it is debatable whether or not the Kurds genuinely have a problem with an Islamic civil code, they do have more difficulties with the use of Islam in the constitution than do the other parties, and this puts them at a disadvantage.
The Kurds have also put forth highly controversial demands. Many of these can be interpreted as part of a Kurdish bargaining technique to secure things such as veto power over legislation. The Kurds, for example, have suggested that they be entitled to a regional referendum in eight years time to determine whether or not they approve of independence. While this is unlikely to be allowed by any Iraqi government, even if it is written into the constitution, it would be a justification for Kurdish independence down the road if things turned sour in the rest of the country. Understandably, the "I" word is not being taken well by the other parties at the table, who are already suspicious of Kurdish intentions.
The current negotiations are tough and complicated, and the Kurds are also the only ones who seem to be going at them alone. Kurdish leaders were the most ardent Iraqi supporters of the U.S. invasion, and Kurdistan is still the only part of Iraq considered safe for American troops. The Kurds put their Peshmerga militia at the service of the U.S. to secure a number of key areas near the north, and almost everyone suspects that the Kurds were the real captors of Saddam Hussein, at least in terms of providing the intelligence that led to his discovery.
Yet despite all of this, the U.S. is concerned about the image a strong U.S.-Kurdish alliance sends to the Arab world, and has failed to provide rewards for Kurdish cooperation. Complicating the issue further is the fact that Turkey remains very uneasy with Kurdish moves.
The Sunni Arabs on the other hand - many of whose active representatives today were once aligned with Baath - have been courted incessantly by the U.S. Their very place in the Iraqi constitutional drafting process is a direct result of this American desire to be accommodating: the parties at the table, at the firm request of the Bush administration, were asked to ignore the fact that very few Sunni Arabs turned out to vote in the Iraqi elections, hence ensuring far fewer representatives in the constitutional negotiations.
The Americans have also sought to appease the majority Shiites. However, conspicuously less talk is heard about the integral advisory role that Iran is playing in support of the Iraqi Shiites. Tehran has behaved as a sophisticated big brother to the Shiites, and seeks to ultimately ensure that the community gets all that the constitutional drafting process can offer them.
In all likelihood, the Kurds will be the party forced to settle for less. Their minimal package of demands does not square with the maximal concessions the other Iraqi communities are willing to offer. The constitution itself will be drafted shortly, but its repercussions will be more evident in about a years time, when the Kurds will have had time to work within a structure they find problematic. A Kurdish backlash, requesting revisions to the constitution or something more serious, will be very likely then.
