Trump ally Erdogan claims Jerusalem for Turkey

Trump's ally? You fucking hate filled fascist retard, I wish I had made your acquaintance :fu: in the desert...


Yeah, I guess that one is unaware that Turkey is in NATO (a mistaken idea I have always believed).
Turkey was pro-NAZI so that is how they got in.

Sounds CRAZY I know!!! What is forgotten is that after Hitler and Germany were defeated, a NEW ENEMY arose, called the USSR. Now, let's see; who is a foe of Communist Russia???

These days Turkey and Russia are both run by fascists. They seem to be having a little disagreement in Azerbaijan, but nonetheless.
 
President Trump and Erdogan were having a summit. While talking informally, Erdogan said, "I've had this dream. In my dream, I see the flag of Turkey and banners proclaiming "Allah is Great" hanging from the White House and on the walls of Jerusalem. "

President Trump said, "I have a very similar dream. But, in my dream, I see banners hanging along every street in Istanbul and on the minarets of the Sophia Mosque".

Erdogan said, "What do the banners say?"

President Trump said, "I don't know ... I don't read Hebrew".
 
So..............one Trident SSBN can wipe out most major cities across all of Russia Turkey and China by itself.............1.........

Yes, that's probably true.

You said, that Turkey should be "kicked out of NATO", and I implied that nukes in Incirlik under NATO nuclear-sharing agreements will be replaced by Turkish ones in a very short time if Turkey ever leaves NATO. For that argument I provided a link.

But, why exactly is there a reason to nuke Turkey with Trident SSBN ?
Turks didn't kill any Americans, the looser countries surrounding Turkey who face domination by Turkey actually did kill Americans and are using their money in Washington and the US press to portray Turkey as an enemy and hope for a tough stance against Turkey because they're helpless against Turkey increasing influence at their expense, even if they ally among themselves.

I don't think Turkey is much concerned about PR in USA, about being "kicked out of NATO" or that the US government considers Turkey an enemy. The concerned ones are others and they're financing the swamp.
40 million tourists visit Turkey every year, it's a beautiful country, why not go there and take a look for yourself, you'll surely not need Jamie Foxx protection

TheKingdom_Theatrical1sht.jpg
 
Last edited:
But, why exactly is there a reason to nuke Turkey with Trident SSBN ?
I never said we had to nuke them...........You brought up nukes and them leaving NATO.........I simply brought up one subs capability.............MERVs...............Multiple Entry Reentry vehicles.
 
Turkey is incapable to produce high tech hardware without Western (or something else) technologies. For example, its famous drones are equipped with Canadian electronics.

The smaller Bayraktar TB-2 drone is using electro-optic components from Wescam (Canada).
Foreign content of the whole drone doesn't exceed 7 % according to Financial Times from UK.

Baykar, which imports 7 per cent of the components used for the TB2

Turkey stockpiled enough WESCAM components, and for the much bigger drones like Akinci, Aksungur and ANKA the Turks went for indigenious solutions.

Here ANKA drone with CATS from Aselsan
ANKA_S_CATS.jpg




Aselsan is one of 7 Turkish companies in Top-100 defense companies in world whereas Canada only has 1 company in Top-100 with Wescam not even making it into that list. It's global supply chain, and not even the USA produces everything 100% indigeniously.

Well, I can congratulate the Turks if they really achieved successes in high tech technologies.

Though, it doesn't dismiss the point that Turkey should be contained as much as possible.
 
Though, it doesn't dismiss the point that Turkey should be contained as much as possible.

You mean the USA should contain Turkey ?
I don't think that is going to happen.
It depends on what direction Turkey will choose to expand its sphere. If that will be the Caucas region and the Middle Asia, then it will be only encouraged.

If it will be at the expense of say Greece and Israel, then counter-measures from the US will follow.
 
569.368 Israelis visited Turkey as tourists in 2019.

What's Israelis total population ? 9 million ?
Seems like Turkey is preferred choice for Israelis making holiday abroad.


What was the population of the Arab countries that together invaded Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973 compared to Israel's? Turkey doesn't worry them any more than the others do, probably less in fact, since Turkey is busy making enemies.

Get rid of Erdogan; he's an idiot and will only get millions of you killed.
 
What was the population of the Arab countries that together invaded Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973 compared to Israel's? Turkey doesn't worry them any more than the others do, probably less in fact, since Turkey is busy making enemies.

Get rid of Erdogan; he's an idiot and will only get millions of you killed.

Who are those enemies who are killing millions of Turks ?
 
Jerusalem was always Jewish
Israel controls it all
Only a small eastern section is Arabic
The entire city is surrounded by massive Jewish settlements
 
It depends on what direction Turkey will choose to expand its sphere. If that will be the Caucas region and the Middle Asia, then it will be only encouraged.

If it will be at the expense of say Greece and Israel, then counter-measures from the US will follow.

USA spent its money on Mid-East whilst infrastructure in America is crumbling, in the mean time the Chinese were expanding their economy and influence at a rate which is threatening US hegemony, and the Germans accumulating a massive trade-balance against USA in favour of Germany all whilst the GI is providing security for Germany (Germany investing money in their export industry instead of its military). The Germans like the NATO and the GIs :)

If you really think the USA should divert ressources to confront Turkey instead of containing China, Russia and Germany you really deserve what is coming for you.
I think, that US administration is seeing the bigger picture.
Since George Bush Junior the USA implemented its whole Mid-East policy without significant Turkish support. It showed to the Americans that there are only actors around who need to be supported by a direct US military presence and/or US taxpayer money.
What did USA gain by that behaviour else than Trillions of debt ?
There won't be any counter-measures by USA against Turkey.
As if America is going to send her sons defending Greeks, who are already debt-owned by Germany / European Central Bank all whilst China is putting a new warship to the sea every week.
First finish Iran and Russia in Mid-East before containing Turkey on the internet :)

USA wants to have influence in Middle-East it needs to work with Turkey. Turkey is expanding with or without USA relations.
 
Last edited:
It depends on what direction Turkey will choose to expand its sphere. If that will be the Caucas region and the Middle Asia, then it will be only encouraged.

If it will be at the expense of say Greece and Israel, then counter-measures from the US will follow.

USA spent its money on Mid-East whilst infrastructure in America is crumbling, in the mean time the Chinese were expanding their economy and influence at a rate which is threatening US hegemony, and the Germans accumulating a massive trade-balance against USA in favour of Germany all whilst the GI is providing security for Germany (Germany investing money in their export industry instead of its military). The Germans like the NATO and the GIs :)

If you really think the USA should divert ressources to confront Turkey instead of containing China, Russia and Germany you really deserve what is coming for you.
I think, that US administration is seeing the bigger picture.
Since George Bush Junior the USA implemented its whole Mid-East policy without significant Turkish support. It showed to the Americans that there are only actors around who need to be supported by a direct US military presence and/or US taxpayer money.
What did USA gain by that behaviour else than Trillions of debt ?
There won't be any counter-measures by USA against Turkey.
As if America is going to send her sons defending Greeks, who are already debt-owned by Germany / European Central Bank all whilst China is putting a new warship to the sea every week.
First finish Iran and Russia in Mid-East before containing Turkey on the internet :)

USA wants to have influence in Middle-East it needs to work with Turkey. Turkey is expanding with or without USA relations.
It depends on what direction Turkey will choose to expand its sphere. If that will be the Caucas region and the Middle Asia, then it will be only encouraged.

If it will be at the expense of say Greece and Israel, then counter-measures from the US will follow.

USA spent its money on Mid-East whilst infrastructure in America is crumbling, in the mean time the Chinese were expanding their economy and influence at a rate which is threatening US hegemony, and the Germans accumulating a massive trade-balance against USA in favour of Germany all whilst the GI is providing security for Germany (Germany investing money in their export industry instead of its military). The Germans like the NATO and the GIs :)

If you really think the USA should divert ressources to confront Turkey instead of containing China, Russia and Germany you really deserve what is coming for you.
I think, that US administration is seeing the bigger picture.
Since George Bush Junior the USA implemented its whole Mid-East policy without significant Turkish support. It showed to the Americans that there are only actors around who need to be supported by a direct US military presence and/or US taxpayer money.
What did USA gain by that behaviour else than Trillions of debt ?
There won't be any counter-measures by USA against Turkey.
As if America is going to send her sons defending Greeks, who are already debt-owned by Germany / European Central Bank all whilst China is putting a new warship to the sea every week.
First finish Iran and Russia in Mid-East before containing Turkey on the internet :)

USA wants to have influence in Middle-East it needs to work with Turkey. Turkey is expanding with or without USA relations.
I am not an American and I only express my opinion as an outside viewer.

In my opinion, if the US want to play decisive role on the international stage in a century to come, then they should find a way to solve their internal issues first - overcome their mostly two-partisan division, bring back industry, sort out the finances etc. If the US will manage to do so and at the end of the century they will be more or less as we know them today (I personally hope they will), then all these discussions will make sense. If not, then I am afraid even to think who will fill this gap.
 
Trump's ally? You fucking hate filled fascist retard, I wish I had made your acquaintance :fu: in the desert...

Exactly. :mad-61:....the way it's phrased "Trump's ally" dripping with virulence....you can almost touch it!

oh well.....that's what TDS does for you.:cuckoo:

OP must have a double dose of TDS: Trump Derangement Syndrome and Turkish Derangement Syndrome.

How xenophobic of him. :laughing0301:
ProsCons.jpg
 
I am not an American and I only express my opinion as an outside viewer.

In my opinion, if the US want to play decisive role on the international stage in a century to come, then they should find a way to solve their internal issues first - overcome their mostly two-partisan division, bring back industry, sort out the finances etc. If the US will manage to do so and at the end of the century they will be more or less as we know them today (I personally hope they will), then all these discussions will make sense. If not, then I am afraid even to think who will fill this gap.

If you want to control everything in all corners of this world then you have to split your capabilities, and in some regions that may not be enough to contain adversaries. That's what happened for USA with the whole China situation.

USA will support Israel with money and technology, but will invest less money and support in all others. It will watch who comes out top-dog, like trial by fire, and throw its support behind that country whilst it gradually moves to Pacific.
Nothing to win for USA either in Europe or Middle-East, but everything to loose if it keeps China unchecked. To have USA support is always good, but Turkey can do without it and still provide its own security and intervene or increase influence in the region.
 
I am not an American and I only express my opinion as an outside viewer.

In my opinion, if the US want to play decisive role on the international stage in a century to come, then they should find a way to solve their internal issues first - overcome their mostly two-partisan division, bring back industry, sort out the finances etc. If the US will manage to do so and at the end of the century they will be more or less as we know them today (I personally hope they will), then all these discussions will make sense. If not, then I am afraid even to think who will fill this gap.

If you want to control everything in all corners of this world then you have to split your capabilities, and in some regions that may not be enough to contain adversaries. That's what happened for USA with the whole China situation.

USA will support Israel with money and technology, but will invest less money and support in all others. It will watch who comes out top-dog, like trial by fire, and throw its support behind that country whilst it gradually moves to Pacific.
Nothing to win for USA either in Europe or Middle-East, but everything to loose if it keeps China unchecked. To have USA support is always good, but Turkey can do without it and still provide its own security and intervene or increase influence in the region.
As I said above, everything is about what the US will be at the end of the century. China and the US are too main players who can compete globally. But the world won't be as it was during the Cold War, when there were two dominant powers and the members of the respective blocs depended almost wholly on them.

The world will be multipolar in the sense that there will be a number of regional players who will have a significant influence in their spheres. And the dominant powers will have to seek for common interests with them.

What these regional powers will be? Take a look at G20 with some exceptions and additions.
 
As I said above, everything is about what the US will be at the end of the century. China and the US are too main players who can compete globally. But the world won't be as it was during the Cold War, when there were two dominant powers and the members of the respective blocs depended almost wholly on them.

The world will be multipolar in the sense that there will be a number of regional players who will have a significant influence in their spheres. And the dominant powers will have to seek for common interests with them.

What these regional powers will be? Take a look at G20 with some exceptions and additions.


Looking just at the G-20 is not enough.
You have to consider the sustainability of their economic well-being.
Middle-East is rich in oil, but not in natural gas.
Natural gas will play an important role in the future, but oil will decrease its role.
Places like Saudi-Arabia, UAE will revert back to deserts without a serious push towards technological progress.

Then you have to look at the cultural narrative of the countries to impact their surroundings. What's their narrative ?
"Our borders have been drawn by imperialists after WW1 rather than our own blood, before USA's appetite for oil after WW2 all our lands were deserts, now we've shiny cities like Dubai and we're behaving like newly-rich pricks instead of using the wealth for the well-being of Muslim communities in the region".
All those monarchies are hated by their own people. These countries are all standing in line for major socio-economic change.
All they can do is funnel money into Washington swamp, American defense industry and buy favourable articles in the American press.
If that's not enough they'll try to buy Israeli support with "peace agreements" for when the day comes the USA will support their dynasties against their own people.

Alliances by those countries are just paper-alliances, they can't send one single soldier abroad without social unrest. Their whole security apparatus is designed to oppress their own people than fighting wars abroad. That's why I'm not concerned by phrases from users like Picaro that Turkey is creating enemies. If many loosers join forces together they still don't make a formidabble enemy. Trump himself said, that Saudi King will fall in 2 weeks without US support.

Turkish narrative on the other hands is simple: "We came here without natural ressources, we care for Palestine, the Rohingya, the Uyghurs, the Syrian refugees and all oppressed Muslims and the people of the region". All whilst TSK is launching one expeditionary operation after the other.
 
Last edited:
As I said above, everything is about what the US will be at the end of the century. China and the US are too main players who can compete globally. But the world won't be as it was during the Cold War, when there were two dominant powers and the members of the respective blocs depended almost wholly on them.

The world will be multipolar in the sense that there will be a number of regional players who will have a significant influence in their spheres. And the dominant powers will have to seek for common interests with them.

What these regional powers will be? Take a look at G20 with some exceptions and additions.


Looking just at the G-20 is not enough.
You have to consider the sustainability of their economic well-being.
Middle-East is rich in oil, but not in natural gas.
Natural gas will play an important role in the future, but oil will decrease its role.
Places like Saudi-Arabia, UAE will revert back to deserts without a serious push towards technological progress.

Then you have to look at the cultural narrative of the countries to impact their surroundings. What's their narrative ?
"Our borders have been drawn by imperialists after WW1 rather than our own blood, before USA's appetite for oil after WW2 all our lands were deserts, now we've shiny cities like Dubai and we're behaving like newly-rich pricks instead of using the wealth for the well-being of Muslim communities in the region".
All those monarchies are hated by their own people. These countries are all standing in line for major socio-economic change.
All they can do is funnel money into Washington swamp, American defense industry and buy favourable articles in the American press.
If that's not enough they'll try to buy Israeli support with "peace agreements" for when the day comes the USA will support their dynasties against their own people.

Alliances by those countries are just paper-alliances, they can't send one single soldier abroad without social unrest. Their whole security apparatus is designed to oppress their own people than fighting wars abroad. That's why I'm not concerned by phrases from users like Picaro that Turkey is creating enemies. If many loosers join forces together they still don't make a formidabble enemy. Trump himself said, that Saudi King will fall in 2 weeks without US support.

Turkish narrative on the other hands is simple: "We came here without natural ressources, we care for Palestine, the Rohingya, the Uyghurs, the Syrian refugees and all oppressed Muslims and the people of the region". All whilst TSK is launching one expeditionary operation after the other.
Yeah, it may well be that the Gulf monarchies are colossus on clay legs. And the interest in them and the region exists only as long as there is a need in their natural recourses. They can get back to their tents and breeding camels, as far as I am concerned.

If Turkey wants to widen its sphere at their cost, then go ahead. I couldn't care less. I am more concerned about European affairs.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top