Turkey's Exhausting Zigzagging between East and West.

[Mindful]

Turkey has been a republic since 1923, a multi-party democracy since 1946, and a member of NATO since 1952. In 1987, it added another powerful anchor into the Western bay where it wanted it to remain docked: It applied for full membership in the European Union (EU). This imperfect journey toward the West was dramatically replaced by a directionless cruise, with sharp zigzags between the East and West, after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist AKP party came to power in 2002. Zigzagging remains the main Turkish policy feature to this day.

Until the summer of 2015 Turkey was widely known as the "jihad highway," because of its systematic tolerance for jihadists crossing through Turkey into neighboring Syria to fight Erdogan's regional nemesis, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Turkey supported various jihadist groups in the hope that they would help Ankara unseat Assad. Then, under pressure from its NATO allies, it decided to join the U.S.-led, international campaign to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Syria. Feeling betrayed, ISIS started to blow up Turkish cities.

Erdogan's recent maneuverings remind me of how Hitler hoodwinked the West. Until four days before he invaded Poland, the West, ever sleepwalking, were utterly convinced Hitler was going to attack USSR, because he had come to power on an anti-Communist ticket. The West had a rude awakening only when, on 23 August 1939, Von Ribbentrop signed the Non-Aggression Pact with Molotov; and on Sept. 1, Hitler took half of Poland. Few days later, Stalin took the other half.

What is the moral of the story? Until a few weeks ago, the West was comfortably day-dreaming that, despite his foibles, Erdogan was a staunch U.S. ally and an eager EU candidate. After all, had he not, only recently, downed a Russian jet? Then, suddenly, what do we see? Putin and Erdogan kissing and making up ... It is a matter of 'my enemy's enemy...'.

Turkey's Exhausting Zigzagging between East and West

 

[alpine]

Turkish seculars lost the fight the moment islamists became pragmatic and more importantly, capitalist... unfortunately...

 

[irosie91]

Turkish seculars lost the fight the moment islamists became pragmatic and more importantly, capitalist... unfortunately...

I do not understand your statement-------when were the islamists
not "capitalist"?

 

[alpine]

Turkish seculars lost the fight the moment islamists became pragmatic and more importantly, capitalist... unfortunately...

I do not understand your statement-------when were the islamists
not "capitalist"?

Before they accumulated enough wealth to become one.

 

[irosie91]

Turkish seculars lost the fight the moment islamists became pragmatic and more importantly, capitalist... unfortunately...

I do not understand your statement-------when were the islamists
not "capitalist"?

Before they accumulated enough wealth to become one.

arab society is CAPITALIST------what do you imagine the
SOUK is? Muhummad was a capitalist---he was a business
man after marrying a rich girl--------Maybe you meant to say
that turkey and its EMPIRE-----(the erstwhile Ottoman countries) became VERY IMPORTANT in the WORLD ECONOMY ----because of the oil...... <<<that kinda makes
sense

 

[alpine]

Turkish seculars lost the fight the moment islamists became pragmatic and more importantly, capitalist... unfortunately...

I do not understand your statement-------when were the islamists
not "capitalist"?

Before they accumulated enough wealth to become one.

arab society is CAPITALIST------what do you imagine the
SOUK is? Muhummad was a capitalist---he was a business
man after marrying a rich girl--------Maybe you meant to say
that turkey and its EMPIRE-----(the erstwhile Ottoman countries) became VERY IMPORTANT in the WORLD ECONOMY ----because of the oil...... <<<that kinda makes
sense

I think you are confused with the definition of what a "capitalist" is.
A capitalist is a person who have accumulated enough wealth to become a capitalist.

In the before times; in Turkey, it was the seculars holding most of the capital/wealth, therefore, they were the capitalists.
That changed in the last 15 years, and islamists grew so much wealth by projecting their power in the government(meaning by stealing), they became the powerful capitalists of the new era.

That, coming together with their pragmatism (like we have seen in Turkish-Israeli relations) they have become an impossible to stop nightmare for seculars...

 

[irosie91]

Turkey has been a republic since 1923, a multi-party democracy since 1946, and a member of NATO since 1952. In 1987, it added another powerful anchor into the Western bay where it wanted it to remain docked: It applied for full membership in the European Union (EU). This imperfect journey toward the West was dramatically replaced by a directionless cruise, with sharp zigzags between the East and West, after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist AKP party came to power in 2002. Zigzagging remains the main Turkish policy feature to this day.

Until the summer of 2015 Turkey was widely known as the "jihad highway," because of its systematic tolerance for jihadists crossing through Turkey into neighboring Syria to fight Erdogan's regional nemesis, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Turkey supported various jihadist groups in the hope that they would help Ankara unseat Assad. Then, under pressure from its NATO allies, it decided to join the U.S.-led, international campaign to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Syria. Feeling betrayed, ISIS started to blow up Turkish cities.

Erdogan's recent maneuverings remind me of how Hitler hoodwinked the West. Until four days before he invaded Poland, the West, ever sleepwalking, were utterly convinced Hitler was going to attack USSR, because he had come to power on an anti-Communist ticket. The West had a rude awakening only when, on 23 August 1939, Von Ribbentrop signed the Non-Aggression Pact with Molotov; and on Sept. 1, Hitler took half of Poland. Few days later, Stalin took the other half.

What is the moral of the story? Until a few weeks ago, the West was comfortably day-dreaming that, despite his foibles, Erdogan was a staunch U.S. ally and an eager EU candidate. After all, had he not, only recently, downed a Russian jet? Then, suddenly, what do we see? Putin and Erdogan kissing and making up ... It is a matter of 'my enemy's enemy...'.

Turkey's Exhausting Zigzagging between East and West

Mind---I kinda see your point-------and now for my brilliant
insight. What I see is -----the gathering together of NATIONS----not exactly hostile to each other in the sense of being at
war------but whose populations REALLY HATE EACH OTHER. Turks despise arabs-----arabs hate turks. Iranians
SNEER with disgust at the mention of anything "arab"---from
their language to their cuisine and even their music. Russians---for all their socialist BS-----have absolutely no use
for------believe it or not------what the Brits call "brown people" and based on their experience with Chechnyans and the fact
of their Eastern Ortho background-----despise muslims. Do you remember in the Movie---LAWRENCE OF ARABIA---the
scene when the arab chieftains get TOGETHER to "DISCUSS" things? I will remind you------in minutes they were dissolved into a rumble

 

[irosie91]

Turkish seculars lost the fight the moment islamists became pragmatic and more importantly, capitalist... unfortunately...

I do not understand your statement-------when were the islamists
not "capitalist"?

Before they accumulated enough wealth to become one.

arab society is CAPITALIST------what do you imagine the
SOUK is? Muhummad was a capitalist---he was a business
man after marrying a rich girl--------Maybe you meant to say
that turkey and its EMPIRE-----(the erstwhile Ottoman countries) became VERY IMPORTANT in the WORLD ECONOMY ----because of the oil...... <<<that kinda makes
sense

I think you are confused with the definition of what a "capitalist" is.
A capitalist is a person who have accumulated enough wealth to become a capitalist.

In the before times; in Turkey, it was the seculars holding most of the capital/wealth, therefore, they were the capitalists.
That changed in the last 15 years, and islamists grew so much wealth by projecting their power in the government(meaning by stealing), they became the powerful capitalists of the new era.

That, coming together with their pragmatism (like we have seen in Turkish-Israeli relations) they have become an impossible to stop nightmare for seculars...

ok---you mean EFFECTIVE national and international
capitalists-----ok. The ACCUMULATION OF WEALTH
FOR POWER-----is the norm in the middle east and turkey----
they have no tradition of socialism---<<< that was my point.
Erdogan is all about POWER

 

[alpine]

Turkish seculars lost the fight the moment islamists became pragmatic and more importantly, capitalist... unfortunately...

I do not understand your statement-------when were the islamists
not "capitalist"?

Before they accumulated enough wealth to become one.

arab society is CAPITALIST------what do you imagine the
SOUK is? Muhummad was a capitalist---he was a business
man after marrying a rich girl--------Maybe you meant to say
that turkey and its EMPIRE-----(the erstwhile Ottoman countries) became VERY IMPORTANT in the WORLD ECONOMY ----because of the oil...... <<<that kinda makes
sense

I think you are confused with the definition of what a "capitalist" is.
A capitalist is a person who have accumulated enough wealth to become a capitalist.

In the before times; in Turkey, it was the seculars holding most of the capital/wealth, therefore, they were the capitalists.
That changed in the last 15 years, and islamists grew so much wealth by projecting their power in the government(meaning by stealing), they became the powerful capitalists of the new era.

That, coming together with their pragmatism (like we have seen in Turkish-Israeli relations) they have become an impossible to stop nightmare for seculars...

ok---you mean EFFECTIVE national and international
capitalists-----ok. The ACCUMULATION OF WEALTH
FOR POWER-----is the norm in the middle east and turkey----
they have no tradition of socialism---<<< that was my point.
Erdogan is all about POWER

"The ACCUMULATION OF WEALTH
FOR POWER-----is the norm in the middle east and turkey"

This is how capitalism works in fact. Same principle applies for all western society.
But with a very crucial difference; in the west, they would not allow one guy to distribute the wealth like it solely belongs to himself, like what Erdogan does.
Rather, they have free market working its magic.

If you allow one guy to distribute your wealth as a nation, then you become what Turkey has become, an islamist shithole...

 

[Mindful]

Turkey has been a republic since 1923, a multi-party democracy since 1946, and a member of NATO since 1952. In 1987, it added another powerful anchor into the Western bay where it wanted it to remain docked: It applied for full membership in the European Union (EU). This imperfect journey toward the West was dramatically replaced by a directionless cruise, with sharp zigzags between the East and West, after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist AKP party came to power in 2002. Zigzagging remains the main Turkish policy feature to this day.

Until the summer of 2015 Turkey was widely known as the "jihad highway," because of its systematic tolerance for jihadists crossing through Turkey into neighboring Syria to fight Erdogan's regional nemesis, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Turkey supported various jihadist groups in the hope that they would help Ankara unseat Assad. Then, under pressure from its NATO allies, it decided to join the U.S.-led, international campaign to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Syria. Feeling betrayed, ISIS started to blow up Turkish cities.

Erdogan's recent maneuverings remind me of how Hitler hoodwinked the West. Until four days before he invaded Poland, the West, ever sleepwalking, were utterly convinced Hitler was going to attack USSR, because he had come to power on an anti-Communist ticket. The West had a rude awakening only when, on 23 August 1939, Von Ribbentrop signed the Non-Aggression Pact with Molotov; and on Sept. 1, Hitler took half of Poland. Few days later, Stalin took the other half.

What is the moral of the story? Until a few weeks ago, the West was comfortably day-dreaming that, despite his foibles, Erdogan was a staunch U.S. ally and an eager EU candidate. After all, had he not, only recently, downed a Russian jet? Then, suddenly, what do we see? Putin and Erdogan kissing and making up ... It is a matter of 'my enemy's enemy...'.

Turkey's Exhausting Zigzagging between East and West

Mind---I kinda see your point-------and now for my brilliant
insight. What I see is -----the gathering together of NATIONS----not exactly hostile to each other in the sense of being at
war------but whose populations REALLY HATE EACH OTHER. Turks despise arabs-----arabs hate turks. Iranians
SNEER with disgust at the mention of anything "arab"---from
their language to their cuisine and even their music. Russians---for all their socialist BS-----have absolutely no use
for------believe it or not------what the Brits call "brown people" and based on their experience with Chechnyans and the fact
of their Eastern Ortho background-----despise muslims. Do you remember in the Movie---LAWRENCE OF ARABIA---the
scene when the arab chieftains get TOGETHER to "DISCUSS" things? I will remind you------in minutes they were dissolved into a rumble

The Iranians hate and look down down on Arabs. I know that for sure.

So maybe we should be looking at the hate and divisiveness within ME societies themselves.

 

[irosie91]

Turkey has been a republic since 1923, a multi-party democracy since 1946, and a member of NATO since 1952. In 1987, it added another powerful anchor into the Western bay where it wanted it to remain docked: It applied for full membership in the European Union (EU). This imperfect journey toward the West was dramatically replaced by a directionless cruise, with sharp zigzags between the East and West, after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist AKP party came to power in 2002. Zigzagging remains the main Turkish policy feature to this day.

Until the summer of 2015 Turkey was widely known as the "jihad highway," because of its systematic tolerance for jihadists crossing through Turkey into neighboring Syria to fight Erdogan's regional nemesis, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Turkey supported various jihadist groups in the hope that they would help Ankara unseat Assad. Then, under pressure from its NATO allies, it decided to join the U.S.-led, international campaign to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Syria. Feeling betrayed, ISIS started to blow up Turkish cities.

Erdogan's recent maneuverings remind me of how Hitler hoodwinked the West. Until four days before he invaded Poland, the West, ever sleepwalking, were utterly convinced Hitler was going to attack USSR, because he had come to power on an anti-Communist ticket. The West had a rude awakening only when, on 23 August 1939, Von Ribbentrop signed the Non-Aggression Pact with Molotov; and on Sept. 1, Hitler took half of Poland. Few days later, Stalin took the other half.

What is the moral of the story? Until a few weeks ago, the West was comfortably day-dreaming that, despite his foibles, Erdogan was a staunch U.S. ally and an eager EU candidate. After all, had he not, only recently, downed a Russian jet? Then, suddenly, what do we see? Putin and Erdogan kissing and making up ... It is a matter of 'my enemy's enemy...'.

Turkey's Exhausting Zigzagging between East and West

Mind---I kinda see your point-------and now for my brilliant
insight. What I see is -----the gathering together of NATIONS----not exactly hostile to each other in the sense of being at
war------but whose populations REALLY HATE EACH OTHER. Turks despise arabs-----arabs hate turks. Iranians
SNEER with disgust at the mention of anything "arab"---from
their language to their cuisine and even their music. Russians---for all their socialist BS-----have absolutely no use
for------believe it or not------what the Brits call "brown people" and based on their experience with Chechnyans and the fact
of their Eastern Ortho background-----despise muslims. Do you remember in the Movie---LAWRENCE OF ARABIA---the
scene when the arab chieftains get TOGETHER to "DISCUSS" things? I will remind you------in minutes they were dissolved into a rumble

The Iranians hate and look down down on Arabs. I know that for sure.

So maybe we should be looking at the hate and divisiveness within ME societies themselves.

CONTROL YOURSELF!!!!! every time the US decided to do the-----"lets support this group over that group" thing---we screwed ourselves. Remember the NOBLE MUJAHDEEN
Pakistanis who fought the USSR for us in the 1980s----DAT WAS DA TALIBAN---and Osama joined-----watta mess

 

[alpine]

Turkey has been a republic since 1923, a multi-party democracy since 1946, and a member of NATO since 1952. In 1987, it added another powerful anchor into the Western bay where it wanted it to remain docked: It applied for full membership in the European Union (EU). This imperfect journey toward the West was dramatically replaced by a directionless cruise, with sharp zigzags between the East and West, after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist AKP party came to power in 2002. Zigzagging remains the main Turkish policy feature to this day.

Until the summer of 2015 Turkey was widely known as the "jihad highway," because of its systematic tolerance for jihadists crossing through Turkey into neighboring Syria to fight Erdogan's regional nemesis, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Turkey supported various jihadist groups in the hope that they would help Ankara unseat Assad. Then, under pressure from its NATO allies, it decided to join the U.S.-led, international campaign to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Syria. Feeling betrayed, ISIS started to blow up Turkish cities.

Erdogan's recent maneuverings remind me of how Hitler hoodwinked the West. Until four days before he invaded Poland, the West, ever sleepwalking, were utterly convinced Hitler was going to attack USSR, because he had come to power on an anti-Communist ticket. The West had a rude awakening only when, on 23 August 1939, Von Ribbentrop signed the Non-Aggression Pact with Molotov; and on Sept. 1, Hitler took half of Poland. Few days later, Stalin took the other half.

What is the moral of the story? Until a few weeks ago, the West was comfortably day-dreaming that, despite his foibles, Erdogan was a staunch U.S. ally and an eager EU candidate. After all, had he not, only recently, downed a Russian jet? Then, suddenly, what do we see? Putin and Erdogan kissing and making up ... It is a matter of 'my enemy's enemy...'.

Turkey's Exhausting Zigzagging between East and West

Mind---I kinda see your point-------and now for my brilliant
insight. What I see is -----the gathering together of NATIONS----not exactly hostile to each other in the sense of being at
war------but whose populations REALLY HATE EACH OTHER. Turks despise arabs-----arabs hate turks. Iranians
SNEER with disgust at the mention of anything "arab"---from
their language to their cuisine and even their music. Russians---for all their socialist BS-----have absolutely no use
for------believe it or not------what the Brits call "brown people" and based on their experience with Chechnyans and the fact
of their Eastern Ortho background-----despise muslims. Do you remember in the Movie---LAWRENCE OF ARABIA---the
scene when the arab chieftains get TOGETHER to "DISCUSS" things? I will remind you------in minutes they were dissolved into a rumble

The Iranians hate and look down down on Arabs. I know that for sure.

So maybe we should be looking at the hate and divisiveness within ME societies themselves.

I lost the count how many times sunnis tried to destroy the shia?

Yazid against Hussein
Ottomans against Safavid
Iraq against Iran
Saudi backed ISIS against Syria

Am I missing any?

 

[irosie91]

Turkey has been a republic since 1923, a multi-party democracy since 1946, and a member of NATO since 1952. In 1987, it added another powerful anchor into the Western bay where it wanted it to remain docked: It applied for full membership in the European Union (EU). This imperfect journey toward the West was dramatically replaced by a directionless cruise, with sharp zigzags between the East and West, after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist AKP party came to power in 2002. Zigzagging remains the main Turkish policy feature to this day.

Until the summer of 2015 Turkey was widely known as the "jihad highway," because of its systematic tolerance for jihadists crossing through Turkey into neighboring Syria to fight Erdogan's regional nemesis, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Turkey supported various jihadist groups in the hope that they would help Ankara unseat Assad. Then, under pressure from its NATO allies, it decided to join the U.S.-led, international campaign to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Syria. Feeling betrayed, ISIS started to blow up Turkish cities.

Erdogan's recent maneuverings remind me of how Hitler hoodwinked the West. Until four days before he invaded Poland, the West, ever sleepwalking, were utterly convinced Hitler was going to attack USSR, because he had come to power on an anti-Communist ticket. The West had a rude awakening only when, on 23 August 1939, Von Ribbentrop signed the Non-Aggression Pact with Molotov; and on Sept. 1, Hitler took half of Poland. Few days later, Stalin took the other half.

What is the moral of the story? Until a few weeks ago, the West was comfortably day-dreaming that, despite his foibles, Erdogan was a staunch U.S. ally and an eager EU candidate. After all, had he not, only recently, downed a Russian jet? Then, suddenly, what do we see? Putin and Erdogan kissing and making up ... It is a matter of 'my enemy's enemy...'.

Turkey's Exhausting Zigzagging between East and West

Mind---I kinda see your point-------and now for my brilliant
insight. What I see is -----the gathering together of NATIONS----not exactly hostile to each other in the sense of being at
war------but whose populations REALLY HATE EACH OTHER. Turks despise arabs-----arabs hate turks. Iranians
SNEER with disgust at the mention of anything "arab"---from
their language to their cuisine and even their music. Russians---for all their socialist BS-----have absolutely no use
for------believe it or not------what the Brits call "brown people" and based on their experience with Chechnyans and the fact
of their Eastern Ortho background-----despise muslims. Do you remember in the Movie---LAWRENCE OF ARABIA---the
scene when the arab chieftains get TOGETHER to "DISCUSS" things? I will remind you------in minutes they were dissolved into a rumble

The Iranians hate and look down down on Arabs. I know that for sure.

So maybe we should be looking at the hate and divisiveness within ME societies themselves.

I lost the count how many times sunnis tried to destroy the shia?

Yazid against Hussein
Ottomans against Safavid
Iraq against Iran
Saudi backed ISIS against Syria

Am I missing any?

a few thousand----the history of the middle east and
the Ottoman empire and Iran------is something like an
epic HATFIELDS AND McCOYS comedy

 

[Mindful]

So; we are still experiencing the reverberations of the Ottoman Empire breakup?

 

[irosie91]

So; we are still experiencing the reverberations of the Ottoman Empire breakup?

Absolutely-----as for Iran ----it has nothing to do with the MYTHICAL CIA COUP------that the islamo Nazis claim.
Getting back to the OTTOMAN EMPIRE---try to remember
that it was a CALIPHATE. ----the pride of the UMMAH ----
for those who do not know. The MOGHUL EMPIRE ---south
east Asia was a CALIPHATE. Indonesia is a vestige of that
pile of dog filth as is Pakistan and----sadly---even Bangla desh.
Iran is working on returning to CALIPHATE days------as is
TURKEY. We are living in the age of ISLAMIC NOSTALGIA------on the level of SHEHERAZADE

 

[LuckyDuck]

Mustafa Ataturk would hate Erdogan and his party. He represents all that Ataturk tried to curb in Turkey.
Since Erdogan became Turkey's leader, it has actually been anti-west (more specifically anti-infidel).
Time to sever relations with him, as well as other Islamic nations.

 

[irosie91]

Mustafa Ataturk would hate Erdogan and his party. He represents all that Ataturk tried to curb in Turkey.
Since Erdogan became Turkey's leader, it has actually been anti-west (more specifically anti-infidel).
Time to sever relations with him, as well as other Islamic nations.

Erdogan has promised an ATATURK PURGE ---in fact, years ago