What's new

US says Turkey agrees to a ceasefire in Syria [Update Post #207]

European countries should give asylum to all those kpk terrorists, if they are so concerned about them.
I wonder where all this sanctions go when USA or UK invade OIL rich countries.
Western countries have one common goal..that is to ensure there is no peace in middle east...They want to stop Turkey because they dont want syria to stabilize. Turkey should go ahead shoving EU's sanctions up their....
 
European countries should give asylum to all those kpk terrorists, if they are so concerned about them.
I wonder where all this sanctions go when USA or UK invade OIL rich countries.
Western countries have one common goal..that is to ensure there is no peace in middle east...They want to stop Turkey because they dont want syria to stabilize. Turkey should go ahead shoving EU's sanctions up their....

And where will the ISIL prisoners go? They will start the Caliphate up again if released.

You say terrorists, some say freedom fighters against Assad. Why is Turkey invading Syria? Don’t you want the Kurds to have their own homeland?

If Turkey wants EU membership it should start behaving in a humane way. If it wants to stay in NATO is should stop buying kit from Russia. But Turkey is not the problem, Erdoyan is and the EU and NATO are waiting for Turkey to become responsible to her allies again after he leaves power.
 
Last edited:
PKK is a terrorist group. YPG is indirectly a part of PKK and that is what Turks are fighting. PKK/YPG have killed many Turkish troops.

I feel for Kurds but they should try a different option.

This invasion is for security reason.

I am an Erdogan and Turkey supporter but to be fair we have to see the irony here. On one hand we say Kashmiris struggle is for Freedom and on the other hand we are labelling Kurdish rebels as Terrorists?
 
And where will the ISIL prisoners go? They will start the Caliphate up again if released.

You say terrorists, some say freedom fighters against Assad. Why is Turkey invading Syria? Don’t you want the Kurds to have their own homeland?

If Turkey wants EU membership it should start behaving in a humane way. If it wants to stay in NATO is should stop buying kit from Russia. But Turkey is not the problem, Erdoyan is and the EU and NATO are waiting for Turkey to become responsible to her allies again after he leaves power.

EU membership isnt much in demand now a days ��

On a serious note EU is a Christian club and will never accept Turkey as a full member. Its just a dangling carrot.
 
Will the new tv channel that Turkey/Malaysia/Pakistan are starting be covering the invasion of another muslim nation and the bombing of Muslims Kurds?

Islamophobia = bad; Bombing the Kurds = ‘you have our full support’.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Our meeting in which we decided to set up a BBC type English language TV Channel that, apart from highlighting Muslim issues, will also fight Islamophobia. <a href="https://t.co/GA6o15oJFH">pic.twitter.com/GA6o15oJFH</a></p>— Imran Khan (@ImranKhanPTI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ImranKhanPTI/status/1178501729823928320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 30, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Prime Minister Imran Khan made a telephone call to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan regarding the recent developments.<br>The Prime Minister conveyed that, like always, Pakistan stands in full support and solidarity with Turkey. <a href="https://t.co/HrBjOdwsua">pic.twitter.com/HrBjOdwsua</a></p>— Govt of Pakistan (@pid_gov) <a href="https://twitter.com/pid_gov/status/1182662473469616131?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 11, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Will the new tv channel that Turkey/Malaysia/Pakistan are starting be covering the invasion of another muslim nation and the bombing of Muslims Kurds?

Islamophobia = bad; Bombing the Kurds = ‘you have our full support’.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Our meeting in which we decided to set up a BBC type English language TV Channel that, apart from highlighting Muslim issues, will also fight Islamophobia. <a href="https://t.co/GA6o15oJFH">pic.twitter.com/GA6o15oJFH</a></p>— Imran Khan (@ImranKhanPTI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ImranKhanPTI/status/1178501729823928320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 30, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Prime Minister Imran Khan made a telephone call to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan regarding the recent developments.<br>The Prime Minister conveyed that, like always, Pakistan stands in full support and solidarity with Turkey. <a href="https://t.co/HrBjOdwsua">pic.twitter.com/HrBjOdwsua</a></p>— Govt of Pakistan (@pid_gov) <a href="https://twitter.com/pid_gov/status/1182662473469616131?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 11, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Should refrain from making such comments in public. It’s better to just support Turkey in silence if that is the position Pakistan wants to take on the Turk-Kurd issue.
 
Have they got an allies, who are the allies of the Kurds?.

At the moment, France and Germany are on the Kurds side although they wouldn’t hesitate to stab the Kurds in the back if it benefited them.
 
I am an Erdogan and Turkey supporter but to be fair we have to see the irony here. On one hand we say Kashmiris struggle is for Freedom and on the other hand we are labelling Kurdish rebels as Terrorists?

Exactly. The word ’terrorism’ is so overused now. We can label anyone we disagree with as terrrorists in order to delegitimize their struggle.
 
Will the new tv channel that Turkey/Malaysia/Pakistan are starting be covering the invasion of another muslim nation and the bombing of Muslims Kurds?

Islamophobia = bad; Bombing the Kurds = ‘you have our full support’.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Our meeting in which we decided to set up a BBC type English language TV Channel that, apart from highlighting Muslim issues, will also fight Islamophobia. <a href="https://t.co/GA6o15oJFH">pic.twitter.com/GA6o15oJFH</a></p>— Imran Khan (@ImranKhanPTI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ImranKhanPTI/status/1178501729823928320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 30, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Prime Minister Imran Khan made a telephone call to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan regarding the recent developments.<br>The Prime Minister conveyed that, like always, Pakistan stands in full support and solidarity with Turkey. <a href="https://t.co/HrBjOdwsua">pic.twitter.com/HrBjOdwsua</a></p>— Govt of Pakistan (@pid_gov) <a href="https://twitter.com/pid_gov/status/1182662473469616131?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 11, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

If hypocrisy had a face...
 
Don't spread propaganda...Turkey is not bombing kurds.. Its bombing terrorists.
And how come this is invasion.. Turkey won't get anything there, because USA have sucked up everything before leaving...
Turkey is not invading syria, Its there to clean up all the mess created by United Snakes of America.
 
And where will the ISIL prisoners go? They will start the Caliphate up again if released.

You say terrorists, some say freedom fighters against Assad. Why is Turkey invading Syria? Don’t you want the Kurds to have their own homeland?

If Turkey wants EU membership it should start behaving in a humane way. If it wants to stay in NATO is should stop buying kit from Russia. But Turkey is not the problem, Erdoyan is and the EU and NATO are waiting for Turkey to become responsible to her allies again after he leaves power.

ISIL and KPK would be taken care of..
They are terrorist and not freedom fighter.
Dont worry Turkey won't differentiate between good and bad terrorist like USA.
West wants government who sucks upto them and if they don't they are termed as dictator.
 
Will the new tv channel that Turkey/Malaysia/Pakistan are starting be covering the invasion of another muslim nation and the bombing of Muslims Kurds?

Islamophobia = bad; Bombing the Kurds = ‘you have our full support’.

Very simplistic way of viewing things. Pakistan, Turkey and Malaysia are nation states, not some sort of utopian Caliphate. Kurds who are disputing borders with their neighbours need to make a convincing case that land which is currently part of other countries should in fact be given to them.

It is natural to feel sympathy for the Kurds, but at the same time they have been used by others to cause trouble in the region when it suits, and dropped like a bad smell when they are costing their sponsors too much money and time.
 
May be Turkey to some extent but Pakistan and Malaysia aren't really nation states. To me nation states are majority mono-ethnic and Mono-lingual. Like Germany, France or Italy.

The only reason why some countries exist in their current form is because the colonial masters wanted to leave them that way.
 
I am an Erdogan and Turkey supporter but to be fair we have to see the irony here. On one hand we say Kashmiris struggle is for Freedom and on the other hand we are labelling Kurdish rebels as Terrorists?

I am a Turkey supporter too but am against this latest incursion

And yes his supporters are mostly hypocritical just like Saudi supporters.

Yemen war was bad, but killing Kurds is fine because they are "terrorists"
 
Don't spread propaganda...Turkey is not bombing kurds.. Its bombing terrorists.


.


Said every bombing country, always.

Saudis say we are bombing terrorists

So does India
China says we are imprisoning terrorists

Myanmar said it was killing Rohingya terrorists

And so on
 
Soon US will be leaving Manbij too, either YPG will run towards south or rejoin with Assad Regime as they did in Aleppo city and Tel Riffat.
AF0773C3-1B1C-4EE2-B74C-3515EA1429B3.jpg
 
May be Turkey to some extent but Pakistan and Malaysia aren't really nation states. To me nation states are majority mono-ethnic and Mono-lingual. Like Germany, France or Italy.

The only reason why some countries exist in their current form is because the colonial masters wanted to leave them that way.

Well that would mean a lot of countries like India couldn't be described a nation states either. For purpose of simplicity I am using definition of nation states as recognised by the rest of the world.
 
ISIL and KPK would be taken care of..
They are terrorist and not freedom fighter.
Dont worry Turkey won't differentiate between good and bad terrorist like USA.
West wants government who sucks upto them and if they don't they are termed as dictator.

1. Taken care of by whom? And how?

2. They want their own homeland free from the totalitarian Syrian state. Why are you siding with this disgusting regime?

3. Why are you ok with Turkey invading a neighbouring state?
 
Ok, there has been spillover from neighbouring wars, but a lot of ISIL were Syrians and there are numerous Syrian factions, as the Syrian Civil War began as part of the Arab Spring.

There has never been a Syrian civil war, most Syrians dont want any conflict in their country. Isis are an offshoot of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Al Nusra who are openly supported by the western nations. Its the west that caused this conflict and have been destroying another nation.

1. Taken care of by whom? And how?

2. They want their own homeland free from the totalitarian Syrian state. Why are you siding with this disgusting regime?

3. Why are you ok with Turkey invading a neighbouring state?

Assad may not be a nice guy but Syrians were a diverse society in a great nation which is now ruined. You might call it a disgusting regime but Syrians will take it over being bombed into western democracy. The Americans and their little poodles UK etc are the real terrorist governments who have no right to be in other peoples land. Robert I have respect for you but wake up, you are supporting state terrorism and cant understand the goverments of the west are the real bad guys. I wish this wasn't the case but we have to accep the truth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well that would mean a lot of countries like India couldn't be described a nation states either. For purpose of simplicity I am using definition of nation states as recognised by the rest of the world.

I dont think India can be classified as a Nation state either. Religious homogeneity isnt necessarily enough to call a group of people a Nation. There is much more to it.
 
The SDF have asked for Bashar al-Assad to send troops to stop the Turkish offensive.

This is the end of the Rojava experiment, but their commander is saying he will choose compromise over genocide.
 
The Kurds in Syria say the Syrian government has agreed to send its army to the northern border to try to halt Turkey's offensive against them.

Syrian state media earlier reported that government forces had been deployed to the north.

It follows the US decision to pull all its remaining troops from the area over the "untenable" situation there.

The Turkish assault, launched last week, is aimed at forcing Kurdish forces from along the border area.

Areas under control of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the main US ally in the area, have come under heavy bombardment over the weekend, with Turkey making gains in two key border towns.

Dozens of civilians and fighters have been killed on both sides.

In a separate development on Sunday, Kurdish officials said nearly 800 relatives of foreign Islamic State (IS) members had escaped from Ain Issa, a camp in the north, as clashes raged nearby.

The Turkish offensive and US withdrawal has drawn an international outcry, as the SDF were the main Western allies in the battle against IS in Syria.

But Turkey views elements of the Kurdish groups within the force as terrorists and says it wants to drive them away from a "safe zone" reaching 30km into Syria.

It also plans to resettle more than three million Syrian refugees currently in Turkey within the zone. Many of them are not Kurds. Critics have warned this could lead to ethnic cleansing of the local Kurdish population.

What do we know about the deal?
The Kurdish-led administration in northern Syria said the Syrian army would deploy along the entire length of the border as part of the agreement.

This deployment would assist the SDF in countering "this aggression and liberating the areas that the Turkish army and mercenaries had entered", it said in a statement.

The move also "paves the way to liberate the rest of the Syrian cities occupied by the Turkish army such as Afrin", it added.

Turkish forces and pro-Turkey Syrian rebels forced Kurdish fighters from Afrin back in 2018 after a two-month operation.

The deal represents a significant shift in alliances for the Kurds, after losing the military protection of their long-term US partners in the area.

It is not yet known what the Syrian government has committed to.

However SDF chief Mazloum Abdi acknowledged "there would be painful compromises" with the Assad government and its Russian allies, in an article for Foreign Policy magazine.

"We do not trust their promises. To be honest, it is hard to know whom to trust," he writes.

"But if we have to choose between compromises and the genocide of our people, we will surely choose life for our people."

The deal follows US President Donald Trump's surprise move last week to pull dozens of troops from pockets in the north-east, effectively paving the way for the Turkish operation against the Kurdish fighters.

At the time, the SDF called the move "a stab in the back".

What about the latest US withdrawal?
US Defence Secretary Mark Esper earlier announced the Pentagon was moving up to 1,000 troops away from the north after learning that Turkey was pushing further into Syria than previously expected.

Describing the situation there as "untenable", he said the SDF had been "looking to cut a deal" with the Syrian government and Russia to counter the Turkish attack.

This, he continued, would leave the US forces stuck between "two opposing advancing armies".

Hours after Mr Esper's comments, Syria said it was deploying its forces to the north to "confront a Turkish aggression". It is not yet clear where exactly the troops are being sent.

On Sunday, President Trump tweeted that it was "very smart" not to be involved in the fighting "for a change", saying engagement in Middle East conflict was a mistake.

What has Turkey seized so far ?
Turkey is pushing deeper into northern Syria.

On Sunday, President Erdogan said his forces had already captured 109 sq km (42 square miles) of territory, including 21 villages.

He told reporters the key border town of Ras al-Ain had come under Turkish control - though the SDF said they had pushed Turkish forces back to the town's outskirts.

Mr Erdogan said Turkish forces had also besieged the town of Tal Abyad, some 120km (75 miles) away.

The UK-based monitoring group the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) said Turkey was in almost complete control there.

Both Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad are key goals in the Turkish offensive against the SDF.

Turkey also announced that its Syrian allies on the ground had seized a key motorway - called M4 - some 30-35km south of the border.

What are the casualty figures?
They're rising, with civilians killed on both sides of the border:

More than 50 civilians and over 100 Kurdish fighters killed in north-eastern Syria, SOHR says
SDF says the Kurdish forces' death toll is 56 and Turkey gives a higher figure of 440
Eighteen civilians killed in southern Turkey, according to Turkish reports
Four Turkish soldiers and 16 pro-Turkish Syrian fighters killed in Syria, Turkey says
The UN humanitarian agency OCHA says up to 160,000 civilians are now on the move and it expects the number to rise. It says it is increasingly concerned about the safety of its staff in the region.

What about IS?
The fighting has spilled over to areas close to IS detainee camps.

Fears that Kurdish forces will be unable to keep IS prisoners confined appeared to have been realised when officials at the Ain Issa camp said nearly 800 relatives of foreign IS members had escaped.

The SOHR said the number of people who fled was 100. It not known where they have fled to.

The camp holds about 12,000 displaced people, previously including nearly 1,000 foreign women and children with jihadist links.

Will Islamic State re-emerge?
The SDF says it is currently holding more than 12,000 suspected IS members in seven prisons, and at least 4,000 of them are foreign nationals.

IS has claimed recent car bombings and on Saturday declared a new campaign in Syria.

Turkey says it will take responsibility for IS prisoners it finds during its offensive.

Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50036901.
 
Turkey-Syria offensive: Syrian army heads north after Kurdish deal

Syrian government forces have started to reach the north of the country, hours after the government agreed to help Kurdish forces facing Turkey.

Syrian state media say government forces entered Ain Issa on Monday, 30km (19 miles) south of the Turkish border.

The deal came after the US, the Kurds' main ally, said it would withdraw its remaining troops from northern Syria.

Turkey began an offensive in the region last week, aiming to push Kurdish forces from the border region.

Areas under the control of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) came under heavy bombardment over the weekend, with Turkey making gains in two key border towns.

Dozens of civilians and fighters have been killed on both sides.

The US announced on Sunday it was evacuating all of its remaining soldiers from northern Syria.

The Turkish offensive and US withdrawal have drawn an international outcry, as the SDF were the main allies of the West in the battle against the Islamic State (IS) group in Syria.

There have been fears about a possible resurgence of the group amid the instability. On Sunday Kurdish officials said nearly 800 relatives of foreign IS members had escaped from a camp in Ain Issa, where the Syrian army reportedly has now reached.

Turkey views elements of the Kurdish groups as terrorists and says it wants to drive them away from a "safe zone" reaching 32km into Syria.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan hopes to resettle up to two million Syrian refugees currently in Turkey within the zone. Many of them are not Kurds and critics have warned this could lead to ethnic cleansing of the local Kurdish population.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50039106
 
Turkey-Syria offensive: Syrian army heads north after Kurdish deal

Syria's army has started to reach the north of the country, hours after the government agreed to help Kurdish forces facing Turkey.

State media said government forces, which are backed by Russia, had entered the strategic town of Tal Tamer, 30km (19 miles) south of the Turkish border.

The deal came after the US, the Kurds' main ally, said it would withdraw its remaining troops from northern Syria.

Turkey's offensive aims to push Kurdish forces from the border region.

Areas under the control of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) came under heavy bombardment over the weekend, with Turkey making gains in the key border towns of Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad.

Dozens of civilians and fighters have been killed on both sides.

Syria's army has started to reach the north of the country, hours after the government agreed to help Kurdish forces facing Turkey.

State media said government forces, which are backed by Russia, had entered the strategic town of Tal Tamer, 30km (19 miles) south of the Turkish border.

The deal came after the US, the Kurds' main ally, said it would withdraw its remaining troops from northern Syria.

Turkey's offensive aims to push Kurdish forces from the border region.

Areas under the control of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) came under heavy bombardment over the weekend, with Turkey making gains in the key border towns of Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad.

Dozens of civilians and fighters have been killed on both sides.

The deal represents a significant shift in alliances for the Kurds, who said they had been "stabbed in the back" by President Donald Trump after he pulled dozens of US troops from pockets in the north-east last week.

The move effectively paved the way for the operation by Turkey, which views elements of the Kurdish groups in Syria as an extension of the banned Kurdistan Workers' Party, which has fought for Kurdish autonomy in Turkey for three decades.

Apart from being important partners in fighting IS in Syria, the Kurds were fundamental for Washington in limiting the influence of Russia and Iran, key allies of President Assad and US rivals, and keeping some leverage on the ground.

For now, Syrian forces will not be deployed between Tal Abyad and Ras al-Ain, where Turkey has focused its efforts. Apart from Tal Tamer, government troops also entered Ain Issa, according to state media.

A crisis also for Nato

The crisis in north-eastern Syria is also a crisis for Nato with both practical and political implications. The immediate fear is that much of the progress made towards defeating IS could be undone.

President Trump's willingness to throw the Kurds to the wolves has not gone down well with many allies; France, Germany and perhaps less stridently, Britain, have all urged the Turks to halt their operation. Spain has threatened to pull out its Patriot missile battery in Turkey in protest.

Mr Trump, who did little to try to stop the operation, has equally threatened to "totally destroy and obliterate" the Turkish economy if they go too far - an extraordinary statement coming from one Nato member to another.

Nato Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg says that despite his deep concerns, Turkey will remain an important member of the alliance. He insists that Nato will get over its current divisions. But if you add to this crisis Ankara's recent decision to purchase Russian surface-to-air missiles, there is a clear sense that Turkey is slowly drifting away from it.

What has the international reaction been?
On Monday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey would not back down its offensive "no matter what anyone says", adding that the operation would continue until "ultimate victory is achieved".

Turkey wants to push Kurdish forces away from a "safe zone" reaching 32km into Syria, to where it will resettle up to two million Syrian refugees currently in Turkey. Many of them are not Kurds and critics warn this could lead to ethnic cleansing of the local Kurdish population.

The Russian government, a close ally of Mr Erdogan, said it did not want to entertain the possibility of a clash between Russian and Turkish forces in Syria, and said it was in regular contact with Turkey's authorities.

Earlier, President Trump suggested Kurdish forces might have released IS prisoners on purpose to draw the US into the conflict. "Big sanctions on Turkey coming!" he added, without giving details.

In other developments:

The EU's Foreign Affairs Council called on Turkey to withdraw its forces from northern Syria, saying the offensive "seriously undermines the stability and the security of the whole region"

EU countries committed to suspending arms exports to Turkey but stopped short of an EU-wide arms embargo

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for an immediate de-escalation of hostilities
What is the situation on the ground?

At least 50 civilians have been killed inside Syria and 18 over the border in southern Turkey, reports say. Kurdish forces have confirmed the deaths of 56 of their fighters while Turkey says four of its soldiers and 16 pro-Turkish Syrian fighters have been killed in Syria.

Up to 160,000 civilians had been displaced, according to UN humanitarian agency OCHA, which said the number was expected to rise.

The fighting has also spilled over to areas close to IS detainee camps, and officials at the Ain Issa camp said nearly 800 relatives of foreign IS members had escaped. The camp holds about 12,000 displaced people, previously including nearly 1,000 foreign women and children with jihadist links.

Turkey has said it will take responsibility for IS prisoners it finds during its offensive.

On Sunday, President Erdogan said his forces had already captured 109 sq km (42 square miles) of territory, including 21 villages.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-50039106
 
Turkey-Syria offensive: US sanctions Turkish ministries

The US has sanctioned two Turkish ministries and three senior government officials in response to the country's military offensive in northern Syria.

President Donald Trump also phoned his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan to demand an immediate truce, Vice-President Mike Pence said.

Mr Pence said he would travel to the region "as quickly as possible".

Syria's army earlier entered areas in the north-east. This could result in a confrontation with Turkish-led forces.

The Syrian army deployment followed a deal with Kurdish-led forces, who until last week were US allies.

Turkey says its offensive aims to push Kurdish forces from the border region and establish what the government in Ankara describes as a "safe zone".

With a "safe zone" reaching about 30km (20 miles) into Syria, Turkey wants to resettle up to two million Syrian refugees currently on its territory.

Many of them are not Kurds and critics warn this could lead to ethnic cleansing of the local Kurdish population.

What about the US sanctions?
Speaking to reporters in Washington DC on Monday evening, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin described the sanctions as "very strong" which would have a severe impact on the Turkish economy.

The US Treasury published a statement, which said that action was taken against Turkey's defence and energy ministries, as well as the ministers of defence, energy and interior.

"The Turkish government's actions are endangering innocent civilians, and destabilizing the region, including undermining the campaign to defeat ISIS [Islamic State]," the statement added.

Appearing alongside Mr Mnuchin, Vice-President Pence warned that the sanctions "will continue and will worsen unless and until Turkey embraces an immediate ceasefire, stops the violence and agrees to negotiate a long-term settlement of the issues along the border between Turkey and Syria".

Mr Pence said that President Trump reiterated this in Monday's phone call with President Erdogan.

The vice-president also reiterated that the US "did not give a green light to Turkey to invade Syria".

The US earlier said that the Turkish "unacceptable" incursion into Syria has resulted in the release of many captured IS fighters.

Earlier on Monday, European Union countries committed to suspending arms exports to Turkey but stopped short of an EU-wide arms embargo.

In response, Turkey said it would examine its co-operation with the EU due to its "unlawful and biased" attitude

What is happening on the ground?
Syrian state media said Russian-backed government forces had entered the strategic town of Manbij, inside the area where Turkey wants to create a "safe zone".

Turkish troops and their allied Syrian militias were gathering near the town.

The deal with Kurdish-led forces was seen as a boost for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as his troops would return to north-eastern areas for the first time since 2012, when their withdrawal to fight rebels elsewhere allowed Kurdish militias to take control.

Despite disagreeing with their attempts at self-rule, Mr Assad did not seek to retake the territory, especially after the Kurds became partners in the coalition against IS with US troops on the ground.

Apart from fighting IS, the Kurds were fundamental for the US in limiting the influence of rivals Russia and Iran and keeping some leverage on the ground.

For now, Syrian forces will not be deployed between Tal Abyad and Ras al-Ain, where Turkey has focused its efforts. Kurdish-led officials insisted they would remain in charge politically, and retain order in the area.

The Russian government, a close ally of Mr Erdogan, said it did not want to entertain the possibility of a clash between Russian and Turkish forces in Syria, and said it was in regular contact with Turkey's authorities.

Up to 160,000 civilians had been displaced, according to UN humanitarian agency OCHA, which said the number was expected to rise.

At least 50 civilians have been killed inside Syria and another 18 over the border in southern Turkey, reports say. Kurdish forces have confirmed the deaths of 56 of their fighters while Turkey says four of its soldiers and 16 pro-Turkish Syrian fighters have been killed in Syria.

Last week, US President Donald Trump abruptly pulled dozens of US troops from pockets in the north-east of Syria after a phone call with Mr Erdogan.

The move effectively paved the way for the operation by Turkey, which views elements of the Kurdish groups in Syria as an extension of the banned Kurdistan Workers' Party, which has fought for Kurdish autonomy in Turkey for three decades.

Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50050264.
 
Don’t you want the Kurds to have their own homeland?

Like Israel for the Jews?

How about a piece of the UK and the Kurds settle there?

Obviously Turkey is doing what all powerful countries do - protect its own interests. America, the UK, and EU do this the most out of any countries in the world. It is really hypocritical.
 
Like Israel for the Jews?

How about a piece of the UK and the Kurds settle there?

Obviously Turkey is doing what all powerful countries do - protect its own interests. America, the UK, and EU do this the most out of any countries in the world. It is really hypocritical.

Because the Kurds live in Turkey, Syria and Iraq. That is their home, yet they have never had a homeland. There should have been a Kurdistan when the Ottoman Empire fell.
 
I think it's going to be really difficult for Kurds to get a Homeland, they are spread over 4 countries and neither want to give them Independence.
 
There has never been a Syrian civil war, most Syrians dont want any conflict in their country. Isis are an offshoot of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Al Nusra who are openly supported by the western nations. Its the west that caused this conflict and have been destroying another nation.

Assad may not be a nice guy but Syrians were a diverse society in a great nation which is now ruined. You might call it a disgusting regime but Syrians will take it over being bombed into western democracy. The Americans and their little poodles UK etc are the real terrorist governments who have no right to be in other peoples land. Robert I have respect for you but wake up, you are supporting state terrorism and cant understand the goverments of the west are the real bad guys. I wish this wasn't the case but we have to accep the truth.

You are wilfully blotting out reality here. This conflict began when Syrians protested against the authoritarian Assad regime.

Al-Qaeda is openly supported by the Western nations? Perhaps their Afghanistani precursor in the 1980s when they were fighting the Soviets. Not since their attacks on US warships and then the WTC.

al-Nusra is another jihadi group who want a caliphate - hardly supportive of Western interests.

Yes the RAF bombed in support of one faction (Free Syrian Army, made largely of Syrian Army officers opposed to Assad), but you have completely ignored the role of Russia in murdering tens of thousands of civilians at Assad’s behest.

The West isn’t responsible for everything bad. You have to accept that some Muslims want to kill other Muslims.
 
I am very disappointed at the hypocrisy of people in our community, its not here, in my FB feed as well, there has been non stop cheering for Turkey to eradicate the Kurds. Of course you just have to say Turkey is fighting the magic word "terrorism". And that's it, anything and everything is justified.

India does the same (against Kashmir), Myanmar did the same (vs Rohingyas), Russia in Chechnya and so on.

Just dehumanize a community by calling them "terrorists", and they can be killed at will

Its the hypocrisy of Muslims that they are cheering Turkey on while they cry when Israel or India does the same.....
 
I am very disappointed at the hypocrisy of people in our community, its not here, in my FB feed as well, there has been non stop cheering for Turkey to eradicate the Kurds. Of course you just have to say Turkey is fighting the magic word "terrorism". And that's it, anything and everything is justified.

India does the same (against Kashmir), Myanmar did the same (vs Rohingyas), Russia in Chechnya and so on.

Just dehumanize a community by calling them "terrorists", and they can be killed at will

Its the hypocrisy of Muslims that they are cheering Turkey on while they cry when Israel or India does the same.....

Yes, it’s quite shocking to see some of these responses. Erdoyan goes all Islamist and that means it is all right for him to go beyond Turkey’s borders and kill other Muslims. When Western nations do this the same people are outraged. Double standard writ large.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">‘Civilians have become the fuel in this terrible war ... to be consumed and burned’ must-read dispatch from the ground in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Qamishli?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Qamishli</a> - written by a female resident <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Syria?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Syria</a> <a href="https://t.co/NFHdhtQJ2t">https://t.co/NFHdhtQJ2t</a></p>— Bel Trew (@Beltrew) <a href="https://twitter.com/Beltrew/status/1183466577590661121?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 13, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
You are wilfully blotting out reality here. This conflict began when Syrians protested against the authoritarian Assad regime.

wrong. the conflict began when the syrian army rebelled and split. A move long in the making.


Al-Qaeda is openly supported by the Western nations? Perhaps their Afghanistani precursor in the 1980s when they were fighting the Soviets. Not since their attacks on US warships and then the WTC.

yes the FSA with elements of AQ and other groups were openly encouraged by william haig and the british govt.

al-Nusra is another jihadi group who want a caliphate - hardly supportive of Western interests.

but they are anarchists that want to burn the world and rebuild it. The Muslim world. All in western interests

Yes the RAF bombed in support of one faction (Free Syrian Army, made largely of Syrian Army officers opposed to Assad), but you have completely ignored the role of Russia in murdering tens of thousands of civilians at Assad’s behest.

made up also of liver eating terrorists

The West isn’t responsible for everything bad. You have to accept that some Muslims want to kill other Muslims.

The west is responsible for everything going wrong in the middle east. this is simply a fact. Everything happening now is because of the west and its historical interventions in the middle east. This is a historical fact. The same is the case in the Indian sub continent.

I suggest you get out and start reading the real history of the british and be ready to do some introspection. Your naivety is getting boring and your ignorance is getting annoying.
 
Yes, it’s quite shocking to see some of these responses. Erdoyan goes all Islamist and that means it is all right for him to go beyond Turkey’s borders and kill other Muslims. When Western nations do this the same people are outraged. Double standard writ large.

Well actually they are the same standards just displayed from the other POV. Unless you think terrorism as a term can only be deployed in our interests and should not be used by anyone else.
 
Fully support turkeys operation against these terrorists.I wish our army could take a similar bold step by conducting a operation in Afghanistan.
 
Because the Kurds live in Turkey, Syria and Iraq. That is their home, yet they have never had a homeland. There should have been a Kurdistan when the Ottoman Empire fell.

why? who give you the right to decide that?

as for the Kurds..I have refrained from venturing into this debate because it is once again being overshadowed by the india pakistan situation..

but here is my opinion. There are two ways to look at this. the humanitarian point of view and the geopolitical point of view.

lets take the latter first. From a geopolitical point of view Turkey has made the right decision. And here is why.

for years the PKK were supported by various regimes, govts etc to ensure a emasure of isntability in a potential future Muslim power. I dont think people understand the fear europe has of turkey, their defeat at vienna in the 1600's was met with unbridled relief and joy because for many years europe felt it was inevitable that the ottomans would conquer them.

After the first world war and the emergence of the new republic, europe needed to ensure that the "empire" would never threaten it again. Hence the need to play on the usual classic divide and rule tactics using the weakness of the republic to its advantage where required. So how did we end up here where Turkey has invaded Syria for the first time since the 16th century?

Simple. The classic tactic the west has used to ensure stabilised destabilisation is to create chaos at the doorstep of future threats and then let them mire themselves in the after effects. the turks knew this but couldnt do too much due to american power. Now that, that has started to wane , they have made their move. The turks cannot allow an unstable situation on its border that allows western countries and their allies the opportunity to further destabilise their country if they need to in the future.

The british were very smart when they cut up the world on a map. they ensured they had police stations available in certain regions to ensure future interventions if required. Afterall the sun was never to set on its empire. The americans simply took over that policy and in true american fashion doubled down on it.

The Turks will now ensure they get their buffer zone, the pkk will be decimated and then they will simply arrange a ceasefire with teh russians and the syrians. Assad will get a unified Syria, turkey a buffer zone guaranteed by putin and the americans will be unceremoniously dumped out of Syria. this will also increase Turkeys importance in NATO further as the alliance will need it to police the area. It is a must have existential operation for the turks.

Moving onto the humanitarian issue. Well nobody can say we didnt warn them. Why didnt the alliance go for a ceasfire if they were so concerned about teh human loss? beautiful cities like Homs are now a wasteland. Why? why all the death? because the alliance wanted it that way. They thought assad would be done in 6 months. Including the turks. But they misjudged the nature of the war and its causes.

Do I have sympathy for the turks. yes just like i have sympathy for the syrians and the others who have died. But turkey knew this was a risk and hence they have now had to play their final card. The alliance didnt think it would come to this and now with trump in charge americas allies have realised its foreign policy is in tatters. It is every man for themselves in the area and turkey will now have to preserve its geopolitical realities.

Who are the winners: Russia, Assad
who are the losers: the alliance and its allies, all of the civilians, and the kurds
who may not have won but not lost: the turks.

That is my two cents..
 
why? who give you the right to decide that?

as for the Kurds..I have refrained from venturing into this debate because it is once again being overshadowed by the india pakistan situation..

but here is my opinion. There are two ways to look at this. the humanitarian point of view and the geopolitical point of view.

lets take the latter first. From a geopolitical point of view Turkey has made the right decision. And here is why.

for years the PKK were supported by various regimes, govts etc to ensure a emasure of isntability in a potential future Muslim power. I dont think people understand the fear europe has of turkey, their defeat at vienna in the 1600's was met with unbridled relief and joy because for many years europe felt it was inevitable that the ottomans would conquer them.

After the first world war and the emergence of the new republic, europe needed to ensure that the "empire" would never threaten it again. Hence the need to play on the usual classic divide and rule tactics using the weakness of the republic to its advantage where required. So how did we end up here where Turkey has invaded Syria for the first time since the 16th century?

Simple. The classic tactic the west has used to ensure stabilised destabilisation is to create chaos at the doorstep of future threats and then let them mire themselves in the after effects. the turks knew this but couldnt do too much due to american power. Now that, that has started to wane , they have made their move. The turks cannot allow an unstable situation on its border that allows western countries and their allies the opportunity to further destabilise their country if they need to in the future.

The british were very smart when they cut up the world on a map. they ensured they had police stations available in certain regions to ensure future interventions if required. Afterall the sun was never to set on its empire. The americans simply took over that policy and in true american fashion doubled down on it.

The Turks will now ensure they get their buffer zone, the pkk will be decimated and then they will simply arrange a ceasefire with teh russians and the syrians. Assad will get a unified Syria, turkey a buffer zone guaranteed by putin and the americans will be unceremoniously dumped out of Syria. this will also increase Turkeys importance in NATO further as the alliance will need it to police the area. It is a must have existential operation for the turks.

Moving onto the humanitarian issue. Well nobody can say we didnt warn them. Why didnt the alliance go for a ceasfire if they were so concerned about teh human loss? beautiful cities like Homs are now a wasteland. Why? why all the death? because the alliance wanted it that way. They thought assad would be done in 6 months. Including the turks. But they misjudged the nature of the war and its causes.

Do I have sympathy for the turks. yes just like i have sympathy for the syrians and the others who have died. But turkey knew this was a risk and hence they have now had to play their final card. The alliance didnt think it would come to this and now with trump in charge americas allies have realised its foreign policy is in tatters. It is every man for themselves in the area and turkey will now have to preserve its geopolitical realities.

Who are the winners: Russia, Assad
who are the losers: the alliance and its allies, all of the civilians, and the kurds
who may not have won but not lost: the turks.

That is my two cents..

I have to be given the right to hold an opinion? OK. In that case God, obviously. Gave me the ability to think for myself.
 
The west is responsible for everything going wrong in the middle east. this is simply a fact. Everything happening now is because of the west and its historical interventions in the middle east. This is a historical fact. The same is the case in the Indian sub continent.

I suggest you get out and start reading the real history of the british and be ready to do some introspection. Your naivety is getting boring and your ignorance is getting annoying.

This completely one-eyed view of history gets nobody anywhere. So Middle Eastern and Arab Muslims states never went to war with each other? Of course they have.

All I do is hold a mirror up and some people here do not like what they see in the mirror, so it is easier to blame me than consider their own prejudices.
 
I know little of the Kurds and their history.
However, it pains me to see young children screaming at the loss of their father or mother, or a mother losing her child.

What Erdogan has done is absolutely barbaric and yet somehow I think Trump has had a hand in this.
 
This completely one-eyed view of history gets nobody anywhere. So Middle Eastern and Arab Muslims states never went to war with each other? Of course they have.

All I do is hold a mirror up and some people here do not like what they see in the mirror, so it is easier to blame me than consider their own prejudices.

Hold a mirror to yourself. Where are you people when western countries invade and loot other countries. When usa and uk killed millions and called it collateral damage no one sanctioned usa and uk. Middles east was peaceful with no terrorist activities, but what usa and uk did?
Now same western media is running fake propaganda with fake pictures of deceased claiming to be of recent turkey's action. Turkey has every right to defend itself. USA was pulling kpk's string when they were carrying out terrorist activities in Turkey. Erdoğan should send all refugees who came from syria to usa and uk... The two saviours of planet earth.
 
Hold a mirror to yourself. Where are you people when western countries invade and loot other countries. When usa and uk killed millions and called it collateral damage no one sanctioned usa and uk. Middles east was peaceful with no terrorist activities, but what usa and uk did?


You must be joking, right? there sure were no isis style attacks, but you had state actors killing hundreds of thousands of people (saddam), Muslims killing each other in civil wars (iran-Iraq), Syrias Hafez Assad killing 20,000 in Hama, Jordan killing thousands of Palestinians (but that should be cheered because Zia led the action, but if Israel kills a few hundreds it becomes a much worse act), hundreds of thousands slaughtered in Algeria's civil war and so on
 
You must be joking, right? there sure were no isis style attacks, but you had state actors killing hundreds of thousands of people (saddam), Muslims killing each other in civil wars (iran-Iraq), Syrias Hafez Assad killing 20,000 in Hama, Jordan killing thousands of Palestinians (but that should be cheered because Zia led the action, but if Israel kills a few hundreds it becomes a much worse act), hundreds of thousands slaughtered in Algeria's civil war and so on

Don’t forget the Arnenian Genocide.
 
You are wilfully blotting out reality here. This conflict began when Syrians protested against the authoritarian Assad regime.

Al-Qaeda is openly supported by the Western nations? Perhaps their Afghanistani precursor in the 1980s when they were fighting the Soviets. Not since their attacks on US warships and then the WTC.

al-Nusra is another jihadi group who want a caliphate - hardly supportive of Western interests.

Yes the RAF bombed in support of one faction (Free Syrian Army, made largely of Syrian Army officers opposed to Assad), but you have completely ignored the role of Russia in murdering tens of thousands of civilians at Assad’s behest.

The West isn’t responsible for everything bad. You have to accept that some Muslims want to kill other Muslims.

The initial protests were very small in number, hundreds not thousands of people. These were instigated via foriegn forces. After Libya, the wests new target was to destroy Syria. This isnt a conspiracy theory, US general has admitted this on screen.

I wrote western forces supported terrorists, Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusra etc. This isnt a secret, admitted by western governments.

Russia arrived in the conflict later to protect it's interets mainly their bases. Russia would never have arrived in Syria if not for western forces aiming to remove Assad and destroy the country.

Muslims have been fighting Muslims since the early days of Islam, this wont stop until the end of time but they have little power now. The middle east being in ruins isnt down to Muslims but down to western imperialism going back to WW1. Sykes–Picot ensured lands are divided so conflict continues.

You can play it as you like but no person on this planet can explain why the US, UK feel they are the worlds police? Can you answer this? After Iraq I thought everyone would realise its all nonsense with their real aim to have geo-political control not that they care about saving civillians. But I guess some are still not clued up.
 
You must be joking, right? there sure were no isis style attacks, but you had state actors killing hundreds of thousands of people (saddam), Muslims killing each other in civil wars (iran-Iraq), Syrias Hafez Assad killing 20,000 in Hama, Jordan killing thousands of Palestinians (but that should be cheered because Zia led the action, but if Israel kills a few hundreds it becomes a much worse act), hundreds of thousands slaughtered in Algeria's civil war and so on

All the things you just mentioned happened after World War 1. Western forces divided up the place and those divisions caused those wars. Have you heard of any major conflict in that part of region before World War 1? It was a peaceful region under Ottoman Empire. Muslims and Jews used to live side by side peacefully.

I don't know if you are a Muslim. I can't believe you are showing sympathy to Israel.
 
Last edited:
The initial protests were very small in number, hundreds not thousands of people. These were instigated via foriegn forces. After Libya, the wests new target was to destroy Syria. This isnt a conspiracy theory, US general has admitted this on screen.

I wrote western forces supported terrorists, Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusra etc. This isnt a secret, admitted by western governments.

Russia arrived in the conflict later to protect it's interets mainly their bases. Russia would never have arrived in Syria if not for western forces aiming to remove Assad and destroy the country.

Muslims have been fighting Muslims since the early days of Islam, this wont stop until the end of time but they have little power now. The middle east being in ruins isnt down to Muslims but down to western imperialism going back to WW1. Sykes–Picot ensured lands are divided so conflict continues.

You can play it as you like but no person on this planet can explain why the US, UK feel they are the worlds police? Can you answer this? After Iraq I thought everyone would realise its all nonsense with their real aim to have geo-political control not that they care about saving civillians. But I guess some are still not clued up.

I'll have a go.

The Victorian English genuinely felt they were God's Kingdom on Earth and doing God's work by spreading Christianity, reason and stability throughout the world. Hence Pax Britannica.

More recently Tony Blair genuinely believed he had the moral responsibility to stabilise the Balkans, Sierra Leone, Northern Ireland, and then remove Saddam. He was successful in the first three. His folly was in thinking that Iraq would default to democracy. Blair can be seen as a modern successor to the Victorians.

The USA believes in Exceptionalism, that it is a Platonic shining city on the hill with a duty to bring light to the world. It assumed the role of Pax Americana after WW2 as the British could no longer fulfill Pax Britannica. Of course big money corrodes and corrupts all it touches.
 
All the things you just mentioned happened after World War 1. Western forces divided up the place and those divisions caused those wars. Have you heard of any major conflict in that part of region before World War 1? It was a peaceful region under Ottoman Empire. Muslims and Jews used to live side by side peacefully.

Yeah, Ottoman conquests of Hungary for instance, Siege of Vienna, and perhaps ten million Poland-Lithuanians, Africans, Slavs and even Cornish enslaved.
 
All the things you just mentioned happened after World War 1. Western forces divided up the place and those divisions caused those wars. Have you heard of any major conflict in that part of region before World War 1? It was a peaceful region under Ottoman Empire. Muslims and Jews used to live side by side peacefully.

I don't know if you are a Muslim. I can't believe you are showing sympathy to Israel.


I am not showing sympathy to Israel; I am pointing out hypocrisy of Muslims when they are up in protests when Israel kills Palestinians, but when Turks kill Kurds they cheer them on.

Not to mention going out of the way to defend China in their treatment of Uighurs.

Amusing how pointing out such hypocrisy makes people doubt my religion :)
 
I'll have a go.

The Victorian English genuinely felt they were God's Kingdom on Earth and doing God's work by spreading Christianity, reason and stability throughout the world. Hence Pax Britannica.

More recently Tony Blair genuinely believed he had the moral responsibility to stabilise the Balkans, Sierra Leone, Northern Ireland, and then remove Saddam. He was successful in the first three. His folly was in thinking that Iraq would default to democracy. Blair can be seen as a modern successor to the Victorians.

The USA believes in Exceptionalism, that it is a Platonic shining city on the hill with a duty to bring light to the world. It assumed the role of Pax Americana after WW2 as the British could no longer fulfill Pax Britannica. Of course big money corrodes and corrupts all it touches.

Interesting posts, thanks. I agree with you in much of it. However they need to understand the world doesn't want them to police. We were told Iraqis would be welcoming invading troops with open arms but instead they forged on the most strongest resistance in history. The governments of the world need to realise it's not the people of God they are dealing with but the children of Satan, dance with them at your own peril.
 
Yeah, Ottoman conquests of Hungary for instance, Siege of Vienna, and perhaps ten million Poland-Lithuanians, Africans, Slavs and even Cornish enslaved.

During those times, invasions and enslavement were normal. Crusaders also slaughtered many Muslims. Despite all those, Muslims and Jews didn't have any major conflict. They lived side by side peacefully (along with Christians).

Middle East in those times was much better than what it is now.
 
I am not showing sympathy to Israel; I am pointing out hypocrisy of Muslims when they are up in protests when Israel kills Palestinians, but when Turks kill Kurds they cheer them on.

Not to mention going out of the way to defend China in their treatment of Uighurs.

Amusing how pointing out such hypocrisy makes people doubt my religion :)

I support Turkish attack on YPG/PPK. Do you know why? It is because these are terrorist groups.

If a group attacks Bangladesh and kills Bangladeshi troops, would BD do nothing or would BD attack that group? Turkey is doing the same thing.

Turkey is not invading Syria to steal resources (like USA does). Turkey just wants to defend itself.
 
Last edited:
During those times, invasions and enslavement were normal. Crusaders also slaughtered many Muslims. Despite all those, Muslims and Jews didn't have any major conflict. They lived side by side peacefully (along with Christians).

Middle East in those times was much better than what it is now.

Oh no, no, no :46: You don't get to excuse the horrors perpetrated by the Ottomans because European countries committed horrors too.
 
Interesting posts, thanks. I agree with you in much of it. However they need to understand the world doesn't want them to police. We were told Iraqis would be welcoming invading troops with open arms but instead they forged on the most strongest resistance in history. The governments of the world need to realise it's not the people of God they are dealing with but the children of Satan, dance with them at your own peril.

I agree.

But big powers always do this to small powers. From 1945-1990 the geopolitical world was a chess game between USA-NATO and the Soviet Union. In the future it may be more of a chess game between USA, EU, Russia, India and China with the little countries used as pawns.
 
I agree.

But big powers always do this to small powers. From 1945-1990 the geopolitical world was a chess game between USA-NATO and the Soviet Union. In the future it may be more of a chess game between USA, EU, Russia, India and China with the little countries used as pawns.

The future is nuclear war and destruction of the planet. Unless the youth of the west wake up and change their leaders. I am optomistic this can happen as long as social media remains free.
 
FRANKFURT: The sanctions the US announced against Turkey this week over its offensive in Syria fall well short of doing serious damage to an economy still healing from a recession and currency collapse.

President Donald Trump could take far tougher action that would deter foreign investment and credit that Turkey badly needs but doing so could backfire in a number of ways, and it’s not clear he really wants to.

Trump has said he could “destroy and obliterate” the economy of Turkey, and has called on the country to rein in its offensive in Syria. The statement follows backlash from both Democrats and Republicans over Trump’s decision to give Turkey a green light for its military incursion against Kurdish fighters who had been US allies.

The sanctions announced Monday, however, did not match the rhetoric and were seen as minimal by analysts and financial investors.

The measures were limited to the Turkish defence and energy ministries and three Turkish officials from the same.

They block transactions involving any assets they may have in the US financial system and bar American residents and businesses from dealing with them.

The US also raised tariffs on Turkish steel exports from 25 per cent back to 50pc, where they were in May, and suspended talks over a US-Turkey trade deal.

Given the dominant role that US financial institutions and the dollar play in world commerce, such measures fall far short of what the US could do by targeting Turkey’s banks and their links to the global financial system. Turkey’s currency and stock market both rose Tuesday as investors breathed a sigh of relief that harsher measures were not imposed.

Timothy Ash, emerging market strategist at Bluebay Asset Management, called the sanctions “minimal” and “window dressing,” noting that the trade deal was years off in any case.

The muted initial response from investors “flies in the face of President Trump’s threat,” said Jason Tuvey, senior emerging markets economist at Capital Economics in London.

One risk from the current sanctions, Tuvey said, is that they may be a prelude to tougher ones, given support in Congress for action against Turkey.

And even though the direct impact on the economy may remain slight, the bigger risk could be on investor and financial market confidence in the country. The imposition of sanctions has re-started talk of Turkey possibly putting limits on the flow of money to prevent it from being taken out of the country.

Link: https://www.dawn.com/news/1511136/us-sanctions-wont-bite-a-vulnerable-turkish-economy.
 
I support Turkish attack on YPG/PPK. Do you know why? It is because these are terrorist groups.

If a group attacks Bangladesh and kills Bangladeshi troops, would BD do nothing or would BD attack that group? Turkey is doing the same thing.

Turkey just wants to defend itself.


Every situation should be taken by itself...

Israel, India, Myanmar, Russia, Serbia (during Bosnia war), US (vs Afghans and Iraq), Turkey (now), Algeria (in 90s), Saudi (in Yemen), Egypt (in Sinai), Sri Lanka vs Tamils

These are just some of the countries who have used "defend ourselves", or "we are just attacking terrorist groups" as a justification for bombing or slaughtering civilians...…

Now what most bystanders (Muslims or others) do is :

1) If its a country they like doing the bombing, they cheer them on (like Pakistanis are supporting Turkey, Serbians and Greeks supporting Russians in Chechnya, American right wingers supporting Israel etc)

2) If its a country they do not like, they will say innocent people are being killed (as Erdogan said about Assad, Pakistanis/Turks will say about India in Kashmir, Bangladeshis/Pakistanis/Turk will say about Myanmar vs Rohingyas and so on

Each situation is different, and it varies over time.

Sri lankan army for e.g. was supported by Pakistanis vs the Tamils as Tamils were seen as Indian proxies and so no matter what Sri Lankan army did (and they were far more brutal than Pakistani army in fata), it was seen as justified and a sort of revenge ...…

However now those same people are seeing that Sri Lanka does have a problem with Buddhist nationalists, and the same people who made the Tamils targets will not hesitate to target Muslims …..

I myself would sympathize previously with the Sri Lankan army, but some of the things they did was surpassed in modern South Asia only by the Myanmarese against the Rohingya in state-sponsored sheer violence and brutality



Coming to Turkeys current war, yes, it may be less brutal than the US wars, however my issue is with a lot of Desis who have jumped on the Turkey bandwagon blindly just because they think Erdogan is some sort of "Khalifa" and just because Turks call their soldiers "Mehmetcik".

They do not care what is going on, they just know that they have to support Turkey as some sort of Spiritual leader for the Muslim world...

This is very similar to how Greeks and Serbs support whatever Russia does and how pro-Saudi desis supported the Saudi war in Yemen
 
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has rejected a US call for an immediate ceasefire in northern Syria.

Mr Erdogan's comments come ahead of a visit to Turkey by the US vice-president and US secretary of state.

Turkey launched an offensive designed to drive away Kurdish troops after their main ally, the US, pulled out.

Russia, which backs Syria, has said it prevent clashes between Turkish and Syrian forces which have now moved into the area after a deal with the Kurds.

Turkey considers elements of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) a terrorist organisation and want to push them away from the border area.

Ankara also says it wants to create a "safe zone" reaching about 30km (20 miles) into Syria to resettle up to two million Syrian refugees currently in Turkey.

However, Syrian forces - which are backed by Russia - advanced north at the weekend following a deal with the Kurds to try to hold back the Turkish operation.

Critics of the Trump administration say the withdrawal of US troops from the region gave Turkey a "green light" for the offensive.

The US has repeatedly denied this, and on Monday Washington announced sanctions on Turkish ministries and senior government officials.

Dozens of civilians have been killed in the operation so far and at least 160,000 have fled the area, according to the UN.

On Tuesday, the medical charity Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) said it had "taken the difficult decision to suspend the majority of its activities and evacuate all its international staff from north-east Syria".

What did President Erdogan say?
"They say 'declare a ceasefire'. We will never declare a ceasefire," Mr Erdogan told reporters on Tuesday.

"They are pressuring us to stop the operation. They are announcing sanctions. Our goal is clear. We are not worried about any sanctions," the president added.

Mr Erdogan is expected to meet Mr Pence and Mr Pompeo in Ankara on Thursday.

Mr Pence on Monday warned that the US sanctions against Turkey would worsen "unless and until Turkey embraces an immediate ceasefire" and negotiates a long-term settlement on the border.

What's the latest on the ground?
Syrian government forces on Tuesday entered the strategic town of Manbij, inside the area where Turkey wants to create its "safe zone".

Meanwhile, Turkish troops and pro-Turkish, anti-government fighters had also been gathering near Manbij.

Over the past two years, hundreds of US troops have visibly patrolled the strategic town, but they left earlier this week.

On Tuesday, Russia - a key ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad - said its forces were patrolling along the "line of contact" between Syrian and Turkish forces.

Moscow describes the Turkish offensive as "unacceptable". On Tuesday, President Erdogan and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin discussed the issue in a phone call.

For now, Syrian forces have not been deployed between Tal Abyad and Ras al-Ain, where Turkey has focused its efforts.

How did we get here?
Kurdish-led forces have been a key ally of the US in the fight against the Islamic State (IS) group in Syria.

They described the US withdrawal, which preceded Turkish action, as a "stab in the back".

There are fears the destabilisation could lead to a resurgence of so-called Islamic State (IS), as thousands of former fighters and their relatives are being detained in northern Syria.

Hundreds of IS family members are said to have already escaped from one camp.

Analysts say that apart from fighting IS, the Kurds were fundamental to the US in limiting the influence of rivals Russia and Iran and keeping some leverage on the ground.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50064546
 
The future is nuclear war and destruction of the planet. Unless the youth of the west wake up and change their leaders. I am optomistic this can happen as long as social media remains free.

Once again, all the West’s fault. Why do you not extend this to the youth of all nuclear-armed states? If the Western democracies disarm, it will allow the authoritarian states China and Russia to extend their influence and further erode human rights. China is forming internment camps for hundreds of thousands of Muslims right now but you still think the West causes all harm.
 
Last edited:
If hypocrisy had a face...

It would be yours.

The only time you come on these forums is to diss the one person who you voted for, Imram Khan, and the one nation you hate to represent, Pakistan. Other than that you just repeat the same pro Indian hypocritical nonsense.

Perhaps you should go back to giving experience on divorce, you're well experienced on that front.
 
Once again, all the West’s fault. Why do you not extend this to the youth of all nuclear-armed states? If the Western democracies disarm, it will allow the authoritarian states China and Russia to extend their influence and further erode human rights. China is forming internment camps for hundreds of thousands of Muslims right now but you still think the West causes all harm.

The West does cause harm thought political and financial influence, there is no doubt about it.

If you are so against the like of China, then here's a thought, let's stop trading with China. Agree?

All this talk of human rights is right up there with the talk of democracy, it's ******** and just a facade. You want to talk about rights, Home, Food, Water, and Education are rights. Oh wait, your leader decided it would be a good idea to in-debt students instead.
 
Last edited:
The West does cause harm thought political and financial influence, there is no doubt about it.

If you are so against the like of China, then here's a thought, let's stop trading with China. Agree?

All this talk of human rights is right up there with the talk of democracy, it's ******** and just a facade. You want to talk about rights, Home, Food, Water, and Education are rights. Oh wait, your leader decided it would be a good idea to in-debt students instead.

I am talking of the struggle of the Hong Kongers to preserve their rights, not any response by HM Gov. Though some trade sanctions in support of HK would be appropriate.

If you think my talk of human rights is a facade then you have never lost them to anybody.

There is another thread on this.
 
Last edited:
I am talking of the struggle of the Hong Kongers to preserve their rights, not any response by HM Gov. Though some trade sanctions in support of HK would be appropriate.

If you think my talk of human rights is a facade then you have never lost them to anybody.

There is another thread on this.

I never said your talk of human rights was a facade, I said the concern for Human rights a national level is right up their with democracy, it is a facade. Funny you are concerned with the democratic rights of Hong Kong, but not the UK and Brexit - this proves my point.

Anyway, you didn't answer my question, shall we cut all economic ties with China?
 
Last edited:
I never said your talk of human rights was a facade, I said the concern for Human rights a national level is right up their with democracy, it is a facade. Funny you are concerned with the democratic rights of Hong Kong, but not the UK and Brexit - this proves my point.

Anyway, you didn't answer my question, shall we cut all economic ties with China?

I want the Britons to reverse their democratic decision by applying more democracy.

I answered your question about China.
 
Turkey is now trying to intimidate us forces by firing on their base and later saying it was not intentional. There is more to this than meets the eye.
Turkey is fearless because it possesses nuclear weapons. This was what one feared , power in wrong hands is dangerous
Turkey must face sanctions soon!

It doesn’t.
 
This completely one-eyed view of history gets nobody anywhere. So Middle Eastern and Arab Muslims states never went to war with each other? Of course they have.

All I do is hold a mirror up and some people here do not like what they see in the mirror, so it is easier to blame me than consider their own prejudices.

of course they have gone to war. But ask yourself where these states came from. We are talking about the modern Middle east and its problems. The modern middle east is entirely a western created problem.

So lets take the major events and problems in the modern age and see whether the west is responsible or not.

Iran: Iran was one of the first countrys to gain independance (from a western nation by the way)
after the discovery of oil that the west felt it was entitled to not the iranians, western govts started taking more of an interest. Musadeq nationalised oil for his people but was overthrown by a cia and british sponsored coup. a dictator was installed by the west which elad to the iranian revolution. Of course all the iranians fault not the wests.

Isreal/palestine: Need I say more? of course all arafats fault not the british.

Iraq: another coutry being in one of the first to gain independance from a western power (how dare they). discovery of oil, coup , heres comes a dictator. Then the west seeing Iran and iraq with mountains of oil decide a good idea would be to get them to bomb the living garbage out of each other. Bring in the cold war (another war created by the greed of the western powers) and you have teh iran iraq war, the eventual gulf wars and the invasion of iraq. Millions dead. Millions homeless. Millions injured...but all saddams fault not the west..

Algeria: colonised by a western country, they gain independance but then are embroiled in another western war(the cold war), get a dictator (here we go again, I see a pattern). thousands of algerians fight for their coloniser hoping to gain independance or favours but are betrayed and treated like slaves. But its all there fault..dumb north africans..the west just wanted to save them.

Egypt: Egypt tries to industrialise under farouk but th west couldnt allow that so ensure it doesnt. I dont have time to go through all of it. Ultimately they gain independance (this is a broken record now) , join that great family tussle known as the cold war and eventually become a permanent dictatorship..all supported by the west.

Turkey: the ottoman empire collapses, the west decide to occupy istanbul and hand over anatolia to the greeks, but teh turks fight back defeat the greeks and drive the colonisers from their soil. attaturk enforces his own brand of westernism and oppresses any expression of islam to appease his new friends. He creates the modern republic and saves anatolia at this price. The british encourage him to abolish teh caliphate that ultimatley leads to OBL and ISIS.(its a long topic but this is true). Turkey then goes through coups and other issues before it finally reconciles with its islamic and secular identity. Leading to the issues we have today. Of course the west just wanted to help.

Saudi and arabia in general: The west encourages a rebellion against the turks promising all sorts of land and independance. Of course they go back on their word pretty swiftly, once the smoke clears and arabia is left to fend for itself until oil is discovered and the west suddenly comes back. Props up the monarchy and hands over arabia to a family. This family proceeds to enact its "reforms". Which ultimatley leads to what we call ISIS and AQ..but at the same prop up many western economies with their arms deals...also to the invasion of yemen which has killed hundreds of thousands, all supported by the west..but lets not talk about that part..because the west just wants to help the yemenis.

The subcontinent:

do we really need to go there? but lets have a very quick sound bite summary. The west get trading rights, set up a company to trade, that then proceeds to slowly but surely enslave the country, steal its wealth to the point it reduces the subcontinent from a super power to a poor outlier. Massacres millions in forced famines, enforces racist policies that creates poverty on a scale never before seen in history. To the extent the countries of the subcontinent still havent recovered. I mean they even stopped people from helping famine afflicted civilians on punishment of the law..but its all the subcontinents fault..the west just wanted to help..

and I could go on and on..the fact is Modern geopolitical problems are a direct result of western colonialism. the greatest crime against humanity ever. The miseries inflicted on the peoples of the world continue in the form of climate change, that has been caused by mass indistrialisation , which in turn was fuelled by the pluner from the colonies..

so yes..it is the wests fault..and I didnt even get to south east asia or africa..
 
I want the Britons to reverse their democratic decision by applying more democracy.

I answered your question about China.

It's not democracy if you choose not to implement a decision made by the people. You leader right now wants to ignore the voice of the majority.

You have not answered the question on China that I can see. It was a Yes or No question, would you want the UK to cease trade with China?

We are all hypocrites. You talk about China's human's rights, but would never cease economic trade with China. This is just one example, but in reality just an excuse for liberals to make some noise.
 
Once again, all the West’s fault. Why do you not extend this to the youth of all nuclear-armed states? If the Western democracies disarm, it will allow the authoritarian states China and Russia to extend their influence and further erode human rights. China is forming internment camps for hundreds of thousands of Muslims right now but you still think the West causes all harm.

and why is china the way it is? ever heard of the opium wars? China will never bow down to colonisation again..and if that means they are dictatorial then that is what they will be..they are communists after all. An ideology first coined where by the way? defniatley not a chinese ideology..I wonder where it came from..

as for authoritarianism. My friend your white..you ever been stopped and searched? wait till the british govt orders all voters to carry id's to vote..you think the west has never created concentration camps?

I'm no defender of the chinese policy in western china but its beyond hypocritcal for a white british citizen to criticise and pretend they are washed in milk and honey while lecturing the chinese..

You can live in your fantasy world, but the fact is much of what we see in the world is a direct result of western policy..

from climate change to famines, to poverty. tell me my friend where are the largest financial markets in the world? New york, London, paris? I could go on and on..
 
It's not democracy if you choose not to implement a decision made by the people. You leader right now wants to ignore the voice of the majority.

You have not answered the question on China that I can see. It was a Yes or No question, would you want the UK to cease trade with China?

We are all hypocrites. You talk about China's human's rights, but would never cease economic trade with China. This is just one example, but in reality just an excuse for liberals to make some noise.

he's not a liberal..He thinks he is and then goes and supports the Lib dems who have racist Mp's that cant string a sentence together without coming out with some prejudice..
 
of course they have gone to war. But ask yourself where these states came from. We are talking about the modern Middle east and its problems. The modern middle east is entirely a western created problem.

So lets take the major events and problems in the modern age and see whether the west is responsible or not.

Iran: Iran was one of the first countrys to gain independance (from a western nation by the way)
after the discovery of oil that the west felt it was entitled to not the iranians, western govts started taking more of an interest. Musadeq nationalised oil for his people but was overthrown by a cia and british sponsored coup. a dictator was installed by the west which elad to the iranian revolution. Of course all the iranians fault not the wests.

Isreal/palestine: Need I say more? of course all arafats fault not the british.

Iraq: another coutry being in one of the first to gain independance from a western power (how dare they). discovery of oil, coup , heres comes a dictator. Then the west seeing Iran and iraq with mountains of oil decide a good idea would be to get them to bomb the living garbage out of each other. Bring in the cold war (another war created by the greed of the western powers) and you have teh iran iraq war, the eventual gulf wars and the invasion of iraq. Millions dead. Millions homeless. Millions injured...but all saddams fault not the west..

Algeria: colonised by a western country, they gain independance but then are embroiled in another western war(the cold war), get a dictator (here we go again, I see a pattern). thousands of algerians fight for their coloniser hoping to gain independance or favours but are betrayed and treated like slaves. But its all there fault..dumb north africans..the west just wanted to save them.

Egypt: Egypt tries to industrialise under farouk but th west couldnt allow that so ensure it doesnt. I dont have time to go through all of it. Ultimately they gain independance (this is a broken record now) , join that great family tussle known as the cold war and eventually become a permanent dictatorship..all supported by the west.

Turkey: the ottoman empire collapses, the west decide to occupy istanbul and hand over anatolia to the greeks, but teh turks fight back defeat the greeks and drive the colonisers from their soil. attaturk enforces his own brand of westernism and oppresses any expression of islam to appease his new friends. He creates the modern republic and saves anatolia at this price. The british encourage him to abolish teh caliphate that ultimatley leads to OBL and ISIS.(its a long topic but this is true). Turkey then goes through coups and other issues before it finally reconciles with its islamic and secular identity. Leading to the issues we have today. Of course the west just wanted to help.

Saudi and arabia in general: The west encourages a rebellion against the turks promising all sorts of land and independance. Of course they go back on their word pretty swiftly, once the smoke clears and arabia is left to fend for itself until oil is discovered and the west suddenly comes back. Props up the monarchy and hands over arabia to a family. This family proceeds to enact its "reforms". Which ultimatley leads to what we call ISIS and AQ..but at the same prop up many western economies with their arms deals...also to the invasion of yemen which has killed hundreds of thousands, all supported by the west..but lets not talk about that part..because the west just wants to help the yemenis.

The subcontinent:

do we really need to go there? but lets have a very quick sound bite summary. The west get trading rights, set up a company to trade, that then proceeds to slowly but surely enslave the country, steal its wealth to the point it reduces the subcontinent from a super power to a poor outlier. Massacres millions in forced famines, enforces racist policies that creates poverty on a scale never before seen in history. To the extent the countries of the subcontinent still havent recovered. I mean they even stopped people from helping famine afflicted civilians on punishment of the law..but its all the subcontinents fault..the west just wanted to help..

and I could go on and on..the fact is Modern geopolitical problems are a direct result of western colonialism. the greatest crime against humanity ever. The miseries inflicted on the peoples of the world continue in the form of climate change, that has been caused by mass indistrialisation , which in turn was fuelled by the pluner from the colonies..

so yes..it is the wests fault..and I didnt even get to south east asia or africa..

Much of this I agree with.

Where I diverge is at the idea that the people of these nations have no agency and are doomed to continue killing each other. Violence can end.

Germany and Japan were smashed harder than any other nations in history, one was forcibly divided by the Soviets, yet are now vibrant successful and peaceful economies.

The West didn't commit the Amenian Genocide, Turks did that all by themsleves. Then Attaturk liberated Turkey and pulled it into the twentieth century. He didn't suppress Islam, there were mosques all over Turkey, he merely ended some oppressive practices like veils worn by government staff.

If Egypt was "all supported by the West" it seems strange that it used Soviet-era tanks and planes.

The Iran-Iraq War was not started by the West but by Saddam. Obviously it was watched with interest by the superpowers which provided political support to Iraq (and weapons from the Soviets) as did other Arab nations.

The Cold War was precipitated by the Soviets subjugating half of Europe instead of liberating half like USA and UK did, then putting up the Iron Curtain because they feared that their new territories would choose Western freedoms and living standards.

People have agency and can stop the violence if they want, rather than blame the past and continue in violent cycles. The great thing about the past is this: it's gone. Look at South Africa, look at Northern Ireland. People can move forward.
 
Germany and Japan were smashed harder than any other nations in history, one was forcibly divided by the Soviets, yet are now vibrant successful and peaceful economies.
.

Very poor example, USA and UK have not parked their military or troops in the countries you mentioned above. In other words, Germany and Japan were left on their own to deal with the future, no interference from Western politics.
 
The Iran-Iraq War was not started by the West but by Saddam. Obviously it was watched with interest by the superpowers which provided political support to Iraq (and weapons from the Soviets) as did other Arab nations.

Saddam was funded by the Americans back then. Remember, Iran was always the goal of Western powers.

You wouldn't have a problem if Russia was not involved. Well Russia is, and it's because of the West.
 
Much of this I agree with.

Where I diverge is at the idea that the people of these nations have no agency and are doomed to continue killing each other. Violence can end.

who says they are doomed to kill each other? they are however at the mercy of powerful western countries and the inbuilt organistations that support their continued colonial policies. I'll give you a simple example. The soviets (who I consider an extension of the west as they are a product of the russian revolution and queen victoria's pan europeanism) invade afghanistan to impose their european ideology on the country. Zia a military dictator supported by the US helps the west defeat the soviets. At home Zia helps set up the MQM, that morphs into a ethno political terrorist organisation. This organisation begins to kill its opponents and ethnically cleanse neighbourhoods in karachi.

years later we find out the leader of the MQM was supported by MI6 amongst others.
The point im making is the west never stops meddling. It always meddles. And then creates issues so it can then"solve" those issues by creating more issues and so on and so on.

People can stop killing each other. But everytime that attempts to happen the west intervenes tos top someone or something..


Germany and Japan were smashed harder than any other nations in history, one was forcibly divided by the Soviets, yet are now vibrant successful and peaceful economies.

yes they were conquered. Germany is still paying reparations. Japan is finished as a military power and is a people on their way to extinction. The west stationed thousands of troops there and continue to do so. They are not a good example.

The West didn't commit the Amenian Genocide, Turks did that all by themsleves. Then Attaturk liberated Turkey and pulled it into the twentieth century. He didn't suppress Islam, there were mosques all over Turkey, he merely ended some oppressive practices like veils worn by government staff.

No they didnt. by the way wearing a veil isnt an oppressive practice. Again you reveal your prejudice against Muslims. Attaturk destroyed turkeys link to its deep Islamic roots. It left a void in turkish society. I went to turkey in 1999 and I met a teacher of teh quraan who had to teach in secret and couldnt even grow a beard. that has changed now. turkey has finally found a balance between its past and its future.

As for the armenian genocide, it was a tragedy of immense proportions committed by nationalist turks lead by the young turks. Who were supported by the french. The ottoman empire had a tradition of including the armenians in govt and society. for its time it was a revolutionary setup. it ended in tragedy. But compared to the bengal famines and numerous massacres of the british it is childs play..

If Egypt was "all supported by the West" it seems strange that it used Soviet-era tanks and planes.

I didnt say it was supported all the while. i said the west was responsible for the situation we see now.

The Iran-Iraq War was not started by the West but by Saddam. Obviously it was watched with interest by the superpowers which provided political support to Iraq (and weapons from the Soviets) as did other Arab nations.


supported encouraged by the west.

The Cold War was precipitated by the Soviets subjugating half of Europe instead of liberating half like USA and UK did, then putting up the Iron Curtain because they feared that their new territories would choose Western freedoms and living standards.

and the rest of the world suffered due to an internal european problem. Especially the middle east..again proves my point either way.

People have agency and can stop the violence if they want, rather than blame the past and continue in violent cycles. The great thing about the past is this: it's gone. Look at South Africa, look at Northern Ireland. People can move forward.

they do, but strangely alot of the epace makers eitehr are found dead or end up in jail for long periods of time..all supported by the west..from **** pani to guantanamo..to abu ghuraib..and these are the ones we know about..
 
he's not a liberal..He thinks he is and then goes and supports the Lib dems who have racist Mp's that cant string a sentence together without coming out with some prejudice..

Liberals have ensured there is no center ground in politics anymore. According to them you are either a fascist/racist for voting against the norm, or evening questioning it, or you are a world citizen by voicing support for a reversal of a democratic decision because they believe they have the right.

Liberals are the reason why the likes of Trump, Farage, Boris, Le Pen et al have succeeded, but sadly these liberals cannot separate reality from delusions of grandeur.

Liberals polarized the West, not Brexit, not Trump.
 
Liberals have ensured there is no center ground in politics anymore. According to them you are either a fascist/racist for voting against the norm, or evening questioning it, or you are a world citizen by voicing support for a reversal of a democratic decision because they believe they have the right.

Liberals are the reason why the likes of Trump, Farage, Boris, Le Pen et al have succeeded, but sadly these liberals cannot separate reality from delusions of grandeur.

Liberals polarized the West, not Brexit, not Trump.

they also cheered the invasion of Iraq afghanistan and the bombing of pakistan..
 
Very poor example, USA and UK have not parked their military or troops in the countries you mentioned above. In other words, Germany and Japan were left on their own to deal with the future, no interference from Western politics.

Excellent example as they were smashed by Western and Soviet powers, and USA and British forces were based in West Germany while USA has airbases in Japan to this day. No excuses about "the West" causing problems decades later, no terrorism, no poverty, they just got on with recovery and fixed themselves up and now look at them.
 
and why is china the way it is? ever heard of the opium wars? China will never bow down to colonisation again..and if that means they are dictatorial then that is what they will be..they are communists after all. An ideology first coined where by the way? defniatley not a chinese ideology..I wonder where it came from..

as for authoritarianism. My friend your white..you ever been stopped and searched? wait till the british govt orders all voters to carry id's to vote..you think the west has never created concentration camps?

I'm no defender of the chinese policy in western china but its beyond hypocritcal for a white british citizen to criticise and pretend they are washed in milk and honey while lecturing the chinese..

You can live in your fantasy world, but the fact is much of what we see in the world is a direct result of western policy..

from climate change to famines, to poverty. tell me my friend where are the largest financial markets in the world? New york, London, paris? I could go on and on..


Yes I heard of the Opium Wars, and then I heard of the Long March which killed tens of millions of Chinese and had nothing to do with the Opium War, and then I heard of Tiannenman Square Massacre which had nothing to do with the Opium War either.

It doesn't matter that I haven't been stopsearched, I know I have white privilege, but calling out human rights abuses is the right thing to do. According to you, doing the right the right thing is hypocritical because only people who have suffered are allowed to do good things. I'll remember that next time I walk past a homeless guy on the street, I won't get him a sandwich because I have never gone hungry and helping him would therefore be hypocritical. I'll tell him sorry mate, I would put food in your belly but I can't because [MENTION=253]the Great Khan[/MENTION] will call me a hypocrite because some dead white guys started an opium war a century before I was born. I'm not allowed to do anything good because of that.
 
Excellent example as they were smashed by Western and Soviet powers, and USA and British forces were based in West Germany while USA has airbases in Japan to this day. No excuses about "the West" causing problems decades later, no terrorism, no poverty, they just got on with recovery and fixed themselves up and now look at them.

Awful example.

You are not honestly comparing a few airbases with troops on the ground in the ME are you? You are telling me the USA/UK military presence in the ME is similar to that of Japan? As for West Germany, you mean COMMUNIST Germany back then, so of course the you will find bases there back in the day! Communism is the greatest threat to capitalism.

And as it has already been pointed out, the West continue to interfere in the ME whether through politics or finance, and you must be naive with all the other millions who believe there would be no repercussions.

So before you claim, compare apples with apples. And you are right, no Western interference, then No terrorism, no poverty, just a recovery.

So please do not pretend West is clean. Iran is the end game, and I am glad Russia is interfering now, as it has put a halt to Western plans for the region.
 
Awful example.

You are not honestly comparing a few airbases with troops on the ground in the ME are you?
You are telling me the USA/UK military presence in the ME is similar to that of Japan? As for West Germany, you mean COMMUNIST Germany back then, so of course the you will find bases there back in the day! Communism is the greatest threat to capitalism.

And as it has already been pointed out, the West continue to interfere in the ME whether through politics or finance, and you must be naive with all the other millions who believe there would be no repercussions.

So before you claim, compare apples with apples. And you are right, no Western interference, then No terrorism, no poverty, just a recovery.

So please do not pretend West is clean. Iran is the end game, and I am glad Russia is interfering now, as it has put a halt to Western plans for the region.

No, I meant the FDR not the DDR.

And I am comparing states that were wrecked and yet managed to succeed with states that were wrecked (though nowhere to the same extent) and stayed wrecked, to demonstrate that states can recover from wreckage if they don't live in the past and blame "the West" for all their ills.
 
No, I meant the FDR not the DDR.

And I am comparing states that were wrecked and yet managed to succeed with states that were wrecked (though nowhere to the same extent) and stayed wrecked, to demonstrate that states can recover from wreckage if they don't live in the past and blame "the West" for all their ills.

They blame THE CURRENT ills on the West because the West continue to interfere in the politics and economics till this day in the region. Which part are you not understanding mate? Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, were NEVER allowed to be rebuilt because Western interests were to busy arming the rebels! What was it that Cameron said? Ahh yes we are arming the *moderate Muslims*.

ME would recover from the wreckage once Western politics stop interfering. Look at the state now, the West have armed Israel with nukes but warn Iran otherwise.
 
No, I meant the FDR not the DDR.

And I am comparing states that were wrecked and yet managed to succeed with states that were wrecked (though nowhere to the same extent) and stayed wrecked, to demonstrate that states can recover from wreckage if they don't live in the past and blame "the West" for all their ills.

More to do with the Japanese people having the highest average IQ levels. High IQ is related to success as explained by Jordan Peterson.

South Asians on the other hand have on average low IQ levels.
 
Back
Top