Turkey: Our NATO Ally

[marcusluvsvols]

You're obviously wanting to engage in hair splitting instead of addressing the major point. What difference does it make if the nukes allegedly there are on Jupiter Missiles, bottle rockets, bombs, pigeons, whatever? The major issue was that if nukes are still there, they shouldn't be there.

Why not address that?

I actually agree with part of that. If turkey is halfstepping, we need to either commit a great amount of defenses to secure that base or pull those warheads out of there to a secure location somewhere in the sandbox asap. Cant let terrorists 65 miles away get their hands on nukes...no matter what.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

As well as how many the Soviets had in East Europe/Warsaw Pact during the Cold War.

How many nukes/missiles/pigeons does Russia have in FSU countries right now vs how many does the US have?

I'm concerned about the here and now, while you and the like are still thinking we are fighting Communist Soviet Russia.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

You're obviously wanting to engage in hair splitting instead of addressing the major point. What difference does it make if the nukes allegedly there are on Jupiter Missiles, bottle rockets, bombs, pigeons, whatever? The major issue was that if nukes are still there, they shouldn't be there.

Why not address that?

I actually agree with part of that. If turkey is halfstepping, we need to either commit a great amount of defenses to secure that base or pull those warheads out of there to a secure location somewhere in the sandbox asap. Cant let terrorists 65 miles away get their hands on nukes...no matter what.

 

[volprof]

How many nukes/missiles/pigeons does Russia have in FSU countries right now vs how many does the US have?

I'm concerned about the here and now, while you and the like are still thinking we are fighting Communist Soviet Russia.

Having American nuclear arms in other responsible Western partners' lands is a good thing. It contributes to deterrence. The more spread out our nuclear deterrent, the less likely Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, whoever, is likely to think it can win a nuclear war. However, having nuclear arms in Turkey has never been a good idea, as Turkey has too many elements in its society all too willing to subvert the great Westernizing project of that state's founder.

Now, as far as Russian nuclear arms are concerned, we should all hope the Kremlin never decides it's a good idea to house any of theirs in other nations (as the Kremlin has suggested perhaps doing in Syria, only god knows why), as any Russian partner willing to house its nukes will inevitably be an unstable autocratic regime (like Assad). While these states themselves might not use them, it only increases the chance that rogue elements, like Islamic terrorists or whackjobs like in "The Sum of All Fears," will get access.

 

[Grand Vol]

I don't know if we want him removed or who orchestrated the coup. It very well could have been an inside job/false flag by Erdogan. But in regards to your outrage about "we want him removed", I don't understand the outrage. As far as I'm concerned, I've been very consistent in my belief that we don't need to meddle in other people's business... all we need to do is promote trade and commerce and that is it. On the other hand, some on the right (not necessarily you, but I wouldn't doubt you've done so in the past) have no issue with regime change and Colour Revolutions. Why all of a sudden is there so much unease about removing Erdogan?

LOL

Since when is asking "wtf" a sign of outrage.

Stop trying to escalate the situation.

 

[volprof]

LOL

Since when is asking "wtf" a sign of outrage.

Stop trying to escalate the situation.

He needs a little "nuclear de-escalation," like his pal, Putin.

 

[volprof]

Just happened to be watching NBC Nightly News at the end of the Olympics coverage, and they did a story on the recent wedding suicide bombing in Turkey. Then did a brief "flashback-rundown" segment, where they talked about the turmoil in the country, including the recent coup. NBC said that there was a failed coup "by top military generals."

I had to do a double-take on that one. Where did they get that from? There were no "top military generals" involved. It was just a bunch of mid-ranking patsies that Erdogan figured he could afford to dispense with for his little fake coup.

That's very poor reporting, especially in the wake of the Brian Williams' scandal.

 

[Grand Vol]

Just happened to be watching NBC Nightly News at the end of the Olympics coverage, and they did a story on the recent wedding suicide bombing in Turkey. Then did a brief "flashback-rundown" segment, where they talked about the turmoil in the country, including the recent coup. NBC said that there was a failed coup "by top military generals."

I had to do a double-take on that one. Where did they get that from? There were no "top military generals" involved. It was just a bunch of mid-ranking patsies that Erdogan figured he could afford to dispense with for his little fake coup.

That's very poor reporting, especially in the wake of the Brian Williams' scandal.

I semi agree with Ras that the nukes in Turkey cause me pause for thought and ask the question "why."

However, for radically different reasons.

I served in two NATO countries that have the MUN Sites, Germany and Turkey. And of the two, Turkey concerned me the most. Not because of the Islamic nature of the nation or the close proximity to the Middle East. But rather the attitude of the Turkish military and (I would assume) the political leadership in the country. They believed the bombs stored at Incirlik to be "theirs" and we had to have their "permission" any time we wanted to access what is rightfully U.S. property. Sorry, but go **** yourself Turkey, you don't get to dictate terms on our property you agreed to store in your third world cesspool of a nation. Which is why I wholeheartedly agree with removing them if it hasn't been done already.

I have no problems with the other NATO nations: Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium, storing said weapons. They know how the game is played and aren't insecure about the perception of power like Turkey is. It's the difference in being a civilized nation and a member of an alliance that protects and benefits them rather than being an arrogant prick of a nation that only occupies strategically important land. And if it wasn't for the location of Turkey, we should have abandoned that nation long ago.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

I semi agree with Ras that the nukes in Turkey cause me pause for thought and ask the question "why."

However, for radically different reasons.

I served in two NATO countries that have the MUN Sites, Germany and Turkey. And of the two, Turkey concerned me the most. Not because of the Islamic nature of the nation or the close proximity to the Middle East. But rather the attitude of the Turkish military and (I would assume) the political leadership in the country. They believed the bombs stored at Incirlik to be "theirs" and we had to have their "permission" any time we wanted to access what is rightfully U.S. property. Sorry, but go **** yourself Turkey, you don't get to dictate terms on our property you agreed to store in your third world cesspool of a nation. Which is why I wholeheartedly agree with removing them if it hasn't been done already.

I have no problems with the other NATO nations: Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium, storing said weapons. They know how the game is played and aren't insecure about the perception of power like Turkey is. It's the difference in being a civilized nation and a member of an alliance that protects and benefits them rather than being an arrogant prick of a nation that only occupies strategically important land. And if it wasn't for the location of Turkey, we should have abandoned that nation long ago.

Of what significance did it make in our discussion about whether they nukes were bombs or on missiles?

 

[volprof]

I semi agree with Ras that the nukes in Turkey cause me pause for thought and ask the question "why."

However, for radically different reasons.

I served in two NATO countries that have the MUN Sites, Germany and Turkey. And of the two, Turkey concerned me the most. Not because of the Islamic nature of the nation or the close proximity to the Middle East. But rather the attitude of the Turkish military and (I would assume) the political leadership in the country. They believed the bombs stored at Incirlik to be "theirs" and we had to have their "permission" any time we wanted to access what is rightfully U.S. property. Sorry, but go **** yourself Turkey, you don't get to dictate terms on our property you agreed to store in your third world cesspool of a nation. Which is why I wholeheartedly agree with removing them if it hasn't been done already.

I have no problems with the other NATO nations: Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium, storing said weapons. They know how the game is played and aren't insecure about the perception of power like Turkey is. It's the difference in being a civilized nation and a member of an alliance that protects and benefits them rather than being an arrogant prick of a nation that only occupies strategically important land. And if it wasn't for the location of Turkey, we should have abandoned that nation long ago.

While I obviously don't share your valuable personal experiences, I couldn't agree more.

Unfortunately, we're just going to have to deal with them. Losing them as an "ally" will be disastrous, in both terms of morale and in geostrategy.

Although it was our idiotic mistake to ever house our weapons there in the first place, a move I suppose our bygone security advisors well-intentionedly thought would put us in close bombing position to the southern USSR/southern Russia, if Erdogan so much as harms a hair upon the head of any US service member at Incirlik, we should take Turkey down. Obama is probably too weak, but I would even threaten to do nuclear strikes on nearly all Turkish military installations in the event that they decide to move in on Incirlik.

This is a war that, if the American people could realize the gravity of it, they could get behind. This would not be some stupid "war of choice" like Iraq, or even to a lesser degree, Afghanistan. This would be a war of necessity. A legitimate one.

I hope it doesn't come to this though, and I'm optimistic that it won't, although, as I said earlier, Erdogan has never struck me as the sharpest tool in the shed. He's no Putin, that's for sure.

 

[Grand Vol]

Of what significance did it make in our discussion about whether they nukes were bombs or on missiles?

You were the one that brought up the Cuban Missile Crisis and the secret agreement we reached with the Soviets.

 

[Pacer92]

I semi agree with Ras that the nukes in Turkey cause me pause for thought and ask the question "why."

However, for radically different reasons.

I served in two NATO countries that have the MUN Sites, Germany and Turkey. And of the two, Turkey concerned me the most. Not because of the Islamic nature of the nation or the close proximity to the Middle East. But rather the attitude of the Turkish military and (I would assume) the political leadership in the country. They believed the bombs stored at Incirlik to be "theirs" and we had to have their "permission" any time we wanted to access what is rightfully U.S. property. Sorry, but go **** yourself Turkey, you don't get to dictate terms on our property you agreed to store in your third world cesspool of a nation. Which is why I wholeheartedly agree with removing them if it hasn't been done already.

I have no problems with the other NATO nations: Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium, storing said weapons. They know how the game is played and aren't insecure about the perception of power like Turkey is. It's the difference in being a civilized nation and a member of an alliance that protects and benefits them rather than being an arrogant prick of a nation that only occupies strategically important land. And if it wasn't for the location of Turkey, we should have abandoned that nation long ago.

Question is...if these nukes are in fact used as bargaining chips,(heaven forbid) what is bargained? For many reasons I diapprove with our foreign policy, however, if Erdogan is using these as leverage, I draw the line. Whatever ways, legit or corrupt, our relationship with Erdogan evolved, those are American nukes and he needs to turn them over immediately or we should do whatever means necessary to assume these weapons. No bargaining whatsoever..

 

[Grand Vol]

While I obviously don't share your valuable personal experiences, I couldn't agree more.

Unfortunately, we're just going to have to deal with them. Losing them as an "ally" will be disastrous, in both terms of morale and in geostrategy.

Although it was our idiotic mistake to ever house our weapons there in the first place, a move I suppose our bygone security advisors well-intentionedly thought would put us in close bombing position to the southern USSR/southern Russia, if Erdogan so much as harms a hair upon the head of any US service member at Incirlik, we should take Turkey down. Obama is probably too weak, but I would even threaten to do nuclear strikes on nearly all Turkish military installations in the event that they decide to move in on Incirlik.

This is a war that, if the American people could realize the gravity of it, they could get behind. This would not be some stupid "war of choice" like Iraq, or even to a lesser degree, Afghanistan. This would be a war of necessity. A legitimate one.

I hope it doesn't come to this though, and I'm optimistic that it won't, although, as I said earlier, Erdogan has never struck me as the sharpest tool in the shed. He's no Putin, that's for sure.

We've got enough allies for the moment. I personally believe there are far easier nations to deal with in that part of the world than Turkey. Israel for example (minus the nukes) or even an independent Kurdistan would be far greater allies than, again, a third world nation that's quickly turning into a fundamentalist dictatorship.

The problem, as you noted, is the fact Obama is weak and I don't think Hillary would be any better in that regard. I'm not implying Trump would be either, so don't take that as tacit support for him. And the threat of nuclear strikes would be as empty as a red line in the sand since Incirlik sits on the outskirts of the city of Adana, population 1.7 million. We would be seen as world pariahs in the case of a nuclear strike against the base to keep the weapons from falling into hostile hands. About the only thing we could do in that eventuality would be a massive military strike to seize and occupy said base, retrieve the weapons (which unfortunately isn't an easy task given the security containers they are in) and fly them out. All while trying to hold off the Turkish military from stopping us.

In the words of Lieutenant Lockhart from the classic Full Metal Jacket, "In other words, it's a huge **** sandwich, and we're all gonna have to take a bite."

 

[Pacer92]

wtf?

My point is this. Regardless of whether we played a part or not, Erdogan feels we have betrayed him...

Fair or not, Saddam and Gadaffi were former allies of the US. We eventually turned on both...both being killed. Erdogan is not naive to this fact..

 

[Grand Vol]

My point is this. Regardless of whether we played a part or not, Erdogan feels we have betrayed him...

Fair or not, Saddam and Gadaffi were former allies of the US. We eventually turned on both...both being killed. Erdogan is not naive to this fact..

Erdogan doesn't feel we have betrayed him. He's using the U.S. as an excuse to purge his political opposition so he can rule freely. Do you honestly believe some random cleric living in exile in Pennsylvania orchestrated a bunch of junior officers to revolt (as was their Constitutional duty) against the sitting government? No Generals or Admirals supporting the revolt?

No, Erdogan needed a reason to go after the opposition in his government, the courts and the military and replace them with people loyal to him or that at least share his views. And the failed coup gave him the prime opportunity to do so and place the blame at the "evil" Americans.

 

[Pacer92]

Erdogan doesn't feel we have betrayed him. He's using the U.S. as an excuse to purge his political opposition so he can rule freely. Do you honestly believe some random cleric living in exile in Pennsylvania orchestrated a bunch of junior officers to revolt (as was their Constitutional duty) against the sitting government? No Generals or Admirals supporting the revolt?

No, Erdogan needed a reason to go after the opposition in his government, the courts and the military and replace them with people loyal to him or that at least share his views. And the failed coup gave him the prime opportunity to do so and place the blame at the "evil" Americans.

Assuming you're right....he plotted it himself. Where's the benefit in blaming "evil" Americans? He already has a fairly free rule of Turkey..

Did he see his time was running out with the US/NATO alliance? It seems odd that our politicians were applauding him for shooting down the Russian jet, then months later, relations are so bad he's blaming and threatening us..

 

[Grand Vol]

Assuming you're right....he plotted it himself. Where's the benefit in blaming "evil" Americans? He already has a fairly free rule of Turkey..

Did he see his time was running out with the US/NATO alliance? It seems odd that our politicians were applauding him for shooting down the Russian jet, then months later, relations are so bad he's blaming and threatening us..

I won't stand firm on the "he planned and implemented it himself" theory. However, it makes a whole lot more sense than a bunch of junior officer nobodies planning to overthrow the government on some idealistic notion or that an exiled cleric was responsible. And if you want to go after your political opposition, it certainly gives you a good reason to. Just a theory, but one that is certainly plausible.

As for "why blame the big bad Americans" question. It's a good question. And the answer, if I was behind it, is simple. Why not blame the Americans? I mean, seriously, what are we going to do about it? We have a President that's as weak as any we've ever seen before in our lifetimes, save maybe Jimmy Carter. And the world knows that. Erdogan knows that. Erdogan should also know that we won't react to his blaming us or harboring his opposition. So in reality, who else would Erdogan blame? Russia? Putin don't play that. The EU? Turkey has been trying to get into the EU for years.

It's easy to pick the biggest power around and look a lot stronger than you really are. "Look at me! I stood up to the US and won!" The same tactic has worked for Castro for 60 years. It's a win-win for Erdogan.

I don't recall our politicians (none of any consequence anyway) applauding the shoot down of the Russian fighter.

 

[volprof]

I won't stand firm on the "he planned and implemented it himself" theory. However, it makes a whole lot more sense than a bunch of junior officer nobodies planning to overthrow the government on some idealistic notion or that an exiled cleric was responsible. And if you want to go after your political opposition, it certainly gives you a good reason to. Just a theory, but one that is certainly plausible.

As for "why blame the big bad Americans" question. It's a good question. And the answer, if I was behind it, is simple. Why not blame the Americans? I mean, seriously, what are we going to do about it? We have a President that's as weak as any we've ever seen before in our lifetimes, save maybe Jimmy Carter. And the world knows that. Erdogan knows that. Erdogan should also know that we won't react to his blaming us or harboring his opposition. So in reality, who else would Erdogan blame? Russia? Putin don't play that. The EU? Turkey has been trying to get into the EU for years.

It's easy to pick the biggest power around and look a lot stronger than you really are. "Look at me! I stood up to the US and won!" The same tactic has worked for Castro for 60 years. It's a win-win for Erdogan.

I don't recall our politicians (none of any consequence anyway) applauding the shoot down of the Russian fighter.

No one on here or in our media praised the shootdown. That's just more Pacer pro-Russian, anti-American nonsense.

To add to your comment, like I said before, Turkey is one of the most anti-American countries on Earth. It's certainly the most anti-American nation within NATO. Just look at the polls. Erdogan scapegoated the Americans (and Gulen, via America, because he lives here in exile), because he knew it was the best way for him to pull off his ruse. The people, so impassioned by their hate and disgust for the one country in the world that keeps them safe, can be easily manipulated, which, as the polls after the ruse suggest, they were.

 

[Pacer92]

I won't stand firm on the "he planned and implemented it himself" theory. However, it makes a whole lot more sense than a bunch of junior officer nobodies planning to overthrow the government on some idealistic notion or that an exiled cleric was responsible. And if you want to go after your political opposition, it certainly gives you a good reason to. Just a theory, but one that is certainly plausible.

As for "why blame the big bad Americans" question. It's a good question. And the answer, if I was behind it, is simple. Why not blame the Americans? I mean, seriously, what are we going to do about it? We have a President that's as weak as any we've ever seen before in our lifetimes, save maybe Jimmy Carter. And the world knows that. Erdogan knows that. Erdogan should also know that we won't react to his blaming us or harboring his opposition. So in reality, who else would Erdogan blame? Russia? Putin don't play that. The EU? Turkey has been trying to get into the EU for years.

It's easy to pick the biggest power around and look a lot stronger than you really are. "Look at me! I stood up to the US and won!" The same tactic has worked for Castro for 60 years. It's a win-win for Erdogan.

I don't recall our politicians (none of any consequence anyway) applauding the shoot down of the Russian fighter.

I can't believe junior officers were behind this either, however, the whole thing is fishy..

I really feel that Erdogan sees himself and Turkey as the "key" between US/Russia relations...therefore, he has power that others don't..

He's a lunatic and both sides know this. Neither trust him and neither think he's the ideal statesman/leader...however, when you play hardball, guys like Erdogan are beneficial/unbeneficial depending on the side..

Believe it or not, I think Putin isn't as hardcore as some of you would like to believe. He keeps trying to work with "our partners"(America) in Syria, regardless the pressure that we have put upon him...

Erdogan has power here, but in the end, hes got to choose a side. He wont survive long standing alone...

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

You were the one that brought up the Cuban Missile Crisis and the secret agreement we reached with the Soviets.

And I said that the agreement was to remove missiles from Turkey. Then you came back with a comment about read up on your history and Jupiter missiles or whatever.

I guess I didn't see the significance in that slight correction when the main thrust was that we shouldn't have had nukes there to begin with, no matter what form or fashion they were in.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

We've got enough allies for the moment. I personally believe there are far easier nations to deal with in that part of the world than Turkey. Israel for example (minus the nukes) or even an independent Kurdistan would be far greater allies than, again, a third world nation that's quickly turning into a fundamentalist dictatorship.

The problem, as you noted, is the fact Obama is weak and I don't think Hillary would be any better in that regard. I'm not implying Trump would be either, so don't take that as tacit support for him. And the threat of nuclear strikes would be as empty as a red line in the sand since Incirlik sits on the outskirts of the city of Adana, population 1.7 million. We would be seen as world pariahs in the case of a nuclear strike against the base to keep the weapons from falling into hostile hands. About the only thing we could do in that eventuality would be a massive military strike to seize and occupy said base, retrieve the weapons (which unfortunately isn't an easy task given the security containers they are in) and fly them out. All while trying to hold off the Turkish military from stopping us.

In the words of Lieutenant Lockhart from the classic Full Metal Jacket, "In other words, it's a huge **** sandwich, and we're all gonna have to take a bite."

I won't stand firm on the "he planned and implemented it himself" theory. However, it makes a whole lot more sense than a bunch of junior officer nobodies planning to overthrow the government on some idealistic notion or that an exiled cleric was responsible. And if you want to go after your political opposition, it certainly gives you a good reason to. Just a theory, but one that is certainly plausible.

As for "why blame the big bad Americans" question. It's a good question. And the answer, if I was behind it, is simple. Why not blame the Americans? I mean, seriously, what are we going to do about it? We have a President that's as weak as any we've ever seen before in our lifetimes, save maybe Jimmy Carter. And the world knows that. Erdogan knows that. Erdogan should also know that we won't react to his blaming us or harboring his opposition. So in reality, who else would Erdogan blame? Russia? Putin don't play that. The EU? Turkey has been trying to get into the EU for years.

It's easy to pick the biggest power around and look a lot stronger than you really are. "Look at me! I stood up to the US and won!" The same tactic has worked for Castro for 60 years. It's a win-win for Erdogan.

I don't recall our politicians (none of any consequence anyway) applauding the shoot down of the Russian fighter.

This is your second time in the last few comments to mention how "weak" Obama is.

Tell me, how would a "strong" president handle Turkey?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

I can't believe junior officers were behind this either, however, the whole thing is fishy..

I really feel that Erdogan sees himself and Turkey as the "key" between US/Russia relations...therefore, he has power that others don't..

He's a lunatic and both sides know this. Neither trust him and neither think he's the ideal statesman/leader...however, when you play hardball, guys like Erdogan are beneficial/unbeneficial depending on the side..

Believe it or not, I think Putin isn't as hardcore as some of you would like to believe. He keeps trying to work with "our partners"(America) in Syria, regardless the pressure that we have put upon him...

Erdogan has power here, but in the end, hes got to choose a side. He wont survive long standing alone...

If Putin is the devil that the MSM and the Neocons make him out to be, he would have kicked off WWIII after they shot down a commercial airliner or plane that allegedly flew into Turkish airspace.

He has shown amazing patience in the face of all of this.

 

[volprof]

If Putin is the devil that the MSM and the Neocons make him out to be, he would have kicked off WWIII after they shot down a commercial airliner or plane that allegedly flew into Turkish airspace.

He has shown amazing patience in the face of all of this.

As I've always said, it's wonderful when a leader takes accountability for the mess he has created. While Putin refusing WWIII as a result of his own failures is not necessarily a mark of great leadership, it at least shows some modicum of the "amazing patience" for which you so highly praise the man who would pay someone else to bury you six feet under faster than a jackrabbit on a date, should you ever cross him.

 

[volprof]

I guess we're going to have to put the Turko-Russo-Iranian axis on hold, at least for the moment:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...e-4544-889b-2cb7f233fc62_story.html?tid=sm_tw

While events in that part of the world are certainly troubling to me, and it is not altogether implausible such a horrible stew could come to boil, one thing that gives me heart is that Turks, Russians, and Iranians (Persians, really) are all so full of themselves - each thinking themselves god's gift to humanity - that they'll probably never really form any sort of cohesive alliance, one that is fully on the same page.

Americans are also completely full of themselves. The difference is, we have every reason to be, because we're actually the best, and we're also still capable of actually working with others. If you think I'm joking, just look at the differences in the structure of NATO as opposed to the now defunct Warsaw Pact.

 

[LouderVol]

interesting development, and theoretical. what do you guys feel about a potential "swap" of allies. Russia gets Turkey, which ousts Iran who we firm things up with.

obviously it will take a ton of work for us to even have normal relations with Iran but just thinking/wondering if they start to feel like a jilted lover.