USA vs. PKK?

[skreamer 1]

BBC news article

Quote

Details of the plan are not clear, but a US official said any military action would be carried out by US troops.

So, Turkey has been fighting the PKK for over 10 years (30 000 casualties) without being able to defeat them. To establish Turkey as an ally it would now appear that the USA will be taking action against the Kurds.

Wasn't one of the reasons for the war what that horrible man Saddam did to the Kurds? Neither Iraq nor Turkey wanted to give the Kurds a homeland (especially since that homeland covering south eastern Turkey and northern Iraq included oil-fields). The USA considers the PKK terrorists - the PKK are fighting for a homeland for the Kurdish people.

I find it really ironic that the USA will now be taking military action against the Kurds. I also feel rather sorry for the US military personnel who will be tasked with going into those mountains to fight the Kurds.

Will

[QuickDraw 0]

Just how many fronts does the US want to fight on ?

These people were allies of special forces and died along side them, 13 pieces of silver all around.

-- Hope you don't die. --

I'm fucking winning

[Gawain 0]

The article doesn't provide a lot of background, but the PKK is not part of the same "community" as the hundreds-of-thousands of Kurds that we are working with in the post-major-conflict-Iraq.

This is an extremist group which is trying to incite all out war to create a separate country Kurdistan - there has never been a "Kurdistan" from any reference I can find. After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Turkey has been trying to maintain its borders since the 1920s. This issue spans longer than 10 years.

Turkey and the US didn't just brew this up. Turkey offered amnesty to the Kurdish militants in July 03. Unfortunately, the offer was to the Kurdish "members", not the leadership. In September, the leadership abandoned its truce, citing absurd reasoning and timing.

This action does not establish Turkey as an ally, Turkey and the US have been allies for decades. Ideally, if an independent Kurdish state were to be created, then it should be wedged out of northern Iraq, since it was the League of Nations that created Iraq in the first place.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[skreamer 1]

Are you disputing the following?

Quote

More than 30,000 people were killed, and over a million displaced from their homes - largely in the predominantly Kurdish southeastern part of the country.

So it is just an extremist group huh?

Loving your spinning class!

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Are you disputing the following?

Quote

More than 30,000 people were killed, and over a million displaced from their homes - largely in the predominantly Kurdish southeastern part of the country.

So it is just an extremist group huh?

Loving your spinning class!

I am not disputing the casualties. I am simply pointing out that this is not the same group of Kurds that have aligned themselves with the US Iraq -- who, by the way, are not seeking an independent state. I am also saying that this conflict is not 10 years old, but is close to 100 years old. If I was trying to spin it, I would've dug deeper to find press released within Turkey.

The BBC article says directly that this militant faction, is about 5,000 people. Ultimately, this faction poses a greater threat to Iraqi security. If the violence continues to escalate, and Turkey takes direct invasive action, then Iraq will plunge into a civil and border war with Turkey. The Kurds that live peacefully in Iran, will enter the conflict and Iran itself may see it fit to take action on other border disputes that have been simmering since the end of the Iran/Iraq war.

While you cite the article well, the related links that have led to this action point out the following:

Quote

2 May 2002 BBC: The Kurdish separatist group, the PKK, is to be added to the European Union's list of groups branded as terrorists, diplomats said.
This will mean any assets the group has in Europe could be frozen.

and

Quote

29 July 2003 BBC (re Amnesty):Turkey is concerned that the power vacuum created by the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq will cause Kurdish insurgents to re-group and to start their attacks against Turkish security forces.

The government is hoping that the new legislation will pave the way for Kurdish militants in Northern Iraq to lay down their arms and to return to Turkey.

After the vote in parliament, the Interior Minister, Abdulkadir Aksu, thanked the deputies for choosing the path to peace and reconciliation.

He rejected the charge that the government came under pressure.

Instead, he said, Turkey had to learn the lessons of the past and it has to embrace all of its people, including some of its terrorists.

and

Quote

2 September 2003 BBC: "I foresee some sort of low-intensity warfare," Mizgin Sen, a spokeswoman for the group said.

She accused the Turkish Government of failing to fully address demands for Kurdish cultural rights, constitutional changes and freedom of expression, despite the passing by parliament of a number of laws removing restrictions on Kurds.

"Taking decisions is one thing. Implementing is another... There are still serious problems concerning the Kurdish issue," she told the BBC.

This is not as one-sided as this collaborative effort seems. But it does enforce one doctrine, proven time and time again in the middle-east, and will prove itself here: There is no negotiating with terrorists. The EU was correct in its classification. If terrorist organizations had any political tact, hostilities would've ended long ago. They are trying to place blame and accountability on Turkey for problems which it didn't create. I was simply pointing out there was more "baggage" if you will.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!