Turkey as protector of NATO
Reader comment on item: Does Turkey Still Belong in NATO?
Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Apr 24, 2009 at 08:55
Isaac Haskiya wrote :
> it is important to know that the Armed Forces of Turkey have garrisoned the south-east flank of the Treaty for decades.<
"The south-east flank of the Treaty" happens to be Turkey's own frontier. And it was actually NATO that was protecting her than Turkey protecting NATO as you crookedly imply.
> Among all the member-states of the Treaty, Turkey is probably the only country today, since the US are occupied in Iraq and Afghanistan, that can mobilize 100.000 well trained men by knocking three times on the ground. <
To do what with them? Attack and occupy Armenia as it was planned in 1992-1993 ? Invade Northern Kurdistan as it was attempted on a few occasions? Occupy Southern Cyprus ? Invade the Aegean islands ? Bomb Southern Russian cities as Dudayev implored the Turks to do once ? Or just block and ambush or expel the US soldiers from Iraq ?
> From a WW I type army until the late 40s, Turkey has developed into a modern force with a lot of fire-power and skill.<
The US and Israeli military and technical aid and training are responsible for that change. It's remarkable that you have failed to notice the little fact... But I forgot that Turks don't tend to express gratitude to anyone, least of all to kafirs.
> This would allow them to further enhance economy, education and health services.<
How do you mean? These things are well developed and do exist ... for the army. The Kemalist officers are overpaid, overprivileged and still dissatisfied that they don't get more. Now you suggest that they should get less and common people despised by the Army should get more? The Army will rather mutiny than allow the military spending to go down dramatically. The inflated Army is the main reason for Turkey's economic, educational and social contrasts and miseries.
> It would also give them time to develop the type of democracy that is suitable for their traditional values.<
"the type of democracy that is suitable for their traditional values"? ... What shall that abstract phrase mean? Total Islamisation and democracy are mutually exclusive terms. The more Islamic Turkey becomes the less chances she has to ever see the shadow of democracy on Turkish soil. 100% Islamisation rate is within your easy reach in a generation or two.
> Historical documents joined to theories of conspiration have been presented in this forum.<
You have not touched upon a single point raised, adduced not a single document or proof. You have just made unsubstantiated claims and dogmatic assertions and now add one more to cap them all. It's therefore not up to you do decide their value as you either ignore them all as infra dignitatem or have not troubled yourself to consider and evaluate them rationally. E.g. you have arrognatly rejected the name "pogrom" for the 1955 state- and army-sponsored riots staged against the Greeks, Armenians and Jews. I told you why you are totally wrong. You didn't deign to answer and yet have the cheek to speak of "theories of conspiration"! If anyone is conspiring here, it is you as you have more than anyone else here to hide from the public eye. You were a reserve officer in 1955 and I asked you what you were doing there during the pogrom ? I repeat the question.
> They serve nothing as far as Nato is concerned.<
Quite the contrary. Everything that enlarges our knowledge about a NATO member state is useful and serves a very important purpose. Reliability and credibility are as important things as the number of "well trained men" a NATO member state "can mobilize ... by knocking three times on the ground." Just like a press report on scandals and crimes into which someone belonging to respectable organization was involved helps keep the organization free of dubious and asocial characters , so these historical documents and evidence pursue the same purpose. How can one trust a member state (Turkey) that bullies and blackmails another member state (Greece) to keep quiet while it assaults a neutral country(Cyprus) , occupies 1/3rd of its territory, expels its population on trumped up accusations of preventing a 'genocide' , destroys and desacrates almost all the previous monuments and religious and cultural symbols, brings in masses of Moslem settlers from its backward regions and pretends with an outcry of offended virtue that nothing has happened and all the incidents "serve nothing as far as Nato is concerned" ?
> Turks will never retrograde to the East,<
Why? because Isaak Haskya says it to us? Turkey is a totally Moslem state. It has never been so completely Islamized in the WHOLE of its history as it is now. Ataturk banned Islamic education in schools. His 'secularist' worshippers made this Islamic education obligatory as part of their coup d'etat of 1980. Isn't it enough of a proof where Turkey's way is really leading ? In the path of Allah!!! And, by Allah, it's not a Western way.
> nor will they import certain western values that do not fit.<
E.g. democracy which is inaplicable for Turkey. What Turkey has is a police state where freedom of speech is non existent. What Turkey has instead is the institutional window-dressing that resembles the Western model without its essence and spirit. Paraphrasing the old saying : "Clothes don't make the man" one could say : "Parliament and elections don't make democracy yet."
> There is an excellent alternative for the Turkish State and that would be go neither "West" or "East" and yet maintain good relations with both sides. A win-win situation as it were!<
> Why should they accept a lose-lose situation when they can easily achieve the contrary?<
True, the Turks can deceive the West claiming they belong to the West and profiting from the claim by blackmailing the West that they can go East if the West doesn't satisfy their demands. At the same time they can deceive the East saying they belong to the East and profit from it as well.
In fact, the Turks are conducting a large-scale and consistently perfidious policy of deception and fraud to make the maximum profit from its position and the ignorance of their partners . They have the single objective in mind - that of making Turkey a Pan-Turkic superpower relying upon a Turkish-dominated empire controlling Central Asia , the Caucasus , The Black Sea and influencing the Balkans and exploiting Europe's resources. This dirty and perfidious game is expressed by you more diplomatically : "It would be Nato´s loss in case the Turks pull out and take care of their own business by themselves." But I'd say that by refusing to the dirty Turkish game NATO might win more than it can lose by allowing the Turks to play the game to the end.
> I wish them luck in that too!<
You have completed another piece of pro-Turkish propaganda. What will be your next argument to glorify Turkey ?
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (521) on this item
Comment on this item
You can help support Daniel Pipes' work by making a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes