Turkish govt. arrests 49 generals in power struggle

[Valley Oak]

Turkish authorities have arrested 49 generals of its armed forces for conspiring to overthrow the democratically elected government. Suspicions of a coup d'état being planned by the Turkish military has provoked Ankara to carry out a sweep against its armed forces. The military heads are now being interrogated to learn how far the plot has developed.

Redada en Turquía contra el golpismo · ELPAÍS.com

Prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is desperately trying to modernize his country and gain entry into the European Union, which has denied Turkey's membership for many good reasons, including lack of democratic reform and military dictatorship:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Turkey

[LenInSebastopol]

From the way I understand it, the fundies of Turkey are again trying to move that country into their camp thus shucking all the Western notions of 'the good life'. Seems Mohamedaism is once again on fire and sweeping the land; shades of 640 BC! If Turkey goes in that direction, Europe will have greater problems than 1/3 Muslim population.

[Valley Oak]

(I have edited my original post)

Not true. This is more misinformation.

The Turkish government is secular. The US wants a weak government in power for military and strategic reasons (Turkey's continued membership in NATO, maintaining a powerful and crucial sentinel in the doorways between the European continent, the Middle East, and Russia) although US interests are also economic.

Erdogan pide al Ejército turco que se mantenga en el marco legal · ELPAÍS.com

The Turkish military has overthrown the civil government four (4) times within the last half century with coup d'etats in 1960, 1971, 1980, 1997. And has subverted the government many more times. In the most recent coup, just one example of military interference with the civilian population and its government, was when the Turkish military forced another secular prime minister, Necmettin Erbakan, to resign under the threat: "the streets of Turkey will be filled with blood." Erbakan left office without a single shot being fired because he didn't want the treacherous military to make good on its threat. This was in 1997.

I completed a term project and oral report on Turkey in one of my political science courses at Sonoma State University in 2002. I used over a dozen peer reviewed articles for my research.

Turkey is a country with enormous potential, more than most European nations by themselves. But Turkey has been severely retarded for decades by a chronic and normally subtle military dictatorship. The true authority of the country is the National Security Council, a military organism, which has always had to approve the civil governments policy decisions before they could be implemented. This means that if the Turkish government passes a law, that law cannot be enacted if the military's NSC disapproves of it. That is not democracy; that is military dictatorship. And that is what the United States has always helped to maintain to serve American interests, not Turkish interests, certainly not the interests of the people of Turkey. This scheme maintained the interests of the Turkish elite, military, and privileged classes, sure, but not the interests of democracy or the majority of Turkish citizens.

Edward

From the way I understand it, the fundies of Turkey are again trying to move that country into their camp thus shucking all the Western notions of 'the good life'. Seems Mohamedaism is once again on fire and sweeping the land; shades of 640 BC! If Turkey goes in that direction, Europe will have greater problems than 1/3 Muslim population.

["Mad" Miles]

Edward/VO,

Nice summary, thanks. It reminded me of things I've forgotten, or perhaps never learned in the first place.

You didn't mention, by the way, the brutal suppression of the Kurds in the east and southeast of Turkey. A whole other can'o'worms.

Back in the mid-eighties I got to know some Turkish International Relations grad students at the University of Chicago. Had a brief affair with one of them until the language barrier created some insoluble problems.

The whole legacy of Kemal Attaturk is a very complicated story. And of course, unfortunately, the Armenian genocide is still officially unacknowledged to this day.

Turkey has an interesting mix of the traditional and modern, the secular and devoutly religious (mostly Islam). I hope to visit some day.


On a completely unconnected note, today was my last day of work at San Quentin State Prison. I got all of the signatures required on my "Report Of Separation, CDC 648" form. I refer to it as my Release papers. I liked greeting my colleagues with, "Dead Teacher Walking!" I do have a sick sense of humor. Many of them have taken clerical jobs with the state at a 40% pay cut. Me, I'm going to collect unemployment, take some car trips, and write.

Of course, a judge might temporarily reverse the whole thing in a hearing tomorrow in SF. Will keep the World of Waccies posted.

I flashed on this last night. My job was to bring hope to the hopeless. Very gratifying. And now, they get bupkus. There will be blood. And I'm not in any way pleased to say it.


Edward, please keep up the informing.

And for those who accused Edward of being a morally twisted sympathizer of pedophiles in the Roman Polanski thread, Edward has a teenage daughter and as much as anyone can relate to the horrors of statutory rape and actual child rape. Part of being a member of a community is paying attention to the other members of that community, and not talking out of your ass if you haven't.

"Mad" Miles

[LenInSebastopol]

There is a brainiac out with a new book, something like The Next 100 Years. He has a talk on the web (CSPAN website as I recall) where he predicts that over the next century Turkey will be a major player in the geo-political and world market. Interesting premise he puts out when he asks what the geo political situation was 100 years ago. Who'd thunk the Ottoman Empire, and all the other empires would have gone towards nationalism on individual independent country-states! The writer Nial Feguson makes the notion of "nations" a perverse idea in War of the World, 20th Century Conflicts as all mankind had known up to that point was empires, at best.
Much appreciated for bringing me up on stuff.

[Sciguy]

I lived in Turkey for five years around 1970, speak Turkish fairly fluently and studied the history as much as I could at the time.

My understanding is that the Turkish Military has very little in common with the stereotypes that we carry in our minds from Central America, the -stan countries of the former Soviet Union and many other dictatorial militaries. The Turkish military takes its cue from the vision of Ataturk (the most respected general ever in Turkey who saved the country from simultaneous invasions by the Greeks, Russians, British and French around 1919) and see it as their role to prevent secular dictators from taking power. Ataturk was devoted to instilling secular democracy. Three or four times, one president sought to seize too much power and the military stepped in, kicked him out, hanged one once, then held elections, installed a new elected government and withdrew. Hardly the picture of a standard dictatiorial military.

I am not that familiar with more recent developments, particularly under the baleful influence of Washington that subverts democracy worldwide. However a few years ago, I heard this story from a Turkish friend. The leader of the islamic leaning party, Erbakan, was throwing out the first ball in a soccer game in a stadium. He was well known for his attempts to turn Turkey into an Islamic state. When he came on the field, the fans stood up and began a chant that spread throughout the stadium: "Turkey is secular! Turkey is secular!"

I am not too worried about Turkey becoming an islamic country or an avowed military dictatorship any time soon. I hope I am not wrong.

On the subject of what happened to the Armenians, I think people should refrain from referring to "the Armenian Genocide" as though it were an established fact. What is a fact, is that Armenians are far more numerous than Turks in this country and they are loud, strident, vociferous and ruthless. Seventy Turkish diplomats have been assassinated by Armenians in the last few decades. The Turks do not deny that many Armenians lost their lives in a forced evacuation. How could they when there are so many personal testimonies by Armenians who were there? What the Turks do say is that the Armenians were collaborating with the Russians who were invading from the Northeast, where the Armenian villages were (they are co-religionists) and so the collapsing Ottoman government decided to relocate the Armenians southward away from the Russian forces. In the process of fighting, many Armenians lost their lives along with many Turks. The Turks thus portray the Armenian removal as a legitimate operation of war, not a genocide. The Turkish scholars point out that the Armenians do not shrink from mendacious inventions. The Armenians repeatedly claim that Hitler stated: "Who now remembers the Armenians?" Turks say there is no basis for this claim - it never happened. There is much more to be said on the Turkish side than you would guess at if you only hear the Armenian laments. I wasn't there so I can only try to sift evidence.

It may be interesting to learn that the Turks have traditionally been supporters of minorities. When I was there in the late sixties, there were still certain islands in the Bosphorus (the Princess Islands) where only Greeks lived. They told me that until recently, Turks were not allowed on the islands (this in Turkey!). There are large Jewish and Armenian and Greek communities around Istanbul. Most of the jewelers in the covered market are Armenians. The Jews arrived in 1492 when Ferdinand and Isabella kicked the Jews out of Spain under pain of conversion or death. Suleyman the Lawgiver, Sultan of Turkey welcomed them in with this famous phrase: "Spain's loss is our gain".

The Kurds are an unfortunate exception. Maybe there are just too many of them. Maybe they tend to be farmers and herders instead of money dealers. The prohibitions against the Kurdish language are being lifted I believe, even while one parlimentarian is being prosecuted for uttering a single word in Kurdish while the prohibition was in effect. But the Turks are a strangely patriotic and inferiority complexed lot in some curious ways. I believe it is still true that you can be arrested for denigrating Turkish money, such as throwing it on the ground. Can you imagine the desire to do just that in a conversation when one lira in 1970 soon became a million and a half lira in 2000? "Bah, this money is worthless" must have passed many lips. But everyone knows better than to give emphasis by throwing a useless bill on the ground.


Paul Palmer

(I have edited my original post)

Not true. This is more misinformation.

The Turkish government is secular. The US wants a weak government in power for military and strategic reasons (Turkey's continued membership in NATO, maintaining a powerful and crucial sentinel in the doorways between the European continent, the Middle East, and Russia) although US interests are also economic.

Erdogan pide al Ejército turco que se mantenga en el marco legal · ELPAÍS.com

The Turkish military has overthrown the civil government four (4) times within the last half century with coup d'etats in 1960, 1971, 1980, 1997. And has subverted the government many more times. In the most recent coup, just one example of military interference with the civilian population and its government, was when the Turkish military forced another secular prime minister, Necmettin Erbakan, to resign under the threat: "the streets of Turkey will be filled with blood." Erbakan left office without a single shot being fired because he didn't want the treacherous military to make good on its threat. This was in 1997.

I completed a term project and oral report on Turkey in one of my political science courses at Sonoma State University in 2002. I used over a dozen peer reviewed articles for my research.

Turkey is a country with enormous potential, more than most European nations by themselves. But Turkey has been severely retarded for decades by a chronic and normally subtle military dictatorship. The true authority of the country is the National Security Council, a military organism, which has always had to approve the civil governments policy decisions before they could be implemented. This means that if the Turkish government passes a law, that law cannot be enacted if the military's NSC disapproves of it. That is not democracy; that is military dictatorship. And that is what the United States has always helped to maintain to serve American interests, not Turkish interests, certainly not the interests of the people of Turkey. This scheme maintained the interests of the Turkish elite, military, and privileged classes, sure, but not the interests of democracy or the majority of Turkish citizens.

Edward

[LenInSebastopol]

SG, thank you for your post. Your experience and insight is valuable. I have to wonder about some of it though. What little I know of Ataturk lines up with what you posted as the man is considered to be the Washington, Jefferson and Franklin rolled into one and his vision continues, we hope, but I would not be surprised if those fundies were at it in the region.
As for the Armenians, I am shocked of what you write. Of course they are mendacious, but no less so than the English, Nigerians, Americans, Haida, Tutsi, Bulgarians, French, Laotians, and every other tribe that's walked the face, dug into and jumped over everything on the planet. I doubt none are alive from the 1918 genocide but the same may be said about Lincoln! Clearly your love for what you found while living in Turkey has shaded your discernment, in my opinion. The internal consistencies of the post indicate such; as the Turks are tolerant of minorities, as mentioned, yet further along the Kurds are mentioned as a contrast!
I would also think it a matter for course for their to be a collective denial from the region, but there is some evidence that supports such an occurrence, with many dying on all fronts. The statistics are in question simply because of the poor record keeping of the predecessors I suppose, or the suppression of the information by the perpetrators, maybe?
In any case I envy you, as Turkey is about the root of all that I am amazed at in a civilization, both good and bad; outside of the Chinese, it seems they invented about everything we take for granted now a days. Thanks for your post.

I lived in Turkey for five years around 1970, speak Turkish fairly fluently and studied the history as much as I could at the time.
The Turkish military takes its cue from the vision of Ataturk (the most respected general ever in Turkey who saved the country from simultaneous invasions by the Greeks, Russians, British and French around 1919) and see it as their role to prevent secular dictators from taking power. Ataturk was devoted to instilling secular democracy. Three or four times, one president sought to seize too much power and the military stepped in, kicked him out, hanged one once, then held elections, installed a new elected government and withdrew. Hardly the picture of a standard dictatorial military.
On the subject of what happened to the Armenians, I think people should refrain from referring to "the Armenian Genocide" as though it were an established fact. What is a fact, is that Armenians are far more numerous than Turks in this country and they are loud, strident, vociferous and ruthless. Seventy Turkish diplomats have been assassinated by Armenians in the last few decades. The Turks do not deny that many Armenians lost their lives in a forced evacuation. How could they when there are so many personal testimonies by Armenians who were there? What the Turks do say is that the Armenians were collaborating with the Russians who were invading from the Northeast, where the Armenian villages were (they are co-religionists) and so the collapsing Ottoman government decided to relocate the Armenians southward away from the Russian forces. In the process of fighting, many Armenians lost their lives along with many Turks. The Turks thus portray the Armenian removal as a legitimate operation of war, not a genocide. The Turkish scholars point out that the Armenians do not shrink from mendacious inventions. The Armenians repeatedly claim that Hitler stated: "Who now remembers the Armenians?" Turks say there is no basis for this claim - it never happened. There is much more to be said on the Turkish side than you would guess at if you only hear the Armenian laments. I wasn't there so I can only try to sift evidence.

It may be interesting to learn that the Turks have traditionally been supporters of minorities. When I was there in the late sixties, there were still certain islands in the Bosphorus (the Princess Islands) where only Greeks lived. They told me that until recently, Turks were not allowed on the islands (this in Turkey!). There are large Jewish and Armenian and Greek communities around Istanbul. Most of the jewelers in the covered market are Armenians. The Jews arrived in 1492 when Ferdinand and Isabella kicked the Jews out of Spain under pain of conversion or death. Suleyman the Lawgiver, Sultan of Turkey welcomed them in with this famous phrase: "Spain's loss is our gain".

The Kurds are an unfortunate exception. Maybe there are just too many of them. Maybe they tend to be farmers and herders instead of money dealers. The prohibitions against the Kurdish language are being lifted I believe, even while one parlimentarian is being prosecuted for uttering a single word in Kurdish while the prohibition was in effect. But the Turks are a strangely patriotic and inferiority complexed lot in some curious ways. I believe it is still true that you can be arrested for denigrating Turkish money, such as throwing it on the ground. Can you imagine the desire to do just that in a conversation when one lira in 1970 soon became a million and a half lira in 2000? "Bah, this money is worthless" must have passed many lips. But everyone knows better than to give emphasis by throwing a useless bill on the ground.
Paul Palmer

[Valley Oak]

The civilian government continues to assert its authority by arresting an additional 18 military leaders for having participated in a plot to overthrow the government.

Go Turkey!

Arrestados otros 18 militares sospechosos de intentar dar un golpe de Estado en Turquía · ELPAÍS.com

[LenInSebastopol]

Does it indicate or clarify if they were fundies?

[Valley Oak]

They are not fundies. They are secular. I made that clear in an earlier post.

The fear mongering here in the US that all of the political parties that reach power in Turkey is a lie to serve military (strategic) and also some important economic interests that favor the US. But the main concern for US foreign policy is military/strategic. The "Muslim terrorism" argument is perfect for keeping Turkey under a military dictatorship.

Now, if you want to split hairs, you could argue that the "fundies" in power, as you insist, might do some hair-brained policy implementation such as school prayer, or some such foolishness. We shouldn't forget that under President Reagan, we, the USA, came close to having school prayer. And I don't think that the US can effectively use such a poor argument that a "fundie" civilian government in power must continue to be subverted by Turkish military rule with US support because they might have Muslim school prayer, again exploiting our 9/11 fears. The real reasons are quite different. The Turkish people have a right to democracy and their lack of it is to their detriment and ours in the long run. In other words, if it's "fundies" you're worried about then please respect Turkish people's right to democracy, the same right that we enjoy here. Fear mongering in US foreign policy supports a continued military rule in Turkey.

Here is some more information from the CIA's factbook website:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/tu.html

Please read my 2nd post in this thread.

Thanks,

Edward

Does it indicate or clarify if they were fundies?

[LenInSebastopol]

They are not fundies. They are secular. I made that clear in an earlier post.

And so you did. My bad. It's just that the Turks consider that issue problematic in their country as well. Also noted, in spite of our "exploited" collective 9/11 fear (isn't that characteristic of some propaganda in light of the evidence that there are folks attempting to repeat, promulgate, and spread the killing of US at home, no?) there are elements of Mohamedaism that are trying to return regions to some kind of ideal state, as they view it, in Turkey, as well as the rest of the world. As I imperfectly understand it, those fundies find that Mohamedaists that do NOT follow "their" way are even more despised than the infidels. Of course that could only be propaganda as I don't read or speak Arabic. Now I have a friend who does speak Arabic fluently and is currently living in North Africa doing Christian missionary work. She tells me that native Arab speakers DO tell US things differently than what the English speaking Arabs tell US. And I believe her more than the CIA or you. True that!

The fear mongering here in the US that all of the political parties that reach power in Turkey is a lie to serve military (strategic) and also some important economic interests that favor the US. But the main concern for US foreign policy is military/strategic. The "Muslim terrorism" argument is perfect for keeping Turkey under a military dictatorship.

I can easily imagine we have national, economic and military interests in mind in dealing with other countries and it need not sound so conspiratorial, does it? Given the geographic placement of Turkey I am sure there are military concerns as well. So why does it, in your context, sound "evil" that it favor US, or is that my paranoia? I suppose if you are a isolationist, like Ron Paul, then we should have NO national interests with other countries, eh? I don't think you are in that camp now, no?

Now, if you want to split hairs, you could argue that the "fundies" in power, as you insist, might do some hair-brained policy implementation such as school prayer, or some such foolishness. We shouldn't forget that under President Reagan, we, the USA, came close to having school prayer.

But we didn't get school prayer, did we?
I too thank God we didn't. So your not alone in that.

And I don't think that the US can effectively use such a poor argument that a "fundie" civilian government in power must continue to be subverted by Turkish military rule with US support because they might have Muslim school prayer, again exploiting our 9/11 fears. The real reasons are quite different.

I can respect your research paper you did a few years ago so you know as well that it is not just a matter of a few simple school prayers if such an occurrence of a fundie explosion happened there.

The Turkish people have a right to democracy and their lack of it is to their detriment and ours in the long run. In other words, if it's "fundies" you're worried about then please respect Turkish people's right to democracy, the same right that we enjoy here. Fear mongering in US foreign policy supports a continued military rule in Turkey.

Here is some more information from the CIA's factbook website:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/tu.html
Please read my 2nd post in this thread.
Thanks,

I read and comprehend poorly; is it OK for prayer in Turkish schools that you find not so objectionable?
I find it fascinating that OUR notion of RIGHT TO DEMOCRACY for other peoples is colored by with our Eurocentric glasses. This is a country, a people, a culture that grew under strict Caliph rulers for more than a while and in less than 100 years ago gained another vision of rule called "nation", and not empire. As late as 1950 the people were given the direct vote and now some here find "whiplashing" them into DEMOCRACY NOW would go over without a fuss! It is quite possible that the mass of people could be given over to voting in a "more Muslim" way of gov't, thus thwarting true democratic paths that have been made. And all this in the name of......? what? Is there a name, or just a notion?
In any case, it's a pleasure.

["Mad" Miles]

....The Kurds are an unfortunate exception. Maybe there are just too many of them. Maybe they tend to be farmers and herders instead of money dealers. .... But the Turks are a strangely patriotic and inferiority complexed lot in some curious ways. ....
Paul Palmer

Sciguy/Paul,

Your second line above, and the last phrase in the third sentence, from the excerpt that I'm quoting, bugged me when I read them. But I've been posting heavily (for me) on this board in the last few days and it was a fight I didn't want to take on. Yet they still sit badly with me, so here goes.

What exactly do you mean? Because if I read it literally it seems extremely racist. I included the other text that seems to qualify it, but I still am having trouble.

Would you like to take this chance to dig yourself out of the hole that I see you in here?

I mean, if there are, "just too many", Kurds. And they aren't, "money dealers", then suppressing their culture, summarily jailing, torturing and executing them is a good thing, right?

Sorry, but aside from being completely opposed to such racist "logic", I can't really believe that's what you meant. So please, can you explain to me how I'm misinterpreting what you wrote?

The only non-evil take I can imagine here is if I suppose you intended those comments to be interpreted as facetious and sarcastic. But in the context of internet chat, I'm afraid emotional inflection, from facial expression, body language and vocal tone, is not available. So if you were saying something outrageous that you didn't want taken seriously, you needed to telegraph that move a little better.

Because of the content of your other contributions on this board, I'm giving you wide benefit of the doubt here. (Although I have doubts about the feasibility of achieving Zero Waste in the context of our consumer Capitalist post-industrial culture, but that's a discussion for another day.) Your other posts made me wonder if I was overinterpreting the language I've quoted above.

Please eludidate, and calm my hopefully unfounded fear and outrage here?

Ta,

"Mad" Miles

[Sciguy]

Sciguy/Paul,

Your second line above, and the last phrase in the third sentence, from the excerpt that I'm quoting, bugged me when I read them. But I've been posting heavily (for me) on this board in the last few days and it was a fight I didn't want to take on. Yet they still sit badly with me, so here goes.

What exactly do you mean? Because if I read it literally it seems extremely racist. I included the other text that seems to qualify it, but I still am having trouble.

Would you like to take this chance to dig yourself out of the hole that I see you in here?

I mean, if there are, "just too many", Kurds. And they aren't, "money dealers", then suppressing their culture, summarily jailing, torturing and executing them is a good thing, right?

Miles:
I must say I was taken aback by your interpretation. But writings are that way - sitting on the page, inadequately explained, no gestures, no quick feedback. So let me explain what I meant.

If you take note, immediately preceding my mention of the Kurds, I was mentioning the three "favored" minorities - Greeks, Jews and Armenians. When I brought up the Kurds, I was actually interrogating myself as to why they didn't fit that same mold. That's when I answered myself that they were different in the ways that I mentioned. Perhaps if I had put the question down for you to see, you would have understood that I was trying to solve a conundrum. So what makes the Kurds so different from the other minorities?

I suppose the main things that distinguish the Kurds is that

• they are so numerous within Turkey
• they have no existing other place to go to or to protect them the way the Greeks do,
• they are overtly trying to create their own country which, if it comes to pass (northern Iraq as a Kurdish province is still in doubt) would lead inevitably to demands that large parts of Eastern Turkey be carved off and joined to the new Kurdish state.

So there is strong fear of territorial loss in Turkey lest the dreaded Kurdish state come into existence. This has led to a vendetta against Kurdish culture. The official Turkish position has even been to deny that Kurds exist - they are designated as "Mountain Turks". There are Turkish military forces in Northern Iraq attacking the emerging Kurdish state for fear that it become incorporated as the new Kurdish nation and start to clamor for annexation of Eastern Turkey. For decades, Kurdish language was banned in official venues, such as Parliament, but I hear that that ban has been lifted and Kurdish newspapers and schools are now forming.

The one time I was traveling by myself in Eastern Turkey, I remember one old Kurdish woman begging me to go to Ankara and ask them to just let the people there live their lives without oppression. There have always been many Turkish army garrisons in Eastern Turkey and life is hard. I felt terrible but of course as a foreigner I was prohibited from any political involvement, as if I could make a difference anyway.

Miles, I was only trying to distinguish the different minorities, not excusing the way they are treated. That was your own contribution.l

The other thing I had in mind was that the Greeks, Armenians and Jews seem to be prominent in the intellectual and commercial life of Istanbul especially and to be valued on that basis. The Kurds seem not to have been able to take on those roles. These are broad generalizations that I wish some one else would comment on who has more up to date experience with Turkey.

Paul Palmer

Sorry, but aside from being completely opposed to such racist "logic", I can't really believe that's what you meant. So please, can you explain to me how I'm misinterpreting what you wrote?

The only non-evil take I can imagine here is if I suppose you intended those comments to be interpreted as facetious and sarcastic. But in the context of internet chat, I'm afraid emotional inflection, from facial expression, body language and vocal tone, is not available. So if you were saying something outrageous that you didn't want taken seriously, you needed to telegraph that move a little better.

Because of the content of your other contributions on this board, I'm giving you wide benefit of the doubt here. (Although I have doubts about the feasibility of achieving Zero Waste in the context of our consumer Capitalist post-industrial culture, but that's a discussion for another day.) Your other posts made me wonder if I was overinterpreting the language I've quoted above.

Please eludidate, and calm my hopefully unfounded fear and outrage here?

Ta,

"Mad" Miles

["Mad" Miles]

I suppose the main things that distinguish the Kurds is that ....

• they have no existing other place to go to or to protect them the way the Greeks do,

....Miles, I was only trying to distinguish the different minorities, not excusing the way they are treated. That was your own contribution.l ....

Paul Palmer

Paul/Sciguy,

Thank you for your clarification. I suspected I was wrong in my interpretation of your remarks and I'm glad I was.

Some comments:

While reading this discussion and thinking about and writing my previous response, I was fully aware that the Kurdish nationalist movement has, in the past, used bombings and assassinations of police, military and others to press for their own cause. And to retaliate to and defend themselves against Turkish oppression. They're not pussycats. On the other hand it's not necessarily every single Kurd who is responsible for this violence. Whether justified or not.

Someone from the region told me about twenty years ago that the Kurds were universally hated by their neighbors. That they were pushy, ignorant and obnoxious people that nobody else liked. I believe it was an Iraqi Arab who told me this, but I have no clear distinct memory of when I was told this and who told me. I, of course, took the comment with a mountainous grain of salt. Ancient enmities and all that.

I didn't include those two items because I didn't think them directly relevant to the discussion. But I thought about them because of this tangential discussion about the Kurds. As with the Armenians, there are many sides to the story.

Although with regard to the Armenians, the death of large numbers of women, children and old people on the relocation marches and in the concentration camps created by the Turkish army, are pretty well documented. Just because the British did it first to the Boers, or the Americans (U.S.) to the Indians, or to each side in the US Civil War, doesn't mean it was acceptable for the Turks, or the British, or us (us in this case = USA) to do it. Murder is Murder. Mass murder is mass murder.


Finally, in response to your, "no other existing place to go or to protect them" claim. While the majority of Kurds reside within the borders of eastern and southeastern Turkey, significant populations also live in Northern Iraq and Northwestern Iran. I suspect the Turkish Kurds reluctance to leave has more to do with living in the area since time immemorial, and wanting to stay on their own land, than a lack of refuge elsewhere.

The "Iraqi" and "Iranian" Kurds have also pushed for a separate Kurdish nation, but due to the lack of access by western journalists and the brutal nature of the regimes in those two countries, plus the general international consensus of - "Fuck the Kurds, who cares about them, they're tripping if they think they'll ever get their own country" - we hear less about those Kurds and their struggle for independence. That is until the aftermath of the Gulf War in 1992 when UN/NATO/USA forces protected a Kurdish enclave in Northern Iraq.


On the issue of clear writing. I was taught to write primarily as an undergraduate in the Philosophy Department at UC Irvine in the mid-seventies. Clarity and conciseness were the primary values rewarded and their lack punished. I often fail on both accounts, especially with regard to being concise!?

So forgive me if I didn't link the two problematic quotes of yours, that I cited in my previous interogative post, to your narrative in your previous paragraphs. The connection didn't exactly jump out at me.

On the other hand all of this is just chat on an internet bulletin board. Standards of clarity, grammar, syntax, etc. aren't exactly rigidly enforced here. Other than by us, the users. Does anybody else really care about any of this? Do we?

Thanks Again, Much Relieved,

"Mad" Miles

[Valley Oak]

The Turkish government has just arrested another general, in a police operation uncovering a coup in the planning stages. Four (4) star general, Saldiray Berk, the highest military official thus far, strongly suspected of forming part of a coup d'état or the planning stages of one.

Turquía acusa a un general en activo por otra trama golpista · ELPAÍS.com

["Mad" Miles]

Did anyone else catch the piece about the 1915 slaughter of Armenians in Turkey on 60 Minutes last Sunday evening? They had testimony, pictures, film, and a complete bold-faced denial by the Turkish ambassador to the US.

I'm reminded of when I was in Guanzhou in the spring of '97 and I was talking with Mr. Zhang's shopclerks, in back of one of his antique shops where I was staying for a weekend, about Tibet and Taiwan. From their perspective both geographic areas had always been and always will be a part of China. Of course, one hears a very different story from the Tibetans and the majority of Taiwanese.

As in all disputes, political, territorial, conceptual, etc. it's best to listen to all sides, check out as much documentation as feasible, and then and only then come to any conclusions. As I used to tell my Honors World History students, a lot of history can be understood by asking this question: Who benefits and who loses?

The victors try and write the history. And they could get away with it in eras of mass illiteracy and limited access to fragile and easily destroyed documentation. In the modern era, with near universal literacy and many ways to document, it's beginning to get more difficult for only the victors to create the official record. They still try, but anyone willing to make the effort can find the views of the underdogs as well.

"Mad" Miles

[Valley Oak]

We don't have a TV set so we don't get mainstream propaganda as much. But the fact that the Turkish ambassador would lie publicly and on record about the Armenians is deeply disturbing. And this horrible statement from the same government that is struggling with its military to assert civilian control over the country. It's very disappointing for me to be rooting for a civilian victory when that same government is capable of making an official statement or as close to an official statement as possible because the prime minister should have disavowed it by now. Perhaps a letter writing campaign would be effective.

I remember when I got the local ACLU, in Santa Rosa, to support me in contacting Lynn Woolsey's office to lobby Congress to ask the Turkish government to release Kurdish political prisoner, Leyla Zana, but Congress did not give the petition enough support. The document was passed around the House of Representatives and some legislators came on board but they were insufficient. I remember when I got a letter from Mike Thompson (1st District) telling me basically that she was a terrorist. Thus, no support from him.

It's hard to analyze without knowing so much more. If we sojourned in Turkey for a year and spoke the language, we would find out a lot more and have the Turk's perspectives, because there will different opinions in such a large country. Perhaps public recognition would hurt the credibility of the current government, and even if this government knew better, such admission of guilt may be absolutely out of the question, especially now that they are in a death lock with the Turkish Armed Forces. There is at least some possibility of civil war, which really make things exciting, perhaps even destabilize the entire region, especially being a doorway to the Middle East and two American wars raging on close by, and finally a predominantly Muslim country with a population of 75 million. But all of this is conjecture.

Nonetheless, I still hope the civilian government is able to come out on top. Turkey cannot evolve under a continued military rule. The risk is necessary and justified.

Edward

Did anyone else catch the piece about the 1915 slaughter of Armenians in Turkey on 60 Minutes last Sunday evening? They had testimony, pictures, film, and a complete bold-faced denial by the Turkish ambassador to the US.

I'm reminded of when I was in Guanzhou in the spring of '97 and I was talking with Mr. Zhang's shopclerks, in back of one of his antique shops where I was staying for a weekend, about Tibet and Taiwan. From their perspective both geographic areas had always been and always will be a part of China. Of course, one hears a very different story from the Tibetans and the majority of Taiwanese.

As in all disputes, political, territorial, conceptual, etc. it's best to listen to all sides, check out as much documentation as feasible, and then and only then come to any conclusions. As I used to tell my Honors World History students, a lot of history can be understood by asking this question: Who benefits and who loses?

The victors try and write the history. And they could get away with it in eras of mass illiteracy and limited access to fragile and easily destroyed documentation. In the modern era, with near universal literacy and many ways to document, it's beginning to get more difficult for only the victors to create the official record. They still try, but anyone willing to make the effort can find the views of the underdogs as well.

"Mad" Miles

[Valley Oak]

I seriously question the timeliness of this vote in the US House of Representatives:

A Changed U.S. House to Vote on Armenian Genocide - NYTimes.com

I also believe that what the Ottoman Empire did, by mass-murdering 1.5 million Armenians, is genocide and should be condemned. But why right now, precisely? The situation in Turkey is far to unstable for this House vote (in the US, no less) to be a coincidence. There are many powerful American interests, both inside and outside of Washington DC, who are steadfastly against the transition of power in Turkey from a military government to a civilian government. The folks here in the US who fear another "Islamic Republic" like Iran are the ones behind this sabotage.

Very sad, dirty, and underhanded. I hope that the people here in the US that are behind the US House vote fail in their attempts to stop the Turkish people from reaching their emancipation.