Replies

>> The political structure of post Saddam Irak:

We maintain that this should be based on ethnically meaningless geographical states just as those in Turkey and the USA.

Our own multimillenial national history on the rise and decline of more than 15 Turkish states has taught us that states based on ethnic boundaries lead to states within a state, and ultimately lead to a breakup.

>> Kurd-phobia (i.e., a racism of sorts)

Terror phobia. Our 12 million Kurds are among the best citizens we have because of their hard working, honest, entrepreneurial, reliable menthality. There is no racism pre se, and one of our recent presidents, Turgut Ozal, was a Kurd.

>> Is it not even conceivable that by so doing that it might alleviate (and even end) the conflict between the Kurds and Turkey ?

No. The otherwise unemployed factions who lead a drive to Kurdish statehood claim 1/3 of Turkey proper. Now, those people I am exremely prejudiced towards. They just bombed a nursery (for kids) in the city of Van.

>> I fully admit that i don't understand the full scope of the Turkish/Kurdish strife.

First of all, the term Turkish/Kurdish strife does not do this situation justice. There is the Marxist PKK, a so called party which is based in some European nations, and also receives support from groups in Irak and Iran. This "party" was first conceived by the USSR to weaken NATO and Turkey, by fomenting seperatism among the poor. The feudal landlords Barzani and Talabani in northern Irak also gave this party intermittent support. If this were a Turkihs/ Kurdish issue, we would have lost long ago, because face it: if 12 million people pissed on the rest all at once, then everyone would be washed away..

>> Is there perhaps already a 'master-plan' in place that making the changes Turkey would like to do would (possibly) disrupt, and (possibly) compromise, the effectiveness of the total mission?

The security of this area being vital to Turkish interests, any master plan hatched by folks 6000 miles away, nice as they may be, that does not include Turkish minds would be unacceptable. It would obviously be better for all those concerned that such "secret" and therefore "halfbaked" plans be opened up to the Turks and agreed upon at the 11th hour rather than at disrupted at half past 12.

>> If so, why would they be worthy of any less consideration for their efforts than Turkey?

Well, if that is how an ally of 50 years thinks, then all bets would be off. That statement shows absolutely no loyalty, no alliance.

The American quest is not to play around and make mud pies with little piles of shit. It is to war on terrorism. This silly tinkering will only get the US bogged down, which is not what you want happening.

>> Yes. And, yes ;-)

Loyalty is very important. You have misread something. We've thrown our lot in with the US a long time ago, and the US with us. Too bad that some of the populus of this most educated ally is sooo misinformed...

not 'mis'informed, a_Turk; rather 'un'informed. It is quite the challenge to:

(a) find information - facts that is; we have no reliable (non-cable) televised news sources -- it feels like we've never been able to really graduate from our research courses in college, because to home in on the truth of a single piece of 'news' we're given, we have to spend hours upon hours to identify sources of both sides of an issue, to develop our own clear picture of the situation. Fortunately, FreeRepublic provides a forum that alerts us to the issues, and provides wonderful interactivity--a refreshing environment in which to grasp a fuller, more accurate vision of what is happening.

and

(b) we have SO many issues here, at home, for which we scramble to sort out fact from fiction, that some of these 'other' issues do not come to light until something just like this transpires -- trying to get at the root of what's going on between Turkey and U.S.

I don't think you answered the question -- in a fair manner -- about the Kurdish support. That was not intended to demean or devalue the contribution that Turkey has made. It was meant to ask you why the Kurds do not, likewise, deserve consideration for their valuable contributions. We concur, obviously, in our conviction that a friend is supposed to be a friend (not just in need); hence, should the same not apply to the Kurds (in this situation), regardless of whether they are an autonomous nation?

Also, I very much appreciate your and the other FReepers offering *concrete* responses to my questions -- the very thing that cannot be found in 'the news'-- derived from their direct experience with Turkey. It's good to have more than one voice ;-)