Replies

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 ;-)

>> hence, should the same not apply to the Kurds

Yes it should. Yet creating a country for them would not be doing them a favor.

Look at how they are being governed.. The rulers are from families of rulers, whose daddies used to be in the same business of ruling. These are feudal landlords, clan leaders, who warred against each other during the 90s.

Creating an "independent" (/sarc off) Kurdistan will not bring peace and prosperity to the Kurds of Irak for the reasons I stated above. Add to that the low low level of education, which is really at the very base of their acceptance of their current rulers.

Providing autonomy to an ethnic group, as seen from our countless experiences with such experimentation, is a precursor to the creation of states, and besides, autonomy creates a state within a state, which automatically makes the central authority impotent.

No, if we're talking about a free, democratic, strong Irak, there should be equal rights for all ethnic groups based on the same principles as spelled out in the US and Turkish constitutions. There should not be a Shiite army, a Kurdish army, etc., just as there is no Ohioan or NY army (don't start with the national guard now :).

Sharing the entire stretch of Irak equally would be a lot better for any Shiite, Kurd, or Iraki arab, and would not predispose the region to further political uncertainty as autonomous provinces would.