Snubbing Turkey--State Department missteps played a part in Saturday’s embarrassing vote.

National Review ^ | 3-3-03 | Joel Mowbray

[valkyrieanne]

There was a thread this weekend about members of the Turkish Parliament(?) passing around political cartoons from our press. Apparently, these cartoons reiterated what CNN had said re: blackmailers. To say they were not flattering towards Turkey would be an understatement.

Why should CNN cut Turkey any slack? It's the wahhabi Muslim countries that get lauded. Turkey isn't politically correct enough for them - unless the Islamists happen to win an election, or there's some human rights flap going on (like that NYTimes article last year about communists "languishing" in Turkish prisons.)

[a_Turk]

ping

[a_Turk]

ping

[valkyrieanne]

Our State department has been a problem as long as I can remember. They have always had what I interpreted as a leftist bias all during the Cold War, and nothing has really changed. They are Clintonists, but they were Clintonists before there was a Clinton.

It's perfectly amazing. As if there aren't smart conservatives all over the US - retired military, professors, writers, etc. - who couldn't be tapped for US State Department jobs. These people could be replaced in two days. Why haven't they? And why doesn't President Bush see this?

[rmlew]

Look up John Fonte's article on Transnational Progressives. You will understand that State Department since 1940's.

[mjaneangels@aolcom]

" I can't imagine Powell trying to undermine the President."

Neither can I. There are things I disagree with Powell about, but I do not see him as being the type person who would do this. Clintonites may still be in the State Department, and if so, they need to be thrown out on their ear. Either way, if this is true, this never should have happened. It certainly explains a few things better than any other theory I have heard.

[a_Turk]

ping

[k2blader]

Thanks for the ping! Good article.

I think now I begin to understand your position. Sounds like State slimed things up--something that doesn't really surprise me.

Our media was pushing the "Turks Say 'Show Me the Money'" angle pretty hard. It being true to a certain extent is one thing; but to report that the "shakedown" continued "even after the economic issues had been agreed upon and taken off the table" is deplorable.

It appears DoD was and is on a more reasoned, diplomatic track than State. There is a frustrating friction between the two departments--due to perhaps something as "simple" as clashing ideologies? President Bush has much to wrestle with here, let alone the War on Terror.

[a_Turk]

ping

[a_Turk]

ping

[a_Turk]

ping

[Beck_isright]

It's actually a split as I had explained to me. There are the pro-democracy rah-rah gang and the "Islam can't be wrong" Arabists in State. From what I've seen in my history courses and front line experience, the Arabists in State are so clueless it's pathetic. But don't worry, they are going out in the university system and teaching the morons of the future.

[a_Turk]

ping

[a_Turk]

ping

[a_Turk]

ping

[weikel]

Yep.

[happygrl]

"...they are going out in the university system and teaching the morons of the future. "

Well, that's encouraging/sarc off.

The next great challenge for conservatism and truth is the higher education system.

Thank you for your first hand comments. It is encouraging to know that there are, and have been, advocates for constitutional democracy in State. Quite honestly, that's not something that is known.

[Beck_isright]

Sadly those few people at state that advocate the spread of deomcracy (that I knew of) were leftovers from the Reagan era. With the Albright socialist loons in there, I'm sure left wing dictators and Arab mullahs are their favs. </sarcasm not really off

[Right_in_Virginia]

Winning the support of Turkey for any Iraq invasion was the State Department's job...

I agree with this (from the article). And, IMO this failure at State should cost some jobs.

(Thanks for the "ping".)

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Bottom line: we had to offer so many sweeteners for the government to go against Turkish anti-Americanism that it looked shady. If Powell had allowed a visit by our military, then he might have been accused of treating Turkey like a 'lap dog', sending generals to 'give them orders'. On the other hand, perhaps GW Bush could have visited Turkey and pled his case directly to the Turkish people, the noble side of the cause, then the talk of 'buying support' might have died down. I'm no Powell defender by any means, but considering your nation's Constitution, sending military negotiators there would have been an even bigger mistake, I think.

No, we should have offered more to the Kurds instead. I think there's still time. We should create a new Kurdistan. Have a nice day.