WH says Turkey has the right to strike back at Kurds.

www.foxnews.com...

It begins to get clearer why the U.S. hasn't been supplying the Kurds with sufficient weapons in their fight with Isis.

There's been evidence of Turkish support of Isis, allowing, with out much counter-effort movement, through Turkey by Isis personnel(?).

Then there's the policy decision not to allow Iraq to split into it's three natural ethnicities right back to the Bush Administration.

What we've ended up with, is an unbelievable amount of conflicting messages to both our enemies and our allies, if we can ever sort out which is which.

Now, due to a couple of car bombs in a Turkish province that is Kurdish populated, and apparently without evidence, blame the Kurds for the bombings and now the U.S.backs Turkish retaliation?? Could Kurds be responsible? Sure. So could have the Turks, or Isis, or Iran...

What a mess.

a reply to: nwtrucker

What I do not understand worth a damn about the Turkish decision to attack the Kurds, is that it is Kurdish forces who have made the greatest headway against IS, fought the hardest, and done the most damage per head of soldiers, in engagements with the bastards.

Even if Kurds were responsible for a car bomb, or even two, they are a far more effective ally against IS, than they are a dangerous enemy. Personally, I think that the Turkish government should be ashamed of themselves, both for their astounding lack of foresight in failing to deal with IS elements moving through their territory to get to IS controlled lands, and furthermore, for backstabbing those who could have become their firmest allies, if they had only united against IS.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I agree completely.

Let's not leave the U.S. out of that "being ashamed of themselves" label either.

a reply to: nwtrucker

There is a determination not to allow the Kurds to govern themselves in Kurdistan - perhaps it has to do with oil reserves in that area? However its hardly fair on the Kurds because just the name for that area 'Kurdistan' on maps should give everyone the clue.

a reply to: Shiloh7

That's undoubtedly, a factor.

There's also not much doubt that if the U.S. had permitted a break-up of Iraq into it's three groups that a now independent Kurd nation would go after the territory in Turkey that was part of Kurdistan, originally.

We're back to the original, deliberate and absurd break-up of the Ottoman Empire by Britain after WWI.

Is there no end to it?

Just a reminder, the Kurds are not a unified group. The Kurds of Iraq are the KRG Kurdistan Regional Government. They are have a history of close ties with the Turks and have conducted joint operations in the past against the PKK.

The PKK are a terrorist group from Turkey who have traditionally used bases in Iraq to strike at Turkey. They have also clashed with KRG. Although they have for the time being been working together against ISIS.

It is the PKK who the Turks hit along with ISIS. While Turkey is getting more aggressive with ISIS it does not the PKK to try anything while the Turks are distracted.

While the KPG are no thrilled that the Turks hit the PKK now they also see the PKK as post ISIS threat that they will need the Turks to deal with.

The factions and sides in this region are very complex and confusing. It is a conflict with many many sides and everybody trying to not to let dealing with short term threats cause larger long term threats. This is why you things like Turkey bombing ISIS and the PKK who are also fighting ISIS and Assads forces bombing Syrian Rebels forces in support of ISIS forces attacking them and also bombing ISIS forces somewhere else. This is why putting US or Western ground troops into that mess would be a disaster of epic proportions.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Maybe the fact that the Kurds are so much more effective against terrorists, is why IS are setting them up with car bombings so Turkey does IS's work for them.

It is small potatoes for IS to do something like this, especially if they are skipping through Turkey willy nilly.

a reply to: MrSpad

I know they are not a unified group in the strictest sense. The Kurdish people were split up by events and have developed their own, regionally specific enmities and allies commensurate with their strategic position and indeed the responses of nations they ended up in or near, to their presence.

But the crucial thing about this is that IS is the enemy of all of those groups, whether they be PKK elements, or KRG, or the Turks. The fact is, that its a failure on a massive scale, for Turkey to fail to recognise the opportunity they have to improve relations with the PKK, by assisting the PKK in resisting the march of IS. Removing PKK elements from the areas in which they are operating, will weaken the buffer zone that the PKK presence represents, and even if the Turks hit IS like the fist of an angry deity, this will mean that there are more places IS will be able to walk their people, without having to worry about ground forces taking them out.

Frankly, the decision is tactically, strategically, and diplomatically stupid, regardless of which banner the Kurdish forces are marching under. They lack the infrastructure and technological capacity to be a threat to a national government like that of Turkey. They have no warplanes, they have no reliable global satellite access to assist with target acquisition, they have no laser guided heavy munitions. They are essentially a group which has access to low tech weapons, home made explosives, and will power, and that is all. They pose a very much smaller threat than do IS, if only because their numbers are smaller, and they have established territory over many years, which they are fighting to defend at the moment. They are locked in battle, and cannot perform massed operations against the Turkish people right now, so it makes little sense to waste resources attacking them, when the Turks could use the opportunity to bury the hatchet with PKK, and fight alongside them.

That is the thing I do not understand right now. IS could find themselves with the forces of the PKK, and the Turks, up their collective tailpipes, and instead, what they have is a situation where their enemies are fighting each other. If the aim of the Turkish government, is to remove IS as a threat, taking out those who would share that aim makes little sense, no matter which way you slice it.

I think the west should remember that "the enemy of my enemy will be my enemy at some point."

originally posted by: nwtrucker
What we've ended up with, is an unbelievable amount of conflicting messages to both our enemies and our allies, if we can ever sort out which is which.

Indeed.

From the CIA censoring the intel on AQ's moneytrail in the data from the raid on OBL's compound - before handing it over to their european intelligence "partners",

to announcing "significant victories" over terrorist groups no one ever heard of (like "Khorasan-group", that even Al-Nusra didn't know of before the Pentagon came up with the name...),

the U.S.' current strategy in the war on terror seems to be somewhat confusing to her allies (to say the least).

So now there is "good Kurds and bad Kurds"... like McCain's "moderate extremists" in Syria I guess?!

*eta:
I had to double-check real quick, but it looks like the German DOD will continue to support the "good Kurds" (Peschmerga) in their fight against IS, regardless of U.S. or Turkey's stance.

Looks like we are once more an unanimous alliance in the war on terror...

a reply to: TrueBrit

The PKK are big internal threat to the Turks. ISIS is not. In the PKK bases along the Iraqi Turkish borders the Turks think that the PKK is simply building up to hit the Turks again. While the Turks are getting more aggressive with ISIS they see that as more than making up for the what the PKK had to offer. The Iraqi Kurds and the Turks have long ties that is not going to change as they need Turkey more than they need the PKK whom the have little love for anyway.

For the Turks, the addition of it new active military role against ISIS added to allowing the US to use additional Turkish bases against ISIS is going to make life for ISIS much worse. And at the same time they are dealing with a long time enemy that they see as a huge internal threat in the PKK. It is a strategically sound decision for the Turks, killing two birds with one stone.

Keep in mind this does not effect the majority of Kurdish forces. And Iraq and Iran do not want Kurdish forces advancing much in Iraq either trying to claim more territory. As is Iraq is looking the other way while the Kurds have been killing and expelling non Kurds in areas they are taking over. If the new US trained Iraqi forces that have now arrived in Ramadi prove effective then Iraq is likely to begin to make moves to contain the Kurds as well. As I said, their are many many sides and as ISIS falls back those sides will begin thinking long term.

a reply to: nwtrucker

I do in truth, whenever I see signs of british hands breaking up countries shudder because of the blatant disregard for the peoples in those areas. Its something that has made our name mud with other peoples, but is nothing to do with the actual british public who were never consulted about any of our crown's and government's actions.

I see your point about Turkey's absorption of part of Kurdistan, which obviously is something for the Turks to consider, especially as its a hot spot of aggro for them to police. Sometimes doing what could well be the right thing and giving a little ground may not be such a bad thing. But who knows?

“If two fish are fighting, look for the Englishman.”

- Gulf Proverb

I think there is a great deal of thinking going into the how and why of the latest Turkish retaliatory strikes on both certain fighters of the Kurds and finally some wrist slapping of IS.

the PKK Kurdish fighters were shelled by cannon and artillery

the IS was bombed by Turkish jets which targeted mainly or almost exclusively IS arms and weapons storehouses of captured Iraqi war making equipment

why now, why a joint operation against both combat groups, why the decided difference in retaliation (missiles & bombs against IS vs. light artillery shelling on the Kurds in the Turkish frontier territory)


I got my notions...

a reply to: St Udio

Maybe the Kurds were too successful in their fight against ISIS?

Like TrueBrit said: the fight the Kurds put up against the radical Islamists is beyond all possible doubt.

And Turkey doesn't even want to defeat ISIS.
Their MP Ahmet Davutoğlu said it himself: Turkey has no interest and won't be interfering in the fight against ISIS.
All they want is to establish a demilitarized zone along the Turkish/Syrian border. And fight the Kurds.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Look up the old road to Basra footage from Gulf War 1,if the US made a definate determination to eliminate ISIS they would no longer be on the face of the earth the fact they are still there means they serve some ulterior motive or purpose.Once again another US ally in the area is sold out or down the river.The only policy I can fathom is that if you have a few bob each way on every horse in the race you'll have the winner in there somewhere.

a reply to: ColCurious

That Turkish PM you refer to is, if I understand it correctly, very vocal in his hate for the U.S., as well.

Yet we don't see those comments in the main media whatsoever.

Perhaps, now that I'm cooled off a bit, the statement from the WH acts as a warning message to Kurds, in general, to back off from any actions against Turkey else face losing even more U.S. support?

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: ColCurious

That Turkish PM you refer to is, if I understand it correctly, very vocal in his hate for the U.S., as well.

Yet we don't see those comments in the main media whatsoever.

Perhaps, now that I'm cooled off a bit, the statement from the WH acts as a warning message to Kurds, in general, to back off from any actions against Turkey else face losing even more U.S. support?

The US has avoided supporting the PKK from the start. The Iraqi Kurds KRG have long had good ties with Turkey as they have no interest in Turkish territory and they both had problems with the PKK. The KPG and PKK put their differences aside for the short term to deal with ISIS. So this effects only one small group of Kurds. Remember historically the Kurds have spent as much time fighting each other as they have anybody else. As the threat of ISIS continues to decline the short term accommodations made to work with each other will fade away to more long term thinking.

I think this was all part of the plan when they decided to invade Iraq.There are so many factions over there that hate each other and the only thing keeping them in line was saddam. The only way to get these factions fighting among themselves was to get rid of saddam. why would we want them fighting among themselves? if they are busy killing each other over there they won`t have the time and resources to be coming over here and blowing stuff up.They are too busy fighting for their own survival to be scheming on ways to commit terrorist acts here.