It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran 'attacks Iraq Kurdish area'

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2006 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt
I don't think they attacked to gain the oil. But to disrupt and destroy...

Ahh, I understand then.
Thank you for clearing that up.






seekerof




posted on May, 1 2006 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Just some thoughts:

The Kurdish region, particularly Kirkuk and its surrounds, have always been very oil rich, amongst the most oil rich in Iraq. A new discovery probably wouldn't change that much in terms of the geological and political importance of the region. Kirkuk is an interesting part of Iraq to watch... it's got Kurds, Sunnis, Shi'ites, it's near the Iranian border and not that far from Turkey either, and it's got plenty of oil. As goes Kirkuk, so might go the nation.

Another important reason the US plays it softly with Turkey is because they are just about the only secular Islamic government left in the region, with the exception of maybe Egypt if that counts as "in the region."

And, it is interesting that "Iraq" has responded to the provocation. I'd be curious to know who and which organ(s) of the Iraqi state made the response. For all intents and purposes of course it shouldn't matter, but it would be interesting if this was Kurds speaking out from positions in Baghdad, or if there was unified condmentation all across the political spectrum as represented there, which is likely given that the attack came from Iran and would never have happened if it came from Turkey, without Kurdish representation in Baghdad to begin with. I think you could tell a lot about the state of the Baghdad government (ie, how unified it is) from knowing more in that regard.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
They also have no airforce, armour, artillery, rocketry, or even a consistent logistical ability, whereas the turks, hell, they're run by a military junta, the syrians have chemical weapons, and the iranians will probably have nukes in the time it takes a peshmerga milita to rear its horses.


Sorry Nygdan, good post and the thread seems to a sensible discussion rather than the usual "Nuke I-ran" stuff, but had to point out what you said above...

Turkey is NOT run by a military Junta. It's a democratically elected parliament with a Prime Minister and Cabint. The Junta days are long gone and if they weren't, Turkey wouldn't even have been entertained by the EU, much less on the road to accession.


Sep

posted on May, 1 2006 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Iran has denied the reports I guess we have to wait to see if the Iraqi government is serious and is willing to back its original claims, or if they were made up by elements not "friendly" towards Iran.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by scarecrow19d
I know Turkey wouldn't like it, but given how helpful they were in the US going into Iraq 3 years ago I just have to say to bad for them.

True, but on the other hand, the Turks took great risks in having US rockets pointed at the Soviet Union in their country. They were something of an important ally in the cold war. That should count for something.

Also, by keeping iraq as a federation, everyone's interests are alligned, more or less. If it fragments, then the different sections have, literally, no interest in being at peace with one another. Selfish-interest can make people that hate each other work together effectively.


Like the puppet iraqi administration and the US for instance...mm..yes you are 100% on the money



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by koji_K
Kirkuk is an interesting part of Iraq to watch... it's got Kurds, Sunnis, Shi'ites,

Also, lets not forget that the north is old assyria, it has chaldean christians and other christian groups, mandeans, and even the Yezidi "Devil Worshippers". Kirkuk has a sunni arab population because saddam moved a population of them into the region, in order to mess with the demographics and give himself more control.


The Junta days are long gone and if they weren't, Turkey wouldn't even have been entertained by the EU, much less on the road to accession.

Perhaps. I am not entirely too clear on how much influence the military cabal still has in that country. They aren't in direct and official control now, but then again they haven't had to be such in order to run the show in the past anyway.

But yes, Turkey is also important because its bascially a western government in the region, sort of like israel.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

True, but on the other hand, the Turks took great risks in having US rockets pointed at the Soviet Union in their country. They were something of an important ally in the cold war. That should count for something.

Also, by keeping iraq as a federation, everyone's interests are alligned, more or less. If it fragments, then the different sections have, literally, no interest in being at peace with one another. Selfish-interest can make people that hate each other work together effectively.


True you make an excellent point about the Cold War role of Turkey.

The situation is a mess for sure, I think that the US cannot have Iran getting anymore involved in Iraq without some sort of response. Turkey as an ally should understand the US position and some sort of compromise should be made. I think the Kurds need their own nation with the understanding that they must leave Turkey alone. Hell having a US base in that new Kurd nation, in fact have it as a buffer between Turkey and Kurd nation might make sense.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by Nygdan
They also have no airforce, armour, artillery, rocketry, or even a consistent logistical ability, whereas the turks, hell, they're run by a military junta, the syrians have chemical weapons, and the iranians will probably have nukes in the time it takes a peshmerga milita to rear its horses.


Sorry Nygdan, good post and the thread seems to a sensible discussion rather than the usual "Nuke I-ran" stuff, but had to point out what you said above...

Turkey is NOT run by a military Junta. It's a democratically elected parliament with a Prime Minister and Cabint. The Junta days are long gone and if they weren't, Turkey wouldn't even have been entertained by the EU, much less on the road to accession.


The Turkish government is just a puppet. It is the Turkish army that takes all the decisions. It is a democracy on paper..



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 04:47 PM
link   
So no olny has iraq, and turky had a history of attacking kurds, irans got one too.

Its like a alliance of countrys, that battle kurds of the face of the planet just because.

Kurds are like the jews of old in the modern day, but the jews actualy do have a country : ) *zing* on the kurds you do not have a country.

But can the alliance of kurd batteling countrys ever defeat the kurdish menace. Olny time will tell.



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 04:26 AM
link   
I read somewhere that Turkish troops had moved up to 8km into Northern Iraq to attack a Kurdish fighter camp, but I can't remember where.

If true, and taking into consideration Turkey's refusal to allow the US to use air bases there, it makes you wonder whether if (and I do say if) if Iran did cross the Iraq border to fight Kurdish rebels, whether it was in a co-ordinated operation with Turkey.

The Kurds have been emboldened since Saddam Hussein lost power, they have more autonomy in Northern Iraq, and they hunger for this in parts of Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran to create a Kurdish state.

Certainly Turkish-Kurdish tensions have flared up, and reports say Iranian troops have been targetted by Kurdish fighters in Iran.

Let's not forget another equation, there were reports that there was US 'feet on the ground' in Iran.

Perhaps they are in the Iranian Kurdish area? Iran pinpointed them alongside the Kurdish fighters, and the Iranians 'let them have it'?



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by Nygdan
They also have no airforce, armour, artillery, rocketry, or even a consistent logistical ability, whereas the turks, hell, they're run by a military junta, the syrians have chemical weapons, and the iranians will probably have nukes in the time it takes a peshmerga milita to rear its horses.


Sorry Nygdan, good post and the thread seems to a sensible discussion rather than the usual "Nuke I-ran" stuff, but had to point out what you said above...

Turkey is NOT run by a military Junta. It's a democratically elected parliament with a Prime Minister and Cabint. The Junta days are long gone and if they weren't, Turkey wouldn't even have been entertained by the EU, much less on the road to accession.


The Turkish government is just a puppet. It is the Turkish army that takes all the decisions. It is a democracy on paper..



The US is also a democracy on paper, lot of countries are.



new topics




 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join