Assadists kill/injure several Turkish soldiers in Idlib/Hama

[azyr]

The syrian

I don't know and I don't care. That doesn't concern us. The thing that concerns us is our fcked up policies on Syrian war.
If we didn't support this war at the first place, we might have not been in this fcked up situation. Got it?

What you're saying is factually incorrect, as people have been hinting on topics for you to look up and see for yourself.

As a major regional power and an aspiring geopolitical player a war on your border is not something you can avoid confronting. To add insult to injury the war was creating a huge influx and magnitude of refugees while also serving as a launch pad for a future terrorist state that is enemy to only you on the same border.

Turkey should have been the first respondent in the war and acted way before even Russia got there - let alone the US. We should have secured the northern Turkic villages against Assad and moved in to ISIS territory before they had a chance to reach our border.

That way we would be the defining factor and power in this war and get what we needed out of it. We avoided it for way to long, waited until Russia Iran and the US consolidated their powers and proxies - ignored ISIS which led the whole world to be angry at us - and when push came to shove we finally started operations against the PKK in Afrin.

The world was furious because it saw us as playing dumb with ISIS while attacking "the valiant and brave Kurds" - they equated us with ISIS (which some of our journalists helped to cement tbh).

So all in all - your proposal would have ended even worse then the situation we are in now. We should have acted the second civil war broke out - Assad would be begging instead of shelling now.

 

[Nein]

What you're saying is factually incorrect, as people have been hinting on topics for you to look up and see for yourself.

As a major regional power and an aspiring geopolitical player a war on your border is not something you can avoid confronting. To add insult to injury the war was creating a huge influx and magnitude of refugees while also serving as a launch pad for a future terrorist state that is enemy to only you on the same border.

Turkey should have been the first respondent in the war and acted way before even Russia got there - let alone the US. We should have secured the northern Turkic villages against Assad and moved in to ISIS territory before they had a chance to reach our border.

That way we would be the defining factor and power in this war and get what we needed out of it. We avoided it for way to long, waited until Russia Iran and the US consolidated their powers and proxies - ignored ISIS which led the whole world to be angry at us - and when push came to shove we finally started operations against the PKK in Afrin.

The world was furious because it saw us as playing dumb with ISIS while attacking "the valiant and brave Kurds" - they equated us with ISIS (which some of our journalists helped to cement tbh).

So all in all - your proposal would have ended even worse then the situation we are in now. We should have acted the second civil war broke out - Assad would be begging instead of shelling now.

I said this before Turkey beated around the bush too long. But man you actually gave a very good detailed answer.

 

[Mr.NiceGuy]

What you're saying is factually incorrect, as people have been hinting on topics for you to look up and see for yourself.

As a major regional power and an aspiring geopolitical player a war on your border is not something you can avoid confronting. To add insult to injury the war was creating a huge influx and magnitude of refugees while also serving as a launch pad for a future terrorist state that is enemy to only you on the same border.

Turkey should have been the first respondent in the war and acted way before even Russia got there - let alone the US. We should have secured the northern Turkic villages against Assad and moved in to ISIS territory before they had a chance to reach our border.

That way we would be the defining factor and power in this war and get what we needed out of it. We avoided it for way to long, waited until Russia Iran and the US consolidated their powers and proxies - ignored ISIS which led the whole world to be angry at us - and when push came to shove we finally started operations against the PKK in Afrin.

The world was furious because it saw us as playing dumb with ISIS while attacking "the valiant and brave Kurds" - they equated us with ISIS (which some of our journalists helped to cement tbh).

So all in all - your proposal would have ended even worse then the situation we are in now. We should have acted the second civil war broke out - Assad would be begging instead of shelling now.

Partly agreed but still I believe that we must have stayed neutral on this issue.
Don't forget that this civil war thing created by USA to establish 2. canton of kurdistan. Next is Iran and Turkey.
Assad is a bad dictator but Saudi monarch, UAE monarch, Jordan monarch and Moroccan monarch are good aren't they? Everyone knows that other monarchs are as bad as assad but the imperialists are interested in only our neighbors. Is this a coincidence?
When the Syrian war was started, many experts were saying that this is a game to create 2 autonomous kurdish state by imperialists. AKP government has recognized it after it was too late to change. Now we are suffering due to wrong calculations of akp government as usual.
So telling us that if this could've happened we would've ve done that or if that could've happened we would've done this etc won't change the reality.
We have on boarded that train with the imperialists so we are suffering the consequences.. .

 

[azyr]

"snip"...AKP government has recognized it after it was too late to change. Now we are suffering due to wrong calculations of akp government as usual..."snip"

It sounds like we're both saying the same thing here right?

We have on boarded that train with the imperialists so we are suffering the consequences.. .

I'm not sure I agree with this part though, every imperialist country in the war is against any action Turkey makes in the area, by this logic how can you define Turkey jumping in bed with other imperialists?

You COULD say that Turkey is in Syria for her own imperialist agenda - and I'd partly agree with that.

 

[Nein]

Partly agreed but still I believe that we must have stayed neutral on this issue.
Don't forget that this civil war thing created by USA to establish 2. canton of kurdistan. Next is Iran and Turkey.
Assad is a bad dictator but Saudi monarch, UAE monarch, Jordan monarch and Moroccan monarch are good aren't they? Everyone knows that other monarchs are as bad as assad but the imperialists are interested in only our neighbors. Is this a coincidence?
When the Syrian war was started, many experts were saying that this is a game to create 2 autonomous kurdish state by imperialists. AKP government has recognized it after it was too late to change. Now we are suffering due to wrong calculations of akp government as usual.
So telling us that if this could've happened we would've ve done that or if that could've happened we would've done this etc won't change the reality.
We have on boarded that train with the imperialists so we are suffering the consequences.. .

Whats bad in being an imperialist. As long as Turks have this anti imperialist mindset we will easily get destroyed or swallowed.

Our ancestors fought and built empires. We are supposed to be the imperialists

 

[Mr.NiceGuy]

Whats bad in being an imperialist. As long as Turks have this anti imperialist mindset we will easily get destroyed or swallowed.

Our ancestors fought and built empires. We are supposed to be the imperialists

I am ok with being imperialist but not ok with being pawn of immigrants like we were on this Syria issue.
Our government chooses being pawn of imperialists then after cries out like a little girl saying "they fooled us ehüüüü"
This is what I have been criticizing for a long while.
If we are independent why are we waiting a permission to make an operation in eastern euphrates?

You COULD say that Turkey is in Syria for her own imperialist agenda - and I'd partly agree with that.

If Turkey could do that I would be really glad.

 

[azyr]

If we are independent why are we waiting a permission to make an operation in eastern euphrates?

Well quite literally the US has stationed her soldiers on the battlefield to be used as deterrents and is daring everyone including Turkey to touch them. Yes, we're independent on some issues - but even if we were 100% independent no one is going to attack the US unless their country is already reduced to ashes and bones. So we're practically begging at this point for the US to move aside and let us do what we want.

This whole scenario is a clusterfuck of bad strategy by the government - and ironically enough it's a major headache caused by none other then the appointed FM back then (Davutoğlu), who - get this - is criticizing the current government to try and bolster his new party that's about to be formed.

I'm seriously appalled that the biggest idiot in AKP's 5 governments actually has the balls to ask votes from people after the mess he's (albeit not singlehandedly) created.

Cronies - the lot of them. Erdogan for being an idiot and appointing "yes" men to stations while also ignoring what's going on there at best and effectively sabotaging institutions at worst. Davutoğlu for undermining the Turkish Republics foreign strategy and leaving the country in a mix of chaos and instability. The rest of the dicks because they're essentially just that.

A proper handling of the situation would have us be in control and "grant" wishes to other parties on what they can and can't do - but no, here we are, the mockery of the world, begging other countries if we can pretty please go after the terrorists that have been plaguing our country for over 40 years.

I can't believe an unparalleled military like ours (in the middle east at least) was used so ineffectively for so long.

Now we're watching the same scenario in Libya.