Erdogan says referendum for death penalty is possible

[xenon54 out]

The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are not a terrorist entity, whether you like it or not. You might as well get over it.

Not a single international organization or sovereign state on earth has classified the SDF as a terrorist entity. Ironically, not even your beloved Turkish government has officially labeled the SDF as a terrorist entity. How ironic.

As for the PKK, it hasn't carried out terrorist attacks against civilians in many years, if not decades. It now focuses exclusively on targeting security personnel (e.g. soldiers) during wartime. That's not terrorism. That's called insurgency. Learn the bloody difference:

pkk/kck/ypg etc. pp. are all the same entitiy with different names, i dont care about terminology but their actions, you can try to show them as different things, i dont care a single bit.

If that's terrorism, then what the hell do you call the actions of Turkish-backed FSA groups in Syria that are blatantly guilty of committing war crimes against innocent civilians, such as the Sultan Murad Division and Nour al-Din al-Zenki Movement?

At least try to be intellectually honest.

I dont follow the war with every detail but i did critisize fsa actions in the past in this very forum, your a new member just because you havent seen it doesnt mean it doesnt exist, the older members know me and they can confirm this.

Yeah, I didn't really expect an apology from you. But you should at least be courteous enough to avoid resorting to libel and false accusations since they are against forum rules.

Read my post again there is no false accusation, you still cant call the entities that has been mentioned above terrorists so i dont really see any false accusation.

 

[Kuwaiti Girl]

pkk/kck/ypg etc. pp. are all the same entitiy with different names, i dont care about terminology but their actions, you can try to show them as different things, i dont care a single bit.

And guess what? The world doesn't care what you think either.

Not a single international organization or sovereign state on God's green earth has ever classified the YPG or SDF as terrorist entities. Even your Turkish government has never officially labeled the YPG and SDF as terrorist groups.

You can call them terrorists until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that they're not considered as such by the international community.

As for their actions, when was the last time any of these groups deliberately attacked non-combatants? In the 1980s and 90s? As far as I'm aware, these Kurdish militant groups are only targeting combatants / security personnel in recent years. That's not terrorism. That's called insurgency.

I'm not in the mood for intellectual dishonesty. There's a clear distinction between targeting security personnel and targeting civilians. Terrorism only applies to attacks on civilians / non-combatants.

I dont follow the war with every detail but i did critisize fsa actions in the past in this very forum, your a new member just because you havent seen it doesnt mean it doesnt exist, the older members know me and they can confirm this.

Are you prepared to label your Syrian Turkmen brethren as terrorists in the same way that you do for the YPG/SDF, considering their blatant crimes against innocent civilians in Aleppo province?

Read my post again there is no false accusation, you still cant call the entities that has been mentioned above terrorists so i dont really see any false accusation.

It's a false accusation. End of story.

The onus is on you to prove that I condone terrorist attacks against civilians. You can't because you know very well that I've never done that. But you insist that I support terrorism just because I do not condemn groups such as the SDF and YPG, which are clearly not engaged in any kind of terrorist attacks on civilians at present.

 

[HannibalBarca]

And guess what? The world doesn't care what you think either.

Not a single international organization or sovereign state on God's green earth has ever classified the YPG or SDF as terrorist entities. Even your Turkish government has never officially labeled the YPG and SDF as terrorist groups.

You can call them terrorists until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that they're not considered as such by the international community.

As for their actions, when was the last time any of these groups deliberately attacked non-combatants? In the 1980s and 90s? As far as I'm aware, these Kurdish militant groups are only targeting combatants / security personnel in recent years. That's not terrorism. That's called insurgency.

I'm not in the mood for intellectual dishonesty. There's a clear distinction between targeting security personnel and targeting civilians. Terrorism only applies to attacks on civilians / non-combatants.


Are you prepared to label your Syrian Turkmen brethren as terrorists in the same way that you do for the YPG/SDF, considering their blatant crimes against innocent civilians in Aleppo province?


It's a false accusation. End of story.

The onus is on you to prove that I condone terrorist attacks against civilians. You can't because you know very well that I've never done that. But you insist that I support terrorism just because I do not condemn groups such as the SDF and YPG, which are clearly not engaged in any kind of terrorist attacks on civilians at present.

I may be ok with some things you say around here. But in my country when Isis or AQ or any group that target security forces are seen as terro.
Whatever they want autonomy or not, bc in the End they are no different than ISIS and such, They are a small group that represent only themselfs for their own benefits and greed.
As for Pkk, they are terro, even the extrem majority of kurds in Turkey do not see them as friends. Few ppl forget that among those security forces, a good part of them are seen as "kurds" even thou they are turkish... .
As for SDF, it's the same as YPG, since even the US said so... . Now the Q will be if YPG are PKK? yes and no, few among them support Pkk and any anti-turkish insurgency, see It like the FSA/al nusra combo.

In the End, Pkk is not a new organization, for decades they killed in turkey, security forces and civilians, and vice-versa . In the Meantime, kurds should not be put in the same basket as pkk and YPG, they are fighting for an ideology, driven by power and greed and not for the safety of those they claim to help. if their own ppl turn against them, be assured they will not hesitate to press the trigger.

 

[xenon54 out]

And guess what? The world doesn't care what you think either.

You obviusly do.

Not a single international organization or sovereign state on God's green earth has ever classified the YPG or SDF as terrorist entities. Even your Turkish government has never officially labeled the YPG and SDF as terrorist groups.

You can call them terrorists until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that they're not considered as such by the international community.

I dont care anough about whether some countries call them terrorists or not to get blue in face (nice imagination you have btw).
The list of countries recognizing a entitiy as terrorists or not is endless but it doesnt make a certain group less of a terrorist.
List of designated terrorist groups

As for their actions, when was the last time any of these groups deliberately attacked non-combatants? In the 1980s and 90s? As far as I'm aware, these Kurdish militant groups are only targeting combatants / security personnel in recent years. That's not terrorism. That's called insurgency.

I'm not in the mood for intellectual dishonesty. There's a clear distinction between targeting security personnel and targeting civilians. Terrorism only applies to attacks on civilians / non-combatants.

Either you are ignorant or you are the intellectually dishonest one.

Just one exsample:

March 2016 Ankara bombing

Result: Target Civilians, TAK claim: Security forces, Deaths 37 civilians + 1 perpetrator Non-fatal injuries
127, Perpetrator Kurdistan Freedom Hawks (TAK)

tak is the urban wing of pkk just like kck its all the same crap so dont come up with ''but it wasnt pkk'' bla bla.

Are you prepared to label your Syrian Turkmen brethren as terrorists in the same way that you do for the YPG/SDF, considering their blatant crimes against innocent civilians in Aleppo province?

If proven then yes but then i would have to label SAA as terrorist too since their crimes against civilians are much bigger.

It's a false accusation. End of story.

The onus is on you to prove that I condone terrorist attacks against civilians. You can't because you know very well that I've never done that. But you insist that I support terrorism just because I do not condemn groups such as the SDF and YPG, which are clearly not engaged in any kind of terrorist attacks on civilians at present.

I dont know if there is a language barrier or something, i have said ''Easy, the ones who conduct car bomb attacks in the middle of Ankara which are being called freedom fighters by you for exsample.''

Which doesnt mean you condone terrorist attacks but you cant call the ones doing terrorists attacks as terrorists, im not worng with what i said since you still try to show pkk as if they werent doing terrorists attack whats so hard in understanding this?

One question, do you know what caused this crater which killed 4 and injured 23 Kurdish villagers?

 

[KediKesenFare3]

I don't share your opinion, Ms. Meillenur. I'm gonna report you for relativizing PKK terror.

 

[Kuwaiti Girl]

I may be ok with some things you say around here. But in my country when Isis or AQ or any group that target security forces are seen as terro.
Whatever they want autonomy or not, bc in the End they are no different than ISIS and such, They are a small group that represent only themselfs for their own benefits and greed.
As for Pkk, they are terro, even the extrem majority of kurds in Turkey do not see them as friends. Few ppl forget that among those security forces, a good part of them are seen as "kurds" even thou they are turkish... .
As for SDF, it's the same as YPG, since even the US said so... . Now the Q will be if YPG are PKK? yes and no, few among them support Pkk and any anti-turkish insurgency, see It like the FSA/al nusra combo.

In the End, Pkk is not a new organization, for decades they killed in turkey, security forces and civilians, and vice-versa . In the Meantime, kurds should not be put in the same basket as pkk and YPG, they are fighting for an ideology, driven by power and greed and not for the safety of those they claim to help. if their own ppl turn against them, be assured they will not hesitate to press the trigger.

ISIS and Al-Qaeda are considered to be terrorist organizations because they do not differentiate between non-combatants and combatants. While it's true that they occasionally attack combatants, it's also true that they also carry out many attacks against innocent civilians as well. Therefore, these groups are naturally classified as terrorist entities.

Having said that, there's a clearly accepted distinction between attacks on innocent civilians and attacks on security personnel. An attack on security personnel is not considered to be a terrorist act. A terrorist act is, put simply, an attack on non-combatants / civilians. If ISIS attacks security personnel in a specific incident, then this specific incident won't be classified as a terrorist attack. For example, it's not terrorism when ISIS attacks the Iraqi armed forces. Having said that, ISIS is still considered to be a terrorist organization because it continues to attack innocent civilians in other incidents. So the specific incident in question may not be a terrorist act, but the perpetrator can still be a terrorist organization.

It's very simple. Any militant group that refrains from attacking innocent non-combatants is not a terrorist group. And any militant group that continues to target innocent non-combatants is a terrorist group, even if it occasionally targets real combatants.

In North Africa, there are numerous Sunni Islamic militant groups that share the same religious views as Al-Qaeda and ISIS but aren't classified as terrorist organizations because they only attack security personnel and do not attack civilians.

The PKK is classified as a terrorist organization by several countries, but this designation was made many decades ago, at a time when the PKK did indeed resort to acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. But the PKK hasn't attacked civilians in many years. It now only attacks security personnel, and these attacks are not terrorist acts by any means. Instead, they are acts of insurgency.

It's very simple. Like I said, I don't like intellectual dishonesty. Terrorism has never applied to insurgent attacks on combatants. Terrorism has always been applied to attacks that are carried out against innocent civilians.

 

[HannibalBarca]

ISIS and Al-Qaeda are considered to be terrorist organizations because they do not differentiate between non-combatants and combatants. While it's true that they occasionally attack combatants, it's also true that they also carry out many attacks against innocent civilians as well. Therefore, these groups are naturally classified as terrorist entities.

Having said that, there's a clearly accepted distinction between attacks on innocent civilians and attacks on security personnel. An attack on security personnel is not considered to be a terrorist act. A terrorist act is, put simply, an attack on non-combatants / civilians. If ISIS attacks security personnel in a specific incident, then this specific incident won't be classified as a terrorist attack. For example, it's not terrorism when ISIS attacks the Iraqi armed forces. Having said that, ISIS is still considered to be a terrorist organization because it continues to attack innocent civilians in other incidents. So the specific incident in question may not be a terrorist act, but the perpetrator can still be a terrorist organization.

It's very simple. Any militant group that refrains from attacking innocent non-combatants is not a terrorist group. And any militant group that continues to target innocent non-combatants is a terrorist group, even if it occasionally targets real combatants.

In North Africa, there are numerous Sunni Islamic militant groups that share the same religious views as Al-Qaeda and ISIS but aren't classified as terrorist organizations because they only attack security personnel and do not attack civilians.

The PKK is classified as a terrorist organization by several countries, but this designation was made many decades ago, at a time when the PKK did indeed resort to acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. But the PKK hasn't attacked civilians in many years. It now only attacks security personnel, and these attacks are not terrorist acts by any means. Instead, they are acts of insurgency.

It's very simple. Like I said, I don't like intellectual dishonesty. Terrorism has never applied to insurgent attacks on combatants. Terrorism has always been applied to attacks that are carried out against innocent civilians.

ISIS or AQ in Tunisia did not attack any civilians... so are they not Terro? The only casuality was from ISIS with the tourist attack in the Hotel of Sousse 2 years ago. Otherwise Aq/ISIS/or others only target security forces/army/police etc... . So May I have your view on that? bc if ysterday I killed and today I do not anymore, will that make me a nice guy,? then few ppl around the world would be happy to live in your world...
Terrorism is an attack driven by an ideology. Period
White supremacist attack is terrorism as much ISIS is... and whoever is the casuality...

 

[xenon54 out]

The PKK is classified as a terrorist organization by several countries, but this designation was made many decades ago, at a time when the PKK did indeed resort to acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. But the PKK hasn't attacked civilians in many years. It now only attacks security personnel, and these attacks are not terrorist acts by any means. Instead, they are acts of insurgency.

My god are you kidding me, just last year they have done several attacks that have intentionally targeted civilians just as my post above proves.

 

[Kuwaiti Girl]

You obviusly do.


I dont care anough about whether some countries call them terrorists or not to get blue in face (nice imagination you have btw).
The list of countries recognizing a entitiy as terrorists or not is endless but it doesnt make a certain group less of a terrorist.
List of designated terrorist groups



Either you are ignorant or you are the intellectually dishonest one.

Just one exsample:

March 2016 Ankara bombing

Result: Target Civilians, TAK claim: Security forces, Deaths 37 civilians + 1 perpetrator Non-fatal injuries
127, Perpetrator Kurdistan Freedom Hawks (TAK)

tak is the urban wing of pkk just like kck its all the same crap so dont come up with ''but it wasnt pkk'' bla bla.


If proven then yes but then i would have to label SAA as terrorist too since their crimes against civilians are much bigger.


I dont know if there is a language barrier or something, i have said ''Easy, the ones who conduct car bomb attacks in the middle of Ankara which are being called freedom fighters by you for exsample.''

Which doesnt mean you condone terrorist attacks but you cant call the ones doing terrorists attacks as terrorists, im not worng with what i said since you still try to show pkk as if they werent doing terrorists attack whats so hard in understanding this?

One question, do you know what caused this crater which killed 4 and injured 23 Kurdish villagers?

First of all, the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks is definitely a terrorist organization since it clearly targets innocent civilians. I do not condone the actions of the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks.

But this group is not affiliated to the PKK. In fact, it opposes the PKK precisely because the PKK refuses to attack civilians. That's exactly why the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks came to existence in the first place. They split from the PKK because they disagreed with the PKK's leaders over how civilians should be treated. They believe that civilians should be targeted, whereas the PKK's leaders believe that only security personnel should be targeted.

So, no, they're not the same. There are a number of differences between these various groups.

Whenever Turks argue that all these groups are "the same", they are basically indirectly condemning every single Kurdish group to the same fate, which is exactly what makes many Kurds resort to extreme measures in the first place.

 

[Deliorman]

We saw @Kuwaiti Girl knows a lot about her beloved PKK... it seems that to her they are angels on earth. Now can you please explain to us how exactly ISIS joined Euphrates shield as you claımed on Twıtter?

ps I don't even know if it is worth it to waste our time arguing with someone blinded with so much hate towards us. We all know where it comes from anyway.

 

[Kuwaiti Girl]

ISIS or AQ in Tunisia did not attack any civilians... so are they not Terro? The only casuality was from ISIS with the tourist attack in the Hotel of Sousse 2 years ago. Otherwise Aq/ISIS/or others only target security forces/army/police etc... . So May I have your view on that? bc if ysterday I killed and today I do not anymore, will that make me a nice guy,? then few ppl around the world would be happy to live in your world...
Terrorism is an attack driven by an ideology. Period
White supremacist attack is terrorism as much ISIS is... and whoever is the casuality...

ISIS is a terrorist organization because it continues to advocate targeting innocent civilians. But an ISIS attack on security personnel is not a terrorist act.

For example, when ISIS attacks a Shia mosque in Iraq, it's clearly a terrorist act because the intended targets were innocent civilians / non-combatants. But when ISIS attacks Shia militias, it's not a terrorist act.

But ISIS is still a terrorist organization because it continues to attack civilians, regardless of its occasional attacks on legitimate combatant targets.

But let's suppose ISIS changes its policy from now on. Let's suppose the ISIS leadership decides to only target combatants from now on and that any attack on non-combatants is a crime. Will ISIS still be considered a terrorist group 10 or 20 years down the road? I doubt it. You may not like hearing this, but this is exactly how the world works. There are many examples around you today. For instance, take a look at China. One could argue that the Chinese communist party (CPC) functioned very much like a terrorist entity during the early years of Communist China, but things eventually changed. Nobody in his/her right mind today would consider the CPC a terrorist entity. Likewise, the founding fathers of America, Australia, Turkey, Israel, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and countless other countries around the world did so many things that were questionable and could be classified as terrorist acts. But they eventually changed, so are these countries considered to be terrorist entities in the year 2017?

It's not a black and white issue. It never was and never will be.

 

[xenon54 out]

First of all, the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks is definitely a terrorist organization since it clearly targets innocent civilians. I do not condone the actions of the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks.

But this group is not affiliated to the PKK. In fact, it opposes the PKK precisely because the PKK refuses to attack civilians. That's exactly why the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks came to existence in the first place. They split from the PKK because they disagreed with the PKK's leaders over how civilians should be treated. They believe that civilians should be targeted, whereas the PKK's leaders believe that only security personnel should be targeted.

So, no, they're not the same. There are a number of differences between these various groups.

Whenever Turks argue that all these groups are "the same", they are basically indirectly condemning every single Kurdish group to the same fate, which is exactly what makes many Kurds resort to extreme measures in the first place.

No they are not different, they might be more extremist and dont agree with pkk not attacking civilians enough but they are still working together with pkk, and since you mentioned international recognision, pkk is recognized as terror organization by a number of countries for a reason and their attack agaisnt civilians didnt stop at ll.

Ok if you really want pkk itself then there you go:

15 tons of explosives which got caught by Kurdish villagers who began chasing the truck, the pkk terrorists blew it up when they couldnt escape, 4 dead 23 injured.


Pkk Attacking a Hospital

Two PKK bomb attacks kill six civilians in Turkey: report

Some other recent attacks:

-Bus bombing by a remote controlled explosion in Diyarbakır, the southeastern city of Turkey on September 12, 2006, causing the death of 10 civilians who were mostly students and injuries of 17 civilians.

- Anafartalar Attack (May 22, 2007): The PKK carries out a suicide bomb attack on Anafartalar Market. 9 people, including 1 Pakistani national, killed. More than 100 people are injured

- Güngören Massacre (July 27, 2008): Two separate explosives planted by PKK terrorists claim 18 lives, including 5 children, in the Güngören district. 154 people are also injured

-A suicide attack in Istanbul on October 31, 2010 which resulted in the injuries of 15 police officers, 13 citizens, and 4 foreign individuals.

- Bursa - Ulu Mosque Attack (April 27, 2016): One person dies, 13 injured in suicide bomb attack.

And many many more that i could find if i would invest more time in it.

And dont try to show me as if i was throwing all Kurds in the same basket, majority of Kurds are peaceful people who hate those terrorists to the guts.

 

[HannibalBarca]

ISIS is a terrorist organization because it continues to advocate targeting innocent civilians. But an ISIS attack on security personnel is not a terrorist act.

For example, when ISIS attacks a Shia mosque in Iraq, it's clearly a terrorist act because the intended targets were innocent civilians / non-combatants. But when ISIS attacks Shia militias, it's not a terrorist act.

But ISIS is still a terrorist organization because it continues to attack civilians, regardless of its occasional attacks on legitimate combatant targets.

But let's suppose ISIS changes its policy from now on. Let's suppose the ISIS leadership decides to only target combatants from now on and that any attack on non-combatants is a crime. Will ISIS still be considered a terrorist group 10 or 20 years down the road? I doubt it. You may not like hearing this, but this is exactly how the world works. There are many examples around you today. For instance, take a look at China. One could argue that the Chinese communist party (CPC) functioned very much like a terrorist entity during the early years of Communist China, but things eventually changed. Nobody in his/her right mind today would consider the CPC a terrorist entity. Likewise, the founding fathers of America, Australia, Turkey, Israel, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and countless other countries around the world did so many things that were questionable and could be classified as terrorist acts. But they eventually changed, so are these countries considered to be terrorist entities in the year 2017?

It's not a black and white issue. It never was and never will be.

So you argue on a terminology basis...

 

[xenon54 out]

So you argue on a terminology basis...

As if it matters...

 

[Kuwaiti Girl]

No they are not different, they might be more extremist and dont agree with pkk not attacking civilians enough but they are still working together with pkk, and since you mentioned international recognision, pkk is recognized as terror organization by a number of countries for a reason and their attack agaisnt civilians didnt stop at ll.

Ok if you really want pkk itself then there you go:

15 tons of explosives which got caught by Kurdish villagers who began chasing the truck, the pkk terrorists blew it up when they couldnt escape, 4 dead 23 injured.


Pkk Attacking a Hospital

Two PKK bomb attacks kill six civilians in Turkey: report

Some other recent attacks:

-Bus bombing by a remote controlled explosion in Diyarbakır, the southeastern city of Turkey on September 12, 2006, causing the death of 10 civilians who were mostly students and injuries of 17 civilians.

- Anafartalar Attack (May 22, 2007): The PKK carries out a suicide bomb attack on Anafartalar Market. 9 people, including 1 Pakistani national, killed. More than 100 people are injured

- Güngören Massacre (July 27, 2008): Two separate explosives planted by PKK terrorists claim 18 lives, including 5 children, in the Güngören district. 154 people are also injured

-A suicide attack in Istanbul on October 31, 2010 which resulted in the injuries of 15 police officers, 13 citizens, and 4 foreign individuals.

- Bursa - Ulu Mosque Attack (April 27, 2016): One person dies, 13 injured in suicide bomb attack.

And many many more that i could find if i would invest more time in it.

And dont try to show me as if i was throwing all Kurds in the same basket, majority of Kurds are peaceful people who hate those terrorists to the guts.

The 2007 Ankara bombing was carried out by the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks, not the PKK.

The 2008 Istanbul bombings were denied by the PKK leadership. They didn't take credit for the attack and claimed no responsibility for it.

The 2016 attacks you listed were also carried out by the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks.

The fact is, the PKK these days only focuses its attacks on security personnel / combatants. It no longer targets civilians. This has been the policy of the PKK leadership in recent years, which is exactly why the Kurdistan Freedom Hawks came to existence in the first place.

So you argue on a terminology basis...

Precisely.

Terminology-wise, a terrorist attack is an attack on non-combatants.

When soldiers and other combatants get killed, it's not terrorism, regardless of who the perpetrator is.

Xenon54 is hellbent on tarnishing my image by making it appear as though I condone attacks on civilians, which I've never done.

Why the hell should I condone attacks on civilians? My own country and people have been victims of terrorist attacks.

I just don't like intellectual dishonesty. I don't like it when someone claims that an attack on soldiers is a terrorist act. No it bloody isn't.