Erdogan's Ergenekon "Victory"

[TheThreePashas]

So you believe if the U.S. or another country legally, peacefully, and properly boarded a Turkish vessel and the Turks attacking the soldiers/sailors were killed in self-defense as a result then Turks would respond the same way and blame the U.S./Chinese/Germans rather than the offending Turks?

Hold on a second, you're not arguing about the topic. You're arguing about Mavi Marmara again.

Before I go ahead, I do not agree with your assessment of the Mavimara event but I don't want to talk about that, just the article you posed so I'll just answer your question anyways.

Yes. It doesn't matter who does it. Killing Turks isn't cool in Turkey. I don't think killing Israelis comes off well in Israel either. Regardless who's in the right or wrong, it's always a situation that will cause a backlash because thats just how politics works. To be honest, if it was another country who did it, we would/could have responded stronger. Even if they US did it, we have channels of leverage to cut off (close Incirlik USAF Base for example). There isn't much we can do to Israel without breaking with the international community (hardpower responses basically)

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

AKP- Neo-Ottoman Nationalist, CHP - Kemalist Nationalists, MHP - Kemalist/Military/Ethnic/Everything Nationalists (hell yeah!)

what this party is about everything

 

[TheThreePashas]

what this party is about everything

Haha. Yeah man, we're nationalists about everything. Go win the World Chess Championship for Turkey and I'm sure us nationalists will put together a State Celebration in honor of our son who brought us glory lol.

 

[Solomon2]

Hold on a second, you're not arguing about the topic. You're arguing about Mavi Marmara again.

Wasn't MM important since it established Erdogan as the flag-bearer of Turkish nationalism, rather than the military?

Yes. It doesn't matter who does it...Regardless who's in the right or wrong, it's always a situation that will cause a backlash because thats just how politics works. To be honest, if it was another country who did it, we would/could have responded stronger.

I accept what you're saying here. Do you think that my prescription for changing Turkey's politics, as much as it would have rubbed against the grain, would have been effective at suppressing Erdogan's growing tyranny?

 

[TheThreePashas]

Wasn't MM important since it established Erdogan as the flag-bearer of Turkish nationalism, rather than the military?

I accept what you're saying here. Do you think that my prescription for changing Turkey's politics, as much as it would have rubbed against the grain, would have been effective at suppressing Erdogan's growing tyranny?

It's tough to explain. First things first Erdoğan has and never will be the flag bearer of Turkish nationalism, rather populism. Think about it. Foreign country kills 9 citizens, what's the automatic response? "SCREW [insert any country]! Let's attack ____!" So really he's just riding the wave of popular sentiment against Turks dieing not popular anti-semitism (it's an important distinction)

Secondly, again tough to explain, the military never really was a flag-bearer of nationalism. More so a protector. But even then, what they protect is Secularism, not Nationalism. For example, if Turkey's military was a pro-active "flagbearer" as you call it, there would have been a coup in the early 90's when the PKK was most successful and the military would have been killing Kurds left and right. Much like how the 2012 Coup in Mali was in reaction to the government not doing enough to stop the Tuareg separatist in the north.

Mavi Marmara was actually a very small win I'd say for Erdoğan domestically. Nothing really changed much. The marginal parts of society who are anti-Semitic didn't need to him to prove his anti-Israeli credentials anyways. Secularists weren't too pleased he was stirring up society. And true nationalists didn't really take too much part, seeing that if it was really a nationalist anti-israeli backlash, there would have been serious talk of military responses. Obviously that never happened.



By changing politics, are you referring to your suggesting that supporting Israel would have been a stepback for Erdoğan's "tyranny"?

 

[Solomon2]

By changing politics, are you referring to your suggesting that supporting Israel would have been a stepback for Erdoğan's "tyranny"?

Yes, that's what I'm referring to.

 

[TheThreePashas]

Eh. Not really. First of all as much as many Turks do not like Erdoğan, he's a domestic enemy, not a foreign one. I think it amounts to treason to back Israel instead of the government in this sense.

Plus again, it wasn't an issue with much domestic sway. Backing Israel wouldve been needlessly unnationalistc for very little gain.

Just to throw you a bit of info to nibble on because it seems like you're pretty interested in Erdoğan. Yes he's authoritarian in style. But he's not an autocrat. Erdoğan tends to dictate yet he is not a dictator. I think that foreign media has done a terrible job covering anti-Erdoğan protests/sentiment and that ends up misleading people, possible yourself too.

It's not like Erdoğan is a hated guy like Mubarak or Kaddafi were before they were ousted. Erdoğan is by no means a dictator awaiting to be overthrown. As much as I too do not like him, he is the countries Prime Minister and he has just as much support unfortunately as he has opponents, maybe even more. So maybe through how it was presented to you, I can see it being like (to a lesser degree obviously) how some Iraqis supported the invasion by the US as a means to get rid of Saddam but things in Turkey are not that bad. But in reality, it's like if you were a liberal Israeli supporting Hamas just because you don't like Netanyahu.

Keep in mind, we Turks are a weird and feisty bunch. It might seem like we're sounding the international SOS about our big bad dictator but really we're just spoiled lol. We love our country and we're paranoid. All the commotion about Turkey's "Islamification" is pretty well summed up with the head-scarf debate. If you just skim the titles and first couple paragraphs of articles about the debate in Turkey, it might seem to you that Erdoğan is forcing everyone to wear them in public places. But the actual debate is that us secularists are angry at the notion that the government wants to allow head scarves in public institutions. That's right allow, not require

 

[-SINAN-]

Wasn't MM important since it established Erdogan as the flag-bearer of Turkish nationalism, rather than the military?

Are you nuts ? The man himself said "we have took all the forms of nationalism under our feet"

POLITICS - Erdo

Saying the exact sentence between 0:30 and 0:35

 

[Solomon2]

Are you nuts ? The man himself said "we have took all the forms of nationalism under our feet"

Eh. Not really. First of all as much as many Turks do not like Erdoğan, he's a domestic enemy, not a foreign one...Backing Israel wouldve been needlessly unnationalistc for very little gain...Keep in mind, we Turks are a weird and feisty bunch. It might seem like we're sounding the international SOS about our big bad dictator but really we're just spoiled lol. We love our country and we're paranoid -

I hit the history books. I apologize.

Yeah, Turks are very nationalistic. Regardless of who their opponents might be Turks fight back hard, resistance that often takes opponents by surprise. (That, of course, doesn't justify the resistance of militant Turks to the Israeli boarding party in the MM affair.) Historically this quality makes Turks easier to manipulate by their leaders.

Israel, then, isn't necessarily (I don't know enough to drop the qualifier) viewed with especial hatred by Turks, only the Erdogan-type guys; it's simply easier for Erdo to get anti-Israel states and organizations on his side by picking on Israel.

The psychology strikes me as different enough from Western, Arab, or Pakistani to suggest that directly defending Israel in the MM affair is not a productive route for Turks to take. Concentrating on how Erdogan stages and uses inflammatory issues to blind people and stifle opposition seems like a better route.

 

[TheThreePashas]

I hit the history books. I apologize.

Yeah, Turks are very nationalistic. Regardless of who their opponents might be Turks fight back hard, resistance that often takes opponents by surprise. (That, of course, doesn't justify the resistance of militant Turks to the Israeli boarding party in the MM affair.) Historically this quality makes Turks easier to manipulate by their leaders.

Israel, then, isn't necessarily (I don't know enough to drop the qualifier) viewed with especial hatred by Turks, only the Erdogan-type guys; it's simply easier for Erdo to get anti-Israel states and organizations on his side by picking on Israel.

The psychology strikes me as different enough from Western, Arab, or Pakistani to suggest that directly defending Israel in the MM affair is not a productive route for Turks to take. Concentrating on how Erdogan stages and uses inflammatory issues to blind people and stifle opposition seems like a better route.

Yeah. That's the problem with Eroğan's populism, you said it right in the last sentence. He blinds people. He has a booming voice that, unfortunately you don't speak Turkish but, it almost convinces you he's right. And he's not, lol.

------
I would ease off blaming the MM affair on the militancy of the Turks onboard alone though. Regardless of who was aggressive and who wasn't, you've gotta think of the mindset of both sides. Both sides had the perfect mindset for a disaster

Turks on Board : They're going to give aid to Gaza. Obviously, Israel is a big obstacle in this and im sure that while they probably weren't anti-semitic in a racist sense, they have a poor opinion of the nation. They're sailing towards Gaza expecting the worst to happen, and when thats being expected thats what happens.

Israelis on board : These are Muslims aiding Gaza. They're probably threatening our security, therefore we have the right to harm them (or defend ourselves, its irrelevant in the point I'm making)..

However both sides were wrong and the worst did happen. The Turks weren't going there to harm Israeli National Security. The Israelis probably weren't going to just slaughter the Turks if they cooperated. It's an unfortunate event.
-----


In terms of the view on Israel you mentioned, I think you're starting to get it. Yes, it's easier to get support from Anti-Israeli rhetoric and in truth that's probably the audience for the rhetoric. Turks just don't get too excited by anti-Israeli action, they just feel bad for fellow Muslims dying.

Remember, the order of action wasn't..
(confront Israel) -> (look for new allies in the region) -> Erdoğan warms up to the arab world
more like..
(Let's foster better relations with the islamic middle east) -> (bash israel to win points)

 

[-SINAN-]

I hit the history books. I apologize.

Yeah, Turks are very nationalistic. Regardless of who their opponents might be Turks fight back hard, resistance that often takes opponents by surprise. (That, of course, doesn't justify the resistance of militant Turks to the Israeli boarding party in the MM affair.) Historically this quality makes Turks easier to manipulate by their leaders.

Israel, then, isn't necessarily (I don't know enough to drop the qualifier) viewed with especial hatred by Turks, only the Erdogan-type guys; it's simply easier for Erdo to get anti-Israel states and organizations on his side by picking on Israel.

The psychology strikes me as different enough from Western, Arab, or Pakistani to suggest that directly defending Israel in the MM affair is not a productive route for Turks to take. Concentrating on how Erdogan stages and uses inflammatory issues to blind people and stifle opposition seems like a better route.

Mate, i don't like, you saying " Erdoğan is manipulating Turkish people". It's like a insult to Turkish peoples' intelligence.

For me; I don't like Erdogan on many points, i don't care what he says. I only see MM incident as "Unarmed Turkish civilians killed by Israeli commandos". There is no need to discuss about legality of the blokade, Turk's holding knives, sticks.... This is my point of view and you or anyone can change it. This is the reason why i dislike Israel. As i think many of the Turks thinks the same.

 

[TheThreePashas]

Mate, i don't like, you saying " Erdoğan is manipulating Turkish people". It's like a insult to Turkish peoples' intelligence.

For me; I don't like Erdogan on many points, i don't care what he says. I only see MM incident as "Unarmed Turkish civilians killed by Israeli commandos". There is no need to discuss about legality of the blokade, Turk's holding knives, sticks.... This is my point of view and you or anyone can change it. This is the reason why i dislike Israel. As i think many of the Turks thinks the same.

Well he is manipulating people though, Sinan. Don't take too much offense to that because I'd say it's true. How many times has Erdoğan distracted from the main issue at hand and start barking about other things to get people to forget about his faults?

 

[Solomon2]

Mate, i don't like, you saying " Erdoğan is manipulating Turkish people". It's like a insult to Turkish peoples' intelligence.

More likely a reflection of my ignorance.

I would ease off blaming the MM affair on the militancy of the Turks onboard alone though. Regardless of who was aggressive and who wasn't, you've gotta think of the mindset of both sides. Both sides had the perfect mindset for a disaster

Turks on Board : They're going to give aid to Gaza. Obviously, Israel is a big obstacle in this and im sure that while they probably weren't anti-semitic in a racist sense, they have a poor opinion of the nation. They're sailing towards Gaza expecting the worst to happen, and when thats being expected thats what happens.

Israelis on board : These are Muslims aiding Gaza. They're probably threatening our security, therefore we have the right to harm them (or defend ourselves, its irrelevant in the point I'm making)..

As everyone should know, the Israelis boarded expecting a peaceful reception. The weapons they initially wielded were paintball guns. As the radio traffic makes clear, only after they were attacked did they radio for permission to use deadly force.

However both sides were wrong and the worst did happen. The Turks weren't going there to harm Israeli National Security.

The way I heard it Erdogan gave the Israelis his informal assurance that there wouldn't be a problem, yet he also took steps to ensure the militant faction was armed and could take control of the ship away from its captain. In short, Erdogan may have plotted the confrontation for his own political purposes. It's a matter worthy of investigation, something Erdogan most desperately wants to avoid, as seen in his repeated insistence that Israel admit to being 100% responsible - thus denying the grounds for any future Turkish investigation to take place.

I only see MM incident as "Unarmed Turkish civilians killed by Israeli commandos". There is no need to discuss about legality of the blokade, Turk's holding knives, sticks.... This is my point of view and you or anyone can change it. This is the reason why i dislike Israel. As i think many of the Turks thinks the same.

Yep, my research is that the Turk doesn't care if his countryman was in the wrong, only that his countryman was injured. Doesn't matter who the enemy was. I think the cleverest Turkish rulers thus took great care about exactly who they recognized as an enemy - regardless of the provocation - so they wouldn't pick someone too damaging to their self-interests.
That said I now understand why it was so important for the pro-Erdogan media to photoshop weapons out of the hands of militants and suppress coverage of the Israelis who were attacked by firearms.

 

[-SINAN-]

Well he is manipulating people though, Sinan. Don't take too much offense to that because I'd say it's true. How many times has Erdoğan distracted from the main issue at hand and start barking about other things to get people to forget about his faults?

Mate, i'm not saying "Erdoğan is not manipulating people", he indeed manipulates. We have seen some excellent examples in "Gezi Park Protests". What i don't agree with is; it is not for Sultans manipulation, there happened to be a enmity between Israel and Turkey.

 

[-SINAN-]

More likely a reflection of my ignorance.

Mate i want to discuss with you but i can't comprehend your sentences.... I first thought, you were evading our opinions and try to say irrelevant things. But after I saw your discussion with TheThreePashas, i understand that you are a reasonable and open person.

So.... can't you use a more simple English while you are talking to me as i couldn't understood what you were trying to say at your previous post.