Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Duuvian]

[devil's advocate] USA intervention seems to cause problems pretty regularly. Why not just stay out of it and let the dominos fall as they will? It's pretty inarguable that not messing around will cause problems, but what's to say intervening won't cause worse ones? In any case, is it genuinely our business what other countries do? Its inarguable that other countries don't affect us, but it's sometimes hard to see how it's the US's responsibility to do something about it [/devil's advocate]

Mostly, my argument is: if anyone can think of a better idea then I'd be willing to give that a try instead.

I think there are several reasons why not to stay out of it. I think letting the dominoes fall as they will would have a real possible chance of at least a regional war. I think that the West has military support obligations to one if not both sides, while other powerful countries that are not the West's enemy (yet, and I hope they never are and have no reason to dread being enemies except when things like this happen) have their own obligations to countries that have strong feelings against Israel.

As to causing worse results, I would be hard pressed to name many other than a terrorist attack upon warships at sea. I doubt Israel would be willing attack a flotilla under US protection. While they may be very unhappy with this action, I also believe it is necessary to stop the unquestioned support of Israeli actions and that it would be a stepping stone to better relations not only between Arab countries and the US, but also between Arab countries and Israel, due to removing the enabler that is unflagging US government support of Israel's current policies despite very practical and humanistic reasons to the contrary.

It's not always our business to affect what other countries do. However, in this instance, which is much more important than 'always' I might add, I think it is very, very much our business as both countries are closely allied to the US; not to mention the threat of a regional war breaking out in a region where we still occupy a country to my chagrin.

All this said, I would say it's not the US's responsibility. It's something that simply needs to be done. If the Chinese or Russians or a Euro country were to do it in the knowledge that they could stop strikes with their presence, that's fine with me. However, I am a citizen of none of these countries, so I nominate my own country's powerful navy to accomplish the task. In addition, the more the merrier I feel as far as countries willing to participate AFTER a powerful enough state to prevent strikes on the flotilla has signed on.

[Il Palazzo]

Erdogan visits Egypt:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/13/turkey-erdogan-egypt-visit_n_960855.html

[Strife26]

The UN said that the blockade is Kosher; we've got no cause to break it.


[quote author=Duuvian link=topic=92904.msg2610458#msg2610458

Let's ignore the two ground wars we are already in and allow a new one to begin, shall we, my isolationist friend, when with a simple escort we could keep war from breaking out?
[/quote]

Three actually. We've still got a heckuva lot of stuff in Korea to fight that war.

I'd contend that the odds of a major war breaking out here are nearly zero. Israel can still defend itself against doctrinal threats more than well enough. The real issue is staying friendly with Turkey and Israel at once.

[mainiac]

Turkey has one of the largest militaries in the world and their population dwarfs israels.  Syria would jump at the opportunity to help them take down Israel.  Lebanon could be very easily provoked into anti-Israeli sentiment given the fragile nature of their political stability.  A war with Turkey could very well be the biggest conflict Israel ever got in.

[RedKing]

A war with Israel would also be almost guaranteed to trigger a military coup within Turkey. Erdogan's AKP has long been attacked by its opponents as a crypto-Islamist party. And going to war with Israel, even with some modicum of popular support, would be seized upon as evidence that the AKP are Islamists and the military would take it as their responsibility to overthrow the government to preserve Turkey's long-treasured secularism. The same way they overthrew the civil government in 1960, 1971 and 1980 although in those cases the tacit justification was that the civil government was either unstable or were crypto-Communists.

[mainiac]

Because secularists in Turkey love Israel?  Just because the Islamists would like a war doesn't mean the secularists wouldn't.

[RedKing]

Because secularists in Turkey love Israel?  Just because the Islamists would like a war doesn't mean the secularists wouldn't.

No, but historically Turkish-Israeli relations have been quite good because they had a shared concern about Islamic fundamentalists in the region. Relations were quite cordial up until last year when the Israelis stormed that ship and killed eight Turks. And the secularists are not going to like seeing Turkey jump on the same bandwagon as Syria and Iran. Secularists in Turkey can be quite militant, almost (it feels wrong to use the word, but...) fundamentalist about preserving secularism. To the point that it used to be immediate grounds for dismissal for government employees if they were seen praying in public, even off-duty. The AKP came to power looking to relax the stringent secularism, which a lot of younger Turks saw as just as restrictive and oppressive as Sharia. FWIW, I don't think they're Islamists, but that's irrelevant. If the military thinks they are, there will be a coup. There was already a military coup plot found and broken up just last February.

Additionally, Turkish-Syrian relations are quite strained at the moment as well, because of the Syrian refugee camps in Turkish territory and the worries that the Syrian army might violate territorial sovereignty. So assuming that Turkey and Syria would gang up on Israel is a long stretch at best.

[olemars]

Open war with Israel would pretty much require Turkey to break with NATO and ditch their EU membership project. A Turkey-Syria war is more likely.

[Virex]

Turkey has one of the largest militaries in the world and their population dwarfs israels.  Syria would jump at the opportunity to help them take down Israel.  Lebanon could be very easily provoked into anti-Israeli sentiment given the fragile nature of their political stability.  A war with Turkey could very well be the biggest conflict Israel ever got in.

With Syria and Turkey on the verge of a small scale war themselves (which is not the first time they faced each other on the battlefield) I doubt they'd unite against Israel, especially since Turkey has little to gain from fighting Israel, but much more from fighting Syria.

[mainiac]

I was unaware of the recent strains in Turkish, Syrian relations.  Still, it sounds very farfetched to me that this would be the downfall of the Turkish government.  The army is very intent on preserving secularism in domestic Turkish politics.  That does not extend to them having any support for Israel.  Imagine for a second that everyone in this situation was practicing norse paganism.  So the norse pagan Israeli's were blockading the norse pagan palestinians and recently interdicted a convoy from the norse pagan Turks.  The Turks would still consider the matter provocative under those circumstances.  That makes it very easy for this issue to be framed as non-religious inside of Turky

Here in the US for instance, most people would agree that the wars in Iraq and Afganistan weren't religious wars.  This is despite quite a few people in this country who do believe that we should be waging religious war against muslims.  These crusadists naturally support the wars, but that still doesn't change the fact that most people wouldn't call these religious wars.  They are wars about terrorism and... whatever the hell the Iraq war was about.

[RedKing]

Except that that *isn't* the case. Again, I'm not saying the AKP is Islamist, and they'll use precisely your argument to say that any hostile actions against Israel aren't driven by religion. What's important is that their opponents (which include many senior army officers) can and will use this to counter-frame aggression towards Israel as part of an Islamist agenda. The military isn't driving the rift with Israel, the civilian government is.

In the same vein, Obama didn't get out of Iraq because he's a crypto-Muslim who wanted to help out al-Qaeda. But that didn't stop his enemies from framing it that way. The difference is that Obama's domestic opponents were mostly laughable and did not enjoy much support from society as a whole. The military has a long-standing reputation as the "guardians" of secular democracy in Turkey. They typically enjoy more popular support than the elected government. If the military came out and said "AKP is trying to destroy Turkey by drawing us into a war with Israel", there would be more than a few who would believe it and support a coup.

[mainiac]

But why?  Why are they gonna put their asses on the line for Israel?  Going by that logic, they'd never have picked a fight with Greece over Cyprus in a million years, since that was much more about religion then this is.

[scriver]

They're not "putting their ass on the line for Israel", they'd be doing it to seize power for themselves. A military coup, taking over the country.

[MonkeyHead]

An unstable and unpredictable Egypt is the joker in the pack really...

[RedKing]

But why?  Why are they gonna put their asses on the line for Israel?  Going by that logic, they'd never have picked a fight with Greece over Cyprus in a million years, since that was much more about religion then this is.

Because domestic politics trumps foreign relations? They're not putting their asses on the line for Israel, they're using an opportunity to take down a domestic rival. The military has been anti-AKP since before they ever took office. It's been an uneasy relationship the whole time they've been in there, one that has only become more strained as the AKP relaxes more and more standards regarding religion. And Cyprus wasn't about religion. It was almost purely a nationalism thing. The Greeks staged a coup against Makarios on the grounds that he was a Communist sympathizer. The Turks used the coup as a pretext to invade to "restore law and order".

Seriously, Turkey does not see themselves as a "Middle Eastern" nation and doesn't feel any strong allegiances to the Arab world. They're not Arabs, they don't speak or write Arabic, and there's still a deep-seated latent resentment towards the Arab world for the imposition of Arabic and Islam during the Ottoman days. At the same time, many Turks are devout Muslims. It's a paradoxical situation, but it makes sense from their standpoint.

Let me give you a counter-example: why would Americans who are staunch secularists oppose American intervention in Iraq, especially when the terms "crusade" start getting bandyed about by the President and certain generals? Why would put their asses on the line to support Saddam? The answer? They weren't supporting Saddam, they were confronting what they saw as bad decisions that were going to do major damage to their country. That's what the Turkish Army would see, and that's what they would do.

They're not "putting their ass on the line for Israel", they'd be doing it to seize power for themselves. A military coup, taking over the country.

Yes and no. The Turkish Army is a rare beast. They pulled off three military coups in the last half of the 20th century alone, yet they actually lived up to their promises each time and transitioned back to civil government. They honestly see themselves (and it's been inculcated in Army officer culture since Ataturk) as the protectors of the people against bad government. That when the government gets too far from the people's wishes (as interpreted by the Army, of course) or too corrupt, it's the Army's job to hit the reset button and start over with a new government. And their periods of junta rule have generally been less corrupt and feckless than the civilian rule, albeit they were also stained with extrajudicial violence against the Turkish Left.