'In the first Iraqi reaction to the vote in Turkey's parliament, Mr Zebari called on PKK rebels, who are fighting for an independent Kurdistan, to leave.
"Our formal request is that they leave Iraqi soil and leave Iraq for its people and do not bring us more problems than we're already suffering," Mr Zebari, an ethnic Kurd himself, said in an interview with Reuters news agency.
He said his government wanted to push the PKK out of the country but lacked the military power.
"Iraqi security forces are battling the terrorists in the streets of Baghdad and many other key cities, and are overstretched," Mr Zebari said.'Iraq urges Kurdish rebels to go
You can just picture one particularly slow PKK member packing up to leave - "Oh wow, it's a formal request" - while his buddies fall about laughing. And didn't Zebari get the memo? It's "things are returning to normal, markets are opening and people are walking the streets unafraid"; not "we're battling and overstretched". And didn't Bush say that US forces are in Iraq to prevent it from becoming a safe haven for terrorists?
Anyway, seriously - will Turkish troops enter Iraq, and what might be the consequences?
The resolution was brought up in the early 1990s. It may have been brought up before, but I have no idea. The 92 year-old massacre is still very fresh in the minds of many Armenians.
What is so wrong with calling something by its proper name? The House of Representatives isn't insisting that other nations call it genocide or a Holocaust, although many already do. They are just calling a spade a spade.
Posts: 17027 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Originally posted by DorianGreyed: The resolution was brought up in the early 1990s. It may have been brought up before, but I have no idea. The 92 year-old massacre is still very fresh in the minds of many Armenians.
What is so wrong with calling something by its proper name? The House of Representatives isn't insisting that other nations call it genocide or a Holocaust, although many already do. They are just calling a spade a spade.
-----------------------------------------------
Hi dg:
The timing of the resolution was terrible.It was a stupid move.
Why did those dummies in our Congress decide that now was the right time to pass a resolution about a genocide that took place over 100 years ago???
Doesn't it seem that this was a deliberate attempt to anger the Turks ,at a time when we need all the Allies we can find???What was their logic behind such a dumb move???
It was an attempt by Pelosi and the Democrats to piss off the Turks, so they would close all of our supply lines in Turkey making it harder to get much needed equipment to our troops engaged in combat. Moon bats, peace at any price idiots.
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02
So, Scotty must feel that it's acceptable to make a campaign promise, like bush did, but to actually do the action promised is not acceptable.
Scotty, you sure are fair and balanced in your objectivity. And ethical, as well. Let's not admit the truth because it would make our friends not help us.
What's next? We could call is "involuntary captivity" instead of slavery so as to not offend the white racists. That will help your buddies with the white trash vote, although I think they have that locked up already.
I see that truth is only important to some if it benefits them.
Posts: 17027 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
It wouldn't surprise me to find out that the resolution was brought up in part to make it more difficult for bush to carry on his war.
I also know that California has about 2 million people of Armenian descent. I have no idea how many live in Pelosi's district. Turkey's refusal to admit to the facts of this matter is very insulting to Armenians.
Posts: 17027 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
I'm guessing Turkish people are way more upset about murders committed by PKK terrorists who hide out across the border in Iraq than they are about symbolic resolutions passed by the US congress. It isn't always about America, guys.
That will help your buddies with the white trash vote, although I think they have that locked up already.
Sorry, DG, but the Democrats are not exactly my buddies. Such a crude comment. When are you going to learn not to be nasty in your responses, it is so childish.
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02
"Your buddies" referred to the Republicans, with whom you agree about 99% of the time in principle. "White Trash" referred to, well, white trash. The only reference to you was your name. It wasn't that hard to understand, was it?
Reading Comprehension - It's a Wonderful Thing
Posts: 17027 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
I understood it perfectly, and I suppose that the "white trash" doesn't support the Democrats. Somehow, I think that it is quite the opposite. Most people who vote democratic are the ones that want the Government to support them, 'white trash" etc, who are unwilling to go out and get an education and support themselves. Look around.
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02
I can always count on you to make my point for me, Scotty. Whether it is statements like that or supplying a link to an article that you obviously didn't understand, you remain my weapon of choice.
Posts: 17027 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
I can always count on you to make my point for me, Scotty. Whether it is statements like that or supplying a link to an article that you obviously didn't understand, you remain my weapon of choice.
The truth hurt, DG. I didn't make any point for you, only told it like it is. Obviously you don't understand. You are quick to point out the failings of others, but you can't see your own, sad. You point out white trash in one way, and I in another, but related. Uh, do you understand that?
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02
You see, DG, the "white racists, white trash", are the people that want the Government to support them. Only the Democrats are willing to do that. Only losers are looking for others to support their lazy a$$es.
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02
You seem to have gone a little off-topic. In any case the question was not about Congress' vote on genocide, but about how Turkey proposes to deal with the PKK over the Iraqi border.
Stupidly, is maybe the answer. They've already been shelling Iraq. That's just the same dumb tactic US forces have used - a conventional army trying to defeat terrorist guerrillas by bombing. When will they learn? Some of the Iraqis being shelled, it seems, are not even from 'Kurdistan', but refugees fleeing the chaos further south. Meanwhile Syria has supported Turkey's stance. Are neighbouring nations getting ready to intervene in Iraq openly and in force?
Turkey refuses to negotiate with local Kurdish authorities, insisting on dealing with the central Iraqi government. It's not clear what the US view is on this; officially it supports a unified Iraq, but Bush's buddies are scrambling to sign oil deals with 'Kurdistan', undermining what power the nominal 'Government of Iraq' has.
The issues between Turkey and the Iraqi Kurds have long pre-dated the talk in Congress of that resolution (which has so far gone nowhere.) Around 40 US states have, at one time or another, legislated language defining that episode as genocide. Given the fact that the hated Pelosi has backed off over the international impact, it's hard to argue Scotty's theory. Well, logically, anyway. Likewise, as I think I already said somewhere here, for bush to criticize the Turkey thingy while welcoming the Dali Lama over China's objections -- China owning gazillions of dollars of our debt and having helped us out with N. Korea -- says political gamesmanship is hardly the domain of one party.
Posts: 1505 | Location: Puget Sound, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
'The top U.S. military commander in northern Iraq said he plans to do "absolutely nothing" to counter Kurdish rebels who are staging deadly cross-border attacks into neighboring Turkey. It was the most blunt assertion yet by an American official in the last few weeks that U.S. forces should not be involved in the fight.'apnews.myway.com
Huh? The US had no good reason for bombing Iraq flat and invading it, but what reasons were given were often connected (if only by rhetoric) with preventing terrorism. Now here's a clear-cut case of terrorists operating out of Iraq (with the acquiescence of regional authorities?) and Turkey is being asked to wait patiently while 'absolutely nothing' is done.
Could it be any clearer that it's about the oil? Deals are being signed between US businesses and the Kurdish government (undermining the central government) so the US doesn't want to upset the Kurds. It doesn't want Turkey to come in and annex the oil-lands either, though. Therefore, "Could everyone please pretend that this isn't happening?"
