 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
gambiabev
United Kingdom
3091 Posts |
 Posted - 28 Jul 2008 : 07:19:26
|
Woke up to terrible news this morning about bombings in Istanbull. Deliberately targeting local residents. Turk, can you give any background to this. Is it Kurdish freedom fighters? What is the history of this?
The EU is supposed to be a trading partnership between democratic nations. Countries are supposed to meet certain requirements before they are allowed to join. This seems to be getting more and more flexible to allow more and more countries in.
My daughter just come back from a holiday in Turkey where she said people were openly trading in Euros alongside Turkish currency. SO people seem to be looking westward for trade already.
Turkey important link between west and east. I've always thought of it as being more eastern than western.......... religion, culture, food, etc etc.....
I wonder what an average Turkish person thinks? Would it be positive move?
WOnder is Turkey is ready for all the petty bureaucracy that would come with being a member? Perhaps the economic benefits would outweigh all that?
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2008 : 10:27:24
|
gambiabev
First of all I find it very funny saying "terrible new this morning......local residents.....freedom fighters". How can you use 'freedom fighters' in the same sentence in killing 17 civilians. Is that a terrorist act? If it is terrorist act, they should be called terrorists, right? I am hoping this is not something you posted because you wanted to get me back. Because you are relating this terrorist act with 'my objections about trading and democracy' is really really cheap shot. Based on 'benefit of doubt', I will assume you would never do such thing.
Kurds in Turkey suffering from their cultural, economical bad situation. The Turkish government has failed to promote cultural rights, municipal autonomy and economic development in the region. So, the government must be blamed with terrorism by kurdish. But at the same time situation is not that bad. For example, Kurds have almost 20 percent of Turkish population but the seperatist Kurdish Party got 4 percent last year election. What does it mean, there are 80 percent of Kurds do not want seperation and approve the violance by Kurdish rebel groups. Turks and Kurdish have been living together for last 1000 years and there are mix marriages between Kurds and Turks. There are more Kurds living in west like Istanbul, Mersin, Ankara than Kurdistan area. Many realize that being part of Turkey is more beneficial than independency. But in terms of economical, cultural and local government autonomy, I think Kurds are right, the turkish government is wrong.
Turkey is meeting most of the requirements. I mean if England is in, why not Turkey if you are refering the this situation and EU membership. Because the IRA terrorism and England and PKK and Turkey have very comparable situation. While Turkey is still not comparable to Western European democracy and human rights, they have made big progress. Turkey is not at the level of democracy and human rights records like some western europe, but they have similar records like greece, crotia, slovenia, poland, cyprus etc...
Personally, I want Turkey to be EU member as being member would improve the democracy and human rights of Turkey. This is advantage for Turkey.
As a Muslim country being part of 'western club' is perfect development to discredit 'clash of civilizations theory'. Hopefully, the other islamic countries would follow similar path to improve government system and mixing religion in the society.
Economic advantages are obvious. EU is getting older and older, the younger population of Turkey would make great jump economically. I was reading article the other day, Considering last 7 years, Turkish economy growth close to double digit every year and became the 17th largest economy in the world, entering EU would take Turkey even further and top economy after UK, France, Germany and Italy by 2023 when membership is accomplished.
As EU is an economic giant and politically very ineffective when it comes to politics. The role of Turkey would empower EU in the world affairs especially EU interaction with the Middleeast and Central Asia. Turkey is playing important role while being close with Israel and Arab world, for example the recent ongoing negotiations of Israel and Syria is accomplished by Turkey. The consensus of presidential election in Lebanon which was the deadlock for years, was due to Turkish mediation between Lebanase fractions. The recent negotiations between Iran and USA was the result of Turkish diplomacy. So Turkish strategic positions and its strong economy, cultural and historical links will empower EU and the position of Turkey in the world. So this is another advantage for Turkey.
You are right about bureauracy may be negative. But Turkey will be the second largest EU country and will lead EU on this. With the help of UK. That is one of the reasons UK supporting Turkey. There are two schools of EU integration methodology in EU. The one France, Germany, Austria promoting, strong integration (vertical integration), the other is the one UK, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Poland promoting losely integrated horizantal approach which is EU should focus on enlargement rather than vertical integration. This is one of the reason Germany and France is talking about special membership rather than full membership as UK, Spain, Italy and Poland will get another strong vote from Turkey to change the bureaucracy of EU.
My only concern is racial/social clash between Turks and nationalist in EU. I think benefits may outweight the disadvantages.
However, I think Turkey can have better position staying out of EU too as they have option to get closer with the other turkish republics like Azerbaijain, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgistan and Kazakistan. We'll see what happens.
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
Edited by - turk on 28 Jul 2008 10:34:43 |
 |
|
|
gambiabev
United Kingdom
3091 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2008 : 12:21:07
|
I used the term freedom fighters because that was the term used on the news. 'Kurdish freedom fighters'. Of course one mans freedom fighter is anothers terrorist. Personally I am against any killing for political ends. I consider any such act an act of terror.
I post on here things I think might interest others. I am not interested in point scoring off anyone. You should know me better than that by now!  |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2008 : 14:32:18
|
gambiabev
Don't mind me. You should have seen me how my body language when I was typing.
Just want to clarify the things about freedom fighters, rebel, terrorist acts. I tell you, the term used for Kurds are 'seperatist rebels', not freedom fighters. Most mainstream media and western government use this term. There are some communist and ultra left in Europe use 'freedome fighters but that is too much.
You are right about the confusion of the terms.
I would consider following criteria to clarify the terms 'rebel', 'freedom fighters','terrorists'
Personally I would consider Kurdish group to be rebel. But the moment they have attacked and kill 3,5 years old child yesterday, they became terrorists. They would be rebel if they fight against the Turkish men. Fair fight. Turkish army has gun, they will kill kurdish rebels when they see, kurdish rebels have gun, they will kill turkish army. Fair fight. Like a gentlemen. So when that happens a group may be called 'rebel'.
However, in Turkey, Turkish men does not go and kill civilians. So there is no need to retaliate as kurdish groups to kill children and civilians. There is an election in Turkey, 20 percent of Kurd vote and they get 4 of vote. There are 27 kurdish member of parliement from that party. There are also more 60 kurdish member in the parliement from the governing party. There are ministers who are turkish. For example minister of education is a kurd. The former chief of army, Gunes was half kurd. The former president Turgut Ozal was half kurd. So, while I admit Kurds have issues in turkey in terms of cultural rights, economic situtation, local government restriction, they still have peace to. They already have freedom. So I don't categorize them as 'freedom fighter', they would be 'rebel' if they fight against Turkish army. But to me they are terrorists.
I would call same for 'irish freedom fighters' too!!!!! They are not freedom fighters. They are bloody terrorist. Most of their acts were targetting civilians.
But there are different stories about palestinians. They have no government, no freedom, no economic freedom, they are under occupation, israeli army kill the civilians. So I would call them 'freedom fighters' but when they killed civilians they are terrorists, they must be condemned as well, but one thing make the situation different for palestinians that the israel is act with terrorism too. |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
gambiabev
United Kingdom
3091 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2008 : 18:28:20
|
Yes turk you are right. The world is a very complex place and we need to look at history, present conditions, actions and motives before we label anyone.
But killing civilians seems harsh whatever the provocation. We may understand the anger and the politics, but the act is horrible.
I think we agree Turk.  |
|
|
|
shaka
996 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2008 : 20:12:05
|
A terribly evil deed!! I hope you and the family are ok Turk.quote:
Originally posted by turk
gambiabev
Don't mind me. You should have seen me how my body language when I was typing.
Just want to clarify the things about freedom fighters, rebel, terrorist acts. I tell you, the term used for Kurds are 'seperatist rebels', not freedom fighters. Most mainstream media and western government use this term. There are some communist and ultra left in Europe use 'freedome fighters but that is too much.
You are right about the confusion of the terms.
I would consider following criteria to clarify the terms 'rebel', 'freedom fighters','terrorists'
Personally I would consider Kurdish group to be rebel. But the moment they have attacked and kill 3,5 years old child yesterday, they became terrorists. They would be rebel if they fight against the Turkish men. Fair fight. Turkish army has gun, they will kill kurdish rebels when they see, kurdish rebels have gun, they will kill turkish army. Fair fight. Like a gentlemen. So when that happens a group may be called 'rebel'.
However, in Turkey, Turkish men does not go and kill civilians. So there is no need to retaliate as kurdish groups to kill children and civilians. There is an election in Turkey, 20 percent of Kurd vote and they get 4 of vote. There are 27 kurdish member of parliement from that party. There are also more 60 kurdish member in the parliement from the governing party. There are ministers who are turkish. For example minister of education is a kurd. The former chief of army, Gunes was half kurd. The former president Turgut Ozal was half kurd. So, while I admit Kurds have issues in turkey in terms of cultural rights, economic situtation, local government restriction, they still have peace to. They already have freedom. So I don't categorize them as 'freedom fighter', they would be 'rebel' if they fight against Turkish army. But to me they are terrorists.
I would call same for 'irish freedom fighters' too!!!!! They are not freedom fighters. They are bloody terrorist. Most of their acts were targetting civilians.
But there are different stories about palestinians. They have no government, no freedom, no economic freedom, they are under occupation, israeli army kill the civilians. So I would call them 'freedom fighters' but when they killed civilians they are terrorists, they must be condemned as well, but one thing make the situation different for palestinians that the israel is act with terrorism too.
|
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2008 : 20:42:20
|
| Thanks shaka. They are ok. |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
