At the weekend meeting of the Inkwell 4, we look at the situation with Turkey, Iraq and the US. We looked at the whole scope. The US is in a bad place damned if they do and damned if they do not. The PKK is a terrorist organization, as defined by the UN and other agencies. The US is either gonna fight terrorism, all terrorism or it is not. If it does not help Turkey, the US will be seen as a hypocrite. If they do nothing but talk and Turkey crosses the border in pursuit of the PKK, it could embolden Iran, who has probs with Kurds, also to invade from the East and they could use the pursuit of the PKK as a pretense for that invasion.
This is a situation that has far reaching consequences for Iraq, Iran, Turkey the US and possibly the entire Middle east. The US has to handle this very carefully and quickly or it will set a precedent that the US will have a helluva time extracting itself from.
Watch and wait--will stupidity and greed overshadow logic and commonsense?
CHUQ
Showing posts with label International Conflicts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label International Conflicts. Show all posts
12 November 2007
31 October 2007
Turkey--Between Iraq And A Hard Place
The US had a vote on a genocide resolution, Turkey amassed a huge force on the Iraqi border, PKK is defiant and Iraq warns of no cross border movement. The Us has been trying everything to prevent the Turks from acting.
Will The Turks cross the border? That my friends is the $64 question. Turkey is not ignorant! They know that the PKK will have the advantage because of the terrain. Turkey has the advantage in fire power, but it will be uselass if there is no one to use it on. Turkey is in a precarious position, if they cross the border going after the PKK and fail, they will empower the Islamists even more than now. If succeed they will set a precedent of the region and would go further into help destabilize an already unstabled area.
Either way the USA is in a lose-lose scenario. Iraq is in a lose-lose scenario. Then what is up with the war drums from Turkey? That is simple! The genocide thing is going away. Turkey is applying pressure on Iraq and the US to take action against the PKK. They will act if they have to, but would pretty much prefer the others to act and act in Turkey's favor.
Just some thoughts we had at this week's meeting of the Inkwell 3.
CHUQ
Will The Turks cross the border? That my friends is the $64 question. Turkey is not ignorant! They know that the PKK will have the advantage because of the terrain. Turkey has the advantage in fire power, but it will be uselass if there is no one to use it on. Turkey is in a precarious position, if they cross the border going after the PKK and fail, they will empower the Islamists even more than now. If succeed they will set a precedent of the region and would go further into help destabilize an already unstabled area.
Either way the USA is in a lose-lose scenario. Iraq is in a lose-lose scenario. Then what is up with the war drums from Turkey? That is simple! The genocide thing is going away. Turkey is applying pressure on Iraq and the US to take action against the PKK. They will act if they have to, but would pretty much prefer the others to act and act in Turkey's favor.
Just some thoughts we had at this week's meeting of the Inkwell 3.
CHUQ
28 October 2007
New Sanctions For Iran
Bush and his Boyz have announced more sanctions against Iran, especially anyone dealing with the Revolutionary Guard. He talks tough! But the all his talk is putting the US on a military footing. It is a preparation of action and all his rhetoric and that of his subordinates are saber rattling.
This could very well backfire on the administration. Iran could harden even further its international stands and demands. Which in turn will harden the resolve of the US govt to prevent Iran from doing whatever is they are doing. The Bush stand is a unilateral motion. The UN failed on tougher sanctions against Iran, so the US will go it unilaterally. Is this good? If you are part of the military-industrial complex, you will be jerking off at the prospect of an armed conflict. For the rest of the country, it will be devastating.
All the rhetoric coming from the administration is pro-war, nothing they are saying sounds like they are even considering a diplomatic solution to the Iranian situation.
I suggest that you just take the time and put your head between you knees and.........you know the rest.
This could very well backfire on the administration. Iran could harden even further its international stands and demands. Which in turn will harden the resolve of the US govt to prevent Iran from doing whatever is they are doing. The Bush stand is a unilateral motion. The UN failed on tougher sanctions against Iran, so the US will go it unilaterally. Is this good? If you are part of the military-industrial complex, you will be jerking off at the prospect of an armed conflict. For the rest of the country, it will be devastating.
All the rhetoric coming from the administration is pro-war, nothing they are saying sounds like they are even considering a diplomatic solution to the Iranian situation.
I suggest that you just take the time and put your head between you knees and.........you know the rest.
23 October 2007
Bhutto Returns Home
We at the Inkwell have been watching the development of the political situation in Pakistan and the return of Benazir Bhutto. After much negotiating between her and the Musharaf people, she returned to her homeland. She said before the return that there were rumors that she was to be assassinated.
She returned. Her convey or parade, if you will came under attack from some suicide bombers and 120+ people were killed and many more injured. Amazing just as she had said would happen if she returned.
Before I go further, her administration was riddled full of corruption; her husband wrangled a 10% finders fee out of every investment in the country under her leadership.
With that said, let us look at the assassination attempt. It has been reported that she deviated from the planned route so that she could greet well wishers. And that she just happened to be on the phone to security when the attack occurred.
Now how did the attackers know she was gonna deviate? All this is a bit coincidental for my liking. As I have said many times in the past, I do not believe in coincidence in politics, everything happens for a reason. This assassination attempt is no exception to the rule. This sounds more like drumming up sympathy for Peoples Party. And of course, to help get US support it had to be al-Qaeda that carried out the attack. All this is just too pat for my liking.
There is more to this incident than is being reported. I suggest that everyone keep an eye on the political horizon in Pakistan. This will soon play out and the real reason for this attack will become known.
CHUQ
She returned. Her convey or parade, if you will came under attack from some suicide bombers and 120+ people were killed and many more injured. Amazing just as she had said would happen if she returned.
Before I go further, her administration was riddled full of corruption; her husband wrangled a 10% finders fee out of every investment in the country under her leadership.
With that said, let us look at the assassination attempt. It has been reported that she deviated from the planned route so that she could greet well wishers. And that she just happened to be on the phone to security when the attack occurred.
Now how did the attackers know she was gonna deviate? All this is a bit coincidental for my liking. As I have said many times in the past, I do not believe in coincidence in politics, everything happens for a reason. This assassination attempt is no exception to the rule. This sounds more like drumming up sympathy for Peoples Party. And of course, to help get US support it had to be al-Qaeda that carried out the attack. All this is just too pat for my liking.
There is more to this incident than is being reported. I suggest that everyone keep an eye on the political horizon in Pakistan. This will soon play out and the real reason for this attack will become known.
CHUQ
17 October 2007
Genocide?
Genocide! Genocide! Where is the genocide?
The Senate has passed the Armenian genocide resolution, but it seems to be losing support in the House. The term genocide is a delicate one at best. Turks say it was not, Bush says it was not, Armenians say it was, but what would you expect them to say?
So, sports fans, who is right? Was it genocide? If you say yes, then is Darfur genocide? If you say yes, then what a bout Tibet? HUH, you may ask. In the 1950's China invaded a free country of Tibet and since then has set about killing people, destroying culture and remaking the country into a Chinese province. Is this genocide?
To the Tibetan people it is! But why has not the present and past Administrations not labeled it as so?
Ask yourself, who is the US largest trade partner? Thinking.....thinking.....CHINA? Nothing gets past you guys, does it? If you think that the US will jeopardize that partnership, you are being delusional.
Genocide is a horrible violation of human rights; no matter who does it. But to pick and choose who will be labeled a genocidal state is pathetic. As long as we are talking about it, what about Serbia and the Balkans, all those deaths, were they from a genocide?
My point is, pick a definition of genocide and stick with it, no matter who you offend--genocide is genocide--it should never be a political hot button for discussion--it should be condemned on all fronts.
CHUQ
The Senate has passed the Armenian genocide resolution, but it seems to be losing support in the House. The term genocide is a delicate one at best. Turks say it was not, Bush says it was not, Armenians say it was, but what would you expect them to say?
So, sports fans, who is right? Was it genocide? If you say yes, then is Darfur genocide? If you say yes, then what a bout Tibet? HUH, you may ask. In the 1950's China invaded a free country of Tibet and since then has set about killing people, destroying culture and remaking the country into a Chinese province. Is this genocide?
To the Tibetan people it is! But why has not the present and past Administrations not labeled it as so?
Ask yourself, who is the US largest trade partner? Thinking.....thinking.....CHINA? Nothing gets past you guys, does it? If you think that the US will jeopardize that partnership, you are being delusional.
Genocide is a horrible violation of human rights; no matter who does it. But to pick and choose who will be labeled a genocidal state is pathetic. As long as we are talking about it, what about Serbia and the Balkans, all those deaths, were they from a genocide?
My point is, pick a definition of genocide and stick with it, no matter who you offend--genocide is genocide--it should never be a political hot button for discussion--it should be condemned on all fronts.
CHUQ
12 October 2007
When Is It Genocide?
That is the question. Where does killing stop and genocide begin? Who defines what is genocide? The simple definition is, the systematic killing of a people. That is the simple one. But who decides when it is genocide or just killings?
Six million deaths of a people in WWII has been called genocide. What about the approximately 15 million Russian deaths? Was that a genocide? The 1.5 million deaths in Cambodia has been labeled a genocide. OK, how many deaths must there be for it to be labeled as a genocide? Darfur has been called a genocide by the US, but most other countries do not call it as such. So is it genocide?
I bring this up because of the recent vote in the Congress that has labeled the deaths of Armenians in 1915 as genocide. The country of Turkey has condemned the vote and now has warned of dire consequences if the vote was in favor of calling it a genocide. The vote has been taken and it is genocide in the eyes of the Congress. Now the consequences will be whatever happens.
The deaths of many people is not something that is a good thing, but to call something genocide should be a decision by the UN or a world body similar. I do not think that one country declaring it as a genocide is necessarily the final word. For most times these things are done as a special favor to a huge campaign contributor.
I am not saying that the deaths of the Armenian people was anything but a tragedy, but who is the US to declare it so over the rest of the world?
I ask again, when is it genocide? And who is the one to label it as such? When is it official? Does the deaths of American Natives count as genocide? Congressional person, Boehner, you gotta love a guy named Boner, you remember him he is the one that cries at the drop of a hat. Anyway, he has said that the vote was a waste of time and that the decision should be left to historians. Who is paying him?
This subject is something that we can debate until the cows come home and never find a spot where we can agree. Genocide is a horrible technique used on a people and it should be condemned and reported. The problem is there is NO good definition for the act. Until there is, any discussion is just purely an argument.
Enough said? you bet!
CHUQ
Six million deaths of a people in WWII has been called genocide. What about the approximately 15 million Russian deaths? Was that a genocide? The 1.5 million deaths in Cambodia has been labeled a genocide. OK, how many deaths must there be for it to be labeled as a genocide? Darfur has been called a genocide by the US, but most other countries do not call it as such. So is it genocide?
I bring this up because of the recent vote in the Congress that has labeled the deaths of Armenians in 1915 as genocide. The country of Turkey has condemned the vote and now has warned of dire consequences if the vote was in favor of calling it a genocide. The vote has been taken and it is genocide in the eyes of the Congress. Now the consequences will be whatever happens.
The deaths of many people is not something that is a good thing, but to call something genocide should be a decision by the UN or a world body similar. I do not think that one country declaring it as a genocide is necessarily the final word. For most times these things are done as a special favor to a huge campaign contributor.
I am not saying that the deaths of the Armenian people was anything but a tragedy, but who is the US to declare it so over the rest of the world?
I ask again, when is it genocide? And who is the one to label it as such? When is it official? Does the deaths of American Natives count as genocide? Congressional person, Boehner, you gotta love a guy named Boner, you remember him he is the one that cries at the drop of a hat. Anyway, he has said that the vote was a waste of time and that the decision should be left to historians. Who is paying him?
This subject is something that we can debate until the cows come home and never find a spot where we can agree. Genocide is a horrible technique used on a people and it should be condemned and reported. The problem is there is NO good definition for the act. Until there is, any discussion is just purely an argument.
Enough said? you bet!
CHUQ
30 September 2007
Is The Iraq Debate Dead?
That is an excellent question? It would appear that the Congress is impotent against Bush and his band of .........can not find a good word to describe his supporters. Everything that the Dems have thrown at the Prez on Iraq has not bloomed into some action to end the war. I will give them their props, they tried, but they couldn't do it.
But what now? If I had to guess it would be to move on to Iran. I mean the entire country sees Iran as a threat. BTW, a helluva sell job on that topic! Congress will enact some legislation that involves sanctions and such, but the wording needs to be followed closely. A similar sanctions thing was past back in 1998 concerning Iraq and it has been one of the cornerstones used to justify the invasion of Iraq. I foresee the same thing being put into any sanctions bills. The wording could be used as a precursor for invasion or an attack or whatever military bullsh*t they come up with in the future.
As far as Iraq goes, the Congress will still offer bills and such as a way to give the impression that at least they are trying, but the Prez is just too strong of an opposition in the Congress. IMO, the focus will shift to Iran, maybe quietly, but it will shift nonetheless.
Just for the info check out H.R. 2880, it says:
This is from a meeting of the Inkwell 3 and their discussion on the Iran/Iraq situation.
CHUQ
But what now? If I had to guess it would be to move on to Iran. I mean the entire country sees Iran as a threat. BTW, a helluva sell job on that topic! Congress will enact some legislation that involves sanctions and such, but the wording needs to be followed closely. A similar sanctions thing was past back in 1998 concerning Iraq and it has been one of the cornerstones used to justify the invasion of Iraq. I foresee the same thing being put into any sanctions bills. The wording could be used as a precursor for invasion or an attack or whatever military bullsh*t they come up with in the future.
As far as Iraq goes, the Congress will still offer bills and such as a way to give the impression that at least they are trying, but the Prez is just too strong of an opposition in the Congress. IMO, the focus will shift to Iran, maybe quietly, but it will shift nonetheless.
Just for the info check out H.R. 2880, it says:
This is from a meeting of the Inkwell 3 and their discussion on the Iran/Iraq situation.
CHUQ
28 September 2007
Professor's Perspective
Myan....My.....Man....M.......m......BURMA!
Hopefully the world now knows what is going on in Myanmar. You know the country that is having the domestic protest problem?
Myanmar was renamed from Burma about 19 yrs ago when the present military junta took control. And from that point all democratic institutions have been oppressed. The country has been under military control for about 40 yrs and the present one has been the most oppressive.
Bush made several comments about the country to include stiffer sanctions on the country. Good idea. But why now? This has been going on for decades and no one really gave a screaming crap. Why now?
The answer is easy--it is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. It is in the news. The media is covering this daily and often. Bush had to appear to be sensitive to the plight of the Burmese people because of his admin's total lack of concern for the people of Darfur. The Bush Boyz have taken lots of grief over the Darfur thing and they wanted to avoid any such thing again.
When the news ceases so will the Bush concern with the country.
CHUQ
Hopefully the world now knows what is going on in Myanmar. You know the country that is having the domestic protest problem?
Myanmar was renamed from Burma about 19 yrs ago when the present military junta took control. And from that point all democratic institutions have been oppressed. The country has been under military control for about 40 yrs and the present one has been the most oppressive.
Bush made several comments about the country to include stiffer sanctions on the country. Good idea. But why now? This has been going on for decades and no one really gave a screaming crap. Why now?
The answer is easy--it is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. It is in the news. The media is covering this daily and often. Bush had to appear to be sensitive to the plight of the Burmese people because of his admin's total lack of concern for the people of Darfur. The Bush Boyz have taken lots of grief over the Darfur thing and they wanted to avoid any such thing again.
When the news ceases so will the Bush concern with the country.
CHUQ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
