VICTORY in IRAQ?? What is Victory?? Is there any substitute for VICTORY??

[Flash]

With the notable exception of the Kurds and perhaps the Armenians, most of the "expelled minorities" you speak of either 1) fled during WWI/the Turkish War of Independence or 2) integrated (as many Kurds/Armenians have) themselves into the Turkish Republic. They didn't all scatter. There are quite a few Turks with Greek and Kurdish heritage in many major cities, and smatterings of Turks who identify, albeit quietly, as Armenian as well.

The facts:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/tu.html#People

The current secular system has been challenged by the ruling party since it came to power in 2003. Pretty much everything the government has proposed has been met with shrill contest by the majority of the populous and the military, and by the judiciary as well. The gov't's blatant antics, to me, are merely showing off and attempting to edge the toes of the military, who tends to react quite sternly and with secular discernment to just about everything the government spouts.

Then how does the controlling party keep getting re-elected?

Excellent example of a democracy, when the military regularly intervenes......:icon_roll

 

[m0tbaillie]

The facts:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/tu.html#People

I'm talking about people who have different ethnic heritages perhaps a generation or two previous, yet are still considered "Turks" by today's standards and in terms of how they identify themselves. Things work a bit different in Turkey. You have have someone who is second-generation say, Greek or Armenian that has full Turkish citizenship and identifies strongly with both, yet national data doesn't quite pick all of that up. The national census in Turkey is a bit more broad and less ethnically-specific than it is in the US. If you have Turkish citizenship, you're counted in the census as a Turk for all intents and purposes. It isn't like the US where people tend to be *-Americans, there is a much stronger national identity within generations as Turks even if they have a heritage from elsewhere. Ataturk was technically born in Greece (Selanik), yet you'd never read anywhere that he was anything other than Turk.

Then how does the controlling party keep getting re-elected?

There are 70 million people in Turkey. Here's [very] basically how the AKP has managed to stay in power. They go to all of little villages out east and basically "buy" their votes by promising to do XYZ for villages and towns that are more cut-off from current events and politics. It is pretty widely understood that they have used rather unscrupulous means by which to retain power, and that is why they for the most part have a far, far lower approval rating and poll far lower in bigger cities than they do in the more conservative rural areas.[/quote]

Excellent example of a democracy, when the military regularly intervenes......:icon_roll

The military doesn't "regularly" intervene by any means. They have, however, remained very sout supporters of the separation of church and state in Turkey and tend to scold religious intermingling within the government. The last time they stepped in in the 70s it was widely welcomed by Turks because of violent civil infighting between leftist and righist groups in the country. The prime minister at the time, Bulent Ecevit was nationaly scored for his inaction and was considered a lame-duck as he was widely seen as inactive and unable to control the increasingly violent confrontations in the country.

It was because of that specifically (and his staunch refusal to do, well, anything) that the military (namely Gen. Ahmet Evren) stepped in and removed him in order to attempt to restore order.

Check these out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenan_Evren
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecevit

Maybe now is the appropriate time to mention that I grew up in Turkey (studied there for both middle and high school) and that my mother is Turkish. This is just in case anybody is wondering how I'm qualified to say all of this; these aren't just arbitrary assumptions that I'm pulling from Wikipedia. This summer is actually the first time since I was a little kid that I will have gone more than a year without either living there or spending time there (I usually spend my summers there but this summer I'm too busy wrapping up my schooling).

 

[Flash]

Turkey does not equal Iraq, that was the point I was trying to make. It is a much more homogoneous nation than Iraq is today, simple as that. To use Turkey, a non-Arab republic, as an example for Iraq is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

The military doesn't "regularly" intervene by any means......The last time they stepped in in the 70s......

There was a coup in 1980, and they forced the government to resign in 1997, that is what I would call 'intervention'.

http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/turkey_chronology_politics.htm

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE6D61131F931A35750C0A961958260

Maybe now is the appropriate time to mention that I grew up in Turkey (studied there for both middle and high school) and that my mother is Turkish. This is just in case anybody is wondering how I'm qualified to say all of this; these aren't just arbitrary assumptions that I'm pulling from Wikipedia.

Okay, that is great, I am happy for you, but maybe it is coloring your assumptions about the current situation in Iraq. I don't believe the Turkish 'model' of democracy would fit in today's Iraq, a country teetering on the edge of chaos and implosion since we invaded. The Kurds are not a suppressed minority with no representation, they are a powerful and independent nation in the country that is Iraq. And religion is going to play a role in the government and the people, it is not going to be 'secular' by any means. Different folks, different strokes......

And I don't get my information from Wikipedia either, I can only cite what I can find on the regular internet. It is part of my job to know about this stuff, take that for what it is worth.

 

[Hozer]

The genocide was done during the Ottoman rule, not Ataturk's

That's not a very clever play.

The Young Turks and members of the CUP were JO's in the Ottoman Army and the principal proponents of the Armenian genocide...the very field officers that conducted the operations under the noses of Imperial German officers...before and during WWI.

Incidentally, I think Turkey is great.

 

[m0tbaillie]

The Young Turks and members of the CUP were JO's in the Ottoman Army and the principal proponents of the Armenian genocide...the very field officers that conducted the operations under the noses of Imperial German officers...before and during WWI.

You cannot necessarily derive link Ataturk's sentiments or feelings about the Armenian people to something as broad as "the JOs in the Turkish Army during the war". There is not any factual evidence that would directly back up your claim that he was a proponent of the genocide so much as much of the evidence points to a chunk of militarymen who saw their chance to drive the Armenians out using whatever means possible under the guise of war.

Not a bad argument, but just for the record (and I'm assuming you know this), *IF* you ever engage in a political discussion with another Turk (and we're not talking me over the Internet who understands the history from multiple perspectives) you really, really want to avoid this particular subject. Not only is the Armenian Genocide a big taboo (it's like going to Germany and talking about the Holocaust - most people acknowledge it, they just don't want to be reminded about it all the time, and it sure isn't their political topic of choice), but saying anything negative about Ataturk however veiled is...very, very, extremely bad. I don't really even want to describe how bad the situation would get other than "very very extremely", but take my word for it.

Not that any of this would ever happen or anything, just thought I'd throw that little disclaimer out there. Also, +1 to Flash for his impressive knowledge on the subject.

 

[wink]

Anbar is about to be turned over, supposedly

What do you mean "supposedly"? Are you not sure of your information, do you not trust who reported it, or do you doubt what "turned over" was intended to mean?

 

[wink]

I've posted from there before and got warned about it.

O.K. Don't know the details, but thanks for heeding the warning of a mod.