middle east updates (part 2)

[solypsist]

So we've got Israel attacking Lebanon. Israel attacking Palestine. Hezbollah attacking Israel. Palestinians attacking Israel. Israel threatening to attack Syria and Iran. Iran meddling in Iraq. The US meddling in Iraq. Lots of terrorists and insurgents targetting the US. The US threatening Iran. Sunnis attacking Shiites. Shiites attacking Sunnis. The US and NATO fighting a resurgant Taliban in Afghanistan. Kurds attacking Turks.

And now, as predicted back when this whole mess was brewing, Turkey threatens to invade Iraq.

Turkish officials signaled Tuesday they are prepared to send the army into northern Iraq if U.S. and Iraqi forces do not take steps to combat Turkish Kurdish guerrillas there _ a move that could put Turkey on a collision course with the United States.

Turkey is facing increasing domestic pressure to act after 15 soldiers, police and guards were killed fighting the guerrillas in southeastern Turkey in the past week.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800823.html

have a good week!

[Vladimir]

And? :shrug:

[rory_20_uk]

:coffeenews:

Yup, it's a mess over there. Has been for years. Will be for years. The sooner we get the oil out and let them sink back into the dark ages the better.

Roll on alternative energy! Break the petrolium strangle hold!

~:smoking:

[LeftEyeNine]

Oh well, Turkish army going over borders is unavoidable. The latest murders have been "the last drops spilling over the full cup". One of my friend has been drafted as commando a year ago, and he had informed me that the operation was a long planned one, counts for around 6 months or more. The invasion is told to be longing towards Mt. Kandil (sorry I couldn't find a map), and aims to total destruction of all PKK camp concentrations over the mountains.

We are in the mud, anyway.

[Tribesman]

I wonder if Turkey will bomb Baghdad airpot and the docks on the Shatt .
It is their right as a soverign nation isn't it:balloon2:

The middle-east , don't ya just love it .:juggle2:

And now, as predicted back when this whole mess was brewing, Turkey threatens to invade Iraq.

I see the temptation there to rub the pro-war crowds faces in it Soly .
But Turkey is already in Iraq , they have been for about 15 years , and for around 10 of those years they were also bombing Iraq regularly , so it is really nothing new .:shrug:

[yesdachi]

Turkey should be offering more support and working in conjunction with the US and Iraq forces to quell these guerrillas. IF they don’t get any support from the US or Iraq then they should send in their army. GO TURKEY!

IMO it is the US and Iraq’s responsibility to keep the actions in Iraq under control.

[PanzerJaeger]

The turkish army sent against US forces would be - pardon the pun - a turkey shoot. :laugh4:

Unless they send some sort of guerilla force, a standing, organized army is red meat for the US armed forces.

But hey, if the turks want annihilation a la the Iraqi army circa 1991, go for it.

[Pannonian]

The turkish army sent against US forces would be - pardon the pun - a turkey shoot. :laugh4:

Unless they send some sort of guerilla force, a standing, organized army is red meat for the US armed forces.

But hey, if the turks want annihilation a la the Iraqi army circa 1991, go for it.
If the Turks want to be mischievous, they could invoke article 5 of the NATO treaty and force the US to choose between its Kurdish clients or its Turkish allies. If Turkey can make it stick, I believe the US is legally obliged to join its side, especially after the Turks kept their part of the treaty in the aftermath of 9/11.

[Tribesman]

Unless they send some sort of guerilla force, a standing, organized army is red meat for the US armed forces.

Really Panzer , and where exactly would these US forces be able to deploy from ?
I can see why you like the Third Reich so much , you are a military genius who is on par with its leader .:dizzy2:

[Papewaio]

The turkish army sent against US forces would be - pardon the pun - a turkey shoot. :laugh4:

Unless they send some sort of guerilla force, a standing, organized army is red meat for the US armed forces.

But hey, if the turks want annihilation a la the Iraqi army circa 1991, go for it.

If you want to stage Gallopolli II its your choice. Just don't think Australia will be suckered into a second such disaster.

[PanzerJaeger]

Really Panzer , and where exactly would these US forces be able to deploy from ?

Why Tribesbibble, they are already there.


If you want to stage Gallopolli II its your choice. Just don't think Australia will be suckered into a second such disaster.

I did not suggest an invasion of Turkey, only that any invasion into Iraq by a turkish army would be crushed.

[Csargo]

Really Panzer , and where exactly would these US forces be able to deploy from ?

Last time I checked the US was already in Iraq. You should really think before you speak.:dizzy2:

[Pannonian]

Why Tribesbibble, they are already there.

I did not suggest an invasion of Turkey, only that any invasion into Iraq by a turkish army would be crushed.
By whom? Their American allies?

Remember that Turkey is a US ally within NATO. Remember article 5 of the Washington treaty that treats an attack on any member of NATO as an attack on all members of NATO. Remember that Turkey discharged their duties per the alliance when they sent troops to Afghanistan after the article was invoked for the only time in its history for the 9/11 attacks. Remember the US has given its full backing to Israel for similarly retaliating against attacks on its sovereign territory (invading Lebanon to boot).

If you are suggesting that US forces be used to crush Turkish forces sent into Iraq, you are suggesting extreme treachery, a war against a formal ally. Don't expect anyone to believe a word you say after that, and don't be surprised if your other allies hurriedly seek alliances elsewhere with countries they can better trust.

[PanzerJaeger]

By whom? Their American allies?

Remember that Turkey is a US ally within NATO. Remember article 5 of the Washington treaty that treats an attack on any member of NATO as an attack on all members of NATO. Remember that Turkey discharged their duties per the alliance when they sent troops to Afghanistan after the article was invoked for the only time in its history for the 9/11 attacks. Remember the US has given its full backing to Israel for similarly retaliating against attacks on its sovereign territory (invading Lebanon to boot).

If you are suggesting that US forces be used to crush Turkish forces sent into Iraq, you are suggesting extreme treachery, a war against a formal ally. Don't expect anyone to believe a word you say after that, and don't be surprised if your other allies hurriedly seek alliances elsewhere with countries they can better trust.


Turkey, sending troops to invade a nation already occupied by the United States, would be the treacherous party, unless an agreement to work together or avoid each other was reached.

I think US allies would see the situation in that light as well.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Great. Just great. I haven't the slightest clue how this will work out. Hopefully we can talk with Turkey about this.

:wall:

[Samurai Waki]

I think where Turkey is getting at is that they know they have a serious problem on their hands, they know that there is already a NATO presence in Iraq its obvious, the Turkish Government isn't being ran by a bunch of baboons shaking their red asses at each other for male supremacy.

What I believe Turkey would do, and has full right with NATO discretion is that they will send in a force to overlook portions of Northern Iraq, this could be beneficial for both Turkey and the US. No Invasions necessary, just keeping the peace.

[Tribesman]

Last time I checked the US was already in Iraq. You should really think before you speak.
Yes csar , but they have their hands full at the moment , they are not in the North in any numbers and no way would the Iranian backed majority government give permission .
Besides which could you possibly see congress giving backing to any action against one of your allies in a fight against terrorists that are on your governments list of nasty groups .
So it is you who should think young man .:no:

Tribesbibble
Thats a very good one Panzer , did you get someone to help you with that or did you manage all by yourself , you really are a clever boy .~:pat:

[Tribesman]

Turkey, sending troops to invade a nation already occupied by the United States, would be the treacherous party, unless an agreement to work together or avoid each other was reached.

I think US allies would see the situation in that light as well.
Keep em coming Panzer , you really are on a roll :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Iraq is not occupied by the United States , the occupation ended quite a while ago , they are there with the permission of the Iraqi government , Turkey however already has its forces in Iraq , and has had for a long time now .

Which allies exactly do you think would see it in that strange light you see as well ?

Israel ?
Unfortunately the Israeli backed terrorist group in Kurdish Iraq has a slight problem with the same group that Turkey has a problem with .
So you need to find an ally that would agree with you that the group your government insisted was really really bad isn't really that bad at all and must be defended .
Perhaps you could get Palau or Micronesia to see it your way , at a price .

[Pannonian]

Turkey, sending troops to invade a nation already occupied by the United States, would be the treacherous party, unless an agreement to work together or avoid each other was reached.

So the Turks would be best advised to cover their backside to warn the US to rein in the Kurds, or they'll go in and do it themselves. Spheres of influence mean regional powers have the power and responsibility to force stability on weaker countries. This was strengthened by the Bush doctrine, which expressly does not differentiate between terrorists and harbourers of terrorists. If the Iraqi Kurds or their American sponsors do nothing to curb the trouble, the Turks would be within their rights, as per power politics and the Bush doctrine, to go in and sort out the problem themselves. Another example of that would be what Israel is currently doing to Palestine and Lebanon.



I think US allies would see the situation in that light as well.
Turkey is merely taking advantage of Bush logic to pursue their own aims. Distasteful, but we don't care enough to protest. However, if US troops attack them as you've suggested, then it's a different matter.

[Papewaio]

Stay on topic, play nicely.

Or thread closed for a timeout.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So the Turks would be best advised to cover their backside to warn the US to rein in the Kurds, or they'll go in and do it themselves....the Turks would be within their rights, as per power politics and the Bush doctrine, to go in and sort out the problem themselves. Another example of that would be what Israel is currently doing to Palestine and Lebanon.
Turkey is merely taking advantage of Bush logic to pursue their own aims. Distasteful, but we don't care enough to protest. However, if US troops attack them as you've suggested, then it's a different matter.

Interesting point -- and less baitingly delivered than Tribes' version (substance the same, but Pan-man goes for the more polite general irony instead of the Tribe's implied tone of 'you are too stupid to breathe')

This is the story of the Middle East at present. Things not going your way? Launch terror strikes. If brutal and messy enough, the targeted nation must counter attack. This counter attack neatly:

1. Wipes out any gains made by the "moderates" of your faction, leaving you to continue your warlord status with all the perks. You don't get to be the ruler of your new country (should that happen by dumb luck) if you aren't the perceived winner on the battlefield.

2. Calls attention to your cause -- and remember, since you are skilled at playing the victim, you will recruit more soldiers as a result.

3. Gets most of the bad press stinking up the counter-attacking nation. After all, you are a nasty terrorist/freedom fighter struggling against a powerful nation. If you murder innocents, its only because the big bad nation you are facing is too strong to be attacked directly -- the press accepts this as normal. The nation state, however, will be lambasted for anyone caught in the crossfire -- you will not.

Note: enhance this where possible by stationing your troops in densely populated civilian areas, this will guarantee lots of innocent casualties along with the inevitable losses among your soldiers.

4. Allows you to create your own de facto nation -- with you in charge -- when chaos has made a shambles of the official country's ability to do anything.


So...

Hamas going too mainstream -- we won how many seats?!?! -- and thinking about reluctantly agreeing to the existence of an Israel? -- Launch! Try to get a few kids under the treads of the Merkavas as they roll in if possible.

Hiz'Bollah; Iran facing more or less coordinated political opposition to its nuke program and Lebanon booting Syria out and struggling toward stable statehood? -- Launch! Try to schedule your post-action vacation for Tunisia, as the local services will be a bit degraded.

Hyper-Kurds upset that USA really seems to mean this one state thing when what you really want is your own independent 'stan? -- Launch! You'll take a few lumps from the Turks, but the Sunnis will finally get slagged and then you'll just sit on the good water when the Turks back off.

Ah....the nobility of the struggle.

[spmetla]

I think the Turks are just declaring it publicly to put pressure on the US. I'd think that the most likely thing that would happen is the US allowing Turkish commando units to work alongside the US forces there and with the help of the US destroy targets. Terrorists are terrorists, if the hide in Iraq but attack Turkey the US should definately help the Turks out.
I don't think Turkey would dare do an attack outright. As one of the US's biggest NATO allies in the region diplomacy would probably wield more power than force. Also I imagine that the EU wouldn't like to have a beligerent Turkey as part of their organization.
As for performance of the Turks IF they did invade I imagine it would be very succesful at first if the US didn't notice a buildup on the border. The terrain in the north is mountainous and the US couldn't cover everything at once. Also the US is geared toward occupying Iraq right now not defending it from invasion. There's lots of scattered units about and they are certainly not geared toward defending an armored assault.
The US counterstrike when it comes would be massive and overwhelming if it came to it. The USAF in Germany, Iraq, and Kuwait would lay some serious destruction upon Turkey and navally when the US would collect a task force together would reek even more destruction on it. But I seriously doubt that Turkey and the US would come to blows. The cost for Turkey would definately out weigh the benefits, I think this is pure political postering.

[LeftEyeNine]

Well all US could say about PKK problem was "stay calm, we will be helping in colving blah blah blah", obviously either USA did not have a clue about what to do or they love KURds as another card in hand, which seems more rational for a long term plan to keep their influence in Northern Iraq.

In 3 days we sacrificed another 13 martyrs and it seems that PKK is happy with the environment in Northern Iraq. Nobody can tell me that KDP and PUK don't favor some guerillas fighting for them in Turkey. Substitute any other nation with Kurds there and try empathizing, wouldn't they somehow ?

However, as I said, we are in the mud again and all I can wish is that this terrorist hunt finishes before a 3rd party somehow gets involved in the battle which will grow the flames higher. And that would be swamp indeed.

Edit: Oh and I can't understand US vs. Turkey scenarios. Neither side can dare or wish that for now.

Edit 2: My friend had told me that the main obstacle before any operation was the permittance of USA. So in this case, Turkish Armed Forces either got permission or got fed up with it and decided to do it themselves.

[PanzerJaeger]

Keep em coming Panzer , you really are on a roll
Iraq is not occupied by the United States , the occupation ended quite a while ago , they are there with the permission of the Iraqi government ,

:laugh4:

No, you're on a roll if you think the Iraqi government would have any say if there was some sort of turkish-US engagement.

Its funny, sometimes you say they are just puppets, now when it suits your argument they seem to have some serious power. :inquisitive:

And are you really trying to say American forces could not engage a turkish army entering Iraq?


So the Turks would be best advised to cover their backside to warn the US to rein in the Kurds, or they'll go in and do it themselves. Spheres of influence mean regional powers have the power and responsibility to force stability on weaker countries. This was strengthened by the Bush doctrine, which expressly does not differentiate between terrorists and harbourers of terrorists. If the Iraqi Kurds or their American sponsors do nothing to curb the trouble, the Turks would be within their rights, as per power politics and the Bush doctrine, to go in and sort out the problem themselves. Another example of that would be what Israel is currently doing to Palestine and Lebanon.

Yes you are right in principle. I was addressing solypsist's assertion of some kind of US-Turkey collision course, which would leave the Turkish military in far worse shape than that of the US.

[whyidie]

[B]
Perhaps you could get Palau or Micronesia to see it your way , at a price .

Wow. How did that come up ? I actually stayed at the Palaun ambassadors house while visiting DC. This was before he moved in, but still...Palau ?

[Tribesman]

Its funny, sometimes you say they are just puppets, now when it suits your argument they seem to have some serious power.
Really Panzer , didn't you know the puppet masters are sitting in Tehran not Washington .
Please try and keep up with events as it turned out that the former puppet ruler that America had before the eletions turned out to have been working for the Iranians all along .

And are you really trying to say American forces could not engage a turkish army entering Iraq?

The Turkish army is already in Iraq .

Wow. How did that come up ?
Well they were in the coilition of the willing were they not , I think America could afford the bribe to get them to play ball again , I don't know which other countries would be stupid enough to get involved in this complete non-starter hypothetical situation . Other than perhaps some of other countries without a military who cold be paid to put their name down but have no actual involvement .

So heres a scenario to tax the brain , if the US by some crazy miracle decided to militarily oppose an escalation of ongoing Turkish action against the PKK , which side would all the different factions in the area take ?
There are a hell of a lot of players in the game . None of which are particularly well disposed towards the US at the moment apart from Turkey and Israel .

[Marquis de Said]

So heres a scenario to tax the brain , if the US by some crazy miracle decided to militarily oppose an escalation of ongoing Turkish action against the PKK , which side would all the different factions in the area take ?
There are a hell of a lot of players in the game . None of which are particularly well disposed towards the US at the moment apart from Turkey and Israel .

I think in that scenario, all the peoples of the other nations in the region - with the exception of Israel - would be laughing their arses off as their enemies pound each other. Let's face it, none of the Arabs or Iranians like the US or the Turks. The ruling regimes in the region would probably sit on the fence to see who comes out on top.

[Vladimir]

Interesting point -- and less baitingly delivered than Tribes' version (substance the same, but Pan-man goes for the more polite general irony instead of the Tribe's implied tone of 'you are too stupid to breathe')

This is the story of the Middle East at present. Things not going your way? Launch terror strikes. If brutal and messy enough, the targeted nation must counter attack. This counter attack neatly:


etc, etc.

Well stated.

:applause:

Edit: Does anyone think maybe the US is allowing or not actively dealing with these raids in some sort of Machelevlian revenge strategy? Perhaps because they changed their mind and didn't allow us to launch an attack into northern Iraq from Turkey? [gah! Wake up brain :coffeenews: ]

[Tribesman]

The ruling regimes in the region would probably sit on the fence to see who comes out on top.
So you don't see the Syrians and Americans forming an alliance to defend their friendly marxist terrorists then .
Me neither .
America could of course honour its agreement with Turkey from '03 and go in against the Syrian backed PKK , but that would mean going through the Iranian backed Kurds first , that ain't gonna happen . The US cannot even control the South let alone try and take on the North as well .
So despite the bluster coming from some quarters about Americas military ability , it is in fact impotent , its political leaders clueless and its policies the mid-east/war on terror a mess .
I suppose it is the result of having a bunch of muppets with a "can-do" mentality in office .
I bet that nut in Tehran is laughing his tits off over this development .

[Banquo's Ghost]

Edit: Does anyone think maybe the US is allowing or not actively dealing with these raids in some sort of Machelevlian revenge strategy? Perhaps because they changed their mind and didn't allow us to launch an attack into northern Iraq from Turkey?

I'd be surprised as there is very little to be gained from antagonising Turkey just for a bit of light relief.

Turkey's attitude is a key part of any exit strategy from Iraq that doesn't result in an immediate and bloody carve-up of territory. The US needs Turkey more than vice versa, which is why LEN may well be right in claiming that the Turks have been 'allowed' to consider controlled reprisals. 'Course the Turks might be tempted to do an 'Israel' and get the 'terrorists' rooted out once and for all. Sauce for the goose and all that...

The US forces in Iraq, as most will agree, are very overstretched and dealing with Kurdish troublemaking is a whole new swamp-land to wallow in. The north is almost a Kurdish state by now anyway, and intervention on Turkey's side or the Kurds will embroil the US in even more horrors. Non-intervention means the region will tip over into unplanned strife anyhow.

If one was uncharitable, one might describe the Iraq situation as problematic. :oops:

[yesdachi]

I think the Turks are just declaring it publicly to put pressure on the US. I'd think that the most likely thing that would happen is the US allowing Turkish commando units to work alongside the US forces there and with the help of the US destroy targets.
:yes:

Amidst the pot shots emerges the voice of reason.

[Pannonian]

The ruling regimes in the region would probably sit on the fence to see who comes out on top.
So you don't see the Syrians and Americans forming an alliance to defend their friendly marxist terrorists then .
Me neither .
America could of course honour its agreement with Turkey from '03 and go in against the Syrian backed PKK , but that would mean going through the Iranian backed Kurds first , that ain't gonna happen . The US cannot even control the South let alone try and take on the North as well .
So despite the bluster coming from some quarters about Americas military ability , it is in fact impotent , its political leaders clueless and its policies the mid-east/war on terror a mess .
I suppose it is the result of having a bunch of muppets with a "can-do" mentality in office .
I bet that nut in Tehran is laughing his tits off over this development .
The Iranian operation over Iraq must be one of the most cost-effective in history. Not only is their historical enemy overthrown and their own proxies installed in his place, but nearly all the setup and running costs were paid by their other main enemy, who believed the Iranian agent was one of their own. Even if you hate the man and his politics, you have to admire the skill of Chalabi and his handlers.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

:yes:

Amidst the pot shots emerges the voice of reason.

Concur.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The ruling regimes in the region would probably sit on the fence to see who comes out on top.
So you don't see the Syrians and Americans forming an alliance to defend their friendly marxist terrorists then .
Me neither .
America could of course honour its agreement with Turkey from '03 and go in against the Syrian backed PKK , but that would mean going through the Iranian backed Kurds first , that ain't gonna happen . The US cannot even control the South let alone try and take on the North as well .
So despite the bluster coming from some quarters about Americas military ability , it is in fact impotent , its political leaders clueless and its policies the mid-east/war on terror a mess .
I suppose it is the result of having a bunch of muppets with a "can-do" mentality in office .
I bet that nut in Tehran is laughing his tits off over this development .

I hatw when this happens.:laugh4:

I agree with you almost completely.

That said I see no reason to rip Panzer apart. Even if he is Teran's man in Bagdahad he's still surrounded by GI's. Any signifficant movement of conventional forces, such as armour, by Turkey into Iraq could be ruthlessly crushed by the Americans. I'm certain the Americans have concentrated tank companies dotted around and they have terrific air power which can be swiftly brought to bear. In this scenario the question is whether the Turkish have the hardware to hit the Americans, I don't believe they do.

Regardless in order for the situation to arrise both the Turks and the Americans would have to stupid and crazy.

[Pannonian]

I hatw when this happens.:laugh4:

I agree with you almost completely.

That said I see no reason to rip Panzer apart. Even if he is Teran's man in Bagdahad he's still surrounded by GI's. Any signifficant movement of conventional forces, such as armour, by Turkey into Iraq could be ruthlessly crushed by the Americans. I'm certain the Americans have concentrated tank companies dotted around and they have terrific air power which can be swiftly brought to bear. In this scenario the question is whether the Turkish have the hardware to hit the Americans, I don't believe they do.

I wonder what Congress or the Senate would make of ruthlessly crushing one of their NATO allies, one that has sent troops to their aid in the near past.

[Redleg]

I wonder what Congress or the Senate would make of ruthlessly crushing one of their NATO allies, one that has sent troops to their aid in the near past.

Congress has allowed its responsiblity and authority to be usurped by the Presidential Branch with the Authorization for the Use of Force in the War on Terror, and the War Powers Act of 1973. Blanket authorizations such these leaves open the window for abuse. Now the Presidential Branch can be called to task on its use of force - but the acts in themselves allows just such a scenerio to occur without Congress even given a say until after the fact.

[Avicenna]

Soly, in addition to that list, aren't there also some form of insurgents in Pakistan? The Baluch who want to form Baluchistan.

[Tribesman]

Don't complicate things further Tiberius , its confusing enough as it is :2thumbsup:
Do you mean the little problem with seperatists wanting a fairer cut of their regions oil revenue and having an ever so insignificant civil war where the govenment forces control practically nothing outside of their heavily fortified bases and are relying on some rather nasty Islamic militants to do their work for them (sounds a bit like Iraq doesn't it) .
If you are going to bring Baluchi problems into it we might as well add Wazeristan to the mix for the fun of it , though I don't know if the Iranians are involved in that second one .

[Vladimir]

Congress has allowed its responsiblity and authority to be usurped by the Presidential Branch with the Authorization for the Use of Force in the War on Terror, and the War Powers Act of 1973. Blanket authorizations such these leaves open the window for abuse. Now the Presidential Branch can be called to task on its use of force - but the acts in themselves allows just such a scenerio to occur without Congress even given a say until after the fact.

Congress controls the money, hence they are more powerful than the Executive. Remember when they blackmailed Bush 41 before the first Gulf War?

[Redleg]

Congress controls the money, hence they are more powerful than the Executive. Remember when they blackmailed Bush 41 before the first Gulf War?

This is an assumption that has lead congress to allow other branches to usurp its authority and responsiblities.

[Redleg]

double post

[Vladimir]

This is an assumption that has lead congress to allow other branches to usurp its authority and responsiblities.

I'm sorry but your statement is incorrect. Congress, the House of Representatives specifically, controls the budget. The President proposes a budget, submits it to congress, they make whatever changes they want, pass it, and the President signs it. If the Chief Executive decides to veto it, it can always be overturned by a supermajority. Unfunded policy is just rhetoric.

And how has the Judicial Branch usurped the power of congress? Congress tells them what they can and can't rule on. The issue with the recent Gitmo case is that they weren't specific enough in their wording. They may have given themselves unwritten powers like judicial review but even that can be controlled if the two other branches work in tandem.

[Redleg]

I'm sorry but your statement is incorrect. Congress, the House of Representatives specifically, controls the budget. The President proposes a budget, submits it to congress, they make whatever changes they want, pass it, and the President signs it. If the Chief Executive decides to veto it, it can always be overturned by a supermajority. Unfunded policy is just rhetoric.

It requires a two-thirds majority to override the President. Under a two party system where the President's party also controls the congress the possiblity of over-riding a veto is small.

When the Congress passed the War Powers Act of 1973 it in essence gave the Executive Branch the ability to declare war for a limited period of time.

The blanket Authorization of Force signed in 2002 also did the same thing. Congress has no choice but to fund both measures during the initial phase.

And the budget - well there is plently of evidence that the Congress is not fulfilling its obligations there either.



And how has the Judicial Branch usurped the power of congress? Congress tells them what they can and can't rule on. The issue with the recent Gitmo case is that they weren't specific enough in their wording. They may have given themselves unwritten powers like judicial review but even that can be controlled if the two other branches work in tandem.

Again look at Roe versus Wade. There are several judicial rulings that overstep the judicial branch and Congress has never called them on it. Neither has Congress always gone back and legislate new law when the Judicial Branch null and voids a poorly written law.

[LeftEyeNine]

Latest info from my commando friend:

An army of 100-150.000 is prepared for deployment. There are around 5.000 terrorists to be hunted and he finds it quite unfortunate that the news were headlined. Now that those scumbags will plant mines, set traps and detonators everywhere. He says that casulaties may be significant. As I said before, Mt. Kandil is the biggest of the targets. All info that you can imagine about terrorist camps are well prepared and gathered for a long time but it was all USA's permission that held things off. He says "army is looking face to face to those terrorists, but we are not allowed to do anything yet".

Also he confirmed that there were Turkish Armed Forces deployments already in Iraq for a long time.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Latest info from my commando friend:

Isn't your commando friend concerned about court-martial? I can't imagine the Turkish army is any more sanguine about having sensitive military information bandied about than any other NATO member - and in my day, there would have been some very serious repercussions to him 'sharing' such info.

:inquisitive:

[yesdachi]

Latest info from my commando friend:

An army of 100-150.000 is prepared for deployment. There are around 5.000 terrorists to be hunted and he finds it quite unfortunate that the news were headlined. Now that those scumbags will plant mines, set traps and detonators everywhere. He says that casulaties may be significant. As I said before, Mt. Kandil is the biggest of the targets. All info that you can imagine about terrorist camps are well prepared and gathered for a long time but it was all USA's permission that held things off. He says "army is looking face to face to those terrorists, but we are not allowed to do anything yet".

Also he confirmed that there were Turkish Armed Forces deployments already in Iraq for a long time.
Hey LEN, perhaps I am just not that observant but this is the first time I noticed your Assistant Moderator title. Congrats.

Neat info BTW, thanks for sharing.

[LeftEyeNine]

Isn't your commando friend concerned about court-martial? I can't imagine the Turkish army is any more sanguine about having sensitive military information bandied about than any other NATO member - and in my day, there would have been some very serious repercussions to him 'sharing' such info.

:inquisitive:

The info is already public, B'sQ. The numbers are I gave and those gone public are quite close. However I found no inconvenience with learning and sharing that info. After all, he didn't gave out any battle plans or anything else vital. Only numbers of two sides, and the operation area which was predicted already.



Hey LEN, perhaps I am just not that observant but this is the first time I noticed your Assistant Moderator title. Congrats.

Neat info BTW, thanks for sharing.


Thank you. :bow:

[Banquo's Ghost]

The info is already public, B'sQ. The numbers are I gave and those gone public are quite close. However I found no inconvenience with learning and sharing that info. After all, he didn't gave out any battle plans or anything else vital. Only numbers of two sides, and the operation area which was predicted already.

Ah, OK. It just seemed as if you were quoting insider information. :smile: