Turkey’s High-Risk Power Play

erdoganOriginally published by the Jerusalem Post

For most Westerners, Turkey is a hard nut to crack. How can you understand a state sponsor of terrorism that is also a member of NATO? How can you explain Turkey’s facilitation of Kurdish independence in Iraq in light of Turkey’s hundred-year opposition to Kurdish independence? What is Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyep Erdogan trying to accomplish here? Is he nuts? On the terrorism support front, today Turkey vies with Iran for the title of leading state sponsor of terrorism.

First there is Hamas.

Last week an Israeli security official told the media that the abduction of Naftali Frankel, Gilad Shaer and Eyal Yifrah was organized and directed by Saleh al-Arouri, a Hamas commander operating out of Turkey.

Turkey has welcomed Hamas to its territory and served as its chief booster to the West since the jihadist terror group won the Palestinian legislative elections in 2006. Erdogan has played a key role in getting the EU to view Hamas as a legitimate actor, despite its avowedly genocidal goals.

Then there is al-Qaida. As Daniel Pipes documented in The Washington Times last week, Turkey has been the largest supporter and enabler of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS).

Erdogan’s government has allowed ISIS fighters to train in Turkey and cross the border between Turkey and Syria at will to participate in the fighting. Moreover, according to Pipes, Turkey “provided the bulk of ISIS’s funds, logistics, training and arms.”

Similarly, Turkey has sponsored the al-Nusra Front, ISIS’s al-Qaida counterpart and ally in Syria.

The Assad regime is not the Turkish- sponsored al-Qaida-aligned forces’ only target in Syria. They have also been engaged in heavy fighting against Rojava, the emerging Kurdish state in northwest Syria. Yet the same Turkey that is sponsoring al-Qaida’s assault on Syrian Kurdistan is facilitating the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan.

In breach of Iraqi law that requires the Kurds to sell their oil through the central government and share oil revenues with the central government, earlier this month Turkey signed a 50-year deal allowing the Kurds to export oil to the world market through a Turkish pipeline. The Kurds are currently pumping around 120,000 barrels of oil a day to the Turkish port of Ceyhan.

Top Turkish officials have in recent weeks come out openly in support for Iraqi Kurdish independence from Baghdad.

Following ISIS’s takeover of Mosul, Huseyin Celik, the spokesman for Erdogan’s ruling AKP party told the Kurdish Rudaw news service, “It has become clear for us that Iraq has practically become divided into three parts.”

Blaming Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for Iraq’s instability Celik said, “The Kurds of Iraq can decide where to live and under what title they want to live. Turkey does not decide for them.”

To date, most Western analyses of the Erdogan regime’s behavior have come up short because their authors ignore its strategic goal. In this failing, analyses of Turkey are similar to those of its Shi’ite counterpart in Iran. And both regimes’ goals are wished away for the same reason: Western observers can’t identify with them.

Iran is not a status quo power. It is a revolutionary power. Iran’s goal is not regional hegemony per se, but global supremacy. As Lee Smith recently noted, two decades before al-Qaida and its goal of establishing a global Islamic caliphate burst onto the scene, Ayatollah Khomeini had already made the Islamic division of the world into the House of Islam and the House of War the basis for Iran’s foreign policy. He viewed his Shi’ite theocracy as the rightful leader of the Islamic empire that would destroy all non-believers and their civilization.

Iran’s first act of foreign policy – the takeover of the US Embassy in Teheran – was a declaration of war not only against the US, but against the nationstate system as a whole.

Iran uses terror, irregular warfare and subversion to achieve its ends because such tactics induce chaos.

As Iran expert Michael Ledeen wrote last week, to defeat the US in Iraq, “the Iranian regime provoked all manner of violence, from tribal to ethnic, because they believed they were better able to operate in chaos.”

The US failed to understand Iran’s strategy because the US was unable to reconcile itself with the fact that other actors do not seek stability as it does.

Like Iran’s mullahs, Erdogan and his colleagues also reject the nation-state system. In their case, they wish to replace it with a restored Ottoman Empire.

Spelling out his goal in a speech in the spring of 2012, Erdogan described Turkey’s mission thus: “On the historic march of our holy nation, the AK Party signals the birth of a global power and the mission for a new world order. This is the centenary of our exit from the Middle East [following the Ottoman defeat in World War I]. Whatever we lost between 1911 and 1923, whatever lands we withdrew from, from 2011 to 2023 we shall once again meet our brothers in those lands.”

To achieve this goal, like Iran, Turkey seeks to destabilize states and reduce peoples to their ethnic, sub-national identities. The notion is that by dividing societies into their component parts, the various groups will all be weaker than one unified state, and all of them will feel threatened by one another and in need of outside support.

This is the same model Erdogan is following in Turkey itself as he remakes it in his Ottoman mold.

As Amir Taheri explained last October, Erdogan has been encouraging members of ethnic groups that long ago melted into the larger Turkish culture to rediscover their disparate identities, learn their unique languages and so separate out from the majority culture of the country. At the same time he is repressing the Kurds, Alevis and Armenians, minorities that have maintained their identities at great cost.

In parallel to his attempt to subsume the Kurds, Alevis and Armenians into a wider morass of separate sub-Turkish ethnicities, Erdogan has been assiduously cultivating hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood associations to enable their takeover of mosques and other key institutions to build a countrywide support base for Islamic supremacism.

By fragmenting Turkish society into long-forgotten component parts while uniting it under radical Islam, he wishes to unite the country under his Sultanate rule while dividing its various factions against one another to maintain support for the regime over the long haul.

A large part of repressing the Kurds at home involves denying them outside assistance. By acting like Iraqi Kurdistan’s best friend, Erdogan hopes to attenuate their support for Turkish Kurds.

While Turkey and Iran are rivals in undermining the international system, their goals are the same, and their strategies for achieving their goals are also similar. But while their chaos strategy is brilliant in its way, it is also high risk. By its very nature, chaos is hard, if not impossible to control. Situations often get out of hand. Plans backfire.

And what we are seeing today in Syria and Iraq and the wider region demonstrates the chaos strategy’s drawbacks.

As Pinchas Inbari detailed in a recent report for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, the Syrian civil war is causing millions of Syrians to leave the country and their migrations are changing the face of many countries.

For instance, their arrival in Lebanon has transformed the multiethnic state into one with a preponderant Sunni majority, thus watering down Hezbollah’s support base.

The Kurds in Iraq may feel they need Turkey today, but there is no reason to assume that this will remain the case for long. Kurdish unity across Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran will destabilize not only Turkey, but Iran, where Kurds make up around ten percent of the population. Iranian Kurdistan also abuts the Azeri provinces. Azeris comprise nearly half the population of Iran.

As for ISIS, it is scoring victories in Iraq today. But its forces are vastly outnumbered by the Baathists and the Sunni tribesmen that defeated al Qaida in 2006. There is no reason to assume that these disparate groups won’t get tired of their new medieval rulers.

Many commentators claimed that Erdogan’s recent foreign policy setbacks in the Arab world convinced him to abandon neo-Ottomanism in favor of more modest goals. But his cultivation of Iraqi Kurdistan, and his sponsorship of ISIS, al-Nusra, the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas tell a different story.

Erdogan remains an Islamic imperialist.

Like Iran he aims to destroy the global order and replace it with an Islamic empire. But like Iran, if his adversaries get wise to what he is doing, it won’t be very difficult to beat him at his own game by using his successes to defeat him.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Marcus777

    All that ?? just wait and see who is a NUT? from all you wrote you are wrong in every single one, but soon you will see the end result, than you will see what is Nut or Genius:)

    • Thomas L. Stafford

      The score is six games to tckletik, zero games Marcus777, match over. Next

    • Habbgun

      No its Wile E Coyote ….GENIUS….. don’t usurp Wile E. You are not of his character. You have not brought joy to millions. I will fight your slurs of Wile E to the death.

  • Marcus777

    Caroline Glick the NUT who said WMD was discovered in Iraq in First days of the war, no one listening your BS

    here read all about it, she is NUT

    Glick’s columns or makes a cursory inquiry into her background. She is, for example, the recipient of the Zionist Organization of America’s (ZOA) Outstanding Journalism in the Mideast award, which was presented to her in a ceremony featuring the esteemed John Bolton. Memorably, Glick was also quick to report (Hebrew), while embedded with a US unit in Iraq that she had “discovered” the first stash of WMDs.

    The kind of US audience Glick appeals to is illustrated by the fact that Latma is fully funded by Center for Security Policy’s Middle East Media program, headed by Frank Gaffney, and that Pastor John Hagee’s Christians United for Israel (CUFI) was quick to post the video on its website.

    The growing importance of the Israeli nodes of American neo and theo conservative networks is not new and regulars readers of Coteret know that we have followed it closely. But the reception this clip has received in Israel was surprising.

    On Friday, I began to see intelligent, mainstream, Israeli opinion-leaders posting the clip on their Facebook pages. I assumed they were doing so for the same reason I was: To illustrate just how misguided some Israeli public diplomacy efforts had become. A closer look revealed just how wrong I was. These posts were intended for non-Israelis. One caption, posted by a successful left-of-center Israeli PR operative on the Economist Facebook page, read “make sure you see this before making up your mind.” On Saturday, they began doing the same thing with a classic Glenn Beck segment on the Flotilla Debacle and were incredulous and argumentative when I pointed out that Beck was not exactly the most effective source to cite if one wanted to make Israel’s case abroad.

    In a two-page spread, this morning’s edition of Yediot (June 6 2010, full translated text below, Hebrew original here and at bottom of post), billed the clip as an effective citizen’s initiative “that defended Israel better than any of the experts.” It also made the following stupefying revelation:

    Members of the Government Press Office who encountered it thought it was a state-sponsored clip and disseminated it overseas. After a Spanish journalist researched its sources, the GPO was forced to clarify that the parody was disseminated accidentally and that the contents of the clip did not reflect the official position of the State of Israel.

    Writing about the Glenn Beck segment referenced above, MJ Rosenberg warned that American popular support for Israel is becoming increasingly restricted to the far-right. The way in which mainstream Israel perceived the public diplomacy value of Glick’s clip is a good illustration of this point. Indeed, with the Israeli media increasingly providing front and center venues for arch-conservatives such as Newt Gingrich (Israel Hayom) and Elliott Abrams (Maariv), one should not be surprised that the perceptual gulf between Israelis and most Americans is widening.

    • tickletik

      So basically what it comes down to is this: you can’t argue with anything she actually wrote in this article, so instead you are going to try to rely on assassinating her character.

      Which tells me that a) you are probably untrustworthy, b) I can safely ignore anything you have to say about her character and c)she’s probably right about everything she wrote in this article.

      Thanks

    • Webb

      Uh, Mucus, old boy, you are as nutty as they come.

    • 1Indioviejo1

      Your personal attack on Ms. Glick decry your lack of substance and facts. It shows you off as a little worm trying to spoil the healthy apple. Is good to know this is all you can come up with, now go away.

      • retired

        I figured out who this shmuck Marcus was & what he was about when he quoted MJ Rosenberg.Anyone who can find agreement with Rosenberg is not someone to take seriously!

    • Bert

      “…one should not be surprised that the perceptual gulf between Israelis and most Americans is widening.” Oh really? Congress is highly supportive of Israel and even Democrats will support Israel over Obama on certain issues. The American people’s support for Israel is at an all time high at about 65% DESPITE the hatred from the NY Times and other leftist rags.

  • Thomas L. Stafford

    Cogent discussion of what is going on in Turkey. It is moving slowly because the majority of his population will not stand for Turkish boots on the ground. Or, anything that will cause them real pain. I do not see Russia as being fond of the reestablishment of a Caliphate that includes much of their southwestern border and a few sates that are still nominally within their borders. Pakistan may get more than a little jumpy about being stuck in the middle of all of this too.

  • Martel

    The neo-ottomans are a fascinating bunch. They have maintained strong relations with the West, they are widely considered modern and moderate, yet Erdogan has been stating his geopolitical ambitions since the early nineties. He intends to conquer Europe through demographic warfare.

    • Drakken

      That is why Germany, Austria and a few other European countries will not allow Turkey full EU membership, they don’t want their countries flooded with Turks.

      • Moa

        Their countries are already flooded with Turks (thanks to the Left). This is not all bad (from an Enlightenment Civilization point-of-view), many Turks have assimilated, but the fact remains that Germany already has a significant population of Turks.

        • Drakken

          Yes Germany and Austria are flooded with Turks, and most are not assimilated, they are Turks first and Germans last and they will never be German. Those countries do not want any more of those 3rd worlders in their countries, so they will never allow Turkey full membership into the EU.

  • 1Indioviejo1

    The Chaotic situation already evidenced in the Muslim world is an existential threat to humanity, but it is taking time for the world to see the danger there. We can’t wait for the threat to knock on our door, but we need to be preemptive and educate the whole world to it. Hollywood could serve the cause for liberty, if only they could get their heads out of their rears. The MSM worldwide is blind, but could be taken over and put to good use. It is all part of the preparation for confrontation against Islam. It needs to happen.

    • El Cid

      The insidious Muslim threat conquered Spain in the 9th and 10th century. The same kind of silencing of non-Muslims took place area by area. It took 500 years for the Christians to finally get it. We are seeing a repeat in the rest of Europe. Muslims are conquering areas slowly in major cities.

      It is ironic that Spain is now inviting back the descendants of the Jews that they threw out along with the Muslim supremacists in the 1492. I guess it takes a long time to see the truth. Muslims are calling for “equal right of return” in Spain. Hah!

      We were always taught about the “Golden Age” in Synagogue. The truth is more surprising. The Spanish had had enough “multiculturalism” after their entire culture was usurped by Islam. It is time for a historical re-evaluation of the life of the Sephardi in the Muslim world. There must be a good reason why the Jews persisted in speaking Spanish to this day instead of adopting Arabic, Turkish, etc.

      • 1Indioviejo1

        Spain expelled the Sephardim in 1492 and has suffered the void ever since then. Muslims are now retaking Spain through legal and illegal immigration, and there is nothing being done about it. Socialist Multiculturalism is destroying Spain.

  • Lanna

    Turkey is supporting Isis, that tells you where the Islamic nations are headed as a Caliphate. There were WMDs is Iraq, they were buried.

    • Pete

      Until they are dug up, the Left will keep flogging their opposition.

      Even after they are found or used, some on the Left will come up with an alternative hypothesis as to their origin and continue scourging their opposition.

  • Painted Horse

    Turkey doesn’t need WMD’s from Irag they already house America’s B61′s thermonuclear bombs (between 70 and 90).

    • Painted Horse

      To be more clear in my statement, we are right to be very concerned with the direction of the leadership of Turkey. Being that it is holding a majority of US thermonuclear weapons (B61′s) that are stationed in Europe. But as other have mentioned Iraq’s WMD’s, few may know that Turkey is in possession of our WMD’s and that they have a means of delivery by way of Turkish F-16′s.

  • Marcus777

    Glick’s columns or makes a cursory inquiry into her background. She is, for example, the recipient of the Zionist Organization of America’s (ZOA) Outstanding Journalism in the Mideast award, which was presented to her in a ceremony featuring the esteemed John Bolton. Memorably, Glick was also quick to report (Hebrew), while embedded with a US unit in Iraq that she had “discovered” the first stash of WMDs.

    The kind of US audience Glick appeals to is illustrated by the fact that Latma is fully funded by Center for Security Policy’s Middle East Media program, headed by Frank Gaffney, and that Pastor John Hagee’s Christians United for Israel (CUFI) was quick to post the video on its website.

    The growing importance of the Israeli nodes of American neo and theo conservative networks is not new and regulars readers of Coteret know that we have followed it closely. But the reception this clip has received in Israel was surprising.

    On Friday, I began to see intelligent, mainstream, Israeli opinion-leaders posting the clip on their Facebook pages. I assumed they were doing so for the same reason I was: To illustrate just how misguided some Israeli public diplomacy efforts had become. A closer look revealed just how wrong I was. These posts were intended for non-Israelis. One caption, posted by a successful left-of-center Israeli PR operative on the Economist Facebook page, read “make sure you see this before making up your mind.” On Saturday, they began doing the same thing with a classic Glenn Beck segment on the Flotilla Debacle and were incredulous and argumentative when I pointed out that Beck was not exactly the most effective source to cite if one wanted to make Israel’s case abroad.

    In a two-page spread, this morning’s edition of Yediot (June 6 2010, full translated text below, Hebrew original here and at bottom of post), billed the clip as an effective citizen’s initiative “that defended Israel better than any of the experts.” It also made the following stupefying revelation:

    Members of the Government Press Office who encountered it thought it was a state-sponsored clip and disseminated it overseas. After a Spanish journalist researched its sources, the GPO was forced to clarify that the parody was disseminated accidentally and that the contents of the clip did not reflect the official position of the State of Israel.

    Writing about the Glenn Beck segment referenced above, MJ Rosenberg warned that American popular support for Israel is becoming increasingly restricted to the far-right. The way in which mainstream Israel perceived the public diplomacy value of Glick’s clip is a good illustration of this point. Indeed, with the Israeli media increasingly providing front and center venues for arch-conservatives such as Newt Gingrich (Israel Hayom) and Elliott Abrams (Maariv), one should not be surprised that the perceptual gulf between Israelis and most Americans is widening.

    • Moa

      You use “Zionist” as a pejorative. That means you don’t want Israelis to live in the land that their Jewish ancestors lived in continuously for over three thousand years.

      This is exactly analogous to wanting to kick American Indians off their reservations, because you favor the Arabs who were brought in ***later*** to work on “Zionist” farms in the 1890s.

      That’s right, you fool, even the “Zionist” immigrants from the 19th Century have been in Palestine longer than the Arabs. The one exception to this are the Bedouin, but they are already Israeli citizens.

      Go and find out where Yasser Arafat was born. You clearly know *nothing* about the history and the Soviet-concocted deception to support Arabs since 1967:
      “The Invention of Palestine – How we Swallow The Lie”
      http://www.al-rassooli.com/palestine/slide-06.html
      From
      http://www.al-rassooli.com/palestine/

      • Americana

        The Russians were/are supporting the Palestinian Arabs in the region because they would like a strategic partner in the Middle East but the Palestinians would no more host the Russians as their permanent military overlords than any of the other former members of the Soviet bloc.

        Palestine had been a demographically Palestinian Arab-dominated population far back into recent history. The limited Jewish Zionist immigration was done in the 1890s and onward without the surety there would eventually be a Jewish state in the region though the major Zionists were working on their public relations in Britain through Lord Rothschild and other Zionists. But to make the totally artificial claim that these Arabs were brought in simply to work on Zionist settlers’ farms is not accurate.

        • Webb

          “far back into recent history” Priceless — you can’t make it up.

          • Bklyn Farmer

            That along with her suggestion that we fight financial support of PA terrorism by using direct deposit and that the UN forces would protect Israel are my favorites.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “The Russians were/are supporting the Palestinian Arabs in the region because they would like a strategic partner in the Middle East but the Palestinians would no more host the Russians as their permanent military overlords than any of the other former members of the Soviet bloc.”

          Come on man. The Fakestinians have been the most productive weapon against the West since…ever. Of course they’re a valuable piece in the game of strategic control over the region but unlike other examples, they’re also used for a mendacious and ongoing attacks on every value that we hold dear. The lies about “Palestine” are used to attack everything about us.

          If even half of their claims are true, we’re the biggest oppressors of all time.

          And they’re big fat liars, just as the Soviets trained them to be..and then some.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “But to make the totally artificial claim that these Arabs were brought in simply to work on Zionist settlers’ farms is not accurate.”

          Totally artificial? So…no migrant workers? Nobody came to Israel from some other place in the region to get work in the booming economy?

          Are you for real?

          • Americana

            Of course some Palestinians were working on Israeli farms, were they expressly brought into the region in DROVES like migrant farm workers? No, they were already living there.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “No, they were already living there.”

            “There” to you is where? In the region? Sure, most. In the immediate area that became sovereign Israeli territory? Not necessarily.

          • Americana

            As I said, I’m off to get British demographic data from the time it became a British mandate. Since the demographics didn’t substantially change until the Israelis began to push for the exclusion of Arabs, we’ll see what the true proportion was of Jewish residents to Palestinian Arab residents.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “As I said, I’m off to get British demographic data from the time it became a British mandate. ”

            Dude, the Jews did not ask to be sovereign over Arabs. That happened when the Arabs as a political faction decided to reject the new sovereignty. Jews coalesced in to a smaller concentrated area that as far as my calculations can come up with is in no significant way disproportionate to their numbers unless you look for ways to misrepresent the facts. And lots of factions did do that.

            Put another way, when you look at the demographics claims you need to look at all of them, and you need to line them up with the specific areas they’ve calculated along the historical timeline.

            It’s not a simple analysis. But only by using partisan arguments can you come up with this “Arabs are victims of Jewish land greed” bullshit.

            The Jews are culturally more attuned to develop land and material. Arab Muslims are far more inclined to build status in their own communities by demonstrating outward signs of peity. Prayer and jihad. That does not make any economy strong. And then pious Arab Muslims also have a tendency to migrate to wealthier areas to either work where they can balance a living with their piety or worse, to pilfer from the developed lands.

            I’m not speaking about any specific person or any “genetic deficiency.” I’m speaking about the values of the culture and what is recognized in those societies as “wisdom” and “goodness.” And therefore those societies reward things differently.

            That’s why you can explain under developed countries without need to look for “outside oppressors.” Although it’s possible to find both, it’s mendacious to minimize or ignore cultural implications.

          • Americana

            True, the Jews didn’t ask to be sovereign over Arabs, they simply asked to be sovereign over Arab territory. The difference is that demanding sovereignty over Arab territory meant that there were significant numbers of Palestinians who were dispossessed by Israel’s Haganah when push came to shove and Israel launched herself into the world.

            http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story572.html

          • Bklyn Farmer

            Actually it was the Arabs that could not live with the Jews, the Zionist were willing to accept smaller and smaller areas (remember Jews outside this area were not only not allowed to purchase land they weren’t even allowed to immigrate there either) each time the Arabs said NO. Remember, many of the Arabs sided with Hitler in the hope of getting rid of the Jews.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “True, the Jews didn’t ask to be sovereign over Arabs, they simply asked to be sovereign over Arab territory.”

            You’re conflating and telling simplified stories. Be specific when this “illicit” request occurred.

          • Americana

            I’m not conflating and simplifying the process whereby Israel was created. The Jews demanded a homeland in the region of Palestine. They pressured the British government, initially only diplomatically, and then when there was a failure to move forward w/the creation of such a Jewish nation, the Jews took to terrorist tactics. As David Ben Gurion says in the link below, there was very little Arab terrorism against Zionists early on.
            ____________________________________________________

            http://www.wrmea.org/wrmea-archives/283-washington-report-archives-2006-2010/may-june-2006/5987-hamas-a-pale-image-of-the-jewish-irgun-and-lehi-gangs.html

            Sixty years ago, however, at the time of the British Mandate, it was Jews in Palestine who mainly waged terrorism against the Palestinians. As Jewish leader David Ben-Gurion recorded in his personal history of Israel: “From 1946 to 1947 there were scarcely any Arab attacks on the Yishuv [the Jewish community in Palestine].”

            The same could not be said for the Zionists. Jewish terrorists waged an intense and bloody campaign against the Palestinians, British, and even some Jews who opposed them leading up to the establishment of Israel.

            The two major Jewish terror organizations in pre-independence Palestine were the Irgun Zvai Leumi—National Military Organization, NMO, also known by the Hebrew letters Etzel—founded in 1937, and the Lohamei Herut Israel, Fighters for the Freedom of Israel, Lehi in the Hebrew acronym, also known as the Stern Gang after its leader Avraham Stern, known as Yair, founded in 1940.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana objectivefactsmatter • 9 hours ago: “I’m not conflating and simplifying the process whereby Israel was created.”

            That’s a relief.

            “The Jews demanded a homeland in the region of Palestine.”

            Wait. What? When did they “demand” a homeland in the region of Palestine?

            “They pressured the British government, initially only diplomatically, and then when there was a failure to move forward w/the creation of such a Jewish nation, the Jews took to terrorist tactics.”

            So you’re not simplifying history. OK then. How many years are we talking about that you just compressed?

            “As Jewish leader David Ben-Gurion recorded in his personal history of Israel: “From 1946 to 1947 there were scarcely any Arab attacks on the Yishuv [the Jewish community in Palestine].”

            Where did that come from? Are you familiar with the term, “cherry picking?”
            “The same could not be said for the Zionists. Jewish terrorists waged an intense and bloody campaign against the Palestinians, British, and even some Jews who opposed them leading up to the establishment of Israel.”

            The same could be said about anyone. But what can you show with an objective presentation of evidence?

            “The two major Jewish terror organizations in pre-independence Palestine were the Irgun Zvai Leumi—National Military Organization, NMO, also known by the Hebrew letters Etzel—founded in 1937, and the Lohamei Herut Israel, Fighters for the Freedom of Israel, Lehi in the Hebrew acronym, also known as the Stern Gang after its leader Avraham Stern, known as Yair, founded in 1940.”

            Are you imagining that you’re coming up with a lucid and coherent presentation of the relevant history?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “The difference is that demanding sovereignty over Arab territory meant that there were significant numbers of Palestinians who were dispossessed by Israel’s Haganah when push came to shove and Israel launched herself into the world.”

            I see. “Push came to shove” means the grand “Zionist conspiracy” is executed and all of the innocent bystanders are “robbed” and “ethnically cleansed.

            Who started the pushing? Does the timeline confuse you or are you totally unfamiliar with the concept?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “…in DROVES…No…”

            So we’re arguing over terminology. OK.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “Palestine had been a demographically Palestinian Arab-dominated population far back into recent history.”

          There was no such thing as “Palestinian Arab” until it was contrived as a modern political tool from the pools of jihadis and dupes. And if the term was used before the Zionist movement, it was a reference to Ottoman Arabs and nothing more. There is no distinct “Palestinian Arab” separate from “Jordanian” or “Islamic” Arab.

          That’s one reason they coopted the name – to conflate in the minds of dupes the ancient name given to the region with the modern fake political movement.

          It’s still a modern movement used to cloak Jihad. And I’m perfectly willing to admit that some modern Arabs within the movement might also be among those we would logically count as dupes. They might actually believe it’s about Western notions of nationalism too. They don’t hold any sway over the future of the movement. They’re tools of the jihadis.

          • Americana

            I guess we’ll have to dredge up some British factoids from the demographics when it was the Palestine Mandate… then we’ll jump to demographic numbers under the United Nations.. and so on and so on. There’s NO DOUBT whatsoever about the Arabs being the DOMINANT ETHNIC GROUP for the last several hundred years.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “There’s NO DOUBT whatsoever about the Arabs being the DOMINANT ETHNIC GROUP for the last several hundred years.”

            In the region? Yes. In the area that became Israel? That’s less clear. And not as relevant as you seem to think.

          • Americana

            Not as relevant as I seem to think? Then why are you all constantly trying to undermine that demographic reality?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Not as relevant as I seem to think? Then why are you all constantly trying to undermine that demographic reality?”

            Because there is no singular “demographic reality” claim. In the greater region? Yes. In the territory that is now Israel? That’s less clear.

          • Americana

            http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story572.html

            There’s nothing “unclear” about what was done. No matter how much you attempt to obfuscate the issue.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            It’s clear that a lot of individual Arabs lost out due to the aggression of certain jihaidis. We could have stipulated to that.

            It’s clear that there are losers in wars, because wars are destructive. We don’t need dramatic charts to come to that stipulation either.

            So what am I trying to obfuscate?

            Jews lost land too and coalesced in a concentrated area. I didn’t see that represented on your map. You’re map is one-sided even if it has data that can eventually be traced by to some real set of events.

            But there might be some useful story that it tells. I’m not sure what it is and I’m open to hearing what you have to say about it.

            What does the map actually clear up that was once controversial? Can you answer that question clearly and directly please?

          • Drakken

            Keep quoting and shrilling the leftist propaganda line, someone actually might fall for it one of these days.

          • Americana

            Not at all true. What’s more, you know it.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Not at all true. What’s more, you know it.”

            What’s stopping you from spelling it out?

            This:

            “Because there is no singular “demographic reality” claim. In the greater region? Yes. In the territory that is now Israel? That’s less clear.”

            Is not a true statement? And I know it’s not true? Really?

            Another mind reader.

          • Drakken

            The reality is the arabs want what the Jews have, and the Jews will never give savages what they won in war, eff the savages. Happy nakba.

          • Americana

            Now you’re going to pretend that ‘Palestinian’ when used to differentiate Arab populations is sort of an ETHNIC term rather than simply a GEOGRAPHIC SIGNIFIER of origin? It’s a GEOGRAPHIC TERM and it’s very clear that when used in reference to Arabs that have lived in the Palestine area for many, many generations, they aren’t recent arrivals.

          • Bklyn Farmer

            You shift key is stuck just like your argument.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “It’s a GEOGRAPHIC TERM…”

            So now you’re saying that “Palestinian Arab” is not a term mined from earlier references to “prove” that “Palestinian nationalism” predates the 1960s?

            “…and it’s very clear that when used in reference to Arabs that have lived in the Palestine area for many, many generations, they aren’t recent arrivals.”

            Demographic “realities” are more complicated than you seem to realize. Statistics are more often than not used to tell very narrow stories that are easy to exploit.

            If you want to go down that road, bring out the statistics that tell your story and we’ll see what we can discern.

            Let me give you one huge example that should be clear enough to all thinking people. Let’s say there are hostilities and you have some aggressive faction of people that are run out of the area. And others are fearful about this kind of tension so they also migrate away.

            And then as a completely separate trend you have people migrating in looking for “economic opportunity” (either licit or otherwise). If they’re assigned to the same demographic group, your stats won’t be able to tell us about migration just by looking at samples of totals, even if the numbers sampled are reliable.

            And then you have this absurd disparity in how Jews are counted as native versus how Arabs are counted as native. But we’re not there yet. But please don’t even bother with OIC UN numbers unless you’re prepared to admit that they’re partisan.

        • Bklyn Farmer

          1. “Russians were/are supporting the Palestinian Arabs” you sell the Russians short, in fact they invented the Palestinians:

          The term “Palestinian People” as a descriptive of Arabs in Palestine appeared for the first time in the 1964 PLO Charter, drafted in Moscow. Soviets were in the business of creating “liberation organizations”: for Palestine and Bolivia in 1964, Columbia 1965, in the 70s “The Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia” that bombed US airline offices in Europe, and “The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine that bombed Israelis.”

          2. Because of the Jews, the per-capita income of Palestinians Arabs more than doubled between WWI – WWII. This resulted in the non-Jewish population increasing by 380,000 and in cities with a large Jewish community the population more than doubled. Between the 2 wars the population of Egypt increased by 14% yet during that same period the non-Jewish population in “Palestinian” increased 75% mostly from unrestricted immigration from neighboring Arab states.

          3. From http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/182419

          “The biggest lie of all. Many Arabs identify their origins by their family names. Here are some of the most common family names among the “Palestinians”:

          “Masri” = from Egypt-Hamas member of Parliament, Mushir al-Masri (the word “masri” littelery means “the egyptian” in arabic !). “Khamis”= Bahrain “Salem Hanna Khamis” “al-Faruqi”= Mosul, Iraq “al-Araj” = Morocco, a member of the Saadi Dynasty “Hussein al-Araj” “al Lubnani” = the Lebanese “al-Mughrabi” = the Moroccan (Maghreb” – meaning “West” in Arabic, and usually referring to North Africa or specifically to Morocco) “al-Djazair” = the Algerian “al-Yamani” = the Yemeni “Issam Al Yamani” “al-Afghani” = the Afghan “al-Hindi” = the Indian “Amin al-Hindi” “Iraqi” = from Iraq. “halabi” = from Aleppo, Syria “El Baghdadi” = from Baghdad Iraq. “Tarabulsi”= Tarabulus-Tripoli, Lebanon. “Hourani” = Houran Syria. “al-Husayni” = Saudi Arabia. “Saudi” = Saudi Arabia. “Metzarwah”= Egypt. “Barda—wil” = “Salah Bardawil” HAMAS legislator in Gaza; Egypt, Bardawil Lake area. “Nashashibi” = Syria. “Bushnak” = Bosnia “zoabi”= from Iraq: “Haneen Zoabi”. “Turki” = Turkey “Daud Turki” “al-Kurd” = Kurdistan. “Haddadins” = YEMEN descended from Ghassanid Christian Arabs. “Arab Abu-Kishk” = Egypt.(Bedouins) “Arab al shakirat” = Egypt (Bedouins) “Arab al zabidat” = Egypt (Bedouins) “Arab al aramsha” = Egypt (Bedouins)

          • Americana

            The term became universal identifier for Arabs living within the Palestine Mandate. Nothing wrong w/being regionally specific. You wouldn’t be trying to make the term into a falsehood if it didn’t contain the whole crux of the matter, which is that those ‘Palestinian’ Arabs had been living in that specific regional area. Do I need to produce a map w/all the Palestinian villages located on it and dates for those villages? Off to find that for you…

          • Bklyn Farmer

            Actually the falsehood is in your post, the term “Palestinian” referred to Jews from the area. Go provide a Map with a country names “Palestine”.

          • Americana

            Palestinian referred to ANYONE of any ethnic group living in the Palestine region.

          • Bklyn Farmer

            Unadulterated BULL

          • Americana

            You’re the one producing unadulterated bull on this issue, BF.

          • Bklyn Farmer

            Still waiting for that pre-1940 map with the country “Palestine”.

          • Larry Larkin

            No, it referred to the Jewish population, and the Jewish population only.

          • Americana

            No, it did not. “Palestinian” was a geographic term that referred to anyone of any ethnic group from that region. It was used as a ADJECTIVAL QUALIFER, so someone might be a Palestinian Jew or a Palestinian Arab or a Palestinian whatever.

            Why on earth would the term be restricted SOLELY to JEWS when there were sooooooo FEW Jews in the region at the time? The attempts made by you to totally negate the demographics of the region for the last several thousand years are ludicrous. You can’t erase the last thousands of years of history in the region simply by writing posts claiming this that and the other. Nor can you rewrite history by making these claims.

          • Drakken

            There were no effing arabs in the Levant until 800 AD sunshine. The demographics of the region were Jews, Romans, Greeks etc. So keep buying the leftist narrative, it makes you look stupid and foolish.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Do I need to produce a map w/all the Palestinian villages located on it and dates for those villages? Off to find that for you…”

            Of course there were Arabs living in the region. Many Arabs were run out by their own “kind” because of the aggression of the jihadis.

            The map has changed no doubt. But you can’t use demographics to build a case against “injustice” caused by Israel. Unpack the history along the timeline with the demographics claims and we’ll explore whatever you think happened versus what additional insight might lead an objective person to conclude.

            Or as some like to say, “…they done brought that $hit on themselves.”

          • Americana

            Here’s an authoritative collection of maps from all eras of the Palestine Mandate and post-partitioning. This is one that refers to the Nakba.

            http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story572.html

          • objectivefactsmatter

            What makes it authoritative?

            What did I miss?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            What specifically is the drama that you’re trying to sell?

          • Americana

            What specifically is the drama that you’re trying to avoid?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana objectivefactsmatter • 9 hours ago: “What specifically is the drama that you’re trying to avoid?”

            That question doesn’t make sense.
            1) I’m not trying to avoid anything

            2) You’re the one presenting dramatic visual arguments about jihadis as victims because…look at all of the red dots!! Oh my!

          • objectivefactsmatter

            There seems to be a problem with my browser. I can’t find the “view data source” function.

          • Bklyn Farmer

            “authoritative” – realy, looks like something produced using Microsoft Excel

          • Drakken

            The ragheads lost, the Israeli’s won, it is just that simple. You think that by siding with every leftist cause in the name of the fakestinians that it will bring a so called peace, you could not be more wrong and misguided.

          • Americana

            There were no “jihadis” at the time of the Palestine Mandate. No, not all sh*t was brought on themselves by the Palestinian Arabs. There are a great many photographs of Palestinians being ushered out of Israeli territory by the Haganah if they happened to be within villages that Israel wanted to be ethnically cleared of Arabs..

          • Bklyn Farmer

            Wrong again:

            “In 1928, Hassan al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood, a rigidly conservative and highly secretive Egyptian-based organization dedicated to resurrecting a Muslim empire (Caliphate). According to al-Banna, “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.” [58] The Muslim Brotherhood, also called Muslim Brethren (jamiat al-Ikhwan al-muslimun, literally Society of Muslim Brothers), opposes the secular tendencies of Islamic nations and wants a return to the precepts of the Quran and rejection of Western influences” – Source Wiki

          • Americana

            http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=17065

            The founding of the Muslim Brotherhood was different than what is termed “jihadi” today which implies the politicized Islamist actions of the ultra-violent ISIS Muslims. This first incarnation of the Muslim Brotherhood was just that, a fraternal organization w/pan Islamism as its aim but that wasn’t necessarily stridently violent w/huge demonstrations and numeours killings as is happening today w/the jihadis. Also, the MB of the time was not that heavily proliferated. It had begun in Egypt and it was largely an Egyptian organization.

            From the link:

            Perhaps the most sophisticated approach to the ideology of Pan-Islam, in the new situation of Nationalism-bound Egypt of the 920s and 1930s, was developed by Hassan al-Banna, The founder, in 1929 and general guide of The Muslim Brethren (Jami’ah Ikhwan Muslimin). Al-Banna was chiefly responsible for formulating the policies of this association. Although these were largely concerned with domestic affairs of Egypt, and subsequently of the other countries, in which branches were established, the idea of universal muslim state was constantly implied due to the association’s focus on Islam. While strongly disapproving of local brands of Nationalism, particularly if they were Western-inspired and secularly-minded, Banna developed his vision of Pan-Islamic Nationalism, insisting that Islam and Nationalism were complementary, especially when the latter operated within the parameter of the Islamic truth, since, for the Muslim Brethren, Islam was of course both religion and state.

          • Bklyn Farmer

            Banna and Qubt both of the Muslim Brotherhood along with al-Husseini (Grand Mufti of Jerusalem) are the origins of today’s Jihadists.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “The founding of the Muslim Brotherhood was different than what is termed “jihadi” today which implies the politicized Islamist actions of the ultra-violent ISIS Muslims.”

            There are nonviolent jihadis in that they choose a non-violent mode or role. Jihad itself, generally speaking, is less concerned about violence than about winning.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            You’re the one that said “Jihadi” is a term exclusively reserved for “ISIS style” sharia activists.

            There were pogroms in “Palestine” from the early mandate days.

          • Americana

            Where did I say that ‘jihadi’ is a term exclusively reserved for ISIS-style brutality? What I said is that our understanding is that, quote, “what is termed “jihadi” today which implies the politicized Islamist actions of the ultra-violent ISIS Muslims” was not initially what was happening in Palestine. The violence ramped up as the knowledge that the diplomatic forces were moving ahead regardless of what the indigenous Palestinian Arabs wanted to have happen. The Irgun and the Haganah ramped up their activities as well so it’s not as if there was no armed response from the nascent Israelis.

          • Drakken

            The bottom line is, the rag heads lost the wars they started, to the victors go the spoils. Here you are, crying for and sympathizing with savages.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana objectivefactsmatter • 9 hours ago: “Where did I say that ‘jihadi’ is a term exclusively reserved for ISIS-style brutality? What I said is that our understanding is that, quote, “what is termed “jihadi” today which implies the politicized Islamist actions of the ultra-violent ISIS Muslims” was not initially what was happening in Palestine.”

            And what are the >relevant< differences wrt this conversation?

            "The violence ramped up as the knowledge that the diplomatic forces were moving ahead regardless of what the indigenous Palestinian Arabs wanted to have happen."

            What does that prove? Very few if any jihadis will use violence if they believe they can win politically. As I said yesterday, the bottom line is winning sharia sovereignty and violence is trivial one way or the other. Although some deranged people do actually feel their chances for heaven are enhanced by sacrificing their own lives, maybe they'd do something anyway.

            The point about jihad is that it's never questioned whether it's "right" to attack an infidel for the sake of Islam if the opportunity is ripe. Or put another way, even if it's quiet, a jihadi will always be waiting for the opportunity to attack priority targets according to Islamic values. And Jews that will not comply with sharia on the Arabian Peninsula – everyone should realize that Islam compels Muslims to work against that and to work towards getting everyone under sharia. And they will use deception at all levels in order to achieve that. Peace accords mean zero.

            "The Irgun and the Haganah ramped up their activities as well so it's not as if there was no armed response from the nascent Israelis."

            Eventually they organized defense forces when the sovereign failed to protect them. Wow. I guess they should feel shame for not allowing their lives to be sacrificed for the sake of allah.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “There are a great many photographs of Palestinians being ushered out of Israeli territory by the Haganah if they happened to be within villages that Israel wanted to be ethnically cleared of Arabs.”

            Really? Dates please when you show me the photos.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “There were no “jihadis” at the time of the Palestine Mandate.”

            Another individual that is drinking way too much of that polluted water from the river of DeNial.

          • Bklyn Farmer

            You try and give the misleading impression that all Palestinians were innocent civilians:

            From the US department of State office of the Historian
            https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war

            “Fighting began with attacks by irregular bands of Palestinian Arabs attached to local units of the Arab Liberation Army composed of volunteers from Palestine and neighboring Arab countries. These groups launched their attacks against Jewish cities, settlements, and armed forces……
            After Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948, the fighting intensified with other Arab forces joining the Palestinian Arabs in attacking”

          • Americana

            Since when have I given the impression the Palestinian Arabs were innocent civilians through this entire process of diplomatic appropriation and forced relocation? Once the Palestinians realized they were at imminent risk of dispossession by diplomatic means, why on earth would they remain passive? Besides, the Irgun certainly weren’t passive. You are making a totally artificial portrayal of the situation and you know it.

          • Bklyn Farmer

            Nice try but the fairytale you put forth “Palestinians realized they were at imminent risk of dispossession” is up there with your direct deposit suggestion.

            In fact, David Ben-Gurion had sent Golda Meir to Haifa to try to persuade the Arabs to stay, but she was unable to convince them because of their fear of being judged traitors to the Arab cause. By the end of the battle, more than 50,000 Palestinians had left.

            “Tens of thousands of Arab men, women and children fled toward the eastern outskirts of the city in cars, trucks, carts, and afoot in a desperate attempt to reach Arab territory until the Jews captured Rushmiya Bridge toward Samaria and Northern Palestine and cut them off. Thousands rushed every available craft, even rowboats, along the waterfront, to escape by sea toward Acre” (New York Times, April 23, 1948).

            In Tiberias and Haifa, the Haganah issued orders that none of the Arabs’ possessions should be touched, and warned that anyone who violated the orders would be severely punished. Despite these efforts, all but about 5,000 or 6,000 Arabs evacuated Haifa, many leaving with the assistance of British military transports.

            The Palestinians that left did so at their own leaders bequest:

            “The refugees were confident their absence would not last long, and that they would return within a week or two,” Monsignor George Hakim, a Greek Orthodox Catholic Bishop of Galilee told the Beirut newspaper, Sada al­Janub (August 16, 1948). “Their leaders had promised them that the Arab Armies would crush the ‘Zionist gangs’ very quickly and that there was no need for panic or fear of a long exile.”

            On April 3, 1949, the Near East Broadcasting Station (Cyprus) said: “It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees’ flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa and Jerusalem.”

            “The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies,” according to the Jordanian newspaper Filastin (February 19, 1949).

            One refugee quoted in the Jordan newspaper, Ad Difaa (September 6, 1954), said: “The Arab government told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in.”

            “The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, assured the Arab peoples that the occupation of Palestine and Tel Aviv would be as simple as a military promenade,” said Habib Issa in the New York Lebanese paper, Al Hoda (June 8, 1951). “He pointed out that they were already on the frontiers and that all the millions the Jews had spent on land and economic development would be easy booty, for it would be a simple matter to throw Jews into the Mediterranean….Brotherly advice was given to the Arabs of Palestine to leave their land, homes and property and to stay temporarily in neighboring fraternal states, lest the guns of the invading Arab armies mow them down.”

            “Since when have I given the impression the Palestinian Arabs were innocent” – Answer: Always, now your giving the myth that the peace loving Palestinians were driven to it by those evil Jews, what a crock of BS

            Was it fear that caused the peace loving Palestinians in 1928 slaughter 67 Jewish men and women in Hebron and Safed, where 18 Jews were killed, as well as scattered other losses totaling 133 Jewish deaths, with more than 300 wounded. During which the British police did nothing to protect the Jews or stop the violence.

            The Arab mentality has not changed since, resulting in 9/11 while apologists such as you work to empower them. And you know it is true

            http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/AmericanAttacks.htm

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “No, not all sh*t was brought on themselves by the Palestinian Arabs.”

            Who started the war?

      • Bklyn Farmer

        Moa,

        Great link, proof in their own words.

        Thanks

  • BillieHCote

    until I looked at the draft for $4470 , I didn’t believe …that…my neighbours mother woz like they say realey making money part time on there computar. . there aunt has been doing this 4 less than 17 months and resantly paid the morgage on there apartment and bought a great new Honda .

    hop over to this website——->>> http://CashConvertmark2013accord1ib51g6T

  • Jeff Ludwig

    It’s an interesting article adding yet another level of complexity to our understanding of the complex (meaning “riddled with enmity and animosity”) of the Islamic world. We have the Baath’ist types who are Islamic socialists, the Shi’ite imperialists led by Iran, those seeking restoration of the Caliphate, we have those who want a Sharia based nationalism, and now we have Turkey seeking to restore Turkish hegemony via a neo-Ottoman political fantasy. The vision of a Westernized, democratic Turkey has been set aside and is not being put forward by any faction (except small and rarely heard factions). We also have Muslim nationalists with a definite militaristic bent as in Egypt and Pakistan. They are the “moderates.” This means that “moderate” in the Islamic world means “military-backed dictatorships.” When I was a kid, this latter type of government was mocked by me and my friends as having the hallmarks of a typical “banana republic.” In more sophisticated language, said governments are one and all based on repression, exploitation, ignorance, and dehumanization of the population.There is no movement for democracy. Democracy is the imposed value of the U.S. as though democracy can be produced synthetically in a constitutional laboratory in the U.S. or even in the United Nations and then, like an artificial heart, be transplanted into the body politic of various Islamic nations. Let’s then look at the Islamic world through non-physiological eyes. Yes, their brains have neurons and synapses like our brains. The hearts have systolic and diastolic pressure like our hearts. Their livers secrete bile like our livers. Yet, they are fundamentally different from us, and need to be seen as different, so we can reject them.

    • Bklyn Farmer

      Jeff,
      Great post could not agree more with you. I just wanted to bring up one thing concerning your last sentence, I recently came across the same sentiment in the essay “The Mirror-Image Fallacy” by Charles Krauthammer ( page 92 in “Things That Matter”) amazingly it was written in ’83.

      • Jeff Ludwig

        Thanks. Krauthammer was 30 years ahead of me with this insight?…. Guess that’s why he’s on TV and I’m writing from the basement of my house. All the best!!

  • 1Indioviejo1

    Just as you say, Islam has had to be stoped on numerous occasions because Islam is a totalitarian, Imperialistic, expansionist ideology masked as a religious cult. It has a power base of ignorant fanatics from where it draws its assassins. We need to Kill the Bitch that bore him. Good day to you my friend.

  • charles simmonds

    Turkey is a real problem and is going to get even bigger

  • EmilieGeorgeulf

    my classmate’s aunt makes $68 every hour on the
    computer . She has been fired for 7 months but last month her paycheck was
    $15495 just working on the computer for a few hours. visit the site R­e­x­1­0­.­C­O­M­