October 17, 2007

The Nancy Pelosi Invasion

The Turkish Parliament authorized their government to invade northern Iraq any time during the next year in order to quell the terrorist attacks in the Kurdish regions of southern Turkey. The overwhelming vote to authorize the invasion demonstrates the declining influence of the US with its NATO partner and Middle East ally, a situation exacerbated by the Congressional effort to censure Turkey over a genocide from a century ago:

The Turkish parliament Wednesday authorized cross-border military operations into northern Iraq to combat Kurdish separatist rebels as world leaders implored Turkey to delay any action.

In the hours before the parliament voted by a gaping margin of 507 to 19 to give Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan permission to launch strikes any time over the next year, Iraqi and NATO officials made a flurry of cautionary, last-minute telephone calls to the country's top leaders.

The vote came just moments after President Bush in a White House press conference urged Turkey to continue talking to Iraq officials about the situation and to not move troops against the rebels.

"We are making it very clear to Turkey that we don't think it is in their interests to send troops into Iraq," Bush told reporters. " . . . There's a better way to deal with the issue than having the Turks send massive troops into the country."

It's almost impossible to overestimate the damage this could cause to the stability we've managed to get thus far in Iraq. The Kurdish territory has been our biggest success story to this point. Their economy has boomed, and the violence in western Iraq has mostly been non-existent in the north. They see America as the savior of the Kurds against both Saddam and the post-invasion chaos.

If the Turks invade the territory, we will have three choices, all of them bad. We could defend the Kurds, which means war with the only Middle Eastern Muslim democracy and a distraction from stabilizing Iraq and containing Iran. We could sit on our hands and alienate the Iraqi Kurds, who won't be able to defend themselves, while the entire north dissolves into guerilla warfare. We could stand between the two groups and try to defend a DMZ, and get our collective asses shot off. That's all of the possibilities, and none of them sound too appetizing.

Iraq's central government offered an intermediate step that might work. Nouri al-Maliki offered to conduct joint operations with the Turks to clear the PKK out of the border region. He'd better do something quick, because a Turkish invasion would likely be followed by Syrian and Iranian incursions into Iraq as well, although the US might take either as enough provocation to conduct military attacks on both capitals. The Iranians have already begun shelling PKK sites along the border. Joint operations would take some resources away from Coalition operations, but this would be a higher priority at the moment.

It goes without saying that we would have had more influence on the situation in Turkey had Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress made themselves the arbiter of the Armenian genocide of 1915. If the troops cross the border, we can thank Pelosi and her colleagues for reducing our ability to avoid a shooting war that could cost thousands of lives here and now.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (57)

Posted by Philip | October 17, 2007 11:44 AM

"not" made themselves

Posted by Philip | October 17, 2007 11:46 AM

Pelosi and crew have fully adopted the strategy of Islamic terrorists: inflame tensions and watch America bleed. She's an American? Right?

Posted by Noocyte | October 17, 2007 11:48 AM

At first, I resisted the notion that this grotesquely ill-timed genocide resolution could have been the backhanded stratagem that it seemed. Surely, it must be yet another example of the pathologically tin-eared Democrat approach to foreign policy, one whose unintended consequences could be devastating.

I have stopped resisting. This is quite possibly the most grievous betrayal of our nation's trust and of their elected offices which this pack of carrion-eaters has ever perpetrated. It is simply nauseating to contemplate what it must be like inside the head of someone to whom this would seem like a good idea.

I live in the most fervent hope that an audiotape will turn up of some back-room meeting where this villainous scheme was hatched.

The guilty parties need not display American flag pins on their orange jumpsuits.

Posted by TomB | October 17, 2007 11:53 AM

I wrote it already, but this place fits better:

The real objective of the Armenian Resolution is IMHO simple: to sabotage the war effort, and possibly to destabilize Iraq by alienating one of our key allies in the area. It is intended to be anti Bush, but it is also a deeply treacherous and anti-American action to please the Left. Even if eventually it wouldn’t pass (or would it?), the damage is already done.

Posted by lexhamfox | October 17, 2007 11:58 AM

The Turkish threat of incursions was real and on its way long before the measure condemming the purge and massacre of Armenian Turks. Saying that the Congress would be responsible for any Turkish retaliation against Kurdish terrorists is really pathetic and ignores the real issue.

The problem is not Congress. The problem is that the Kurdish terrorists still have a safe haven in Iraq and they use it to attack Tukey and Iran. End the safe haven and turn the terrortists over.

Posted by Michael Mumford | October 17, 2007 12:02 PM

Could the Democratic congress - having what amounts to a hissy fit to counter the quickly improving situation in Iraq - chosen a worse moment to grandstand with a resolution condemning Turkey?

The moment I saw the Democratic resolution, I knew Turkey would have to respond. Now they have. Thanks Democrats.

I was against our entry into Iraq (the timing only - I felt we would need to do so eventually). I also complained about the "whack a mole" strategy that was leading to civil war.

However, it is obvious that the new strategy is gaining positive results. Whether they continue or not is to be seen. I truly hope so - though I am sure there will be ups and downs.

That, however, is the nature of war. What the Democrats did was a childish attempt at political advantage.

Posted by patrick neid | October 17, 2007 12:07 PM

Turkey will not, under any circumstances, invade northern Iraq. That, no matter how it is construed, is an act of war. We would be forced to defend Iraq. It is our baby now. Whatever remote dreams they have of joining the European Union would disappear.

Turkey passed this resolution to wake up the Maliki government to take seriously the Kurdish group--considered by us to be a terror organization. The greater Kurdistan, the fabled Kurdish homeland, is a threat to Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran and even a little bit of Armenia.


Time for a new bumper sticker!

Posted by burt | October 17, 2007 12:07 PM

They are not DC police; they are federal police.

Posted by Noocyte | October 17, 2007 12:08 PM


You are unduly conflating two related but distinct issues.

It is true that the PKK has been a destabilizing influence in northern Iraq/Southeastern Turkey, and that it has to be dealt with.

However, it is also true that by antagonizing and shaming Turkey, the misbegotten resolution (which, I note with hope, appears poised to sink with only a few bubbles...) acts to force the Turkish hand to regain face by acting with far more bellicosity than they might otherwise have done. Therein lies the evil genius of the thing; the timing strikes at a fracture point with all the precision of a jeweler's chisel.

We can only hope that this thing goes away swiftly (and, again, it's looking that way), and that some sensible policy is arranged between Baghdad and Ankara. Something like joint operations with an option for extremely limited "hot-pursuit" actions just over the border seems do-able. My sense is that this is the way it will go.

But this has dropped squarely on the peak of the growing pile of things for which I will never forgive the Democrats.

Posted by Doug | October 17, 2007 12:10 PM

We have lost the trust of the one NATO ally that was staying with us shoulder to shoulder in Afghanistan as well. Please note that a major amount of the construction works in both Iraq & Afghanistan are being performed by Turkish construction firms and they have lost numerous workmen in both countries. Pelosi's self serving resolution serves only her own political ambitions.

If she really wanted to do something constructive, she should ask for a moment of silence in the House to honor all those that died during WWI and WWII. She should not create situations which open old wounds and perhaps inflame the ME into WWIII. Don't dwell in the past, but have enough common sense to see how your actions will affect the future.

Posted by rhombus | October 17, 2007 12:11 PM

I agree with you that the real problem is the safe havens. However, this does NOT let the Democratic Congress off the hook. What are they suggesting to deal with the real problem? Nothing. So clearly THEY aren't interested in "real problems". Instead Democrats are distracted by Bush and have actively aggravated a situation for their own political benefit. What's new?

Posted by Leni | October 17, 2007 12:13 PM

Turkey is no democracy. You must be smoking something turkish there buddy...

Posted by rhombus | October 17, 2007 12:14 PM

Sorry comment meant for Lexhamfox not TomB

Posted by dave rywall | October 17, 2007 12:15 PM

Predictably, most of you yahoos will focus on the Dem motion (yes it was retarded) rather than the on the ground situation itself and exactly what Bush did or didn't do to deal with the attacks up there in Iraq's "BIGGEST SUCCESS STORY TO THIS POINT".

Despite a bunch of half-assed ceasefires and handshake agreements to cease and desist, PKK shenanigans have continued pretty much unabated since the American invasion of Iraq. If that's a success story, I'd sure hate to see what f**ked up chaos looks like.

Posted by AnonymousDrivel | October 17, 2007 12:20 PM

Sometimes I cannot believe the Democrat party is still a viable one to the American electorate. I know there are some decent, well-meaning Democrats around the nation, but the leadership is going out of its way to harm the nation taking and taking the moderates with them.

Pelosi and crew are beyond stupid. In her off time she visits Syria's Assad to undermine the administration. In her on time she agitates Turkey. What's next? Blueprints to our vulnerabilities for Ahmadinejad?

Our nation is in trouble if we will not recognize and cannot expunge such self-serving saboteurs in our midst.

Posted by dwightkschrute | October 17, 2007 12:21 PM

So because a bill had been discussed, not passed or even voted on, that's reason enough to pin all blame on Pelosi and congress? The buck passing and finger pointing is breathtaking. This clearly is the set up for the "stab-in-the-back" ridiculousness that is sure to take place once a Democratic president takes office in 08 and tries to make the best of this debacle Bush and Cheney have created.

Posted by Ron C | October 17, 2007 12:23 PM

"...more influence on the situation in Turkey had Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress [NOT] made themselves the arbiter of the Armenian genocide of 1915." - I think you meant, Ed.

Posted by TomB | October 17, 2007 12:36 PM

So, what's the other reason for even discussing Armenia promptly 92 years after the fact (or not)?

Posted by coldwarrior415 | October 17, 2007 12:49 PM

There may be a silver lining to this in the long run.

If Maliki in Baghdad and Erdogan in Ankara can cobble together a joint Turkish-Iraqi gendarmerie tasked with rooting out PKK elements inside Iraq, the results could be:

-- a stronger central government in Baghdad;

-- a more stabile northern Iraq, thus inviting more foreign investment;

-- better relations, real relations with a neighboring state - Turkey, a Moslem country;

-- a more stable Turkish border region and easier inflow of US logisitics to Iraq;

-- A message to Syria that Iraq stands ready to root out foreign armed thugs;

-- a message to Iran that Iran's incursions and attacks on Iraq have a limit;

-- an influx of more Turkish contractors into Iraq and a more rapid rebuilding of essential infrastructure;

-- and a strong message to other PKK or PKK-like entitries in the region that they will be treated as thugs and bandits and be dealt with accordingly.

The Turkish military has been given a one-year authorization. How the Turks, the Iraqis and the U.S. use this one-year period can make a major difference in stabilizing a major region of the world.

But, on the streets in Turkey major damage has been done by this Congressional affront to Turkey. Regaining our own relationship with Turkey still hangs in the balance. We are not the only source of needed military systems and foreign investment. They have already sealed several long term deals with South Korea for weapons, and are talking to Taiwan as well, both relationships that goes back to the Korean War.

They know who their friends are.

We, apparently, don't.

Posted by NoDonkey | October 17, 2007 12:53 PM

Pelosi is an incompetent, traitorous idiot and this Armenian nonsense is right in line with her traveling to Syria, donning a burqa and playing at being Assad's chambermaid.

Pelosi and her absolutely worthless Democrat Party are actively undermining our country during a time of war.

Pelosi is knowingly putting the lives of American military personnel at risk, all for pure, partisan gain while she is doing the bidding of the Democrat Party's lunatic left base.

Nancy Pelosi is a traitor. She should be dragged out of the Capitol in chains and thrown into a solitary cell in Leavenworth.

Posted by whocares | October 17, 2007 1:04 PM

Turkey would be foolish to expose their supply lines more than a few miles in Iraq. The Peshmerga hasn't to date been attacking Turks, rather its been building its strength with training and arms from the USA. Turkey has invaded the Kurdish regions before, not with happy results. If they do it this time, they will suffer large losses to men and equipment up in those high mountain areas. The Peshmerga is the perfect well trained, well armed guerilla force. The Turks will be mauled. For me, the US has a 4th option. Watch carefully, increase our ground forces with lots of long range artillery near the Kurds but sit back and don't do anything unless Iran , Syria or Turkey chooses to take the fight deep into Iraq.
If any do that, we are on the hook to stop it, regardless of who is doing it.

Incidentally I do not have much respect for our Turkish ally. It was their refusal of right away into Northern Iraq in 2003 that prolonged that conflict and allowed so many of Saddam's henchmen to flee Baghdad ahead of the invasion. They have responsibility for the Sunni insurgency that resulted, not much perhaps, but its there.

Posted by Rich H. | October 17, 2007 1:06 PM

Actually, the Dems get a three-fer here.

1) As stated, they get to throw a wrench in the works in Iraq.

2) They force oil prices up thereby raising gas prices in the future. This gives Congress another chance to go after higher taxes from the oil companies.

3) Higher oil prices depress the wider stock market. Dems can complain about the the sorry state of the economy.

Three big effects from one little resolution. Gotta love the Dems capacity for creating chaos.

Posted by FedUp | October 17, 2007 1:08 PM

I agree with NoDonkey! It's time for Nancy to find another line of work... underwater basketweaving comes to mind! She obviously has NO grasp of the obvious. She should be concentrating on domestic matters and staying out of foreign matters. Our government has been going downhill and she's making the trip a lot faster! She needs to GO!

Posted by Michael Volpe | October 17, 2007 1:27 PM

Fox News reports this morning that the momentum has swung in our favor on this NON BINDING resolution. Now is the time to keep the pressure up so I urge everyone to call, fax and or email your rep and let them know how furiously you are against this needless resolution. If we keep the pressure up now, we will go a long way toward once and for all killing this resolution.

Here is how I saw it...


Posted by BoWowBoy | October 17, 2007 1:29 PM

I don't believe .......... anyone has ever accused Pelosi of .....being smart.

Posted by gnholbrook | October 17, 2007 1:31 PM

Doug recommends speaker Pelosi shouldn't dwell in the past if she wants to be a constructive leader of her party. I agree.

After 90+ years, she and her party should move on.

Perhaps the Dems should start a non-profit, with a catchy name to remind themselves. Call it MoveOn.org, or something like that.

Posted by Sam Pender | October 17, 2007 1:40 PM

Democrats got elected on the promise of providing a NEW DIRECTION IN IRAQ, but never even had a meeting to plan a meeting to come up with a plan, so....now it's

The New Direction INTO Iraq

Brilliant strategy, to get the US out of Iraq, to end American casualties, and to get Iraq into a state that won't need a 3rd US invasion of Iraq...Democrats get another country to come in, attack US forces there, drive out US forces, and trash the country 1000000 times worse than it already is. True brilliance knows no bounds.

I'm not saying she's a screwup because she's a woman, but it's gonna be tough to get people to trust a woman to do the Speaker's job again for a long long time.

What's the Democrats' Congressional approval rating now? Are they in the negatives yet?

Posted by rjschwarz | October 17, 2007 1:45 PM

The US should tell Turkey that if they invade Northern Iraq the US will (a) have them removed from NATO or remove the USA from NATO. (b) War with Turkey until all Kurdish areas in Turkey and Iraq are free of Turks. (c) The US would also support Greek claims to the Bosporus and other contested areas.

If they chill rather than forcing us to act, and making us lose face, we will take care of the PKK within the next sixth months.

If delivered by Cheney I think the message would be listened to and the Turks would stop the nonsense talk.

Posted by RKV | October 17, 2007 1:46 PM

Funny no one here mentions the Turkish Parliament's refusal to allow the US to stage attacks on Iraq from Turkey in 2003. Our putative ally Turkey screwed us then, and aim to do the same to us again, with an attack into Iraq. They can't control their borders any better than the US is doing. That's not to say it can't be done, but it does take will and money. We can do better and so can they, without invading a neighboring country.

Posted by coldwarrior415 | October 17, 2007 1:48 PM

Pelosi pushed this resolution for two reasons:

-- the first is to screw up the works of the Iraq War, in a typical passive-aggressive manner, so she can once again chant the mantra that it is all Bush's fault.

-- the second is Pelosi's desire to placate the California-Armenian political machine. If it has money, she is there with the purse wide open. Personal political gain traded off for the lives of Americans in uniform. Abhorrent.

California Armenian-Americans are a very powerful lobby in California, have been for decades, and for decades have exercised political and financial power upper-class largely-leftist California political circles way beyond their numbers would indicate. I note that the only legal foreign trade office in Yerevan, Armenia, is the California Trade Office. We don't even have an American Trade Office there. [Since Armenia has yet to abide by the several agreements and conventions on human rights it originally signed, no US Administration has permitted this since Armenia's obtaining independence. Apparently, none of the Euro's have permitted it either.]

I don't begrudge Armenian-Americans their accumen in taking advantage of the American Dream, nor their Right to do the same, but I do take major issue with their overall agenda taking precedence over the lives and well-being our our sons and daughters in uniform.

Posted by docjim505 | October 17, 2007 1:59 PM

When you're trying to keep a lid on a pressure cooker, it's really not helpful to have some idiot come along and turn up the heat. This is what SanFran Nan and her fellow morons in the Congress have done. We've got enough trouble in the Middle East generally and Iraq specifically without them antagonizing the Turks.

How f***ing stupid can they be?

Posted by mhufnagel | October 17, 2007 2:08 PM

The PKK needs to be taken care of and it really doesn't matter by who. If the US/Iraq gov'ts won't do it, then it's up to Turkey.
Sure the Dems in congress are looking to screw Bush, but this has been coming for a long time.

And in regards to offending Turkey, has everyone forgotten how they wouldn't allow us to enter Iraq through their territory? I haven't and I don't think we should consider them that big an ally.

The best solution is to have the US close down the PKK. They don't have an ally to protect them from a joint US/Iraq/Turkey assualt.

Posted by NavyspyII | October 17, 2007 2:15 PM

Not to be facetious, but can we call it Treason yet?

Posted by coldwarrior415 | October 17, 2007 2:22 PM


"Funny no one here mentions the Turkish Parliament's refusal to allow the US to stage attacks on Iraq from Turkey in 2003. Our putative ally Turkey screwed us then, and aim to do the same to us again, with an attack into Iraq."

That decision was not made in a vacuum. To suggest that they just up and screwed us for no reason only serves to be revisionist about history, and seriously cloud the issue. I've mentioned this on other recent threads along with the context for Ankara making that decision.

Once again, looking at Turkey in 2003, just before our invasion of Iraq, there were many bombings and other Islamist-JIhadi-associated things going on inside Turkey. Jihad inside Turkey was on a sharp upward slope. The Parliament was dealing with a large pro-Sharia faction, and trying to maintain their viability in NATO as well as maintaining forward momentum to join the European Community, having passed all the checkmarks required for membership years ago, still not allowed to be a member, and trying to be as supportive of the US as they could. [The first non-US Special Operations forces to go to Afghanistan to destroy the Taliban were Turkish, and they are still there. They are also still involved in major projects throughout Afghanistan and also inside Iraq. They are doing a lot more than most of the rest of our NATO allies.]

Back to 2003, we, at the same time Turkey was straining to stay alive in the face of the rising jihadist threat, gave Turkey about 48 hours notice that we were going to stage the Army's 4th Infantry Division within their borders, arrange them as a tactical formation inside their borders, and then use their borders for a launch pad to invade Kurdish Iraq. AThis, after summarily closing most of our bases in Turkey in the early 90's and having a gross negative effect on the Turkish economy along the way, we, in 2003, then offered Turkey a very public bribe to allow the 4th ID to enter Turkey after their rigfht of refusal. Piss poor politics, on our part, period.

We gave the Turkish Parliament and Erdogan's government very little wiggle room, none actually.

But, they allowed us to use Incirlik unfettered and still do...well, but as of this morning, I wouldn't take that to the bank, yet.

But calling them a putative ally when you actually mean lap dog doesn't do any of this problem any good at all.

As for the border, they have nearly 60,000 troops already on the border. And the PKK attacks still continue, and the PKK uses northern Iraq as a launch pad for these raids and attacks.

There are already Turkish military units operating inside northern Iraq, and they have been there for a good bit of time already. How big this thing gets depends on many things, and a lot of cooperation and compromise among us, the Iraqis, and the Turks.

But denigrating the Turks isn't going to help any of us, nor the Iraqis, nor lend to a solution to the overall problem.

Posted by whocares | October 17, 2007 2:26 PM

Everyone is talking about "shutting down the PKK" as if its just that easy. They have outlived the Ottomans, the Shah, Saddam and will outlive the current regimes in the area. A serious Turkish invasion will result in turmoil within Turkey as their losses mount and politicians imitate our own Democratic party. Maybe they will seek accommodation rather than endless strife with their oppressed Kurdish minority?

Posted by Noocyte | October 17, 2007 2:26 PM

What we can do is to write to our respective representatives and try to widen the hole into which this misbegotten resolution appears to be sliding. For what it's worth, here's mine:


Dear Rep. Murphy;

I expect you are aware of the non-binding resolution before the House, which seeks to label as genocide the depredations of the long-defunct Ottoman Empire against ethnic Armenians, upwards of 90 years ago. I am writing today to urge you in the strongest possible terms to resist the passage of this resolution. Its mere discussion has prompted ominous stirrings from our valued allies in Ankara, who will have to respond in a face-saving way to what they cannot help but see as a grievous insult.

As a veteran of OIF, I imagine you are well aware of the vital strategic and logistical value of Incirlik Air Base, whose use we enjoy at the pleasure of the Turkish government. At least 90% of the MRAP vehicles which will do so much to protect your erstwhile comrades in arms will enter Iraq via Incirlik.

The Kurdish region of Northern Iraq is one of the great success stories (so far) of OIF. For this ill-considered resolution to force Ankara's hand toward precipitate action against the PKK, to deny CF use of Incirlik, and to sour relations with a vital ally will do no good and will do much harm. It will endanger American lives, jeopardize American interests abroad, and likely have adverse effects on the world economy, as the ensuing destabilization of oil-rich regions forces global petroleum prices to rise.

There is, quite simply, no sense to this resolution at this time in this climate. The only imaginable motivation for choosing this issue at this time is to sabotage the war effort indirectly, having failed to force an ignominious and premature withdrawal from Iraq by legislative means. I persist in the hope that such dishonorable motives have no place in the halls of Congress, and most strenuously and respectfully ask that you vindicate that hope through your efforts.



Posted by Jose | October 17, 2007 2:32 PM

Dozens of Turks including several soldiers have been killed in the past few weeks. The Turks are well within their right to fight back.

None of this is new, Turks have performed hot pursuit raids into Iraqi Kurdistan for some time now. The Irans occassionaly lob a few shells over as well.

This doesn't have anything to do with Pelosi.

Posted by Angry Dumbo | October 17, 2007 2:36 PM

Pelosi pushed this resolution for two reasons:

-- the first is to screw up the works of the Iraq War, in a typical passive-aggressive manner, so she can once again chant the mantra that it is all Bush's fault.

-- the second is Pelosi's desire to placate the California-Armenian political machine. If it has money, she is there with the purse wide open. Personal political gain traded off for the lives of Americans in uniform. Abhorrent.

Coldwarrior damn, that was tight. Specifically, your "passive-aggressive" analogy to the Pelosi Congress. The Pelosi Congress does not want to lead as much as they want to keep President Bush (and by deduction, Americans) from having any success in the next 18 months.

Pelosi is feeding her base and feeding her coffers. I don't begrudge her this. I certainly don't expect the msm to call her on this. My question is when will Republicans start feeding us (their base) by publicly attacking earmarks such as Chuck and Hillary's Woodstock museum?

Posted by TomB | October 17, 2007 2:45 PM

I did call it treacherous, does it count?

Do Kurds have a right to become a country?
Maybe it is time?

Posted by coldwarrior415 | October 17, 2007 2:56 PM

"Do Kurds have a right to become a country?"


But, what the Kurds consider "home" encompasses not only Northern Iraq, but also northeastern Syria, southwest Turkey, northwestern Iran, parts of Armenia and Georgia and Azerbaijan. This is the curse the Kurds have been forced to live with for well over a century, and longer.

This is also why it is vital that the Kurdish part of Iraq be enabled to gain solid stability. They may not get their entire homeland to call their own independent country, but having a vibrant part of their homeland, northern Iraq, to call their own might be a good thing.

To do so, become a country, though, would require the active positive participation and support of a lot of actors all across the region. Don't see it happening in my lifetime.

Posted by TomB | October 17, 2007 3:07 PM

It seems everybody around wants to avoid a precedent. But a precedent was made in Yugoslavia.

Posted by BB | October 17, 2007 3:13 PM

For the Kurds to have a home, a secure, prosperous, globally recognized home, as they now have in their northern enclave in Iraq, is a monumental achievement. Country or no, they have more there now than they ever have and are realistically likely to see for quite some time. If Kurds are to maintain the significant sympathy and support they now have, they need to take the lead in reining in the PKK. That is the true defense of the only region of the world where no-one is trying to destroy them.

Posted by daytrader | October 17, 2007 4:07 PM

The dems are always claiming they are going to put the USA in a better international view

How they are doing it so far

Comfort Women resolution against Japan for WWII

Armenian Genocide about Turkey (loosing ground each day from all reports)

Talking to Syria

Stopping free trade agreement with Chile

Stopping war on drugs funding to Columbia

Lots of lefties visiting Chevez and Castro

and many more items that could be added to the list

Posted by bayam | October 17, 2007 4:27 PM

At least Pelosi is one idiot that has no chance of winning the White House. After Bush, the last thing this country needs is another idiot occupying the highest office.

Another ethnic, sectarian division is emerging in the the Middle East? What a surprise. There's no chance that the US will defend the Kurds. No realistic military or political objective could underly such a policy, unless our objective is to alienate our only true ally in the Middle East.

Posted by Captain Ed | October 17, 2007 4:31 PM


Plus, it has to be said -- the Turks have a case here. The PKK are terrorists, and if they base themselves in Iraq for those attacks, eventually someone has to take care of the problem. If Iraq and the US don't, Turkey eventually will.

Posted by gab | October 17, 2007 4:42 PM

Coldwarrior415 says:

"California Armenian-Americans are a very powerful lobby in California, have been for decades, and for decades have exercised political and financial power upper-class largely-leftist California political circles way beyond their numbers would indicate."

Having grown up among many, many Calif. Armenian-Americans, I can absolutely guarantee that the above statement is totally without merit. The percentage of Armenian-American leftists is minuscule. They are mostly farmers and small business owners. They are, almost to a man, Republicans.

Posted by bman | October 17, 2007 4:42 PM

The PKK is the major destabalizing force in Iran.
If they would just concentrate on killing Revolutionary Guards and not Turkish soldiers it would be a lot easier to ignore them.

Posted by Del Dolemonte | October 17, 2007 5:02 PM

Sam Pender asks:

"What's the Democrats' Congressional approval rating now? Are they in the negatives yet?"

Latest poll has their "approval" at 24%, down from 29% in June.

Posted by Keemo | October 17, 2007 5:30 PM

Overall rating of Congress now stands at 24%; when polled strictly based on how Congress is handling the GWOT, their rating is now at 11%.

Seems that most of America is paying attention to this lack of talent show the Dems are putting on for the entire world to see. Their bed partners aren't faring very well either, as detailed here.

Morgan Stanley, the second-biggest shareholder in New York Times Co., sold its entire 7.3 percent stake today, according to a person briefed on the transaction, sending the stock to its lowest in more than 10 years.

The person declined to be identified because Morgan Stanley hasn't made the sale public yet. Traders with knowledge of the transaction said Merrill Lynch & Co. brokered a $183 million block trade of 10 million New York Times shares this morning.

Hassan Elmasry, managing director of Morgan Stanley Investment Management, unsuccessfully challenged the Sulzberger family's control of New York Times Co. through super-voting stock that gives them a board majority. Shareholders owning 42 percent of the company, parent of the namesake newspaper and Boston Globe, withheld support for directors at the publisher's April annual meeting.

``This guy has been speaking for a lot of people who are too discreet to speak up and challenge management,'' said Porter Bibb, a managing partner at Mediatech Capital Partners LLC in New York and a former New York Times Co. executive.

New York Times shares slid 43 cents, or 2.3 percent, to $18.48 at 4:04 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading, the lowest since January 1997. The stock has declined 24 percent this year.

This latest stunt (Turkey attack) constructed by Pelosi, is turning into another huge embarrassment for Pelosi and the entire Democratic controlled Congress. Many members of her own party are now backing away from this misstep, and the chances of this disaster coming to a vote are now fading. This woman is a disaster of a leader, and the Dems are paying a severe price for having been so foolish as to have put her in this position to begin with. Things don't look much better for good ol' Harry Reid either, as his approval ratings have been flushed down the sewer on a national level as well as in his home state. The best the Dems can do is to put another unqualified woman in a position she has zero chance of having success in; Hillary Clinton. A party that is totally bankrupt of leaders "the 2007 Democrat Party".

Posted by The Mechanical Eye | October 17, 2007 6:16 PM

Victory in the War on Terror and the Democracy Agenda, as far as I can tell from the rarefied, intelligent words of a blog comments section, requires that the United States back away from acknowledging a genocide to placate an ally with a militaristic government - a government that's barely cooperating with us in Iraq and whose population is increasingly anti-American due to the enlightened diplomacy of George W. Bush?

And of course the Democrats are all treasonous. Traitors! Traitors! Traitors!


Posted by TyCaptains | October 17, 2007 6:49 PM

Geez, so many conspiracy theories around.

Maybe, just maybe they're attempting to fulfill Bush's promise to that community?


Chicago - During a recent trip to Chicago to promote his tax-cut plan, President George W. Bush made statements to members of the Armenian National Committee (ANC) reaffirming his campaign pledge to "ensure that our nation properly recognizes the tragic suffering of the Armenian people."
A partial text of Bush's letter appears below.
"The twentieth century was marred by wars of unimaginable brutality, mass murder and genocide. History records that the Armenians were the first people of the last century to have endured these cruelties. The Armenians were subjected to a genocidal campaign that defies comprehension and commands all decent people to remember and acknowledge the facts and lessons of an awful crime in a century of bloody crimes against humanity. If elected President, I would ensure that our nation properly recognizes the tragic suffering of the Armenian people." (George W. Bush 2-19-2000)

Posted by exDemo | October 17, 2007 7:10 PM

Providing we don't have a Pelosi War. there are some good things that can come of the this Turkish affair.

It reinforces to the Kurds in Iraq that it is MUCH SAFER to be a federal part of a Iraqi nation supported by the Superpowers, than an independent Kurdistan likely to be beset upon by Turkey, Iran and Syria.

Further the way to expand Kurdistan is to free the oppressed Kurds in much weaker Syria and Iran.

Especially,Since the PKK is fighting guerrilla wars in all three countries. It would be better if they merely redirected their efforts at Syria and Iran and cool their efforts against Turkey.

Both of those dictatorships are very rickety. Syria Baathism hangs by a thread. The theocracy totters as well. Freeing the oppression of the Kurds in those countries FIRST, would help Kurds the most. Peeling off the Syrian Kurdish provinces in far northeast Syria for Anschluss with Iraqi Kurdistan, and perhaps far northwestern Iran would destabilize both of these hated despots. it would also help balance the minority populations in Iraq.

It is not really that the world thinks the Persians should be denied the bomb; its that the world fears the Persian theocratic regime and its lunatics. It is hated externally in the Mideast; and hated by its repressed population after thirty revolutionary years of no progress and 7th century nonsense.

The best outcome is not bombing Iran,but having theocracy go the way of the Soviet Union in 1988. If you listen closely, you can hear the regime creaking and tottering on the edge of collapse.

Lets let the Kurds help tip it over.

Posted by Hope Muntz | October 17, 2007 7:19 PM

Sorry. I dislike the the lady as much as you do, but this is not "Nancy Pelosi's invasion". In point of fact, as support for the bill wanes in the House in the face of Senate opposition and an implied presidential veto, the Turkish parliament has acted unilaterally to authorize the invasion of Kurdish Iraq anyway. This timetable has absolutely nothing to do with the House measure on the Armenian Genocide--or else it would have occurred after, not before our House voted on it. It is in a word, pre-emptive. And would have happened even if Pelosi had never even heard of Armenian-American voters. Bear in mind that this is a Western woman who would happily wear a head-scarf if invited to Ankara.

Of far more import than assigning blame is what happens next on the ground. Ralph Peters believes that if the Turks proceed on this course it will become a second Falklands War for the Turkish military, though this scenario seems to imply active US involvement. Others believe that the Pesh Merga can sustain an unconventional war against Turkey while Europe, already loath to consider Turkish admission into its club, implements economic sanctions against it. Nearly a third of Turkey's territory is Kurdish, so any such war might very well spill over into an active guerilla campaign--and eventually a civil war--inside Turkey itself. This in a country that has plans to bring online at least 4 new nuclear reactors.

Whether Peters is right or not, the Turks' atavistic hubris in this will do nothing but import the worst horrors of Iraq and Lebanon into a society that seemed at last to be freeing itself from the chains of the past.

Posted by coldwarrior415 | October 17, 2007 7:34 PM

Pesh Merga, Kurdish Irregular Forces, is not the same as the PKK, Kurdistan Workers Party. The Pesh Merga in Iraq has actually been fighting against the PKK inside Iraq, vying for territory, and trying to prevent PKK influence on the Kurdish people in Northern Iraq. The Pesh Merga has been an active ally of US forces in Iraq since our arrival. The PKK has vowed to take on US forces and push them out of northern Iraq.

The Pesh Merga has not yet been involved in attacks inside Turkey, and probably will not do so, but Turkey was very concerned when Kirkuk was liberated in 2003 by the Pesh Merga and they in turn called for a pan-Kurdish state.

Posted by LSD | October 17, 2007 7:36 PM

Did the US Congress understand that the Turkish Parliment would vote on this prior to their own vote on the Armenian genocide?

-If so it seems it was a ruse. Now the sabotuers can withdraw from a noble cause because of hightened tensions in the region. They never had to go on record with a vote.

Posted by AnonymousDrivel | October 18, 2007 1:36 AM

RE: TyCaptains (October 17, 2007 6:49 PM)

"...Maybe, just maybe they're attempting to fulfill Bush's promise to that community?"


(George W. Bush 2-19-2000)

Isn't that somewhat relevant? This is not an inconsequential distinction.

Posted by Burford Holly | October 18, 2007 8:59 AM

Col. WIlkerson (Colin Powell's former aide) predicted this invasion 18 months ago, said it was the worlds #1 flash point.

Turkey's invasion has been in the works for about 2 years.

Post a comment