• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Turkey fires artillery at Syria

Never said that or implied it.

Well surely by citing 'war crimes' as an example of why one side is not preferable to the other (unless I have you wrong) you are lending it moral value (or at least value of some consequence) ? i think it makes more sence to assess the value of killing pows in itself rather then looking at the legality of it as if it actually means something. Which again brings us to the question of what the rebels are to do with POWs if not kill them?

I wouldn't even endorse killing POW's i just think the act needs to be judged for what it was, an act for desperation when no other option was available, which contrasts quite strongly with bludgeoning a civilian population into accepting an unjust form of government.

Of course they are Dave! Remember, anyone who rebels against people we don't like are the good guys! Even if they do have AQ in them and even if they do want an Islamic state.

Are the FSA supposed to perform background checks as well now? I would accept help from Satan himself if i were in their position.
 
Last edited:
Turkey doesn't play, and from everything I've heard they have a very good military and would wipe the floor with Syria.

yes goshin ,but i dont want any war in my country unless we really need it to defend turkey against a serious thread....

we deserved such an attack from syria,yes aqgain it is innocents who were killed,nothing happened to erdoğan and his team............
 
Protecting minority rights, generally through a constitution, is standard procedure in modern western liberal democracy (that being the democracy to which people generally refer). Everyone knows that direct democracy that lacks protections for minorities is a bad thing.

The problem is that there is nothing that can enforce minority rights authored this way. All is only paper then.

In the US it took the creation of a territorially based legal administrative division between EQUAL ranks to create such rights. And after that, the word minority became invalidated by the equality, so it was called Electoral College, instead of something like some rights of minor Rhode Island against the de-facto major New York.

I guess the point is that you can't enforce or even implement minority rights if they are minority rights. The solution is to eliminate the de-facto minority-majority relationship. The easiest to achieve this is a full genocide against the minority. A brilliant theoretical consequence of the initiating premise of democracy. Now let's look for a more humane solution. (Not deportations either.)
 
Are you talking about an end-of-Soviet-Union style fragmentation of countries as opposed to a French style colonialistic division like the end of Austria-Hungary? I think I agree with you then, and Turkey's future will expand and strengthen if it can do the former style devolution of itself into a community of countries including Kurdistan, Armenia, and others. Yet, speculating even further, if successful, Turkey can even export this and initiate the devolution of European nationalistic tyrants too, such as Romania and most Slavonic states. A really respectable historic contribution to the theory of international political development.

no i didnt mean it, but i wish such type of administration worked for us .but it seems every federated states are divided one day.what ı am against is ethnic naionalism which the french revolution let it cause troubles in many countries..
 
Well surely by citing 'war crimes' as an example of why one side is not preferable to the other (unless I have you wrong) you are lending it moral value (or at least value of some consequence) ? i think it makes more sence to assess the value of killing pows in itself rather then looking at the legality of it as if it actually means something. Which again brings us to the question of what the rebels are to do with POWs if not kill them?

I wouldn't even endorse killing POW's i just think the act needs to be judged for what it was, an act for desperation when no other option was available, which contrasts quite strongly with bludgeoning a civilian population into accepting an unjust form of government.



Are the FSA supposed to perform background checks as well now? I would accept help from Satan himself if i were in there position.


I am not saying they should do background checks, but they have actively stated they would seek help from AQ if the West did not provide it (Syria rebels warn they will turn to Al-Qaeda if West fails them — RT) (Syrian rebels consider joining al Qaeda - The Hill's DEFCON Hill)


I am using the war crimes that both sides are accused of in conjunction with other evidence that I have presented to back my argument that I support neither side.
 
no i didnt mean it, but i wish such type of administration worked for us .but it seems every federated states are divided one day.what ı am against is ethnic naionalism which the french revolution let it cause troubles in many countries..

I agree with you. I am a victim of this French revolutionary ethnic nationalism myself, because of it is that my family lost its lands, title, everything. Too bad that almost all nation states in Europe decide to choose this type of nationalism. (Tragic, and an insult to God, I think.)
 
I am not saying they should do background checks, but they have actively stated they would seek help from AQ if the West did not provide it (Syria rebels warn they will turn to Al-Qaeda if West fails them — RT) (Syrian rebels consider joining al Qaeda - The Hill's DEFCON Hill)


I am using the war crimes that both sides are accused of in conjunction with other evidence that I have presented to back my argument that I support neither side.

Again if Al Qaeda seek to take advantage of their desperation then we should deprive them of the opportunity to do so. Think what would have happened if we had supported the Vietnamese against the French and deprived the Chinese and Soviets of the opportunity to take advantage of the situation?

What you need to explain here is what is so heinous about these actions other then their illegality, because their illegality itself means didley squat.
 
Last edited:
I agree with you. I am a victim of this French revolutionary ethnic nationalism myself, because of it is that my family lost its lands, title, everything. Too bad that almost all nation states in Europe decide to choose this type of nationalism. (Tragic, and an insult to God, I think.)

ı understand you .feel sorry for your family:tink:
 
The easiest to achieve this is a full genocide against the minority. A brilliant theoretical consequence of the initiating premise of democracy. Now let's look for a more humane solution. (Not deportations either.)

Bold is false. See signature, ecocentrism.
 
we deserved such an attack from syria,

No, Medusa, innocent people do not deserve to be targetted. In a house was a mother, two children and her friend.
 
No, Medusa, innocent people do not deserve to be targetted. In a house was a mother, two children and her friend.

turkey deserved it .......and always innocents ones are killed .nothing happens to teh governers......
 
And that I find to be the greatest irony. People who fight for freedom so often turn into the very evil that they once opposed.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
 
turkey deserved it .......and always innocents ones are killed .nothing happens to teh governers......

No, Turkey did not deserve to have innocent citizens targetted. There is a big difference between innocents being killed (collateral damage) and innocents being targetted (terrorism).
 
No, Turkey did not deserve to have innocent citizens targetted. There is a big difference between innocents being killed (collateral damage) and innocents being targetted (terrorism).

but pkk has doing it to my people for over 30 yearsiand all the west had supported those bloody terrorists.
ı mean we have our own problems and have to solve them.
 
How was Syria provoked?

you lived here and must know it better..rebels cross the border and bomb their own soldiers everyday and people ,then come back and use their freedom in turkey.....it is just an example......erdoğan and his team has been supporting them..........,
if europe is that kind ,they can take some of the refugees and feed them...
 
but pkk has doing it to my people for over 30 yearsiand all the west had supported those bloody terrorists.
ı mean we have our own problems and have to solve them.

Supported them so much that they banned them and raided their training camps.

you lived here and must know it better..rebels cross the border and bomb their own soldiers everyday and people ,then come back and use their freedom in turkey.....it is just an example......erdoğan and his team has been supporting them..........

So you would rather close the borders and leave these people to die?
 
but pkk has doing it to my people for over 30 yearsiand all the west had supported those bloody terrorists.
ı mean we have our own problems and have to solve them.

I don't care who's done what. The targetting of innocent civilians must be stopped. It's happening right now in Syria and Iran. They are one in the same, with Hez and Hamas. Enough is enough. It's time for freedom.
 
Supported them so much that they banned them and raided their training camps.



So you would rather close the borders and leave these people to die?


of course not ,but civilized europeans could do it easyly..............
 
Supported them so much that they banned them and raided their training camps.



So you would rather close the borders and leave these people to die?

do you know why they banned after causing lots of people'S being killed ??
 
Back
Top Bottom