Adieu, Turkey: Should the United States end its alliance with Turkey?

Lord Tammerlain said:

Russia does not boarder Turkey and no Russian aggression is likely. Meaning less chance of a Russian attack on Turkey than a US attack on Turkey. Overal Russia would be happy with a split between Turkey and the US/NATO. It removes a threat from its South West boarder.

Click to expand...

The Turks and Russians are historic foes. Putin doesn't trust Erdogan anymore than anyone in Washington does. You can bet your ass the moment Turkey seems exposed Russia is going to swoop in and carve out a piece their orbit, whether it be in the Balkans or Caucasus. At this point, seeing how Macron among other European leaders have begun to adopt a more conciliatory approach to the Kremlin - if not necessarily 'friendly' - in the wake of Trump's reality TV show presidency/insanity NATO and Russia would be more likely to form a temporary military alliance against Turkish aggression than the US is likely to do anything... like AT ALL.

Furthermore, Russia is supporting the Assad regime against Turkey, and the only countries that openly support Turkey are Azerbaijan, the Central Asian Turkic states and Pakistan:

After Trump wrote his strange letter to Erdogan (which was tossed in the trash), Erdogan said that writing to him in such a manner was insulting.

He said that he wouldn’t forget the lack of respect. And I quote; “When the time comes necessary steps will be taken”

I'm not sure what Erdogan means by that, but it doesn't sound like he's singing Kumbaya.

Abbazorkzog said:

The Turks and Russians are historic foes. Putin doesn't trust Erdogan anymore than anyone in Washington does. You can bet your ass the moment Turkey seems exposed Russia is going to swoop in and carve out a piece their orbit, whether it be in the Balkans or Caucasus. At this point, seeing how Macron among other European leaders have begun to adopt a more conciliatory approach to the Kremlin - if not necessarily 'friendly' - in the wake of Trump's reality TV show presidency/insanity NATO and Russia would be more likely to form a temporary military alliance against Turkish aggression than the US is likely to do anything... like AT ALL.

Furthermore, Russia is supporting the Assad regime against Turkey, and the only countries that openly support Turkey are Azerbaijan, the Central Asian Turkic states and Pakistan:

Click to expand...

Russia is also selling S400 systems to Turkey, with intent to sell other weapon systems to Turkey if possible. Right now and for the next few years, Russia has no interest in invading or even attacking Turkey. It has far more important land areas it would like to claim/reclaim (eastern Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan for instance. The only strategic aspect of Turkey that Russia would truly love right now would be the Bosphorus Strait. Beyond that the cost of conquest and the return on it (combined with the cost of maintaining control would be to high.

Overall Turkey and Russia are acting like traditional competitors, they have common and diverging interests. Russia does not want Syria to collapse so that it can maintain a port there, I doubt it really cares one way or another about the Kurds. It is the same with Iran, all three have common and diverging interests in the region, none are likely to go to war over the diverging interests. Iran and Turkey share the same interest in ensuring no Kurdish independent state. Russia I expect understands that is a prime issue for Turkey and wont press against it, but push for Syria to move back into the area with a guarantee that no Kurdish state will form

Now for the next few years Russia's main strategic interest would be to see nato dissolve, encouraging Turkey to act in a way to cause that is ideal for Russia, any attack by Russia on Turkey will stop that long term goal, as such will not occur for the next few years. Over course given that Turkey does not boarder Russia is a huge issue. To attack Turkey would require a large force, being shipped by sea or air, something Russia does not have the capacity to do, and the logistical support to keep that force equipped and fed. Russia's forces in Syria are relatively small (less than 20 000), a force to attack Turkey would require hundreds of thousands ( Turkey has the largest standing army in Europe). Without a land link Russia would be hard pressed to supply its invasion force. Putin is not that stupid

Other: there's no provision in the NATO charter that allows a member nation to be expelled.

No it should try to salvage it on better terms than Trump can manage

RabidAlpaca said:

Yes absolutely. Despite Trump and his supporters being huge fans of brutal dictatorships, America shouldn't be allies with them.

Now, watch a bunch of conservatives defend the honor and character of a Muslim theocratic dictatorship.

Click to expand...

Continuing to lie about people that you know nothing about, really isn't something that you should be so proud of.

Felis Leo said:

The question up for discussion today: Should the United States end its alliance with Turkey?

Following Turkey's attack on the Kurds, supposedly the Kurdish Communist guerrilla faction (the PKK), a moment of realization has crystalized on both the political right and the political left, which has led many to call the American-Turkish alliance into question, some calling for the outright suspension or expulsion of Turkey from NATO (though there is no means to presently do so).

I, personally, am all for it. I used to love Turkey and its secular system of government, but have grown cooler towards it over time since Erdogan has turned himself into an Ottoman Pasha in all but name. NATO should, arguably, be the alliance of law-governed democracies against tyrannical dictatorships. But we have watched as an otherwise law-governed democracy has turned into an illiberal dictatorship right before our eyes. I do not think it is wise to bind ourselves to

What I am NOT asking:

1. I am not asking whether or not we should sanction or punish Turkey over the nation's variegated actual or alleged bad acts.
2. I am not asking whether or not we should aid Turkey's enemies against Turkey, or get into a direct military confrontation with Turkey.
3. I am not asking whether or not we should re-examine our alliance with any other countries other than Turkey. I do not want this to devolve into a "whataboutism" debate about our alliances with other countries which have governments that have done horrible things, or have been accused of doing so, though you can certainly bring it up if the principles which inform your choice are relevant to the discussion.

If you answer "Other," please tell us what you think the other alternative would be.

Click to expand...

Felis Leo:

I voted no. Erdogan isn't Turkey and Turkey plays a vital geographical role in NATO's security. Kick out Turkey and NATO looses the second largest armed forces in the alliance, it looses control of the Bosporus and it looses easy access to the Black Sea. That is just playing into the Russian's/Putin's plans for weakening NATO. Find a way to get rid of Erdogan rather than flushing all of Turkey out with Erdogan's scat-splattered clique. Strangle Turkey's economy and interdict tourism to and from Turkey. Target the Erdogan Government minister's private holdings and pull a Venezuela-style sanctions blanket over Turkey. Erdogan's popularity and re-electability will reduce substantially.

Expel Turkey from NATO and it will further gravitate towards Russia, Iran and China and away from Europe. This strengthens the very foes/rivals which NATO must potentially contend with.

There is no mechanism in the NATO charter by which to expel a member state against that state's government's will.

Keep Turkey but get rid of Erdogan by political and economic means.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

This region brings up a wonderful old saying that holds so true throughout history. The enemy of your enemy is your friend. This and every other superpower have been propping up and beating down advisories of each other for 100 years.

The solution to the middle east problems has always been the same exact thing. Lose the dependency on oil as quickly as possible. Solar, wind, nuclear will save the environment and that area much more quickly than sending troops and putting them in harms way.

Simon W. Moon said:

Were we fighting the Turks in warfare?
Were we close to fighting the Turks in warfare? And Trump backed down or something?


Everyone in the world knew that Trump's threat was an empty bluff when he made it.
Not really the point though.

The point being that shouldn't destroy and obliterate an ally's economy.

Trump needs to fess up that he made a transparent bluff and move on.
Or, get to work removing Turkey from our list of allies before he makes good on his threat.

Imho, when you're playing poker, it's pointless to bluff if everyone can tell you are bluffing.
It just costs you money.
That's what Trump has done.
He bluffed about destroying Turkey's economy even though everyone knew it was a bluff.

Click to expand...

You sure it was just a bluff? Turkey COULD slaughter 100% of Kurds in their path. Have they? That is what all the warhawks claimed is going to happen unless we go to war against the Turks in Syria.

Turkey is on the best way to join an alliance with Russia, Iran and Middle East Countries.It's too late to woo it back

Evilroddy said:

Felis Leo:

I voted no. Erdogan isn't Turkey and Turkey plays a vital geographical role in NATO's security. Kick out Turkey and NATO looses the second largest armed forces in the alliance, it looses control of the Bosporus and it looses easy access to the Black Sea. That is just playing into the Russian's/Putin's plans for weakening NATO. Find a way to get rid of Erdogan rather than flushing all of Turkey out with Erdogan's scat-splattered clique. Strangle Turkey's economy and interdict tourism to and from Turkey. Target the Erdogan Government minister's private holdings and pull a Venezuela-style sanctions blanket over Turkey. Erdogan's popularity and re-electability will reduce substantially.

Expel Turkey from NATO and it will further gravitate towards Russia, Iran and China and away from Europe. This strengthens the very foes/rivals which NATO must potentially contend with.

There is no mechanism in the NATO charter by which to expel a member state against that state's government's will.

Keep Turkey but get rid of Erdogan by political and economic means.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Click to expand...

I voted no for same or similar reasons in my post #36.

Your post goes more into specifics which is good.

I stated additionally that another pressure US can place on Erdogan or his successor is to send our generals and admirals through Ankara in a chain of fact slapping visits to further push Turkey back into the alliance as a full partner.

Getting Turkey to keep the S-400 for the US and Nato to autopsy would be good for the good guys and awful for the Kremlin. Nato anyway designates the S-400 as the "Growler" for the noises it makes when Putin turns it on. US can release the Patriot missiles to Turkey in yet another Trump non-deal DepState cancelled recently after a lot of growling by Congress.

It would also be possible to redeploy the F-35 to Turkey. It would resolve too ours and Nato's massive headaches over the B-60 nukes US has deployed at the Incirlik Air Base near the border with Syria (of all places as it turns out) -- all 50 of 'em. I have no doubt Erdogan wants those nukes regardless of heads exploding in Moscow, Tehran, SA, Israel and Washington among other states to include of course the Nato-EU countries. Erdogan doesn't care whose head explodes or how many of 'em do as long as he gets his way.

I invoke the old rule that no matter what it is it's never as bad as it seems. Well, not always and Turkey is no exception. There's also the factor Turkey is in a recession, the Lira has become Parker Bros. money, Erdogan's party lost the mayoral election in Istanbul despite Erdogan cancelling it which only made him lose big on the second vote. Erdogan's still got his room full of mirrors but he's running low on blue smoke while his pump is making a lot of noise.

RabidAlpaca said:

Yes absolutely. Despite Trump and his supporters being huge fans of brutal dictatorships, America shouldn't be allies with them.

Now, watch a bunch of conservatives defend the honor and character of a Muslim theocratic dictatorship.

Click to expand...

What should happen to the nuclear weapons they have? Should the US make an enemy of them knowing they could use them?

Rogue Valley said:

Those are Turkish Kurds, not Syrian Kurds. Stop lumping everyone into one convenient basket.

Click to expand...

FYI all Kurds are fighting to get their own country. Neither Turkey, Iran, Syria or Iraq want that.

The knee jerk reactionary in me says both NATO and the EU should ditch Turkey. They at least used to try to walk the fine line of supporting western foreign policy and their own regional tribal agenda. Now that line is so blurred that they just aren't trustworthy anymore. I would even say they are verging on becoming our enemy.

But to cut them loose now would be to basically hand them over to Russia, or at the very least create another highly unstable political actor in the region. We have a lot of military investment in Turkey, not to mention it is a huge strategic gateway to Europe. We can't afford to lose control of it.

Better to keep this enemy close to us.

Tangmo said:

I voted no for same or similar reasons in my post #36.

Your post goes more into specifics which is good.

I stated additionally that another pressure US can place on Erdogan or his successor is to send our generals and admirals through Ankara in a chain of fact slapping visits to further push Turkey back into the alliance as a full partner.

Getting Turkey to keep the S-400 for the US and Nato to autopsy would be good for the good guys and awful for the Kremlin. Nato anyway designates the S-400 as the "Growler" for the noises it makes when Putin turns it on. US can release the Patriot missiles to Turkey in yet another Trump non-deal DepState cancelled recently after a lot of growling by Congress.

It would also be possible to redeploy the F-35 to Turkey. It would resolve too ours and Nato's massive headaches over the B-60 nukes US has deployed at the Incirlik Air Base near the border with Syria (of all places as it turns out) -- all 50 of 'em. I have no doubt Erdogan wants those nukes regardless of heads exploding in Moscow, Tehran, SA, Israel and Washington among other states to include of course the Nato-EU countries. Erdogan doesn't care whose head explodes or how many of 'em do as long as he gets his way.

I invoke the old rule that no matter what it is it's never as bad as it seems. Well, not always and Turkey is no exception. There's also the factor Turkey is in a recession, the Lira has become Parker Bros. money, Erdogan's party lost the mayoral election in Istanbul despite Erdogan cancelling it which only made him lose big on the second vote. Erdogan's still got his room full of mirrors but he's running low on blue smoke while his pump is making a lot of noise.

Click to expand...

You and Roddy are dreaming.

Erdogan is using NATO as a "shield of morality" to commit war crimes in northern Syria.

Turkey may have used chemical weapons on the Kurdish civilians Trump left vulnerable

Turkey Accused of War Crimes After Suspected White Phosphorus Use Against Kurds in Syria

Mason66 said:

What should happen to the nuclear weapons they have? Should the US make an enemy of them knowing they could use them?

Click to expand...

Uh, they're our nukes so, take them our of Turkey?

Rogue Valley said:

You and Roddy are dreaming.

Erdogan is using NATO as a "shield of morality" to commit war crimes in northern Syria.

Turkey may have used chemical weapons on the Kurdish civilians Trump left vulnerable

Turkey Accused of War Crimes After Suspected White Phosphorus Use Against Kurds in Syria

Click to expand...

Everyone knows Turkey is having militia trail their regular troops and forces to do the dirty work of cleansing.

Everyone also knows Nato has no provisions to expel or suspend a member state. And everyone knows Erdogan is using Trump to execute his malevolent will against the US ally the Kurds. The tragic irony is evident to everyone but Trump.

Neither is Nato minus the United States going to bomb Ankara and Erdogan's palace to save the Kurds. So Turkey being a member of Nato does not implicate Nato in Erdogan's fascist genocide.

It's all on Trump.

And we know Putin pulls Erdogan's chain when he wants to and he also pulls Trump's chain when he needs and wants something big. The US abandoning an ally is big. The US abandoning an ally to genocide is very big. Putin considers he has nothing to complain about in this one. Another one.

Tangmo said:

Everyone knows Turkey is having militia trail their regular troops and forces to do the dirty work of cleansing.

Everyone also knows Nato has no provisions to expel or suspend a member state. And everyone knows Erdogan is using Trump to execute his malevolent will against the US ally the Kurds. The tragic irony is evident to everyone but Trump.

Neither is Nato minus the United States going to bomb Ankara and Erdogan's palace to save the Kurds. So Turkey being a member of Nato does not implicate Nato in Erdogan's fascist genocide.

It's all on Trump.

And we know Putin pulls Erdogan's chain when he wants to and he also pulls Trump's chain when he needs and wants something big. The US abandoning an ally is big. The US abandoning an ally to genocide is very big. Putin considers he has nothing to complain about in this one. Another one.

Click to expand...

You have it backwards. The US isn't abandoning. Erdogan abandoned the US, NATO, and Western liberalism with the supposed putsch.

We should get our nukes out of there asap.

Rogue Valley said:

You have it backwards. The US isn't abandoning. Erdogan abandoned the US, NATO, and Western liberalism with the supposed putsch.

We should get our nukes out of there asap.

Click to expand...

Erdogan abandoning the West is a part of the big picture. Erdogan has dubious standing in Turkey for reasons I've pointed out in scrolling. Which means he is vulnerable to having to alter his ways or possibly lose power. The next US election can go a long way toward recovering Turkey and to reestablish it in the Nato alliance.

Getting the nukes out of Turkey could mean we retreat and return 'em to the USA or we nail down a Nato country or two to receive 'em. Still, there is the matter of secure locations in another country or two and getting 'em there under the required standards of high security and safety. I'd say the worse thing US can do is retreat by returning 'em to the US then hope they can be restored to the Nato geostrategic setting.

The Kurds and the Turks are tribal but they become a part of the big picture because the US has abandoned an ally and it is to genocide which everyone knew was coming and is occurring. Trump gave the green light when he pulled US troops back and away and announced their retreat from their bases at the border with Turkey. Keeping 'em there instead would have gone eyeball to eyeball with Erdogan about firing on US-Nato forces. Erdogan is not mad enough to do that or he would have done it previously. Instead Erdogan took the easy route of grabbing Trump by the balls and saying get the troops out, which Erdogan knew Trump would do no matter the consequences to the Kurds.

joko104 said:

You sure it was just a bluff? Turkey COULD slaughter 100% of Kurds in their path. Have they? That is what all the warhawks claimed is going to happen unless we go to war against the Turks in Syria.

Click to expand...

Trump gave no red line or details about what Trump feels is acceptable behavior from the Turks.
Trump is free to crawfish back as far as Erdogan chases him.


But ask yourself, "Are we actually going to obliterate and destroy the economy of an ally?"
Is that a serious consideration as something America does? Sabotage our allies?

You pivoted from this point a bit ago by suggesting that the threat is just a bluff.
If it's just a bluff, it's a ****ty bluff

It absolutely looks like an empty threat.
There's no red line for Turkey.
That makes it look like Trump is planning on moving the goal post from the get-go.

If you are attempting to bluff, your bluff needs to at least look credible.

You are suggesting that it's not a bluff, now?
As though you think it's likely America will attack and destroy our ally's economy.



You could also decide that the current sanctions have already destroyed Turkey's economy and call it obliterated.
Then, Trump has fulfilled his promise. He tried, but the Turks just would respond to tough guy letters and reason.
Oh, well.

RabidAlpaca said:

Yes absolutely. Despite Trump and his supporters being huge fans of brutal dictatorships, America shouldn't be allies with them.

Now, watch a bunch of conservatives defend the honor and character of a Muslim theocratic dictatorship.

Click to expand...

Actually, Turkey isn't a Muslim theocracy, the military is actually extremely anti-Islamist. Also, the US does support Turkey and not even due to Trump. This is a decades long situation, mainly revolving around them being a NATO member.

Mr. Invisible said:

Actually, Turkey isn't a Muslim theocracy, the military is actually extremely anti-Islamist. Also, the US does support Turkey and not even due to Trump. This is a decades long situation, mainly revolving around them being a NATO member.

Click to expand...

I know the history of Turkey and our relationship with them. They absolutely have become a Muslim dictatorship under Erdogan. These people are not our friends and shouldn't be treated as such.

Felis Leo said:

The question up for discussion today: Should the United States end its alliance with Turkey?

Following Turkey's attack on the Kurds, supposedly the Kurdish Communist guerrilla faction (the PKK), a moment of realization has crystalized on both the political right and the political left, which has led many to call the American-Turkish alliance into question, some calling for the outright suspension or expulsion of Turkey from NATO (though there is no means to presently do so).

I, personally, am all for it. I used to love Turkey and its secular system of government, but have grown cooler towards it over time since Erdogan has turned himself into an Ottoman Pasha in all but name. NATO should, arguably, be the alliance of law-governed democracies against tyrannical dictatorships. But we have watched as an otherwise law-governed democracy has turned into an illiberal dictatorship right before our eyes. I do not think it is wise to bind ourselves to

What I am NOT asking:

1. I am not asking whether or not we should sanction or punish Turkey over the nation's variegated actual or alleged bad acts.
2. I am not asking whether or not we should aid Turkey's enemies against Turkey, or get into a direct military confrontation with Turkey.
3. I am not asking whether or not we should re-examine our alliance with any other countries other than Turkey. I do not want this to devolve into a "whataboutism" debate about our alliances with other countries which have governments that have done horrible things, or have been accused of doing so, though you can certainly bring it up if the principles which inform your choice are relevant to the discussion.

If you answer "Other," please tell us what you think the other alternative would be.

Click to expand...

Yes. Under its current course, Turkey is not an ally of the U.S., nor are they a trustworthy or reliable NATO ally. Putin's #1 foreign policy goal is to produce a failed NATO Article V invocation... and Turkey could easily give it to them. Cut them loose from NATO and re-negotiate our relationship with them along terms that better reflect the reality of our relationship.

Mr. Invisible said:

Actually, Turkey isn't a Muslim theocracy, the military is actually extremely anti-Islamist.

Click to expand...

The military has also been completely neutered in the "counter coup", and I wouldn't put too much faith in Turkish security organs being and remaining "extremely anti-Islamist".

Simon W. Moon said:

Trump gave no red line or details about what Trump feels is acceptable behavior from the Turks.
Trump is free to crawfish back as far as Erdogan chases him.


But ask yourself, "Are we actually going to obliterate and destroy the economy of an ally?"
Is that a serious consideration as something America does? Sabotage our allies?

You pivoted from this point a bit ago by suggesting that the threat is just a bluff.
If it's just a bluff, it's a ****ty bluff

It absolutely looks like an empty threat.
There's no red line for Turkey.
That makes it look like Trump is planning on moving the goal post from the get-go.

If you are attempting to bluff, your bluff needs to at least look credible.

You are suggesting that it's not a bluff, now?
As though you think it's likely America will attack and destroy our ally's economy.



You could also decide that the current sanctions have already destroyed Turkey's economy and call it obliterated.
Then, Trump has fulfilled his promise. He tried, but the Turks just would respond to tough guy letters and reason.
Oh, well.

Click to expand...

Trump is the worst dealmaker since Chamberlain.