_sabotage_ wrote:Betiko, I'm not Iraqi, I'm saying were I born there at the same time as I was born, that would have been my life.
Again, you seem to be blaming the average Iraqi for what happens to the average Kuwaiti. I don't seeing starving innocent children as a form of legitimate spanking.
You seem to be clueless as to the US's long standing relationship with Saddam and are blaming the shit they incurred on the average citizen. Sounds familiar: oh that's what terrorists do.
Where have I been blaming average Iraqi for what Saddam did? See, that s your flaw when someone discusses with you. You assume way too many things, interpretate people s opinions the way you want. Irak under Saddam being a dictatorship how do you expect me to blame the Irakis, that were victim of this mad man to be the ones to blame? Stop smoking carpet. The fact that the US had a relationship with Saddam doesn t change the fact that at some point he snapped and went rogue, overestimating his military and political power.
Sure you blamed the average Iraqi. Your response to the shitty life they've had, largely due to Saddam and his relationship with the US, was, but they attacked Kuwait.
See that's your flaw, you won't admit what you did. I don't assume you wrote it: the post is still there. In response to all the bullshit that Iraqis have endured at Western whims, instead of placing yourself in their shoes, you say, but Kuwait: even Steven.
If you are belaboring under the theory that France's private army is in Ivory Coast in order to make reparations to the people for leaving them a resourceless political muddle, then if feel obliged to disenchant you.
Kind of ironic how the people who were starved through US policy are now the same people the US is sending aid for because of ISIS. Rather ironic that ISIS is rolling into towns like P Diddy at Thanksgiving, toting US guns and delivering convoys of food they were bribed into taking.
Just because you can't see the irony in your post, in the policies, in the produced outcomes, doesn't mean it isn't there. You do realize that these operations are carried out for gain, right? It isn't people out there saying I hate freedom. It's people out there whose homes were invaded, family killed, children deformed, life dictated. These are real legitimate reasons to be pissed. Imagine they all thought they were Texas cowboys. Shit would be 100 times worse.
The terrorists were well-equipped and willing to do some downright nasty shit. Every group of people have those that are willing to do stupid terrible shit. In the US, we elect them. In other cultures, they pass them the US weapons so conveniently there.
But, one thing you haven't responded to, I said you are not willing to get to the bottom of this. I understand media is intent on directing perception and doing a crisis, reaction, solution chain on people, why don't you?
Whether manufactured directly or indirectly, the government won't let a good crisis go to waste. Maybe you should take a moment to reflect on what rights this may cause you to lose and what you may do to prevent it.
I've posted this before, but I was arrested for hash and spent a few years in prison in Macau. I've known many killers and seen some in action. These guys were not amateurs. This wasn't a kid running up in a school and taking out as many folks as they can. These were not some guys who had been trained and unleashed. These fuckers had experience. And that is your question: why are experienced soldiers running loose on the streets of Paris? Who is actually funding them? What are the real reasons that they may have support?
Just like the boss of a white supremacist movement may not be at all a white supremacist, their leaders may not give two shits about the ideology of their movement, except in so far as it helps their movement move. But that doesn't mean their support and network doesn't rely on the atrocities of the past.
Metsfanmax Killing a human should not be worse than killing a pig.
It never ceases to amaze me just how far people will go to defend their core beliefs.
sabotage, can you please quote where I said anything about the average iraqi please? as far as i know, my words were against the iraqi army (therefore saddam's regime obviously). The general idea is to prevent civil populations to be repressed and mass murdered anywhere in the world. Do something to help people suffering. If you think what is best is to let people deal with their own shit, well ok. I'm just not in the mood to listen to all you jibberish. So yeah, I'm lucky enough to have never lived in a country in war or civil war, or repressend by an authoritarian regime depriving me of any liberty. I think that in the the 21st century it would be a good thing if this could be the case for every human on this planet. Geopolitics are not something manichean where there is a 100% right thing to do and there is always a part of compromise.
So just now on my way home I realized that one of the cartoonists killed lived a few buildings away from me in my street as I've just seen flowers and his name there. I guess all I should say is "he deserved it" because france should just mind its own business.
By the way... the afternoon after killing the cop, the guy that took hostage a jewish deli just went in a park and shot a jogger for fun. The guy is in critical state and might be another victim of the killing (not to mention the other 4 people in critical state that were just shopping in the jewish deli that might not survive)
Oh and thank you for inventing gun powder. i mean, not like it's common knowledge that these guys had been trained in yemen by al quaeda in 2011, and that the received some funds by daesh to buy all the guns. They made a video during the week toexplain all this.
Anyways, i'm done talking with you. You are a twisted young man, all I can say.
_sabotage_ wrote:I've never condoned anything done by Saddam, for most of his career he was operating for the US. In fact, when Saddam was planning to attack Kuwait he told the US about it and took no feedback to be the go ahead. Little did he know, other plans were afoot.
I haven't tried to blame the police or cartoonists for being victims, but you immediately go that route with my Iraqi self. Somehow he is responsible for Saddam attacking Kuwait so it's all good in your books. Betiko's mind bubble: Sure that Iraqi self suffered, but when he was eleven his dictator attacked a neighbor, so, ya know, well he kind of deserved it.
So Victor Hugo was lying?
Given that we re the same age, i guess you can understand that as a french 11yo kid in an american school in india at the time, I probably had another version of the story. Stories about the mean Oudaï Hussein, I also remember watching the news where some koweiti kid was telling how some iraki soldiers came to their house and started removing his parent's eyes from their orbit with a spoon in front of him. Given that you are always full of conspiracy theories, i will just say that you are probably right in from your spectrum in a few cases but that most of your explanations just sound like heavy extrapolations turned into facts. Irak starting to have this imperialistic view over its neighbours was just a big mistake, and if you got the UN and a coalition on 34 countries on your back, you did diserve a spanking. i don t know what kind of relationship your family had with the regime, saddam probably managed to keep the country together as we see the chaos it s been ever since. While i have to admit saddam wasn t probably all that bad, would you agree to say he was some kind of piece of shit too?
Here you equate a story about an individual's actions with those of each Iraqi and say my Iraqi self deserved a spanking.
That is, you're doing what a terrorist does. I.e. since France, US, et al did bad shit, then the average French man deserves a spanking. You are justifying terrorism.
Great let's just say atrocious selfish foreign policy is not 100% good and then ignore it. That'll help.
They made a video to explain it all. How nice.
Last edited by _sabotage_ on Mon Jan 12, 2015 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Metsfanmax Killing a human should not be worse than killing a pig.
It never ceases to amaze me just how far people will go to defend their core beliefs.
_sabotage_ wrote:I've never condoned anything done by Saddam, for most of his career he was operating for the US. In fact, when Saddam was planning to attack Kuwait he told the US about it and took no feedback to be the go ahead. Little did he know, other plans were afoot.
I haven't tried to blame the police or cartoonists for being victims, but you immediately go that route with my Iraqi self. Somehow he is responsible for Saddam attacking Kuwait so it's all good in your books. Betiko's mind bubble: Sure that Iraqi self suffered, but when he was eleven his dictator attacked a neighbor, so, ya know, well he kind of deserved it.
So Victor Hugo was lying?
Given that we re the same age, i guess you can understand that as a french 11yo kid in an american school in india at the time, I probably had another version of the story. Stories about the mean Oudaï Hussein, I also remember watching the news where some koweiti kid was telling how some iraki soldiers came to their house and started removing his parent's eyes from their orbit with a spoon in front of him. Given that you are always full of conspiracy theories, i will just say that you are probably right in from your spectrum in a few cases but that most of your explanations just sound like heavy extrapolations turned into facts. Irak starting to have this imperialistic view over its neighbours was just a big mistake, and if you got the UN and a coalition on 34 countries on your back, you did diserve a spanking. i don t know what kind of relationship your family had with the regime, saddam probably managed to keep the country together as we see the chaos it s been ever since. While i have to admit saddam wasn t probably all that bad, would you agree to say he was some kind of piece of shit too?
Here you equate a story about an individual's actions with those of each Iraqi and say my Iraqi self deserved a spanking.
That is your doing what a terrorist does. I.e. since France, US, et al did bad shit, then the average French man deserves a spanking. You are justifying terrorism.
Great let's just say atrocious selfish foreign policy is not 100% good and then ignore it. That'll help.
They made a video to explain it all. How nice.
you were positioning yourself as an iraqi close to the regime. so I included you, not the general iraqi population
Many many thing to answer here, hard to keep track of everything.
saxitoxin wrote:
arno30 wrote:correct.... but how do you chose them "properly" ?
don't choose, there's no law that says you have to give guns to anyone
(though, if there were law that said that and I were walking down the street and saw a man with a dirty beard crawling out of a cave, dressed like he was an extra in the cast of Aladdin, the first thought through my head would not be "I should give that dude a surface-to-air missile and see what happens")
that's the easy way but not the real one. you have to chose, unless you become swiss. and even swiss...
saxitoxin wrote:
arno30 wrote:like there have been no solution for the Israel/palestinian problem for decades
had France not given Israel the technology to build the atom bomb, the Israel/Palestinian problem would have been solved back in the 1980s by Israel's neighbors ... if you remove one side in a conflict then there ceases to be a conflict - easy
back then, after WWII and the creation of the state, it was impossible to not help israel defends itself. why creating Israel to let it destroy ?
And i am not going to try to introduce in the middleof the discussion the different lobbies, industrial or religious ones, that have had ( and probably still have) huge influences on the decision taken.
GoranZ wrote:Something smells in the attack of Charliе Hebdo.
1. The attackers forgot their ID card in the car they used for the attack. The logical question to be asked is "Why would they need ID card when they are planning to commit a massacre?" maybe they got struck by instant desire to be good citizens. 2. Terrorist didn't had any means of how to enter the building unless someone opened the door(which indeed happen). The logical question to be asked is "What would they have been doing, masked and armed to the teeth, if no one didn't opened the door?" 3. The French president visited the scene of the crime rite after the attack. The logical question to be asked is "Terrorists are on the run, a massacre has been committed, the city is an emergency, no one knows where the terrorist are and french secret service is taking the President to the scene of the crime? Why such big mistake has been done and the life of the President is directly endangered?" Maybe French secret service wanted assassination attempt to the french president. But if that attempt was successful the attackers would have been glorified as saints.
German newspaper Hamburger Morgenpost was attacked last night, probably because it reposted the caricatures made by Charliе Hebdo. No casualties in this attack, only material damage.
Does someone from the west want to divert the public opinion away from the real problems in EU?
1. maybe they didn't want to have problem before the attack at a random police control ? maybe they didn't think about it ? Maybe maybe maybe... 2. after the 2011 burning of their building, the adress was hidden. charlie hebdo was hosted in a "secret" location inside a building with no exterior sign. and they probably didn't have the occasion to go for an overview of the site to plan the attack. just an approximate idea on the situation. 3. it was probably the safest place on earth right after the attack don't you think ? and he had to go for obvious political reasons. he took probably more risk this sunday during their walk...
As Iraqi with close ties by saying I don't condone Saddam's actions?
I didn't know close ties were needed to condone an action.
Your first reply was suggesting that Saddam was my "dictator". I didn't know you got to choose dictators. Again, you brought up Kuwait as if I, who hadn't claimed to be a powerful Iraqi but just positioned myself as any Iraqi who had lived through the period, was tainted by the act. I would have been 10/11 at the time.
If you can't come to grips that many more people have suffered at French and French allied hands than will (hopefully) ever be reciprocated and that they were made to suffer for specific benefits, which to some extent were enjoyed by all of France, then so be it. If the only response you have is, well too bad, we aren't going to suffer for them, then you are less intelligent than I thought.
Chris Rock on racism. White people haven't made progress, they are just doing less bad shit.
Well France is still doing bad shit. Should the innocent members of French society suffer? Of course not, but they are benefitting. Perhaps they should stop trying benefit off others suffering and then others will be less likely to get pissed off watching their lives turned to shit.
Metsfanmax Killing a human should not be worse than killing a pig.
It never ceases to amaze me just how far people will go to defend their core beliefs.
GoranZ wrote: Back to the terrorist attacks in France 4. The third suspect Hamyd Mourad (18) was at school. How did the French police figure out that he was part of the attack is still a mystery. 5. According to the Turkish officials Hayat Boyumeddienne(Amedy Coulibali's girlfriend) arrived in Turkey on 2-nd of January and most-likely was already in Syria when the attacks occurred but the French officials are still looking her in France.
4. and 5. : you really believe TV and politics ? do you really think they always say what the police is really doing ? no one is saying the truth i think...
_sabotage_ wrote:As Iraqi with close ties by saying I don't condone Saddam's actions?
I didn't know close ties were needed to condone an action.
Your first reply was suggesting that Saddam was my "dictator". I didn't know you got to choose dictators. Again, you brought up Kuwait as if I, who hadn't claimed to be a powerful Iraqi but just positioned myself as any Iraqi who had lived through the period, was tainted by the act. I would have been 10/11 at the time.
If you can't come to grips that many more people have suffered at French and French allied hands than will (hopefully) ever be reciprocated and that they were made to suffer for specific benefits, which to some extent were enjoyed by all of France, then so be it. If the only response you have is, well too bad, we aren't going to suffer for them, then you are less intelligent than I thought.
Chris Rock on racism. White people haven't made progress, they are just doing less bad shit.
Well France is still doing bad shit. Should the innocent members of French society suffer? Of course not, but they are benefitting. Perhaps they should stop trying benefit off others suffering and then others will be less likely to get pissed off watching their lives turned to shit.
If you claim to be iraki and that you don t condone most of what saddam did well yes, you were most likely in his favour, and he was "your dictator". I ve talked to a few iraki refugees in france who wouldn t speak so highly of saddam you know. Hey, but I guess that saddam was a good guy, invading koweit was a good thing, allirakis were just living the good life under his regime, and the international community just had to watch all this with a happy smile.
What france/ the US/ the UN does is just to destroy happy lives of populations living the good life because they are evil shit. It s never people crying for help and an international coalition s intervention.
The CIA put Saddam's party in power in 1963. The CIA wasn't pleased about nationalizing oil and getting rid of anti-Russian agreements. The CIA then passed along a list of dissidents who were then promptly murdered.
When you call Saddam my dictator, you are right, I am American. He was our guy.
The greatest crimes we condemn Saddam for, we sponsored. Perhaps next time you talk to an Iraqi refuge, ask them where Saddam got his chemical weapons. Ask them what was the US supplying Saddam with to pit him against Iran, who US were also supplying weapons to through selling coke to the US population.
But let's follow your logic. Imagine that we hold each individual responsible for the acts of their state.
I can't see you going up to PhatScotty and kicking him to the curb where he watches you extract his former wealth. You'd expect him to retaliate, you know people would side with him, you have too much to lose.
But France does this all the time. But not to PhatScottys. They do it to the little guy whose resource potential exceeds his military potential. You just drive in armed convoys through former African colonies and drive out with their shit, no taxes paid, no license needed.
By your logic then, it's ok to take shit when the price for taking it is low.
Also by your logic, the actions of a country's leader are the actions of its individuals. France gets diamonds, the French get diamonds.
Now let's see if you can empathize. The Algerian Betiko is watching his family suffer, while his leader is in cahoots with the instigators. Betiko goes online and sees "his" leader happens to have a multi-million dollar crib in Southern France and happens to be rumored to have fat stacks in a Swiss account. This leader just happens to let your family and community suffer for the joint benefit of himself and France.
Here's the kicker. You can only gain refugee status if the leader is deemed unfavorable by countries like France who are encouraging him to be unfavorable. The UN will not give a shit about you (see Palestine). Your own leader is screwing you and France is screwing you.
Now by your logic, two things become apparent:
1. If you want France to leave you alone, make bothering you costly.
2. Every French person is equally culpable for the actions of France.
Now some sorry sucker looking for revenge may not now be guided by revenge, but by the proven way to stop France fucking with him: make them pay. Still revenge, but it also becomes a logical strategy according to your logic. Also by your logic, any target will do.
Seems like a recipe for something.
Metsfanmax Killing a human should not be worse than killing a pig.
It never ceases to amaze me just how far people will go to defend their core beliefs.
_sabotage_ wrote:TGD, my son wasn't feeling well, so I only got like halfway through. But I can see how it was open to diverse perception. I was actually thinking how differently my uncle and some of my Pakistani friends may react to it.
Betiko, I don't condone the Paris attack any more than the preceding centuries that France has held the aggressor position in the natio's where shitty footballers may think they have an appreciative audience for such an attack.
Just stop being such a fucking bozo. You started mentioning that you were not condoning the terrorist acts in paris, then you keep on putting the words you decide in my mouth. Yeah I definitely said that what a country leader does/says makes equally culpable the inhabitants of said country. You are just unbearable dude. How do you expect anyone to have a conversation with you? You decide that the person you are talking to thinks whatever crap then you stick to it for pages. Something you are guilty of doing in one of your first messages. Have a kit kat.
I think I see the problem. You think radical Muslim mullahs are getting kids up in a frenzy over jihad and the image of Mohammed. Their fanatical family finances France's future fear. They send them to General Bin Laden's boot camp for training and then sell the family silver to get the kid into France with a gun and then off to 40 virgins.
I call bullshit.
Al Qaeda means "The Base", as in the database on Muslim assets of the intelligence community. Seeing them as a unified body is like saying everyone in the FBI's database is an associate. That's why whenever we find someone is Al Qaeda we find some sort of tie to the intelligence or military communities of the US. 11 of the 9/11 hijackers had some sort of military or intelligence record of receiving training and/or resources. So they were Al Qaeda not for being a part of a group that they would understand to be called Al Qaeda, but just as anyone in the FBI's database is part of a group.
The database became a group when they were making a case against Bin Laden. They needed to tie him to the other parties that they had evidence against. So what they did was took the whole database of assets/known figures and said it was an organization and Bin Laden was the head of it. Now as the head of the group, he could be prosecuted.
So what then is Al Qaeda? It's a catalog of, in some cases, some very different people.
I come from a place full of religious fundamentalist, Montana. We have all kinds of shit going on. But it's going on quite separately both physically and ideologically. It would also be pretty easy to infiltrate, investigate, coerce, divide or otherwise make ineffectual if at any point it appeared to pose a threat to the state.
If Al Qaeda were radicalized Muslims, united in a common body, then finding who is radicalizing them shouldn't cost hundreds of billions a year. All the same cheap, effective tactics apply. All the same insane, condemnable attacks would arise from them as they do in Montana-none.
It's nice to give things a title, like Christian crusaders. But I don't remember many being sainted. They were doing it for lots of reasons: money, pure pressure, fame, adventure. The morality of it was just a way to legitimize it. If we looked at the "leadership" of Al Qaeda and the reasons someone may join in with one of the leaders, I don't think radical Islam is as much of a factor as stuff like having your family blown up in a drone attack on a wedding and the guy they were trying to get taking you under his wing.
As much as you may like it to be so, it still doesn't put a gun someone's hands or the ability to evade the allied powers of the world. Unless you believe that praying to Allah made the 70+ cameras directed at the site of the pentagon attack not record a plane then you need to reconsider this concept of radical Islam is what caused this attack. Unless you believe that prayer can give you the tools to strike down your enemy, then viewing this as some form of radical Islam is at best extremely tenuous.
So, if this is an act of being pissed that someone drew Mohamed, then I fully condemn it. As an Al Qaeda attack, I can't put much faith in that. I believe it's a bunch of dicks getting power and money for fucking around and they use the vulnerable, of which western foreign policy has created many, and co-opt the idea of Allah with the personal experiences of these kids and get them to do stupid shit.
In that sense, I do not condemn, nor condone the guy who pulled the trigger. He was putty in the hands of the people who turned him into putty, like a dog trained to fight. It was a terrible shame that he didn't have better support available.
Who I do condemn are those who have access to the leaders listed on those databases, who funnel them weapons, money, and can never seem to find them. Who know that events exactly like this will be the result and that the tools will be those who they made vulnerable in the first place. If there is a leader of Al Qaeda, if there is a unified strategy, it can be those holding the database.
Metsfanmax Killing a human should not be worse than killing a pig.
It never ceases to amaze me just how far people will go to defend their core beliefs.
betiko wrote:I ve talked to a few iraki refugees in france who wouldn t speak so highly of saddam you know. Hey, but I guess that saddam was a good guy, invading koweit was a good thing
Betiko since you claim that you are an expert for determining if one regime is dictatorship or not let put your expertise on the ultimate test. Which regime has more dictatorship elements. The one in Saudi Arabia or Sadams? And on what grounds did you conclude that?
betiko wrote:I ve talked to a few iraki refugees in france who wouldn t speak so highly of saddam you know. Hey, but I guess that saddam was a good guy, invading koweit was a good thing
Betiko since you claim that you are an expert for determining if one regime is dictatorship or not let put your expertise on the ultimate test. Which regime has more dictatorship elements. The one in Saudi Arabia or Sadams? And on what grounds did you conclude that?
Where exactly have i said anything about saudi arabia?
GoranZ wrote: Back to the terrorist attacks in France 4. The third suspect Hamyd Mourad (18) was at school. How did the French police figure out that he was part of the attack is still a mystery. 5. According to the Turkish officials Hayat Boyumeddienne(Amedy Coulibali's girlfriend) arrived in Turkey on 2-nd of January and most-likely was already in Syria when the attacks occurred but the French officials are still looking her in France.
4. and 5. : you really believe TV and politics ? do you really think they always say what the police is really doing ? no one is saying the truth i think...
Also, the Turkish government has been (quite openly) steering more towards being the Sultanate of old, rather than the Democracy that had been in place. Plus their inactions and not helping in taking ISIS forces in recent months, I would be suspiscious of anything Erdogan's government puts out there.
betiko wrote:I ve talked to a few iraki refugees in france who wouldn t speak so highly of saddam you know. Hey, but I guess that saddam was a good guy, invading koweit was a good thing
Betiko since you claim that you are an expert for determining if one regime is dictatorship or not let put your expertise on the ultimate test. Which regime has more dictatorship elements. The one in Saudi Arabia or Sadams? And on what grounds did you conclude that?
Where exactly have i said anything about saudi arabia?
That is the problem... You say nothing about Saudi Arabia, mainly because it is Western ally and you can only compare it with Islamic State or the Taliban by its repressions. All others are flowers compare to it. Typical Western Double Standards.
muy_thaiguy wrote:Also, the Turkish government has been (quite openly) steering more towards being the Sultanate of old, rather than the Democracy that had been in place. Plus their inactions and not helping in taking ISIS forces in recent months, I would be suspiscious of anything Erdogan's government puts out there.
lolz. Yeah, the president doesn't like Twitter and doesn't show a huge inclination to get directly involved in another country's civil war, therefore he is a nasty dictator who is probably lying in order to derail France's investigations into the Charlie Hebdo attacks.
muy_thaiguy wrote:Also, the Turkish government has been (quite openly) steering more towards being the Sultanate of old, rather than the Democracy that had been in place. Plus their inactions and not helping in taking ISIS forces in recent months, I would be suspiscious of anything Erdogan's government puts out there.
How can you be so dumb, so shortsighted?
Turkish government are heavily working on establishing Turkey as key player in Europan faith(for the whole continent, not just EU) and how it looks like they will succeed in their goal. How will they succeed that? Main pipelines(gas and oil) from the wells in Azerbaijan, Iran, Iraq and most likely Russia and Kazakhstan(canceled South Stream will probably be built thew Turkey as Turkish Stream) will pass threw Turkey. That is almost half of whole energy demands(gas and oil) for Europe will come from Turkish territory. Can you even imagine how strong position is that for Turkey? From my point of view they can not imagine stronger position than that. That upgrades Turkey from US vassal to equal partner(US are still not aware of this fact). This puts Erdogan's government(and Turkey) is a position to chose what they want on their own not what US wants. So in practice if US wants democracy in Turkey and Erdogan's government wants something else max that US can get is middle finger(or maybe two middle fingers from both hands). Will Erdogan's government succeed in establishing new Ottoman empire? Yes, Turkey will become economic giant in Europe very soon, and with that they will spread their interests primarily in the Balkans and in the middle east quite effectively... On a long run I wouldn't be surprised if Turkey tries to mix its fingers deeper in the heart of Europe threw Muslim population in Europe.
P.S. Do I like Erdogan's government? No, I always prefer secular government(no exceptions). But Erdogan's government is playing their best possible game in European political theater(hats off for their play).
muy_thaiguy wrote:Also, the Turkish government has been (quite openly) steering more towards being the Sultanate of old, rather than the Democracy that had been in place. Plus their inactions and not helping in taking ISIS forces in recent months, I would be suspiscious of anything Erdogan's government puts out there.
How can you be so dumb, so shortsighted?
Turkish government are heavily working on establishing Turkey as key player in Europan faith(for the whole continent, not just EU) and how it looks like they will succeed in their goal. How will they succeed that? Main pipelines(gas and oil) from the wells in Azerbaijan, Iran, Iraq and most likely Russia and Kazakhstan(canceled South Stream will probably be built thew Turkey as Turkish Stream) will pass threw Turkey. That is almost half of whole energy demands(gas and oil) for Europe will come from Turkish territory. Can you even imagine how strong position is that for Turkey? From my point of view they can not imagine stronger position than that. That upgrades Turkey from US vassal to equal partner(US are still not aware of this fact). This puts Erdogan's government(and Turkey) is a position to chose what they want on their own not what US wants. So in practice if US wants democracy in Turkey and Erdogan's government wants something else max that US can get is middle finger(or maybe two middle fingers from both hands). Will Erdogan's government succeed in establishing new Ottoman empire? Yes, Turkey will become economic giant in Europe very soon, and with that they will spread their interests primarily in the Balkans and in the middle east quite effectively... On a long run I wouldn't be surprised if Turkey tries to mix its fingers deeper in the heart of Europe threw Muslim population in Europe.
P.S. Do I like Erdogan's government? No, I always prefer secular government(no exceptions). But Erdogan's government is playing their best possible game in European political theater(hats off for their play).
this looks like the perfect plan but i think: 1. US and the rest of europe are aware of it (how can't they be ?) 2. what if ISIS knock at their door ? they let it go in and settle in Turkey ? or they fight it ?
