More than 60 years ago, Polish-Jewish scholar Ralph Lemkin coined the term "genocide" precisely to describe the scale and brutality of the systematic slaughter of 1.5 million Christian Armenians by the Ottoman Turks.
The assertions Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates made arguing against Congress passing HR 106/SR 106, which calls on our government to recognize the historical truth of the Armenian Genocide are outright lies: that loss of access to Turkish land and air supply routes will imperil coalition forces in Iraq, and that that Turkey is an indispensable ally. Unfortunately, these lies were enough to sway one co-sponsor of the bill, Jane Harmon (D-CA), to withdraw her support.
The truth: Turkey is irresolute as an Iraq War ally and irrelevant as a NATO ally.
If Turkey makes good on its threats to deny the U.S. access to Incirlik Air Base – through which 70 percent of military cargo sent to Iraq is flown – and closes the Turkish-Iraq border to trucks that deliver 30 percent of the fuel used by the U.S. military, there is a Plan B. "Turkey has been a tremendous hub for us, and if we didn't have it that would increase time lines and distances. But it would be a short-term impact," a senior military officer involved in logistical planning and operations tells The New York Times. Armored vehicles and other equipment flown to Iraq over Turkish airspace can also be rerouted, if necessary.
The day the Berlin Wall fell was the day Turkey ceased to matter as a NATO member. Here, highlights of a "Note to the Turkish government" Hugh Fitzgerald posted on Dhimmi Watch that are germane to the focus of this post:
The Cold War, or at least the First Cold War, is over. It is no longer 1950, or 1960. There is no longer a need for Turkey's help in confronting Russia, which, while it has reverted to unpleasantness and despotism, is not the menace it once was. And Turkey is not quite so important a place for listening-posts and other bases. ...
Turkey has not fulfilled, as it seems to think, its duties to its American "ally." It did not permit the use of Incirlik airbase. Three rather than four divisions, therefore, had to take over Iraq. There was no invasion force from the north that might have made a difference in Anbar. ...
Turkey is a member of NATO. The Turks apparently think they will remain in NATO no matter how outrageously they behave. But why should NATO continue to tolerate an Islamic country? What conceivable good can come of having privy to NATO circles a government like that now in power in Istanbul, given that the great threat to the other countries of NATO, and to the Western alliance, comes now from the forces of Jihad? ...- Advertisement -
It may be that Bush thinks that the large-scale murders of Christian Armenians by Muslim Turks began in 1915, when it began twenty years before, with no "wartime conditions" to blame ... [Emphasis, The Stiletto's.]
[T]he E.U. does not need Turkey, does not want Turkey. ... NATO, and the Americans, do not need Turkey, a recalcitrant Turkey, a difficult Turkey, a Turkey that makes demands for the rewriting or the ignoring of history. ... [T]he Turkish army will not be ordered to collaborate with Infidels against other Muslims - and it will not be, not by the current government - then what good is Turkey to NATO?
Fitzgerald's piece also details what a back-stabbing "friend" Turkey has been to the U.S. and punctures Turkey's denialist claims, parroted by our government – as well as by John Fund and Turkey's other shills at The Wall Street Journal.Here's what's really going on: Turkey is using HR 106 as a pretext to carry out its long-planned excursion into Northern Iraq to kill as many Kurds as possible – along with any ambitions they might have of joining their brethren on the Turkish side of the border to form an independent country. The real prize is the potentially huge untapped oil reserves now under the control of the Kurdish Regional Government.
The "insult" of passing the Armenian Genocide Resolution gives Turkey the cover it needs to further it's geopolitical interests and to undermine the U.S. mission in Iraq once again – just as a "neutral" Turkey undermined the Allies in WWII by secretly supplying Hitler with chromium. (Another historical truth that Shimon Peres and Abe Foxman must deny along with the Armenian Genocide so that Israel can maintain its "friendship" with Turkey.)
Conservatives who argue that the Armenian Genocide happened, but it's "inconvenient" to say so right now, should know better than anyone that doing the right thing is never "convenient." It's convenient to steal a car, not to save up money to buy one; to rape a woman a man is sexually attracted to, not to woo and marry her; and to abort a baby, not to feed, clothe and raise him. But in each of these cases – as with passing the Armenian Genocide Resolution - the convenient thing is not the right thing.
On "Fox News Sunday," Steny Hoyer (D-MD) told Brit Hume that he supported the U.S. government's official recognition of the Armenian Genocide for 25 years – and that there never seemed to be "a right time" as far as the Turks were concerned:
Hume: ... Just on the strength of the committee action, the Turks recalled their ambassador, which is a - you know, it's more than a mild form of protest about this. If it's that sensitive at this moment, why do it now?
Hoyer: OK, Brit. That's a good question. I've been in the Congress 26 years. I've been for this resolution for 25 years. I've talked to the Turkish ambassadors, Turkish government, Turkish parliamentarians, over a quarter of a century. Never once in that quarter of a century has anybody in the Turkish government said to me, "OK, this is the right time." In other words, there would be no right time. ...
1 | 2