What are the Dems up to threatening Turkey?

Clearly we do. Who would it serve in US politics to do this? Which party might have something to show for it?

They wait until it could be considered politically motivated to do this? Why?

I think a few of those questions are rhetorical but they are excellent questions indeed.
 
I think a few of those questions are rhetorical but they are excellent questions indeed.

Best I can tell is that it's Pelosi making her folks back home happy and the Turks giving us an early warning that they WILL HAVE to respond negatively if it goes any further than this subcommittee vote.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aSadgbKml95w&refer=home

Speaker Pelosi said that she did not have a date in mind for bringing the issue to the floor, but that it would be brought up this session, which is to end around Nov. 16. Whatever happens, she insisted, relations between the United States and Turkey will remain strong.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/12/europe/12turkey.php?page=2
 
Last edited:
Pelosi et al............

are not Democrats of the past...they are Socialist...pure and simple...mis-information is their game! They will do the bidding of the KGB as the Ho's that they are! Putin must be proud of them, one and all...!
 
are not Democrats of the past...they are Socialist...pure and simple...mis-information is their game! They will do the bidding of the KGB as the Ho's that they are! Putin must be proud of them, one and all...!

I'm trying to stay pretty open on this one but I fail to see any point in this resolution. Any democrat have an explanation ?
 
Nope...............

I'm trying to stay pretty open on this one but I fail to see any point in this resolution. Any democrat have an explanation ?




There are no more Democrats per the old...the Repubs are the new Demos..The past Demos are progressives..now known as Socialist/Communists!...Please get up to speed!:rolleyes:
 
I'm trying to stay pretty open on this one but I fail to see any point in this resolution. Any democrat have an explanation ?
Explanation:

We can get rid of an ally in the WOT, especially one that is barely hanging onto Democracy by a thread and has been amassing troops on the border with Iraq.
 
Explanation:

We can get rid of an ally in the WOT, especially one that is barely hanging onto Democracy by a thread and has been amassing troops on the border with Iraq.

It's important to get the truth of all genocides on record. We shouldn't be laying with these dogs anyway. Pragmatism paves the road to hell.
 
It's important to get the truth of all genocides on record. We shouldn't be laying with these dogs anyway. Pragmatism paves the road to hell.
Which record? Our history books already relate this incident. Does it make it any more true because Congress says it is?

There is little reason for this, other than political.
 
Explanation:

We can get rid of an ally in the WOT, especially one that is barely hanging onto Democracy by a thread and has been amassing troops on the border with Iraq.

You think someone might politely and privately slap whoever upside the head and tell them how much their silly little semantic game of politics is going COST ? We're already treading water in Northern Iraq with the PPK attacking Turkey.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/18/world/europe/18turkey.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

"Parliament in Turkey Votes to Allow Iraq Incursion"
And here we go with the Turkey backlash!


I wonder if those who supported the Israeli invasion and bombing of lebanon, under similar circumstances, will rush forward to support turkey's right to do the same?

As for me: I'm totally consistent. I don't want to see the turkish air force bombing iraqi cities, airports, highways, and infrastructure. Although I don't deny them the right to defend themselves, perhaps with limited special forces or covert ops against PKK terrorists.
 
This comes at a damn inconvenient time.

Sooner or later they are going to have to actually act. This is not sabre rattling.
 
Back
Top