Yes they do. Did you watch the video?
I have seen this video and watched this video multiple times before and altough i do agree with it on most parts in general, it does not apply to Turkey or the Turkish army; like I reasoned in my reply above, Ottomans are not Arabs!
Did you forget about the purgings? Did you also fail to learn from the Soviet example?
"The main question would be how hard his "Gulenist purge" has struck the military officers." quote from my reply above.....
I'm not sure that referencing a puppet speculating with outdated and inaccurate statistics is an adequate rebuttal.
Despite you mocking his presentation, Binkov is actually quite good at his theories and explanations (not perfect), check more of his videos if you are unsure.
He got exactly what he wanted, how he wanted, and when he wanted it.
Yes and Dutch PM Mark Rutte got exactly what he wanted out of it to, just days before the Dutch elections. To be clear I mean the intervention in Rotterdam and sending a message about Erdogan's political campaigning in western EU by denying 1 minister entrance and expelling another from Dutch soil. It was a win-win situation for both politicians.
If Europe could effectively deal with Turkey, other nations wouldn't be required to step in.
Not sure what your context is here. EU world police?
They need a firm hand. Erdogan now needs a display of force, because he has been coddled too long.
I fail to see the justification in this, you suggest war because Erdogan says something hostile? Don't get me wrong; I think Erdogan is an asshole goatfucking disgrace of a man undoing everything Attaturk build up and dragging Turkey back into the stone ages. But he has been democratically elected and has a majority vote behind him... The situation in the country is dispicable and the mass arrests horrid but the warcost alone wouldn't wage up against the possible gains made as any hostility or flexing of US strenght will only empower Erdogan more in his rethoric with his constituents.
Just wondering how you would see the US military handle this "rapidly", if it came to a war between US and Turkey without NATO intervention and without the use of EU/Arab airbases or landbased entrancepoints. Cause I can't think of any scenario that doesn't involve heavy losses for any invading US forces and a logistical nightmare all around.
it does not apply to Turkey or the Turkish army; like I reasoned in my reply above, Ottomans are not Arabs!
It does apply. It is a top down military. Ottoman, Arab, Paki, Mexican, Cuban, it don't matter what the race or religion is.
You're arguing a point I never made and ignoring the fact that I pointed out.
Binkov is actually quite good..
His other videos are irrelevant, and this one is out dated and inaccurate, and unsupported.
While it may be interesting, it is not useful as evidence of anything.
I fail to see the justification in this, you suggest war because Erdogan says something hostile?
Now that's a disingenuous comment. Nowhere did I say that, and you'd have to Interpret pretty hard to think that 'a firm hand' means declare immediate war.
Not sure what your context is here. EU world police?
What I hear: Policing the world is bad, evil horrible. So we will just bend over for the bullys until it gets so bad that the US or someone else steps in and saves us.
Then we'll sit back and talk about how morally superior we are.
Do you know why you live a free life? Because UK, US, Canada and others 'policed' the world when your policy of 'be nice to assholes' failed. Your method would have seen the world divided by Hitler and Stalin.
Now I would agree that unilateral actions are a bad idea. But when there are too many pussys crying to use kid-gloves on savages, you end up getting people killed.
A policy of appeasement is just going to create the next monster.
One brutal smackdown will end the problem early. But enabling him and setting a bad example will result in far more suffering in the long run. When a nation starts swinging its dick outside of its borders, it is open for 'policing', in my opinion.
Just wondering how you would see the US military handle this "rapidly", if it came to a war between US and Turkey without NATO intervention and without the use of EU/Arab airbases or landbased entrancepoints.
That's silly. Are you intentionally misconstruing what I am saying, or am I really that bad at explaining what I mean?
I'll play though. Air superiority. Turkys airforce would be eliminated faster than you can say "Nu-uh, no way". After that they could leisurely pick the nation apart from a distance with artillery and rocketry. It wouldn't go down like that, so I'm not sure what, if any, point you're trying to make.
Turkey does not have a top tier military, and could not stand against one.
It does apply. It is a top down military. Ottoman, Arab, Paki, Mexican, Cuban, it don't matter what the race or religion is. You're arguing a point I never made and ignoring the fact that I pointed out.
You have been ignoring my reasoning on subject two replies ago, again, and now simply piling any shithole country on your Arab theory cause it has a "top down structure".......
In context to the video:
The Turkish army is not designed to oppress it's own general population (counting the kurdish area not as general pop but as a civil war/occupation)
Turks are not Arab or shitcountry in mentality. They carry nationalism and patriotism to a new level due to their Ottoman heratige (seriously they are worse then the French), they (still) have a very decent education system, a well developed economy, reasonable living conditions and they had a pretty free press climate untill not so long ago. Their army is not basically in "low morale", lowly educated or disinformed like is standard for any basic sandpit army.
The Turkish army has a modern based structure and is based on information sharing western tactics and strategies of combined warfare. It has proven this in the Cyprian war, Kurdish civil war and Syrian intervention.
The Turkish army has always been well funded, trained and maintained. It has been on high alert ever since the cold war and it was one of the pillars of Attaturk's secular Turkey, they even intervered multiple times in the name of the constitution to correct their politicians. To me it's unclear how far the purge has influenced general mentality within the armed forces and hence influencing its operational capacities for now. I severely doubt it will influence equipment handling and maintenance in the short term.
"Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım announced on 16 July 2016 that 2,839 soldiers of various ranks had been arrested.[42] Among those arrested were at least 34 generals or admirals." - wikipedia: I mean general army participation in the coup attempt was around 8k troops most of which where just following orders. I don't know how extensive this is on a standing army of 600k and what the impact would be or how "top down" the situation actually is at the moment, I would barely compare it to Arab standards or the Soviet purge for now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus everyone always links Isreal 6 day war so here's Turkey's moment of glory!
I agree the longer Erdogan is in power the more it could become comparible to an "Arab military", for now that is not the case just yet.
Now that's a disingenuous comment. Nowhere did I say that, and you'd have to Interpret pretty hard to think that 'a firm hand' means declare immediate war.
All your rethoric points towards a forcefull intervention in this thread, so was it really so odd for me to interpret it like that? I agree with you EU has been way to soft on Turkey, but I don't agree it's Europe's sole responsibility to keep Turkey in check.
His other videos are irrelevant, and this one is out dated and inaccurate, and unsupported. While it may be interesting, it is not useful as evidence of anything.
It is usefull as it goes into detail of what an invasion and warfare would actually cost and take in operations. Not just "muhhhhh air superiority"
Do you know why you live a free life? Because UK, US, Canada and others 'policed' the world when your policy of 'be nice to assholes' failed. Your method would have seen the world divided by Hitler and Stalin.
So yes EU world police Aaaannnd straight to a WW2 reference, bravo. US came pretty fucking late and had to be dragged into the war kicking and screaming when Japan and Germany actually declared war on the US. So it makes your example pretty invalid........ "My policy" of "be nice to assholes" ? I just remarked there is no just cause for your war rethoric as it is only based on feefees and not on reason. Isn't the 'be nice to assholes' policy exactly what the UK, US, Canada and others have been doing globally post WW2 to provide stability?
One brutal smackdown will end the problem early. But enabling him and setting a bad example will result in far more suffering in the long run. When a nation starts swinging its dick outside of its borders, it is open for 'policing', in my opinion.
cough cough Afghanistan cough cough Iraq..... worked so well there, mission accomplished!..... A brutal smackdown on a NATO ally that has not made any actual hostile moves or claims outside it's borders (not counting Cyprus and the temporary actions against the kurds in Syria)... Who even have US Nukes based on their soil (3rd time i mention this)..... It would only sow more anti-Western rethoric, fuel the next in line populist dictator wannabe's agenda and probably push them right into the arms of Putin's influence sphere much further.....
That's silly. Are you intentionally misconstruing what I am saying, or am I really that bad at explaining what I mean? I'll play though. Air superiority. Turkys airforce would be eliminated faster than you can say "Nu-uh, no way". After that they could leisurely pick the nation apart from a distance with artillery and rocketry. It wouldn't go down like that, so I'm not sure what, if any, point you're trying to make.
That is a pretty simplistic view of warfare and I am not "intentionally misconstucting" I am going straight to the fucking core and pointing out that war on Turkey is not a simple "rapid" operation as you are claiming! (just my modernpowers geekiness popping up here) Air superiority how and from where? Carriers in the med? Without any nearby airbases or ports, asides from 1 carrier group already there the rest would have to get there first, logistics will be extensive, operations, range and equipment would be severely limited.
On the subject of air superiority, you keep forgetting/ignoring Turkish extensive high tech AA, SAM and radar capacities, on top of that Turkey is a F-35 partner. They shot down a Russian CAS back in 2015 while it was in Turkish airspace for only a few seconds! Now after everything is patched up with Putin over that kerfuffle, they continue to become BFF's again. To confirm their ties, they even made a deal for top of the line S-400 systems to increase Turkish AA even further. Air superiority is not a given here at all, their airforce will position out of range and strike defensively in coordination with their AA. An air campaign will cost a lot of losses and take a lot of time while wielding disputable succes, I doubt the US could justify this attrition back home. Especially with US troops still stationed in Afghanistan, iraq and now possibly Syria as well. You might actually have to reinstating draft in this scenario!
Turkey does not have a top tier military
https://www.f35.com/global/participation/turkey
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_missile_system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_aircraft_of_the_Turkish_Air_Force
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_weapons_of_the_Turkish_Air_Force
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Turkish_Land_Forces
and could not stand against one.
In an all around "total war" scenario they would eventually lose to the US, I agree; but in a realistic conventional modern war of attrition the US has no chance of winning an invasion of Turkey without taking unacceptable losses.
Yes they do. Did you watch the video?
It is a top-down military with centralized control. Did you forget about the purgings? Did you also fail to learn from the Soviet example?
I'm not sure that referencing a puppet speculating with outdated and inaccurate statistics is an adequate rebuttal.
Again Turkey can not stand against a tier one military. You can buy all the toys, but history has shown that leadership, experience, and moral are far more decisive.
He got exactly what he wanted, how he wanted, and when he wanted it.
If Europe could effectively deal with Turkey, other nations wouldn't be required to step in.
They need a firm hand. Erdogan now needs a display of force, because he has been coddled too long.