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.
Way to dodge and weave.
Disputing points I never made while ignoring all the facts I pointed out.
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)
You contradict yourself. 'Not designed to oppress, except when it does' and don't kid yourself into thinking the Kurds are the only one under the thumb.
Turks are not Arab
You keep saying that. But I never claimed they were. I've already clarified that for you, so I'm thinking you're getting emotional, or irrational.
The Turkish army has a modern based structure..
The Turkish army has always been well funded..
So what? Reread previous replys for an explanation of why that is irrelevant. I'm not going to go in circles.
"Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım announced..
Irrelevant.
Turkishinvasionof_Cyprus ..
Seriously irrelevant.
..so was it really so odd for me to interpret it like that?..
Yes. You took the worst possible interpretation and then extended it far beyond its context and presented that as the inevitable and clearly intended outcome.
Any reasonable person would have read that and correctly assumed that a 'firm hand' meant a firm hand, not genocide.
It is usefull as it goes into..
Not when it is speculation. And especially when speculating with outdated information. At that point it may be interesting, it may point to good questions, but it can not be used as evidence of anything.
Aaaannnd straight to a WW2 reference, bravo..
More disingenuous nonsense designed to change the argument into something you think you can win?
Straight? This is pretty deep in the thread for that word to be honest.
The reference I made is 100% relevant to the point. It is not shoehorned in, and is genuinely relevant to the discussion. Unlike your attempt to use it as a means of moving the goal posts.
US came pretty fucking late..
More deflection. You can remove the US from my list, and it would not change anything. You'd be speaking German if my countrymen had not visited your country to dish out some policing. Dodge and weave all you like, but you don't seem able to deny the actual point, eh?
cough cough Afghanistan ..
What does Afghanistan have to do with using a firm hand in diplomatic relations in Turkey. What does it have to do with anything that has been said? I would imagine that you are trying to make some silly point about first tier militarys not walking over 3rd tier forces. But thats stupid. Iraq is the natural comparison, if any. Afghanistan was an occupation against a holy war. Guerrilla-terrorism, not conventional war.
Iraq has a Turkish style military. Modern, well trained, well equipped, etc. Remember how the Republican Guard held out for years?
Ya, me neither.
That is a pretty simplistic view of warfare and I am not "intentionally misconstucting" I am going straight to the fucking core ..
No you are not. You've mostly ignored the points I made and attacked a bunch I didn't. You have repeatedly put words in my mouth, without actually disputing most of what I do say.
On the subject of air superiority..
You've been poorly misinformed if you think Turkey F16's could stand up to a tier one Airforce. Might as well use cavalry against tanks.
I'm not going to argue this, since there is no way to prove who is right, and your arguments are not as rational as they usually are.
But here are a few facts to ponder. Turkey has tier 2/3 equipment, tier 4 manpower, shit for leadership, nonexistant loyalty, shaky moral, weak boarders, and is surrounded by enemies. Your over-estimation of their air defense can probably be cured if you look into the history of air defense. I'll give you a hint, they are temporary band-aids and not a viable long term defense against a technologically superior enemy. Not that any of that matters, because even if their forces were of equal tec and training, their lack of dynamic leadership would prevent them from being a contender anyway.
They would lose. Badly.
If you still think they are ready to go toe to toe with the US, then I can't argue you out of that kind of brain damage.
:p
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.