Kurds

Considering the recent clashes between Turkey and the SDF (comprised primarily of Kurdish units known as the YPG), I was wondering what the at war community thought? The Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the world without a state to call their own. They have shown in Syria (and in Iraq) a willingness to fight radical extremist but I have also read about issues pertaining to attacks they have committed in Turkey as well as the threat they may cause to Assyrian Christians (not sur show accurate this later claim is).

Personally I like the idea of a Kurdish state so long as it is tolerant (which I believe it will be) of anyone not Kurdish. They are de facto independent in Iraq and parts of Syria and have an experienced military in both areas. If a Kurdish state were created (and based off of models in Syria) It would appear to be a left-leaning democratic country that maintains a tolerant society. I'd like to think it would offer an example of stability, much like Lebanon before it descended into civil war.

Let's be logical:

Question is: Should the Kurds be allowed their own state?

Kurds are in Turkey.
Opi is Kurd.
Kurds shouldn't be allowd their own state.

Why?

Cuz Opi is Kurd.
Eazy question, give another one.


Cheers

Opi will have too much freedom with kurdish state....
vote: no

Written by Croat, 09.07.2017 at 10:26

Let's be logical:

Question is: Should the Kurds be allowed their own state?

Kurds are in Turkey.
Opi is Kurd.
Kurds shouldn't be allowd their own state.

Why?

Cuz Opi is Kurd.
Eazy question, give another one.


Cheers

In my opinion I dont think the problem lays within if Kurds should get their own state or not, I thnk the problem lays with what countries are going to give a piece of their country to 'form' this kurdish state. Because I am probably sure none will give, which is their fully right to do so.

Written by Waffel, 09.07.2017 at 18:34

In my opinion I dont think the problem lays within if Kurds should get their own state or not, I thnk the problem lays with what countries are going to give a piece of their country to 'form' this kurdish state. Because I am probably sure none will give, which is their fully right to do so.

Only Turkey resist. Syria and Iraq are very willing/their opinions dont matter anymore, to give their northern and western parts respectively, Americans made sure of that. There will be new borders drawn in the next 10 years, im sure of it.

Written by Waffel, 09.07.2017 at 18:34

In my opinion I dont think the problem lays within if Kurds should get their own state or not, I thnk the problem lays with what countries are going to give a piece of their country to 'form' this kurdish state. Because I am probably sure none will give, which is their fully right to do so.

From what I understand about the legality of states and what not is that in theory, most countries (at least, the major powers) want to see the citizens of the world protected and safe. This way, they can lead productive lives and thus lessen the risk of conflict which may threaten global peace. Every recognized nation has a regime that is given sovereignty over their land (i.e.. British regime has rule over British land). Most importantly, each regime, to have legitimacy and sovierngty over said territory, must follow a code of conduct called (in diplomatic circles) R2P or "Right to Protect." Basically it states that a specific regime has sovereignty over a specific group of people and in theory said regime will protect these people without causing a strain on global peace (to sum up a complicated issue).

A regime can lose it's sovereignty (i theory, lose it's very right to exist) if it does 1 of 4 things:

1. Is aggressive against it's neighbors (attacks/invades them)
2. Harbors known criminals terrorist
3. Possesses WMD's with nefarious intent
4. Commits genocide

All four of those things violate the principle of R2P due to the fact they cause harm directly or indirectly on people, whether or a regimes own citizens or another nations citizens,


I bring these up to make the case for a Kurdistan. When discussing the question of a Kurdish state, we primarily talk of the Kurds inhabiting Turkey, Syria, and Iraq (there are kurds present significantly in certain regions of Iran and Armenia and Georgia but they do not harbor independent sentiments). In Iraq, the Kurds experienced repression and genocide under the hands of Saddam Hussein. After his fall, the Kurds were instrumental in securing northern areas of the country and were later given large autonomous control over much of these regions (specifically those where they constitute a majority). They have a functioning regional government, and while Iraqs army ran away from ISIS, it was th Kurds that saved thousands of Yazidis who would have perished if not for the support of coalition forces and the Kurds.

In Syria and Turkey, Kurds have once more experienced immense discrimination. In the Syrian Arab Republic (emphasis of the Arab part), Kurds were many times denied citizenship. They were treated as second-class citizens (assuming again, that they had citizenship). In both Turkey and Syria, there languages were outlawed, their culture was looked down upon, and both regimes do not care for the Kurds. In Syria, the Kurds represent the only major force capable of fighting and defeating ISIS. A couple years ago when the Kurds were making a last stand at Kobane against 15,000 ISIS fighters (who had overrun hundreds of villages in the weeks prior preparing for this assault), Turkish troops watched across the border- apparently jihadist taking over the town was more important than helping these people.

My point is that all three nations have violated the principle of R2P by discriminating and killing Kurds (directly or indirectly). They have lost all legitimacy in the eyes of the Kurds due to these regimes lack of care in protecting them and servicing them (In Iraq, Kurds are very autonomous so this is expected while in Syria and Turkey, Kurds have taken up much of the public service). They have shown a willingness to fight radical extremist and a desire to protect themselves and others. A kurdish state could definitely be set up in Syria and Iraq (both regimes lack the power to stop them). Turkey would be a problem- Erdogan has really played up the nationalist card and his military will never allow secession without a fight.

Written by Pheonixking929, 09.07.2017 at 23:48

My point is that all three nations have violated the principle of R2P by discriminating and killing Kurds (directly or indirectly). They have lost all legitimacy in the eyes of the Kurds due to these regimes lack of care in protecting them and servicing them (In Iraq, Kurds are very autonomous so this is expected while in Syria and Turkey, Kurds have taken up much of the public service). They have shown a willingness to fight radical extremist and a desire to protect themselves and others. A kurdish state could definitely be set up in Syria and Iraq (both regimes lack the power to stop them). Turkey would be a problem- Erdogan has really played up the nationalist card and his military will never allow secession without a fight.

Not to be rude or something,

But you say alot of things (western) media makes the people believe. I am not fully aware of the history of kurds, but I am sure I know some of the history of Turkey. Over the 50 years or something there have been so many attacks in Turkey, mostly from the PKK and other small groups, which also have Kurdisch roots in it. These attacks had alot of different reasons but I think we can all agree on that its mainly the reason for an independent state in Eastern Turkey. I can understand why you think Kurds deserve a state, because they are also citizens, but lets be honest, so many people from different cultures and religions have married and made children etc, alot of new 'species' of human are born this way, we have Gypsies for that matter, balkans, etc. etc., if we are going to give everyone with some 'species' background the right to create their own state and w/e, we are going to have alot of chaos in the world. I understand the points you made, but a country has its own right to give or not give a piece of its borders to some other countries or people. Like Khal said above, the case with Iraq and Syria is already showing how far other countries (western) are willing to go to break this right, since its basically a warzone there and of course America will hover in and be the ''peacekeeper'.

I mean I am fully aware of the bad connections between those 3 countries and the kurds, but lets take in a moment, some people have over the years created a kind of own culture, nature, and habbits, these people can differ from people being banned from their own family and friends for marrying with someone outside of the 'inner circle' or people who just happened to live in one of those 3 zones and were forced to advantually become family with the growing population of people with a different background, and now years have passed by and those people are still growing, and now they force the other 3 countries to give a piece (a pretty big one) of their own country full of sovereignty to those people 'in need'.

I mean, take Israel and Gaza for a second, some say Gaza was first, some say Israel was first, but the problem is, that alot of the western side of the world say Gaza isnt real and dont deserve their own state, yet this same part of the world says Kurdish people are real and do deserve their own state. Don't you see the double standards? And that is what is kinda the problem with this world, being led by all these leaders who can't do shit.

Written by Pheonixking929, 09.07.2017 at 10:24

Considering the recent clashes between Turkey and the SDF (comprised primarily of Kurdish units known as the YPG), I was wondering what the at war community thought? The Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the world without a state to call their own. They have shown in Syria (and in Iraq) a willingness to fight radical extremist but I have also read about issues pertaining to attacks they have committed in Turkey as well as the threat they may cause to Assyrian Christians (not sur show accurate this later claim is).

Personally I like the idea of a Kurdish state so long as it is tolerant (which I believe it will be) of anyone not Kurdish. They are de facto independent in Iraq and parts of Syria and have an experienced military in both areas. If a Kurdish state were created (and based off of models in Syria) It would appear to be a left-leaning democratic country that maintains a tolerant society. I'd like to think it would offer an example of stability, much like Lebanon before it descended into civil war.

Any and everything that has ever leaned left has shot itself in the foot and collapsed, why do people still hold on to fairy tale ideals that's do not work within the human system.

Written by Waffel, 10.07.2017 at 03:58

I mean, take Israel and Gaza for a second, some say Gaza was first, some say Israel was first, but the problem is, that alot of the western side of the world say Gaza isnt real and dont deserve their own state, yet this same part of the world says Kurdish people are real and do deserve their own state. Don't you see the double standards? And that is what is kinda the problem with this world, being led by all these leaders who can't do shit.

Nah Gaza and Israel situation is very different than the one with Kurds and Turkey.

1. Arab "Palestinians" are not a distinct ethnic, cultural group. They are just Arabs from neighboring countries ( Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon) who highjacked the term palestinian AFTER Israel was created.

2. Israel never attacked Palestinians or arabs, they are the ones who waged war officially against Israel several times (and got defeated) and still use guerilla and terorist attacks against it.

3. Israel has offered two state solution several times but the arab world always declined. They are the ones who claim they wont rest until Israel is destroyed, not the other way around.

4. As for Gaza specifically, ironically Hamas is the one sending thousands of rockets on the Israelis, not the other way around. They are the ones using hospitals and schools as operation headquarters, weapons storage and launching sites. They are the ones commiting suicide bombings, not the Israelis.

Perspective is needed. Its easy to always blame the "evil Jews" and always protect the "peacefull Muslems" but the reality of the situation is that Kurds are nothing like the so called Palestinians and Israel is nothing like Turkey.

Written by Khal.eesi, 10.07.2017 at 07:12

Written by Waffel, 10.07.2017 at 03:58

I mean, take Israel and Gaza for a second, some say Gaza was first, some say Israel was first, but the problem is, that alot of the western side of the world say Gaza isnt real and dont deserve their own state, yet this same part of the world says Kurdish people are real and do deserve their own state. Don't you see the double standards? And that is what is kinda the problem with this world, being led by all these leaders who can't do shit.

Nah Gaza and Israel situation is very different than the one with Kurds and Turkey.

1. Arab "Palestinians" are not a distinct ethnic, cultural group. They are just Arabs from neighboring countries ( Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon) who highjacked the term palestinian AFTER Israel was created.

2. Israel never attacked Palestinians or arabs, they are the ones who waged war officially against Israel several times (and got defeated) and still use guerilla and terorist attacks against it.

3. Israel has offered two state solution several times but the arab world always declined. They are the ones who claim they wont rest until Israel is destroyed, not the other way around.

4. As for Gaza specifically, ironically Hamas is the one sending thousands of rockets on the Israelis, not the other way around. They are the ones using hospitals and schools as operation headquarters, weapons storage and launching sites. They are the ones commiting suicide bombings, not the Israelis.

Perspective is needed. Its easy to always blame the "evil Jews" and always protect the "peacefull Muslems" but the reality of the situation is that Kurds are nothing like the so called Palestinians and Israel is nothing like Turkey.

I dunno how you managed to make this a muslim-jewish thing, when I made it perfectly clear that I used Gaza and Israel as example about the whole state of Gaza and how the same people who say Kurdistan should be created are the one denying that Gaza is in the same boat.

Like I said there are different sides from each story and I am pretty sure, both you and I are never going to get the full truth about Gaza or Israel, since its been decades ago now, and the so called proffessors, or priests or w/e, claiming how it went, is just not objective enough in my opinion. You can sure as hell believe it if you want, but don't come here stating things which you and I both dont know the full truth of. And that is the whole reasons why I stated my comment like that, to hope some people would understand that I was not gonna start a discussion about wether or not things are true, since like I said above, in my opinion, we will never know.

I already stated what I think about this whole subject, so did you Khal.

I think that the western world is anything but democratic and opressing others to follow them or face war. It is disgusting that we live like the little privileged persons we are, while half of the world is starving or dying because of diseases none of us care about. Hence the reason why I brought up the double standards, because that sure as hell is what is happening right now, all because Erdogan is the president of Turkey. If it were any other country, like Russia or w/e european country, nobody would've even cared.

Written by Khal.eesi, 10.07.2017 at 07:12

Perspective is needed. Its easy to always blame the "evil Jews" and always protect the "peacefull Muslems" but the reality of the situation is that Kurds are nothing like the so called Palestinians and Israel is nothing like Turkey.

As for the perspective, yes indeed, the objective perspective is needed for this. Which isnt the case here. You are to personally infested in the whole muslim-jew thing, we all know where you stand about turkey and muslims, so subjective perspectives don't really lead us anywhere in this discussion..

Written by Helly, 10.07.2017 at 06:10

Any and everything that has ever leaned left has shot itself in the foot and collapsed, why do people still hold on to fairy tale ideals that's do not work within the human system.

Because people differ. Not everyone is the same, not everyone have the same standards, not everyone have the same culture, not everyone have the same sexualities, not everyone have the same political stands. You can't force people to believe what you want.

Quote:

Written by Helly, 10.07.2017 at 06:10

snip

Any and everything that has ever leaned left has shot itself in the foot and collapsed, why do people still hold on to fairy tale ideals that's do not work within the human system.

I think I might have used the wrong words. I say left-leaning due to the PKK's imprisoned leader having been influenced by a Brooklyn socialist; from what I can tell in Syria (the most de facto independent country for Kurds), they have established a few "cantons" (kinda like the Swiss) and their government is fairly decentralized down to the neighborhood level. When I say left-leaning, it just seems to me they have a sort of war economy at the moment where everyone is working or doing something to better their cause. I would imagine if they had their own state, their economics might change to be more market-friendly as they spend more time developing their economy than fighting a war.

Written by Waffel, 10.07.2017 at 03:58

Not to be rude or something,

It's just a discussion on a complicated issue, I don't see anyone being deliberately rude :thumb:

Written by Waffel, 10.07.2017 at 03:58

I am not fully aware of the history of kurds, but I am sure I know some of the history of Turkey. Over the 50 years or something there have been so many attacks in Turkey, mostly from the PKK and other small groups, which also have Kurdisch roots in it. These attacks had alot of different reasons but I think we can all agree on that its mainly the reason for an independent state in Eastern Turkey. I can understand why you think Kurds deserve a state, because they are also citizens, but lets be honest, so many people from different cultures and religions have married and made children etc, alot of new 'species' of human are born this way, we have Gypsies for that matter, balkans, etc. etc., if we are going to give everyone with some 'species' background the right to create their own state and w/e, we are going to have alot of chaos in the world. I understand the points you made, but a country has its own right to give or not give a piece of its borders to some other countries or people. Like Khal said above, the case with Iraq and Syria is already showing how far other countries (western) are willing to go to break this right, since its basically a warzone there and of course America will hover in and be the ''peacekeeper'.

The Kurds though represent a unique group in the sense that they are the largest ethnic group without a state to call their own who have not just been discriminated against by Arab ad Turkish governments, but butchered with chemical weapons. As far as Turkey goes, this is a country that has always made it difficult for Kurds to have a say in a government that in theory should represent them- whether this is by outlawing certain elements of Kurdish language and culture, having the highest standards in the world for a party to gain seats in Parliament (I believe it's 10% of popular vote to get seats, in the US it's closer to around 2.5-5%), or by ignoring the plight of these people when faced with imminent slaughter at the hands of jihadist who Turkey originally allowed to pass unmolested from Turkey and into Syria. There are 45 million Kurds in the world, primarily in the three countries of Turkey, Syria, and Iraq. They have shown more willingness to fight terrorism than Erdogan, and respect fellow humans far more than Assad or Maliki.

Written by Waffel, 10.07.2017 at 03:58

if we are going to give everyone with some 'species' background the right to create their own state and w/e, we are going to have alot of chaos in the world.

If a large ethnic group was fighting terrorism on its own, policing the areas it controls on its own, providing services to areas it controls on its own while an official government does everything in its power to make sure this group is hindered, than yes, I suppose I would support any "species" (for lack of a better term, I get what you mean though) that harbors independent sentiments. If a government fails its people, those people have a right to have a new one.

Written by Waffel, 10.07.2017 at 03:58

I understand the points you made, but a country has its own right to give or not give a piece of its borders to some other countries or people. Like Khal said above, the case with Iraq and Syria is already showing how far other countries (western) are willing to go to break this right, since its basically a warzone there and of course America will hover in and be the ''peacekeeper'.

The Middle East and Africa is a patchwork of states drawn up by foreigners with no understands of the varying nationalities that comprised them. This is partly why the Middle East is so fragile- they do not have strong nation-states like Europe. In Iraq and Syria, the Kurds could declare independence and would not face immediate reprisals due to both atone governments lacking the man power to actually force unity (in Syria, the Kurds have already done this). I understand what you mean by a countries rights to its land, but the Turkish government has lost all legitimacy on this matter. While Erdogans continues purging the judiciary, the military, and the press of anyone who views things differently from him, he continues to sideline Kurds by arresting opposition leaders. The Sultan of Turkey represents Turkish, not Kurdish, interest. He fails on all accounts to try to make a lasting peace with the Kurds.

I can understand radicals trying to derail peace talks, but Erdogan does not discriminate when he has his forces level cities.

Written by Waffel, 10.07.2017 at 03:58

I mean I am fully aware of the bad connections between those 3 countries and the kurds, but lets take in a moment, some people have over the years created a kind of own culture, nature, and habbits, these people can differ from people being banned from their own family and friends for marrying with someone outside of the 'inner circle' or people who just happened to live in one of those 3 zones and were forced to advantually become family with the growing population of people with a different background, and now years have passed by and those people are still growing, and now they force the other 3 countries to give a piece (a pretty big one) of their own country full of sovereignty to those people 'in need'.

I mean, take Israel and Gaza for a second, some say Gaza was first, some say Israel was first, but the problem is, that alot of the western side of the world say Gaza isnt real and dont deserve their own state, yet this same part of the world says Kurdish people are real and do deserve their own state. Don't you see the double standards? And that is what is kinda the problem with this world, being led by all these leaders who can't do shit.

I wouldn't say the Kurds are "in need"- they have shown time and time again their resilience and ability to protect themselves and anyone who wishes to support their ideals (Kurds and non-Kurds alike) the the global community failed them. The Arabs and Turks don't like them and would rather see them gone. As for these states sovereignty, they do not deserve it at the present time. Syria is a war zone with Assad having the largest militia in a country fun of them. Iraq shares little with the Kurdish autonomous zone other than that they both disliked Hussein. And Turey repeatedly derails any type of peace in the region by doing things like attacking the SDF the same time they are attacking Raqqa

These are complicated issues and I wouldn't compare them to the Palestinians. Palestinians could get their own state, they only have to set aside an agreement with Israel. Instead their leaders (and the Muslim world) has failed them. They don't want to negotiate, and frankly much of the region doesn't care to integrate or assimilate any palestinians. Instead they live in refugee camps whether it be in Jordan, Syria, or southern Lebanon. These camps have existed for two generations and fellow muslims in this part of the world take more time criticizing Israel than helping these distraught Palestinians.

Kurds have never had the support of the outside world. They have never had their own state and yet they are currently developing a photo-sate in the power vacuum the Arab spring has created. They deserve a state not just for being the worlds largest ethic group without one, but for the willingness to develop a functioning state unlike the Palestinians, or gypsies, or any other group.

According to a 1960 UN resolution (Resolution number 1514 I think), every people has the right to self-determination..so I don't see why can't they have their own state..

No. That's Armenian territory.

Written by Skanderbeg, 10.07.2017 at 13:38

No. That's Armenian territory.

Then

Written by Metyu, 11.07.2017 at 10:03

Then

Greek territory? [pontus mean lake on greek]

Written by Skanderbeg, 11.07.2017 at 12:21

Written by Metyu, 11.07.2017 at 10:03

Then

Greek territory? [pontus mean lake on greek]

Yeap