Military Coup In Turkey?

-Saw reports that navy ships are missing and they don't know what side the navy is on.
-Another 15,000 officials suspended or removed.
-A deputy mayor in Istanbul was shot.
-And another report support a prearranged fake coup with a pre coup list of those to purge, remove, imprison etc.

Sad and messy.

Peace
 

Notes of interest:

Erdogan just fired all university deans and suspended 21,000 teachers in all public and private institutions. The move to de-secularize Turkey seems to be moving ahead full steam.

Fifty nuclear weapons stored at Turkey's Incirlik military base are locked up and inaccessible to America. And Turkish base commanders have been arrested.

Turkey's Prime Minister has stated that henceforth, they will be working with the Syrian government and the Iraqi government to normalize relations. (so much for supporting America in their drive to get rid of Assad)

Turkey recently apologized to Russia for shooting down their military jet and the pilot who shot that jet down has been arrested. And according to some reports Putin and Erdogan will meet again in August.

MP's in Germany and Britain have called for an end to NATO expansionism and are calling for dialogue with Russia

Leadership of France, Italy, Bulgaria and Greece have distanced themselves from the rhetoric that is coming out of Warsaw and all see Russia (Putin) as a partner as opposed to the devil that NATO would have us see.

and the icing on the cake that our media is not talking about (surprise, surprise!): Three weeks ago, in front of a gathering of foreign journalists in St. Petersburg, President Putin called them to task for not telling the people of the world what is really going on, that the world is being drawn in the direction of nuclear destruction and they are sitting by silently and not exposing the lies.










http://www.strategic-culture.org/ne...calls-end-nato-expansion-dialogue-russia.html


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...wn-fires-all-university-deans-suspends-21000-
 
Debby said:
Notes of interest:

Erdogan just fired all university deans and suspended 21,000 teachers in all public and private institutions. The move to de-secularize Turkey seems to be moving ahead full steam.

Fifty nuclear weapons stored at Turkey's Incirlik military base are locked up and inaccessible to America. And Turkish base commanders have been arrested.

Turkey's Prime Minister has stated that henceforth, they will be working with the Syrian government and the Iraqi government to normalize relations. (so much for supporting America in their drive to get rid of Assad)

Turkey recently apologized to Russia for shooting down their military jet and the pilot who shot that jet down has been arrested. And according to some reports Putin and Erdogan will meet again in August.

MP's in Germany and Britain have called for an end to NATO expansionism and are calling for dialogue with Russia

Leadership of France, Italy, Bulgaria and Greece have distanced themselves from the rhetoric that is coming out of Warsaw and all see Russia (Putin) as a partner as opposed to the devil that NATO would have us see.

and the icing on the cake that our media is not talking about (surprise, surprise!): Three weeks ago, in front of a gathering of foreign journalists in St. Petersburg, President Putin called them to task for not telling the people of the world what is really going on, that the world is being drawn in the direction of nuclear destruction and they are sitting by silently and not exposing the lies.


[video]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45055.htm[/video]








http://www.strategic-culture.org/ne...calls-end-nato-expansion-dialogue-russia.html


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...wn-fires-all-university-deans-suspends-21000-
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what the UK and Germany can achieve negotiating with a super power like Russia which is probably bigger than both combined. If they want out of NATO fine but what kind of leverage would individual countries have. Those nukes and talks with Iran and Syria are the most troubling. Erdogan is supposedly sponsoring or enabling much of th terrorism in or from that region of the world. Sounds like the government was pretty frail to begin with.
 

As I was reading, I came upon an article that was interesting as it suggests something that I hadn't thought of but in view of the IMMENSE profits of American military equipment and weapons producers (27,000% in last 50 years), it does seem to be a reasonable hunch.

While 'the coalition' seemed to expend a great deal of energy into the rhetoric about 'getting ISIS', we still had a ringside seat to atrocities like beheadings, burning men alive, etc. It wasn't until Russia got in there and started bombing terrorists, that those stories began to decrease along with news about ISIS being on the run increasing. My question is, why was the coalition as ineffective as they seemed to be?

At the same time, NATO is continuing to build up defences and bases in the EU, and all with the stated reason of defending against Russian aggression. The question here is, what aggression? Russia has not been aggressive except with the terrorists in Syria, including ISIS, which one would think should be seen as a good thing.

So here's the theory that I read: The American administration is going after Russia instead of spending its energy on ISIS because the destruction of ISIS would require less weaponry. They wouldn't need big bombs, destroyers and submarines to take out ISIS, but in a war with Russia, all those things would be required. And while it may be that there isn't a real hope for war with Russia, because surely even the politicians can see that we would all lose in that event, to use them as the boogeyman that must be defended against, would justify a build up in weaponry and equipment and all the spin off industries that go along with it. The way to solve the employment problem in the US.

The problem as I see it, is that their 'boogeyman' is a nation with a vested interest in its own protection and they might be a little tired of or concerned over the direction that this stupidity is taking and they might finally react just as they've been goaded into doing and if that were to happen as it appears President Putin is worrying it might, then we're all done.

http://www.makewarshistory.co.uk/?p=2629


 
Debby said:
As I was reading, I came upon an article that was interesting as it suggests something that I hadn't thought of but in view of the IMMENSE profits of American military equipment and weapons producers (27,000% in last 50 years), it does seem to be a reasonable hunch.

While 'the coalition' seemed to expend a great deal of energy into the rhetoric about 'getting ISIS', we still had a ringside seat to atrocities like beheadings, burning men alive, etc. It wasn't until Russia got in there and started bombing terrorists, that those stories began to decrease along with news about ISIS being on the run increasing. My question is, why was the coalition as ineffective as they seemed to be?

At the same time, NATO is continuing to build up defences and bases in the EU, and all with the stated reason of defending against Russian aggression. The question here is, what aggression? Russia has not been aggressive except with the terrorists in Syria, including ISIS, which one would think should be seen as a good thing.

So here's the theory that I read: The American administration is going after Russia instead of spending its energy on ISIS because the destruction of ISIS would require less weaponry. They wouldn't need big bombs, destroyers and submarines to take out ISIS, but in a war with Russia, all those things would be required. And while it may be that there isn't a real hope for war with Russia, because surely even the politicians can see that we would all lose in that event, to use them as the boogeyman that must be defended against, would justify a build up in weaponry and equipment and all the spin off industries that go along with it. The way to solve the employment problem in the US.

The problem as I see it, is that their 'boogeyman' is a nation with a vested interest in its own protection and they might be a little tired of or concerned over the direction that this stupidity is taking and they might finally react just as they've been goaded into doing and if that were to happen as it appears President Putin is worrying it might, then we're all done.

http://www.makewarshistory.co.uk/?p=2629
Click to expand...

I think a lot of that is to stop old Soviet Union type expansion. And spend them into the ground again. Also any country in that region is naturally closer to other countries in that region(potential NATO enemies) so the west needs forward operating bases for military operations. But if they are going to prop governments they need the most neutral calmest personality they can find. Anyone from that region might hold or has been exposed to age old beliefs & conflicts which they must eventually deal with which they will wind up picking a side other than a NATO or the west's preference.

It might have been an elected government but how did this Erdogan rise to power.
 
WhatInThe said:
I'm not quite sure what the UK and Germany can achieve negotiating with a super power like Russia which is probably bigger than both combined. If they want out of NATO fine but what kind of leverage would individual countries have. Those nukes and talks with Iran and Syria are the most troubling. Erdogan is supposedly sponsoring or enabling much of th terrorism in or from that region of the world. Sounds like the government was pretty frail to begin with.
Click to expand...


My guess is that the MP's in Britain and Germany are fed up with the sanctions which are only hurting EU and British farmers and industries and that they see that it's time to resume a normal relationship as it was before the Ukraine coup that overthrew that government. They aren't saying they want out of NATO as far as I've heard, but my guess is that they're thinking NATO has overstepped (and possibly has an agenda that is counterproductive to the safety of the region?) Keep in mind that throughout this entire three year fiasco, Putin has been nothing but conciliatory and open to discussion and tried numerous times to point back to the need for an adherence to International Law and has stated time and again that Russia's only desire is to do business with respect between the nations for each countries sovereignty.


As for Erdogan, there has been talk that it he has been wanting to take the country back to a more Islamist and less secular philosophy which would explain the firings and suspensions of all educators and he has been cracking down on the freedom of the press in that country to actually report on events that are going on. And there's also rumours that he believes the CIA is involved in the coup and intended that the man named Gulen who is in exile and hiding in the US, would be installed as the new leader of Turkey.
 
WhatInThe said:
I think a lot of that is to stop old Soviet Union type expansion. And spend them into the ground again. Also any country in that region is naturally closer to other countries in that region(potential NATO enemies) so the west needs forward operating bases for military operations. But if they are going to prop governments they need the most neutral calmest personality they can find. Anyone from that region might hold or has been exposed to age old beliefs & conflicts which they must eventually deal with which they will wind up picking a side other than a NATO or the west's preference.

It might have been an elected government but how did this Erdogan rise to power.
Click to expand...


Stop what Soviet Union type expansion? The Soviet Union collapsed 25 or 30 years ago. Has Russia done anything that remotely resembles that era? Not at all. We've already talked about Crimea not being the same because the Crimean people voted to return to Russia when their own 'government' was making threatening utterances towards any citizens who were Russian speaking. Russia accepted them only because Crimea is the location of their one warm water naval port but when the other two regions that were being destroyed by the Ukraine government wanted to go back to Russia, Putin said no. So there is no Soviet style expansionism going on.

When Russia helped the S. Ossetians fight the Georgian government, they went home after that. In short order. How long was America in Afghanistan? How long in Iraq and by the way, I just read somewhere that you've got troops going back into Iraq. And Russia was invited into Syria as opposed to just invading it. So again, I'd have to ask, what Soviet style expansionism?

As a matter of interest, I just watched a little piece on some news show a couple days ago and a Canadian crew went to Crimea and talked to the folks of Crimea. The piece was actually about German families who are immigrating to the region and the folks the news team talked to were all pretty much happy with their move and the locals, with the reattachment to Russia. One young woman was complaining that prices had gone up for stuff since the return but she was the only complainer that they found and hey, prices are going up for stuff all over the world right?
 
Debby said:
Stop what Soviet Union type expansion? The Soviet Union collapsed 25 or 30 years ago. Has Russia done anything that remotely resembles that era? Not at all. We've already talked about Crimea not being the same because the Crimean people voted to return to Russia when their own 'government' was making threatening utterances towards any citizens who were Russian speaking. Russia accepted them only because Crimea is the location of their one warm water naval port but when the other two regions that were being destroyed by the Ukraine government wanted to go back to Russia, Putin said no. So there is no Soviet style expansionism going on.

When Russia helped the S. Ossetians fight the Georgian government, they went home after that. In short order. How long was America in Afghanistan? How long in Iraq and by the way, I just read somewhere that you've got troops going back into Iraq. And Russia was invited into Syria as opposed to just invading it. So again, I'd have to ask, what Soviet style expansionism?

As a matter of interest, I just watched a little piece on some news show a couple days ago and a Canadian crew went to Crimea and talked to the folks of Crimea. The piece was actually about German families who are immigrating to the region and the folks the news team talked to were all pretty much happy with their move and the locals, with the reattachment to Russia. One young woman was complaining that prices had gone up for stuff since the return but she was the only complainer that they found and hey, prices are going up for stuff all over the world right?
Click to expand...

I think Putin dreams of putting the band(the old Soviet Union) back together again, maybe not geographically but in size and scope. He did get his start in the old cold war KGB.
 
Putin has stated numerous times that he has no desire to 'put the band back together again'. And his actions demonstrate that in my opinion. Let's not forget, he didn't want to start nibbling at Ukraine, he didn't stay in Georgia and take that country over back in 2008.....seriously that is American government and military propaganda to justify the buildup of weaponry in Europe and the Baltics. And while, like every other country, yours included, he wants to have influence or relationships and ties with countries that are close at hand, that's not the same as 'owning them'. I suspect that what he'd like in his region, is a relationship such as Canada, Mexico and the USA have.



Russia is not trying to bring back the USSR, but "nobody wants to believe it", Vladimir Putin has said.
The Russian president accused European leaders of confusing Russia with the Soviet Union, while in the same breath vowing to enhance the country’s nuclear weapons, in an interview aired late Sunday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ant-the-USSR-back-but-no-one-believes-us.html




In Ukraine, and in his whistle-stop trip to Hungary, Putin is out to score points for Russia. He is not out to win friends in Ukraine or Europe. Nor is he out to restore a Russian empire, or build a new Moscow-centric geopolitical order. Putin wants respect for Russia, not external obligations. He wants respect in the old-fashioned, hard-power sense of the word.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/what-putin-really-wants-12311
 
I think Putin is looking for some new puppet states like Cuba or many of the Eastern bloc countries were during the Cold War hence the ventures into Syria, neighbor of Turkey justified or not.
 
Syria isn't a good example. They began diplomatic relations in 1944 with the then, Soviet Union and then in 1971, Syria allowed Russia to open a naval base at Tartus. In 1980 Russia signed a Treaty of Friendship with Syrian leader Haffaz al Assad which ran for 20 years and can be extended in 5 year increments with the agreement of both parties. In 1992 Syria recognized Russia as the successor to the Soviet Union.

The point is 'Russia' has a long history of friendship with Syria, so they are not taking over Syria and indeed waited to begin helping until Bashar al Assad invited them in. Right there too, you have the basis for Russia stepping in and stopping America from bombing the country in 2013. It's what you do for friends and allies.
 
I was reading on this page and some are starting to think the coup may have been organized to discourage Russia and Turkey (and Syria) from coming to a point of common ground, but that the coup has backfired by driving them into each others arms. Considering that America has been locked up in the base where their nukes are, it's not hard to figure out who Turkey may be looking at as an instigator or at least an associate of the coup leaders.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=136751

So if Turkey is in NATO, but they connect with Russia and NATO pushes Russia to the point of retaliation, will Turkey go to aid Russia or will they go to the aid of NATO in spite of feeling that NATO or someone inside NATO was involved in the organization of the coup that attempted to take Erdogan down?

Also to be noted in this second link from the same site and dated today: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=136828

1500 American airmen and their families(?) are in lock up on that base and the power has been cut so they are making do with the use of generators, and yet, no mention by Clinton or Trump (and the Republicans who would surely grasp at this as a weapon to use against Obama's effectiveness as a President) and in looking at CNN's website they have one story on the coup, dated July 17th and they make no mention of 'imprisoned' American airmen'.
 
I doubt very seriously that it is the Turks who have locked up the American base. More likely, the Americans have locked themselves down to prevent incursions by the Turks. I think it's a leap to say there are "imprisoned" airmen there.

Incirlik is an unaccompanied tour, for the Army, at least, which means no families are probably there. Not sure about the AF, but my husband spent 18 months there and it was an unaccompanied tour -- deemed not safe for dependents.
 
If you Google it, I think you will find it is the Turkish government who has locked the base down. They have cut the power to it and supplies are not getting in.

I found the following statement:

Deutsche Welle reported, via American Survival Guide:
The US consulate in Turkey says the Incirlik air base has been placed in lockdown.
The base is used by the US-led coalition, including Germany, to launch airstrikes against “Islamic State.”
A message on the website of the US consulate in Adana said Saturday that “local authorities were denying movements [onto] and off of Incirlik air base.” It advised US citizens to avoid the facility until normal operations had been restored.
The sealing-off of the facility, which houses as many as 80 nuclear bombs, follows a coup attempt by a faction within Turkey’s military a day earlier.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...cirlik-air-base-used-us-fight-isis-power-cut/



​
As for the 'families' thank you for clarifying that. I thought I saw that included on one of the website's that I looked at and I did think it sounded weird (which is why I stuck the ? in the sentence).

The Turkish government is highly suspicious that this coup has had American support and his calls for the extradition of that Gulen guy are thought to be part of the reason that the airbase has been placed in lockdown. According to another video that I watched, Imam Gulen, who has lived in the US for 16 years, is a CIA associate and that he has been working to build and support private schools and madrases around the USA and is a billionaire who has donated to the Clinton foundation during the time that she was the Secretary of State as have many of his followers. His support to the foundation will likely have resulted in benefits to his various businesses possibly in the form of tax-payer funded monies (see the following link).

I think many, if not most of the people in Turkey who've been suspended or fired or arrested are thought by the Turkish government to be followers of the Gullen movement. At least that's what I've heard and read so far. http://www.globalresearch.ca/turkey...erious-islamic-cleric-fethullah-gulen/5536349

How much of this is true, I honestly don't know at this point, but these are all bits and pieces that are often not being discussed on the mainstream media and I think they're relevant and worthy of consideration. And who knows, the story may change tomorrow, but that's what's out there today.

*******
(information on who Deutsche Welle is can be found here:http://www.dw.com/en/about-dw/profile/s-30688)
 
I dunno . . . . could be base authorities denying ingress and egress. That's what they do when they feel unsafe. And I would be absolutely amazed if Incirlik does not have generators, etc. to provide their own power.
 
Well, according to that Deutsche Welle website that I referenced before, it's not the base commanders but the local authorities that are preventing movement at the base and that was from the US Consulate advising American citizens (who I guess weren't on the base at the time the gates were sealed).

And the video that I'd watched did say the people inside were using generators for the time being as the power to the base has been cut.

I guess time will tell as to how this plays out.
 
We lived in Turkey from 1969 to 1972, first "on the economy" and later on the base. As it was during the Cold War and as our base was a Common Defense Installation that served as a "listening station", it was made very clear to dependents that we ranked only somewhat higher than canned goods when it came to evacuation priority in case of hostilities with Russia. There was a "new wives' orientation" every month in the base theater. We were told to keep a suitcase packed at all times, told what needed to be in that suitcase and to head for the base/stay on the base post haste. We were told that they would make "every effort" to evacuate us from Turkey but only after essential personnel and equipment was removed. We were told we would not be seeing our husbands. If that bothered anyone, she was free to leave on the next flight. Some did. We were on sort-of-lockdown anytime the Russian fleet was in Istanbul. It was a time of some drama.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top