Erdogan's purge in Turkey

angrysoba said:
Oh dear! That's terrible. Would it be fair to make a parallel between the followers of Fethullah Gulen and the Chinese religion of Falun Gong?

And similarly to make a parallel between Erdogan and the Chinese Communist Party?

Furthermore, are you not concerned about being involved in these discussions and linking to various websites?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you might take out of those comparisons. There are plenty of articles being written about the players in all this.

And yes I am concerned about what I might post here. What a sad state of affairs that is.
 
GlennB said:
Today's decree on the closure of institutions linked to Fethullah Gülen:

According to the Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s office, the decree will close 1,043 private schools, 1,229 foundations and associations, 35 medical institutions, 19 unions, and 15 universities. Their assets will be seized by the treasury. The presidency said that parliament will be able to vote on the measure.

link
Click to expand...

A finishing of the job that started over two years ago.
http://en.trend.az/world/turkey/2247783.html
 
Sideroxylon said:
A finishing of the job that started over two years ago.
http://en.trend.az/world/turkey/2247783.html
Click to expand...
Were the anti-corruption campaign filled with substance or filled with falsehood?
I was under the impression that a number of the charges had stuck. :confused:
The Turkish government announced plans last November to eradicate the 'dershane,' a substantial number of which are run by a movement headed by Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic preacher living in self-imposed exile in the U.S. state of Pennsylvania.

The announcement of the plan triggered a conflict between the government and Gulen, whose followers have been accused by the government of infiltrating key state institutions and of forming an illegal 'parallel state.'

This 'parallel' group, according to government sources, launched an alleged anti-graft operation on December 17, targeting a number of government allies.
Click to expand...
 
CapelDodger said:
The reforms were a considered response to European example, not European influence. Events in Egypt and Greece made it very clear that the Ottoman world had fallen seriously behind. They were still the match of the Persians but Europe was a whole new thing, and even the Russians were getting the better of them.

Those reforms, like so many other efforts, ran into the sand because of conservative opposition, naturally allied with religious establishments. This is what nationalists like Ataturk recognised and tried to suppress.

There were two general answers given to the question of Muslim backwardnes : one blamed it on not enough religion, the other on too much. Until very recently it was the latter opinion that was on top, and there's no reason to think it won't get back there.
Click to expand...


What you attacked is semantics, I largely agree with you. influence = the capacity to have an effect on the character, development, or behaviour of someone or something. Especially the defeats on the battlefields (after the siege of Vienna) had definitely such an effect on the Turks (or Egyptians) once they realized that superficial changes were far from being enough to reverse the situation. The 'ideal', God commanded, society centred around islam and its institutions proved to be very mortal. Ataturk (not a believer) correctly identified islam as the main problem and ousted it outside the public area via force (with very little opposition because of the pressure of the colonialists, in normal times such a thing would have been unthinkable). Ok, English is not my first language now.
 
Last edited:
CapelDodger said:
You're making too much of a relatively short period during which the Middle East has been under pretty constant stress, starting with the Iraq-Iran War (which was, let us not forget, a huge affair). Central authority eroded away with the usual result - the desert tribes turn bandit and come swooping in.

That's what led to the Arab Invasion and subsequent empire - the Byzantines and Persians beat each other to a standstill creating massive opportunities for a charismatic and capable general. Religion wasn't behind it at all.
Click to expand...


Yes some argued like that, Schumpeter for example. Unfortunately religion had a decisive impact, it's rather like that. I'm afraid it is still mainly behind the Islamic backwardness (other factors are of less importance).
 
Last edited:
I got to where your link started talking about Buddhism, then couldn't continue because I was laughing too hard.
 
A'isha said:
Bakhit supported legal reforms that benefited the British, so they backed him. They certainly didn't give a **** about his conservative, anti-modernist positions, and only withdrew their support when he supported open revolt against their rule (something of a pattern with the British - they did the exact same thing with Amin al-Husseini).

They also had no problem throwing Zaghloul the reformer out of the country for the heinous crime of leading an Egyptian delegation to the Paris Peace Conference that asked Britain to recognize the independence of Egypt.
Click to expand...


Bakhit seemed more 'progressive' at the time than most at al Azhar. And the laws of Zaghlul were supported also by the Egyptian nationalists. What happened later is another thing. I do not know why you think that totally negating the modernist role of British Imperialism is the most justified solution, the reality is that there were also some positive effects and we should do better to acknowledge them.

First there is ample evidence that the Western civilization produced most of modern discoveries, it is totally unrealistic to maintain that the British, their greed notwithstanding, did not have a positive impact in the backward countries of the Islamic world they colonized. Secondly, surprisingly for this time, there are even studies which give a good mark to the impact of colonialism:

http://www.nber.org/papers/w12546.pdf

I don't think the Islamic world offer significant exceptions. Now, overall, colonialism was not a good thing, I agree, but it had its good side as well. Especially in 'taming' islam.
 
Last edited:
CapelDodger said:
Nothing is certain but it's way beyond likely that Erogan's allegedly religious despotism will fail in pretty short order and that man in the street will find new cheerleaders.

The worst enemy of religious rule is the experience of it.
Click to expand...

I hope that is true. I'm hugely skeptical of it however. Turkey is not the first Islamic majority state to have experienced secularization. It's just the only one that had some measure of success at it, until this month anyway.

This coup could well be like 1979 was for Iran and Afghanistan.

McHrozni
 
caveman1917 said:
ISIS originated in the Iraqi section of NATO's network of torture detention facilities.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression NATO had nothing to do with the Iraq invasion. In fact I seem to remember a few members of NATO tried very hard to stop the invasion.

Yes, nothing to do with it at all.
Click to expand...

Precisely, nothing to do with it at all. Being detained (and/or tortured) by the US doesn't make one organize a fanatical death cult, dedicated primarily to killing minorities in his own state, and then also to kill foreigners - primarily those belonging to the country that tried to stop the invasion that led to his detention in the first place. Do you realize just how stupid this claim is?

Also, IIRC, in the earliest stage of ISIS there was some interesting cultural exchange between it and the US. In its treatment of prisoners it adopted American methods and symbols, such as breaking bones, as well as using that orange overall - as you can see in for instance the earliest beheading videos.
Click to expand...

Orange overalls are useful for prisoners because they make escaping and hiding much more difficult. They probably captured some from a prison or two, and decided to adopt what is really just good security practice.

Where did you get the idea US methods involve breaking bones?

McHrozni
 
No Other said:
Can you provide another source regarding the KGB involvement? I went to your link and this was attached at the end of the portion about the KGB... "[citation needed]" thank you
Click to expand...

Look at biographies of the leaders of the coup.

- a tank commander in the Soviet army.
- a pilot of the Soviet air force
- the founder of the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (i.e. Communist party), whose works were translated into Russian before the coup
- a guy who invited the Soviets in Afghanistan
- a guy who the Soviets installed as president of Afghanistan

The fall of Afghanistan had everything to do with the KGB and the Soviet Union.

McHrozni
 
McHrozni said:
Look at biographies of the leaders of the coup.

- a tank commander in the Soviet army.
- a pilot of the Soviet air force
- the founder of the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (i.e. Communist party), whose works were translated into Russian before the coup
- a guy who invited the Soviets in Afghanistan
- a guy who the Soviets installed as president of Afghanistan

The fall of Afghanistan had everything to do with the KGB and the Soviet Union.

McHrozni
Click to expand...
I have no issue with your overall KGB stance but if you are going to use a source, use a source that is vetted or in Wikipedia's case a citation.
 
Turkish man said on video:

Turkish military has history of protecting Turkish people from tyrants etc. . Four times since 1960 their military has ousted corrupt power grabbing leader(s) and then returned to barracks when not needed.

Previously, military has arrested leaders late Sunday night when citizens are safe at home. Then on Monday they announce martial law which ends when the newly elected govt is installed.

This time was different, on Friday afternoon on that bridge. Citizens got hurt and govt buildings got shelled. Also the coup was poorly organized unlike previous four times.

Captured troops told reporters they had been told they were going out on a training operation.
 
TubbaBlubba said:
Well, that's the difference between political and legal power. I wonder if there is some kind of secret police that Erdogan controls directly?
Click to expand...

If there isn't, just give it time. Erdogan wants to be Hitler, IMHO.
 
Bubba said:
Captured troops told reporters they had been told they were going out on a training operation.
Click to expand...

This bit of information in particular is not very useful. It could be the coup plotters didn't think the soldiers were reliable and told them it was an exercise, or that the troops knew full well what they were doing and understandably chose to faint ignorance in order to avoid being punished for the coup. It's what I'd do.

Of course this information is also entirely in line with MIHOP, but I wouldn't say it's reliable until we have some sort of independent confirmation, maybe signals intelligence picked up something it's not sharing. It's unlikely we'll know soon, maybe even never.

McHrozni
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom