Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iran cracks down on Kurd villages with help from Turkish intelligence
GeoStrategy Direct. ^ | 6/19/2010 | GeoStrategy Direct.

Posted on 06/18/2010 8:55:13 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld

Iran has intensified its crackdown on Kurdish nationalists. Opposition sources said Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has been attacking Kurdish villages throughout northeastern Iran near the border with Turkey.

"The terrorists are upset because our intelligence on their network has vastly improved over the last year because of our cooperation with Turkey," an Iranian source said.

The sources said the crackdown has targeted the Iranian wing of the Kurdish Workers Party known as Free Life in Kurdisan, or PJAK.

"The targets include anybody believed associated with PJAK," an opposition source said.

The sources said IRGC, particularly the Basij militia, has been raiding Kurdish villages near the border with Iraq's autonomous Kurdistan region. They said Iranian troops have arrested scores of people as well as torched their homes and fields.

"The Iranians have been carrying out a policy of collective punishment," a PKK source in Iraq said. "For every incident, there is massive retaliation."

Iranian officials have acknowledged the crackdown on PJAK. They said IRGC has been battling an increase in insurgency activities along the Iranian border with Iraq as well as the use of Iranian territory for attacks against neighboring Turkey

(Excerpt) Read more at geostrategy-direct.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iran; irgc; kurds; middleast; turkey; turkishintelligence

1 posted on 06/18/2010 8:55:13 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 1COUNTER-MORTER-68; Mr. Mojo; James C. Bennett; mowowie; Captain Beyond

Ping


2 posted on 06/18/2010 8:55:56 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ( "Fortes fortuna adiuvat"-Fortune Favors the Strong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
Iraq will need to deal with a Kurdish resurgence at some point. We pretty much kept Iraq from dealing with the Kurds as they wanted to.

Now if we could get Iraq to unleash the Kurds on Iran that would solve several problems. The situation there though is that the Kurds want parts of Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. And we thought the Isreali's had it bad with the Pali's. That is nothing near as bad as the Kurds.

And the Kurds are a bit better at real combat experience than the Pali's are. And the Kurds are used to dealing with multiple enemy's at once.

Messy situation there for those who we have some sort of relationship with; Irag, Turkey and with us because we would love to keep both happy... and they gave us invaluable aid with Iraq, so we owe them something for that.

What a mess for all that needs to deal with them.
3 posted on 06/18/2010 9:29:57 PM PDT by JSteff ((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Kurds are the closest thing we have to friends in the area.

Here’s what I wrote on the subject of Iran, Iraq & Afghanistan a while back.

To: NormsRevenge
We SHOULD withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran.

Here’s how I think we should “pull out of Iraq.” Add one more front to the scenario below, which would be a classic amphibious beach landing from the south in Iran, and it becomes a “strategic withdrawal” from Iraq. And I think the guy who would pull it off is Duncan Hunter.

How to Stand Up to Iran

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1...osts?page=36#36
Posted by Kevmo to TomasUSMC
On News/Activism 03/28/2007 7:11:08 PM PDT • 36 of 36

Split Iraq up and get out
***The bold military move would be to mobilize FROM Iraq into Iran through Kurdistan and then sweep downward, meeting up with the forces that we pull FROM Afghanistan in a 2-pronged offensive. We would be destroying nuke facilities and building concrete fences along geo-political lines, separating warring tribes physically. At the end, we take our boys into Kurdistan, set up a couple of big military bases and stay awhile. We could invite the French, Swiss, Italians, Mozambiqans, Argentinians, Koreans, whoever is willing to be the police forces for the regions that we move through, and if the area gets too hot for these peacekeeper weenies we send in military units. Basically, it would be learning the lesson of Iraq and applying it.

15 rules for understanding the Middle East
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1774248/posts

Rule 8: Civil wars in the Arab world are rarely about ideas — like liberalism vs. communism. They are about which tribe gets to rule. So, yes, Iraq is having a civil war as we once did. But there is no Abe Lincoln in this war. It’s the South vs. the South.

Rule 10: Mideast civil wars end in one of three ways: a) like the U.S. civil war, with one side vanquishing the other; like the Cyprus civil war, with a hard partition and a wall dividing the parties; or c) like the Lebanon civil war, with a soft partition under an iron fist (Syria) that keeps everyone in line. Saddam used to be the iron fist in Iraq. Now it is us. If we don’t want to play that role, Iraq’s civil war will end with A or B.

Let’s say my scenario above is what happens. Would that military mobilization qualify as a “withdrawal” from Iraq as well as Afghanistan? Then, when we’re all done and we set up bases in Kurdistan, it wouldn’t really be Iraq, would it? It would be Kurdistan.

.
.

I have posted in the past that I think the key to the strategy in the middle east is to start with an independent Kurdistan. If we engaged Iran in such a manner we might earn back the support of these windvane politicians and wussie voters who don’t mind seeing a quick & victorious fight but hate seeing endless police action battles that don’t secure a country.

I thought it would be cool for us to set up security for the Kurds on their southern border with Iraq, rewarding them for their bravery in defying Saddam Hussein. We put in some military bases there for, say, 20 years as part of the occupation of Iraq in their transition to democracy. We guarantee the autonomy of Iraqi Kurdistan as long as they don’t engage with Turkey. But that doesn’t say anything about engaging with Iranian Kurdistan. Within those 20 years the Kurds could have a secure and independent nation with expanding borders into Iran. After we close down the US bases, Kurdistan is on her own. But at least Kurdistan would be an independent nation with about half its territory carved out of Persia. If Turkey doesn’t relinquish her claim on Turkish Kurdistan after that, it isn’t our problem, it’s 2 of our allies fighting each other, one for independence and the other for regional primacy. I support democratic independence over a bullying arrogant minority.

The kurds are the closest thing we have to friends in that area. They fought against Saddam (got nerve-gassed), they’re fighting against Iran, they squabble with our so-called ally Turkey (who didn’t allow Americans to operate in the north of Iraq this time around).

It’s time for them to have their own country. They deserve it. They carve Kurdistan out of northern Iraq, northern Iran, and try to achieve some kind of autonomy in eastern Turkey. If Turkey gets angry, we let them know that there are consequences to turning your back on your “friend” when they need you. If the Turks want trouble, they can invade the Iraqi or Persian state of Kurdistan and kill americans to make their point. It wouldn’t be a wise move for them, they’d get their backsides handed to them and have eastern Turkey carved out of their country as a result.

If such an act of betrayal to an ally means they get a thorn in their side, I would be happy with it. It’s time for people who call themselves our allies to put up or shut up. The Kurds have been putting up and deserve to be rewarded with an autonomous and sovereign Kurdistan, borne out of the blood of their own patriots.

Should Turkey decide to make trouble with their Kurdish population, we would stay out of it, other than to guarantee sovereignty in the formerly Iranian and Iraqi portions of Kurdistan. When one of our allies wants to fight another of our allies, it’s a messy situation. If Turkey goes “into the war on Iran’s side” then they ain’t really our allies and that’s the end of that.

I agree that it’s hard on troops and their families. We won the war 4 years ago. This aftermath is the nation builders and peacekeeper weenies realizing that they need to understand things like the “15 rules for understanding the Middle East”

This was the strategic error that GWB committed. It was another brilliant military campaign but the followup should have been 4X as big. All those countries that don’t agree with sending troups to fight a war should have been willing to send in policemen and nurses to set up infrastructure and repair the country.

What do you think we should do with Iraq?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1752311/posts

Posted by Kevmo to Blue Scourge
On News/Activism 12/12/2006 9:17:33 AM PST • 23 of 105

My original contention was that we should have approached the reluctant “allies” like the French to send in Police forces for the occupation after battle, since they were so unwilling to engage in the fighting. It was easy to see that we’d need as many folks in police and nurse’s uniforms as we would in US Army unitorms in order to establish a democracy in the middle east. But, since we didn’t follow that line of approach, we now have a civil war on our hands. If we were to set our sights again on the police/nurse approach, we might still be able to pull this one off. I think we won the war in Iraq; we just haven’t won the peace.

I also think we should simply divide the country. The Kurds deserve their own country, they’ve proven to be good allies. We could work with them to carve out a section of Iraq, set their sights on carving some territory out of Iran, and then when they’re done with that, we can help “negotiate” with our other “allies”, the Turks, to secure Kurdish autonomy in what presently eastern Turkey.

That leaves the Sunnis and Shiites to divide up what’s left. We would occupy the areas between the two warring factions. Also, the UN/US should occupy the oil-producing regions and parcel out the revenue according to whatever plan they come up with. That gives all the sides something to argue about rather than shooting at us.

38 posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 3:55:19 PM by Kevmo (We need to get away from the Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party ~Duncan Hunter)

___________________________________________________________________


4 posted on 06/19/2010 12:48:43 AM PDT by Kevmo (So America gets what America deserves - the destruction of its Constitution. ~Leo Donofrio, 6/1/09)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson; Nachum; MestaMachine; SunkenCiv

How cozy....


5 posted on 06/19/2010 7:21:29 AM PDT by hennie pennie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hennie pennie; AdmSmith; Berosus; bigheadfred; blueyon; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; ...

Thanks hennie pennie.


6 posted on 06/22/2010 4:47:17 PM PDT by SunkenCiv ("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson