The author of the linked article is no fan of Turkey but at least he sticks with facts and does come down on your side. But he does not gloss over our own Washington's roll in the confusion and foul-up.
Nor does he brush aside the democratic process vis-a-vis Turkey's decision -- it did play a role.
So many here simply toss out, "We got stiffed by Turkey when we needed them. Screw 'em forever!" and drive off.
The linked article comes close to answering why forty ships of infantry gear were shipped off to Turkey before Turkey's parliament even considered it -- and, as I recall, 80 percent of the public there opposed the war -- the author says 90 percent. It explains a little about what some unfinished business left over from the Gulf War had to do with pocketbook issues. Remember, we vote our pocketbooks (my words not the authors)?
Should Turkey not have "democracy and autonomy?"
My point: shouldn't those in Washington who made the war plans do some explaining about those forty ships of infantry gear headed for Turkey?
Should Turkey not have “democracy and autonomy?”
***Those are not Turks in eastern Turkey, they’re Kurds. So, by taking out the phrase “for indigenous groups” you change the meaning of the sentence and turn it into a straw argument.
My point: shouldn’t those in Washington who made the war plans do some explaining about those forty ships of infantry gear headed for Turkey?
***Sure, let Washington explain some gear, and let Turkey explain why they are quashing an indigenous democracy. One issue seems way bigger than the other.