Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • The Turks Just Gassed the Kurds?!?

    Posted by Trent Telenko on August 14th, 2010 (All posts by )

    The world just changed.

    Der Spiegel just reported the following:

    German experts have confirmed the authenticity of photographs that purport to show PKK fighters killed by chemical weapons. The evidence puts increasing pressure on the Turkish government, which has long been suspected of using such weapons against Kurdish rebels. German politicians are demanding an investigation.

    American built M-60A3 Tanks in Turkish Service

    American built M60A3 Tanks in Turkish Army Service

    If this pans out as true, and not a Leftist German-PKK disinformation exercise, expect two things —

    1) The NATO Alliance as we know it to dissolve.
    2) Turkey will go nuclear within a couple of years.

    The age of Catalytic Nuclear Proliferation will be upon us, with lethal gas as an accompaniment.

    Update: Gatewaypundit is on the case

     

    14 Responses to “The Turks Just Gassed the Kurds?!?”

    1. Ron Hunter Says:

      I am not arguing the conclusion, but am curious of the reasoning behind them. Why would NATO collapse, why not kick them out, and why would they go nuclear?
      Ron

    2. Jonathan Says:

      Yeah. Turkey tested Israel and now tests us. The situation will only get worse if we and our allies continue to ignore Turkey’s provocations.

    3. Trent Telenko Says:

      If the USA cannot sanction or prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction AND THERE USE ON NATO POPULATIONS, by a NATO member state…Please explain what use NATO retains?

      This has immense implications for Israel’s coming war with Hezbollah and Syria. It is already all over the Israeli press.

      Not to mention for EU and American foreign aid to Turkey.

      The domestic American political implications of this will appear the next time there are Congressional actions on Turkish foreign military sales or a resolution about the Armenian genocide hits the floor in Congress. The Greek, Jewish and Armenian lobby’s will all be against the former and support the latter.

      Moreover, the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty requires actions in the event of suspected chemical weapons use.

      See:

      http://www.cwc.gov/cwc_treaty_verification_p11.html

      Greece will demand such an investigation from the UN and NATO…and get it refused, either by other NATO/UN members, or simply by Turkey telling the CWC investigation team to stuff it.

      I had already expected catalytic nuclear proliferation.

      Turkey’s actions — while a member of NATO — mean we are going to get it for chemical weapons as well.

    4. Jonathan Says:

      So this took place in 2009. That’s not quite as bad as if it had just happened. Still, bad enough.

      The fact that the Israeli govt still pretends that Turkey is an ally suggests that the Israelis were not aware of the chemical attack.

    5. Mrs. Davis Says:

      Please explain what use NATO retains?

      I’ve been wondering about that for 20 years.

    6. Tom Holsinger Says:

      NATO died in Bosnia. It is only a ghost for governments to reflexively genuflect at.

    7. Tom Holsinger Says:

      Jonathan, your comment that this occurred in 2009, with the implication that it hasn’t since, makes as much sense as observing that terrorism occurred in Aghanistan and Iraq in 2009 with the implication that it hasn’t since.

      The PKK and the Turks have engaged in low-level hostilities for many years, and it is on-going. If the Turks used chemical weapons against the Kurds in 2009, it is likely that they are doing so this year too.

    8. Jonathan Says:

      I initially interpreted Trent’s quote from the Spiegel article as meaning that the events had occurred recently. If they had occurred recently they could be interpreted as deliberate provocation/probing of the USA and Israel.

    9. Tom Holsinger Says:

      Jonathan, I am more than a little skeptical about this story. IMO there is at most enough to merit further investigation. If it is true, Trent’s speculation about its effects is sound. Right now, though, it’s all speculation.

      But if the Turks really did use chemical weapons against the Kurds in 2009, it is more likely than not that they are doing so in 2010 as well.

    10. Trent Telenko Says:

      Tom,

      It is more accurate to call NATO a zombie than a ghost.

      Srebrenicia killed the original NATO.

      President Clinton’s covert assistance to the Bosnian Muslims and overt assistance to the Croats Operation Storm, plus the 1999 Kosovo War animated the corpse as a flawed tool of American policy inside Europe.

      Clinton stopped ethnic cleansing/genocide inside Europe using NATO.

      Turkey using chemical weapons on the Kurds,

      a) Assuming it is true and

      b) Given “a)” the Obama Administration doing nothing
      about it for a year,

      …breaks the spell that animates the corpse.

    11. TMLutas Says:

      The accusation is spectacular. The truthfulness is yet to be determined. I would like to hear from the chemical weapons ban organization (OPCW) before I took this very seriously. Der Spiegel could have sought their comment but apparently didn’t.

      The OPCW, unless it’s completely moribund, should be the go-to group when there’s an accusation of chemical munitions use. It would be useful to know whether these guys are on the ball.

    12. Jonathan Says:

      Reasonable points.

    13. Anonymous Says:

      TMLutas,

      what I have read to date from Der Spiegel implies strongly that some sort of chemical blister agent was used:

      “It would be difficult to exceed the horror shown in the photos, which feature burned, maimed and scorched body parts. The victims are scarcely even recognizable as human beings.”

      And Der Spiegel would have very good editorial reasons for not publishing them.

      Chemical burn wounds caused by blister agents are distinctive because they are hydrophilic — they seek parts of the body that are always wet — and that isn’t limited to the eyes.

      Go to this link (not safe for work) http://www.mustardgas.org/photos.htm

      And see the photo titled:

      “Penis & Scrotum Burnt With Mustard Gas”

    14. TMLutas Says:

      Anonymous – I’m not disputing the horrific nature of the photos. It would do no good to show me them as I’ve got no expertise in judging things. But you’re building up a straw man here.

      The key matters are:

      1. Were chemical munitions used
      2. Who were they used on
      3. Who were they used by

      Chemical blister agents are not that hard to make, being 90 year old technology. You can find at least one recipe book for it on amazon.com (and no, I’m not linking to it). You quote “victims are scarcely even recognizable as human beings” which makes me wonder whether they’re recognizable at all as kurds. Looking at the photos does me no good because I don’t know the markers to tell the difference between kurds and turks and arabs for that matter.

      Turkish kurds getting gassed by the Turkish army today v Iraqi kurds getting gassed by Saddam’s army a decade ago, how do you tell the difference? From the human dimension there is no difference, of course. It would be nice to be sure we’re nailing the right bad guys though.

      My point is reducible to don’t turn off your brain when confronted with horror and evil. The same principles of justice should apply.