The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Russian Reaction BlogTeasers
Turkey Coup: Undone by Demographics
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Turkey has a proud and rich history of military coups. As analysts tirelessly point out, they are even sanctioned by the Constitution as a means of preserving secularism.

However, those days have come to an end.

The abortive coup of the past few days was in all likelihood the dying gasp of 20th century Turkey.

I

In Western op-eds over the years, there has been rising disquiet over the AKP’s “Islamization” of Turkish society, including the education system. However, if opinion polls are anything to go by, the Islamization effect has been slight.

According to the World Values Survey, a comprehensive survey of global cultural values that runs in multiyear “waves,” there has been no very significant rise in religious fervor in Turkish society from the first wave in 1989-1993 to the last wave in 2010-2014. A mere 1% of Turks disbelieve in God, but that is barely different from 2% in the mid-1990s (and exactly analogous to the US in the early 1980s and Poland in the early 1990s). The percentage of Turks who listed “religious faith” as one of the more desirable traits for their children fell from 44% to 40% in the last 25 years, and while the percentage of Turks who consider religious faith to be “very important” rose from 60% in the early 1990s to around 80% through the rest of the 1990s and 2000s, in the very last wave of surveys that number fell back to 68%. The percentage of Turks considering themselves to be a “religious person” rose from 73% in the early 1990s, but has remained stable at around 80%-85% ever since. And despite all the mosque building under the AKP, religious attendance has virtually no changes over the past quarter century and only 1% of Turks say they are members of a religious organization.

The banal reality is that Turkey has consistently been a conservative and strongly religious society (even if it is nothing on the scale of Arab countries where half or more of the population supports the death penalty for adultery and apostasy). Some 70% of Turks agree that in conflicts between religious and science, the former is “always” right. This is lower than the 90%+ agreement rate you see in Arab Muslim countries for this question, but is considerably higher than in the more religious Western countries such as the US (39%) and Poland (25%) – or for that matter in Russia (22%), for all the rhetoric about it becoming a theocracy.

On the other hand, a generation ago, masses of bearded men would not have come out onto the streets of Istanbul, charging rifle tanks and putting themselves in the way of tanks, to defend an Islamist President against a military coup. They would not have then proceeded to beat up and in some cases lynch surrending soldiers, most of whom – as it now emerges – were hapless conscripts who were not even aware that they were participating in a coup.

But if this wasn’t a case of the AKP’s Islamization campaign generating many more hardcore Islamists, what actually changed?

II

The answer ultimately lies in Turkish demographics: In short, the devout Muslims have migrated to the cities.

In the past generation, Turkey has urbanized at breakneck speeds. The urban population share of Turkey has increased from 44% in 1980, the data of the last major successful coup, to 73% today. In absolute numbers, this translated in an increase from 20 million to 55 million urban denizens during this period, including a fivefold increase in Istanbul from 3 million to 15 million. The other western coastal cities and Ankara also saw major increases.

From 1965 to today, the share of the Turkish population residing in richer, more heavily urbanized Western Turkey soared from a third to a half, while poorer and more rural Central Turkey and Eastern Turkey fell from a third each to 23% and 28%, respectively. However, Western Turkey also has the country’s lowest fertility rates, at less than the replacement level rate of 2.1 and comparable to those seen in the North-Eastern USA.

turkey-fertility-rate-2000

Total fertility rates in Turkey in 2000.

So where did their new denizens come from?

turkey-internal-migration

Internal migration in Turkey.

They came from the Anatolian hinterlands, whose fertility rates – almost one expected child more in Marmara and the Aegean coast – are comparable to that of Utah, not New England. They are much more conservative, much more religious, and less socioeconomically advanced (Western coastal Turkey has a GDP per capita comparable to Greece, whereas Central Turkey is more comparable to Romania and the Kurdish triangle to the southest converges to more overtly Third World conditions).

These people of Middle Turkey, derided as backwards country bumpkins and Islamist retrogrades by coastal Kemalist latte-sipping urbanites, have their own political vision…

turkey-2011-elections-results

Typical Turkish electoral map (2011 elections).

… which is centered on the social conservatism and political “Islamism Lite” of Erdogan and the AKP. And they continue to have many more babies than the traditional westcoasters, even after moving there: Whereas in 2003 the TFR of urban natives across all of Turkey was a mere 1.68 children per woman, considerably lower than the all Turkish average of 2.23 children per woman, for rural-to-urban migrants it was 2.82 children per women, and only modestly lower than the 3.28 rate for rural natives.

Incidentally, this also explains the strong Islamism, low socioeconomic status, high fertility rates (higher than back home!), and high degree of Erdogan support amongst German Turks. The Gastarbeiters primarily hailed from Middle Turkey, and the migration to Germany was just one aspect of the mass population movement from there to more advanced areas in the second part of the 20th century.

III

And all this, possibly more so than contingent factors like poor planning or the failure to eliminate Erdogan, explains why the military coup failed.

ORDER IT NOW

First off, this internal migration of virile Islamists created a class of urbanites in Ankara and especially Istanbul who were ready to go out for and in some cases to lay their lives down for their beliefs. While historically rapid urbanization was associated with political instability and revolution, the major difference is that in Turkey, it is Erdogan who is the candidate of the sans-culottes and of the factory workers. In previous coups, the military could take control to reinstate secularism at will, and what was an aggrieved Muslim in the Anatolian boondocks to do about it? Stew in his own juices. But now, those same people could flood into the streets, having been rapidly mobilized by their neighborhood imams and Erdogan pleading for help on social media.

Second, it should be noted that the economic effects of Anatolian urbanization have worked strongly to the Islamists’ favor. Apart from the direct benefits to people’s pockets that came with the fusion of political Islam and economic liberalization, the construction projects associated with the mass Anatolian relocation to Ionia and Marmara, as well as the industries that sprang up to service their needs (retail, credit, etc.), has created a class of Turkish oligarchs. Moreover, unlike in say Russia, where the oil & gas oligarch class remains somewhat resentful of Putin for circumscribing their power after the 1990s free-for-all when not expropriating their ill-gotten gains outright, the Turkish oligarchs created in the 1990s generally have more reasons to remain loyal to the regime:

The names of those allegedly involved reads like a Who’s Who of Turkey’s ­government-linked oligarchy, whose firms have profited in recent years from the more than $100bn-worth of public contracts awarded by the AKP. Nepotism in the awarding of tenders has long been one of the most visible signs of corruption in Turkey, and in the AKP’s years a coterie of construction firms has risen up around it.

A hostile oligarch class combined with an independent military makes for a highly unstable polity and has been the traditional bane of populist governments in Latin America. Erdogan, however, has successfully coopted the oligarch class through the same mechanisms that won him the support of a critical mass of people in Turkey’s twin capitals.

IV

It is now increasingly evident that a political transformation of cardinal proportions is taking place in Turkey. As of the time of writing, around 30 governors, 100 generals, 2,700 judges, 3,000 soldiers, and 8,000 police have been dismissed or arrested – in short, something like a third of Turkey’s high-level apparat has been purged. Although there remain good grounds to continue to doubt that the coup was “planned” by Erdogan, it’s pretty clear that the Black Book was written long beforehand for just such an occasion.

If Erdogan now uses the opportunity to take Turkey in a much more Islamist direction what do the demographic trends indicate about his chances of longterm success?

First off, it was not that the incidence of religiosity has increased in Turkey. In fact, DESPITE the much higher fertility rates of the Islamists, and more than a decade’s worth of active Islamization, religiosity in Turkey has only modestly increased during the 2000s and actually seems to have started falling again by the time of the fifth WVS (see above). This is quite stunning in that it implies that the global secular trend towards secularism (LOL) is incredibly strong, in that even in Turkey it has succeeded in holding its own against very powerful demographic and propaganda countercurrents. Even if Turkey went so far as to delink itself from the Council of Europe and NATO, it’s not clear why these secularizing forces should stop acting on it.

Second, there is the Kurdish factor. Although the oft made case for similarities between Putin and Erdogan have tended to be overstated, there is one sphere in which I think where the comparison is legitimate: Ethnic policy. Both are “manynationals” who are using ideology to try to glue their country together – Islam is basically the Turkish version of Russia’s WW2 Victory cult with a small dose of “spiritual buckles” like the anti-LGBT law. But if anything Turkey’s problems are more acute. Russia’s only truly “problematic” region in that it combines an aggrieved ethnicity with a high total fertility rate – which at 2.9 children per woman is not even that high – is Chechnya, which only has 1% of Russia’s population. In contrast, Kurdish Turkestan has more than 10% of the Turkish population and almost all of its provinces have a fertility rate of greater than 3 children per woman. Will an even more rigorous Islamization campaign keep them within Turkey or will the gravitational attraction of the incipient Rojava state prove to be unavoidable?

On that particular front, there are few grounds for optimism. It is above all Erdogan’s own foreign policy that enabled the rise of Rojava and it is too late to put the lid on it; certainly it is beyond the capabilities of the SAA itself, which has enough problems dealing with Al Nusra and Islamic State to say nothing of an SDF that is now supported by US airpower. And Turkey’s own military capabilities have, at least in the short-term, been sharply curtailed by Erdogan own purge of as many high-ranking officers (percentage wise) within a couple of days as Stalin only managed to do over the course of a year.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Color Revolution, Demographics, Turkey 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    It is now increasingly evident that a political transformation of cardinal proportions is taking place in Turkey.

    Yup, Caliphate for real.

    Ironic if the western oligarchs – by off-shoring their manufacturing base to places like Turkey and thus driving the move to the cities – have created a Frankenstein that will destroy them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @g2k
    That's a massive exaggeration. The extent to which turkey and subsequently Turkish Islam differs from the Arab/African/South Asian Sunni form can't be overstated. This article makes the case with polling data pretty well and articulates the point better than I can. If you still need convincing then go into Google or Yandex street view and look at Anatolia (the AKP heartlands are all included, eg. Elazaig) the number of hooded women is an absolute minority, similarly find YouTube clips of an Erdogan rally; about 50:50 there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/demographics-of-turkey-coup/#comment-1496985
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. “And all this, possibly more so than contingent factors like poor planning or the failure to eliminate Erdogan, explains why the military coup failed.”

    This suggests to me even more that the coup was a CIA plot. The Americans are prone to buying into their own propaganda in lieu of in-depth and fact based analysis. They probably thought the latte-sipping urbanites would be out in the streets cheerfully supporting the military’s attempt to return secularist values. Oops.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I would be a little disappointed and even surprised if the CIA was fostering such an incompetent coup in 2016.
    , @European-American
    Hi, off-topic, but the comment of yours I wanted to reply to is in a post where comments are closed:

    my comment was rather tongue-in-cheek about an incident where AK very uncharacteristically lost his cool. It’s difficult to describe out of context, and there’s no way I can find it now
    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/reader-poll-2016/#comment-1476826
     
    Just FYI, you do an injustice to our host Ron Unz's powerful search feature:
    http://www.unz.com/?s=%22cucked+faggot%22&searchsubmit=Search&authors=anatoly-karlin&ptype=akarlin&commentsearch=only

    But what I really wanted to say was that I regret the apparent result of AK's poll: privileging long-form posts.

    I usually like reading AK's thoughts, but not when they are that long. Or I read the long ones only on occasion, when I am exceptionally interested in the topic he is discussing or the idea he is advancing.

    (There was that amazing "open thread" article a while back that had at least a dozen fascinating (and short and unrelated) topics, but all glommed together in one indigestible article. Why the need to make such a long post? Does it seem more serious and weighty that way?)

    So I'll just say I'm one of the readers who wish AK would experiment more with brevity, and I bet many of us feel that way, poll notwithstanding.

    Of course I may not be AK's target. Even for short posts, I feel intrigued but a little out of my depth. The long posts are successful in eliminating me from the set of AK readers, and that may be the intended effect :)

  3. General Akin Ozturk who was arrested along with five other senior Turkish Generals for leading the failed military coup against president Erdogan on Friday – served as military attaché at Turkish embassy in Israel between 1996-1998.

    “Clearly, the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad were directly involved in the planning, coordination, and execution of yesterday’s coup attempt. Just as they have been directly involved in all of Turkey’s military-staged coups over the past 40 years, this one fits the pattern perfectly. The disillusioned segments of Turkish society don’t have sufficient control or influence over the military to effectuate a successful coup; only the Western intelligence agencies have such power,” State of the Nation, July 16, 2016.

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/07/18/leader-of-turkeys-failed-military-coup-served-in-israel/

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    “Clearly, the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad were directly involved in the planning, coordination, and execution of yesterday’s coup attempt. "

    I find this hard to swallow. This "clearly" needs some additional decorations. Also, motives? And I mean real motives, not a "because reasons that I find these guys could find convenient". And these reasons have to be massive enough to weight up against the dangers of failure, this not being Chile in the 80s.
  4. @anon

    It is now increasingly evident that a political transformation of cardinal proportions is taking place in Turkey.
     
    Yup, Caliphate for real.

    Ironic if the western oligarchs - by off-shoring their manufacturing base to places like Turkey and thus driving the move to the cities - have created a Frankenstein that will destroy them.

    That’s a massive exaggeration. The extent to which turkey and subsequently Turkish Islam differs from the Arab/African/South Asian Sunni form can’t be overstated. This article makes the case with polling data pretty well and articulates the point better than I can. If you still need convincing then go into Google or Yandex street view and look at Anatolia (the AKP heartlands are all included, eg. Elazaig) the number of hooded women is an absolute minority, similarly find YouTube clips of an Erdogan rally; about 50:50 there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    The extent to which turkey and subsequently Turkish Islam differs from the Arab/African/South Asian Sunni form can’t be overstated.
     
    Yes, Ottoman Islam was always more practical-Imperial than elsewhere - which is what makes it a potentially bigger deal imo.
  5. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @g2k
    That's a massive exaggeration. The extent to which turkey and subsequently Turkish Islam differs from the Arab/African/South Asian Sunni form can't be overstated. This article makes the case with polling data pretty well and articulates the point better than I can. If you still need convincing then go into Google or Yandex street view and look at Anatolia (the AKP heartlands are all included, eg. Elazaig) the number of hooded women is an absolute minority, similarly find YouTube clips of an Erdogan rally; about 50:50 there.

    The extent to which turkey and subsequently Turkish Islam differs from the Arab/African/South Asian Sunni form can’t be overstated.

    Yes, Ottoman Islam was always more practical-Imperial than elsewhere – which is what makes it a potentially bigger deal imo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @g2k
    Point taken but so what: The biggest Islamic threat to Europe comes not from Turkish imperialism but the Wahabification, and subsequent terrorism, of it's Muslim minorities from less sophisticated corners of the world (even in Germany Turks are immune to this and in the uk they're as secular as the natives)? Merkel's shameless know towing notwithstanding. Armenia is a Russian protectorate, the rest of their old stomping grounds are American protectorates and the Altalticists are every bit as anti-Assad as the Islamists.
    , @gwynedd1
    Not any more than the original Arab Caliphate. There was plenty of practicality , and impious debauchery, even in the early Umayyad dynasty, that is to say after Islam lost s republican roots and became hereditary. We know the afterlife is less appealing to an aristocracy enjoying the fruits of this world. So as we see time and time again , Islam can only be pacified by elite, central rule.
  6. @Rehmat
    General Akin Ozturk who was arrested along with five other senior Turkish Generals for leading the failed military coup against president Erdogan on Friday – served as military attaché at Turkish embassy in Israel between 1996-1998.

    “Clearly, the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad were directly involved in the planning, coordination, and execution of yesterday’s coup attempt. Just as they have been directly involved in all of Turkey’s military-staged coups over the past 40 years, this one fits the pattern perfectly. The disillusioned segments of Turkish society don’t have sufficient control or influence over the military to effectuate a successful coup; only the Western intelligence agencies have such power,” State of the Nation, July 16, 2016.

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/07/18/leader-of-turkeys-failed-military-coup-served-in-israel/

    “Clearly, the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad were directly involved in the planning, coordination, and execution of yesterday’s coup attempt. ”

    I find this hard to swallow. This “clearly” needs some additional decorations. Also, motives? And I mean real motives, not a “because reasons that I find these guys could find convenient”. And these reasons have to be massive enough to weight up against the dangers of failure, this not being Chile in the 80s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rehmat
    Of course - truth is always hard to "swallow".

    I'm sure morons like you don't believe that CIA and Mossad pulled the 9/11.

    Last year, after, the UK’s David Cameron government announced the construction of a £50 million Holocaust Museum to please country’s Organized Jewry – the outspoken pro-Palestinian and pro-Iran Vicar of Christ Church in Virginia Waters (UK), Bishop Stephen Sizer, posted: “9-11/ Israel did it” on his Facebook page (see above). In order to expose western ‘freedom of speech’ double standard, he added: “Is this anti-Semitic? If so, no doubt I’ll be asked to remove it. It raises so many questions.” Bishop Sizer found the answer when his superiors at the Diocese of Guilford demanded that Sizer must remove the ‘political incorrect statement’ from his Facebook……

    AK: You were asked to provide evidence, not infest the thread with your usual Single Issue Fanaticism (which is a rules violation). Do it again and you will be banned.
    , @No_0ne
    Possible reasons for US/ Israel to back anti-Erdogan coup:
    1. Erdogan's reconciliation with Putin (including an apology, no less).
    2. Erdogan is now talking to Assad
    http://m.jpost.com/Middle-East/Erdogan-Assad-talk-Israel-Syria-peace#article=0NzhFMkUzNzBCQ0RDNEExQjQzNjRDNTNDMkM0Mjk0QUU=

    Proof? Hardly. Adequate motive? Certainly.
    , @Macon Richardson
    Agree completely, El Dato. Use of the word "clearly" is a disinformation technique. (Perhaps I should say it is clearly a disinformation technique. . . .) It makes the entire post suspect.

    In addition, I think any assumption that CIA, MI6 or Mossad must be behind this or any coup is quite ethnocentric. It implies that Turks aren't capable of mounting a poorly planned, poorly executed failed coup all by themselves. What hubris.
  7. @anon

    The extent to which turkey and subsequently Turkish Islam differs from the Arab/African/South Asian Sunni form can’t be overstated.
     
    Yes, Ottoman Islam was always more practical-Imperial than elsewhere - which is what makes it a potentially bigger deal imo.

    Point taken but so what: The biggest Islamic threat to Europe comes not from Turkish imperialism but the Wahabification, and subsequent terrorism, of it’s Muslim minorities from less sophisticated corners of the world (even in Germany Turks are immune to this and in the uk they’re as secular as the natives)? Merkel’s shameless know towing notwithstanding. Armenia is a Russian protectorate, the rest of their old stomping grounds are American protectorates and the Altalticists are every bit as anti-Assad as the Islamists.

    Read More
  8. @El Dato
    “Clearly, the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad were directly involved in the planning, coordination, and execution of yesterday’s coup attempt. "

    I find this hard to swallow. This "clearly" needs some additional decorations. Also, motives? And I mean real motives, not a "because reasons that I find these guys could find convenient". And these reasons have to be massive enough to weight up against the dangers of failure, this not being Chile in the 80s.

    Of course – truth is always hard to “swallow”.

    I’m sure morons like you don’t believe that CIA and Mossad pulled the 9/11.

    Last year, after, the UK’s David Cameron government announced the construction of a £50 million Holocaust Museum to please country’s Organized Jewry – the outspoken pro-Palestinian and pro-Iran Vicar of Christ Church in Virginia Waters (UK), Bishop Stephen Sizer, posted: “9-11/ Israel did it” on his Facebook page (see above). In order to expose western ‘freedom of speech’ double standard, he added: “Is this anti-Semitic? If so, no doubt I’ll be asked to remove it. It raises so many questions.” Bishop Sizer found the answer when his superiors at the Diocese of Guilford demanded that Sizer must remove the ‘political incorrect statement’ from his Facebook……

    AK: You were asked to provide evidence, not infest the thread with your usual Single Issue Fanaticism (which is a rules violation). Do it again and you will be banned.

    Read More
  9. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    All I know is that democracy, political freedoms, civil rights, free press, etc., seem pretty much inimical to any Muslim society.

    Read More
  10. @AK: To put it mildly, Rehmat has never been a valuable asset to have in any comment thread.

    Read More
  11. A question for Karlin, if a similar coup attempt took place in Russia would the average citizen take to the streets to counter the coup or not ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    Look here, fool, those were not "average citizens"; most of those were Erdogan-supporting Islamist fanatics, trained militants and thugs, many summoned directly from mosques - the Turkish-Islamist version of "brownshirts". There was not a single female among them, which tells you how much "average citizens" they were - if they were average people, you'd have expected a significant proportion of them to be women. The overwhelming majority of the "average citizens" of Turkey (including virtually all of the 50+% of the population that opposes Erdogan and his AKP party) STAYED AT HOME during the coup attempt - due both to the coup spokesmen warning people on TV to stay home because a general curfew had been declared (a bad move, in retrospect, since it meant that the only people on the streets would be the hardened pro-Erdogan paramilitary fanatics prepared to disregard the warning, who could then be misrepresented to gullible outsiders as "ordinary civilians fighting to save democracy from a military coup"), and also to the fact that most "average citizens" are normal people accustomed to leading normal lives, i.e., not ready and willing to rush out into the streets at a moment's notice, right into the midst of savage violence, to risk life and limb by getting shot, stabbed or beaten to a pulp.

    Next time, try to understand your subject matter a little bit better, before you go opining about events in far-off lands which you know very little of. It will make you a better person, trust me.
    , @Mitleser
    Remember the August coup in 1991.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    The "average" citizen won't. (Almost all revolutions and counter-revolutions are made by minorities).

    However, its safe to say that hundreds of thousands in Moscow will.
  12. @neutral
    A question for Karlin, if a similar coup attempt took place in Russia would the average citizen take to the streets to counter the coup or not ?

    Look here, fool, those were not “average citizens”; most of those were Erdogan-supporting Islamist fanatics, trained militants and thugs, many summoned directly from mosques – the Turkish-Islamist version of “brownshirts”. There was not a single female among them, which tells you how much “average citizens” they were – if they were average people, you’d have expected a significant proportion of them to be women. The overwhelming majority of the “average citizens” of Turkey (including virtually all of the 50+% of the population that opposes Erdogan and his AKP party) STAYED AT HOME during the coup attempt – due both to the coup spokesmen warning people on TV to stay home because a general curfew had been declared (a bad move, in retrospect, since it meant that the only people on the streets would be the hardened pro-Erdogan paramilitary fanatics prepared to disregard the warning, who could then be misrepresented to gullible outsiders as “ordinary civilians fighting to save democracy from a military coup”), and also to the fact that most “average citizens” are normal people accustomed to leading normal lives, i.e., not ready and willing to rush out into the streets at a moment’s notice, right into the midst of savage violence, to risk life and limb by getting shot, stabbed or beaten to a pulp.

    Next time, try to understand your subject matter a little bit better, before you go opining about events in far-off lands which you know very little of. It will make you a better person, trust me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Holy shit. No need for the hostility. Try to not treat people like shit for not thinking exactly like you or not knowing what you think you know.
    , @jay
    Conservative Turks have traditional sex roles. So of course women aren't out and about doing this sort of thing raising up children and all the usual feminine roles.

    You will find this in any civilization in history. In a patriarchal society when revolts are staged they are done entirely by men.

    Anything to do with politics are done purely by men in a patriarchal setting like the conservative Turks.
  13. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    So what does this mean for Syrian policy?

    Will Erdogan now without much opposing him invade Syria and supply arms to anti-Assad rebels to try to bring down Assad?

    Or will he see himself as vulnerable, stay permanently hostile to Americans, warm up to Russians, and leave Syria alone?

    If the latter case, this failed coup might have stabilized Turkey by preventing Erdogan from bringing down Syria, dumping fuel on terrorism, and having Turkey feel the huge blow back.

    Read More
  14. @neutral
    A question for Karlin, if a similar coup attempt took place in Russia would the average citizen take to the streets to counter the coup or not ?

    Remember the August coup in 1991.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Remember the August coup in 1991.
     
    Totally different paradigms.
  15. @Anonymous
    So what does this mean for Syrian policy?

    Will Erdogan now without much opposing him invade Syria and supply arms to anti-Assad rebels to try to bring down Assad?

    Or will he see himself as vulnerable, stay permanently hostile to Americans, warm up to Russians, and leave Syria alone?

    If the latter case, this failed coup might have stabilized Turkey by preventing Erdogan from bringing down Syria, dumping fuel on terrorism, and having Turkey feel the huge blow back.

    Most likely, no change.

    Read More
  16. Is Erdogan donmeh? Seems rather light-skinned.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Georgian
    , @Marcus
    He's about average for eastern Turkey, western trends fairer-complexioned, see Omer Asik for example.
  17. The theory of conservatives having moved to the big Turkish cities and having turned them into being in favor of Erdogan also explains the strong convergence of fertility rates over time. In the heydays of secularism in the 1950s, the TFR in Turkey was over 6, while it was below 3 in the poster child of Turkish modernity, Istanbul. Since then, rural folks have flocked into the city and thus today, Istanbul’s fertility isn’t that different from the overall Turkish rate anymore:

    https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8723/28361763031_fe6506f981_o.png

    When it comes to the Turkish/Kurdish fertility difference, it has so far stubbornly remained at two children. While in the past it was 8 for the Kurds and 6 for the Turks, it now is 4 for the Kurds and 2 for the Turks:

    https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7502/27823798114_83876f3d16_o.png

    The future of ffertility in Turkey will be quite interesting: While I can’t tell anything about future regional shifts, in my eyes overall fertility in Turkey will decline quite a bit, and this is because of rising women’s employment. So far, Turkey (as most other islamic countries) has very low female labor force participation, but in Turkey this has been rising in the past few years, as productivity is stalling and getting more people to work is the only way to grow the economy. Usually, as females enter the economy and childcare is not so much available, fertility drops to those familiar levels of 1.3 or so, as women who want to do a career can’t have children anymore. In Turkey, more and more women are starting careers because the male labor potential has already been activated. It is possible that, along this development, Turkey will see its TFR drop to those levels now seen in Greece, Italy or Spain.

    Read More
  18. The evidence so far seems to indicate that the failed coup was carried out mostly by Gulenist cadres in the officers corps who were about to be purged by Erdogan.

    Both Gulen and Erdogan are Islamists. There are no “secular” Islamists.

    All “Islamists” are Muslims, by definition.

    Thus trying to explain the failure of coup with Muslim birth rates isn’t just wrong, you missed the whole point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Gülenists are elitist Islamists.
    They do not have the support of the conservative Islamic masses who migrated to Istanbul and other cities and were essential for Erdogan's victory.
  19. I have never understood (believed) Erdogan’s desire for EU membership. Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?

    Hopefully, recent events will push Turkey closer to Russia and Syria will finally be allowed to recover intact. Imperial aggression in the MENA would finally be stopped. The invasion (it’s not a rebellion) of Syria cannot succeed anyway against Russian resistance.

    And what if the Kurds were able to create a Kurdistan where they dominate linguistically? Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey WC,

    EU membership
     
    I believe Turkey (even before Erdogan - remember Ecevit?) has always wanted it on their own terms; economic benefits without cultural meddling - this is why a compromise has never been reached.

    The invasion (it’s not a rebellion) of Syria
     
    It was definitely a rebellion in the beginning - very native and local in nature (http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/sheikh-muhammad-al-yaqoubi-interviewed-by-syria-comment/). Let's not fool ourselves; Daesh is horrible - no question, but the Assad regime are no angels. They represent one of the more torturous (one of the things that set people off was the torture and mutilation of a child - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/31/syria-unrest-teenage-victim-hamza) and repressive police states in the area. If you know any run-of-the-mill Syrians, they will let you know how feared the mukhabarat was (even if you lived outside Syria, an off-hand comment at a dinner party in Des Moines could haunt you when you landed in Damascus for a visit) - and if they couldn't break you directly, your wife and daughter were fair game. Any neutral Human Rights group can confirm this; you can look through any public record reports from NGOs from the 1990's and early 2000's. However, you are absolutely correct - once things started rolling, it was definitely picked up by the foreign elements (governments and otherwise) for their own nefarious designs.

    Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?
     
    Though the Kurds have a leg up in demographic projections, he is not - he makes overtures to them when politically preferable (http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/02/turkey-erdogan-new-kurdish-allies.html). The Kurds likely have far more to fear from a ehtno-nationalist Turkish military state. As I posted elsewhere, Kurdish/Turkish relations fared better under the rubric of them both being distinct, but brother Muslim communities under the Ottomans rather than the secular Turkish nationalists:
    “Confronted with the choice of being annexed at some point by Persia or formally accepting the supremacy of the Ottoman sultan in exchange for a very wide autonomy, the Kurdish leaders opted for this second solution and thus Kurdistan, or more exactly its countless fiefs and principalities entered the Ottoman bosom by the path of diplomacy.”
    “This particular status was to assure Kurdistan about three centuries of peace. The Ottomans controlled some strategic garrisons on the Kurdish territory, but the rest of the country was governed by the Kurdish lords and princes…Despite interferences from time to time from the central power, this particular status, to the satisfaction of the Kurds and the Ottomans, functioned without any major hitch until the beginning of the XIXth century.”
    http://www.institutkurde.org/en/institute/who_are_the_kurds.php

    Peace.
    , @Mitleser

    Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?
     
    Would he? Turkey will soon be more populous than Germany.
    Demographics and Turkey's growing economy would ensure that Turkey would be one of the most influential EU countries.
    , @Erik Sieven
    the Turks have seen that even Greece could easily outsmart northern Europeans and make them pay money without getting anything back. They figured that they could do the same, and for them it would be even easier: less bad conscience than the greek have, because it is only non-muslims who they take advantage of.
    Also for Turkey joining the EU is perceived as the slow conquering of Europe by muslims, in line with mass immigration.
    , @gokart-mozart
    @WorkingClass: "I have never understood (believed) Erdogan’s desire for EU membership. Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?


    He doesn't want to TAKE orders FROM Brussels. He wants to GIVE orders TO Brussels, or more likely to Vienna. Turkey in the EU + NATO would dominate in short order, and mass conversions among formerly Christian nations would quickly follow. Notre Dame will be Hagia Maria mosque within 25 years, since the alternative to Christendom is not secular hedonism - it is Islam.
  20. @neutral
    A question for Karlin, if a similar coup attempt took place in Russia would the average citizen take to the streets to counter the coup or not ?

    The “average” citizen won’t. (Almost all revolutions and counter-revolutions are made by minorities).

    However, its safe to say that hundreds of thousands in Moscow will.

    Read More
  21. @WorkingClass
    I have never understood (believed) Erdogan's desire for EU membership. Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?

    Hopefully, recent events will push Turkey closer to Russia and Syria will finally be allowed to recover intact. Imperial aggression in the MENA would finally be stopped. The invasion (it's not a rebellion) of Syria cannot succeed anyway against Russian resistance.

    And what if the Kurds were able to create a Kurdistan where they dominate linguistically? Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?

    Hey WC,

    EU membership

    I believe Turkey (even before Erdogan – remember Ecevit?) has always wanted it on their own terms; economic benefits without cultural meddling – this is why a compromise has never been reached.

    The invasion (it’s not a rebellion) of Syria

    It was definitely a rebellion in the beginning – very native and local in nature (http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/sheikh-muhammad-al-yaqoubi-interviewed-by-syria-comment/). Let’s not fool ourselves; Daesh is horrible – no question, but the Assad regime are no angels. They represent one of the more torturous (one of the things that set people off was the torture and mutilation of a child – https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/31/syria-unrest-teenage-victim-hamza) and repressive police states in the area. If you know any run-of-the-mill Syrians, they will let you know how feared the mukhabarat was (even if you lived outside Syria, an off-hand comment at a dinner party in Des Moines could haunt you when you landed in Damascus for a visit) – and if they couldn’t break you directly, your wife and daughter were fair game. Any neutral Human Rights group can confirm this; you can look through any public record reports from NGOs from the 1990′s and early 2000′s. However, you are absolutely correct – once things started rolling, it was definitely picked up by the foreign elements (governments and otherwise) for their own nefarious designs.

    Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?

    Though the Kurds have a leg up in demographic projections, he is not – he makes overtures to them when politically preferable (http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/02/turkey-erdogan-new-kurdish-allies.html). The Kurds likely have far more to fear from a ehtno-nationalist Turkish military state. As I posted elsewhere, Kurdish/Turkish relations fared better under the rubric of them both being distinct, but brother Muslim communities under the Ottomans rather than the secular Turkish nationalists:
    “Confronted with the choice of being annexed at some point by Persia or formally accepting the supremacy of the Ottoman sultan in exchange for a very wide autonomy, the Kurdish leaders opted for this second solution and thus Kurdistan, or more exactly its countless fiefs and principalities entered the Ottoman bosom by the path of diplomacy.”
    “This particular status was to assure Kurdistan about three centuries of peace. The Ottomans controlled some strategic garrisons on the Kurdish territory, but the rest of the country was governed by the Kurdish lords and princes…Despite interferences from time to time from the central power, this particular status, to the satisfaction of the Kurds and the Ottomans, functioned without any major hitch until the beginning of the XIXth century.”

    http://www.institutkurde.org/en/institute/who_are_the_kurds.php

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy WIlliam

    It was definitely a rebellion in the beginning – very native and local in nature
     
    I met a Syrian American recently who was born in the US to Syrian immigrant parents and still has family members living in Syria. Although totally secular (he was a pretty heavy drinker) and seemingly apolitical, he absolutely detested the Assad family. I wouldn't say he supported the rebels but he definitely despised the Assad's and seemed to fear that they would harm his family that was still living in Damascus.

    I was really surprised because I had always thought the secular middle class was very supportive of Assad.

    Just goes to show how complex things are over there.
    , @Krollchem
    Yes the rebellion was local near the border with Jordan. It was, however, the CIA which used the environmental problems to reach their goals under America’s CIA covert operation against the Syrian regime, known as Timber Sycamore :
    http://warontherocks.com/2016/07/the-logic-for-shoddy-u-s-covert-action-in-syria/

    Remember that the drought and other environmental factors were too much for the poor rural Syrians to bear. The same thing happened in Yugoslavia where the World Bank collapsed the Yugoslavia currency resulting in the civil war. The people can be relied to blame other ethnic groups for their problems rather than the "Master of the Universe". It works almost every time...
  22. @Akira
    The evidence so far seems to indicate that the failed coup was carried out mostly by Gulenist cadres in the officers corps who were about to be purged by Erdogan.

    Both Gulen and Erdogan are Islamists. There are no "secular" Islamists.

    All "Islamists" are Muslims, by definition.

    Thus trying to explain the failure of coup with Muslim birth rates isn't just wrong, you missed the whole point.

    Gülenists are elitist Islamists.
    They do not have the support of the conservative Islamic masses who migrated to Istanbul and other cities and were essential for Erdogan’s victory.

    Read More
  23. @WorkingClass
    I have never understood (believed) Erdogan's desire for EU membership. Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?

    Hopefully, recent events will push Turkey closer to Russia and Syria will finally be allowed to recover intact. Imperial aggression in the MENA would finally be stopped. The invasion (it's not a rebellion) of Syria cannot succeed anyway against Russian resistance.

    And what if the Kurds were able to create a Kurdistan where they dominate linguistically? Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?

    Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?

    Would he? Turkey will soon be more populous than Germany.
    Demographics and Turkey’s growing economy would ensure that Turkey would be one of the most influential EU countries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    That's exactly why the rest of the EU doesn't want them: they would have as much say as Germany, France, or Italy despite having a much weaker economy.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Exactly right. If the Germans, French, and Italians et al. are suicidal enough to admit Turkey to the EU, it will immediately be the most populous member.

    In fact, the way fertility rates are going in Europe versus Turkey, the population of Turkey could be as great as that of Germany and France COMBINED, in due course. Terrible to contemplate.
    , @WorkingClass
    Thank you. That gives me a bit of light.
  24. @Mitleser

    Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?
     
    Would he? Turkey will soon be more populous than Germany.
    Demographics and Turkey's growing economy would ensure that Turkey would be one of the most influential EU countries.

    That’s exactly why the rest of the EU doesn’t want them: they would have as much say as Germany, France, or Italy despite having a much weaker economy.

    Read More
  25. @WorkingClass
    I have never understood (believed) Erdogan's desire for EU membership. Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?

    Hopefully, recent events will push Turkey closer to Russia and Syria will finally be allowed to recover intact. Imperial aggression in the MENA would finally be stopped. The invasion (it's not a rebellion) of Syria cannot succeed anyway against Russian resistance.

    And what if the Kurds were able to create a Kurdistan where they dominate linguistically? Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?

    the Turks have seen that even Greece could easily outsmart northern Europeans and make them pay money without getting anything back. They figured that they could do the same, and for them it would be even easier: less bad conscience than the greek have, because it is only non-muslims who they take advantage of.
    Also for Turkey joining the EU is perceived as the slow conquering of Europe by muslims, in line with mass immigration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser

    the Turks have seen that even Greece could easily outsmart northern Europeans and make them pay money without getting anything back
     
    What are you talking about?
    Greece did not outsmart us.
    We may have to write off a lot of money, but we are making sure that Greeks are punished for what they did.
  26. or for that matter in Russia (22%), for all the rhetoric about it becoming a theocracy.

    Oh, look at that *censored*! A Russian emigre to America who studied democracy in Harvard and lives in the USA. No wonder any of his rhetoric about Russia is so utterly ridiculous. But I wonder for how long (Russian: “dokole!”) the right to speak for Russia will be given to such Harvard-brainwashed “democrats” who live in the States and who have nothing to do with Russia? Why don’t American MSM give the right to speak for America to the FSB Academy graduates who live in Moscow?

    Read More
  27. Moreover, unlike in say Russia, where the oil & gas oligarch class remains somewhat resentful of Putin for circumscribing their power after the 1990s free-for-all when not expropriating their ill-gotten gains outright,

    Well, name a single oil, gas and minerals oligarch, except for Khodorkovsky and his Yukos, who are resentful of Putin. Russian oligarchs are very, VERY content with Putin, I will dare to say they are even much more content with Putin than with Yeltsin, and without doubt more than Turkish oligarchs are content with Erdogan. This is why in Russia there haven’t been even a slight attempt of an anti-Putin coup and it will never be, because the only people who can raise a coup against Putin are against oligarchs as well, but thus the perspective putschists have neither power nor means. And the Russian Army, unlike the Turkish one, is totally bought out and nourished by the Kremlin and has even less disagreement with Putin, Shoigu is one of the closest Putin’s friends. So the dead end, a putsch in Russia is never possible. Erdogan, you were silly, learn grande politique from the masters like Putin!

    Read More
  28. Now and again when I read something about Turkey I cannot help but see parallels with Russia:

    The names of those allegedly involved reads like a Who’s Who of Turkey’s Russia’s ­government-linked oligarchy, whose firms have profited in recent years from the more than $100bn-worth of public contracts awarded by the AKP United Russia. Nepotism in the awarding of tenders has long been one of the most visible signs of corruption in Turkey Russia, and in the AKP’s United Russia’s years a coterie of construction firms has risen up around it.

    Perfect!

    Read More
  29. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Mitleser
    Remember the August coup in 1991.

    Remember the August coup in 1991.

    Totally different paradigms.

    Read More
  30. @Erik Sieven
    the Turks have seen that even Greece could easily outsmart northern Europeans and make them pay money without getting anything back. They figured that they could do the same, and for them it would be even easier: less bad conscience than the greek have, because it is only non-muslims who they take advantage of.
    Also for Turkey joining the EU is perceived as the slow conquering of Europe by muslims, in line with mass immigration.

    the Turks have seen that even Greece could easily outsmart northern Europeans and make them pay money without getting anything back

    What are you talking about?
    Greece did not outsmart us.
    We may have to write off a lot of money, but we are making sure that Greeks are punished for what they did.

    Read More
  31. @Andrei Martyanov

    Remember the August coup in 1991.
     
    Totally different paradigms.

    In a good or bad way?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    In a good or bad way?
     
    In a good way for Russia. As I said it many times before--the only thing which prevents Russia's liberals from hanging by the neck from numerous lamp posts is Putin's genuine 80+% support rating. In this regard Russia is a very stable country despite some noticeable economic difficulties but as they say--not by bread alone.
  32. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Mitleser
    In a good or bad way?

    In a good or bad way?

    In a good way for Russia. As I said it many times before–the only thing which prevents Russia’s liberals from hanging by the neck from numerous lamp posts is Putin’s genuine 80+% support rating. In this regard Russia is a very stable country despite some noticeable economic difficulties but as they say–not by bread alone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus

    Putin’s genuine 80+% support rating.
     
    Are that many Russians oblivious to the Muslim invasion he's abetted since taking power?
  33. @Mitleser

    Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?
     
    Would he? Turkey will soon be more populous than Germany.
    Demographics and Turkey's growing economy would ensure that Turkey would be one of the most influential EU countries.

    Exactly right. If the Germans, French, and Italians et al. are suicidal enough to admit Turkey to the EU, it will immediately be the most populous member.

    In fact, the way fertility rates are going in Europe versus Turkey, the population of Turkey could be as great as that of Germany and France COMBINED, in due course. Terrible to contemplate.

    Read More
  34. @Mitleser

    Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?
     
    Would he? Turkey will soon be more populous than Germany.
    Demographics and Turkey's growing economy would ensure that Turkey would be one of the most influential EU countries.

    Thank you. That gives me a bit of light.

    Read More
  35. @Talha
    Hey WC,

    EU membership
     
    I believe Turkey (even before Erdogan - remember Ecevit?) has always wanted it on their own terms; economic benefits without cultural meddling - this is why a compromise has never been reached.

    The invasion (it’s not a rebellion) of Syria
     
    It was definitely a rebellion in the beginning - very native and local in nature (http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/sheikh-muhammad-al-yaqoubi-interviewed-by-syria-comment/). Let's not fool ourselves; Daesh is horrible - no question, but the Assad regime are no angels. They represent one of the more torturous (one of the things that set people off was the torture and mutilation of a child - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/31/syria-unrest-teenage-victim-hamza) and repressive police states in the area. If you know any run-of-the-mill Syrians, they will let you know how feared the mukhabarat was (even if you lived outside Syria, an off-hand comment at a dinner party in Des Moines could haunt you when you landed in Damascus for a visit) - and if they couldn't break you directly, your wife and daughter were fair game. Any neutral Human Rights group can confirm this; you can look through any public record reports from NGOs from the 1990's and early 2000's. However, you are absolutely correct - once things started rolling, it was definitely picked up by the foreign elements (governments and otherwise) for their own nefarious designs.

    Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?
     
    Though the Kurds have a leg up in demographic projections, he is not - he makes overtures to them when politically preferable (http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/02/turkey-erdogan-new-kurdish-allies.html). The Kurds likely have far more to fear from a ehtno-nationalist Turkish military state. As I posted elsewhere, Kurdish/Turkish relations fared better under the rubric of them both being distinct, but brother Muslim communities under the Ottomans rather than the secular Turkish nationalists:
    “Confronted with the choice of being annexed at some point by Persia or formally accepting the supremacy of the Ottoman sultan in exchange for a very wide autonomy, the Kurdish leaders opted for this second solution and thus Kurdistan, or more exactly its countless fiefs and principalities entered the Ottoman bosom by the path of diplomacy.”
    “This particular status was to assure Kurdistan about three centuries of peace. The Ottomans controlled some strategic garrisons on the Kurdish territory, but the rest of the country was governed by the Kurdish lords and princes…Despite interferences from time to time from the central power, this particular status, to the satisfaction of the Kurds and the Ottomans, functioned without any major hitch until the beginning of the XIXth century.”
    http://www.institutkurde.org/en/institute/who_are_the_kurds.php

    Peace.

    It was definitely a rebellion in the beginning – very native and local in nature

    I met a Syrian American recently who was born in the US to Syrian immigrant parents and still has family members living in Syria. Although totally secular (he was a pretty heavy drinker) and seemingly apolitical, he absolutely detested the Assad family. I wouldn’t say he supported the rebels but he definitely despised the Assad’s and seemed to fear that they would harm his family that was still living in Damascus.

    I was really surprised because I had always thought the secular middle class was very supportive of Assad.

    Just goes to show how complex things are over there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Greasy,

    Missed you man...yeah - I just wanted to make clear to people that any polls indicating support for Assad is not what one assumes in a normal stable political circumstance. As I mentioned to Rurik in another post:
    There is a large community [of your average Syrians] near Bridgeview where I can interact with them. They are rightly appalled at Daesh but all of them want Assad out (eventually). In this case, this is the choice the Syrian people are being asked to make; do you want to get kicked in the groin or kicked in the backside?

    I have met exactly one Syrian who liked Assad - and that dude ran off without paying his share of the rent (which I had to cover) and stole another roommate's credit card.

    Peace.
    , @Max Payne

    I met a Syrian American recently who was born in the US to Syrian immigrant parents
     
    Sounds like a Westerner indoctrinated through Western media to me. It happens.

    So pervasive is the Western MSM the children of immigrants become true believers of the BS shoveled in their face.

    Regardless of that I've heard Iraqi Arabs (and one bonafide Iraqi Kurd who fought in the Iran-Iraq war for Saddam) bitch and whine about Hussein up until his death. Then I heard:

    "He was a head of state, the least they could have done is shown him respect. They didn't have to hang him like some thief or spy. He kept stability. He had his faults but....[blah blah blah]"

    Hate must be trendy or something. Assad will probably go through the same thing, like Qaddafi. Everyone hated him... until they didn't.

  36. @WorkingClass
    I have never understood (believed) Erdogan's desire for EU membership. Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?

    Hopefully, recent events will push Turkey closer to Russia and Syria will finally be allowed to recover intact. Imperial aggression in the MENA would finally be stopped. The invasion (it's not a rebellion) of Syria cannot succeed anyway against Russian resistance.

    And what if the Kurds were able to create a Kurdistan where they dominate linguistically? Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?

    : “I have never understood (believed) Erdogan’s desire for EU membership. Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?

    He doesn’t want to TAKE orders FROM Brussels. He wants to GIVE orders TO Brussels, or more likely to Vienna. Turkey in the EU + NATO would dominate in short order, and mass conversions among formerly Christian nations would quickly follow. Notre Dame will be Hagia Maria mosque within 25 years, since the alternative to Christendom is not secular hedonism – it is Islam.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {....and mass conversions among formerly Christian nations would quickly follow. Notre Dame will be Hagia Maria mosque within 25 years, since the alternative to Christendom is not secular hedonism – it is Islam.}

    Exactly.

    If Turkey were to become member of EU, Islamist Turks would have the right to move in any EU country unfettered. 10s of millions of Muslim Turks would flood into Christian Europe and forever extinguish the Western civilization there.

    Turkey will never become member of EU, of course.
    Even if EU remains intact, it won't.
    But EU is on its way to the dustbin of history.
    When the EU shackles are thrown off, the patriots in Western European countries will take their countries back from Globalist bureaucrats.
  37. @gokart-mozart
    @WorkingClass: "I have never understood (believed) Erdogan’s desire for EU membership. Why would the man who would be Sultan want to take orders from Brussels?


    He doesn't want to TAKE orders FROM Brussels. He wants to GIVE orders TO Brussels, or more likely to Vienna. Turkey in the EU + NATO would dominate in short order, and mass conversions among formerly Christian nations would quickly follow. Notre Dame will be Hagia Maria mosque within 25 years, since the alternative to Christendom is not secular hedonism - it is Islam.

    {….and mass conversions among formerly Christian nations would quickly follow. Notre Dame will be Hagia Maria mosque within 25 years, since the alternative to Christendom is not secular hedonism – it is Islam.}

    Exactly.

    If Turkey were to become member of EU, Islamist Turks would have the right to move in any EU country unfettered. 10s of millions of Muslim Turks would flood into Christian Europe and forever extinguish the Western civilization there.

    Turkey will never become member of EU, of course.
    Even if EU remains intact, it won’t.
    But EU is on its way to the dustbin of history.
    When the EU shackles are thrown off, the patriots in Western European countries will take their countries back from Globalist bureaucrats.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gwynedd1
    Not just Turks. Turks would import the entire Middle east.

    Europe is a potential paradise for Islam specifically because it has non-Muslims. The luxury of an Islamic state comes from it Jizyah.

    "Umar wore clothes with so many patches and mingled with his subjects on such free terms that when a stranger came to petition him he would find it difficult to recognize the Caliph. When many of his agents wrote that his fiscal reforms in favour of new converts would deplete the Treasury, he replied, "Glad would I be, by Allah, to see every body become Muslim so that thou and I would have to till the soil with our own hands to earn a living."


    That is to say Islam looses its tax and/or slave economic base when the entire host is Islam.


    Islam destroys itself with perfect equality, just like socialism does. Thus Islam , quite like socialism must expand or die.
  38. This article is wrong. The coup failed because the Obama Administration learned of it several hours before it was to start through human sources and intercepts and immediately informed Erdogan, giving him time to take counter-measures. Case closed, folks.

    Read More
  39. @Chris Bridges
    This article is wrong. The coup failed because the Obama Administration learned of it several hours before it was to start through human sources and intercepts and immediately informed Erdogan, giving him time to take counter-measures. Case closed, folks.

    Don’t be an Obama-shill.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    'Cased closed folks', I think, gave away the hint of sarcasm in that post.
  40. http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2016/7/21/putin-erdogan-and-the-plot-against-the-rest-of-us

    As the picture clarifies, it seems that the coup attempt was motivated by the emerging alliance between Turkey and Russia. The possibility that Turkey becomes integral to a peaceful resolution in Syria brings to an end NATO’s interventionist war against the Assad regime

    no Golan Heights for you – bitch

    http://previous.presstv.ir/photo/20130301/rahimi20130301064409737.jpg

    Read More
  41. @Andrei Martyanov

    In a good or bad way?
     
    In a good way for Russia. As I said it many times before--the only thing which prevents Russia's liberals from hanging by the neck from numerous lamp posts is Putin's genuine 80+% support rating. In this regard Russia is a very stable country despite some noticeable economic difficulties but as they say--not by bread alone.

    Putin’s genuine 80+% support rating.

    Are that many Russians oblivious to the Muslim invasion he’s abetted since taking power?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    he’s abetted
     
    Wrong term and not directly related to Putin. Actually, Russian immigration situation, while not an easy one, is generally under control. Nothing like 1990s or early 2000s when it was basically uncontrolled. It is a very complex issue and it CAN NOT be separated from the Soviet legacy. Many of those Muslims are pretty much second iteration of Soviet Middle Asia citizens and very many of them do integrate quite well, know Russian and many not only become Russian citizens but actually call themselves Russians. I know this first-hand since my sister-in-law married Uzbek guy in 1985 and all her children are already Russian citizens, well-educated and wonderful humans. Love them dearly. Despite being nominally Muslim they are fairly secular, outgoing, hard working and are true benefit to Russian society. There are very many of those Muslims in Russia. It couldn't have been otherwise--Russia is an enormous economic and political center of gravity. Are there problems with Muslims in Russia, yes, there are but it is a work in progress. This is my short opinion.
  42. @Chuck
    Is Erdogan donmeh? Seems rather light-skinned.

    He’s about average for eastern Turkey, western trends fairer-complexioned, see Omer Asik for example.

    Read More
  43. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Mitleser
    Don't be an Obama-shill.

    ‘Cased closed folks’, I think, gave away the hint of sarcasm in that post.

    Read More
  44. @anon

    The extent to which turkey and subsequently Turkish Islam differs from the Arab/African/South Asian Sunni form can’t be overstated.
     
    Yes, Ottoman Islam was always more practical-Imperial than elsewhere - which is what makes it a potentially bigger deal imo.

    Not any more than the original Arab Caliphate. There was plenty of practicality , and impious debauchery, even in the early Umayyad dynasty, that is to say after Islam lost s republican roots and became hereditary. We know the afterlife is less appealing to an aristocracy enjoying the fruits of this world. So as we see time and time again , Islam can only be pacified by elite, central rule.

    Read More
  45. @Avery
    {....and mass conversions among formerly Christian nations would quickly follow. Notre Dame will be Hagia Maria mosque within 25 years, since the alternative to Christendom is not secular hedonism – it is Islam.}

    Exactly.

    If Turkey were to become member of EU, Islamist Turks would have the right to move in any EU country unfettered. 10s of millions of Muslim Turks would flood into Christian Europe and forever extinguish the Western civilization there.

    Turkey will never become member of EU, of course.
    Even if EU remains intact, it won't.
    But EU is on its way to the dustbin of history.
    When the EU shackles are thrown off, the patriots in Western European countries will take their countries back from Globalist bureaucrats.

    Not just Turks. Turks would import the entire Middle east.

    Europe is a potential paradise for Islam specifically because it has non-Muslims. The luxury of an Islamic state comes from it Jizyah.

    “Umar wore clothes with so many patches and mingled with his subjects on such free terms that when a stranger came to petition him he would find it difficult to recognize the Caliph. When many of his agents wrote that his fiscal reforms in favour of new converts would deplete the Treasury, he replied, “Glad would I be, by Allah, to see every body become Muslim so that thou and I would have to till the soil with our own hands to earn a living.”

    That is to say Islam looses its tax and/or slave economic base when the entire host is Islam.

    Islam destroys itself with perfect equality, just like socialism does. Thus Islam , quite like socialism must expand or die.

    Read More
    • Agree: Marcus
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    thought that is the case for capitalism too?
    , @Marcus
    Before Muhammad, the Arabs were feared raiders, but they were always quarreling among themselves, so they couldn't do much more than looting the occasional frontier town of their larger neighbors. Muhammad aimed to replace tribal loyalties with a religious one, giving them the ability to loot and permanently exploit much larger prizes. The opulence of the Turko-Persian empires (see the Taj Mahal and all the other staggering palaces, mosques, etc.) was due to their looting and draining of India, which had been the richest civilization in the world https://moneyjihad.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/muslims-in-india-levied-jizya-and-shameful-abuse/
  46. @gwynedd1
    Not just Turks. Turks would import the entire Middle east.

    Europe is a potential paradise for Islam specifically because it has non-Muslims. The luxury of an Islamic state comes from it Jizyah.

    "Umar wore clothes with so many patches and mingled with his subjects on such free terms that when a stranger came to petition him he would find it difficult to recognize the Caliph. When many of his agents wrote that his fiscal reforms in favour of new converts would deplete the Treasury, he replied, "Glad would I be, by Allah, to see every body become Muslim so that thou and I would have to till the soil with our own hands to earn a living."


    That is to say Islam looses its tax and/or slave economic base when the entire host is Islam.


    Islam destroys itself with perfect equality, just like socialism does. Thus Islam , quite like socialism must expand or die.

    thought that is the case for capitalism too?

    Read More
    • Replies: @gwynedd1
    Capitalism is a graduated aristocracy. Although it depends on the level of wealth preservation. In the ideal circumstance like ancient Athens , there was little in the way of forming natural monopolies. Sparta had good farmland and could point spears at the Helots. Such estates allowed for hereditary aristocracies. Eventually it was gold that sunk Athens, which in turn ,according to Aegis, finished off the Ephorate. Japan also followed the same pattern. Eventually the Yen became as good as gold. Still Japan is inherently better off in that the value is in its people, not the territory it occupies.
  47. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Turkey looks remarkably like Ukraine.

    The Kurdish region looks like Donbass.

    And both are part of tug-o-war between US and Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Not a good comparison.

    Turkish Kurdistan is a backwards, rural, highly fertility region. (Those occasional reports of Turks doing honor killings in Germany? Almost inevitably ethnic Kurds). The Donbass is the precise opposite. It is more industrially developed, secular, and lower fertility relative to the rest of Ukraine and especially the most nationalist areas in the West. (There's a lot more nuance but for the most part this is true).

    If Turkey has a "Donbass" of sorts it would likely be the ethnic Turkoman regions scattered across the Turkish-Syrian border, which Turkish nationalists would not mind annexing (though those regions are very poor and economically worthless, unlike Donbass). The guy who strafed the parachuting Su-24 pilot was a Turkish nationalist and son of an MHP politician who was "vacationing" in Syria.
  48. @gwynedd1
    Not just Turks. Turks would import the entire Middle east.

    Europe is a potential paradise for Islam specifically because it has non-Muslims. The luxury of an Islamic state comes from it Jizyah.

    "Umar wore clothes with so many patches and mingled with his subjects on such free terms that when a stranger came to petition him he would find it difficult to recognize the Caliph. When many of his agents wrote that his fiscal reforms in favour of new converts would deplete the Treasury, he replied, "Glad would I be, by Allah, to see every body become Muslim so that thou and I would have to till the soil with our own hands to earn a living."


    That is to say Islam looses its tax and/or slave economic base when the entire host is Islam.


    Islam destroys itself with perfect equality, just like socialism does. Thus Islam , quite like socialism must expand or die.

    Before Muhammad, the Arabs were feared raiders, but they were always quarreling among themselves, so they couldn’t do much more than looting the occasional frontier town of their larger neighbors. Muhammad aimed to replace tribal loyalties with a religious one, giving them the ability to loot and permanently exploit much larger prizes. The opulence of the Turko-Persian empires (see the Taj Mahal and all the other staggering palaces, mosques, etc.) was due to their looting and draining of India, which had been the richest civilization in the world https://moneyjihad.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/muslims-in-india-levied-jizya-and-shameful-abuse/

    Read More
    • Replies: @gwynedd1
    Yep. Islam unified the Arabs which really had no cultural contribution to any of their conquests. Everything they did was copied or borrowed. Although the Semitic peoples in Syria and Egypt probably were originally from Arabia. The Arabian peninsula is not a good place to do much more than survive after all. Such places are perfect incubators for creating racial differences which then migrated out into North Africa in particular.
    , @Talha
    Hey Marcus,

    This makes zero sense. There is no doubt that many Muslims loved to exploit non-Muslims for jizya, but to lay this at the feet of the Prophet (pbuh) and the principles he espoused is way out there. By all accounts, the man was the undisputed ruler of Arabia at the time of his death and the state in which he died was in complete material want. By some accounts, with his armor mortgaged to a Jewish man for some measures of wheat.
    "By God, it is not poverty I fear for you, but rather I fear you will be given the wealth of the world just as it was given to those before you. You will compete for it just as they competed for it and it will destroy you just as it destroyed them." - Reported in Muslim

    "O Messenger of Allah, how can we allow you to live like this? Look at the kings of Roman, Persia. Look at how they live. Surely, O Messenger of Allah, you deserve better."
    http://lifeofprophet.com/the-bed-of-the-prophet/

    The Umayyads were indeed as you say Arab-supremacists, most of them saw the non-Muslims as a kind of cattle or golden goose and refused to accept that their conversions allowed them a way out of paying the jizya:
    "The Umayyad caliphs (661–750), however, faced with increasing financial difficulties, demanded the jizya from recent converts to Islam as well as from the dhimmis."
    https://www.britannica.com/topic/jizya

    The previous poster correctly cited how Umar ibn Abdal Aziz (ra) [this is actualy Umar II] had truly absorbed the lessons from his Master (pbuh) and made reformations:
    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Umar-II

    "It was during his time that Islam took root and was accepted by a large segment of the population of Persia and Egypt. When the officials complained that because of conversion, the Jizya revenue of the State had experienced a steep decline, Umar wrote back saying that 'Prophet Muhammad SAW was sent as a Prophet to invite people to Islam and not as a tax collector.'"
    http://www.africanscholarpublications.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/UMAR-BIN-ABDUL%E2%80%99AZIZ%E2%80%99S-LEGACY-OF-ADMINSTRATION.pdf

    Of course, this led to him being poisoned by his family.

    As far as the Muslim rulers that came later (Ghaznavids, Almoravids, Rustamids, etc.) - no argument, they (with a few exeptions) were far more interested in building up the treasury than any other purpose in life.

    Now - to assume that jizya was the only thing keeping the state together, well then one has never come across the concepts of 'ushr and kharaj.

    Peace.

  49. @Astuteobservor II
    thought that is the case for capitalism too?

    Capitalism is a graduated aristocracy. Although it depends on the level of wealth preservation. In the ideal circumstance like ancient Athens , there was little in the way of forming natural monopolies. Sparta had good farmland and could point spears at the Helots. Such estates allowed for hereditary aristocracies. Eventually it was gold that sunk Athens, which in turn ,according to Aegis, finished off the Ephorate. Japan also followed the same pattern. Eventually the Yen became as good as gold. Still Japan is inherently better off in that the value is in its people, not the territory it occupies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    so does that mean the usa is no longer a capitalistic society - graduate classes/segments? we have a few who have almost all the wealth/power and bottom feeders makes up the rest. mini monopolies every where.
  50. @Greasy WIlliam

    It was definitely a rebellion in the beginning – very native and local in nature
     
    I met a Syrian American recently who was born in the US to Syrian immigrant parents and still has family members living in Syria. Although totally secular (he was a pretty heavy drinker) and seemingly apolitical, he absolutely detested the Assad family. I wouldn't say he supported the rebels but he definitely despised the Assad's and seemed to fear that they would harm his family that was still living in Damascus.

    I was really surprised because I had always thought the secular middle class was very supportive of Assad.

    Just goes to show how complex things are over there.

    Hey Greasy,

    Missed you man…yeah – I just wanted to make clear to people that any polls indicating support for Assad is not what one assumes in a normal stable political circumstance. As I mentioned to Rurik in another post:
    There is a large community [of your average Syrians] near Bridgeview where I can interact with them. They are rightly appalled at Daesh but all of them want Assad out (eventually). In this case, this is the choice the Syrian people are being asked to make; do you want to get kicked in the groin or kicked in the backside?

    I have met exactly one Syrian who liked Assad – and that dude ran off without paying his share of the rent (which I had to cover) and stole another roommate’s credit card.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    And I'm not kidding when I say the guy's name was Shadi - I should have seen it coming - LOL!
  51. @Marcus
    Before Muhammad, the Arabs were feared raiders, but they were always quarreling among themselves, so they couldn't do much more than looting the occasional frontier town of their larger neighbors. Muhammad aimed to replace tribal loyalties with a religious one, giving them the ability to loot and permanently exploit much larger prizes. The opulence of the Turko-Persian empires (see the Taj Mahal and all the other staggering palaces, mosques, etc.) was due to their looting and draining of India, which had been the richest civilization in the world https://moneyjihad.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/muslims-in-india-levied-jizya-and-shameful-abuse/

    Yep. Islam unified the Arabs which really had no cultural contribution to any of their conquests. Everything they did was copied or borrowed. Although the Semitic peoples in Syria and Egypt probably were originally from Arabia. The Arabian peninsula is not a good place to do much more than survive after all. Such places are perfect incubators for creating racial differences which then migrated out into North Africa in particular.

    Read More
  52. @Marcus
    Before Muhammad, the Arabs were feared raiders, but they were always quarreling among themselves, so they couldn't do much more than looting the occasional frontier town of their larger neighbors. Muhammad aimed to replace tribal loyalties with a religious one, giving them the ability to loot and permanently exploit much larger prizes. The opulence of the Turko-Persian empires (see the Taj Mahal and all the other staggering palaces, mosques, etc.) was due to their looting and draining of India, which had been the richest civilization in the world https://moneyjihad.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/muslims-in-india-levied-jizya-and-shameful-abuse/

    Hey Marcus,

    This makes zero sense. There is no doubt that many Muslims loved to exploit non-Muslims for jizya, but to lay this at the feet of the Prophet (pbuh) and the principles he espoused is way out there. By all accounts, the man was the undisputed ruler of Arabia at the time of his death and the state in which he died was in complete material want. By some accounts, with his armor mortgaged to a Jewish man for some measures of wheat.
    “By God, it is not poverty I fear for you, but rather I fear you will be given the wealth of the world just as it was given to those before you. You will compete for it just as they competed for it and it will destroy you just as it destroyed them.” – Reported in Muslim

    “O Messenger of Allah, how can we allow you to live like this? Look at the kings of Roman, Persia. Look at how they live. Surely, O Messenger of Allah, you deserve better.”

    http://lifeofprophet.com/the-bed-of-the-prophet/

    The Umayyads were indeed as you say Arab-supremacists, most of them saw the non-Muslims as a kind of cattle or golden goose and refused to accept that their conversions allowed them a way out of paying the jizya:
    “The Umayyad caliphs (661–750), however, faced with increasing financial difficulties, demanded the jizya from recent converts to Islam as well as from the dhimmis.”

    https://www.britannica.com/topic/jizya

    The previous poster correctly cited how Umar ibn Abdal Aziz (ra) [this is actualy Umar II] had truly absorbed the lessons from his Master (pbuh) and made reformations:

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Umar-II

    “It was during his time that Islam took root and was accepted by a large segment of the population of Persia and Egypt. When the officials complained that because of conversion, the Jizya revenue of the State had experienced a steep decline, Umar wrote back saying that ‘Prophet Muhammad SAW was sent as a Prophet to invite people to Islam and not as a tax collector.’”

    http://www.africanscholarpublications.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/UMAR-BIN-ABDUL%E2%80%99AZIZ%E2%80%99S-LEGACY-OF-ADMINSTRATION.pdf

    Of course, this led to him being poisoned by his family.

    As far as the Muslim rulers that came later (Ghaznavids, Almoravids, Rustamids, etc.) – no argument, they (with a few exeptions) were far more interested in building up the treasury than any other purpose in life.

    Now – to assume that jizya was the only thing keeping the state together, well then one has never come across the concepts of ‘ushr and kharaj.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    So you don't think wealth was the primary motive for the Arabs' conquests? Surely some of them were zealous evangelists, but not enough to fill entire armies IMO. They had some idea of the wealth of the neighboring empires due to trade and the close ties of the Ghassanids to the Romans and the Lakhmids to the Persians.
  53. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Marcus

    Putin’s genuine 80+% support rating.
     
    Are that many Russians oblivious to the Muslim invasion he's abetted since taking power?

    he’s abetted

    Wrong term and not directly related to Putin. Actually, Russian immigration situation, while not an easy one, is generally under control. Nothing like 1990s or early 2000s when it was basically uncontrolled. It is a very complex issue and it CAN NOT be separated from the Soviet legacy. Many of those Muslims are pretty much second iteration of Soviet Middle Asia citizens and very many of them do integrate quite well, know Russian and many not only become Russian citizens but actually call themselves Russians. I know this first-hand since my sister-in-law married Uzbek guy in 1985 and all her children are already Russian citizens, well-educated and wonderful humans. Love them dearly. Despite being nominally Muslim they are fairly secular, outgoing, hard working and are true benefit to Russian society. There are very many of those Muslims in Russia. It couldn’t have been otherwise–Russia is an enormous economic and political center of gravity. Are there problems with Muslims in Russia, yes, there are but it is a work in progress. This is my short opinion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus

    Vladimir Putin was the first head of a non-Muslim majority state to speak at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, a gathering of 57 Muslim states, in October 2003...

    Since then, Putin and other Russian leaders, including the foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, claim that Russia "is, to some extent, a part of the Muslim world." ..

    "We must prevent Islamophobia," said Putin in the Al Jazeera interview.
     
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/opinion/29iht-edlevesque.1.18978430.html?_r=0

    http://www.interpretermag.com/7500-mosques-have-been-erected-in-russia-since-putin-became-president/

    http://www.interpretermag.com/newly-reopened-mosque-anchor-for-moscows-2-5-million-muslims/

    http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/09/02/ramadan-muslims-fill-moscow-streets/
    , @Eskaton

    Actually, Russian immigration situation, while not an easy one, is generally under control. Nothing like 1990s or early 2000s when it was basically uncontrolled. It is a very complex issue and it CAN NOT be separated from the Soviet legacy. Many of those Muslims are pretty much second iteration of Soviet Middle Asia citizens and very many of them do integrate quite well, know Russian and many not only become Russian citizens but actually call themselves Russians. I know this first-hand since my sister-in-law married Uzbek guy in 1985 and all her children are already Russian citizens, well-educated and wonderful humans. Love them dearly. Despite being nominally Muslim they are fairly secular, outgoing, hard working and are true benefit to Russian society. There are very many of those Muslims in Russia.
     
    You don't get it. The fact that central Asians can assimilate to Russian ways actually makes things *worse*, not better. These people are completely worthless from human capital point of view. They have no economical value. HBD consensus tells us that this won't change. The successful assimilation will make sure that the process of importing millions of immigrants from Earth's HBD garbage dumb will not stop.

    It seems that inviting hordes of worthless migrants from former colonies (as well as countries that used to in the "sphere of influence") is how the remnants of old empires choose to die. UK and Pakistan, France and northern Africa, Germany and Turkey, Russia and the -stan shitholes. Eventually the Uzbeks and other central Asians will become the same cancerous presence as blacks are in the United States or the inhabitants of french no-go zones. Arguably, this already happened in Moskovskaya Oblast'... I heard stories.

    Things got so bad that I'm actually relieved to hear that the economy is not doing so well -- after all, this means that at least some of the migrants will go back home; and for a while I won't feel like a stranger in a city I was born in. How did the kremlinoids managed to fuck things up so badly that I have to cheer for bad economy? I bet when future historians (a 100 years from now) will study the current events they will fail to notice any substantial differences between the politics or ideology of Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin.

  54. @Talha
    Hey Greasy,

    Missed you man...yeah - I just wanted to make clear to people that any polls indicating support for Assad is not what one assumes in a normal stable political circumstance. As I mentioned to Rurik in another post:
    There is a large community [of your average Syrians] near Bridgeview where I can interact with them. They are rightly appalled at Daesh but all of them want Assad out (eventually). In this case, this is the choice the Syrian people are being asked to make; do you want to get kicked in the groin or kicked in the backside?

    I have met exactly one Syrian who liked Assad - and that dude ran off without paying his share of the rent (which I had to cover) and stole another roommate's credit card.

    Peace.

    And I’m not kidding when I say the guy’s name was Shadi – I should have seen it coming – LOL!

    Read More
  55. @Talha
    Hey Marcus,

    This makes zero sense. There is no doubt that many Muslims loved to exploit non-Muslims for jizya, but to lay this at the feet of the Prophet (pbuh) and the principles he espoused is way out there. By all accounts, the man was the undisputed ruler of Arabia at the time of his death and the state in which he died was in complete material want. By some accounts, with his armor mortgaged to a Jewish man for some measures of wheat.
    "By God, it is not poverty I fear for you, but rather I fear you will be given the wealth of the world just as it was given to those before you. You will compete for it just as they competed for it and it will destroy you just as it destroyed them." - Reported in Muslim

    "O Messenger of Allah, how can we allow you to live like this? Look at the kings of Roman, Persia. Look at how they live. Surely, O Messenger of Allah, you deserve better."
    http://lifeofprophet.com/the-bed-of-the-prophet/

    The Umayyads were indeed as you say Arab-supremacists, most of them saw the non-Muslims as a kind of cattle or golden goose and refused to accept that their conversions allowed them a way out of paying the jizya:
    "The Umayyad caliphs (661–750), however, faced with increasing financial difficulties, demanded the jizya from recent converts to Islam as well as from the dhimmis."
    https://www.britannica.com/topic/jizya

    The previous poster correctly cited how Umar ibn Abdal Aziz (ra) [this is actualy Umar II] had truly absorbed the lessons from his Master (pbuh) and made reformations:
    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Umar-II

    "It was during his time that Islam took root and was accepted by a large segment of the population of Persia and Egypt. When the officials complained that because of conversion, the Jizya revenue of the State had experienced a steep decline, Umar wrote back saying that 'Prophet Muhammad SAW was sent as a Prophet to invite people to Islam and not as a tax collector.'"
    http://www.africanscholarpublications.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/UMAR-BIN-ABDUL%E2%80%99AZIZ%E2%80%99S-LEGACY-OF-ADMINSTRATION.pdf

    Of course, this led to him being poisoned by his family.

    As far as the Muslim rulers that came later (Ghaznavids, Almoravids, Rustamids, etc.) - no argument, they (with a few exeptions) were far more interested in building up the treasury than any other purpose in life.

    Now - to assume that jizya was the only thing keeping the state together, well then one has never come across the concepts of 'ushr and kharaj.

    Peace.

    So you don’t think wealth was the primary motive for the Arabs’ conquests? Surely some of them were zealous evangelists, but not enough to fill entire armies IMO. They had some idea of the wealth of the neighboring empires due to trade and the close ties of the Ghassanids to the Romans and the Lakhmids to the Persians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Marcus,

    Actually I am quite certain that many of the Arab (save the first generation), Persian, Turk conquests were motivated by wealth - they were often criticized by the Muslim scholars for it and many scholars were jailed and tortured for speaking up. You can see historically, the Tartars basically viewed Slavic people as a cash-cow (much like the Varangians did) to be raided for plunder and slaves - they didn't spend much effort trying to spread Islam among them. I was contending that this had zero to do with the principles taught by the Prophet (pbuh) who neither lived by materialist pursuits nor encouraged them in his followers. You can see how the description of his first four caliphs are before the Umayyads take control - they lived materially abject lives even though they had conquered Persia, much of North Africa and a good amount of the Levant.
    "A strong ruler, stern toward offenders, and himself ascetic to the point of harshness, he was universally respected for his justice and authority."
    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Umar-I
    This is how TB Irving (not a fan of Islam) describes his parley with the priests of Jerusalem - I don't agree with the factual basis of soem of Irving's claims since they are not based on the strongest of reports, but even hostile writers admit things such as this :
    "On his way to the camp Omar beheld a number of Arabs, who had thrown by the simple garb of their country, and arrayed themselves in the silken spoils of Syria. He saw the danger of this luxury and effeminacy, and ordered that they should be dragged with their faces in the dirt, and their silken garments torn from their backs."
    "The arrival of the Caliph was followed by immediate capitulation. When the deputies from Jerusalem were admitted to a parley, they were astonished to find this dreaded potentate a bald-headed man, simply clad, and seated on the ground in a tent of hair-cloth."

    Every pre-modern conquering army basically stated the following to a population they came across:
    "Pay us taxes and submit politically or fight."

    The Muslims were the only ones (I can think of) that were supposed to offer a completely non-materialistic option as the first one - basically "become our brothers in faith and your wealth is prohibited to us":
    "When Muslim armies encountered non-Muslims outside the lands already under the rule of Islam, they were supposed to offer them the choice of conversion to Islam; payment of jizya and
    acceptance of dhimmi status; or trying the fortunes of war." - Michael Bonner - Jihad in Islamic History
    http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8280.html

    Most did not live up to those ideals, thus is the world...

    Peace.
  56. @Andrei Martyanov

    he’s abetted
     
    Wrong term and not directly related to Putin. Actually, Russian immigration situation, while not an easy one, is generally under control. Nothing like 1990s or early 2000s when it was basically uncontrolled. It is a very complex issue and it CAN NOT be separated from the Soviet legacy. Many of those Muslims are pretty much second iteration of Soviet Middle Asia citizens and very many of them do integrate quite well, know Russian and many not only become Russian citizens but actually call themselves Russians. I know this first-hand since my sister-in-law married Uzbek guy in 1985 and all her children are already Russian citizens, well-educated and wonderful humans. Love them dearly. Despite being nominally Muslim they are fairly secular, outgoing, hard working and are true benefit to Russian society. There are very many of those Muslims in Russia. It couldn't have been otherwise--Russia is an enormous economic and political center of gravity. Are there problems with Muslims in Russia, yes, there are but it is a work in progress. This is my short opinion.

    Vladimir Putin was the first head of a non-Muslim majority state to speak at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, a gathering of 57 Muslim states, in October 2003…

    Since then, Putin and other Russian leaders, including the foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, claim that Russia “is, to some extent, a part of the Muslim world.” ..

    “We must prevent Islamophobia,” said Putin in the Al Jazeera interview.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/opinion/29iht-edlevesque.1.18978430.html?_r=0

    http://www.interpretermag.com/7500-mosques-have-been-erected-in-russia-since-putin-became-president/

    http://www.interpretermag.com/newly-reopened-mosque-anchor-for-moscows-2-5-million-muslims/

    http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/09/02/ramadan-muslims-fill-moscow-streets/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    As I stated on a number of occasions: if you want to follow US main-stream media "interpretations", be my guest. But until you recall that Northern Caucasus and Tatarstan together with Bashkortostan are predominantly Muslim areas, albeit with Tatars and Bashkirs being of a more "liberal"Hanafi madhab and that appearances of mosques there is natural occurrence any discussion of this issue becomes a moot point. Problems related to radicalization are a serious matter but again, I just returned from Russia and I communicated there with people who, how to put politely, understand the issue. Again, unlike in Germany or France Russia's Muslim community knows damn well what can happen if they misbehave. But again, as I pointed before--I gave here a very short version. From the source you presented, I quote:

    At the same time, Moskovsky Komsomolets continued, most people in the region speak Russian rather than other languages and most of the stores are “’secular’” rather than Muslim-oriented. That means, Roman Silantyev, a specialist on Islam notorious for his anti-MSD positions, that it is “premature” to speak about the formation of Muslim “quarters” in Moscow.
     
  57. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Marcus

    Vladimir Putin was the first head of a non-Muslim majority state to speak at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, a gathering of 57 Muslim states, in October 2003...

    Since then, Putin and other Russian leaders, including the foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, claim that Russia "is, to some extent, a part of the Muslim world." ..

    "We must prevent Islamophobia," said Putin in the Al Jazeera interview.
     
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/opinion/29iht-edlevesque.1.18978430.html?_r=0

    http://www.interpretermag.com/7500-mosques-have-been-erected-in-russia-since-putin-became-president/

    http://www.interpretermag.com/newly-reopened-mosque-anchor-for-moscows-2-5-million-muslims/

    http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/09/02/ramadan-muslims-fill-moscow-streets/

    As I stated on a number of occasions: if you want to follow US main-stream media “interpretations”, be my guest. But until you recall that Northern Caucasus and Tatarstan together with Bashkortostan are predominantly Muslim areas, albeit with Tatars and Bashkirs being of a more “liberal”Hanafi madhab and that appearances of mosques there is natural occurrence any discussion of this issue becomes a moot point. Problems related to radicalization are a serious matter but again, I just returned from Russia and I communicated there with people who, how to put politely, understand the issue. Again, unlike in Germany or France Russia’s Muslim community knows damn well what can happen if they misbehave. But again, as I pointed before–I gave here a very short version. From the source you presented, I quote:

    At the same time, Moskovsky Komsomolets continued, most people in the region speak Russian rather than other languages and most of the stores are “’secular’” rather than Muslim-oriented. That means, Roman Silantyev, a specialist on Islam notorious for his anti-MSD positions, that it is “premature” to speak about the formation of Muslim “quarters” in Moscow.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Is flooding streets during Ramadan, disrupting traffic, good behavior? I'm sure they're biased, but Russian nationalists I've spoken to deeply resent their government for its perceived leniency to the huge numbers of arrogant and often violent immigrants (while it cracks down on nationalists).
    , @Talha
    One of my spiritual teachers (a Naqshbandi Mujaddidi) has many disciples in Moscow and the other Russian districts. Even has some spiritual deputies (that are authorized to guide others in tazkiya) there. Russia has come a long way in its treatment of Muslims (especially since the Communist times - what a horror). From what I've heard, it is not perfect, but they are treated well as long as nobody misbehaves. Of course there are skinhead types that harass people - but what're you going to do, those kind of jerks are everywhere.

    Peace.
  58. @Talha
    And I'm not kidding when I say the guy's name was Shadi - I should have seen it coming - LOL!

    What does Shadi mean?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey RT,

    Shadi means a 'singer' but it sounds like "Shady" - no? :)

    Dude was definitely shady...

    Peace.

  59. @Marcus
    So you don't think wealth was the primary motive for the Arabs' conquests? Surely some of them were zealous evangelists, but not enough to fill entire armies IMO. They had some idea of the wealth of the neighboring empires due to trade and the close ties of the Ghassanids to the Romans and the Lakhmids to the Persians.

    Hey Marcus,

    Actually I am quite certain that many of the Arab (save the first generation), Persian, Turk conquests were motivated by wealth – they were often criticized by the Muslim scholars for it and many scholars were jailed and tortured for speaking up. You can see historically, the Tartars basically viewed Slavic people as a cash-cow (much like the Varangians did) to be raided for plunder and slaves – they didn’t spend much effort trying to spread Islam among them. I was contending that this had zero to do with the principles taught by the Prophet (pbuh) who neither lived by materialist pursuits nor encouraged them in his followers. You can see how the description of his first four caliphs are before the Umayyads take control – they lived materially abject lives even though they had conquered Persia, much of North Africa and a good amount of the Levant.
    “A strong ruler, stern toward offenders, and himself ascetic to the point of harshness, he was universally respected for his justice and authority.”

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Umar-I

    This is how TB Irving (not a fan of Islam) describes his parley with the priests of Jerusalem – I don’t agree with the factual basis of soem of Irving’s claims since they are not based on the strongest of reports, but even hostile writers admit things such as this :
    “On his way to the camp Omar beheld a number of Arabs, who had thrown by the simple garb of their country, and arrayed themselves in the silken spoils of Syria. He saw the danger of this luxury and effeminacy, and ordered that they should be dragged with their faces in the dirt, and their silken garments torn from their backs.”
    “The arrival of the Caliph was followed by immediate capitulation. When the deputies from Jerusalem were admitted to a parley, they were astonished to find this dreaded potentate a bald-headed man, simply clad, and seated on the ground in a tent of hair-cloth.”

    Every pre-modern conquering army basically stated the following to a population they came across:
    “Pay us taxes and submit politically or fight.”

    The Muslims were the only ones (I can think of) that were supposed to offer a completely non-materialistic option as the first one – basically “become our brothers in faith and your wealth is prohibited to us”:
    “When Muslim armies encountered non-Muslims outside the lands already under the rule of Islam, they were supposed to offer them the choice of conversion to Islam; payment of jizya and
    acceptance of dhimmi status; or trying the fortunes of war.” – Michael Bonner – Jihad in Islamic History

    http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8280.html

    Most did not live up to those ideals, thus is the world…

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    I've indeed read that Umar and Muhammad did not live extravagantly at all, I just find it hard to believe that many Arabs would have "signed up" for the early armies without some inkling of the vast rewards that could gained from richer neighbors, e.g.

    Allah has promised you much booty that you will take [in the future] and has hastened for you this [victory] and withheld the hands of people from you - that it may be a sign for the believers and [that] He may guide you to a straight path
     
    Not saying there's anything wrong with that, the pattern is established throughout history: civilizations become fat and complacent and get plundered by poorer but more vigorous neighbors.
  60. @reiner Tor
    What does Shadi mean?

    Hey RT,

    Shadi means a ‘singer’ but it sounds like “Shady” – no? :)

    Dude was definitely shady…

    Peace.

    Read More
  61. @Andrei Martyanov
    As I stated on a number of occasions: if you want to follow US main-stream media "interpretations", be my guest. But until you recall that Northern Caucasus and Tatarstan together with Bashkortostan are predominantly Muslim areas, albeit with Tatars and Bashkirs being of a more "liberal"Hanafi madhab and that appearances of mosques there is natural occurrence any discussion of this issue becomes a moot point. Problems related to radicalization are a serious matter but again, I just returned from Russia and I communicated there with people who, how to put politely, understand the issue. Again, unlike in Germany or France Russia's Muslim community knows damn well what can happen if they misbehave. But again, as I pointed before--I gave here a very short version. From the source you presented, I quote:

    At the same time, Moskovsky Komsomolets continued, most people in the region speak Russian rather than other languages and most of the stores are “’secular’” rather than Muslim-oriented. That means, Roman Silantyev, a specialist on Islam notorious for his anti-MSD positions, that it is “premature” to speak about the formation of Muslim “quarters” in Moscow.
     

    Is flooding streets during Ramadan, disrupting traffic, good behavior? I’m sure they’re biased, but Russian nationalists I’ve spoken to deeply resent their government for its perceived leniency to the huge numbers of arrogant and often violent immigrants (while it cracks down on nationalists).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Is flooding streets during Ramadan, disrupting traffic, good behavior? I’m sure they’re biased, but Russian nationalists I’ve spoken to deeply resent their government
     
    No, it is definitely not. Medvedev's cabinet is the one who continues to promote "liberal" immigration policies. Why Putin doesn't react to that--is totally different matter but "import" of Muslims from "near abroad" was promoted since the times Yeltsin. Again, today immigration policy is much tougher than it was before. Most importantly, unlike 1990s and early 2000s mass deportations are common occurrences. As I stated--it is not a problem which could be solved in one day and by President's decree. Russia can not escape her geographic position and economic and social gravitational field she . In other words, Russia is bound by history to live with this neighborhood in some form of cooperation. What will be the emerging framework--it is all dynamic, that is changing, and we will have to see what level of tolerance will emerge--low or fairly high. But I will reiterate the point--very many of those Muslims are fully integrated. While in Moscow, which does have significant presence of Muslims I saw women dressed in traditional Muslim garb (faces open, though) maybe three or four times in 10 days. Just an anecdotal evidence of a fairly "liberal" version of Islam. Again, complex issue--not enough time and space to go very deep into it. It is not black and white. And then comes this small, purely professional issue--Russian special-intelligence services are on the several orders of magnitude more competent than their "Western" colleagues when dealing with Islamist threat. One of the major reasons for that is the fact that majority of Muslims in Russia have a very different outlook on this whole Jihad thing and do cooperate big time and do it very sincerely. In the end, comforts of Moscow, St. Petersburg or Kazan, among many, are too precious to waste for some dubious religious and ideological reasons.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    It's like people don't realize that in between:

    (1) Being an open borders "keep them at arm's length" cuck, which some Alt Righters apparently believe of Putin; and

    (2) Living up to the overly "optimistic"/false image other Alt Righters - and Putin Derangement Syndrome-suffering liberals, and (((neocons))) - have of Putin;

    ... there is a pretty big middle ground (around which Putin actually falls).

    Yes, many Russian nationalists are sitting under Article 282 (some of them deservedly, but yes, many of them regrettably not; it is an unjust law that should ideally go the way of the rest of Europe's "hate laws," i.e. into the dustbin of history). But, at least, Russia also imprisons many Islamic extremists and even anti-ethnic Russians under that law (a partial lack of double standards that the Council of Europe is very unhappy about). And moderate Russian (anti-immigration) nationalists like Egor Kholmogorov are hardly social or legal pariahs; they get to write op-eds in the nation's highest circulation newspaper, Komsomolskaya Pravda.

    And then there is of course Dmitry Rogozin, who was an outright (anti-immigration) nationalist. Apart from his antics as NATO ambassador, here's an ad from his party Rodina in 2005, in which he calls on to clear "rubbish" from Moscow's streets:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiBOg5jTJQs

    He has since joined the government, curates the military-industrial prospect, and is not an altogether impossible (if highly unlikely) Presidential successor.

    Ultimately, there is a very wide spectrum between a cucked faggot like Wolfgang Schaeuble and /pol/'s image of Ben Garrison, and on that spectrum, Putin is far closer to the likes of Trump, Le Pen, and Orban than he is to the mainstream Western political elites (on this, at least, the Western MSM has it correct). Reasonable figures in the Alt Right recognize such as Richard Spencer recognize that they can't have their way all of the time, and as such urge people to support these sorts of "middle ground" politicians, despite their occasional concessions to cuckoldry (even though Spencer himself got arrested in and banned from in Hungary for holding an identitarian conference so he has personal reasons to be skeptical of Orban).
  62. Anyone paying attention to the spread of jihad has seen this coming for at least a decade, aided and abetted by Barackbar, buddy of Erdogan. The Turks want to stay secular, the moslem immigrants are pushing for Sharia, Erdy is on the side of the muzzies. Obama supports the muzzies everywhere.

    Read More
  63. @Talha
    Hey Marcus,

    Actually I am quite certain that many of the Arab (save the first generation), Persian, Turk conquests were motivated by wealth - they were often criticized by the Muslim scholars for it and many scholars were jailed and tortured for speaking up. You can see historically, the Tartars basically viewed Slavic people as a cash-cow (much like the Varangians did) to be raided for plunder and slaves - they didn't spend much effort trying to spread Islam among them. I was contending that this had zero to do with the principles taught by the Prophet (pbuh) who neither lived by materialist pursuits nor encouraged them in his followers. You can see how the description of his first four caliphs are before the Umayyads take control - they lived materially abject lives even though they had conquered Persia, much of North Africa and a good amount of the Levant.
    "A strong ruler, stern toward offenders, and himself ascetic to the point of harshness, he was universally respected for his justice and authority."
    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Umar-I
    This is how TB Irving (not a fan of Islam) describes his parley with the priests of Jerusalem - I don't agree with the factual basis of soem of Irving's claims since they are not based on the strongest of reports, but even hostile writers admit things such as this :
    "On his way to the camp Omar beheld a number of Arabs, who had thrown by the simple garb of their country, and arrayed themselves in the silken spoils of Syria. He saw the danger of this luxury and effeminacy, and ordered that they should be dragged with their faces in the dirt, and their silken garments torn from their backs."
    "The arrival of the Caliph was followed by immediate capitulation. When the deputies from Jerusalem were admitted to a parley, they were astonished to find this dreaded potentate a bald-headed man, simply clad, and seated on the ground in a tent of hair-cloth."

    Every pre-modern conquering army basically stated the following to a population they came across:
    "Pay us taxes and submit politically or fight."

    The Muslims were the only ones (I can think of) that were supposed to offer a completely non-materialistic option as the first one - basically "become our brothers in faith and your wealth is prohibited to us":
    "When Muslim armies encountered non-Muslims outside the lands already under the rule of Islam, they were supposed to offer them the choice of conversion to Islam; payment of jizya and
    acceptance of dhimmi status; or trying the fortunes of war." - Michael Bonner - Jihad in Islamic History
    http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8280.html

    Most did not live up to those ideals, thus is the world...

    Peace.

    I’ve indeed read that Umar and Muhammad did not live extravagantly at all, I just find it hard to believe that many Arabs would have “signed up” for the early armies without some inkling of the vast rewards that could gained from richer neighbors, e.g.

    Allah has promised you much booty that you will take [in the future] and has hastened for you this [victory] and withheld the hands of people from you – that it may be a sign for the believers and [that] He may guide you to a straight path

    Not saying there’s anything wrong with that, the pattern is established throughout history: civilizations become fat and complacent and get plundered by poorer but more vigorous neighbors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Many later Muslim rulers did claim to that their primary objective was to spread their faith rather than to plunder, but we have good reason to be skeptical of this, Timur wasn't entirely selfish though, being a great patron of the arts and education.

    "I know this, but I desire that on the day of resurrection I should be summoned with the words ‘Where is that Mahmud who broke the greatest of heathen idols?’ rather than by these: ‘Where is that Mahmud who sold the greatest of the idols to the infidels for gold?’"
     
    -Mahmud of Ghazni

    My principal object in coming to Hindustan has been to accomplish two things. The first was to war with the infidels, the enemies of the Mohammadan religion; and by this religious warfare to acquire some claim to reward in the life to come. The other was that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels: plunder in war is as lawful as their mothers milk to Musalmans who war for their faith.
     
    - Timur
    , @Talha
    Hey Marcus,

    Intention is a big deal. The first hadith taught in all traditional hadith studies (East to West) is:
    "Actions are but by intention and every man shall have but that which he intended. Thus he whose migration was for God and His messenger, his migration was for God and His messenger, and he whose migration was to achieve some worldly benefit or to take some woman in marriage, his migration was for that for which he migrated." ~ Related by Bukhari and Muslim

    No doubt many normal Bedioun wanted both loot as well as a chance at a getting a nubile Levantine concubine to warm their beds. But it is clear to me (through both Muslim and academic non-Muslim sources) that the leadership and core/elite of the first generation was not materially motivated for the following reasons:
    1) You just don't see it in their personal life - there is no amassing of thousands of slaves or opulent clothing as in the later generations. Their aphorisms constantly remind about the need for asceticism.
    2) By the third caliph, Uthman (ra) the territory is enormous, beyond any Arab dream (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uthman#/media/File:Mohammad_adil_rais-rashidun_empire-at-its_peak.PNG), yet the capital is kept at Madinah. I have come across no evidence which shows massive amounts of wealth being brought into Madinah (or Mecca) and squandered on making it a lavish center of a huge empire. they remain mostly mud-brick desert townships until the Ottomans finally pay some attention to prettying them up. Caliph Ali (ra) moves it to a newly founded city of Kufa, which is also not fancy. The Umayyads immediately established themselves (not even in Jerusalem, but) in Damascus, a magnificent capital.
    3) The mechanics of the way spoils works; a normal soldier only gets a chance at spoils and slaves if the encountered population decides to go to war, which is the last of the three options provided. The first two options grant him nothing more than his normal remuneration - both jizya and zakat go into the public coffers. A soldier could march from the Hijaz all the way to the edge of Gibraltar and come home with nothing beyond his normal pension (and actually many of the earliest soldiers financed their own provisions - before the state bureaucracy of Persia and Byzantium were absorbed).

    Though even the state of the normal foot soldier was alluded to in the famous letter from Khalid bin Walid (ra) to the Persian leadership:
    "To the Governers of Persia,
    Embrace Islam so that you may be safe. If not, make a covenant of protection with me and pay jizyah. Otherwise, I have brought you a people who love death just as you love drinking wine."

    Now, that may have had a rhetorical edge to it to convince the Persians not to put up a fight, but, if the Battle of Qadissiyah is any evidence, then my suspicion is he was being straight forward.

    Compare this to the exhortations to his men by Tariq ibn Ziyad (ra) - he glorifies God of course, but the rest is a great speech, but much like something from Braveheart:
    "In the attack I myself will be in the fore, where the chance of life is always least...You have heard that in this country there are a large number of ravishingly beautiful Greek maidens, their graceful forms are draped in sumptuous gowns on which gleam pearls, coral, and purest gold, and they live in the palaces of royal kings. The Commander of True Believers, Alwalid, son of Abdalmelik, has chosen you for this attack from among all his Arab warriors; and he promises that you shall become his comrades and shall hold the rank of kings in this country."
    http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/source/711Tarik1.asp

    Peace.
  64. @Marcus
    I've indeed read that Umar and Muhammad did not live extravagantly at all, I just find it hard to believe that many Arabs would have "signed up" for the early armies without some inkling of the vast rewards that could gained from richer neighbors, e.g.

    Allah has promised you much booty that you will take [in the future] and has hastened for you this [victory] and withheld the hands of people from you - that it may be a sign for the believers and [that] He may guide you to a straight path
     
    Not saying there's anything wrong with that, the pattern is established throughout history: civilizations become fat and complacent and get plundered by poorer but more vigorous neighbors.

    Many later Muslim rulers did claim to that their primary objective was to spread their faith rather than to plunder, but we have good reason to be skeptical of this, Timur wasn’t entirely selfish though, being a great patron of the arts and education.

    “I know this, but I desire that on the day of resurrection I should be summoned with the words ‘Where is that Mahmud who broke the greatest of heathen idols?’ rather than by these: ‘Where is that Mahmud who sold the greatest of the idols to the infidels for gold?’”

    -Mahmud of Ghazni

    My principal object in coming to Hindustan has been to accomplish two things. The first was to war with the infidels, the enemies of the Mohammadan religion; and by this religious warfare to acquire some claim to reward in the life to come. The other was that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels: plunder in war is as lawful as their mothers milk to Musalmans who war for their faith.

    - Timur

    Read More
  65. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Marcus
    Is flooding streets during Ramadan, disrupting traffic, good behavior? I'm sure they're biased, but Russian nationalists I've spoken to deeply resent their government for its perceived leniency to the huge numbers of arrogant and often violent immigrants (while it cracks down on nationalists).

    Is flooding streets during Ramadan, disrupting traffic, good behavior? I’m sure they’re biased, but Russian nationalists I’ve spoken to deeply resent their government

    No, it is definitely not. Medvedev’s cabinet is the one who continues to promote “liberal” immigration policies. Why Putin doesn’t react to that–is totally different matter but “import” of Muslims from “near abroad” was promoted since the times Yeltsin. Again, today immigration policy is much tougher than it was before. Most importantly, unlike 1990s and early 2000s mass deportations are common occurrences. As I stated–it is not a problem which could be solved in one day and by President’s decree. Russia can not escape her geographic position and economic and social gravitational field she . In other words, Russia is bound by history to live with this neighborhood in some form of cooperation. What will be the emerging framework–it is all dynamic, that is changing, and we will have to see what level of tolerance will emerge–low or fairly high. But I will reiterate the point–very many of those Muslims are fully integrated. While in Moscow, which does have significant presence of Muslims I saw women dressed in traditional Muslim garb (faces open, though) maybe three or four times in 10 days. Just an anecdotal evidence of a fairly “liberal” version of Islam. Again, complex issue–not enough time and space to go very deep into it. It is not black and white. And then comes this small, purely professional issue–Russian special-intelligence services are on the several orders of magnitude more competent than their “Western” colleagues when dealing with Islamist threat. One of the major reasons for that is the fact that majority of Muslims in Russia have a very different outlook on this whole Jihad thing and do cooperate big time and do it very sincerely. In the end, comforts of Moscow, St. Petersburg or Kazan, among many, are too precious to waste for some dubious religious and ideological reasons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Yes, even as an outsider I can recognize that many Russian nationalists do take an ahistorically manichaean view of the issue due to neo-Nazi influence: some of their complaints seem legitimate, but one has to be cautious. There seems to be a lack of articulate spokesmen for more reasonable nationalists, maybe due to gov. crackdowns?
  66. @Andrei Martyanov

    Is flooding streets during Ramadan, disrupting traffic, good behavior? I’m sure they’re biased, but Russian nationalists I’ve spoken to deeply resent their government
     
    No, it is definitely not. Medvedev's cabinet is the one who continues to promote "liberal" immigration policies. Why Putin doesn't react to that--is totally different matter but "import" of Muslims from "near abroad" was promoted since the times Yeltsin. Again, today immigration policy is much tougher than it was before. Most importantly, unlike 1990s and early 2000s mass deportations are common occurrences. As I stated--it is not a problem which could be solved in one day and by President's decree. Russia can not escape her geographic position and economic and social gravitational field she . In other words, Russia is bound by history to live with this neighborhood in some form of cooperation. What will be the emerging framework--it is all dynamic, that is changing, and we will have to see what level of tolerance will emerge--low or fairly high. But I will reiterate the point--very many of those Muslims are fully integrated. While in Moscow, which does have significant presence of Muslims I saw women dressed in traditional Muslim garb (faces open, though) maybe three or four times in 10 days. Just an anecdotal evidence of a fairly "liberal" version of Islam. Again, complex issue--not enough time and space to go very deep into it. It is not black and white. And then comes this small, purely professional issue--Russian special-intelligence services are on the several orders of magnitude more competent than their "Western" colleagues when dealing with Islamist threat. One of the major reasons for that is the fact that majority of Muslims in Russia have a very different outlook on this whole Jihad thing and do cooperate big time and do it very sincerely. In the end, comforts of Moscow, St. Petersburg or Kazan, among many, are too precious to waste for some dubious religious and ideological reasons.

    Yes, even as an outsider I can recognize that many Russian nationalists do take an ahistorically manichaean view of the issue due to neo-Nazi influence: some of their complaints seem legitimate, but one has to be cautious. There seems to be a lack of articulate spokesmen for more reasonable nationalists, maybe due to gov. crackdowns?

    Read More
  67. @Andrei Martyanov
    As I stated on a number of occasions: if you want to follow US main-stream media "interpretations", be my guest. But until you recall that Northern Caucasus and Tatarstan together with Bashkortostan are predominantly Muslim areas, albeit with Tatars and Bashkirs being of a more "liberal"Hanafi madhab and that appearances of mosques there is natural occurrence any discussion of this issue becomes a moot point. Problems related to radicalization are a serious matter but again, I just returned from Russia and I communicated there with people who, how to put politely, understand the issue. Again, unlike in Germany or France Russia's Muslim community knows damn well what can happen if they misbehave. But again, as I pointed before--I gave here a very short version. From the source you presented, I quote:

    At the same time, Moskovsky Komsomolets continued, most people in the region speak Russian rather than other languages and most of the stores are “’secular’” rather than Muslim-oriented. That means, Roman Silantyev, a specialist on Islam notorious for his anti-MSD positions, that it is “premature” to speak about the formation of Muslim “quarters” in Moscow.
     

    One of my spiritual teachers (a Naqshbandi Mujaddidi) has many disciples in Moscow and the other Russian districts. Even has some spiritual deputies (that are authorized to guide others in tazkiya) there. Russia has come a long way in its treatment of Muslims (especially since the Communist times – what a horror). From what I’ve heard, it is not perfect, but they are treated well as long as nobody misbehaves. Of course there are skinhead types that harass people – but what’re you going to do, those kind of jerks are everywhere.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    The richest man in Russia is a Muslim and a friend of Putin
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alisher_Usmanov
    , @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia has come a long way in its treatment of Muslims (especially since the Communist times – what a horror).
     
    So, now let's talk about how Saudi Arabia will come a long way in treatment of Christians. No, wait, owning a Bible or being a Christian there often means a death sentence. What a horror...

    http://www.israellycool.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/Saudi-Arabia-apartheid-road-sign-to-Mecca-non-Muslims.jpg
  68. @Priss Factor
    Turkey looks remarkably like Ukraine.

    The Kurdish region looks like Donbass.

    And both are part of tug-o-war between US and Russia.

    Not a good comparison.

    Turkish Kurdistan is a backwards, rural, highly fertility region. (Those occasional reports of Turks doing honor killings in Germany? Almost inevitably ethnic Kurds). The Donbass is the precise opposite. It is more industrially developed, secular, and lower fertility relative to the rest of Ukraine and especially the most nationalist areas in the West. (There’s a lot more nuance but for the most part this is true).

    If Turkey has a “Donbass” of sorts it would likely be the ethnic Turkoman regions scattered across the Turkish-Syrian border, which Turkish nationalists would not mind annexing (though those regions are very poor and economically worthless, unlike Donbass). The guy who strafed the parachuting Su-24 pilot was a Turkish nationalist and son of an MHP politician who was “vacationing” in Syria.

    Read More
  69. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Yes, even as an outsider I can recognize that many Russian nationalists do take an ahistorically manichaean view of the issue

    Good observation.

    There seems to be a lack of articulate spokesmen for more reasonable nationalists, maybe due to gov. crackdowns?

    I don’t know. Recently all kinds of exotic people ranging from Prosvirnin to Strelkov and even Limonov tried to form some Committee–it didn’t last long with Limonov dropping out in a week or so and having such people as Strelkov in it doesn’t add much credence, anyway. Gov. had nothing to do with the implosion of this “nationalist” enterprise. Real Russian nationalism is more complex and it still does have this easily recognized Soviet element in it, with it comes a degree of internationalism.

    Read More
  70. @Talha
    One of my spiritual teachers (a Naqshbandi Mujaddidi) has many disciples in Moscow and the other Russian districts. Even has some spiritual deputies (that are authorized to guide others in tazkiya) there. Russia has come a long way in its treatment of Muslims (especially since the Communist times - what a horror). From what I've heard, it is not perfect, but they are treated well as long as nobody misbehaves. Of course there are skinhead types that harass people - but what're you going to do, those kind of jerks are everywhere.

    Peace.

    The richest man in Russia is a Muslim and a friend of Putin

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alisher_Usmanov

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Wow - had no clue! Thanks!
    , @5371
    I'm not the accountant of any of them, but according to Bloomberg, Blavatnik, Potanin, Mikhelson, Vekselberg, Mordashov and Fridman are all richer than Usmanov.
  71. @Andrei Martyanov

    he’s abetted
     
    Wrong term and not directly related to Putin. Actually, Russian immigration situation, while not an easy one, is generally under control. Nothing like 1990s or early 2000s when it was basically uncontrolled. It is a very complex issue and it CAN NOT be separated from the Soviet legacy. Many of those Muslims are pretty much second iteration of Soviet Middle Asia citizens and very many of them do integrate quite well, know Russian and many not only become Russian citizens but actually call themselves Russians. I know this first-hand since my sister-in-law married Uzbek guy in 1985 and all her children are already Russian citizens, well-educated and wonderful humans. Love them dearly. Despite being nominally Muslim they are fairly secular, outgoing, hard working and are true benefit to Russian society. There are very many of those Muslims in Russia. It couldn't have been otherwise--Russia is an enormous economic and political center of gravity. Are there problems with Muslims in Russia, yes, there are but it is a work in progress. This is my short opinion.

    Actually, Russian immigration situation, while not an easy one, is generally under control. Nothing like 1990s or early 2000s when it was basically uncontrolled. It is a very complex issue and it CAN NOT be separated from the Soviet legacy. Many of those Muslims are pretty much second iteration of Soviet Middle Asia citizens and very many of them do integrate quite well, know Russian and many not only become Russian citizens but actually call themselves Russians. I know this first-hand since my sister-in-law married Uzbek guy in 1985 and all her children are already Russian citizens, well-educated and wonderful humans. Love them dearly. Despite being nominally Muslim they are fairly secular, outgoing, hard working and are true benefit to Russian society. There are very many of those Muslims in Russia.

    You don’t get it. The fact that central Asians can assimilate to Russian ways actually makes things *worse*, not better. These people are completely worthless from human capital point of view. They have no economical value. HBD consensus tells us that this won’t change. The successful assimilation will make sure that the process of importing millions of immigrants from Earth’s HBD garbage dumb will not stop.

    It seems that inviting hordes of worthless migrants from former colonies (as well as countries that used to in the “sphere of influence”) is how the remnants of old empires choose to die. UK and Pakistan, France and northern Africa, Germany and Turkey, Russia and the -stan shitholes. Eventually the Uzbeks and other central Asians will become the same cancerous presence as blacks are in the United States or the inhabitants of french no-go zones. Arguably, this already happened in Moskovskaya Oblast’… I heard stories.

    Things got so bad that I’m actually relieved to hear that the economy is not doing so well — after all, this means that at least some of the migrants will go back home; and for a while I won’t feel like a stranger in a city I was born in. How did the kremlinoids managed to fuck things up so badly that I have to cheer for bad economy? I bet when future historians (a 100 years from now) will study the current events they will fail to notice any substantial differences between the politics or ideology of Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Are you still throwing empty bottles at migrants?
    , @Andrei Martyanov

    Things got so bad that I’m actually relieved to hear that the economy is not doing so well
     
    Actually, it is not that simple, especially when you review Help Needed sections of Russian newspapers. Let me put it this way--a huge demand for people with actual industrial skills from CNC operators to G-Code programmers and Electronics specialists.
  72. @Marcus
    Is flooding streets during Ramadan, disrupting traffic, good behavior? I'm sure they're biased, but Russian nationalists I've spoken to deeply resent their government for its perceived leniency to the huge numbers of arrogant and often violent immigrants (while it cracks down on nationalists).

    It’s like people don’t realize that in between:

    (1) Being an open borders “keep them at arm’s length” cuck, which some Alt Righters apparently believe of Putin; and

    (2) Living up to the overly “optimistic”/false image other Alt Righters – and Putin Derangement Syndrome-suffering liberals, and (((neocons))) – have of Putin;

    … there is a pretty big middle ground (around which Putin actually falls).

    Yes, many Russian nationalists are sitting under Article 282 (some of them deservedly, but yes, many of them regrettably not; it is an unjust law that should ideally go the way of the rest of Europe’s “hate laws,” i.e. into the dustbin of history). But, at least, Russia also imprisons many Islamic extremists and even anti-ethnic Russians under that law (a partial lack of double standards that the Council of Europe is very unhappy about). And moderate Russian (anti-immigration) nationalists like Egor Kholmogorov are hardly social or legal pariahs; they get to write op-eds in the nation’s highest circulation newspaper, Komsomolskaya Pravda.

    And then there is of course Dmitry Rogozin, who was an outright (anti-immigration) nationalist. Apart from his antics as NATO ambassador, here’s an ad from his party Rodina in 2005, in which he calls on to clear “rubbish” from Moscow’s streets:

    He has since joined the government, curates the military-industrial prospect, and is not an altogether impossible (if highly unlikely) Presidential successor.

    Ultimately, there is a very wide spectrum between a cucked faggot like Wolfgang Schaeuble and /pol/’s image of Ben Garrison, and on that spectrum, Putin is far closer to the likes of Trump, Le Pen, and Orban than he is to the mainstream Western political elites (on this, at least, the Western MSM has it correct). Reasonable figures in the Alt Right recognize such as Richard Spencer recognize that they can’t have their way all of the time, and as such urge people to support these sorts of “middle ground” politicians, despite their occasional concessions to cuckoldry (even though Spencer himself got arrested in and banned from in Hungary for holding an identitarian conference so he has personal reasons to be skeptical of Orban).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Solemnity
    I hope that readers realize that what is now called "eastern Turkey" was Christian Armenia.

    Turks arrived there from Central Asia. Turks are not indigenous to that region.

    The Sultans brought Kurds north from their traditional homeland that is further south (where they still reside) - to dilute the Armenian population. That is how Kurds wound up that far north.

    Then in the 20th century the Turks committed genocide against Christian Assyrians, Hellenics, and Armenians. Many Kurds helped the Turks in that effort.

    The Treaty of Sevres of 1920 assigned much of what is now "eastern Turkey" to Armenia. Most people don't know that.

    Unfortunately, it was not put into effect, and the great "hero", Kemal Ataturk, basically annihilated whatever Christians remained.

    This is the great anti-Christian Turkey which says it belongs in the EU and which naïve, de-Christianized Europeans and Americans slobber over, and which Russians are cozying up to.
  73. @Marcus
    I've indeed read that Umar and Muhammad did not live extravagantly at all, I just find it hard to believe that many Arabs would have "signed up" for the early armies without some inkling of the vast rewards that could gained from richer neighbors, e.g.

    Allah has promised you much booty that you will take [in the future] and has hastened for you this [victory] and withheld the hands of people from you - that it may be a sign for the believers and [that] He may guide you to a straight path
     
    Not saying there's anything wrong with that, the pattern is established throughout history: civilizations become fat and complacent and get plundered by poorer but more vigorous neighbors.

    Hey Marcus,

    Intention is a big deal. The first hadith taught in all traditional hadith studies (East to West) is:
    “Actions are but by intention and every man shall have but that which he intended. Thus he whose migration was for God and His messenger, his migration was for God and His messenger, and he whose migration was to achieve some worldly benefit or to take some woman in marriage, his migration was for that for which he migrated.” ~ Related by Bukhari and Muslim

    No doubt many normal Bedioun wanted both loot as well as a chance at a getting a nubile Levantine concubine to warm their beds. But it is clear to me (through both Muslim and academic non-Muslim sources) that the leadership and core/elite of the first generation was not materially motivated for the following reasons:
    1) You just don’t see it in their personal life – there is no amassing of thousands of slaves or opulent clothing as in the later generations. Their aphorisms constantly remind about the need for asceticism.
    2) By the third caliph, Uthman (ra) the territory is enormous, beyond any Arab dream (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uthman#/media/File:Mohammad_adil_rais-rashidun_empire-at-its_peak.PNG), yet the capital is kept at Madinah. I have come across no evidence which shows massive amounts of wealth being brought into Madinah (or Mecca) and squandered on making it a lavish center of a huge empire. they remain mostly mud-brick desert townships until the Ottomans finally pay some attention to prettying them up. Caliph Ali (ra) moves it to a newly founded city of Kufa, which is also not fancy. The Umayyads immediately established themselves (not even in Jerusalem, but) in Damascus, a magnificent capital.
    3) The mechanics of the way spoils works; a normal soldier only gets a chance at spoils and slaves if the encountered population decides to go to war, which is the last of the three options provided. The first two options grant him nothing more than his normal remuneration – both jizya and zakat go into the public coffers. A soldier could march from the Hijaz all the way to the edge of Gibraltar and come home with nothing beyond his normal pension (and actually many of the earliest soldiers financed their own provisions – before the state bureaucracy of Persia and Byzantium were absorbed).

    Though even the state of the normal foot soldier was alluded to in the famous letter from Khalid bin Walid (ra) to the Persian leadership:
    “To the Governers of Persia,
    Embrace Islam so that you may be safe. If not, make a covenant of protection with me and pay jizyah. Otherwise, I have brought you a people who love death just as you love drinking wine.”

    Now, that may have had a rhetorical edge to it to convince the Persians not to put up a fight, but, if the Battle of Qadissiyah is any evidence, then my suspicion is he was being straight forward.

    Compare this to the exhortations to his men by Tariq ibn Ziyad (ra) – he glorifies God of course, but the rest is a great speech, but much like something from Braveheart:
    “In the attack I myself will be in the fore, where the chance of life is always least…You have heard that in this country there are a large number of ravishingly beautiful Greek maidens, their graceful forms are draped in sumptuous gowns on which gleam pearls, coral, and purest gold, and they live in the palaces of royal kings. The Commander of True Believers, Alwalid, son of Abdalmelik, has chosen you for this attack from among all his Arab warriors; and he promises that you shall become his comrades and shall hold the rank of kings in this country.”

    http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/source/711Tarik1.asp

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Thanks, I'll have to read up on the subject again, "The Great Arab Conquests," is a solid book IIRC. I think that the Arab conquests would've happened in some form with or without Islam, but they wouldn't have been as widespread or had the same lasting impact without it. The Arabs were an incredibly hardy warrior people who could strike at anywhere on the desert periphery: an area the Romans and the Persians had to rely on unreliable auxiliaries to defend. What made them so much more potent after Muhammad was the loyalty that they felt to the Caliph's office; Khalid bin al-Walid meekly obeyed when recalled from campaigning: it's hard to imagine an Arab warrior doing that for a mere tribal chieftain.
  74. @Marcus
    The richest man in Russia is a Muslim and a friend of Putin
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alisher_Usmanov

    Wow – had no clue! Thanks!

    Read More
  75. @Talha
    Hey Marcus,

    Intention is a big deal. The first hadith taught in all traditional hadith studies (East to West) is:
    "Actions are but by intention and every man shall have but that which he intended. Thus he whose migration was for God and His messenger, his migration was for God and His messenger, and he whose migration was to achieve some worldly benefit or to take some woman in marriage, his migration was for that for which he migrated." ~ Related by Bukhari and Muslim

    No doubt many normal Bedioun wanted both loot as well as a chance at a getting a nubile Levantine concubine to warm their beds. But it is clear to me (through both Muslim and academic non-Muslim sources) that the leadership and core/elite of the first generation was not materially motivated for the following reasons:
    1) You just don't see it in their personal life - there is no amassing of thousands of slaves or opulent clothing as in the later generations. Their aphorisms constantly remind about the need for asceticism.
    2) By the third caliph, Uthman (ra) the territory is enormous, beyond any Arab dream (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uthman#/media/File:Mohammad_adil_rais-rashidun_empire-at-its_peak.PNG), yet the capital is kept at Madinah. I have come across no evidence which shows massive amounts of wealth being brought into Madinah (or Mecca) and squandered on making it a lavish center of a huge empire. they remain mostly mud-brick desert townships until the Ottomans finally pay some attention to prettying them up. Caliph Ali (ra) moves it to a newly founded city of Kufa, which is also not fancy. The Umayyads immediately established themselves (not even in Jerusalem, but) in Damascus, a magnificent capital.
    3) The mechanics of the way spoils works; a normal soldier only gets a chance at spoils and slaves if the encountered population decides to go to war, which is the last of the three options provided. The first two options grant him nothing more than his normal remuneration - both jizya and zakat go into the public coffers. A soldier could march from the Hijaz all the way to the edge of Gibraltar and come home with nothing beyond his normal pension (and actually many of the earliest soldiers financed their own provisions - before the state bureaucracy of Persia and Byzantium were absorbed).

    Though even the state of the normal foot soldier was alluded to in the famous letter from Khalid bin Walid (ra) to the Persian leadership:
    "To the Governers of Persia,
    Embrace Islam so that you may be safe. If not, make a covenant of protection with me and pay jizyah. Otherwise, I have brought you a people who love death just as you love drinking wine."

    Now, that may have had a rhetorical edge to it to convince the Persians not to put up a fight, but, if the Battle of Qadissiyah is any evidence, then my suspicion is he was being straight forward.

    Compare this to the exhortations to his men by Tariq ibn Ziyad (ra) - he glorifies God of course, but the rest is a great speech, but much like something from Braveheart:
    "In the attack I myself will be in the fore, where the chance of life is always least...You have heard that in this country there are a large number of ravishingly beautiful Greek maidens, their graceful forms are draped in sumptuous gowns on which gleam pearls, coral, and purest gold, and they live in the palaces of royal kings. The Commander of True Believers, Alwalid, son of Abdalmelik, has chosen you for this attack from among all his Arab warriors; and he promises that you shall become his comrades and shall hold the rank of kings in this country."
    http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/source/711Tarik1.asp

    Peace.

    Thanks, I’ll have to read up on the subject again, “The Great Arab Conquests,” is a solid book IIRC. I think that the Arab conquests would’ve happened in some form with or without Islam, but they wouldn’t have been as widespread or had the same lasting impact without it. The Arabs were an incredibly hardy warrior people who could strike at anywhere on the desert periphery: an area the Romans and the Persians had to rely on unreliable auxiliaries to defend. What made them so much more potent after Muhammad was the loyalty that they felt to the Caliph’s office; Khalid bin al-Walid meekly obeyed when recalled from campaigning: it’s hard to imagine an Arab warrior doing that for a mere tribal chieftain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Thanks for that reference - it is not one I have come across. I am also interested in reading this one:
    https://www.amazon.com/Great-Arab-Conquests-Spread-Changed/dp/0306817403

    As far as Khalid ibn Walid (ra) - from the material perspective, it doesn't make sense (Arabs were notoriously rebellious beyond their own tribe) though he was his cousin - it does make sense if some one has been trained to erase their ego.
    "O you who believe! Obey God, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Messenger, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day; that is best, and most suitable for final determination." 4:59

    Likewise, the Prophet (pbuh) exhorted people to listen to their leader as long as it didn't involve disobedience to God as reported in the Bukhari collection. It was only with this discipline that they were able to put their fighting potential into a hammer that could smash the collective armies of Byzantium, Persia and Rome (North Africa) - otherwise they would have splintered fairly quickly into tribal federations.

    Peace.

  76. @Eskaton

    Actually, Russian immigration situation, while not an easy one, is generally under control. Nothing like 1990s or early 2000s when it was basically uncontrolled. It is a very complex issue and it CAN NOT be separated from the Soviet legacy. Many of those Muslims are pretty much second iteration of Soviet Middle Asia citizens and very many of them do integrate quite well, know Russian and many not only become Russian citizens but actually call themselves Russians. I know this first-hand since my sister-in-law married Uzbek guy in 1985 and all her children are already Russian citizens, well-educated and wonderful humans. Love them dearly. Despite being nominally Muslim they are fairly secular, outgoing, hard working and are true benefit to Russian society. There are very many of those Muslims in Russia.
     
    You don't get it. The fact that central Asians can assimilate to Russian ways actually makes things *worse*, not better. These people are completely worthless from human capital point of view. They have no economical value. HBD consensus tells us that this won't change. The successful assimilation will make sure that the process of importing millions of immigrants from Earth's HBD garbage dumb will not stop.

    It seems that inviting hordes of worthless migrants from former colonies (as well as countries that used to in the "sphere of influence") is how the remnants of old empires choose to die. UK and Pakistan, France and northern Africa, Germany and Turkey, Russia and the -stan shitholes. Eventually the Uzbeks and other central Asians will become the same cancerous presence as blacks are in the United States or the inhabitants of french no-go zones. Arguably, this already happened in Moskovskaya Oblast'... I heard stories.

    Things got so bad that I'm actually relieved to hear that the economy is not doing so well -- after all, this means that at least some of the migrants will go back home; and for a while I won't feel like a stranger in a city I was born in. How did the kremlinoids managed to fuck things up so badly that I have to cheer for bad economy? I bet when future historians (a 100 years from now) will study the current events they will fail to notice any substantial differences between the politics or ideology of Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin.

    Are you still throwing empty bottles at migrants?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Kek.

    Eskaton does have a very good point, contra Smoothie. Recall which country had the lowest score in the last PISA survey?

    Kyrgyzstan.

    And that's actually one of the better Central Asian countries.

    Other psychometric assessments have found that the difference between C. Asian and Russian IQs is of the same order as the B-W Gap in the US.

    Hopefully at least some significant part of it is due to environmental factors that will fade away with time (in particular Central Asian countries have been slow to start iodizing salt), so the IQ gap will likely shrink to something more resembling European/Muslim or White American/Hispanic levels, but OTOH I am skeptical about the longterm prospects of controlling Islamism.

    They are starting to produce some slick propaganda: http://orda1313.info/ (Islamist Eurasian version of Sputnik i Pogrom)
    , @Eskaton
    I got like 15 new followers the day after AK posted a screencap of that tweet.
  77. @Greasy WIlliam

    It was definitely a rebellion in the beginning – very native and local in nature
     
    I met a Syrian American recently who was born in the US to Syrian immigrant parents and still has family members living in Syria. Although totally secular (he was a pretty heavy drinker) and seemingly apolitical, he absolutely detested the Assad family. I wouldn't say he supported the rebels but he definitely despised the Assad's and seemed to fear that they would harm his family that was still living in Damascus.

    I was really surprised because I had always thought the secular middle class was very supportive of Assad.

    Just goes to show how complex things are over there.

    I met a Syrian American recently who was born in the US to Syrian immigrant parents

    Sounds like a Westerner indoctrinated through Western media to me. It happens.

    So pervasive is the Western MSM the children of immigrants become true believers of the BS shoveled in their face.

    Regardless of that I’ve heard Iraqi Arabs (and one bonafide Iraqi Kurd who fought in the Iran-Iraq war for Saddam) bitch and whine about Hussein up until his death. Then I heard:

    “He was a head of state, the least they could have done is shown him respect. They didn’t have to hang him like some thief or spy. He kept stability. He had his faults but….[blah blah blah]”

    Hate must be trendy or something. Assad will probably go through the same thing, like Qaddafi. Everyone hated him… until they didn’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William

    Sounds like a Westerner indoctrinated through Western media to me. It happens.
     
    It definitely does happen but I think he probably got the Assad hate from his parents. I mean, I don't know but that's the impression I got.

    Assad will probably go through the same thing, like Qaddafi. Everyone hated him… until they didn’t.
     
    I read a piece by a western writer in the early 00's talking about a Syrian woman friend of his who would go on and on about about how much she hated Assad Sr. Then after he died she was inconsolable, saying that "he was a father to all of us (Syrians)".

    Go figure.
  78. @Mitleser
    Are you still throwing empty bottles at migrants?

    Kek.

    Eskaton does have a very good point, contra Smoothie. Recall which country had the lowest score in the last PISA survey?

    Kyrgyzstan.

    And that’s actually one of the better Central Asian countries.

    Other psychometric assessments have found that the difference between C. Asian and Russian IQs is of the same order as the B-W Gap in the US.

    Hopefully at least some significant part of it is due to environmental factors that will fade away with time (in particular Central Asian countries have been slow to start iodizing salt), so the IQ gap will likely shrink to something more resembling European/Muslim or White American/Hispanic levels, but OTOH I am skeptical about the longterm prospects of controlling Islamism.

    They are starting to produce some slick propaganda: http://orda1313.info/ (Islamist Eurasian version of Sputnik i Pogrom)

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    That Orda thing reeks of Langley VA.
    , @Anonymous

    so the IQ gap will likely shrink to something more resembling European/Muslim or White American/Hispanic levels
     
    You aren't saying this kind of gap leads to no troubles, are you? Only Reed, and for the factious motives we know, has been saying that.

    The cockneys’ complaints are similar to those of Archie Bunker in 1970s America—that immigrants are permanently changing the community and country for the worse. (The Bunker character was in fact based on the cockney Alf Garnett of the popular sitcom Til Death Us Do Part, which aired on the BBC from 1965 to 1975.) In 2013, 62 percent of Britons thought an increasing Muslim populace in the U.K. would “weaken” national identity, up from 48 percent a decade earlier. Sixty-six percent of non-degreed Britons (including non-whites) in 2011 felt immigration had a negative effect economically, up from 47 percent in 2002. Sixty-two percent of the same group felt a negative cultural effect from immigration, up from 42 percent nine years earlier.
    While the Archie Bunkers of the East End may be a dying breed, the views of British Muslims are growing more extreme. A 2016 survey found that British Muslims like the ones moving into the East End were significantly less tolerant and less willing to assimilate than were previous generations of Muslim immigrants. Some have found a “generation gap” among British Muslims, with earlier immigrant waves and second-generation British Muslims diverging in their views. Later arrivals and British-born children of Muslim immigrants hold more strident religious and less socially tolerant views than their forbearers. Analysis of the U.K.’s 2011 Census by the Muslim Council of Britain shows that British Muslims are far less likely to be employed full-time, more likely to be caregivers, and more likely to live in areas of concentrated poverty."
     
  79. @Marcus
    Thanks, I'll have to read up on the subject again, "The Great Arab Conquests," is a solid book IIRC. I think that the Arab conquests would've happened in some form with or without Islam, but they wouldn't have been as widespread or had the same lasting impact without it. The Arabs were an incredibly hardy warrior people who could strike at anywhere on the desert periphery: an area the Romans and the Persians had to rely on unreliable auxiliaries to defend. What made them so much more potent after Muhammad was the loyalty that they felt to the Caliph's office; Khalid bin al-Walid meekly obeyed when recalled from campaigning: it's hard to imagine an Arab warrior doing that for a mere tribal chieftain.

    Thanks for that reference – it is not one I have come across. I am also interested in reading this one:

    https://www.amazon.com/Great-Arab-Conquests-Spread-Changed/dp/0306817403

    As far as Khalid ibn Walid (ra) – from the material perspective, it doesn’t make sense (Arabs were notoriously rebellious beyond their own tribe) though he was his cousin – it does make sense if some one has been trained to erase their ego.
    “O you who believe! Obey God, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Messenger, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day; that is best, and most suitable for final determination.” 4:59

    Likewise, the Prophet (pbuh) exhorted people to listen to their leader as long as it didn’t involve disobedience to God as reported in the Bukhari collection. It was only with this discipline that they were able to put their fighting potential into a hammer that could smash the collective armies of Byzantium, Persia and Rome (North Africa) – otherwise they would have splintered fairly quickly into tribal federations.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Yeah it's very accessible, for more dense volumes there's Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521484553/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_3IRKxbBB9BJH2
  80. @El Dato
    “Clearly, the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad were directly involved in the planning, coordination, and execution of yesterday’s coup attempt. "

    I find this hard to swallow. This "clearly" needs some additional decorations. Also, motives? And I mean real motives, not a "because reasons that I find these guys could find convenient". And these reasons have to be massive enough to weight up against the dangers of failure, this not being Chile in the 80s.

    Possible reasons for US/ Israel to back anti-Erdogan coup:
    1. Erdogan’s reconciliation with Putin (including an apology, no less).
    2. Erdogan is now talking to Assad

    http://m.jpost.com/Middle-East/Erdogan-Assad-talk-Israel-Syria-peace#article=0NzhFMkUzNzBCQ0RDNEExQjQzNjRDNTNDMkM0Mjk0QUU=

    Proof? Hardly. Adequate motive? Certainly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {(including an apology, no less).}

    Actually, there was no 'apology'.
    Turks themselves announced that it was not an apology.
    People who know the Turkish language say the expression Erdogan used in his letter to Putin was roughly equivalent to "...let bygones, be bygones....."

    And the non-apology was to the families of the killed and murdered pilots, not to the Russian state.
    Also, there was no compensation, as Putin had demanded after the shootdown for normalizing relations.

    Nevertheless, for some reason or another Putin grabbed at the straw and folded.
    He must have his reasons.
  81. @No_0ne
    Possible reasons for US/ Israel to back anti-Erdogan coup:
    1. Erdogan's reconciliation with Putin (including an apology, no less).
    2. Erdogan is now talking to Assad
    http://m.jpost.com/Middle-East/Erdogan-Assad-talk-Israel-Syria-peace#article=0NzhFMkUzNzBCQ0RDNEExQjQzNjRDNTNDMkM0Mjk0QUU=

    Proof? Hardly. Adequate motive? Certainly.

    {(including an apology, no less).}

    Actually, there was no ‘apology’.
    Turks themselves announced that it was not an apology.
    People who know the Turkish language say the expression Erdogan used in his letter to Putin was roughly equivalent to “…let bygones, be bygones…..”

    And the non-apology was to the families of the killed and murdered pilots, not to the Russian state.
    Also, there was no compensation, as Putin had demanded after the shootdown for normalizing relations.

    Nevertheless, for some reason or another Putin grabbed at the straw and folded.
    He must have his reasons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Since Putin does not understand Turkish, the letter Putin read must have been one written in Russian, not the one written in Turkish you seem to know so much about.
    , @Parbes
    Putin and his team are making more and more serious mistakes of late. In February, Putin stopped the joint Russo-Syrian advance against the jihadis just as they were on the verge of being crushed and the surviving ones chased back into Turkey, for the sake of "talks with our partners" to "find a diplomatic solution in which noone will lose"! The result, several months later: Neither peace nor victory, the war grinding on brutally on the ground with many thousands more Syrian soldiers and civilians dead, the jihadis reinvigorated, replenished and on the attack again.

    What is the reason? Simple naivete? A sort of psychological collapse brought on by the torrents of opprobrium and criticism heaped on him? Creeping senility? I don't know... But it's more and more starting to look like a change of guard is becoming necessary in Russia.
  82. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Talha
    One of my spiritual teachers (a Naqshbandi Mujaddidi) has many disciples in Moscow and the other Russian districts. Even has some spiritual deputies (that are authorized to guide others in tazkiya) there. Russia has come a long way in its treatment of Muslims (especially since the Communist times - what a horror). From what I've heard, it is not perfect, but they are treated well as long as nobody misbehaves. Of course there are skinhead types that harass people - but what're you going to do, those kind of jerks are everywhere.

    Peace.

    Russia has come a long way in its treatment of Muslims (especially since the Communist times – what a horror).

    So, now let’s talk about how Saudi Arabia will come a long way in treatment of Christians. No, wait, owning a Bible or being a Christian there often means a death sentence. What a horror…

    http://www.israellycool.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/Saudi-Arabia-apartheid-road-sign-to-Mecca-non-Muslims.jpg

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Smoothie,

    Asking the wrong guy; I'm a Hanafi...in our school - the relied upon fatwa states - non-Muslims can even enter the sacred precincts and the sacred mosques of Makkah and Madinah:
    http://seekershub.org/ans-blog/2010/10/20/are-non-muslims-allowed-to-enter-mecca-and-the-sacred-mosque-haram/

    You can ask the British why they helped kick out the staunchly Hanafi Ottomans and install the current Wahhabi state.

    Peace.
  83. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Eskaton

    Actually, Russian immigration situation, while not an easy one, is generally under control. Nothing like 1990s or early 2000s when it was basically uncontrolled. It is a very complex issue and it CAN NOT be separated from the Soviet legacy. Many of those Muslims are pretty much second iteration of Soviet Middle Asia citizens and very many of them do integrate quite well, know Russian and many not only become Russian citizens but actually call themselves Russians. I know this first-hand since my sister-in-law married Uzbek guy in 1985 and all her children are already Russian citizens, well-educated and wonderful humans. Love them dearly. Despite being nominally Muslim they are fairly secular, outgoing, hard working and are true benefit to Russian society. There are very many of those Muslims in Russia.
     
    You don't get it. The fact that central Asians can assimilate to Russian ways actually makes things *worse*, not better. These people are completely worthless from human capital point of view. They have no economical value. HBD consensus tells us that this won't change. The successful assimilation will make sure that the process of importing millions of immigrants from Earth's HBD garbage dumb will not stop.

    It seems that inviting hordes of worthless migrants from former colonies (as well as countries that used to in the "sphere of influence") is how the remnants of old empires choose to die. UK and Pakistan, France and northern Africa, Germany and Turkey, Russia and the -stan shitholes. Eventually the Uzbeks and other central Asians will become the same cancerous presence as blacks are in the United States or the inhabitants of french no-go zones. Arguably, this already happened in Moskovskaya Oblast'... I heard stories.

    Things got so bad that I'm actually relieved to hear that the economy is not doing so well -- after all, this means that at least some of the migrants will go back home; and for a while I won't feel like a stranger in a city I was born in. How did the kremlinoids managed to fuck things up so badly that I have to cheer for bad economy? I bet when future historians (a 100 years from now) will study the current events they will fail to notice any substantial differences between the politics or ideology of Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin.

    Things got so bad that I’m actually relieved to hear that the economy is not doing so well

    Actually, it is not that simple, especially when you review Help Needed sections of Russian newspapers. Let me put it this way–a huge demand for people with actual industrial skills from CNC operators to G-Code programmers and Electronics specialists.

    Read More
  84. @Mitleser
    Are you still throwing empty bottles at migrants?

    I got like 15 new followers the day after AK posted a screencap of that tweet.

    Read More
  85. @Talha
    Thanks for that reference - it is not one I have come across. I am also interested in reading this one:
    https://www.amazon.com/Great-Arab-Conquests-Spread-Changed/dp/0306817403

    As far as Khalid ibn Walid (ra) - from the material perspective, it doesn't make sense (Arabs were notoriously rebellious beyond their own tribe) though he was his cousin - it does make sense if some one has been trained to erase their ego.
    "O you who believe! Obey God, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Messenger, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day; that is best, and most suitable for final determination." 4:59

    Likewise, the Prophet (pbuh) exhorted people to listen to their leader as long as it didn't involve disobedience to God as reported in the Bukhari collection. It was only with this discipline that they were able to put their fighting potential into a hammer that could smash the collective armies of Byzantium, Persia and Rome (North Africa) - otherwise they would have splintered fairly quickly into tribal federations.

    Peace.

    Yeah it’s very accessible, for more dense volumes there’s Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521484553/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_3IRKxbBB9BJH2

    Read More
  86. @Anatoly Karlin
    It's like people don't realize that in between:

    (1) Being an open borders "keep them at arm's length" cuck, which some Alt Righters apparently believe of Putin; and

    (2) Living up to the overly "optimistic"/false image other Alt Righters - and Putin Derangement Syndrome-suffering liberals, and (((neocons))) - have of Putin;

    ... there is a pretty big middle ground (around which Putin actually falls).

    Yes, many Russian nationalists are sitting under Article 282 (some of them deservedly, but yes, many of them regrettably not; it is an unjust law that should ideally go the way of the rest of Europe's "hate laws," i.e. into the dustbin of history). But, at least, Russia also imprisons many Islamic extremists and even anti-ethnic Russians under that law (a partial lack of double standards that the Council of Europe is very unhappy about). And moderate Russian (anti-immigration) nationalists like Egor Kholmogorov are hardly social or legal pariahs; they get to write op-eds in the nation's highest circulation newspaper, Komsomolskaya Pravda.

    And then there is of course Dmitry Rogozin, who was an outright (anti-immigration) nationalist. Apart from his antics as NATO ambassador, here's an ad from his party Rodina in 2005, in which he calls on to clear "rubbish" from Moscow's streets:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiBOg5jTJQs

    He has since joined the government, curates the military-industrial prospect, and is not an altogether impossible (if highly unlikely) Presidential successor.

    Ultimately, there is a very wide spectrum between a cucked faggot like Wolfgang Schaeuble and /pol/'s image of Ben Garrison, and on that spectrum, Putin is far closer to the likes of Trump, Le Pen, and Orban than he is to the mainstream Western political elites (on this, at least, the Western MSM has it correct). Reasonable figures in the Alt Right recognize such as Richard Spencer recognize that they can't have their way all of the time, and as such urge people to support these sorts of "middle ground" politicians, despite their occasional concessions to cuckoldry (even though Spencer himself got arrested in and banned from in Hungary for holding an identitarian conference so he has personal reasons to be skeptical of Orban).

    I hope that readers realize that what is now called “eastern Turkey” was Christian Armenia.

    Turks arrived there from Central Asia. Turks are not indigenous to that region.

    The Sultans brought Kurds north from their traditional homeland that is further south (where they still reside) – to dilute the Armenian population. That is how Kurds wound up that far north.

    Then in the 20th century the Turks committed genocide against Christian Assyrians, Hellenics, and Armenians. Many Kurds helped the Turks in that effort.

    The Treaty of Sevres of 1920 assigned much of what is now “eastern Turkey” to Armenia. Most people don’t know that.

    Unfortunately, it was not put into effect, and the great “hero”, Kemal Ataturk, basically annihilated whatever Christians remained.

    This is the great anti-Christian Turkey which says it belongs in the EU and which naïve, de-Christianized Europeans and Americans slobber over, and which Russians are cozying up to.

    Read More
  87. @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia has come a long way in its treatment of Muslims (especially since the Communist times – what a horror).
     
    So, now let's talk about how Saudi Arabia will come a long way in treatment of Christians. No, wait, owning a Bible or being a Christian there often means a death sentence. What a horror...

    http://www.israellycool.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/Saudi-Arabia-apartheid-road-sign-to-Mecca-non-Muslims.jpg

    Hey Smoothie,

    Asking the wrong guy; I’m a Hanafi…in our school – the relied upon fatwa states – non-Muslims can even enter the sacred precincts and the sacred mosques of Makkah and Madinah:

    http://seekershub.org/ans-blog/2010/10/20/are-non-muslims-allowed-to-enter-mecca-and-the-sacred-mosque-haram/

    You can ask the British why they helped kick out the staunchly Hanafi Ottomans and install the current Wahhabi state.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Things still could've turned out well after WWI: the Allies betrayal of the Hashemites was odious even for that era. Faisal wasn't even opposed to Jewish immigration, he just didn't want partition. I've met several Jordanian Christians who had only good things to say about the dynasty.
  88. @Marcus
    The richest man in Russia is a Muslim and a friend of Putin
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alisher_Usmanov

    I’m not the accountant of any of them, but according to Bloomberg, Blavatnik, Potanin, Mikhelson, Vekselberg, Mordashov and Fridman are all richer than Usmanov.

    Read More
  89. @Avery
    {(including an apology, no less).}

    Actually, there was no 'apology'.
    Turks themselves announced that it was not an apology.
    People who know the Turkish language say the expression Erdogan used in his letter to Putin was roughly equivalent to "...let bygones, be bygones....."

    And the non-apology was to the families of the killed and murdered pilots, not to the Russian state.
    Also, there was no compensation, as Putin had demanded after the shootdown for normalizing relations.

    Nevertheless, for some reason or another Putin grabbed at the straw and folded.
    He must have his reasons.

    Since Putin does not understand Turkish, the letter Putin read must have been one written in Russian, not the one written in Turkish you seem to know so much about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {Since Putin does not understand Turkish, the letter Putin read must have been one written in Russian.....}

    I don't have any inside info of course, but it's not like his staff handed him a Russian translation letter and Putin made his decision based on that. You just don't do that for something that important. Moscow has excellent Turkologists and language experts since Soviet times. The language experts know all the nuanced meanings of a given foreign word.

    My guess is that Putin team sat down, with a couple of KGB/FSB Turkish language experts and they parsed every word. And Erdogan had done the same, of course: write something - with team - that would potentially be acceptable to Putin, but stop well short of a formal apology.

    Putin knew exactly what Erdogan had written, word for word.
    But, like I said before, for reasons that are beyond my comprehension, Putin just grabbed onto what little Erdogan had thrown his way and ran with it.
  90. @Avery
    {(including an apology, no less).}

    Actually, there was no 'apology'.
    Turks themselves announced that it was not an apology.
    People who know the Turkish language say the expression Erdogan used in his letter to Putin was roughly equivalent to "...let bygones, be bygones....."

    And the non-apology was to the families of the killed and murdered pilots, not to the Russian state.
    Also, there was no compensation, as Putin had demanded after the shootdown for normalizing relations.

    Nevertheless, for some reason or another Putin grabbed at the straw and folded.
    He must have his reasons.

    Putin and his team are making more and more serious mistakes of late. In February, Putin stopped the joint Russo-Syrian advance against the jihadis just as they were on the verge of being crushed and the surviving ones chased back into Turkey, for the sake of “talks with our partners” to “find a diplomatic solution in which noone will lose”! The result, several months later: Neither peace nor victory, the war grinding on brutally on the ground with many thousands more Syrian soldiers and civilians dead, the jihadis reinvigorated, replenished and on the attack again.

    What is the reason? Simple naivete? A sort of psychological collapse brought on by the torrents of opprobrium and criticism heaped on him? Creeping senility? I don’t know… But it’s more and more starting to look like a change of guard is becoming necessary in Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Putin likewise prevented a full exploitation of Debaltsevo, and taking undefended Mariupol.

    https://twitter.com/UnkawaiiPigDog/status/709798244893782016
    , @Avery
    {But it’s more and more starting to look like a change of guard is becoming necessary in Russia.}

    One of traditional weaknesses of Russia since the times of Tsars has been just that: rule by one person. A good Tsar comes along, and does a lot of good work. Then a lousy one comes along and undoes pretty much all of it, and nobody can stop him.

    Same in USSR. How could they allow one man, Gorbachev, to willy-nilly dismantle it. USSR could not continue to exist in its form, but could be wound down in an orderly fashion. Most of Russia's problems today are because of Gorbachev's incompetence. For example, if it was done in an orderly fashion, Crimea would have been returned to Russia before the breakup and Eastern Ukraine attached to Russia, without any bloodshed.

    The same problem exists now. Putin is a smart man, well prepared, sharp mind, but what happens after his term ends? What if Russians elect another drunkard like Yeltsin?
    How could a country like Russia allow one man, Yeltsin, a lousy "Tsar", to almost bring Russia to the brink of collapse?

    Western countries don't have that problem. No matter who is PM, or Pres, nothing changes much. Doesn't really matter who the leader is, because there is a gelled system in place that assures continuity. Nobody like Yelstin or Gorbachev would be allowed to do what they did here in the US, for example.

    {A sort of psychological collapse brought on by the torrents of opprobrium and criticism heaped on him}

    Possible, and another weakness of one-man rule. Easy to target and demonize one person.
    And another advantage West has: nobody cares if you demonize Obama, Cameron, Hollande,....
    They are pretty much nobodies: a System runs the country. There is no target.

    Chinese also have figured it out: their selected leader is essentially a colorless bureaucrat. The Party runs China in an orderly fashion. If Xi Jinping drops dead tomorrow from heart attack, nothing will change in China. If Putin has a stroke, nobody knows what will happen to Russia.

    , @Mitleser

    Putin and his team are making more and more serious mistakes of late.
     
    BS, Putin and his team make serious mistakes all the time.
    Remember how US-expansion was supported by Russia or how the Georgian president who did later to attack Russian soldiers was accepted by Russia.

    They did not get worse in the last years.
  91. @Parbes
    Putin and his team are making more and more serious mistakes of late. In February, Putin stopped the joint Russo-Syrian advance against the jihadis just as they were on the verge of being crushed and the surviving ones chased back into Turkey, for the sake of "talks with our partners" to "find a diplomatic solution in which noone will lose"! The result, several months later: Neither peace nor victory, the war grinding on brutally on the ground with many thousands more Syrian soldiers and civilians dead, the jihadis reinvigorated, replenished and on the attack again.

    What is the reason? Simple naivete? A sort of psychological collapse brought on by the torrents of opprobrium and criticism heaped on him? Creeping senility? I don't know... But it's more and more starting to look like a change of guard is becoming necessary in Russia.

    Putin likewise prevented a full exploitation of Debaltsevo, and taking undefended Mariupol.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    I agree completely...
    , @Hail

    Putin likewise prevented a full exploitation of Debaltsevo, and taking undefended Mariupol.
     
    If so, why?
  92. @Parbes
    Putin and his team are making more and more serious mistakes of late. In February, Putin stopped the joint Russo-Syrian advance against the jihadis just as they were on the verge of being crushed and the surviving ones chased back into Turkey, for the sake of "talks with our partners" to "find a diplomatic solution in which noone will lose"! The result, several months later: Neither peace nor victory, the war grinding on brutally on the ground with many thousands more Syrian soldiers and civilians dead, the jihadis reinvigorated, replenished and on the attack again.

    What is the reason? Simple naivete? A sort of psychological collapse brought on by the torrents of opprobrium and criticism heaped on him? Creeping senility? I don't know... But it's more and more starting to look like a change of guard is becoming necessary in Russia.

    {But it’s more and more starting to look like a change of guard is becoming necessary in Russia.}

    One of traditional weaknesses of Russia since the times of Tsars has been just that: rule by one person. A good Tsar comes along, and does a lot of good work. Then a lousy one comes along and undoes pretty much all of it, and nobody can stop him.

    Same in USSR. How could they allow one man, Gorbachev, to willy-nilly dismantle it. USSR could not continue to exist in its form, but could be wound down in an orderly fashion. Most of Russia’s problems today are because of Gorbachev’s incompetence. For example, if it was done in an orderly fashion, Crimea would have been returned to Russia before the breakup and Eastern Ukraine attached to Russia, without any bloodshed.

    The same problem exists now. Putin is a smart man, well prepared, sharp mind, but what happens after his term ends? What if Russians elect another drunkard like Yeltsin?
    How could a country like Russia allow one man, Yeltsin, a lousy “Tsar”, to almost bring Russia to the brink of collapse?

    Western countries don’t have that problem. No matter who is PM, or Pres, nothing changes much. Doesn’t really matter who the leader is, because there is a gelled system in place that assures continuity. Nobody like Yelstin or Gorbachev would be allowed to do what they did here in the US, for example.

    {A sort of psychological collapse brought on by the torrents of opprobrium and criticism heaped on him}

    Possible, and another weakness of one-man rule. Easy to target and demonize one person.
    And another advantage West has: nobody cares if you demonize Obama, Cameron, Hollande,….
    They are pretty much nobodies: a System runs the country. There is no target.

    Chinese also have figured it out: their selected leader is essentially a colorless bureaucrat. The Party runs China in an orderly fashion. If Xi Jinping drops dead tomorrow from heart attack, nothing will change in China. If Putin has a stroke, nobody knows what will happen to Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser

    Same in USSR. How could they allow one man, Gorbachev, to willy-nilly dismantle it.
     
    Gorbachev did not dismantle the USSR, the late ruling Soviet class did.

    a System runs the country
     
    Same with Russia.

    If Putin has a stroke, nobody knows what will happen to Russia.
     
    Nothing will change because the system is already stabilized.
  93. @5371
    Since Putin does not understand Turkish, the letter Putin read must have been one written in Russian, not the one written in Turkish you seem to know so much about.

    {Since Putin does not understand Turkish, the letter Putin read must have been one written in Russian…..}

    I don’t have any inside info of course, but it’s not like his staff handed him a Russian translation letter and Putin made his decision based on that. You just don’t do that for something that important. Moscow has excellent Turkologists and language experts since Soviet times. The language experts know all the nuanced meanings of a given foreign word.

    My guess is that Putin team sat down, with a couple of KGB/FSB Turkish language experts and they parsed every word. And Erdogan had done the same, of course: write something – with team – that would potentially be acceptable to Putin, but stop well short of a formal apology.

    Putin knew exactly what Erdogan had written, word for word.
    But, like I said before, for reasons that are beyond my comprehension, Putin just grabbed onto what little Erdogan had thrown his way and ran with it.

    Read More
  94. @Anatoly Karlin
    Kek.

    Eskaton does have a very good point, contra Smoothie. Recall which country had the lowest score in the last PISA survey?

    Kyrgyzstan.

    And that's actually one of the better Central Asian countries.

    Other psychometric assessments have found that the difference between C. Asian and Russian IQs is of the same order as the B-W Gap in the US.

    Hopefully at least some significant part of it is due to environmental factors that will fade away with time (in particular Central Asian countries have been slow to start iodizing salt), so the IQ gap will likely shrink to something more resembling European/Muslim or White American/Hispanic levels, but OTOH I am skeptical about the longterm prospects of controlling Islamism.

    They are starting to produce some slick propaganda: http://orda1313.info/ (Islamist Eurasian version of Sputnik i Pogrom)

    That Orda thing reeks of Langley VA.

    Read More
  95. @Parbes
    Putin and his team are making more and more serious mistakes of late. In February, Putin stopped the joint Russo-Syrian advance against the jihadis just as they were on the verge of being crushed and the surviving ones chased back into Turkey, for the sake of "talks with our partners" to "find a diplomatic solution in which noone will lose"! The result, several months later: Neither peace nor victory, the war grinding on brutally on the ground with many thousands more Syrian soldiers and civilians dead, the jihadis reinvigorated, replenished and on the attack again.

    What is the reason? Simple naivete? A sort of psychological collapse brought on by the torrents of opprobrium and criticism heaped on him? Creeping senility? I don't know... But it's more and more starting to look like a change of guard is becoming necessary in Russia.

    Putin and his team are making more and more serious mistakes of late.

    BS, Putin and his team make serious mistakes all the time.
    Remember how US-expansion was supported by Russia or how the Georgian president who did later to attack Russian soldiers was accepted by Russia.

    They did not get worse in the last years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    BS is yours; I agree that he has made mistakes before, but his mistakes seem to be getting more frequent and more egregious lately.
  96. @Avery
    {But it’s more and more starting to look like a change of guard is becoming necessary in Russia.}

    One of traditional weaknesses of Russia since the times of Tsars has been just that: rule by one person. A good Tsar comes along, and does a lot of good work. Then a lousy one comes along and undoes pretty much all of it, and nobody can stop him.

    Same in USSR. How could they allow one man, Gorbachev, to willy-nilly dismantle it. USSR could not continue to exist in its form, but could be wound down in an orderly fashion. Most of Russia's problems today are because of Gorbachev's incompetence. For example, if it was done in an orderly fashion, Crimea would have been returned to Russia before the breakup and Eastern Ukraine attached to Russia, without any bloodshed.

    The same problem exists now. Putin is a smart man, well prepared, sharp mind, but what happens after his term ends? What if Russians elect another drunkard like Yeltsin?
    How could a country like Russia allow one man, Yeltsin, a lousy "Tsar", to almost bring Russia to the brink of collapse?

    Western countries don't have that problem. No matter who is PM, or Pres, nothing changes much. Doesn't really matter who the leader is, because there is a gelled system in place that assures continuity. Nobody like Yelstin or Gorbachev would be allowed to do what they did here in the US, for example.

    {A sort of psychological collapse brought on by the torrents of opprobrium and criticism heaped on him}

    Possible, and another weakness of one-man rule. Easy to target and demonize one person.
    And another advantage West has: nobody cares if you demonize Obama, Cameron, Hollande,....
    They are pretty much nobodies: a System runs the country. There is no target.

    Chinese also have figured it out: their selected leader is essentially a colorless bureaucrat. The Party runs China in an orderly fashion. If Xi Jinping drops dead tomorrow from heart attack, nothing will change in China. If Putin has a stroke, nobody knows what will happen to Russia.

    Same in USSR. How could they allow one man, Gorbachev, to willy-nilly dismantle it.

    Gorbachev did not dismantle the USSR, the late ruling Soviet class did.

    a System runs the country

    Same with Russia.

    If Putin has a stroke, nobody knows what will happen to Russia.

    Nothing will change because the system is already stabilized.

    Read More
  97. @Anatoly Karlin
    Putin likewise prevented a full exploitation of Debaltsevo, and taking undefended Mariupol.

    https://twitter.com/UnkawaiiPigDog/status/709798244893782016

    I agree completely…

    Read More
  98. @Mitleser

    Putin and his team are making more and more serious mistakes of late.
     
    BS, Putin and his team make serious mistakes all the time.
    Remember how US-expansion was supported by Russia or how the Georgian president who did later to attack Russian soldiers was accepted by Russia.

    They did not get worse in the last years.

    BS is yours; I agree that he has made mistakes before, but his mistakes seem to be getting more frequent and more egregious lately.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    You showed nothing that backs your claim that they are "getting more frequent and more egregious lately".

    Syria 2016 is barely an irreversible mistake like Libya 2011.

  99. @Parbes
    BS is yours; I agree that he has made mistakes before, but his mistakes seem to be getting more frequent and more egregious lately.

    You showed nothing that backs your claim that they are “getting more frequent and more egregious lately”.

    Syria 2016 is barely an irreversible mistake like Libya 2011.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    "You showed nothing that backs your claim that they are “getting more frequent and more egregious lately”

    That's because this is an online blog comments section, not a full-length current affairs article or a Wikipedia page; and I'm expecting you to be already CONVERSANT with things in recent history. If it will help your edification, though, here is a brief breakdown of serious mistakes, off the top of my head, just in the 2013-to-present-day period:

    1. 2013 - Failure to anticipate or preempt the textbook U.S.-backed "color revolution" illegal Maidan coup in Russia's crucial underbelly Ukraine, against a democratically elected leader friendly with Russia, on account of "being distracted by the Sochi Olympics" and taking eyes off the ball as the U.S. was preparing the coup. Then being "taken aback" and standing back doing nothing but wringing hands as the violent coup was happening, with Neo-Nazis and everything. Disastrous consequences still ongoing.

    2. 2014-2015 - Failing to take over, or give adequate support to, the gravely endangered Russian sections of Eastern Ukraine and Donetsk; then "snatching truces out of the jaws of victory" every time they were close to actually winning on the battlefield - Debaltsevo, Mariupol etc., as A. Karlin said. Disaster still ongoing daily; final result unknown.

    3. February 2016 - Forcing a halt to very successful Russo-Syrian military operations against U.S./Turkish/Saudi-backed jihadis, on the verge of a major victory - see my post above. Disaster still ongoing daily; final result unknown.

    4. July 2016 - Helping the terror-supporting Islamist tyranny regime of Erdogan, an archenemy of Russia, Syria and Europe, survive a coup attempt (if they really did, that is); and starting a totally fake, silly "rapprochement" with it - on the ludicrous fantasy-based premise that Erdogan is an Ally Of Russia Now, who is Out Of The U.S. Orbit, and will become a member of Russia's so-called Big Eurasian Axis. Outcome impossible to predict; but potentially devastatingly bad consequences, especially if Erdogan starts to pursue Neo-Ottoman aspirations in a seriously aggressive manner, or backstabs Russia again at a very inopportune moment.

    "Syria 2016 is barely an irreversible mistake like Libya 2011."

    Libya 2011 was more a "mistake" of the Medvedev crew, than Putin per se. Also, the outcome of the Syria imbroglio is still unknown; and if it turns out to be a loss, it will be far worse than Libya 2011, since Syria is a much more important place than Libya.

    Besides - 2011 is not so ancient that it can't be called "lately", is it?
  100. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Kek.

    Eskaton does have a very good point, contra Smoothie. Recall which country had the lowest score in the last PISA survey?

    Kyrgyzstan.

    And that's actually one of the better Central Asian countries.

    Other psychometric assessments have found that the difference between C. Asian and Russian IQs is of the same order as the B-W Gap in the US.

    Hopefully at least some significant part of it is due to environmental factors that will fade away with time (in particular Central Asian countries have been slow to start iodizing salt), so the IQ gap will likely shrink to something more resembling European/Muslim or White American/Hispanic levels, but OTOH I am skeptical about the longterm prospects of controlling Islamism.

    They are starting to produce some slick propaganda: http://orda1313.info/ (Islamist Eurasian version of Sputnik i Pogrom)

    so the IQ gap will likely shrink to something more resembling European/Muslim or White American/Hispanic levels

    You aren’t saying this kind of gap leads to no troubles, are you? Only Reed, and for the factious motives we know, has been saying that.

    The cockneys’ complaints are similar to those of Archie Bunker in 1970s America—that immigrants are permanently changing the community and country for the worse. (The Bunker character was in fact based on the cockney Alf Garnett of the popular sitcom Til Death Us Do Part, which aired on the BBC from 1965 to 1975.) In 2013, 62 percent of Britons thought an increasing Muslim populace in the U.K. would “weaken” national identity, up from 48 percent a decade earlier. Sixty-six percent of non-degreed Britons (including non-whites) in 2011 felt immigration had a negative effect economically, up from 47 percent in 2002. Sixty-two percent of the same group felt a negative cultural effect from immigration, up from 42 percent nine years earlier.
    While the Archie Bunkers of the East End may be a dying breed, the views of British Muslims are growing more extreme. A 2016 survey found that British Muslims like the ones moving into the East End were significantly less tolerant and less willing to assimilate than were previous generations of Muslim immigrants. Some have found a “generation gap” among British Muslims, with earlier immigrant waves and second-generation British Muslims diverging in their views. Later arrivals and British-born children of Muslim immigrants hold more strident religious and less socially tolerant views than their forbearers. Analysis of the U.K.’s 2011 Census by the Muslim Council of Britain shows that British Muslims are far less likely to be employed full-time, more likely to be caregivers, and more likely to live in areas of concentrated poverty.”

    Read More
  101. @Parbes
    Look here, fool, those were not "average citizens"; most of those were Erdogan-supporting Islamist fanatics, trained militants and thugs, many summoned directly from mosques - the Turkish-Islamist version of "brownshirts". There was not a single female among them, which tells you how much "average citizens" they were - if they were average people, you'd have expected a significant proportion of them to be women. The overwhelming majority of the "average citizens" of Turkey (including virtually all of the 50+% of the population that opposes Erdogan and his AKP party) STAYED AT HOME during the coup attempt - due both to the coup spokesmen warning people on TV to stay home because a general curfew had been declared (a bad move, in retrospect, since it meant that the only people on the streets would be the hardened pro-Erdogan paramilitary fanatics prepared to disregard the warning, who could then be misrepresented to gullible outsiders as "ordinary civilians fighting to save democracy from a military coup"), and also to the fact that most "average citizens" are normal people accustomed to leading normal lives, i.e., not ready and willing to rush out into the streets at a moment's notice, right into the midst of savage violence, to risk life and limb by getting shot, stabbed or beaten to a pulp.

    Next time, try to understand your subject matter a little bit better, before you go opining about events in far-off lands which you know very little of. It will make you a better person, trust me.

    Holy shit. No need for the hostility. Try to not treat people like shit for not thinking exactly like you or not knowing what you think you know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    Thanks a lot for the patronization. But foolish positions and opinions need to be called out for what they are: Foolish. If you're so thin-skinned that you can't even take a light insult against your foolish statements in stride on a political blog dealing with very important current world affairs, then maybe you should be commenting on one of the "lifestyle" magazines - or better yet, on a school newspaper.
  102. @gwynedd1
    Capitalism is a graduated aristocracy. Although it depends on the level of wealth preservation. In the ideal circumstance like ancient Athens , there was little in the way of forming natural monopolies. Sparta had good farmland and could point spears at the Helots. Such estates allowed for hereditary aristocracies. Eventually it was gold that sunk Athens, which in turn ,according to Aegis, finished off the Ephorate. Japan also followed the same pattern. Eventually the Yen became as good as gold. Still Japan is inherently better off in that the value is in its people, not the territory it occupies.

    so does that mean the usa is no longer a capitalistic society – graduate classes/segments? we have a few who have almost all the wealth/power and bottom feeders makes up the rest. mini monopolies every where.

    Read More
  103. @Mitleser
    You showed nothing that backs your claim that they are "getting more frequent and more egregious lately".

    Syria 2016 is barely an irreversible mistake like Libya 2011.

    “You showed nothing that backs your claim that they are “getting more frequent and more egregious lately”

    That’s because this is an online blog comments section, not a full-length current affairs article or a Wikipedia page; and I’m expecting you to be already CONVERSANT with things in recent history. If it will help your edification, though, here is a brief breakdown of serious mistakes, off the top of my head, just in the 2013-to-present-day period:

    1. 2013 – Failure to anticipate or preempt the textbook U.S.-backed “color revolution” illegal Maidan coup in Russia’s crucial underbelly Ukraine, against a democratically elected leader friendly with Russia, on account of “being distracted by the Sochi Olympics” and taking eyes off the ball as the U.S. was preparing the coup. Then being “taken aback” and standing back doing nothing but wringing hands as the violent coup was happening, with Neo-Nazis and everything. Disastrous consequences still ongoing.

    2. 2014-2015 – Failing to take over, or give adequate support to, the gravely endangered Russian sections of Eastern Ukraine and Donetsk; then “snatching truces out of the jaws of victory” every time they were close to actually winning on the battlefield – Debaltsevo, Mariupol etc., as A. Karlin said. Disaster still ongoing daily; final result unknown.

    3. February 2016 – Forcing a halt to very successful Russo-Syrian military operations against U.S./Turkish/Saudi-backed jihadis, on the verge of a major victory – see my post above. Disaster still ongoing daily; final result unknown.

    4. July 2016 – Helping the terror-supporting Islamist tyranny regime of Erdogan, an archenemy of Russia, Syria and Europe, survive a coup attempt (if they really did, that is); and starting a totally fake, silly “rapprochement” with it – on the ludicrous fantasy-based premise that Erdogan is an Ally Of Russia Now, who is Out Of The U.S. Orbit, and will become a member of Russia’s so-called Big Eurasian Axis. Outcome impossible to predict; but potentially devastatingly bad consequences, especially if Erdogan starts to pursue Neo-Ottoman aspirations in a seriously aggressive manner, or backstabs Russia again at a very inopportune moment.

    “Syria 2016 is barely an irreversible mistake like Libya 2011.”

    Libya 2011 was more a “mistake” of the Medvedev crew, than Putin per se. Also, the outcome of the Syria imbroglio is still unknown; and if it turns out to be a loss, it will be far worse than Libya 2011, since Syria is a much more important place than Libya.

    Besides – 2011 is not so ancient that it can’t be called “lately”, is it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser

    I’m expecting you to be already CONVERSANT with things in recent history
     
    Different people interpretate history differently.

    1. 2013 – Failure to anticipate or preempt the textbook U.S.-backed “color revolution” illegal Maidan coup in Russia’s crucial underbelly Ukraine, against a democratically elected leader friendly with Russia, on account of “being distracted by the Sochi Olympics” and taking eyes off the ball as the U.S. was preparing the coup. Then being “taken aback” and standing back doing nothing but wringing hands as the violent coup was happening, with Neo-Nazis and everything.
     
    Maidan coup was in 2014 and it was Yanuk's job to prevent it.
    There was not much Russia could do as long as Yanuk was undecisive.

    2. 2014-2015 – Failing to take over, or give adequate support to, the gravely endangered Russian sections of Eastern Ukraine and Donetsk; then “snatching truces out of the jaws of victory” every time they were close to actually winning on the battlefield – Debaltsevo, Mariupol
     
    Does only apply to Mariupol.
    Debaltsevo was regained (yes, the UAF was quite weakened, but so was the NAF).
    The Donbass rebels were preserved in 2014.
    I am not happy with the outcome either and wish they would liberate the whole Donbass, but considering that it was not certain that they would save anything, I do not consider it that egregious.

    3. February 2016 – Forcing a halt to very successful Russo-Syrian military operations against U.S./Turkish/Saudi-backed jihadis, on the verge of a major victory
     
    There were major victories at that time, the re-establishment of the connection with the Shia enclaves in North Aleppo and cutting off the Syrian rebels in North Aleppo from the rest plus the end of most rebel-controlled Latakia.

    4. July 2016 – Helping the terror-supporting Islamist tyranny regime of Erdogan, an archenemy of Russia, Syria and Europe, survive a coup attempt (if they really did, that is); and starting a totally fake, silly “rapprochement” with it – on the ludicrous fantasy-based premise that Erdogan is an Ally Of Russia Now, who is Out Of The U.S. Orbit, and will become a member of Russia’s so-called Big Eurasian Axis.
     
    Do you understand that the alternative to Erdogan is Gülen, an international islamist who lives in the USA? It was a coup organized by his supporters.
    One of the reasons why Russia intervened in Syria was the prevention of regime change.
    Why would Russia want regime change in a major trade partner that did not join the Western sanctions? Unless the new government is less anti-Russian, there is nothing to win, but more to lose.

    Outcome impossible to predict; but potentially devastatingly bad consequences, especially if Erdogan starts to pursue Neo-Ottoman aspirations in a seriously aggressive manner,
     
    Erdogan is now busy purging Gülenists.
    He has no time for Neo-Ottoman non-sense.
    The Turkish Armed Forces are weakened, the Turkish economy too.
    Western powers are getting less friendly. He won't be a threat for a while.
  104. @Talha
    Hey Smoothie,

    Asking the wrong guy; I'm a Hanafi...in our school - the relied upon fatwa states - non-Muslims can even enter the sacred precincts and the sacred mosques of Makkah and Madinah:
    http://seekershub.org/ans-blog/2010/10/20/are-non-muslims-allowed-to-enter-mecca-and-the-sacred-mosque-haram/

    You can ask the British why they helped kick out the staunchly Hanafi Ottomans and install the current Wahhabi state.

    Peace.

    Things still could’ve turned out well after WWI: the Allies betrayal of the Hashemites was odious even for that era. Faisal wasn’t even opposed to Jewish immigration, he just didn’t want partition. I’ve met several Jordanian Christians who had only good things to say about the dynasty.

    Read More
    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Marcus,

    I you had your way - ;) - and me and family had to pack our bags, I actually find some monarchies less odious than others to live under. Order of preference in the Middle East:
    Jordan (Hashemite)
    Morocco
    Oman
    Qatar or UAE (can't decide)

    Saudi actually tops the list for retiring into (do silent dhikr like the Sufis in Madinah until you keel over - hey, it worked for Imam Shamyl [ra]).

    Taking all Muslim monarchies into account; by far, the revolving elective monarchy of the Malay sultanates - aka Malaysia - is the best bet.

    Peace.

  105. @Parbes
    "You showed nothing that backs your claim that they are “getting more frequent and more egregious lately”

    That's because this is an online blog comments section, not a full-length current affairs article or a Wikipedia page; and I'm expecting you to be already CONVERSANT with things in recent history. If it will help your edification, though, here is a brief breakdown of serious mistakes, off the top of my head, just in the 2013-to-present-day period:

    1. 2013 - Failure to anticipate or preempt the textbook U.S.-backed "color revolution" illegal Maidan coup in Russia's crucial underbelly Ukraine, against a democratically elected leader friendly with Russia, on account of "being distracted by the Sochi Olympics" and taking eyes off the ball as the U.S. was preparing the coup. Then being "taken aback" and standing back doing nothing but wringing hands as the violent coup was happening, with Neo-Nazis and everything. Disastrous consequences still ongoing.

    2. 2014-2015 - Failing to take over, or give adequate support to, the gravely endangered Russian sections of Eastern Ukraine and Donetsk; then "snatching truces out of the jaws of victory" every time they were close to actually winning on the battlefield - Debaltsevo, Mariupol etc., as A. Karlin said. Disaster still ongoing daily; final result unknown.

    3. February 2016 - Forcing a halt to very successful Russo-Syrian military operations against U.S./Turkish/Saudi-backed jihadis, on the verge of a major victory - see my post above. Disaster still ongoing daily; final result unknown.

    4. July 2016 - Helping the terror-supporting Islamist tyranny regime of Erdogan, an archenemy of Russia, Syria and Europe, survive a coup attempt (if they really did, that is); and starting a totally fake, silly "rapprochement" with it - on the ludicrous fantasy-based premise that Erdogan is an Ally Of Russia Now, who is Out Of The U.S. Orbit, and will become a member of Russia's so-called Big Eurasian Axis. Outcome impossible to predict; but potentially devastatingly bad consequences, especially if Erdogan starts to pursue Neo-Ottoman aspirations in a seriously aggressive manner, or backstabs Russia again at a very inopportune moment.

    "Syria 2016 is barely an irreversible mistake like Libya 2011."

    Libya 2011 was more a "mistake" of the Medvedev crew, than Putin per se. Also, the outcome of the Syria imbroglio is still unknown; and if it turns out to be a loss, it will be far worse than Libya 2011, since Syria is a much more important place than Libya.

    Besides - 2011 is not so ancient that it can't be called "lately", is it?

    I’m expecting you to be already CONVERSANT with things in recent history

    Different people interpretate history differently.

    1. 2013 – Failure to anticipate or preempt the textbook U.S.-backed “color revolution” illegal Maidan coup in Russia’s crucial underbelly Ukraine, against a democratically elected leader friendly with Russia, on account of “being distracted by the Sochi Olympics” and taking eyes off the ball as the U.S. was preparing the coup. Then being “taken aback” and standing back doing nothing but wringing hands as the violent coup was happening, with Neo-Nazis and everything.

    Maidan coup was in 2014 and it was Yanuk’s job to prevent it.
    There was not much Russia could do as long as Yanuk was undecisive.

    2. 2014-2015 – Failing to take over, or give adequate support to, the gravely endangered Russian sections of Eastern Ukraine and Donetsk; then “snatching truces out of the jaws of victory” every time they were close to actually winning on the battlefield – Debaltsevo, Mariupol

    Does only apply to Mariupol.
    Debaltsevo was regained (yes, the UAF was quite weakened, but so was the NAF).
    The Donbass rebels were preserved in 2014.
    I am not happy with the outcome either and wish they would liberate the whole Donbass, but considering that it was not certain that they would save anything, I do not consider it that egregious.

    3. February 2016 – Forcing a halt to very successful Russo-Syrian military operations against U.S./Turkish/Saudi-backed jihadis, on the verge of a major victory

    There were major victories at that time, the re-establishment of the connection with the Shia enclaves in North Aleppo and cutting off the Syrian rebels in North Aleppo from the rest plus the end of most rebel-controlled Latakia.

    4. July 2016 – Helping the terror-supporting Islamist tyranny regime of Erdogan, an archenemy of Russia, Syria and Europe, survive a coup attempt (if they really did, that is); and starting a totally fake, silly “rapprochement” with it – on the ludicrous fantasy-based premise that Erdogan is an Ally Of Russia Now, who is Out Of The U.S. Orbit, and will become a member of Russia’s so-called Big Eurasian Axis.

    Do you understand that the alternative to Erdogan is Gülen, an international islamist who lives in the USA? It was a coup organized by his supporters.
    One of the reasons why Russia intervened in Syria was the prevention of regime change.
    Why would Russia want regime change in a major trade partner that did not join the Western sanctions? Unless the new government is less anti-Russian, there is nothing to win, but more to lose.

    Outcome impossible to predict; but potentially devastatingly bad consequences, especially if Erdogan starts to pursue Neo-Ottoman aspirations in a seriously aggressive manner,

    Erdogan is now busy purging Gülenists.
    He has no time for Neo-Ottoman non-sense.
    The Turkish Armed Forces are weakened, the Turkish economy too.
    Western powers are getting less friendly. He won’t be a threat for a while.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Parbes
    "Maidan coup was in 2014 and it was Yanuk’s job to prevent it. There was not much Russia could do as long as Yanuk was undecisive."

    Protests leading up to coup started in late 2013. (Anyway, if the coup was in 2014, it would only reinforce my statement that Putin's mistakes are getting more frequent lately.) It's ludicrous to say that "there was not much Russia could do". The U.S. was able to PREPARE and seed the coup, and see it through, right? If the U.S., an Anglo country from the other side of the globe, could do that, then Russia, right next door to Ukraine, a fellow Slavic/half Russian country with tens of millions of Russian speakers and a friendly government to boot, should have been able to detect it in time and take steps to prevent it, considering the prime importance of Ukraine to Russia. If they hadn't been asleep at the wheel, that is.

    "There were major victories at that time, the re-establishment of the connection with the Shia enclaves in North Aleppo and cutting off the Syrian rebels in North Aleppo from the rest plus the end of most rebel-controlled Latakia."

    Look, man, this is really kind of ridiculous. It is possible to argue about something endlessly without getting anywhere like this, using tendentious interpretation tactics to re-interpret everything away to fit one's own point-of-view. Those were relatively small-scale, opening-stage victories, not decisive ones. The REAL major victory would have been smashing the jihadi front completely, recovering Aleppo and liberating all of Northern, Eastern and Southern Syria, and advancing to the Turkish, Iraqi and Jordanian borders after having eliminated the bulk of the jihadi forces while watching the surviving ones flee across the border with their tails between their legs. THAT is what a major war victory looks like. The combined Russo-Syrian-Hezbollah forces, with the momentum and morale they had, were getting close to achieving just that in February 2016 - until Putin suddenly pulled the plug and forced a halt to the successful offensive for the sake of "truce talks". You don't suddenly walk away in the middle of a war when you're on the verge of winning and declare a truce in exchange for absolutely nothing substantial, allowing the enemy to regroup and reattack. Which is exactly what has happened.

    "...the alternative to Erdogan is Gülen, an international islamist who lives in the USA? It was a coup organized by his supporters."

    The claim that the coup was "organized by Gülen supporters" is the version of events put out by the Erdogan regime, without any real evidence to prove it. Why should it be taken at face value - especially when Erdogan has so much to gain by it? Has it been independently verified by any impartial objective investigation? In my opinion the coup attempt was probably organized by a coterie of desperate secular mid-level army officers. To me it's obvious that Erdogan is trying to "catch two birds with one stone" here - having defeated the attempt from the secular army officers, he wants to simultaneously eliminate the challenge to his power from the rival Islamist network, by pinning the coup attempt on "Gülenists" and put pressure on the U.S. to extradite Gülen to him, thus emerging as the sole strongman "sultan" with all power concentrated in his own regime.

    Also, who says that the "only alternative to Erdogan is Gülen" in Turkey? Why should that be so? That is just pernicious Islamist propaganda. What about the secular opposition, a secular government? Turkey already had the basic framework of a secular system in place, which Erdogan and other Islamists of his ilk have done their best to destroy all these years. Why shouldn't it be possible to go back to it?

    "Why would Russia want regime change in a major trade partner that did not join the Western sanctions? Unless the new government is less anti-Russian..."

    Erdogan is a brutal Islamist tyrant at the head of an aggressive Islamonationalist government connected to international jihadis of all stripes. HIS REGIME IS DESTROYING THE SECULAR ORDER IN TURKEY. His medium and long-term interests are diametrically opposed to those of Russia and her allies. He has shot down a Russian fighter plane (and probably had a hand in the bringing down of the Russian civilian airliner), sent tens of thousands of jihadis into Syria, supported jihadi terrorism in Russia, China and Central Asia, sent millions of Muslim migrant invaders into Europe, openly announced Neo-Ottomanist designs, and so on. The economic relations between Turkey and Russia are overwhelmingly to Turkey's, not Russia's, benefit - Turkey gets lots of Russian tourists, cheap gas from Russia, and construction business in Russian cities. None of this is really too beneficial to Russia, but it all helps shore up the Erdogan regime economically. PLUS, HE IS STILL A MEMBER OF NATO AND HIS "FALLING OUT" WITH THE U.S. IS TEMPORARY AND LARGELY FAKE. How would a new government be worse?

    "Erdogan is now busy purging Gülenists."

    Not only Gülenists - secular opposition too.

    "He has no time for Neo-Ottoman non-sense....He won’t be a threat for a while."

    How long will "a while" last, in your opinion? A few months? A year? Two years? Three? And what after that?
  106. Philip Owen [AKA "Soarintothesky"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The coup was not a surprise to anyone. Here is the US think tank AEI predicting it back in March.

    https://www.aei.org/publication/could-there-be-a-coup-in-turkey/

    Other writers predicted that it would be a Keamlist coup, which is permitted by the constitution insofar as the army is regarded as the protector of secularism. If an American think tank was talking a coup then Erdogan presumably had it heavily infiltrated already. Rather than a complete set up, it was an ineffectual Kemalist gesture allowed to proceed in order to give Erdogan an excuse to target the Gulenists.

    Turkey’s use to NATO is no longer Incirlik. Developments in Eastern Europe have made that obsolete. Turkey’s control of the Bosporus is the remaining item of interest. NATO controlling the Bosporous makes Russia’s error over Crimea pointless as well as politically and economically expensive. Not that surface ships add up to much anyway.

    A US inspired coup would have been supported by a large PR campaign with an identified set of injustices and a call for democracy. This didn’t happen. Perhaps this was a group of idealistic officers defending Kemalist ideals and being encouraged by Erdogan’s Agents Provacteur. No outsiders needed (except for the conspiracy minded).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser

    Not that surface ships add up to much anyway.
     
    Maybe you should tell that the Syrian Express, smartass.
  107. @Parbes
    Look here, fool, those were not "average citizens"; most of those were Erdogan-supporting Islamist fanatics, trained militants and thugs, many summoned directly from mosques - the Turkish-Islamist version of "brownshirts". There was not a single female among them, which tells you how much "average citizens" they were - if they were average people, you'd have expected a significant proportion of them to be women. The overwhelming majority of the "average citizens" of Turkey (including virtually all of the 50+% of the population that opposes Erdogan and his AKP party) STAYED AT HOME during the coup attempt - due both to the coup spokesmen warning people on TV to stay home because a general curfew had been declared (a bad move, in retrospect, since it meant that the only people on the streets would be the hardened pro-Erdogan paramilitary fanatics prepared to disregard the warning, who could then be misrepresented to gullible outsiders as "ordinary civilians fighting to save democracy from a military coup"), and also to the fact that most "average citizens" are normal people accustomed to leading normal lives, i.e., not ready and willing to rush out into the streets at a moment's notice, right into the midst of savage violence, to risk life and limb by getting shot, stabbed or beaten to a pulp.

    Next time, try to understand your subject matter a little bit better, before you go opining about events in far-off lands which you know very little of. It will make you a better person, trust me.

    Conservative Turks have traditional sex roles. So of course women aren’t out and about doing this sort of thing raising up children and all the usual feminine roles.

    You will find this in any civilization in history. In a patriarchal society when revolts are staged they are done entirely by men.

    Anything to do with politics are done purely by men in a patriarchal setting like the conservative Turks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {Conservative Turks have traditional sex roles. So of course women aren’t out and about doing this sort of thing raising up children and all the usual feminine roles.}

    Nonsense.
    You are making things up out of thin air.

    About half the Gezi protesters in 2013 were women.
    There was a lot of violence: two dozen were killed, 1000s injured, 1000s arrested.

    Here is one "traditional sex roles" woman lying, injured.
    https://wittymisfitsinc.wordpress.com/2013/06/01/turkish-spring-turkish-citizens-protest-against-fascism-an-islamic-government-and-police-brutality/turkey-protest-photos-occupy-gezi-taksim-gezi-park-34/

    Here is another "traditional sex roles" woman: the famous 'lady in red'.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gezi_Park_protests#/media/File:2013_protests_in_Turkey_,_Woman_in_Red_image.jpeg
  108. @Philip Owen


    The coup was not a surprise to anyone. Here is the US think tank AEI predicting it back in March.

    https://www.aei.org/publication/could-there-be-a-coup-in-turkey/

    Other writers predicted that it would be a Keamlist coup, which is permitted by the constitution insofar as the army is regarded as the protector of secularism. If an American think tank was talking a coup then Erdogan presumably had it heavily infiltrated already. Rather than a complete set up, it was an ineffectual Kemalist gesture allowed to proceed in order to give Erdogan an excuse to target the Gulenists.

    Turkey's use to NATO is no longer Incirlik. Developments in Eastern Europe have made that obsolete. Turkey's control of the Bosporus is the remaining item of interest. NATO controlling the Bosporous makes Russia's error over Crimea pointless as well as politically and economically expensive. Not that surface ships add up to much anyway.

    A US inspired coup would have been supported by a large PR campaign with an identified set of injustices and a call for democracy. This didn't happen. Perhaps this was a group of idealistic officers defending Kemalist ideals and being encouraged by Erdogan's Agents Provacteur. No outsiders needed (except for the conspiracy minded).

    Not that surface ships add up to much anyway.

    Maybe you should tell that the Syrian Express, smartass.

    Read More
  109. @jay
    Conservative Turks have traditional sex roles. So of course women aren't out and about doing this sort of thing raising up children and all the usual feminine roles.

    You will find this in any civilization in history. In a patriarchal society when revolts are staged they are done entirely by men.

    Anything to do with politics are done purely by men in a patriarchal setting like the conservative Turks.

    {Conservative Turks have traditional sex roles. So of course women aren’t out and about doing this sort of thing raising up children and all the usual feminine roles.}

    Nonsense.
    You are making things up out of thin air.

    About half the Gezi protesters in 2013 were women.
    There was a lot of violence: two dozen were killed, 1000s injured, 1000s arrested.

    Here is one “traditional sex roles” woman lying, injured.

    https://wittymisfitsinc.wordpress.com/2013/06/01/turkish-spring-turkish-citizens-protest-against-fascism-an-islamic-government-and-police-brutality/turkey-protest-photos-occupy-gezi-taksim-gezi-park-34/

    Here is another “traditional sex roles” woman: the famous ‘lady in red’.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gezi_Park_protests#/media/File:2013_protests_in_Turkey_,_Woman_in_Red_image.jpeg

    Read More
  110. @Mitleser

    I’m expecting you to be already CONVERSANT with things in recent history
     
    Different people interpretate history differently.

    1. 2013 – Failure to anticipate or preempt the textbook U.S.-backed “color revolution” illegal Maidan coup in Russia’s crucial underbelly Ukraine, against a democratically elected leader friendly with Russia, on account of “being distracted by the Sochi Olympics” and taking eyes off the ball as the U.S. was preparing the coup. Then being “taken aback” and standing back doing nothing but wringing hands as the violent coup was happening, with Neo-Nazis and everything.
     
    Maidan coup was in 2014 and it was Yanuk's job to prevent it.
    There was not much Russia could do as long as Yanuk was undecisive.

    2. 2014-2015 – Failing to take over, or give adequate support to, the gravely endangered Russian sections of Eastern Ukraine and Donetsk; then “snatching truces out of the jaws of victory” every time they were close to actually winning on the battlefield – Debaltsevo, Mariupol
     
    Does only apply to Mariupol.
    Debaltsevo was regained (yes, the UAF was quite weakened, but so was the NAF).
    The Donbass rebels were preserved in 2014.
    I am not happy with the outcome either and wish they would liberate the whole Donbass, but considering that it was not certain that they would save anything, I do not consider it that egregious.

    3. February 2016 – Forcing a halt to very successful Russo-Syrian military operations against U.S./Turkish/Saudi-backed jihadis, on the verge of a major victory
     
    There were major victories at that time, the re-establishment of the connection with the Shia enclaves in North Aleppo and cutting off the Syrian rebels in North Aleppo from the rest plus the end of most rebel-controlled Latakia.

    4. July 2016 – Helping the terror-supporting Islamist tyranny regime of Erdogan, an archenemy of Russia, Syria and Europe, survive a coup attempt (if they really did, that is); and starting a totally fake, silly “rapprochement” with it – on the ludicrous fantasy-based premise that Erdogan is an Ally Of Russia Now, who is Out Of The U.S. Orbit, and will become a member of Russia’s so-called Big Eurasian Axis.
     
    Do you understand that the alternative to Erdogan is Gülen, an international islamist who lives in the USA? It was a coup organized by his supporters.
    One of the reasons why Russia intervened in Syria was the prevention of regime change.
    Why would Russia want regime change in a major trade partner that did not join the Western sanctions? Unless the new government is less anti-Russian, there is nothing to win, but more to lose.

    Outcome impossible to predict; but potentially devastatingly bad consequences, especially if Erdogan starts to pursue Neo-Ottoman aspirations in a seriously aggressive manner,
     
    Erdogan is now busy purging Gülenists.
    He has no time for Neo-Ottoman non-sense.
    The Turkish Armed Forces are weakened, the Turkish economy too.
    Western powers are getting less friendly. He won't be a threat for a while.

    “Maidan coup was in 2014 and it was Yanuk’s job to prevent it. There was not much Russia could do as long as Yanuk was undecisive.”

    Protests leading up to coup started in late 2013. (Anyway, if the coup was in 2014, it would only reinforce my statement that Putin’s mistakes are getting more frequent lately.) It’s ludicrous to say that “there was not much Russia could do”. The U.S. was able to PREPARE and seed the coup, and see it through, right? If the U.S., an Anglo country from the other side of the globe, could do that, then Russia, right next door to Ukraine, a fellow Slavic/half Russian country with tens of millions of Russian speakers and a friendly government to boot, should have been able to detect it in time and take steps to prevent it, considering the prime importance of Ukraine to Russia. If they hadn’t been asleep at the wheel, that is.

    “There were major victories at that time, the re-establishment of the connection with the Shia enclaves in North Aleppo and cutting off the Syrian rebels in North Aleppo from the rest plus the end of most rebel-controlled Latakia.”

    Look, man, this is really kind of ridiculous. It is possible to argue about something endlessly without getting anywhere like this, using tendentious interpretation tactics to re-interpret everything away to fit one’s own point-of-view. Those were relatively small-scale, opening-stage victories, not decisive ones. The REAL major victory would have been smashing the jihadi front completely, recovering Aleppo and liberating all of Northern, Eastern and Southern Syria, and advancing to the Turkish, Iraqi and Jordanian borders after having eliminated the bulk of the jihadi forces while watching the surviving ones flee across the border with their tails between their legs. THAT is what a major war victory looks like. The combined Russo-Syrian-Hezbollah forces, with the momentum and morale they had, were getting close to achieving just that in February 2016 – until Putin suddenly pulled the plug and forced a halt to the successful offensive for the sake of “truce talks”. You don’t suddenly walk away in the middle of a war when you’re on the verge of winning and declare a truce in exchange for absolutely nothing substantial, allowing the enemy to regroup and reattack. Which is exactly what has happened.

    “…the alternative to Erdogan is Gülen, an international islamist who lives in the USA? It was a coup organized by his supporters.”

    The claim that the coup was “organized by Gülen supporters” is the version of events put out by the Erdogan regime, without any real evidence to prove it. Why should it be taken at face value – especially when Erdogan has so much to gain by it? Has it been independently verified by any impartial objective investigation? In my opinion the coup attempt was probably organized by a coterie of desperate secular mid-level army officers. To me it’s obvious that Erdogan is trying to “catch two birds with one stone” here – having defeated the attempt from the secular army officers, he wants to simultaneously eliminate the challenge to his power from the rival Islamist network, by pinning the coup attempt on “Gülenists” and put pressure on the U.S. to extradite Gülen to him, thus emerging as the sole strongman “sultan” with all power concentrated in his own regime.

    Also, who says that the “only alternative to Erdogan is Gülen” in Turkey? Why should that be so? That is just pernicious Islamist propaganda. What about the secular opposition, a secular government? Turkey already had the basic framework of a secular system in place, which Erdogan and other Islamists of his ilk have done their best to destroy all these years. Why shouldn’t it be possible to go back to it?

    “Why would Russia want regime change in a major trade partner that did not join the Western sanctions? Unless the new government is less anti-Russian…”

    Erdogan is a brutal Islamist tyrant at the head of an aggressive Islamonationalist government connected to international jihadis of all stripes. HIS REGIME IS DESTROYING THE SECULAR ORDER IN TURKEY. His medium and long-term interests are diametrically opposed to those of Russia and her allies. He has shot down a Russian fighter plane (and probably had a hand in the bringing down of the Russian civilian airliner), sent tens of thousands of jihadis into Syria, supported jihadi terrorism in Russia, China and Central Asia, sent millions of Muslim migrant invaders into Europe, openly announced Neo-Ottomanist designs, and so on. The economic relations between Turkey and Russia are overwhelmingly to Turkey’s, not Russia’s, benefit – Turkey gets lots of Russian tourists, cheap gas from Russia, and construction business in Russian cities. None of this is really too beneficial to Russia, but it all helps shore up the Erdogan regime economically. PLUS, HE IS STILL A MEMBER OF NATO AND HIS “FALLING OUT” WITH THE U.S. IS TEMPORARY AND LARGELY FAKE. How would a new government be worse?

    “Erdogan is now busy purging Gülenists.”

    Not only Gülenists – secular opposition too.

    “He has no time for Neo-Ottoman non-sense….He won’t be a threat for a while.”

    How long will “a while” last, in your opinion? A few months? A year? Two years? Three? And what after that?

    Read More
  111. The coup initiated by a small section of the army was stopped because most of the army units, police force and intelligence services remained loyal to president Erdogan. Incompetence on the part of the putchists only made the supression of the coup easier. The role of the people on the street was more of a nuisance than a decisive factor.

    Read More
  112. @JL
    "And all this, possibly more so than contingent factors like poor planning or the failure to eliminate Erdogan, explains why the military coup failed."

    This suggests to me even more that the coup was a CIA plot. The Americans are prone to buying into their own propaganda in lieu of in-depth and fact based analysis. They probably thought the latte-sipping urbanites would be out in the streets cheerfully supporting the military's attempt to return secularist values. Oops.

    I would be a little disappointed and even surprised if the CIA was fostering such an incompetent coup in 2016.

    Read More
  113. @Anatoly Karlin
    Putin likewise prevented a full exploitation of Debaltsevo, and taking undefended Mariupol.

    https://twitter.com/UnkawaiiPigDog/status/709798244893782016

    Putin likewise prevented a full exploitation of Debaltsevo, and taking undefended Mariupol.

    If so, why?

    Read More
  114. @Max Payne

    I met a Syrian American recently who was born in the US to Syrian immigrant parents
     
    Sounds like a Westerner indoctrinated through Western media to me. It happens.

    So pervasive is the Western MSM the children of immigrants become true believers of the BS shoveled in their face.

    Regardless of that I've heard Iraqi Arabs (and one bonafide Iraqi Kurd who fought in the Iran-Iraq war for Saddam) bitch and whine about Hussein up until his death. Then I heard:

    "He was a head of state, the least they could have done is shown him respect. They didn't have to hang him like some thief or spy. He kept stability. He had his faults but....[blah blah blah]"

    Hate must be trendy or something. Assad will probably go through the same thing, like Qaddafi. Everyone hated him... until they didn't.

    Sounds like a Westerner indoctrinated through Western media to me. It happens.

    It definitely does happen but I think he probably got the Assad hate from his parents. I mean, I don’t know but that’s the impression I got.

    Assad will probably go through the same thing, like Qaddafi. Everyone hated him… until they didn’t.

    I read a piece by a western writer in the early 00′s talking about a Syrian woman friend of his who would go on and on about about how much she hated Assad Sr. Then after he died she was inconsolable, saying that “he was a father to all of us (Syrians)”.

    Go figure.

    Read More
  115. @AndrewR
    Holy shit. No need for the hostility. Try to not treat people like shit for not thinking exactly like you or not knowing what you think you know.

    Thanks a lot for the patronization. But foolish positions and opinions need to be called out for what they are: Foolish. If you’re so thin-skinned that you can’t even take a light insult against your foolish statements in stride on a political blog dealing with very important current world affairs, then maybe you should be commenting on one of the “lifestyle” magazines – or better yet, on a school newspaper.

    Read More
  116. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Turkish authorities have arrested more than 13,000 people believed to be tied to the coup attempt and have gutted the country’s civil services sector suspending over 60,000 educators, judges and police.

    “‘Why should I keep them and feed them in prisons for years to come?’ – that’s what the people say,” said Erdogan.

    Not that it does look better than the Washington Post’s and New York Time’s average home page.

    As for the “what the people say”, it should open our eyes to what degenerate mud real democracy would be.
    We should ask the elite to be more decent, respectful, responsible to the population in its whole, and a bit selfless.
    Who wishes for “democracy” is someone who hates the humankind nearly as communists did.

    Read More
  117. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Turkish authorities have arrested more than 13,000 people believed to be tied to the coup attempt and have gutted the country’s civil services sector suspending over 60,000 educators, judges and police. “‘Why should I keep them and feed them in prisons for years to come?’ – that’s what the people say,” said Erdogan.

    Not that it does look better than the Washington Post’s and New York Time’s average home page. As for the “what the people say”, it should open our eyes to what degenerate mud real democracy would be. We should ask (in a commanding tone, sure enough) the elite to be more decent, respectful, responsible to the population in its whole, and a bit selfless.
    We should demand the James Traubs, including some large calibre ones, to be removed from their positions; and humble some.

    Still, who wishes for “democracy” is someone who hates the humankind nearly as communists did.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Comes to mind how insistently globalists and their European pawns pushed to, ehm, bring Turkey under the West's wing.

    Dear, come to the EU, we really need some country like yours to enrich our exclusive club of democracies and freedomlands.

    Turkey in the EU.
    Turkey in the EU.
    For years, they never got tired of chanting that verse.

    Now they devised another, more viable path: let's make the whole EU, from Sicily to Sweden, a Turkey.
    If Turkey doesn't come to the EU, the EU comes to Turkey.
    Headstrong people, are our leaders not?
  118. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous

    Turkish authorities have arrested more than 13,000 people believed to be tied to the coup attempt and have gutted the country’s civil services sector suspending over 60,000 educators, judges and police. "'Why should I keep them and feed them in prisons for years to come?' – that’s what the people say," said Erdogan.
     
    Not that it does look better than the Washington Post's and New York Time's average home page. As for the "what the people say", it should open our eyes to what degenerate mud real democracy would be. We should ask (in a commanding tone, sure enough) the elite to be more decent, respectful, responsible to the population in its whole, and a bit selfless.
    We should demand the James Traubs, including some large calibre ones, to be removed from their positions; and humble some.

    Still, who wishes for "democracy" is someone who hates the humankind nearly as communists did.

    Comes to mind how insistently globalists and their European pawns pushed to, ehm, bring Turkey under the West’s wing.

    Dear, come to the EU, we really need some country like yours to enrich our exclusive club of democracies and freedomlands.

    Turkey in the EU.
    Turkey in the EU.
    For years, they never got tired of chanting that verse.

    Now they devised another, more viable path: let’s make the whole EU, from Sicily to Sweden, a Turkey.
    If Turkey doesn’t come to the EU, the EU comes to Turkey.
    Headstrong people, are our leaders not?

    Read More
  119. @El Dato
    “Clearly, the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad were directly involved in the planning, coordination, and execution of yesterday’s coup attempt. "

    I find this hard to swallow. This "clearly" needs some additional decorations. Also, motives? And I mean real motives, not a "because reasons that I find these guys could find convenient". And these reasons have to be massive enough to weight up against the dangers of failure, this not being Chile in the 80s.

    Agree completely, El Dato. Use of the word “clearly” is a disinformation technique. (Perhaps I should say it is clearly a disinformation technique. . . .) It makes the entire post suspect.

    In addition, I think any assumption that CIA, MI6 or Mossad must be behind this or any coup is quite ethnocentric. It implies that Turks aren’t capable of mounting a poorly planned, poorly executed failed coup all by themselves. What hubris.

    Read More
  120. @Talha
    Hey WC,

    EU membership
     
    I believe Turkey (even before Erdogan - remember Ecevit?) has always wanted it on their own terms; economic benefits without cultural meddling - this is why a compromise has never been reached.

    The invasion (it’s not a rebellion) of Syria
     
    It was definitely a rebellion in the beginning - very native and local in nature (http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/sheikh-muhammad-al-yaqoubi-interviewed-by-syria-comment/). Let's not fool ourselves; Daesh is horrible - no question, but the Assad regime are no angels. They represent one of the more torturous (one of the things that set people off was the torture and mutilation of a child - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/31/syria-unrest-teenage-victim-hamza) and repressive police states in the area. If you know any run-of-the-mill Syrians, they will let you know how feared the mukhabarat was (even if you lived outside Syria, an off-hand comment at a dinner party in Des Moines could haunt you when you landed in Damascus for a visit) - and if they couldn't break you directly, your wife and daughter were fair game. Any neutral Human Rights group can confirm this; you can look through any public record reports from NGOs from the 1990's and early 2000's. However, you are absolutely correct - once things started rolling, it was definitely picked up by the foreign elements (governments and otherwise) for their own nefarious designs.

    Can someone explain why Erdogan is so deathly afraid of the Kurds?
     
    Though the Kurds have a leg up in demographic projections, he is not - he makes overtures to them when politically preferable (http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/02/turkey-erdogan-new-kurdish-allies.html). The Kurds likely have far more to fear from a ehtno-nationalist Turkish military state. As I posted elsewhere, Kurdish/Turkish relations fared better under the rubric of them both being distinct, but brother Muslim communities under the Ottomans rather than the secular Turkish nationalists:
    “Confronted with the choice of being annexed at some point by Persia or formally accepting the supremacy of the Ottoman sultan in exchange for a very wide autonomy, the Kurdish leaders opted for this second solution and thus Kurdistan, or more exactly its countless fiefs and principalities entered the Ottoman bosom by the path of diplomacy.”
    “This particular status was to assure Kurdistan about three centuries of peace. The Ottomans controlled some strategic garrisons on the Kurdish territory, but the rest of the country was governed by the Kurdish lords and princes…Despite interferences from time to time from the central power, this particular status, to the satisfaction of the Kurds and the Ottomans, functioned without any major hitch until the beginning of the XIXth century.”
    http://www.institutkurde.org/en/institute/who_are_the_kurds.php

    Peace.

    Yes the rebellion was local near the border with Jordan. It was, however, the CIA which used the environmental problems to reach their goals under America’s CIA covert operation against the Syrian regime, known as Timber Sycamore :

    http://warontherocks.com/2016/07/the-logic-for-shoddy-u-s-covert-action-in-syria/

    Remember that the drought and other environmental factors were too much for the poor rural Syrians to bear. The same thing happened in Yugoslavia where the World Bank collapsed the Yugoslavia currency resulting in the civil war. The people can be relied to blame other ethnic groups for their problems rather than the “Master of the Universe”. It works almost every time…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey KC,

    Great article - thanks! So the "masters of the universe" are playing chess with the lives of millions - what else is new...sigh...The one thing is that the involvement of the US may actually be bringing a level of sanity (I know this itself sounds insane) to the degree of escalation; bear in mind that the Saudis and Qataris are involved and they have some very advanced weapon systems in their inventory. They also do not have any inkling on restraint in this mess, it may only be US pressure keeping things like MANPADS out of the hands of the various militias and Daesh:
    “He [commander of a US-backed militia) said he has hopes that Saudi Arabia and Qatar may tire with the U.S. ban on supplying MANPADS and break coalition ranks, but that the Gulf countries are not ready to flaunt the Americans.”
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-saudi-foreign-minister-adel-al-jubeir-on-syrian-war-a-1078337.html

    Also, you probably know this, but a lot of the Arab Spring was predicated on the dire day-to-day situation of the average Syrian/Egyptian/Tunisian; the flight of capital from the worldwide market bust (2008/2009) into certain commodities raised the prices of household items like bread to high levels for these people (many of whom just scrape by). The public immolation of that Tunisian man was just the match (black swan event) that lit a very deadly and widespread dead wood in the region. I just don't know how much of that capital investment was guided or orchestrated.

    Peace.
  121. @Krollchem
    Yes the rebellion was local near the border with Jordan. It was, however, the CIA which used the environmental problems to reach their goals under America’s CIA covert operation against the Syrian regime, known as Timber Sycamore :
    http://warontherocks.com/2016/07/the-logic-for-shoddy-u-s-covert-action-in-syria/

    Remember that the drought and other environmental factors were too much for the poor rural Syrians to bear. The same thing happened in Yugoslavia where the World Bank collapsed the Yugoslavia currency resulting in the civil war. The people can be relied to blame other ethnic groups for their problems rather than the "Master of the Universe". It works almost every time...

    Hey KC,

    Great article – thanks! So the “masters of the universe” are playing chess with the lives of millions – what else is new…sigh…The one thing is that the involvement of the US may actually be bringing a level of sanity (I know this itself sounds insane) to the degree of escalation; bear in mind that the Saudis and Qataris are involved and they have some very advanced weapon systems in their inventory. They also do not have any inkling on restraint in this mess, it may only be US pressure keeping things like MANPADS out of the hands of the various militias and Daesh:
    “He [commander of a US-backed militia) said he has hopes that Saudi Arabia and Qatar may tire with the U.S. ban on supplying MANPADS and break coalition ranks, but that the Gulf countries are not ready to flaunt the Americans.”

    Read More

  122. @Marcus
    Things still could've turned out well after WWI: the Allies betrayal of the Hashemites was odious even for that era. Faisal wasn't even opposed to Jewish immigration, he just didn't want partition. I've met several Jordanian Christians who had only good things to say about the dynasty.

    Hey Marcus,

    I you had your way – ;) – and me and family had to pack our bags, I actually find some monarchies less odious than others to live under. Order of preference in the Middle East:
    Jordan (Hashemite)
    Morocco
    Oman
    Qatar or UAE (can’t decide)

    Saudi actually tops the list for retiring into (do silent dhikr like the Sufis in Madinah until you keel over – hey, it worked for Imam Shamyl [ra]).

    Taking all Muslim monarchies into account; by far, the revolving elective monarchy of the Malay sultanates – aka Malaysia – is the best bet.

    Peace.

    Read More
  123. @JL
    "And all this, possibly more so than contingent factors like poor planning or the failure to eliminate Erdogan, explains why the military coup failed."

    This suggests to me even more that the coup was a CIA plot. The Americans are prone to buying into their own propaganda in lieu of in-depth and fact based analysis. They probably thought the latte-sipping urbanites would be out in the streets cheerfully supporting the military's attempt to return secularist values. Oops.

    Hi, off-topic, but the comment of yours I wanted to reply to is in a post where comments are closed:

    my comment was rather tongue-in-cheek about an incident where AK very uncharacteristically lost his cool. It’s difficult to describe out of context, and there’s no way I can find it now

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/reader-poll-2016/#comment-1476826

    Just FYI, you do an injustice to our host Ron Unz’s powerful search feature:

    http://www.unz.com/?s=%22cucked+faggot%22&searchsubmit=Search&authors=anatoly-karlin&ptype=akarlin&commentsearch=only

    But what I really wanted to say was that I regret the apparent result of AK’s poll: privileging long-form posts.

    I usually like reading AK’s thoughts, but not when they are that long. Or I read the long ones only on occasion, when I am exceptionally interested in the topic he is discussing or the idea he is advancing.

    (There was that amazing “open thread” article a while back that had at least a dozen fascinating (and short and unrelated) topics, but all glommed together in one indigestible article. Why the need to make such a long post? Does it seem more serious and weighty that way?)

    So I’ll just say I’m one of the readers who wish AK would experiment more with brevity, and I bet many of us feel that way, poll notwithstanding.

    Of course I may not be AK’s target. Even for short posts, I feel intrigued but a little out of my depth. The long posts are successful in eliminating me from the set of AK readers, and that may be the intended effect :)

    Read More
  124. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    NATO was involved in last year’s downing of Russia’s Su-24 bomber in Syrian airspace, Willy Wimmer, former Vice-President of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), told Sputnik Deutschland on Friday.

    Where “NATO” is an aconym alternative to “USA.”

    I have never doubt this, personally. Nobody would down a Russia’s (or China’s) by their own initiative.

    Read More
  125. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous

    NATO was involved in last year's downing of Russia's Su-24 bomber in Syrian airspace, Willy Wimmer, former Vice-President of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), told Sputnik Deutschland on Friday.
     
    Where "NATO" is an aconym alternative to "USA."

    I have never doubt this, personally. Nobody would down a Russia's (or China's) by their own initiative.

    acronym*

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I don't think there can be any doubts as to what the hoped-for outcome of the bomber was.
    To instigate war.
  126. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    acronym*

    I don’t think there can be any doubts as to what the hoped-for outcome of the bomber was.
    To instigate war.

    Read More
  127. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    A neo con coup that failed. All the neo cons who supported the iraq war back on fox proclaiming support for this coup..

    If erdogan goes it will give chance for isis to infiltrate turkey. Prefer erdogan 100000x over isis criminals.

    Read More

Comments are closed.