advertisement


Trouble in the Middle-East

T

thebigfredc

pfm Member
My heart goes out to the poor people of Syria as yet more destruction is being brought to their country. Will their misery never end as their neighbouring states and opposing factions continue to play out power games in their country. Turkey's new offensive is a worrying development, especially with Russian forces present on the ground.

The attacks on Saudi Arabia's oil installations also show that this is a dangerous region of the world with the potential for widespread consequences.

Ray
 
wacko said:
Britain and France drew straight lines in the sand 100 years ago and forgot about 30m Kurds. Sh1t happens. It is still happening.
Click to expand...

True, but then they had a problematic situation on their hands. The Ottoman Empire had fallen to pieces, along with its administrative system. The area was peopled by a great number of different tribes and ethnic groups, some of them nomadic. The French and Brits had to secure their oil supplies. The book about Gertrude Bell is interesting. She helped "create" Iraq in the '20s, and needed to set up some kind of government by a ruling class with figures of prestige, and sufficient popular approval thereof. She and the other British "operatives" considered the Kurds, but the problem was that they were split in three factions that would not speak to each other, so they were left out. So they cobbled together what they could and drew those straight lines. But it is difficult to imagine what other lines they could have drawn.
 
MikeMA said:
I feel particularly sorry for the Kurds who are a much put upon and persecuted people in Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. They should have there own country. One of our local taxi drivers is a doctor and Peshmerga tank driver, from whom I have learnt much.
Click to expand...

And that is the reason they're persecuted. The territory of greater Kurdistan overlaps four countries, none of whom are wont to cede any territory. Turkey have been waiting years for a chance to execute a "final solution".
 
Yank said:
And that is the reason they're persecuted. The territory of greater Kurdistan overlaps four countries, none of whom are wont to cede any territory. Turkey have been waiting years for a chance to execute a "final solution".
Click to expand...
They need to be careful. There are around 14 million ethnic Kurds in Turkey. I predict big trouble.
 
Seems like a truly insane decision by Trump, but what’s new? A lot of entirely innocent and decent people are going to get killed, a lot of infrastructure destroyed and a hell of a lot of environmentally damaging pollution created for no logical gain I can figure out.
 
US multinationals owned by Trump’s chums will fix the infrastructure once, to coin a phrase, they’ve cleared away the dead bodies.
 
Poor buggers. I collect 120 year old Kurdish tribal bag faces, think I have about 20-25 of them, all made by one tribal group called the jaf tribe and I love their history.
 
thebigfredc said:
The attacks on Saudi Arabia's oil installations also show that this is a dangerous region of the world with the potential for widespread consequences.

Ray
Click to expand...
The brutal destruction of and siege of Yemen being perpetrated by the Saudis, US and UK which has left tens of thousands dead and millions on the brink of starvation didn't show you how dangerous this region of the world is, but a small retaliation against a Saudi oil field, with no casualties, did?
 
maxflinn said:
The brutal destruction of and siege of Yemen being perpetrated by the Saudis, US and UK which has left tens of thousands dead and millions on the brink of starvation didn't show you how dangerous this region of the world is, but a small retaliation against a Saudi oil field, with no casualties, did?
Click to expand...

Keep your hair on.

I agree the Saudi war on Yemen is terrible too.

I find it strange that you chose to leave out the bulk of my post regarding the similar plight of the civilian population in Syria.

Funny folk round these parts.
 
Tragic situation, the Kurds did so much in fighting Isis. They deserve better. 2 weeks ago I was looking at a Bosch fridge and a Siemens fridge , all made in Turkey. Think I won't be buying anything made I Turkey for while
 
Boycotting their goods as a form of protest is an idea. It would certainly hurt them as you rightly say a lot of European white goods are made there these days. Turkey is attractive to manufacturers because they are part of the EU customs union and yet have low labour costs. From memory they gained access in return for not sending millions of refugees to the EU which is the same card that nice Mr Erdogan played again yesterday in relation to our criticism of their military action.

Funnily enough I considered not buying anymore products made in the US over Trump’s refusal to send the diplomats wife home who killed Harry Dunn.

Ray
 
Last edited:
Was planing a holiday in Turkey. Now firmly off my Christmas card list. I think their leader is doing a Thatcher, drop in popularity so lets have a war.
 
PaulMB said:
True, but then they had a problematic situation on their hands. The Ottoman Empire had fallen to pieces, along with its administrative system. The area was peopled by a great number of different tribes and ethnic groups, some of them nomadic. The French and Brits had to secure their oil supplies. The book about Gertrude Bell is interesting. She helped "create" Iraq in the '20s, and needed to set up some kind of government by a ruling class with figures of prestige, and sufficient popular approval thereof. She and the other British "operatives" considered the Kurds, but the problem was that they were split in three factions that would not speak to each other, so they were left out. So they cobbled together what they could and drew those straight lines. But it is difficult to imagine what other lines they could have drawn.
Click to expand...
The Turks had the good sense to rule Mesopotamia as three separate areas, each with its own governor, the splits approximating to Shia/Sunni/Kurds. As a cost-saving measure, the British stuck the three bits together, called it Iraq and imposed a king (one of the Hashemites) from outside. It seems to me like Empire-building on the cheap.

Not so sure that oil supplies had anything to do with it. Oil had already been discovered in Persia before the First World War, and it was sufficient to lead the then First Sea Lord, Winston Churchill, to convert the Royal Navy from coal to oil. It was exploited by the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (later Anglo-Iranian, now BP), and its nationalisation by Mohammed Mossadeq led to the CIA's overthrow of Mossadeq and reinstatement of the Shah.
 
Tony L said:
Seems like a truly insane decision by Trump, but what’s new? A lot of entirely innocent and decent people are going to get killed, a lot of infrastructure destroyed and a hell of a lot of environmentally damaging pollution created for no logical gain I can figure out.
Click to expand...
It diverts attention away from his impeachment proceedings.
 
Konteebos said:
It diverts attention away from his impeachment proceedings.
Click to expand...

And gives him an excuse to hold more rallies where breathless knuckledraggers await his rants and a nod to chant "Lock her up!" and hear slanderous one-liners like yesterday's 'Stupid Biden was only VP because he knew how to kiss Obama's ass'.

I don't know which is more embarrassing: living in a country with the knuckledraggers or a congress full of spineless democrats utterly afraid of him.
 
tones said:
The Turks had the good sense to rule Mesopotamia as three separate areas, each with its own governor, the splits approximating to Shia/Sunni/Kurds. As a cost-saving measure, the British stuck the three bits together, called it Iraq and imposed a king (one of the Hashemites) from outside. It seems to me like Empire-building on the cheap.

Not so sure that oil supplies had anything to do with it. Oil had already been discovered in Persia before the First World War, and it was sufficient to lead the then First Sea Lord, Winston Churchill, to convert the Royal Navy from coal to oil. It was exploited by the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (later Anglo-Iranian, now BP), and its nationalisation by Mohammed Mossadeq led to the CIA's overthrow of Mossadeq and reinstatement of the Shah.
Click to expand...

As I understand it, but I do not claim to be an authority on the subject, the Turkish system was inefficient and very corrupt. In practice a kind of post-feudal system with Turkish governors. From reading the book on Gertrude Bell, it would seem that the Brits did not so much "impose" a (Hashemite) king, but gave their approval and material support to a king and a supporting ruling class which was viable in that context. The purpose being to have a regime which was stable, but also obediently friendly to Britain. The main reason being oil.

Around 1905 - 1915 warship design shifted from coal-fired boilers to fuel oil. I don't think the the discovery of Persian oil prompted this, so much as progress in ship design. Although obviously the availability of oil permitted this. But then there was already a large supply of oil from the United States, and it would make sense for the Royal Navy, on which British national and imperial power rested, not to wish to be totally dependent on America, but to have its own tame sources. And by the 1920s the demand for oil had also grown enormously for other purposes, motor vehicles, merchant ships, aircraft, factories. So oil was a key element in the industrial, military, and political rivalry between Britain, France and Germany. As well as the maintenance of what was still a global empire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top