- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
No way that could go bad
Hey if israel retaliates after it would mean israel attacked a NATO country
Not if Turkiye attacks first. NATO is only a mutual defense pact, it doesn’t back first strikes
Edit: I felt like I need to point out that this is what’s on paper. That hasn’t always been the case historically.
I’m sure Israel would never attack first and never launch a retaliatory strike that is not proportional.
On the other hand I would remind Turkish citizens to not litter the streets of Israel or risk Turkey being bombed.
It’s a bit risky, geopolitical situations and all
Maybe Syria, Iran, and India could join in? What fun! Ireland could bring the snacks
India is an Israel ally, unfortunately. They love to trade weaponry with each other among other things like that spyware the government sneaked into everyone’s phone.
2026 is right around the corner, let’s just hurry up to make it canon
Obviously any and all outside support for either is completely due to complex and additional ulterior motives… but even knowing that, I’m sick of my taxes being used like they are and I find myself in agreement with this fucker…
What moment did we stray from a reasonable timeline
It was never a reasonable timeline. Modern history is essentially the present population waking up to the crimes of past (and present) generations, including their direct ancestors.
Israel was created by colonial states committing colonial-minded crimes, during the near-total collapse of colonialism immediately following WW2. England had assumed control of “Mandatory Palestine” after the Ottoman Empire fell with WW1. Through the League of Nations — dominated by colonial powers, like the UN is to this day — they essentially annexed land they had no legitimate ownership of, denying the population of Palestine their basic human rights to democracy and self determination, and gifted it to millions of refugees who were not even born in that location, and held no reasonable claim to that land (beyond ancestry from hundreds/thousands of years ago, that never made up more than a minority of the people who lived there).
It would make more sense, and be more logically and legally justifiable, to give the USA, Canada, and Australia to their indigenous populations in 2024 — who 100% owned those lands up until the last few hundred years — than to give Palestine to the Jewish population in 1946.
Similar crimes happened in South East Asia and Africa post-WW2. For example France trying to militarily reclaim Laos and Vietnam (backed by the USA). Both the Vietnam war and Cambodian genocide may have never occurred if those countries were allowed to implement legitimate democracy.
Totally with you here.
How did I end up on a timeline where I am vibing with Erdogan.
For clarity, he says:
Just like we entered Karabakh, just like we entered Libya, we might do similar to them.
Türkiye didn’t “enter” into either of those countries with its own troops. Rather they used Syrian mercs, and provided technical support, including “selling” their drones.
I don’t think what he means is sending in troops in this situation as well. Türkiye (or rather, maybe, Erdoğan’s ruling party) has existing strong ties with both Hamas and Hezbollah.
So my assumption on how this translates would be arms shipments to Lebanon. I don’t think they can get anything in to Gaza. And I don’t think either Lebanon or Palestine would welcome Syrian mercenaries.
But let’s see.
The same Turkey that continues to attack and slaughter the Kurds of Rojava unprompted? That Turkey?
Bit hypocritical, eh?
Based Erdogran? Nah, he’s just playing international poker and making waves.
Sounds based but likely not more than empty words.
Though he did put a nice boycott on israel after a few months of Genocide.
deleted by creator
Have to bump it up a notch. The ongoing war headlines were getting kind of stale.
“Might”
