“Rogue state” is such an interesting term. Saudi Arabia is not a rogue state, but Tuareg rebels are not a state at all. Iran is a rogue state, but Pakistan is not.
“Autocratic” is interesting too. Turkey before Turgut Özal had military as its supreme power, as that military had constitutional right to just disband any government they didn’t like. So it was a legal junta rule allowing some democratic appearance.
In terms of being fascist and genocidal Turkey under Erdogan hasn’t changed one bit to the worse. I’d argue it’s possibly became better, not worse in that regard. Even despite their participation in Artsakh.
It has become more corrupt, maybe. But they had a period of terrific growth of both economy and population (which has abruptly slowed down), that tends to make corruption more visible.
“200 years” is funny too. I take it the Red Sultan or the Young Turks or Kemal himself were less “rogue” or less “autocratic” than Erdogan?
Typical Western ignorance, when they praise Kemal who is basically a Turkish version of Heidrich, only more successful. EDIT: for example
Yeah why would someone go and change the subject? This is a sweet picture of a cat in a community about cats therefore we’re trying to insult this guy’s nationality and talk about genocide.
Yes, you saying Erdo has moved Turkey 200 years ago and thus saying that his Turkey is worse than anything in that timespan is a pretty clear case.
It’s pretty usual for Turkey. It’s never been a real democracy before Özal, and all the time till Erdo technically military still could depose the government. What Erdo changed is that apparently now this can’t happen. He made it technically more democratic if anything.
I mean, OK, if we compare this to Russia which only had one kinda democratic president (who was also president of RSFSR, so basically no single fully normal power transfer in modern Russian history), then yeah, they had a few normal presidents and Erdo broke that chain.
But then why is it 200 years, the Ottoman empire had Tanzimat, you know. Eh, until the good sultan died and the maniac took his place, abolished all those laws and started killings.
Riiiiiight, an Armenian that blows a gasket at the slightest suggestion that Erdogan might not be the greatest Kalif of all time! What else you got for me, wolf?
Riiiiiight, an Armenian that blows a gasket at the slightest suggestion that Erdogan might not be the greatest Kalif of all time! What else you got for me, wolf?
Same user, same level of intelligence. I’ll be magnanimous:
I was addressing your weird opinion that Erdogan made something worse about Turkey, making it a “rogue state”.
In the narratives popular in the West (discourse by Baudrillard) it was a normal state since joining NATO, because that makes it part of the “good guys”, “free world” and all that bullshit.
But in reality it had a few big Greek and Armenian pogroms after joining NATO, used historical monuments as target practice, had military coups as normal order of things, censorship, extrajudicial murders by military, special services, pro-government militias, had “village guards”, and all that after Turkey joining NATO.
As I have already said, any kind of democracy is a new thing for Turkey. And before Erdogan technically Turkish military still could just change the government without violating any law. Also Erdogan started with quite a bit of social liberalization and still hasn’t undone that. He surely plays sultan, but it appears to be the zeitgeist. And he’s going to die and things are going to change.
So it being a “rogue state” is conditioned not by it becoming worse (it’s been plainly fascist for all of its history in NATO), but by it becoming somehow less useful for the West. Which makes the “rogue state” concept meaningless, it’s one thing to become one because of breaking rules, it’s another to become one just because of bad alliances.
Just like Georgia right now is getting all kinds of threats because of their construction of the port in Anaklia. Since it’s a project involving China. While it’s still a flawed democracy. And Azerbaijan is not getting any threats while being a genocidal sultanate. And Azerbaijan is closer to Russia than Georgia is, so that’s not a justification.
Wow. That’s the first time anyone has managed to explain whataboutism in a way that makes sense.
For years it’s been all “fallacious logic” this and “counter-argument” that. “Reductio”, “partial tu quoque”, “changing the subject”, and a myriad of other things that say lots while describing little.
“Rogue state” is such an interesting term. Saudi Arabia is not a rogue state, but Tuareg rebels are not a state at all. Iran is a rogue state, but Pakistan is not.
“Autocratic” is interesting too. Turkey before Turgut Özal had military as its supreme power, as that military had constitutional right to just disband any government they didn’t like. So it was a legal junta rule allowing some democratic appearance.
In terms of being fascist and genocidal Turkey under Erdogan hasn’t changed one bit to the worse. I’d argue it’s possibly became better, not worse in that regard. Even despite their participation in Artsakh.
It has become more corrupt, maybe. But they had a period of terrific growth of both economy and population (which has abruptly slowed down), that tends to make corruption more visible.
“200 years” is funny too. I take it the Red Sultan or the Young Turks or Kemal himself were less “rogue” or less “autocratic” than Erdogan?
Typical Western ignorance, when they praise Kemal who is basically a Turkish version of Heidrich, only more successful. EDIT: for example
Three words for you, son:
What about ism
Comparing Turkey to itself is sure as hell not that. That’s an F, sit down.
“You say A is bad, but what about B?!”
Pretty clear case.
Just take the L for trying to shoehorn nationalism and xenophobia into the thread.
“Take the L”, wow, that’s original! Did you hear that on Reddit?
Nah “take the L” has been around since like 2000, I guess this is your admission you get all your references from reddit though.
Woooosh
Yeah why would someone go and change the subject? This is a sweet picture of a cat in a community about cats therefore we’re trying to insult this guy’s nationality and talk about genocide.
Yes, you saying Erdo has moved Turkey 200 years ago and thus saying that his Turkey is worse than anything in that timespan is a pretty clear case.
It’s pretty usual for Turkey. It’s never been a real democracy before Özal, and all the time till Erdo technically military still could depose the government. What Erdo changed is that apparently now this can’t happen. He made it technically more democratic if anything.
I mean, OK, if we compare this to Russia which only had one kinda democratic president (who was also president of RSFSR, so basically no single fully normal power transfer in modern Russian history), then yeah, they had a few normal presidents and Erdo broke that chain.
But then why is it 200 years, the Ottoman empire had Tanzimat, you know. Eh, until the good sultan died and the maniac took his place, abolished all those laws and started killings.
Point out where I said “it’s worse than anything in that timespan?”
I didn’t. Your inherent tendency to become too emotional in a discussion seems to be clouding your judgement. Unsurprising.
Next you’ll probably show me the 🤘
I’m arguing in the opposite fucking direction and I’m Armenian.
Riiiiiight, an Armenian that blows a gasket at the slightest suggestion that Erdogan might not be the greatest Kalif of all time! What else you got for me, wolf?
Same user, same level of intelligence. I’ll be magnanimous:
I was addressing your weird opinion that Erdogan made something worse about Turkey, making it a “rogue state”.
In the narratives popular in the West (discourse by Baudrillard) it was a normal state since joining NATO, because that makes it part of the “good guys”, “free world” and all that bullshit.
But in reality it had a few big Greek and Armenian pogroms after joining NATO, used historical monuments as target practice, had military coups as normal order of things, censorship, extrajudicial murders by military, special services, pro-government militias, had “village guards”, and all that after Turkey joining NATO.
As I have already said, any kind of democracy is a new thing for Turkey. And before Erdogan technically Turkish military still could just change the government without violating any law. Also Erdogan started with quite a bit of social liberalization and still hasn’t undone that. He surely plays sultan, but it appears to be the zeitgeist. And he’s going to die and things are going to change.
So it being a “rogue state” is conditioned not by it becoming worse (it’s been plainly fascist for all of its history in NATO), but by it becoming somehow less useful for the West. Which makes the “rogue state” concept meaningless, it’s one thing to become one because of breaking rules, it’s another to become one just because of bad alliances.
Just like Georgia right now is getting all kinds of threats because of their construction of the port in Anaklia. Since it’s a project involving China. While it’s still a flawed democracy. And Azerbaijan is not getting any threats while being a genocidal sultanate. And Azerbaijan is closer to Russia than Georgia is, so that’s not a justification.
Wow. That’s the first time anyone has managed to explain whataboutism in a way that makes sense.
For years it’s been all “fallacious logic” this and “counter-argument” that. “Reductio”, “partial tu quoque”, “changing the subject”, and a myriad of other things that say lots while describing little.
Thank You.
It’s literally called “what about” ism… That’s on you my man