3
3
0
Turkey may no longer be a bystander in the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS). On Tuesday, the Turkish government sought a mandate from Parliament to expand cross-border military operations into Iraq and Syria. This week Parliament will vote on whether or not to authorize it, as Turkish soldiers and tanks position themselves along the border with Syria.
It’s not clear whether Turkey would immediately send in ground troops or conduct airstrikes over Syria. However, even though Parliament is likely to approve the mandate, the government will most likely not authorize ground troops without an internationally backed no-fly zone in northern Syria. The White House is said to be considering a no-fly zone.
Until now, Turkey has had a less active military role against ISIS. Given it shares a 560-mile border with Syria, Turkey has to put more focus on ISIS controlling border points. Since ISIS besieged Kobani last week, more than 160,000 Kurdish refugees have poured into the country, according the semiofficial Anadolu News Agency. Kobani is a Syrian border town, and Turkey can’t ignore the fact ISIS fighters are at its front door steps.
Turkish leaders have already shown support in the United States-led operations against the militant group, but the push for this mandate is the first proactive military move. Should Parliament authorize Turkish troops on the ground? If it comes to the no-fly zone, should the U.S. back a no-fly zone in northern Syria? What else can the U.S. and other NATO members do to eliminate Turkey’s hesitation with combat force?
It’s not clear whether Turkey would immediately send in ground troops or conduct airstrikes over Syria. However, even though Parliament is likely to approve the mandate, the government will most likely not authorize ground troops without an internationally backed no-fly zone in northern Syria. The White House is said to be considering a no-fly zone.
Until now, Turkey has had a less active military role against ISIS. Given it shares a 560-mile border with Syria, Turkey has to put more focus on ISIS controlling border points. Since ISIS besieged Kobani last week, more than 160,000 Kurdish refugees have poured into the country, according the semiofficial Anadolu News Agency. Kobani is a Syrian border town, and Turkey can’t ignore the fact ISIS fighters are at its front door steps.
Turkish leaders have already shown support in the United States-led operations against the militant group, but the push for this mandate is the first proactive military move. Should Parliament authorize Turkish troops on the ground? If it comes to the no-fly zone, should the U.S. back a no-fly zone in northern Syria? What else can the U.S. and other NATO members do to eliminate Turkey’s hesitation with combat force?
Posted in these groups: 
ISIS
ISIS
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 12
5
5
0
Let's bomb Iraq with shredded bbq pork and nudie pics. Then crop dust with ever clear
(5)
(0)
SGT Wayne Gains
Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11
Bush admits there were no weapons of mass destructions in Iraq and that Iraq had no ties with Al Qaida.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Packy Flickinger
Iraq didn't directly support 9/11 however they did give safe harbor to its terrorists. Iraq did have WMD's. He used them! Also early Intel suggested he gave the rest to Syria to hide when we attacked. Guess what. Syria used them! I was briefed in the 90's on Osama and the terrorists. What is told to the people and what is factual doesn't always agree. Also, presidents quite frequently send in troops for humanitarian needs. Saddam was one of the biggest mass murderers on the planet. If we wernt justified in invading Iraq, why are we still there?! The reason is the same, only the name has changed.
(0)
(0)
SGT Wayne Gains
wow what were you then Peabody an admiral. make it sound like you were personally briefed on Osama and the terrorists. you weren't the only one that was in the military in the 90s. I was also briefed on the red army faction and the baader-meinhof groupin the 70s doesn't make me john wayne. why are we still there because for some dumbass reason a moron decided he was going to make that area democratic so we stayed to build democracy. working really well from what I have seen so far.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Packy Flickinger
Gee. Silly me. I thought it's about terrorists. You know ISIS, Al Qaeda, Bin laden, etc The guys killing Americans. That's what I was briefed on. That's what happened. And that's who's killing and terrorizing now. When I was briefed it was with most of the base and in hind site, the info was dead on. Maybe if some people wernt spending their time deflecting and blaming we might not be in the situation we are in now. But by all means, let's just forget about terrorism and concentrate and WMD's, oil and democracy.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
They need to get actively involved in the fight against ISIS despite releasing their hostages.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
Do we, the American people, really want Turkey to send troops into Syria? Does anyone remember any history?
(3)
(0)
SSG Pete Fleming
MSG Brad Sand, I love history... and yes Turkey needs to go there. It is their backyard, not ours. They kept the Middle East peaceful during the Ottoman Empire, as long as they stay out of Europe and don't condone terrorism... I would support them. Especially if the would offer to pay for our support (at least the cost of missiles and bullets)
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
At this point I think Turkish troops are the only ones who even have half a chance of deploying a credible ground force that could effectively combat ISIS. Their logistics trains wouldn't be nearly as long as the other interested Arab or NATO militaries also. I've been waiting for them to step in and I think it is long overdue.
(0)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
Here are my concerns with the Turkish involvement, they are not likely to support the Kurds (the fighters already on the ground with the most to lose with ISIS) or will actively oppose them. The Turks are primarily Sunni and bring more historical baggage into the mix. It is hard for Americans to understand the long standing fear and outright hatred between these competing groups. Sunni and Shia, and Kurds, Turks, Arab and Persian (plus a laundry list of other groups)? Yes, I think the Turkish troops could do an excellent job defending their boarders against ISIS fighters but will have a similar effect…to a much lesser degree…as bringing in Israeli troops. Most Americans are not even aware of the Turkish genocide against the Kurds (and their Armenian cousins), let alone the animosity between Shia and Sunni? American are cursed with a very short cultural memory. Of course, we will abandoned the Kurds AGAIN and arm those who will turn our weapons on us in a few months AGAIN and everyone will try to blame the other political party for not seeing the disaster they all joined in on but we need to put our trust in those who have faithfully stood beside us year after year. The Kurds deserve their own nation, made up of portions of Iraq, Iran and Turkey. (The Armenians also should have a bigger piece to the pie, but that is another issue.)
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I can't figure which way Turkey will go. As a predominantly Muslim country, if they tackle ISIS, it puts a major dent in ISIS' propaganda claim that they're fighting to protect Islam. It would also open the door for discord within Turkeys own population. Turkey and the Kurds don't have the best track record for harmony either. So 160,000 refugees is not likely to set all that well.
That being said, if Turkey decides to "saddle up and roll in", look out for some real fireworks. I'm not qualified or educated enough to evaluate the Turkish military per se, but historically the Turkish fighting man is a no-holds-barred, balls-to-the-wall warrior. The Chinese and North Koreans discovered that in the Korean conflict. With a bit of good fortune, we could see Turkey becoming the "benevolent big brother' in the region. Certainly the Arab world would be more amenable to the influence of another Muslim power as opposed to western influence. Turkey hasn't always been our "best" friend, but they've always been a friend.
Just to add an afterthought, If we left Turkey alone to settle things with Assad it will be a conflict between two muslim countries. At the same time, since Turkey shares a border with Iraq also, it will give Iran a reason to reassess just how belligerent they wish to be. Iraq and Iran beat each other to a standstill some years back. Iran has to consider Turkey and Iraq joining forces against them and putting them in their place. I would think that is a nightmare the mullahs don't wish to see........Just a thought....
That being said, if Turkey decides to "saddle up and roll in", look out for some real fireworks. I'm not qualified or educated enough to evaluate the Turkish military per se, but historically the Turkish fighting man is a no-holds-barred, balls-to-the-wall warrior. The Chinese and North Koreans discovered that in the Korean conflict. With a bit of good fortune, we could see Turkey becoming the "benevolent big brother' in the region. Certainly the Arab world would be more amenable to the influence of another Muslim power as opposed to western influence. Turkey hasn't always been our "best" friend, but they've always been a friend.
Just to add an afterthought, If we left Turkey alone to settle things with Assad it will be a conflict between two muslim countries. At the same time, since Turkey shares a border with Iraq also, it will give Iran a reason to reassess just how belligerent they wish to be. Iraq and Iran beat each other to a standstill some years back. Iran has to consider Turkey and Iraq joining forces against them and putting them in their place. I would think that is a nightmare the mullahs don't wish to see........Just a thought....
(2)
(0)
Maj Robert Reiss
I would have agreed with your comment and the comments of some others here in regards to Turkey pre-2002. The Erodgan government (1st as PM, now President of Turkey) has systematically Islamacized Turkey from it's decades-long secular status. One of his particular measures was the purging of the military, the historic bulwark against Islamatization of Turkey. Syria shot down an unarmed Turkish recon plane and sure, Turkey wants Assad gone but has yet to do anything real about it. Think about this: Turkey is NATO, yet no one has invoked the charter on "an attack upon one is an attack upon all" clause. Might that start WWIII? IDK
The Turkish military exists but to what level of performance, again, IDK.
I'm still upset about the Turks not allowing US forces to attack Iraq from the north which would have provided no escape and quicker victory
Try not to mix history as the current Turkish Gov is not as much an ally/friend as pre-2002
The Turkish military exists but to what level of performance, again, IDK.
I'm still upset about the Turks not allowing US forces to attack Iraq from the north which would have provided no escape and quicker victory
Try not to mix history as the current Turkish Gov is not as much an ally/friend as pre-2002
(1)
(0)
PO3 John Jeter
The fact that Turkey is predominantly muslim, coupled with their membership in NATO makes them a perfect bridge between our worlds. We haven't seen the demonizing of the west out of Turkey as we have with other muslim countries. They're walking a tightrope, trying to maintain a workable relationship with the west while not antagonizing the rest of the muslim world. Part of that tightrope was not allowing us to stage troops out of Turkey to invade northern Iraq. On top of everything else, the Russians would have been highly upset if we were staging combat power that close to them. Also at that point, many muslim countries were suspicious of our goals at that time. We had not yet proven to them that we weren't there to take over the oil fields. We have a bit more credibility now (but we're still infidels). It's possible that ISIS will be the catalyst that pushes Turkey off the fence, I'm just not sure how far they will go. We'll just have to wait and see.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
This situation is getting out of control and more dangerous every day. As MAJ Keith Young points out, the what ifs and second and third order effects of intervention by any interested third party are particulary dangerous. From my perspective, going to war with ISIS will be ineffective without going to war with Assad at the same time. Destroying ISIS helps the Assad regime. Destroying the Assad regime helps ISIS. Destroying both helps us and Iraq. And don't forget how destroying ISIS also helps Iran and Russia. But then, you need to remember that part of the Powell Doctrine that says "If you break it, you buy it." There is no acceptable and effective group ready to rule Syria and we clearly are not ready, able or willing to do the job ourselves. Turkey is in a tight spot because the danger is at their doorstep and they have no effective response. We saw how NATO airstrikes helped remove Gaddafi from power but then Libya devolved into borderline anarchy with tribal fighting. I see the potential for a similar outcome in Syria. To effectively destroy ISIS a gound war seems necessary, but I don't think the Free Syrian Army is up to the task in Syria. Rolling ISIS back in Iraq will be long and costly and it still only solves half the problem, so all options are really starting to suck. A No Fly Zone will get interesting when Russia and Iran try to resupply Assad and it won't do much at all to stop Assad or ISIS from continuing the fight. Turkey should participate in the bombing campaign I think, but as of right now the only permanent solution to stopping ISIS that I can see working is a massive and protracted NATO combined arms fight. But I don't think the American people or our NATO allies have the stomach for such a fight. At least not until ISIS bombs start going off in our homelands.
(2)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
MAJ Keith Young CPT (Join to see) Gentlemen spot on. Couldn't agree more with your analysis of this complex situation.
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
I believe the Russians are a wildcard or joker in this whole equation. What will they do if we hinder Assad's troops. MAJ Keith Young CPT (Join to see) Doesn't Syria (Assad) have a pact with Russia for the defense of Syria?
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
MSgt (Join to see), excellent point about Russia. Russia has effectively kept the UN uninvolved in resolving the situation. They have lots of weapons contracts with Syria that are worth tens of millions (maybe more?) and a basing agreement to dock a portion of their Mediterranean Fleet. Both are significant strategic interests Russia has invested with the Syrian government. In fact, the instability of Syria might have played a factor in Putin willing to use force to take over Crimea and secure a warm weather port for Russia's Black Sea Fleet. If both ports (Sevastapol Ukraine and Tartus Syria) had fallen outside of Russian influence, Russia's naval access to Europe and the Middle East would have been significantly degraded. Just another reason why the Syria Crisis is so convoluted.
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
CPT (Join to see) MAJ Keith Young Turning every thing over in my mind and thinking about things. I have wondered if we could possibly secretly negotiate with Russia about indirectly supporting Assad. And not supporting or equipping the rebels to the fullest. Keeping our so called Middle East allies and the UN happy. I know this would be walking a fine line. But being that Syria is so important to Russia and we want in the end a democratic Iraq that maybe it would be best to sleep with the devil to accomplish what we are seeking. In that we could negotiate a mutual exceptable outcome to both Russia and the U.S. and eliminating the threat of ISIS and freeing Iraq. At least with Assad we know for sure where we stand and we would not have to worry later about whether the rebels would turn in to the next new treat against America. Just my crazy .02
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
With that much border in common, they can take a stand right now, or they will be forced into a corner later. If it was me, I would take a position (either one really...just make a stand). Those that get caught sitting on the fence are playing both sides and will often get burned in the end. Right, Wrong, or Indifferent, they need to pick a side. Degree of active or not so active is up to them.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I certainly feel that we should do whatever we can do to help engage the countries in that region that are wanting to participate in a positive direction. Personally I feel that the us has acted as an enabler in this region far to long. ISIS may just be the catalyst needed for the people to finally put an end to the extremist ideology that has been festering and proliferating for far to long.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Turkey is pretty much a non-aggressive ally of ISIS. They have repeatedly stated that they would not get involved in dealing with them, and have moved over the years to be more Islamic and less allied to NATO, Europe, and the United States. They have refused to allow usage of NATO bases, and during the war with Iraq, refused to allow us to stage units there to enter the battle. At this point I would even be reluctant to consider Turkey an ally.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Cpl Ray Fernandez, I understand your skepticism about Turkey. One thing that should be considered is all the trouble Turkey has had with their Kurdish minority population, the PKK in particular which has been responsible for numerous terrorist attacks throughout Turkey. Turkey is not supportive of anything that might make the Kurds more powerful. The Kurdistan region that most Kurds wish would gain independence includes a good chunk of southern Turkey. Turkey had issues with the fact that our invasion of Iraq would empower the Kurds, who might seek the independence of all of Kurdistan and cause problems for Turkey. Now that Turkey has authorized military action against not just ISIS but "other terrorist groups" (i.e. PKK) in Syria and Iraq, they are working to secure their own borders. They also want a No Fly Zone over Syria so that Assad's air forces cannot oppose them. So not only does Turkey want to destroy the terrorists, they want to get rid of Assad also. In my opinion, with their latest vote to authorize military action, they may actually be willing to go even further than we are right now.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I wonder if they will handle ISIS the same way as they did N Korea and Chinese? My Uncle told me stories from the Korean War
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
It looks like Turkey may be getting more serious about the situation with a vote from their parliament happening soon. The refugee crisis they face is getting worse by the day. The Suleyman Shah Tomb seems to be a very real symbolic issue for the Turks also. I have a feeling we might see limited engagement by the Turks, but primarily to protect their border and safeguard both refugees and their tomb. I woun't really expect them to go all in to defeat ISIS.
Turkish lawmakers OK military action against ISIS - CNN.com
Turkish lawmakers voted Thursday to authorize military force against ISIS in Syria and Iraq, joining a growing international coalition.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Yup. Turkey just voted to allow military action against ISIS. Apparently they will be doing more than I expected. "The Turkish Parliament voted 298-98 to not only to let the country's military leave its borders to battle ISIS but to eliminate threats coming from any terrorist organization in Iraq and Syria, starting Saturday." - CNN.
Turkish lawmakers OK military action against ISIS - CNN.com
Turkish lawmakers voted Thursday to authorize military force against ISIS in Syria and Iraq, joining a growing international coalition.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google