Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (46091)	9/22/2002 9:42:48 AM
From: BigBull	Respond to of 281500

Reading those lines from a poem, in a speech he gave, was what got him in trouble. The way the Turks seem to work it, the Military will not take over the Gov, they just bar any religious takeover. Yup. Nothing so rude as tanks occupying Instanbul and Ankara. Reading Kaplan's "Eastward to Tartary" began to clue me into how the Turkish military works these things. What is also interesting is that the Turkish military functions in many ways as one of the largest political party's in Turkey(albeit unelected) and whose guiding principles are Kemalist and secular. If we establish a "lilypad" in Iraq, and the Arab Governments start appeasing us, it will give us more influence there than France and Germany have. Bingo! Include Russia on your list as well. Baku Ceyhan operations are being driven by who?

To: LindyBill who wrote (46091)	9/22/2002 10:12:18 AM
From: BigBull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

LB Here is a JP editorial that speaks more directly to your "Playpen/Lillypad" point: Sep. 19, 2002 Why Europe is soft on Iraq BY DANIEL DAGAN jpost.com BUT IT would be a mistake to think it is altruistic motives alone that push the Europeans into such unrealistic positions. True, they want international order. True, they are driven by the illusion that Saddam can be curbed and harnessed to constructive cooperation. But there are also solid interests Europe is trying to defend. Here are some of them: While the economic sanctions on Iraq continue, many new paths of developing commerce with Saddam's regime have opened up in Europe. Through fictitious companies, most of which are registered in eastern European countries, many factories export industrial and other equipment to Iraq. A member of the Iraqi opposition said here lately that much of the export is done under the guise of tractors and agricultural machinery. But there are also entire production lines sent to Iraq, often declared as food-producing machines. It is an open secret that bilateral chambers of commerce, in which members of some European parliaments are active, serve as convenient conduits for business relations with Baghdad. A typical case from the past few days: the chief prosecutor in Mannheim, Germany, filed suits against two businessmen who exported cannon barrels to Iraq via the Czech Republic, and submitted to Baghdad a long list of further requisition offers, including equipment and machines for the weapons industry. It is not always necessary to use devious means to satisfy Iraq's appetite for technological and industrial infrastructures that can serve both civilian and military purposes. Russia, which conducts open commerce with Iraq, is an important supply route for companies in western Europe. It is easy to get around political and other restrictions by sending the cargo to Russian partners, who in turn send the equipment to Iraq. Supervision of this kind of "circuitous export" is impossible; besides which, the EU governments prefer to turn a blind eye to it so as not to hurt business. To wage an effective war against a distant and large country such as Iraq Europe lacks not only the political will and determination but also the intelligence and military resources. The first weak spot: European states do not have surveillance satellites that could provide them with reliable and timely data about the arena in "real time." They have to rely on US capabilities. This in turn increases their dependence on the "big brother" across the ocean. This is not an easy position for the EU, which has skyrocketing pretensions about formulating a unified foreign policy and appearing in the international arena as an independent and substantial player. The second weak spot: the inability to quickly transfer large amounts of equipment and supplies to a new military arena. After decades of neglect, Europe is only now developing a large cargo plane that will afford it the flexibility and mobility needed to handle crises. But the emphasis is on the medium- and long-term future. For the moment, the Europeans depend on America in this delicate area, too. If that weren't enough, missions in the former Yugoslavia and in Afghanistan are devouring many resources and placing a heavy burden on the European armies. In fact, there are no actual reserves of appropriate forces to handle another large crisis such as is developing in Iraq. The third weak spot: Except for England and to an extent France, the European states, during all the years of the Cold War, only prepared for a possible ground war that would take place only in the home arena and employ huge masses of armor and millions of standing army soldiers, who naturally have limited military training. They completely neglected to cultivate small, mobile and highly trained forces for special operations in distant locations. Priorities have changed since then, but the necessary forces are still not available at an adequate level to meet new challenges on the international scene.