Istanbul: Ataturk airport attack: 41 dead and 236 injured

[SGOS]

Does ISIL see Turkey as a threat, or is Turkey particularly vulnerable to becoming a caliphate and therefore an easy target?  I know that's a forced choice, but it's just a way of asking, "Why attack Turkey?"  Or any country for that matter?  One reason is that you don't like them, another is that they are an easy target and can be controlled.  But there are probably other reasons.  Or maybe not.

Sometimes I think the political strategy of terrorism is to confuse people with pointless acts of violence. <END>

People will start to wonder what terrorists groups want, so they do get attention, but while terrorism seems big on violence, it comes up short when it comes to explanations.  People seek closure.  They will even make up explanations for terrorism.  But for the life of me, I'm at a loss to explain terrorism satisfactorily.

Someone said yesterday on NPR that the reason these groups draw so many recruits is that the idea of a creating a caliphate is very popular.  Well if it's so popular, just create a caliphate, and beat your women or do whatever it is that caliphates do.  Or maybe it's not so easy because a caliphate isn't all that popular of an idea in the first place.  However, talking heads are paid to explain things so they have to say things, but I have yet to hear an explanation that resonates logically.

[pr126]

What I don't understand is how Erdogan has failed to proclaim that the terrorist attack had nothing to do with Islam.
That is deviating from the norm.

Apparently he is not an Islamic theologian like the rest of the rest of the world leaders.

Did not mention gun control either. A missed opportunity.

[Baruch]

Erdogan blames everything on Kurds, and sometimes he is right ;-(

[pr126]

Erdogan blames everything on Kurds, and sometimes he is right ;-(

Don't forget the Jooos!  They are to blame for every ill in the world. (Quran 5:82)

[Flanker1Six]

Does ISIL see Turkey as a threat, or is Turkey particularly vulnerable to becoming a caliphate and therefore an easy target?  I know that's a forced choice, but it's just a way of asking, "Why attack Turkey?"  Or any country for that matter?  One reason is that you don't like them, another is that they are an easy target and can be controlled.  But there are probably other reasons.  Or maybe not.

Sometimes I think the political strategy of terrorism is to confuse people with pointless acts of violence. <END>

People will start to wonder what terrorists groups want, so they do get attention, but while terrorism seems big on violence, it comes up short when it comes to explanations.  People seek closure.  They will even make up explanations for terrorism.  But for the life of me, I'm at a loss to explain terrorism satisfactorily.

Someone said yesterday on NPR that the reason these groups draw so many recruits is that the idea of a creating a caliphate is very popular.  Well if it's so popular, just create a caliphate, and beat your women or do whatever it is that caliphates do.  Or maybe it's not so easy because a caliphate isn't all that popular of an idea in the first place.  However, talking heads are paid to explain things so they have to say things, but I have yet to hear an explanation that resonates logically.

You've hit on a very important element of A: Revolutions, B: Arab Muslim Culture/Sociology, C: Maleness, D: Superstitions......................WHAT are the odds? 

A:  Revolutions; I've been reading military and general history for decades.  My observations are 1. Gaining power is far easier than maintaining it; for a whole host of reasons.  Chiefest being you probably didn't get all the dudes you threw out of power---and they're are going to want payback, and a good chunk of your "Bros" aren't going to follow instructions well, or will be actively trying to under cut you so they can call the shots.  2. If you have a revolution (successfully overthrow the established regime, gov, religion, etc) there is an 80-90% chance whatever you establish will be worse than the shit you just tossed out.  The sad part is many times your dipshit friends and you don't realize what a nightmare you've created, or are inflicting on those blessed by your operation. 

B: They may not have invented "factionalism" (aka tribalism), but they are first or second to have signed up for life.  This became vividly obvious; via 5 years of close association with Arabs and Afghanis.  An absolutely chaotic dizzying array of constantly realigning factions, rivalries, temporary alliances, hurt feelings/honor,  and PAYBACK   (can you say cyclical violence?).  Ever wonder why the most stable Arab countries and groups have tended to have autocratic, paternalistic strongmen running the show?   That is until the Bush and Obama Admin's decided to do their absolute best to destabilize the entire region  (for very different reasons, of course).

C:  98% of all violence across the entire planet for all time has been committed by a single sex.   Men are sex driven and very territorial; like most male animals--we are hard wired for it.  Some have learned to moderate that shit; which is to the benefit of us all; some channel it in other not quite so atavistic directions; we're all still our own worst enemies to varying degrees.  Remove the civilized social/cultural restraints in a given area, or take that and mix it with A & B and it's  Except to the poor individuals on the receiving end     

D:  When the Dog is on your side..........................you can do no wrong.  Mix in some A, B, & C.................need I say more? 

[drunkenshoe]

SGOS; Why wouldn't ISIL attack Turkey? It does not have anything do with creating a caliphate at all. What caliphate? Whose caliphate? What sects, what islamic culture? You are looking into this with Pope-Catholic glasses...completely different than that.

Erdogan is not religious leader, he is a politician who wants to build a little 'America' in the ME. And unfortunately he got a lot of support to do that from Uncle Sam from the begining because whatever is the political show on the front screen in the end the cuontry is the strategic ally. Not just USA's but also Israel's.

Are you still at the point of 'islam did it'? Seriously?

Flanker1Six What does Arab/Muslim Culture sociology mean other than the Arabic states?

Arabs are %12 of muslim population of the planet. What Arab culture is this that you equated with Muslim culture(S) and sociolgy?  Which Arabs? Which arab culture?



All primates are sex driven and territorial, humans is the most violent one among all. This has nothing to do with gender. Demostrating violent acts has nothing to do with gender or even size. There is no such thing as men are more violent than women because they are male. This is bullshit that has been repeated for so long and as all the human cultures are built on it, you cannot even think otherwise.

I reiterate, there is no scientific fact as such that having a male chromosome is determinative of being violent or being sex driven. Bullshit. Males commiting the most violent crimes and a very big percentage of crimes have many various causes and reasons. It's all about the civilisation people build. Why crime is significantly lower in highly secular countries where the equality is most established between all genders, but higher in the ones that is religious to relatively religious?

Nature; evolution doesn't conform to people's beliefs and delusions just because a specific primate culture and social control mechanism EVOLVED in some way and spread on to the planet. Evolution is not a determinate process, it is the ever going nature itself. It doesn't give a fuck what is your perception of it.




What revolution? What is a revolution to millions of people that had to leave a country because there is NO WATER to survive? What's revolution to people whose country has been invaded and burned to the ground and milions of people killed like animals? What is revolution to whom for what?

And where do all the political games, paybacks, rivalry, hurt feelings and honour fights fit in where people do not have the basic requirements to survive? Nowhere. People just get armed, found terrorist states and groups and attack anywhere they can. Anywhere That's what people do. And civilians, the rest dies. Or flees for their lives anywhere they can. This is not some complicated issue of power. We have WAAAY passed that long time ago.

That is until the Bush and Obama Admin's decided to do their absolute best to destabilize the entire region  (for very different reasons, of course).

Nobody has ever wanted a stabilised ME anyway. Not 50 years ago, 30 years ago, not 20 years ago, NOT even now.


It back-fired at EU and with the more idiotic policies triggered by the main goals of power and money, exploded at UK's ass. The whole thing reads like a fucking biblical parable that's the part I hate the most.

[drunkenshoe]

Erdogan blames everything on Kurds, and sometimes he is right ;-(

Erdogan blames Kurds? LOL Do you have any idea how many millions of Kurds have been voting for Erdogan since the beginning?

Erdogan is not stupid. Do not underestimate him.

[Baruch]

Not just Biblical ... Oedipal ;-(

Any blaming ... is purely political/cynical.  Erdogan gains power by being tough on ... X.  Doesn't matter what X it is (same as any other warlord) ... provided that is strengthens his power.  Machiavelli never was blinded by partisanship.

[Baruch]

Latest: Erdogan suddenly kissed and made up with Israel and Russia.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-28/isolated-erdogan-heals-israel-russia-rifts-for-economic-boost

Isolated Erdogan Heals Israel, Russia Ties to Boost Economy

And Obama is making kiss faces at Putin over Syria.  Coincidence?

[drunkenshoe]

Yeah...'coincidence'. Let's see what will Erdogan do about Syria. Sigh. Breath in, breath out.

[marom1963]

And Obama is making kiss faces at Putin over Syria.  Coincidence?

Obama isn't about to challenge Putin. The US is too far stretched as it is - and Putin knows it.

[drunkenshoe]

Baruch, my worry is that in any upcoming possible bad situation we -I mean the whole world- need Uncle Sam to push and pull with Putin and it will be very difficult without UK outside of EU.

[marom1963]

Baruch, my worry is that in any upcoming possible bad situation we -I mean the whole world- need Uncle Sam to push and pull with Putin and it will be very difficult without UK outside of EU.

The UK invariably sides w/the US. Either the UK can strengthen the US position in dealing w/the EU - or have no effect whatever. However, the UK can strengthen the US position when dealing w/Russia. The Russians will never consider opposing the US w/o taking the UK - and the Royal Navy - into account.

[SGOS]

5 years of close association with Arabs and Afghanis.  An absolutely chaotic dizzying array of constantly realigning factions, rivalries, temporary alliances, hurt feelings/honor,  and PAYBACK   (can you say cyclical violence?).  Ever wonder why the most stable Arab countries and groups have tended to have autocratic, paternalistic strongmen running the show?

I started thinking about these sorts of things during the time we got rid of Saddam.  I had read a book about the coming war in Iraq, written by a former CIA Mideast analyst.  Over all, he more or less supported the war, but he was surprisingly even handed in pointing out the dangers of such an action.  He outlined things not brought to our attention during the heady prewar propaganda we were being fed by the administration.  One was the possibility of creating a power vacuum that would eventually be filled by something we could not predict, and the strong possibility that it could be worse that what we already had.

Saddam was a brutal maniac, and he ruled with an iron hand, and while I understand that it is politically incorrect to say anything that could remotely be construed as defending Saddam, it should be apparent by now that he was operating in an unstable environment surrounded by forces in and outside his country that strongly coveted his power.  While Saddam was brutal, he was playing to equally brutal audience, and the same can be said for many Mideast leaders.  Running a country like Iraq is not an easy job, as we now realize.  Saddam was keeping in check forces of equal or worse brutality than himself, and forces which the US and the new Iraq leadership cannot contain.

And the chaos is now spilling across the Mideast.  Maybe it was going to happen anyway.  We can never know for sure, but one thing we can be quite sure of is that our role certainly does not appear to have helped, and it likely made things much worse.  Things were more stable when Saddam was in power.  Are the two simultaneous events related?  I think they are, but I can't be certain.