Skip to main content

Something Very Interesting Is Happening In Turkey.

I am no fan of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, never have been, but that does not mean I do not hold his ability as an international diplomat and strategist in high regard.  He is a ruthless and wily opponent if ever there is one, and this means that in the face of a coup like we saw this week any number possibilities should be considered.  But lets look at what we do know, and a picture begins to emerge.

First and foremost, we need to get one thing immediately clear. Turkey has been a major strategic ally of Washington and provided the geographical and logistical cover not only for Washington's rebels in their "Assad must go" regime change push (which they disguise as a civil war) but also for ISIS and have been heavily complicit in the illegal ISIS oild trade among other things.  Secondly, the war in Syria is the preeminent strategic military operation in the globe at the moment and absolutely NOTHING goes down without Washington either orchestrating it or giving it their green light, especially something like a Military coup of a major NATO partner that houses over 70 US nuclear warheads.  Let's not be naive here, to suggest Washington is not at some level aware or complicit, or to rule out that possibility would be poor detective work.  This is an angle I suggest we watch closely in the coming weeks.

Next lets look at the timing. Recently Erdogan sent something that could loosely be considered an apology for the downing of the Russian jet that saw a frosting over of Russian/Turkish relations.  The US does not like this fact. The prime reason for NATO's very survival right now is for Russia to be painted as a villain (which is sick considering Russia's valiant efforts at fighting terrorism of late).  The US military and intelligence community certainly do not approve of the thawing of Erdogans resolve in Syria either, or recent Turkish/Israeli/Russian gas industry related dealings involving Gazprom, or the way the Iran deal has been progressing (at least factions in the US have not been happy about it).  I think the timing here is also very interesting. I am well aware of the circumstantial nature of the last two factors but stick with me here, we are building a picture, framing a case & looking for direction to avoid the MSM smoke-screening that will characterize the coverage of this event going forward.

And what of Fethullah Gulen, who Erdogan has personally accused of being behind things?  He is holed up in self-imposed exile in the US, if the US is complicit he would be the ideal candidate for the sort of puppet regime the US would want in the region, the sort that characterizes the true nature of a US "Strategic Partner" or better put, ...Puppet regime.  Regime change by coup, like in the Ukraine and being attempted in Syria is the standard MO (if not soft power grabs or military invasion) of the US when shopping for partners.

One other interesting possibility that should be taken seriously is the possibility of Erdogan playing a role in the staging of the coup itself, but further evidence would be needed here:

I think there there are some very interesting factors to consider in our assessment of the situation, and there is a broader game afoot, keep an open mind but also try justifiable suspicious prejudice against US empire building. Somewhere in the middle we will find our solution.

Popular posts from this blog

Dīvide et imperā: How To Defeat The Most Effective Social Control Weapon In Human History

Many different empires, cultures and nations have existed in history and while the details, styles, values and aesthetics keep changing, the core structure remains unchanged. In order to benefit from social coperation and steal reward in excess of the labour and value you invest, you cannot take it by brute  for extended periods of time without facing the wrath of the crowds. The crowds need to give it to you willingly or unknowingly. There was one exception to this synopsis, the Feudal System  but there is more to that than people realise, it's a post for a later day and deserves full scrutiny and parrellels do manifest. The support of the home crowd is also needed to win wars. No army has ever been effective fighting under duress, they would assemble, arm  and immediatly turn on you.

Before the current reigning Judeo-Christian Anglo American Empire of today there were other more monolithic empires that the loosely ideologically aligned old money banking dynasties, globalists an…

Scientific Consensus is that Consensus is overturned 100% of the time

Everything you know is wrong. There is a very good reason why science succeeds more often than politics does.  Unlike politics, It's not a consensus or a vote,  it's actually method.  The scientific method. Anyone who has read this blog before probably knows I'm a lifelong science junkie as well as someone who spends thousands of hours breaking down the the political and economic agendas behind the special interest groups that guide public policy.  In many ways I'm actually uniquely qualified to tie these angles together in ways not well understood by the overwhelming majority of people.  That actually includes scientists. Scientists are notoriously naive in the political and economic forces that drive the human world.

For example if you are of the opinion that the earth has one moon, the earth revolves around the sun etc you are already wrong. Well sort of. The politicpl world is black and white, the scientific world is nuanced, see…

CO2 is not a pollutant, it is greening the earth!

Whatever your persuasion is on CO² and AGW, nobody disagrees on the tremendous benefit it provides plant life. Many of the past famine disasters and desertification has CO² decline listed as a contributor.

I feel I've already blown the notion that humans are the main cause of climate change out of the water. Or rather I've used the reasoning of others and put it together in a convenient outline. See my previous post above for starters.  However, I recognize that humans do increase CO² levels, no matter how tiny. Increases are likely to be very short lived because the earth has an effective feedback mechanism, but we can apparently get small increases, and it's been put forward on very poor science that this is a bad thing. That assertion hinges completely on bad models. More on that in the bottom most link.  Model's and the measurement sample dates are dubious at best.

Furthermore, the main increase in CO²  as…