>

That wouldn't happen in an internal NATO conflict. Otherwise the whole alliance is ruined
Erdogan is so desperate to win 2023 elections, he’s such a political whore about it too. >

Doesn't he win anyways because he got his opposition arrested? >

He's not arrested and won't be jailed and the result is still not certain. He was only one of the three possible candidates so arresting him won't win the election. >

Ahh okay. I probably remembered something wrong, thanks for the clarification :) >

Can we just fast forward to the part where Erdogan has passed on already? Jesus Christ…what a shit-stirrer! >

Sorry to say, this issue is not an erdogan issue. It’s a Turkey vs Greece issue that has dragged on for almost 100 years. >

This is most definitely a Turk nationalist trend issue. You cannot argue that Turkey has NOT been trending more and more nationalist in the past 10-20 years since Erdogan has cemented his grip on the country. >

I mean Greece and Turkey never really got on, but he has definitely made it worse by far. But I don’t think he wants to start a war with NATO, who would likely come in overthrow him quickly, recognize the Kurdish people that would instantly ally with the Iraqi Kurds to push for international recognition. This would cause a huge shit show with Iran and Syria as they have large Kurdish populations. In the mean time Greece gets to live peacefully while Turkey, Iraq, and Iran go to complete shit. >

They already have fought over cyprus in 1974, while both were members of NATO. 
Wikipedia article >

Turkish invasion of Cyprus 

The Turkish invasion of Cyprus began on 20 July 1974 and progressed in two phases over the following month. Taking place upon a background of intercommunal violence between Greek and Turkish Cypriots, and in response to a Greek junta-sponsored Cypriot coup d'état five days earlier, it led to the Turkish capture and occupation of the northern part of the island. The coup was ordered by the military junta in Greece and staged by the Cypriot National Guard in conjunction with EOKA B. It deposed the Cypriot president Archbishop Makarios III and installed Nikos Sampson.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5) >

Does Erdogan understand that if he attacks another NATO country, NATO is not going to side with him? >

I think the issue here is that he believes the rest of NATO will turn a blind eye to him attacking Greece over the Mediterranean dispute in exchange for not opening Turkey's airspace or the Turkish Straits to Russia. >

I think he would find himself deposed and in NATO custody, and his successor would be a more reliable partner. >

But the West isn’t a colonizer anymore right? >

Are you under the impression that Turks are from turkey? They are invaders from the steppes of asia. THEY are the colonizers, the rapers, pillagers and the stealers of land and the Turks have genocide as a cultural staple. STFU >

Are you under the impression that the Hungarians and Germanic countries aren't originally Asian?
Give everything back to the Roman empire or gtfo. >

The germanics are not "asian".  And the hungarians are not "originally" asian but were infused with asian through the eastern invasions.
the romans and the greeks are teh same, in fact you will find many greeks today will call themselves Romoi.  Helene or Romoi, it is the same.  But not turk. >

The Romans and the Greek are not the same, no. The people of the eastern empire were Greek speakers who identified as Romans. The Greeks of today transformed that identity into a Hellenic one during and after the war of independence, but the Romans of the East thought of the Greeks as a long dead people.
Yes, you have some remnants in the language, like Ρωμιοί. But the myth of an eternal Greek people is something western Europe and the modern Greek state came up with. No one in Thessaloniki in the year 1000 would've identified as Greek, and would've corrected you if you called him that. >

interesting that the romans of the east thought of the greeks as a long dead people because "greeks" were what the romans called hellenic people. hellenic people did not identify as "greek".  Roman aristocrats spoke ancient greek instead of latin.  And when the roman's took control of greece they did so against the macedonians with the help of other greek city states.  The Romans did not come in and genocide like the turk as greece was culturally the center of the latin and hellenic shared world, which is the point and why using romans as an example is terrible. >

Yeah, I know, the Graikos. The Romans thought of them as the Babylonians or Assyrians, long dead civilizations.
I speak English. I'm not English.
The Romans respected the Greeks, spoke Greek, and some lived in Greece. But between the post Hadrian era and shortly before the war of independence, there were no Greeks in Greece. There were Romans, who identified as Roman, spoke Romaic (Koine Greek), thought of Aeneas and Romulus as their ancestors, had a centralised Roman state, and followed the Roman religion of Christianity. These people were the descendants of the ancient Greeks and the ancestors of the modern Greeks, but they did not identify as Greek (ie. Hellenes).
Before and during the war of independence, the revived Hellenic identity defeated the older Roman one, but they absolutely did not mean the same thing. Hellenes were seen as brave freedom fighters, and Romans were seen as meek Ottoman slaves. This was the ethnogenesis of the modern Greek people, but again, no one was identifying as Greek for the vast majority of the existence of the medieval Roman empire. >

This is more like a status update, every state is like "Oh crap, I forgot to update my foes on the situation..!" >

Oh, it's Saturday! >


Both countries will hold national elections by next summer. >

Erdogan threatening Greece is such an empty threat, I'm shocked anyone in Turkey takes it seriously. At least when he threatens the Kurds you know he's capable of carrying it out. >

Yes, attacking the Kurds in Syria is much more likely than a war with Greece/NATO >

Especially when he's literally right now already attacking the Kurds in Syria and assaulting their cities. >

Turkey wants to rule the nat gas flow in Europe. Russia wants to make Turkey a hub for Russian nat gas and Greece has the potential to totally cut Russia out of europes future with their own gas flow. Turkey has and always will place both sides of the fence >

when you think you are out smarting the good the bad and the inoccent people but ultimately you have become the evil that you accused the others; dictators often honestly don't agree they are one, some lie, some don't... it's like a grade school bully mentality >

Since Erdogan has already staged a fake coup, maybe he’s going to do the “create an existential threat to distract” from the fact that he and his party appear to be trailing badly in the upcoming election. >

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 63%. (I'm a bot)


ATHENS - Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavu?o?lu on Thursday threatened Greece with retaliation if Athens proceeded with any expansion of its territorial waters in the Aegean, saying that it would still be seen as a casus belli justifying military action.
"Our position is clear, no 12 miles, we will not allow for territorial waters to be expanded by even a mile in the Aegean," Çavu?o?lu said during an end-of-year press briefing in Ankara, commenting on reports that Athens plans to extend territorial waters around the island of Crete.
Back in October, Greek foreign ministry officials told POLITICO that the technical work needed to extend territorial waters to 12 nautical miles south and east of Crete could be ready within weeks.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: ATHENS^#1 territorial^#2 waters^#3 Greek^#4 mile^#5 >

Hey Türkiye, how's your inflation going? >

Territorial sea dispute between Turkey and Greece is a sham fight. Tension always rises during internal elections. It’s just a way to get votes. No threat of actual war. I’m sure my greek neighbors can confirm this. >

And any ohter county have an idea about it. Neiter turkey or greek dont care at all. >

Let me guess, Turkey wants to hold that over Sweden and Finland's heads too, right?  Fuckin' Turkey man, that country is just backward as hell. >

Not exactly Turkey as a whole, more like Erdogan and his provincial gang of unruly AKP Islamic extremists. >

It always cracks me up to see folks exclude a country's people from the equation.  
In the end, a country's people are as equally to blame.  For if it were not for a country's people, their government wouldn't be what it is.  A country's government get its power from its people.
Even here in the US.  Our president is our direct representative to foreign nations.  That is one of the three main duties of our president, with protection of our people(commander in chief of all military branches), and the veto power over congressional bills.
In regard to other country's leaders being representative of their peoples, they are the same.  If a country's leader is doing wrong, the people of that country are at fault. >

Wouldn't it be direct representation for democracies only? Considering the US is a republic. >

And how are the representatives chosen in the US? >

The house representatives we elect are our representation to the national government.  That is why we call them representatives, and also why they are in proportion to a state's total population as per census.  They do not represent you to foreign nations.
And as a side note; our senators are you states' representatives to our national government. >

Should anyone tell them that Asia Minor was a Greek colony for most of its settled history? >

Lol it’s not a colony it’s a central piece of  Byzantium >

Not talking about Rome, dude. (And Constantinople was still the Greek speaking half of the empire). I'm talking about before Rome conquered Greece and its eastern colonies >

Most of it’s settled history would’ve been in Roman hands, who held it for a Millenia >

Rome accounts for maybe 1/3 of Greek history. 
You're talking about ~7000 years of Greek city states in Greece and the Mediterranean (and Asia Minor) prior to being conquered by Alexander in 334 BC, then Rome took formal control in 146 BC.
The Ottomans took Constantinople, the last Roman city, in 1453 CE. So no, Rome controlled the region for about 1500 years. Which isn't comparable to Greek history in the region. And not at all comparable to the Turkish history of about 600 years >

Ok I’m not really sure about Bronze Age history, but I’m pretty sure Anatolia was controlled by the hittites or Persians or whoever other big power was in the Middle East. So most of its colonised history would’ve been divided into different emerging empires throughout history, but the Roman and eastern Roman Empire held it for the longest continuous stretch of time in it’s settled history >

Now... this guy too? I mean... really? Do we need more tension, anxiety and wars? Can't we just get along? >

Turkey when your economy is shit and they think it can't get worse....
It can >

What countries aren’t at odds with each other at this point? :/ >

Well, the city-state of Ankh-Morpork is currently not at war with the kingdom of Lancre....oh, did you mean on Earth? >

The luggage is about to disrupt international events here too >

Well, you know, the thing about the war thing, Greece can then invoke Article 5. >

Does Article 5 apply to intra-NATO conflicts? >

I don't see why not as there are no limitation for within or without (probably it wasn't imagined of a threat from within just as there wasn't an imagine need to kick a member out).
Per Wiki:

The key section of the treaty is Article 5. Its commitment clause defines the casus foederis. It commits each member state to consider an armed attack against one member state, in Europe or North America, to be an armed attack against them all. Upon such attack, each member state is to assist by taking "such action as [the member state] deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area." The article has only been invoked once, but considered in a number of other cases.

September 11 attacks
Main article: September 11 attacks
It has been invoked only once in NATO history, after the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001.[58][59] The invocation was confirmed on 4 October 2001, when NATO determined that the attacks were indeed eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty.[60] The eight official actions taken by NATO in response to the 9/11 attacks included Operation Eagle Assist and Operation Active Endeavour, a naval operation in the Mediterranean which was designed to prevent the movement of terrorists or weapons of mass destruction, as well as enhancing the security of shipping in general. Active Endeavour began on 4 October 2001.[61]
Ironically, Turkey threatened to invoke Article 5 twice (per Wiki):

Turkey Turkey  June, 2012  

Main article: 2012 Turkish F-4 Phantom shootdown
The downing of an "unarmed" Turkish military jet which was "13 sea miles" from Syria over "international waters" on a "solo mission to test domestic radar systems".[62][63] On 25 June, the Turkish Deputy Prime Minister said that he intended to raise Article 5.[64]
Turkey Turkey   August, 2012    
Main article: Tomb of Suleyman Shah § Events during the Syrian Civil War
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan stated that "The tomb of Suleyman Shah [in Syria] and the land surrounding it is our territory. We cannot ignore any unfavorable act against that monument, as it would be an attack on our territory, as well as an attack on NATO land... Everyone knows his duty, and will continue to do what is necessary" >

Well, Article 5 is so vaguely worded that there's room for either interpretation... but luckily, Article 8 is much clearer and directly relevant.

Each Party undertakes not to enter into any international engagement in conflict with this Treaty

So the other NATO members could trigger this clause in the charter to justify any sanctions that they levy against Turkey in the event that it attacks Greece. The question, of course, is will they be willing to do that at the risk of Turkey withdrawing from NATO? >

iirc the Tripoli government and the Turkish government just invested their own economic zones to help capture oil deposits off the coast of southern Cyprus. However this new and mostly unrecognised economic zone means that a good portion of the Eastern Greek islands are now in Turkish waters. 
Turkey has NATO and the EU over a barrel until they stop objecting to Finland and Sweden's admittance to NATO >

Erdey shouldn't have gazed into that glass ball and talked to pootin. Cut-rate saurons everywhere these days. >

Oh my god can you just fuuuuuuck ooooooofffffff >

Again, why is Turkey in NATO? >

Because it's geographically closer to russia, the whole Cuban missile crisis started because NATO had missiles in turkey >

It's long past time to kick Turkey out of NATO. >

Yea, once NATO 'actually' can kick its members out of the organization. >

Maybe members of NATO that issue threats to other members of NATO should be considered for expulsion. >

Erdogan gets greasy… >

Turkey shouldn’t be in NATO. >

Shut up turkey or we’re gonna eat you >

Some fuckin ally Türkiye is. 
NATO, show them the damn door.
Ridiculous. >

12 miles, or, where the 12 miles would intersect,  the midpoint of the distance between the closest Turkish land territory and the closest Greek land territory.
Problem solved (assuming rationality, which I fully understand cannot be assumed). >

Aren’t the Turks the crowd that stored gun powder in the Parthenon and then it went boom?      Thought it was back in the 1600’s but they still haven’t fixed it. >

What the heck is wrong with world leaders? War war war. >

Normal people don't become world leaders, only narcissists and sociopaths do. And they are either controlled by their surroundings or... >

Another armchair psychiatrist generalizing about people he has never met. >

Yes they pay me for that^^ >

It’s almost like I’m seeing an axis nation group forming in Iran , Russia , China , turkey etc. >

Just when I think this pendejo can't get worse.... >

Shut up and make me a sandwich. >

Fuck turkey >

If Turkey attacks Greece and Greece invokes article 5 then the straight is closed, Turkish airspace is closed, and the next Turkish government will be welcomed into NATO with open arms.