Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 345678910111213141516 LastLast
Results 241 to 260 of 309

Thread: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

  1. #241

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    Not perhaps. That's exactly why. They don't want to find themselves on the receiving end of an invitation to such a body, with their signature saying they consider their decisions binding. That's also exactly why Greece rejected the jurisdiction of the ICJ to try such matters. I don't understand what you think this link, if it says what you say it says, proves. I told you numerous times in this discussion that Greece will not get what it is legally entitled to if they go to international arbitration. Because those processes are about compromise. So yes, Greece will have to compromise and get less than it claims. Now, since what it claims is what the international standard affords them, Greece will end up with less than it is legally entitled to. That doesn't mean Greece is wrong to claim what it does. Greece has every right to. But international law is about what you can force as much as what you are entitled to and Turkey is going to steal a nice big chunk of what UNCLOS affords Greece, because they can. The only thing that could stop that is if Greece successfully wages a war against Turkey in the near future, or finds some other way to apply comparable pressure on Turkey. Both of which are rather unlikely.
    The Hague is not a place of compromise, but sure, I understand why you'd bank on that since it undermines the Greek perspective. It is not some organization that weighs countries' military power in order to pass judgment. It gives judgment based on what international law dictates. Why the Hague wouldn't give 100% of what Greece wants is the very principle of equity. Greece knows this. Making up excuses won't change that.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  2. #242
    dogukan's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Middle freaking east
    Posts
    7,625

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    The amount of failures of Turkish expansionist adventurism seems to be cornered badly.
    For some time now, our credit worthiness has declined, exchange rates are racing towards records at unsustainable rates.

    Turkey's actions have managed to isolate it from both the Western axis and the Russian axis. That in itself is a major achievement.
    So much so that we seem to have managed to make incompatible sides work together.
    It is good to see that the "we deserve everything we think we are entitled to" perspective when it comes to Kurds, Armenians, human rights and security perceptions, border disputes etc.." meets it match.
    We have completely lost what it means to think pluralistically. This is something that goes from domestic politics of Turkey to international relations. Thankfully, international relations is not governed by "Turkish juidiciary".

    While we dipped our international image to the bottom by supporting jihadism against a rightful resistance of Kurds in Syria, we did manage to dip ourselves even more in the last months. The Eurasianist militarists who took over our foreign relations hand in hand with Islamo-nationalist alliance have led us to an adventurism purely by relying on our military might. It is good to see their authoritarian-expansionist and uncompromising attitude fail.

    Meanwhile, Turkey seems to be backtraccking in the Meditterenean from a position of "MAVİ VATAN" is the doctrine of the Turkish nation to a more sensible compromising diplomatic position as it should have been.

    Let's be clear. Geography does not favor any law in this area, and as each case in maritime law is, this is a unique case too.
    The only way forward is NOT through militaristic enforcement of our demands, but a compromising position without nationalist egotistical dickwaving. Something our current regime have perhaps forgotten due to the power poisoning they have within the domestic politics.

    Aegean should be the sea of peace where we enjoy the beaches, the tavernas, the music, the food together for a common culture. Unfortunately, unlike German nationalism, Turkish nationalism did not experience the trauma of expansionist warfare for a long time. Think about it, EU was founded by the compromise between France and Germany on the disputed area between them, it turned into the biggest peace project of humanity. Turkey does not intend to compromise. And that is why it is wrong. Not because there is no sense in Turkey's claims, there is definetly a justice in Turkey pointing to there being something wrong with the sea zones given the circumstances, but it all comes down to the attitude. Because Greece is also right.
    There can either be war or a compromising deal that promotes the common life in the area.
    Turkey is used to the "war" option seeing how it worked with the Kurds. But the coalition formed around Greece seem to have stopped Turkey for now.
    Hopefully, Kurdish situation will also resolve with a sensible compromise one day.
    And Turkey can finally transform into a democratic mindset where we can move forward instead of dealing with security-obsessed populist elite &bureaucracy.
    "Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves. Thus, communism, in particular, is a dogmatic abstraction; in which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism as taught by Cabet, Dézamy, Weitling, etc. This communism is itself only a special expression of the humanistic principle, an expression which is still infected by its antithesis – the private system. Hence the abolition of private property and communism are by no means identical, and it is not accidental but inevitable that communism has seen other socialist doctrines – such as those of Fourier, Proudhon, etc. – arising to confront it because it is itself only a special, one-sided realisation of the socialist principle."
    Marx to A.Ruge

  3. #243
    Alastor's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Not home
    Posts
    1,425

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nebaki View Post
    This is such a ridiculous claim in other words you agree on yourself that Greece is not in right, i thought you guys were for sure with your quotes from United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and now you don´t like the Agreements which you went on your own and signed? blaming Turkey in the one hand to not respecting International Law and on the other hand not even loyal to treaties which you part of like ones which are not even Turkey is involved - now this is real hypocrisy.
    No I do not agree "on myself" that Greece is not "in right". I have stated repeatedly and unequivocally that Greece has every right to claim what it claims. Maybe you were reading other things, not my posts, if you came to these conclusions. The agreements are fine, but international law is not enforceable. That is what I am saying. Greece has the law on its side, but it doesn't matter as much as it should.

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    The Hague is not a place of compromise, but sure, I understand why you'd bank on that since it undermines the Greek perspective. It is not some organization that weighs countries' military power in order to pass judgment. It gives judgment based on what international law dictates. Why the Hague wouldn't give 100% of what Greece wants is the very principle of equity. Greece knows this. Making up excuses won't change that.
    Nonsense. The Hague is a place to resolve international disputes. You don't do that by laying down the law. Because there is no international policeman that will enforce these decisions. What is the Hague going to do to a state that refuses to follow a ruling? The UN charter gives the right to the other party to appeal to the security council and request some sanctions. The more powerful and relevant the state, the less likely these already unlikely sanctions will be. In other words the ICJ will huff, then it will puff and finally do nothing about it. Hence the Hague needs to find rulings that the states involved are willing to accept. That is, it needs to find a compromise.

  4. #244

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Nope. His comments are not the official line of the Turkish state. You can not produce those comments elsewhere. He is not the number 2 in the Turkish republic either. That rank goes to the speaker of the assembly. Officials of a state, or even the heads of state often make off-handed remarks that do not follow the official state lines. You can try to grasp on it as much as you want. Turkey never made any claims on the sovereignty of Kastellorizo. You're simply confusing official stance of a state with personal opinion of a state official.

    How about you find an official statement from Turkey making a claim on Kastellorizo's sovereignty? Should be fairly easy given your tone about it.
    The statements of the Vice President of the Republic of Turkey do not represent the official positions of the Republic of Turkey. Just listen to yourself. Whose statements then represent the official positions of the republic of Turkey? No, your comment is the most ridiculous thing that has ever been written here.

  5. #245

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    Nonsense. The Hague is a place to resolve international disputes. You don't do that by laying down the law. Because there is no international policeman that will enforce these decisions. What is the Hague going to do to a state that refuses to follow a ruling? The UN charter gives the right to the other party to appeal to the security council and request some sanctions. The more powerful and relevant the state, the less likely these already unlikely sanctions will be. In other words the ICJ will huff, then it will puff and finally do nothing about it. Hence the Hague needs to find rulings that the states involved are willing to accept. That is, it needs to find a compromise.
    Article 38 of the ICJ Statute:

    1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply:a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states;
    b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
    c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
    d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.
    2. This provision shall not prejudice the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the parties agree thereto.
    ICJ is not your family elder that you go to resolve your dispute.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    The statements of the Vice President of the Republic of Turkey do not represent the official positions of the Republic of Turkey. Just listen to yourself. Whose statements then represent the official positions of the republic of Turkey? No, your comment is the most ridiculous thing that has ever been written here.
    You couldn't find any official statement from Turkey on the subject, didn't you? As expected... Yes, not every statement made by a person holding a government position is the official position of the state they're working for. Why is that concept such a ridiculous one? Does every single statement from any Greek minister or member of the government represent the official position of the Greek government? By the way, Fuat Oktay isn't the vice president, at least not in the sense people use that position. His position is more of a mirror one from prime minister undersecretary before the system was changed in Turkey. You can have multiple "vice presidents" in Turkey, and they're not elected.
    Last edited by PointOfViewGun; September 17, 2020 at 08:54 AM.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  6. #246
    Alastor's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Not home
    Posts
    1,425

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Article 38 of the ICJ Statute:

    ICJ is not your family elder that you go to resolve your dispute.
    You don't want to understand do you? I told you before, now I'm asking you, what happens if a state refuses to abide by a ruling? How is the ruling enforceable?

    The role of the ICJ is to resolve international disputes. If a state refuses to abide by a ruling then the ICJ has failed in its role. In fact, it made the situation worse. Hence the need to find a compromise that both states can accept. Look at how many ways the list you quoted provides to the ICJ to get a compromise. A decision can be based on convention, on customs, on principles, on opinions etc. It is not ironclad and it is not meant to be, or it would be very difficult to offer compromises. That's how the ICJ works. Quite like your family elder that you go to resolve a dispute.

    Oh btw since you like bringing up precedent, do read the referenced article 59.

  7. #247
    dogukan's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Middle freaking east
    Posts
    7,625

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Turkey does not have a properly functioning bureaucracy to claim an "official statement".

    Politics is made by those who are in power. That includes Erdoğan, his advisor circle, the factions he has to lend his ears to control the country (gray wolves, eurasianists, various Islamic cults...etc).

    Announcements coming from Bahçeli, these Eurasianist circles as well Erdoğan's advisors are not just some random statements made by a parliament member. So Greece has every right to consider these as Turkey's potential position. Not to mention that within the public discourse or media, even worse things are being said for a very long time.

    Erdoğan himself has many times made expansionist talks, though he did not directly say we will go and take these islands.

    In anycase, from a rational perspective, given the coalition at the helm of Turkey and the structure of Turkish politics, the deduction of a potential military threat is quite sensible.
    "Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves. Thus, communism, in particular, is a dogmatic abstraction; in which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism as taught by Cabet, Dézamy, Weitling, etc. This communism is itself only a special expression of the humanistic principle, an expression which is still infected by its antithesis – the private system. Hence the abolition of private property and communism are by no means identical, and it is not accidental but inevitable that communism has seen other socialist doctrines – such as those of Fourier, Proudhon, etc. – arising to confront it because it is itself only a special, one-sided realisation of the socialist principle."
    Marx to A.Ruge

  8. #248
    Alastor's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Not home
    Posts
    1,425

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by dogukan View Post
    In anycase, from a rational perspective, given the coalition at the helm of Turkey and the structure of Turkish politics, the deduction of a potential military threat is quite sensible.
    Add that Turkey does have a recent history of invasion and that it maintains an official casus belli against Greece and that deduction becomes even more credible.

  9. #249
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,146

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by dogukan View Post
    The amount of failures of Turkish expansionist adventurism seems to be cornered badly.
    For some time now, our credit worthiness has declined, exchange rates are racing towards records at unsustainable rates.

    Turkey's actions have managed to isolate it from both the Western axis and the Russian axis. That in itself is a major achievement.
    So much so that we seem to have managed to make incompatible sides work together.
    It is good to see that the "we deserve everything we think we are entitled to" perspective when it comes to Kurds, Armenians, human rights and security perceptions, border disputes etc.." meets it match.
    We have completely lost what it means to think pluralistically. This is something that goes from domestic politics of Turkey to international relations. Thankfully, international relations is not governed by "Turkish juidiciary".

    While we dipped our international image to the bottom by supporting jihadism against a rightful resistance of Kurds in Syria, we did manage to dip ourselves even more in the last months. The Eurasianist militarists who took over our foreign relations hand in hand with Islamo-nationalist alliance have led us to an adventurism purely by relying on our military might. It is good to see their authoritarian-expansionist and uncompromising attitude fail.

    Meanwhile, Turkey seems to be backtraccking in the Meditterenean from a position of "MAVİ VATAN" is the doctrine of the Turkish nation to a more sensible compromising diplomatic position as it should have been.

    Let's be clear. Geography does not favor any law in this area, and as each case in maritime law is, this is a unique case too.
    The only way forward is NOT through militaristic enforcement of our demands, but a compromising position without nationalist egotistical dickwaving. Something our current regime have perhaps forgotten due to the power poisoning they have within the domestic politics.

    Aegean should be the sea of peace where we enjoy the beaches, the tavernas, the music, the food together for a common culture. Unfortunately, unlike German nationalism, Turkish nationalism did not experience the trauma of expansionist warfare for a long time. Think about it, EU was founded by the compromise between France and Germany on the disputed area between them, it turned into the biggest peace project of humanity. Turkey does not intend to compromise. And that is why it is wrong. Not because there is no sense in Turkey's claims, there is definetly a justice in Turkey pointing to there being something wrong with the sea zones given the circumstances, but it all comes down to the attitude. Because Greece is also right.
    There can either be war or a compromising deal that promotes the common life in the area.
    Turkey is used to the "war" option seeing how it worked with the Kurds. But the coalition formed around Greece seem to have stopped Turkey for now.
    Hopefully, Kurdish situation will also resolve with a sensible compromise one day.
    And Turkey can finally transform into a democratic mindset where we can move forward instead of dealing with security-obsessed populist elite &bureaucracy.
    The US dropping the Cyprus embargo and plain out ignoring Turkish objections to dropping it should have been a warning to Erdogan that Turkish ambitions are isolating them. They are stepping on everyone's toes but still like to try to paint themselves as victims or simply for the sake of their security.

    Turkey won't be able to keep it up forever. They can't confront every neighbor they have as it is now. They can push the Greeks and French around but the Turks won't bother the Israelis and are definitely reluctant to attack Sirte in Libya since thats Egypt's red line.

  10. #250

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    You don't want to understand do you? I told you before, now I'm asking you, what happens if a state refuses to abide by a ruling? How is the ruling enforceable?

    The role of the ICJ is to resolve international disputes. If a state refuses to abide by a ruling then the ICJ has failed in its role. In fact, it made the situation worse. Hence the need to find a compromise that both states can accept. Look at how many ways the list you quoted provides to the ICJ to get a compromise. A decision can be based on convention, on customs, on principles, on opinions etc. It is not ironclad and it is not meant to be, or it would be very difficult to offer compromises. That's how the ICJ works. Quite like your family elder that you go to resolve a dispute.

    Oh btw since you like bringing up precedent, do read the referenced article 59.
    Sigh... That's not how it works. I don't care how the rulings are enforced. Parties go to ICJ agreeing on the scope of disputes while acknowledging the jurisdiction of the court beforehand. The court has no mission to find a compromise. That line of argument has no basis in writing or in reality. You're basically trying to defy the very reality revolving around ICJ to excuse Greece away from it. Article 59 doesn't dissolve the concept of precedent as you seem to suggest either. Just because the court wants to stress the uniqueness of each case doesn't mean the principles used in such cases would not be applied in other ones.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  11. #251

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    Egypt's red line.
    Egypt is a joke.



    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    The US dropping the Cyprus embargo and plain out ignoring Turkish objections to dropping it should have been a warning to Erdogan that Turkish ambitions are isolating them. They are stepping on everyone's toes but still like to try to paint themselves as victims or simply for the sake of their security.

    Turkey won't be able to keep it up forever. They can't confront every neighbor they have as it is now. They can push the Greeks and French around but the Turks won't bother the Israelis and are definitely reluctant to attack Sirte in Libya since thats Egypt's red line.

    At the End of the Day we even will not get Russia but China too in the Mediterranean if US is going pushing harder with their altitude against Turkey. Then forgot about Turkey what how to deal then with these two ones?

  12. #252
    Alastor's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Not home
    Posts
    1,425

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Sigh... That's not how it works. I don't care how the rulings are enforced. Parties go to ICJ agreeing on the scope of disputes while acknowledging the jurisdiction of the court beforehand. The court has no mission to find a compromise. That line of argument has no basis in writing or in reality. You're basically trying to defy the very reality revolving around ICJ to excuse Greece away from it. Article 59 doesn't dissolve the concept of precedent as you seem to suggest either. Just because the court wants to stress the uniqueness of each case doesn't mean the principles used in such cases would not be applied in other ones.
    Excuse Greece away from it? Greece doesn't recognize the jurisdiction of the ICJ to try such matters period. There is nothing to excuse. That doesn't mean Greece and Turkey can't still go there if they opt to. States can agree beforehand to go to such arbitration bodies and get a ruling, like you say, but they won't do that if they are not going to get a ruling that is acceptable to them. A compromise that is. If you don't care about how rulings are enforced it's because you know the answer. They are not. Meaning... it is how it works.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nebaki View Post
    Egypt is a joke.
    A joke?
    As far as Libya goes, Egypt is right next to it. What is Turkey going to do? Launch a full-scale naval invasion across the Mediterranean? Sorry pal, but that is the joke.
    Last edited by Alastor; September 17, 2020 at 10:39 AM.

  13. #253

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    Excuse Greece away from it? Greece doesn't recognize the jurisdiction of the ICJ to try such matters period. There is nothing to excuse. That doesn't mean Greece and Turkey can't still go there if they opt to. States can agree beforehand to go to such arbitration bodies and get a ruling, like you say, but they won't do that if they are not going to get a ruling that is acceptable to them. A compromise that is. If you don't care about how rulings are enforced it's because you know the answer. They are not. Meaning... it is how it works.
    Going to the Hague is not arbitration. States that go to the ICJ do not know for a fact what the ruling will be. There is no compromise there. Otherwise they'd simply resolve their dispute through a bilateral agreement.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  14. #254
    Alastor's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Not home
    Posts
    1,425

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Going to the Hague is not arbitration. States that go to the ICJ do not know for a fact what the ruling will be. There is no compromise there. Otherwise they'd simply resolve their dispute through a bilateral agreement.
    Attempting to get a bilateral agreement is step number one. The Greek PM recently said that is the first goal. Attempt to get a compromise before trusting international bodies with that goal. Yes, you don't know what the exact ruling of a court will be beforehand. But if you do choose to go to such a court you will have a good idea. Also, as I said, the court will have to keep in mind that the ruling must actually resolve the dispute. That is the goal of the court. A ruling that is unacceptable for one side will not do that. The ruling will be a compromise.

  15. #255
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,146

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nebaki View Post
    Egypt is a joke.
    Is that why the Turks are so scared to attack Sirte? Let me know when Turkey grows a pair and crosses that red line.

  16. #256

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    Attempting to get a bilateral agreement is step number one. The Greek PM recently said that is the first goal. Attempt to get a compromise before trusting international bodies with that goal. Yes, you don't know what the exact ruling of a court will be beforehand. But if you do choose to go to such a court you will have a good idea. Also, as I said, the court will have to keep in mind that the ruling must actually resolve the dispute. That is the goal of the court. A ruling that is unacceptable for one side will not do that. The ruling will be a compromise.
    For the second time:

    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  17. #257
    Alastor's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Not home
    Posts
    1,425

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    For the second time:

    You mean debating? Yeah I know, people usually respond with arguments, not pictures with stupid memes. But I guess when you don't have one, you have to make do with the other.
    Last edited by Alastor; September 17, 2020 at 12:38 PM.

  18. #258

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by mishkin View Post
    Thank god that nationalist scum only represents 12% of the country.
    A new poll that came out today actually puts him at 6.5%. As he got older he got more frantic. He likely has dementia. AKP needs him to get the majority vote in its bloc but more and more people have been slipping away from his party to saner options. The irony is that he, back in early 2000s, when his party MHP enjoyed highest representation in the elections and the parliament, didn't oppose to abolishing capital punishment despite PKK's leader being on death row. Back then, basically per his permission, as he was in the coalition government, the law was changed. Today, he wants it back. With every tantrum and lashing out he's losing more voters.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  19. #259

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    You couldn't find any official statement from Turkey on the subject, didn't you? As expected... Yes, not every statement made by a person holding a government position is the official position of the state they're working for. Why is that concept such a ridiculous one? Does every single statement from any Greek minister or member of the government represent the official position of the Greek government? By the way, Fuat Oktay isn't the vice president, at least not in the sense people use that position. His position is more of a mirror one from prime minister undersecretary before the system was changed in Turkey. You can have multiple "vice presidents" in Turkey, and they're not elected.
    His position is more of a mirror one from prime minister undersecretary before the system was changed in Turkey.
    Regardless, he is a member of the government.


    I'm afraid that saying that the Vice President of the Republic of Turkey (or any other country, for that matter), expresses personal opinions and not the official stance of Turkey (or the country he is vice president of) when being interviewed on issues of international politics" is a statement that demonstrates an inability to hold a reasonable conversation. It pretty much begs the question of WHO it is that would express the official stance of Turkey on such issues. I have the feeling that regardless of whose statements I would bring, you would still offer the same ridiculous excuse.

  20. #260

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Regardless, he is a member of the government.

    I'm afraid that saying that the Vice President of the Republic of Turkey (or any other country, for that matter), expresses personal opinions and not the official stance of Turkey (or the country he is vice president of) when being interviewed on issues of international politics" is a statement that demonstrates an inability to hold a reasonable conversation. It pretty much begs the question of WHO it is that would express the official stance of Turkey on such issues. I have the feeling that regardless of whose statements I would bring, you would still offer the same ridiculous excuse.
    Is there a reason why you failed to respond to any questions I asked?
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •