Is it possible for a national army to fight terrorism?

Question

Was it ever successful? Any other alternatives?

I guess the great majority among you is pretty fixed on the idea of "war against terrorism".

It runs a nice headline, isn't it?

Then again, I think that perhaps this is what any "PKK" would love any "Turkey" to do: enter a war. An endless and bloody war... The bloodier the better! Whereas, Turkey will declare first when the war will start, PKK will be the last to let Turkey know when the war will finish. And how. The "how" is perhaps the key to the final result. It's when negotiations will start on top of dead bodies, bloody losses, sorrow and despair. Now, its just sweet talking and brave hearts...

I don't think that this war will do any harm to PKK. On the contrary...Time will tell.

I think there are alternative ways. These require much less adrenaline and no mass headlines. But amid very few exceptions no would be willing to discuss this here I guess.

For the moment, let's see how much the stock exchange and the lira will fall this week. I am afraid, the war has already started... PKK wants distress on all possible levels. Hard and unethical to compete with those that have "absolutely nothing" to loose. No flag, no land, no name. Call them terrorists or freedom fighters. I don't think they do give a damn really.

To Manisalibo:

The IRA is an unfortunate example. And very different from PKK. And it was solved for reasons that are not obvious to anyone. But definitely not because of the British Gvt!!!

I never said Greeks would have done better. I am saying that whenever you deal with someone that has nothing to loose, you loose first. The tragedy in this, is that the Turkish gvt has no choice but entering this war. The pressure from the masses is huge. People want revenge. But masses were hardly ever clever enough. The result of this war is known to everyone. Turks as well. Negotiations or continuation of mass killings. PKK pushes for that. And masses help them make their life easier.

Morticia:

No one is mixing anyone. You are the first to mix these two by the way...

Answer 1

Our army will find these 3500 terrorists who cowardly hide in the mountains...

We will find them, DEAD OR ALIVE !!!!!!!!

Answer 2

Intelligence and infiltration are the keys. its easy for terrorists to target a lone soldier or ambush a fairly unprotected military target. soldiers wear uniforms so they are easily identifiable where as the terrorist simply drops his weapon and blends back into the environment.
The army should be used when the correct intelligence has been gathered and not just because the Turkish civilians want revenge.
I am sure the with today's technology that's available for national armies such as Turkey they will have little problem finding the the PKK hideouts and knocking them out with special forces raids and air strikes. but the problem lies in where the rest are hiding . the ones that simply blend into the environment living in Turkey , these are the ones that will need to be infiltrated and kept under surveillance.
One of the reasons why terrorist groups seem to come out better is because the government sets their armies with rules of engagement whilst the terrorist simple don't have any.

As for the person who said that the IRA had beaten the British. Well the fighting stopped and northern Ireland is still British . That doesn't sound like an IRA victory to me.

I certainly wouldn't like to be in the position that the PKK are about to be in. They will be out gunned out witted and faced with superior surveillance tactics and equipment from Satellites,night vision to long distance listening devices etc.

Answer 3

Not a national Army Frank a dedicated squadron or division I remind you of the operation "The Wrath of God" that particular terrorist organisation no longer exists. Furthermore, I also remind you of ASALA that organisation no longer exists, the JCAG no longer exists. Turkey and the Turks have effectively been at war for close to a thousand years and we are still here and we will be for another 1000 at least. The PKK will come and go another terrorist organisation supported by Western Powers will take up the vacuum. Nothing changes only the names to protect the innocent. I commend Israel for their fortitude in tracking down and killing almost all of the Munich Olympics terrorists. At the moment Turkey is held back by a select few DREAMING of joining the EU, I can not wait for the day that the EU stops stringing Turkey along and tells the truth for once that Turkey will never join because they are Muslim, the crusades mentality never having changed. In short you don't need a national Army to beat terrorists you need a dedicated team of experts and professionals.

Answer 4

If there is only one army can fight against terrorists, it is Turkish Army has been fought against PKK since 1983.

There is no alternative... Whereever there is terrorist organizations, all countries should fight altogether against them instead of supporting them...

Turkish Army has been re-organized for this purpose. Only professional, specially trained and equipped soldiers will fight against terrorists in a few month.

Answer 5

you think of it is going to likely be disastorus if we depart Iraq without making specific democracy will build (whatevever the heck meaning) there huh?? the actual disaster has already occurred in that we took our eye off catching Bin weighted down and crushing Al Queida at Tora Bora in 2003, to flow set up i.e. tension a central authority on Iraq while it become none of our damn buisness. In our so called warfare on terror, Bush desperate to depart Afganistan and invade the only Arab united states interior the finished mid east the place there have been no terrorists!!!!

Answer 6

Spain is fighting Bask terrorists, Bask people havenot had a free state as of yet and it doesnot look possible in the near future.

The British were fighting IRA, and the result has been that IRA left armed struggle for democratic struggle.

So, yes. All in all, an army is legitimate, terrorism isn't. An army is better equipped, soldiers are better looked after. An army doesnot have to kidnap kids for personnel.

And the Turkish example willnot follow US example, because US was attacked by oversea-based terrorists, Turkey is fighing on its soil, for its own soil. US has launched invading attacks with the PRETEXT to fight terrorism (terror prevention could be done without invading Afghanistan and Iraq), whereas Turkey IS fighting terrorism.

And the final answer is, we'll see.

Edit: Guys, if you had the chance to ask the Ottoman administration, they would say that Greek freedom-fighters were terrorists.

Answer 7

Wait and see.
As for 'one nation's terrorist, another nation's freedom fighters', that only works for the US. They think only they have the right to decide who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter. If you harm US interests, then you are a terrorist, if you harm someone else, then you are a freedom fighter!!!

p.s. Greeks were not terrorists, they were struggling for freedom from the Ottoman Empire (with the help of the British).
edit: Would anyone like to comment on the behavior of the Spanish government toward the political wing of the Bask movement? The leaders were brutally arrested last week but no one in the EU protested that. Can you imagine Turkey doing the same? They will all attack Turkey saying there is no democracy or human rights!!!!!

Answer 8

Yes

Answer 9

Yes it is possible,if terrorist are attacking our country than the national army should take responsibilities,just like the Fateh el Islam that happened recently in Lebanon,our Lebanese army Crushed them!!

Answer 10

Dont mix up the Turkish Army with the American one.

Answer 11

Of corz its possible. Turkish Army is a real national army; not as the other mercenary armies.

The problem is the training period, its not enough to fight in the mountains.