Turkish military offensive in Syria/Rojava

[Nea Byzantia]

So, it took me a little time to find the image in English and in a high definition, but I finally found it. Spoilering it as it's quite large. (Please tell me if the image is not visible.)

(Image)

Essentially, the idea of "PKK = YPG = [Some other organisation you've probably never heard of]" is...complicated. Honestly, it's very difficult to track these fellows down, especially when the three-letter acronyms are all over the place. For instance, we maintain that the PKK commits terrorist attacks in Turkey, but the idea is that the PKK is the political wing of "Turkish Kurdistan", i.e. "Kurdistan Workers' Party", "Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê"; while its armed wing is actually the HPG, or "People's Defence Forces", "Hêzên Parastina Gel".

All of these organisations are - again, theoretically - connected to the transnational organisation, KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union, Koma Civakên Kurdistan), which is essentially meant to be the primary executive organ of the Kurdish state. In reality, however, due to practical concerns, these organisations - PKK, PJAK, PYD, and so on - act in relative independence from one another and the KCK. On the other hand, Kongra-Gel is the legislative organ which elects the executive council of the KCK.

I hope that brings at least some amount of clarity to the issue at hand.

Thank you, and yes, its visible.

[Chernoslavia]

Oh now you were just being sarcastic

Nah, I was being sarcastic from the beginning when I responded to your bullshit like so:

Because I don't want a genocide to happen, that obviously means that I think Kurds are naturally better than Turks. What an absolute bullshit line of thinking. Not that I'd expect anything better, considering you're more concerned with bitching about "virtue signaling" than this atrocious invasion of Northern Syria at the hands of Erdogan's regime.

Do take note how I was calling your ludicrous bullshit suggestion - that I somehow think that the Kurds were naturally better than the Turks - bullshit.

But, by all means, please keep falsely insinuating that I'm the racist one here after you decided to blame the entire Kurdish ethnicity for the PKK's attacks on civilians in Turkey as a justification for Turkey's invasion of Northern Syria.

And now I'm calling bullshit on your statement.

But you are a racist though, it's in your own posts.

[United Muscovite Nations]

1) Every expert on the matter and even the YPG's own fighters disagree. In fact, about half of its forces are Turkish Kurds

I'd like a source on the YPG's own fighters saying they're part of the PKK. As it is, all I've seen from sources is the USA and Turkey saying the YPG's a terrorist organization, and those two states calling other groups terrorists has about as much weight to it as the vacuum of space.

2) Perhaps not, but the Turkish state certainly should be worried about a state propping up on its southern border that is linked to a group trying to start a civil war in its territory.

I don't really give a fuck about the Turkish state's concerns about an oppressed minority group trying to start a revolution either, tbqh. I do give a fuck about the fact that the PKK's been attacking civilians, though, and would certainly hope whatever future actions they take happen to avoid unnecessary bloodshed.

1) Read the threat, it's been sourced numerous times. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/m ... onnection/

2) The Turks have given a lot of deference to the Kurds, they have their own political parties, after all and representation in parliament. The Turks even engage in regular peace talks with the leaders of the PKK, even as that group murders civilians.

[Torrocca]

I'd like a source on the YPG's own fighters saying they're part of the PKK. As it is, all I've seen from sources is the USA and Turkey saying the YPG's a terrorist organization, and those two states calling other groups terrorists has about as much weight to it as the vacuum of space.



I don't really give a fuck about the Turkish state's concerns about an oppressed minority group trying to start a revolution either, tbqh. I do give a fuck about the fact that the PKK's been attacking civilians, though, and would certainly hope whatever future actions they take happen to avoid unnecessary bloodshed.

1) Read the threat, it's been sourced numerous times. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/m ... onnection/

Okay, that's one thing.

However, Vistulange brings up an excellent point:

So, it took me a little time to find the image in English and in a high definition, but I finally found it. Spoilering it as it's quite large. (Please tell me if the image is not visible.)

(Image)

Essentially, the idea of "PKK = YPG = [Some other organisation you've probably never heard of]" is...complicated. Honestly, it's very difficult to track these fellows down, especially when the three-letter acronyms are all over the place. For instance, we maintain that the PKK commits terrorist attacks in Turkey, but the idea is that the PKK is the political wing of "Turkish Kurdistan", i.e. "Kurdistan Workers' Party", "Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê"; while its armed wing is actually the HPG, or "People's Defence Forces", "Hêzên Parastina Gel".

All of these organisations are - again, theoretically - connected to the transnational organisation, KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union, Koma Civakên Kurdistan), which is essentially meant to be the primary executive organ of the Kurdish state. In reality, however, due to practical concerns, these organisations - PKK, PJAK, PYD, and so on - act in relative independence from one another and the KCK. On the other hand, Kongra-Gel is the legislative organ which elects the executive council of the KCK.

I hope that brings at least some amount of clarity to the issue at hand.

The links between the YPG and PKK are far more complicated than just "YPG = PKK in Syria!!1!"

2) The Turks have given a lot of deference to the Kurds, they have their own political parties, after all and representation in parliament. The Turks even engage in regular peace talks with the leaders of the PKK, even as that group murders civilians.

And Turkey's simultaneously in the midst of committing atrocities in Rojava, despite the clearly complicated links between the PYD and the PKK, so I'd very much say that that alone speaks more volumes than the seldom amount of concessions the Turkish state offers to its oppressed Kurdish minority.

[United Muscovite Nations]

1) Read the threat, it's been sourced numerous times. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/m ... onnection/

Okay, that's one thing.

However, Vistulange brings up an excellent point:

So, it took me a little time to find the image in English and in a high definition, but I finally found it. Spoilering it as it's quite large. (Please tell me if the image is not visible.)

(Image)

Essentially, the idea of "PKK = YPG = [Some other organisation you've probably never heard of]" is...complicated. Honestly, it's very difficult to track these fellows down, especially when the three-letter acronyms are all over the place. For instance, we maintain that the PKK commits terrorist attacks in Turkey, but the idea is that the PKK is the political wing of "Turkish Kurdistan", i.e. "Kurdistan Workers' Party", "Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê"; while its armed wing is actually the HPG, or "People's Defence Forces", "Hêzên Parastina Gel".

All of these organisations are - again, theoretically - connected to the transnational organisation, KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union, Koma Civakên Kurdistan), which is essentially meant to be the primary executive organ of the Kurdish state. In reality, however, due to practical concerns, these organisations - PKK, PJAK, PYD, and so on - act in relative independence from one another and the KCK. On the other hand, Kongra-Gel is the legislative organ which elects the executive council of the KCK.

I hope that brings at least some amount of clarity to the issue at hand.

The links between the YPG and PKK are far more complicated than just "YPG = PKK in Syria!!1!"

2) The Turks have given a lot of deference to the Kurds, they have their own political parties, after all and representation in parliament. The Turks even engage in regular peace talks with the leaders of the PKK, even as that group murders civilians.

And Turkey's simultaneously in the midst of committing atrocities in Rojava, despite the clearly complicated links between the PYD and the PKK, so I'd very much say that that alone speaks more volumes than the seldom amount of concessions the Turkish state offers to its oppressed Kurdish minority.

They're still links to a terrorist organization with many of the same fighters and leadership. If it were ISIS and not the PKK they were having links with, we wouldn't see this kind of apologia.

And as long as we're calling the Turks shelling targets atrocities, let's talk about how Rojava earlier today bombed a Turkish village and killed a child. It's war, mistakes happen.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Speaking of the YPG they mortared a school in a Kurdish majority area earlier. Not the best way to win hearts and minds lol.

[Chernoslavia]

Ignoring your butthurt remark against my meme flag...I already did, multiple fucking times in fact and you know it. If you truly think otherwise, you're welcome to provide evidence that I said that genocide against Kurds is justified, but we both know you don't got shit on me and it's why you're intentionally trying to put words into my mouth.

It's not butthurt but pity that you worship someone so hackneyed that [adult swim] with its ground level standards for live shows said "No thanks". :^]

You didn't have to confess in blatant, exact terms like a Scooby Doo villain. Your whataboutism with the PKK in response to Torocca emphasizing genocide is bad pretty much sealed that you think Kurdish genocide is justified.

''worship'' yeah no that's definitely not snark emitting from your post lmao. You must be one of those people who think he's a racist alt righter.

I have told you and Torrocca countless times that I never implied that it's justified and that I wasn't making a generalization about an entire ethnic group. But please tell me more about how much of a mind reader you are. And it isn't whataboutism as I'm not taking any sides as I also previously mentioned but you already know this.

[Torrocca]

Okay, that's one thing.

However, Vistulange brings up an excellent point:



The links between the YPG and PKK are far more complicated than just "YPG = PKK in Syria!!1!"



And Turkey's simultaneously in the midst of committing atrocities in Rojava, despite the clearly complicated links between the PYD and the PKK, so I'd very much say that that alone speaks more volumes than the seldom amount of concessions the Turkish state offers to its oppressed Kurdish minority.

They're still links to a terrorist organization with many of the same fighters and leadership.

And it's still not as simple as "YPG = PKK" as was claimed earlier.

If it were ISIS and not the PKK they were having links with, we wouldn't see this kind of apologia.

It's almost like they're two vastly different groups with two vastly different ideologies and two vastly different goals, or something. One of which committed genocide in the name of establishing a ruthless, hyper-authoritarian theocracy and the other of which has committed a good deal of atrocities in a fight for liberty. And one of them has ties to a third group with similar but also somewhat different beliefs and goals.

[Vistulange]

2) The Turks have given a lot of deference to the Kurds, they have their own political parties, after all and representation in parliament. The Turks even engage in regular peace talks with the leaders of the PKK, even as that group murders civilians.

To be frank, I wouldn't go so far as to say that Turkey has been all that kind. The recent opening up began with the AKP after 2007-ish, when the Kemalist secular elite's iron grip over the state apparatus was broken for good. Prior to that, ever since their (I'd say historic) break-up with the mainstream Turkish centre-left in 1990, when HEP split from SHP, their political parties always existed in some shape or form. They just happened to get constantly banned by the Constitutional Court - which, again, prior to 2007, was a stronghold of secular Kemalist elites - but they formed new parties, always contesting elections as independents so as to be able to get past the 10% electoral threshold, with the exception of the HDP in 2015 which - again, historically - contested elections as a party and crossed the threshold.

That said, even that I would say is not the full picture. Despite the HDP's representation in the Grand National Assembly, the party is demonised and villified, even delegitimised, on the basis that they are acting as the political branch of the PKK. Whether or not that is true is not the point here, rather, the notion that Kurds are perceived as "represented" when the sole mainstream pro-Kurdish party is essentially regarded as a political no-no by all mainstream parties - which largely includes the opposition CHP and İYİP as well - it's not really conducive, as they are ignored and cast as the "bad guys" in any discussion.

Moreover, the AKP doesn't engage in "regular" peace talks with the PKK. That happened during 2013-2015, when the loudly-touted Peace Process was enacted by the AKP government under Erdoğan - then Prime Minister - in order to solve the Kurdish problem. In fact, some of the AKP's massive success in the 2011 general elections is attributed to the immense support of the Southeastern Anatolian Kurds voting for the AKP. Come June 2015 and electoral defeat, the ever-pragmatic Erdoğan shifted his base, allying with the nationalist MHP - which had been branding the AKP as traitors for about five years - and shifting the rhetoric to one best described as "conservative nationalist". Since then, no talks - that we know of - have occurred.

[Baltenstein]

So, it took me a little time to find the image in English and in a high definition, but I finally found it. Spoilering it as it's quite large. (Please tell me if the image is not visible.)

(Image)

Essentially, the idea of "PKK = YPG = [Some other organisation you've probably never heard of]" is...complicated. Honestly, it's very difficult to track these fellows down, especially when the three-letter acronyms are all over the place. For instance, we maintain that the PKK commits terrorist attacks in Turkey, but the idea is that the PKK is the political wing of "Turkish Kurdistan", i.e. "Kurdistan Workers' Party", "Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê"; while its armed wing is actually the HPG, or "People's Defence Forces", "Hêzên Parastina Gel".

All of these organisations are - again, theoretically - connected to the transnational organisation, KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union, Koma Civakên Kurdistan), which is essentially meant to be the primary executive organ of the Kurdish state. In reality, however, due to practical concerns, these organisations - PKK, PJAK, PYD, and so on - act in relative independence from one another and the KCK. On the other hand, Kongra-Gel is the legislative organ which elects the executive council of the KCK.

I hope that brings at least some amount of clarity to the issue at hand.

It is indeed very informative. Why are the Assyrian organisations explicitedly included, are they close to the Kurdish ones? I was under the impression that there is bad blood between these two nations, or is it a "frienemy" thing?

And btw, thank you, Vis.

[United Muscovite Nations]

They're still links to a terrorist organization with many of the same fighters and leadership.

And it's still not as simple as "YPG = PKK" as was claimed earlier.

If it were ISIS and not the PKK they were having links with, we wouldn't see this kind of apologia.

It's almost like they're two vastly different groups with two vastly different ideologies and two vastly different goals, or something. One of which committed genocide in the name of establishing a ruthless, hyper-authoritarian theocracy and the other of which has committed a good deal of atrocities in a fight for liberty. And one of them has ties to a third group with similar but also somewhat different beliefs and goals.

The ties are extremely close, not remote. Read the article I posted, as many as half of the YPG's fighters are from the PKK.

They're both terrorist groups that bomb civilians in terror attacks. Either that's wrong or it's not, the reasoning for doing so isn't important.

[Vistulange]

So, it took me a little time to find the image in English and in a high definition, but I finally found it. Spoilering it as it's quite large. (Please tell me if the image is not visible.)

(Image)

Essentially, the idea of "PKK = YPG = [Some other organisation you've probably never heard of]" is...complicated. Honestly, it's very difficult to track these fellows down, especially when the three-letter acronyms are all over the place. For instance, we maintain that the PKK commits terrorist attacks in Turkey, but the idea is that the PKK is the political wing of "Turkish Kurdistan", i.e. "Kurdistan Workers' Party", "Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê"; while its armed wing is actually the HPG, or "People's Defence Forces", "Hêzên Parastina Gel".

All of these organisations are - again, theoretically - connected to the transnational organisation, KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union, Koma Civakên Kurdistan), which is essentially meant to be the primary executive organ of the Kurdish state. In reality, however, due to practical concerns, these organisations - PKK, PJAK, PYD, and so on - act in relative independence from one another and the KCK. On the other hand, Kongra-Gel is the legislative organ which elects the executive council of the KCK.

I hope that brings at least some amount of clarity to the issue at hand.

It is indeed very informative. Why are the Assyrian organisations explicitedly included, are they close to the Kurdish ones? I was under the impression that there is bad blood between these two nations, or is it a "frienemy" thing?

And btw, thank you, Vis.

To my knowledge, it's more of the latter. Truthfully - and this is my opinion - I'm of the belief that notions such as "bad blood" are very weak in determining how actual political actions take place. I'd sooner hedge my bets on practicality: You don't alienate another group who more or less wants a similar thing to you. You can always purge them later, you can always shaft them later, but you don't do that while you're trying to just hang on. Right now, they're at the phase of "hanging on for dear life", and have been so for quite some time. It's a bad time to let "bad blood" get you all killed.

Of course, that's not always the case, and things don't always work out that smoothly, but I think you get the gist of what I'm saying.

[Torrocca]

And it's still not as simple as "YPG = PKK" as was claimed earlier.



It's almost like they're two vastly different groups with two vastly different ideologies and two vastly different goals, or something. One of which committed genocide in the name of establishing a ruthless, hyper-authoritarian theocracy and the other of which has committed a good deal of atrocities in a fight for liberty. And one of them has ties to a third group with similar but also somewhat different beliefs and goals.

The ties are extremely close, not remote. Read the article I posted, as many as half of the YPG's fighters are from the PKK.

I didn't say they're "remote" ties, I said it's a complicated matter. Which it is. Even if half of the YPG's fighting power comes from the PKK, that doesn't even remotely explicitly mean that the YPG is just the PKK in Syria.

They're both terrorist groups that bomb civilians in terror attacks. Either that's wrong or it's not, the reasoning for doing so isn't important.

They're not, though. The PKK is since it deliberately targets civilians, as far as I know, but the YPG doesn't do that. Like you said earlier, they mistakenly bombed a village.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Just saw this as breaking elsewhere but apparently the SDF is falling back en masse from Tal Abyad and Ras al Ayn. The Turks have pretty much smashed them, from this point I think they're done as a relevant force.

[Chernoslavia]

The ties are extremely close, not remote. Read the article I posted, as many as half of the YPG's fighters are from the PKK.

I didn't say they're "remote" ties, I said it's a complicated matter. Which it is. Even if half of the YPG's fighting power comes from the PKK, that doesn't even remotely explicitly mean that the YPG is just the PKK in Syria.

They're both terrorist groups that bomb civilians in terror attacks. Either that's wrong or it's not, the reasoning for doing so isn't important.

They're not, though. The PKK is since it deliberately targets civilians, as far as I know, but the YPG doesn't do that. Like you said earlier, they mistakenly bombed a village.

What was that thing you said about hanging out or associating with fascist groups? Also, how do you ''mistakenly'' bomb a village?

[Vistulange]

They're not, though. The PKK is since it deliberately targets civilians, as far as I know, but the YPG doesn't do that. Like you said earlier, they mistakenly bombed a village.

Actually, not really. For ever since they existed - aside from their first few attacks in the 1980's - the PKK's modus operandi has in fact been to attack military installations. The 1990's and the 2000's, the latter of which I remember clearly, were always and always filled with news of PKK militants raiding Turkish outposts in the Southeast. The focus to civilians occurred in 2015, the attacks beginning with Suruç - and even now, we aren't exactly sure if those were by the PKK, or their radicalised offshoot, the TAK.

[Washington Resistance Army]

They're not, though. The PKK is since it deliberately targets civilians, as far as I know, but the YPG doesn't do that. Like you said earlier, they mistakenly bombed a village.

It wasn't mistakenly done. The YPG has been shelling Turkish territory and border towns since the conflict started.

[United Muscovite Nations]

The ties are extremely close, not remote. Read the article I posted, as many as half of the YPG's fighters are from the PKK.

I didn't say they're "remote" ties, I said it's a complicated matter. Which it is. Even if half of the YPG's fighting power comes from the PKK, that doesn't even remotely explicitly mean that the YPG is just the PKK in Syria.

They're both terrorist groups that bomb civilians in terror attacks. Either that's wrong or it's not, the reasoning for doing so isn't important.

They're not, though. The PKK is since it deliberately targets civilians, as far as I know, but the YPG doesn't do that. Like you said earlier, they mistakenly bombed a village.

It certainly means that the ties between the groups are extremely close.

They didn't mistakenly do it, they bombed a village indiscriminately. It's the Turks who are mistakenly killing civilians.

[Torrocca]

I didn't say they're "remote" ties, I said it's a complicated matter. Which it is. Even if half of the YPG's fighting power comes from the PKK, that doesn't even remotely explicitly mean that the YPG is just the PKK in Syria.



They're not, though. The PKK is since it deliberately targets civilians, as far as I know, but the YPG doesn't do that. Like you said earlier, they mistakenly bombed a village.

It certainly means that the ties between the groups are extremely close.

Not really.

They didn't mistakenly do it, they bombed a village indiscriminately. It's the Turks who are mistakenly killing civilians.

You literally just called the attack a mistake. Also, I certainly wouldn't call precision airstrikes into towns and cities "mistakes". Indirect mortar fire is far more of a mistake than that shit is.

They're not, though. The PKK is since it deliberately targets civilians, as far as I know, but the YPG doesn't do that. Like you said earlier, they mistakenly bombed a village.

Actually, not really. For ever since they existed - aside from their first few attacks in the 1980's - the PKK's modus operandi has in fact been to attack military installations. The 1990's and the 2000's, the latter of which I remember clearly, were always and always filled with news of PKK militants raiding Turkish outposts in the Southeast. The focus to civilians occurred in 2015, the attacks beginning with Suruç - and even now, we aren't exactly sure if those were by the PKK, or their radicalised offshoot, the TAK.

Huh, fair enough. Do you happen to have a source on that? I believe it, but I'd like to verify it to be sure.

[Vistulange]

Huh, fair enough. Do you happen to have a source on that? I believe it, but I'd like to verify it to be sure.

I'd have to dredge up what is essentially dozens, perhaps hundreds of Turkish-language newspapers such as Hürriyet, Milliyet, etc. and basically tell you the contents. To my knowledge, no academic literature regarding the targets of PKK attacks exists as of now, at least in English, and frankly, social science articles published solely in Turkish tend to be somewhat poor anyway.

[Torrocca]

Huh, fair enough. Do you happen to have a source on that? I believe it, but I'd like to verify it to be sure.

I'd have to dredge up what is essentially dozens, perhaps hundreds of Turkish-language newspapers such as Hürriyet, Milliyet, etc. and basically tell you the contents. To my knowledge, no academic literature regarding the targets of PKK attacks exists as of now.

Alright, fair enough. It'd be appreciated anyway, especially since the conversation's going back and forth about whether the PKK's a terrorist organization or not, but you don't have to if it's too much work.

[Vistulange]

I'd have to dredge up what is essentially dozens, perhaps hundreds of Turkish-language newspapers such as Hürriyet, Milliyet, etc. and basically tell you the contents. To my knowledge, no academic literature regarding the targets of PKK attacks exists as of now.

Alright, fair enough. It'd be appreciated anyway, especially since the conversation's going back and forth about whether the PKK's a terrorist organization or not, but you don't have to if it's too much work.

It is too much work, especially when it's almost 10pm here and I have a metric fuckton of work to do, ironically, regarding Turkish foreign policy. Hope I can make up for it in the future, though!

[Torrocca]

Alright, fair enough. It'd be appreciated anyway, especially since the conversation's going back and forth about whether the PKK's a terrorist organization or not, but you don't have to if it's too much work.

It is too much work, especially when it's almost 10pm here and I have a metric fuckton of work to do, ironically, regarding Turkish foreign policy. Hope I can make up for it in the future, though!

No worries, I understand! If you can, it'd be appreciated, but if not, it's totally fine!

[Page]

Look, guys, I get that the whole "Sultan Erdoğan" circlejerk is fun, Turkey should be kicked from NATO circlejerk is fun, it's all really fun and exciting to talk about while branding anybody who dares have the slightest different opinion from you to be shills and "listening to Turkish propaganda", but let's, for God's sake, get a few facts in and then the circlejerk can carry on as though nothing had happened.

"Turkey should be kicked from NATO".

Guys, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, formed by the North Atlantic Treaty - linked here - does not have an expulsion mechanism. Full stop. It only provides provisions for a member state to leave on its own accord with Article 13. Now, it is without a doubt that some people will either say or think "but Vistulange, you Turko-Erdoğan shill, we can just bypass Turkey, have a fait accompli and just not include Turkey in NATO's proceedings, you're just being pedantic". Well, yeah, that's possible, the long-term ramifications of doing so notwithstanding, but that's not really "kicking Turkey from NATO", is it? It's "bypassing Turkey when NATO affairs are involved". Different concepts, and if that's pedantry, so be it.

Is there some kind of law of nature encoded into quantum physics that prevents a country from being expelled from NATO? It can be done. Humans can do anything with human concepts.

[Vistulange]

Look, guys, I get that the whole "Sultan Erdoğan" circlejerk is fun, Turkey should be kicked from NATO circlejerk is fun, it's all really fun and exciting to talk about while branding anybody who dares have the slightest different opinion from you to be shills and "listening to Turkish propaganda", but let's, for God's sake, get a few facts in and then the circlejerk can carry on as though nothing had happened.

"Turkey should be kicked from NATO".

Guys, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, formed by the North Atlantic Treaty - linked here - does not have an expulsion mechanism. Full stop. It only provides provisions for a member state to leave on its own accord with Article 13. Now, it is without a doubt that some people will either say or think "but Vistulange, you Turko-Erdoğan shill, we can just bypass Turkey, have a fait accompli and just not include Turkey in NATO's proceedings, you're just being pedantic". Well, yeah, that's possible, the long-term ramifications of doing so notwithstanding, but that's not really "kicking Turkey from NATO", is it? It's "bypassing Turkey when NATO affairs are involved". Different concepts, and if that's pedantry, so be it.

Is there some kind of law of nature encoded into quantum physics that prevents a country from being expelled from NATO? It can be done. Humans can do anything with human concepts.

Absolutely not. However, the treaty that established NATO as an organisation has no mechanism of doing so. To introduce a mechanism would mean revision of the treaty, which would also necessitate Turkish involvement.

The point you are making is incredibly nebulous in that if we accept it as meaning "anything can happen", that would make practically everything humanity has established in a social sense meaningless, when we clearly put at least some stock in laws, treaties, agreements, and so on, both in the domestic and foreign spheres.

I mean, yes, it can be done. The US constitution can also be trounced. Democracy can be dismantled. Fascist regimes can fall. And...so? Yes, we are aware. I don't quite get the point of introducing an argument that is so broad so as to explain absolutely nothing, into this. I mean, how do you falsify that statement? How do you falsify "humans can do anything with human concepts"? That's what I mean by "so broad that it does not explain anything". It's, frankly, more along the lines of buzzword slogans, not a real statement of a situation we find ourselves in.

Yes, there is obviously a way of expelling Turkey from NATO: Engage another article of the treaty, namely Article 12, and add in another article or clause that does indeed permit the expulsion of member states. Just because this way exists, however, does not mean that it will practically happen.