The loss of the secular state of Turkey

Miss_Leah wrote: I suspect that is true. But the question remains: is violence towards civilians and civil servants a reasonable solution to anger towards the a leader and his party?

Well no, it isn't, and in this case it has backfired spectacularly. The purges and crackdowns in the coming days and weeks will be brutal. Erdogan, whose place had become somewhat shaky in the last couple of years, will be able to reconsolidate and bolster his power.

Expect a lot of people to quite literally lose their heads over this.

I suspect that is true. But the question remains: is violence towards civilians and civil servants a reasonable solution to anger towards the a leader and his party?

The violence was not aimed against the civilians , they were warned to go home and stay in , the violence was against what you call civil servants ,only , they are not civil servants they are marionets of Erdogans regime, the same Erdogan that urged his supporters to leave the safety of their houses and protest against the army ( with a leader like that who cares nothing about your safety , you dont need enemies imo ) , they do what he tells them to do while the army had to inforce the constitution , you can turn this in what ever direction you want to , violence is never the answer, violence is the last resort !

Adi wrote:

Miss_Leah wrote: I suspect that is true. But the question remains: is violence towards civilians and civil servants a reasonable solution to anger towards the a leader and his party?

Well no, it isn't, and in this case it has backfired spectacularly. The purges and crackdowns in the coming days and weeks will be brutal. Erdogan, whose place had become somewhat shaky in the last couple of years, will be able to reconsolidate and bolster his power.

Expect a lot of people to quite literally lose their heads over this.

Well, let's hope that if things get out of hand, help can be had from allies. If democracy fails, then the problem may grow beyond the boundaries of Turkey. But that's a whole other kettle of fish.

Adi wrote:

Miss_Leah wrote: I suspect that is true. But the question remains: is violence towards civilians and civil servants a reasonable solution to anger towards the a leader and his party?

Well no, it isn't, and in this case it has backfired spectacularly. The purges and crackdowns in the coming days and weeks will be brutal. Erdogan, whose place had become somewhat shaky in the last couple of years, will be able to reconsolidate and bolster his power.

Expect a lot of people to quite literally lose their heads over this.

From what we here can see , they already have ...i dont agree with all the violence but i understand where its coming from , it will be a long time now before there is peace in Turkey again.

MartaLina wrote:

I suspect that is true. But the question remains: is violence towards civilians and civil servants a reasonable solution to anger towards the a leader and his party?

The violence was not aimed against the civilians , they were warned to go home and stay in , the violence was against what you call civil servants ,only , they are not civil servants they are marionets of Erdogans regime, the same Erdogan that urged his supporters to leave the safety of their houses and protest against the army ( with a leader like that who cares nothing about your safety , you dont need enemies imo ) , they do what he tells them to do while the army had to inforce the constitution , you can turn this in what ever direction you want to , violence is never the answer, violence is the last resort !

Are civil servants not civilians? Just regular people trying to do everyday jobs?

And are people not free to support the leader the believe in? If they didn't truly believe in his leadership, would they have taken to the streets?

Well - and I could be wrong here so correct me if I am - but most if not all of the civilian deaths can be traced not back to the military uprisers but back government itself and it's supporters. The military told people to stay home; it was Erdogan himself who told everyone to stay in the streets.... plus it was governmental forces who attacked the parliament building which where most of the deaths occurred, as far as I'm aware. Unfortunately most of the stories I've read have been in conflict with each other to some extent, so I imagine there's still a lot.of clarifying left to be done.

Miss_Leah wrote:

MartaLina wrote:

I suspect that is true. But the question remains: is violence towards civilians and civil servants a reasonable solution to anger towards the a leader and his party?

The violence was not aimed against the civilians , they were warned to go home and stay in , the violence was against what you call civil servants ,only , they are not civil servants they are marionets of Erdogans regime, the same Erdogan that urged his supporters to leave the safety of their houses and protest against the army ( with a leader like that who cares nothing about your safety , you dont need enemies imo ) , they do what he tells them to do while the army had to inforce the constitution , you can turn this in what ever direction you want to , violence is never the answer, violence is the last resort !

Are civil servants not civilians? Just regular people trying to do everyday jobs?

And are people not free to support the leader the believe in? If they didn't truly believe in his leadership, would they have taken to the streets?

Off course they are , i am placing myself in the heads of the people that think that the violence was their only choice , but we are going around in circles , we can discuss this for ages , i agree that violence is not the answer and that there are other methodes , but i am not that old that i can still remember people believing in leaders that killed more people than we will ever see together , and i therefore think that people think that violence is their only choice. I myself think there is always a choice ..and i will always try a peacefull solution , the great sadness i feel is for the ones who felt they did not have that choice .

MartaLina wrote:

Miss_Leah wrote:

MartaLina wrote:

I suspect that is true. But the question remains: is violence towards civilians and civil servants a reasonable solution to anger towards the a leader and his party?

The violence was not aimed against the civilians , they were warned to go home and stay in , the violence was against what you call civil servants ,only , they are not civil servants they are marionets of Erdogans regime, the same Erdogan that urged his supporters to leave the safety of their houses and protest against the army ( with a leader like that who cares nothing about your safety , you dont need enemies imo ) , they do what he tells them to do while the army had to inforce the constitution , you can turn this in what ever direction you want to , violence is never the answer, violence is the last resort !

Are civil servants not civilians? Just regular people trying to do everyday jobs?

And are people not free to support the leader the believe in? If they didn't truly believe in his leadership, would they have taken to the streets?

Off course they are , i am placing myself in the heads of the people that think that the violence was their only choice , but we are going around in circles , we can discuss this for ages , i agree that violence is not the answer and that there are other methodes , but i am not that old that i can still remember people believing in leaders that killed more people than we will ever see together , and i therefore think that people think that violence is their only choice. I myself think there is always a choice ..and i will always try a peacefull solution , the great sadness i feel is for the ones who felt they did not have that choice .

True, we can't help by talking about it.

My main reason for commenting in the first place was I felt the OP to be an emotional knee-jerk reaction that made seemingly rash accusations that could stir up prejudice and conflict.

should you peacefully coexitst with a tyrant?

if the authorites are violating human rights and creeping themselves into a dictatorship, and people see this and resist it, are those who resist to be seen as the cause of conflict?

OB1Shinobi wrote: should you peacefully coexitst with a tyrant?

if the authorites are violating human rights and creeping themselves into a dictatorship, are those who resist to be seen as the cause of conflict?

If they're using violence, isolating the people from the rest of the world, and killing people, then they're causing conflict, yes. The're not the root of the problem, but they're certainly not helping.