Biden’s Turkey Visit: Multipolar Backroom Deals, the Gulen Card & President Erdogan at Crossroads

In this week’s Newsbud Roundtable Sibel Edmonds, James Corbett and Spiro Skouras discuss Vice President Joe Biden’s recent trip to Turkey. What kind of back room deals were reached in Biden’s meeting with Turkish and Kurdish officials? What’s the prize behind the multi-polar decision on further incursion into Northern Syria? What kind of prize would benefit Russia, US, Turkey, Syria and Iran? Our trio also talks about the status of Fethullah Gulen’s extradition, President Erdogan’s choices, and of course, the interests of the people versus the Deep State and Military Industrial Complex. Don’t miss this stimulating discussion- join and bring in your thoughts.

*Follow us here at Newsbud Twitter

*Subscribe here at BFP-Newsbud YouTube Channel

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.

Comments

  1. Valerie Lever says:

    Kurds = ISIS a simple change of costume… Syria has been about creating a new drug/weapon/human rat line. Incerlik being replaced by multiple smaller US bases in Western Africa. Assad had cut the “fields of red” (poppies) that covered Damascus countryside to north. Pipelines – Turkey wants to be more than a transit country. Would like Iraqi & Syrian & Israeli gas/oil under its control. Turkey has pipeline from KRG but central Iraqi govt. stopped funding as a result so US still with a foot in “Barzanistan” they offer a share of the profits to Barzani/ Turkey/ W. Africa. Its globalization of the drug trade just like every other possible product. The coup attempt allowed Turkey to remove certain military officers while still keeping the ones willing to go into Syria.
    Any thoughts???

  2. Great job laying out how all the parties have agreed to this incursion! Great job also pointing out how this fact begs many questions beginning with how many countries knew of the coup attempt beforehand and what was it’s purpose? Is the incursion payback to Erdogan to win back his good graces or was the coup necessary to pave the way for it as hypothesized in the podcast? Does Assad, Russia, Barzani, and Iran all feel that southern Syria is lost and never to be regained and therefore open to a new mutually agreeable purpose for the area like a Kurdish controlled refugee camp or ???????

    Turkey has always done the dirty work for NATO. It has always been riddled with corruption at the top. The US insures that. It would be a great loss to US global hegemonic ambitions for it to be otherwise. Turkey has no more of a chance of getting a leader who represents the people instead of the Deep State than the US without a clear comprehensive vision of how that would work. I would love to see Newsbud interview some people who could possibly provide some of the intellectual ammunition for such a future and not just in Turkey. What would/could a path from our current military industrial corpratocracy to a truly rights based society look like? As James said, “There can not be a political solution to our political problems”! So what exactly are you advocating for?
    -M

    • Mandela, thank you for your encouraging words.

      “So what exactly are you advocating for?”- I believe what James meant was: the classical petition writing to congress, elections as a choice between two evils, going through pseudo ‘Rights’ NGOs, etc. It is about taking these on as individuals, as we the people. At least that’s my take.

      • “It is about taking these on as individuals, as we the people.”
        This is exactly what you, Sibel, have been advocating for the Turkish people in this instance and for many others all over the world while setting a sterling personal example of how it’s done. I’m wondering as to how successful that strategy can be. You saw what happened with your struggle to get the truth out that you had discovered while working for the FBI. Even when a group as large as occupy Wall Street had both numbers and publicity they couldn’t make even a dent in the system. All they accomplished in the end was popularizing of the phrase, “The 1%”

        I believe that in order for real change to happen that doesn’t just result in, ‘so long to the old thugs and welcome to the new’, there has to be both a vision of a positive future and a path to its attainment. Are you saying that you could imagine the Turkish people, for example, getting Turkey out of NATO, getting rid of Erdogan, and creating a political, police, military, economic, schools, and administrative infrastructure that would represent the Turkish people’s interests? In general when the people are upset it is do to a few issues that they have become incensed over. They just have a small window into the problem. Like Bernie’s followers who neither had any idea who he really was – he has caved on his ‘platform’ his whole life to stay in the good graces of those in power – nor how impossible it would ever therefore be for him to effect any change that would really matter.

        The people don’t understand what they are up against so how can they know what the answer is? One glaring example is how many people understand how perverted their understanding of economics is. Jill Stein who is running for president representing the green party believes that Quantitative Easing can pay for all the needs of the poor. She says that all that we have to understand is that it is like a magic trick. There are no magic tricks. The same level of knowledge that successfully builds a bridge or building is necessary to create the conditions for a functioning, self sustaining, growing, equal society. All such knowledge has been repressed in our academic system and by “The Spectacle” as CuChu would say.

        Sorry for ranting, but the irate minority has to sing a new song.

        Thanks for listening,
        -M

        • Larry Hoover says:

          2 things:
          1) When the “Occupy Wall Streeters” were doing their thing, I thought of them like I thought of the Hippies of the 1960s – spoiled brats. However, since then, I learned they were right about the 1%. However, they didn’t know the half of it.
          2) There can never be true freedom if everyone has to be “equal”. “Equality” has been grossly misused, and the misconception has created a real problem. Each person puts out the effort and gets whatever rewards and/or punishments he/she deserves, generally. If everyone had to be equal, irrespective of their individual initiative and efforts, that would be hell on earth.

          • Larry,

            Yes, some good distinctions re equalality. Maybe we could say equal rights under the law?

          • tallsexyblonde says:

            “If everyone had to be equal, irrespective of their individual initiative and efforts, that would be hell on earth.” – might want to bring that one up at a Bilderberg meeting. 😉

          • Larry Hoover says:

            Equal rights under the law? That is supposedly what I thought we had in America until I woke up and discovered the law doesn’t apply to the elite ruling class. The law is what they use to control the “little people” or whatever label they use for the masses of non-elite.
            If the Bilderberg people invited me, I would certainly bring this to their attention. But, there’s not any chance they’re interested in what I have to say.

        • CuChulainn says:

          Corbett is on the right track at 30:25
          https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/
          Political emancipation is the reduction of man, on the one hand, to a member of civil society, to an egoistic, independent individual, and, on the other hand, to a citizen, a juridical person.
          political emancipation is not human emancipation…
          Only when the real, individual man re-absorbs in himself the abstract citizen, and as an individual human being has become a species-being in his everyday life, in his particular work, and in his particular situation, only when man has recognized and organized his “own powers” as social powers, and, consequently, no longer separates social power from himself in the shape of political power, only then will human emancipation have been accomplished.

          • Cuchu,
            I was referring to that exact Corbett moment in my post.

            I agree with what you said. You point to the evolutionary imperative for mankind that everything is now stacked against. The system seems to instinctively know what could lead to human emancipation as it does its best to keep it from growing. Power and control knows what works against it.

            You went to deeper truth in responding to my question. What do you see as a potential path to its attainment (human emancipation)? I know that a lot of it has to happen on the individual level, but without societal growth……….

          • Couldn’t have expressed it better.

          • CuChulainn says:

            i didn’t say anything there, just quoted Marx.
            everything that needs to be said is there in Marx but no-one can be bothered to read him, least of all, it seems, the Marxists–this is why at the end of his life Marx never tired of saying, “one thing i know for sure, i am no Marxist.”

  3. Larry Hoover says:

    At the point in your discussion where you ask the question “what is the USA getting out of this situation, with US-back forces fighting US-backed forces?”
    After thinking for less than a minute, it occurred to me that the US and Western weapons manufacturers are making killing (pardon the pun) from all these warring factions. Plus, it wears down everyone in the region, making them susceptible to something else being planned for them.
    Who is paying for all these wars? Answer: the insouciant Western people who are being used like pawns

  4. CuChulainn says:

    not true that Syria has had no problem with Turkey’s invasion, has opposed it from the beginning
    https://twitter.com/theLemniscat/status/772825928791683072
    Phil Greaves on Twitter has been pretty good on this

  5. Bruce Hamaguchi says:

    This discussion didn’t make sense to me so I did some research on my own and I feel I am now able to connect the dots. The key was a comment made by Mark Svoboda of the latest edition of “Cross Talk” on RT. He said the Turkish incursion was necessary to maintain the supply lines. Let’s say Assad, despite his protestations after the fact, agreed to the move to drive ISIS out of Jarabulus. I read an article in the NYTimes that ISIS had pulled out just before the arrival of the Turks. What if they were notified in advance by the Turks? Why then the SDF could be forestalled in their advance toward Jarabulus which they were in danger of taking. But if the operation were facilitated by the US not only with air strikes but by the order to the SDF to pull back across the Euphrates, then Erdogan could achieve a primary objective; preventing the advance of the SDF into Jarabulus which would serve to arrest the movement by the Kurds to unite the west and east cantons of Kurdish-held territory thereby completing the severing of the supply line of ISIS reinforcements and supplies to ISIS from Turkey. So one objective was to continue to be able to supply the enemy of the Kurds, and the other was to prevent a connecting of the east and west cantons of Kurdish-held Syrian territory. Of course, the US threw Erdogan this bone in order to win Erdogan back after attempting to overthrow him in the aborted coup. This is my explanation of all this confusing behavior by the US and Turkey. Does this make any sense, Sibel?

Speak Your Mind