It would be difficult to penetrate Turkey

"Anyone who sees it differently is blind, or wants to be"

Does Turkey have the right to invade Northern Iraq?

Turkey by no means has the right to invade the Kurdish northern Iraq. This is the umpteenth time that it violates applicable international law. Taking the Israeli actions as a basis for legitimacy does not help and does not in the least justify the step. Since the founding of the republic until today, Turkish governments have not understood that the Kurdish problem, the south-east problem, as many officials and the Turkish propaganda emphasize, can never be solved with military force. More than twelve million people with a different historical and cultural background, a fundamentally different language, cannot simply be ignored and defined away. This policy is the cause of all Kurdish uprisings up to the PKK. What is needed is a Turkish Gorbachev who finally has the courage to pour pure wine into his country, defy the Kemalist military apparatus and constitute a new Second Republic. That means multilingualism with constitutional status (example Switzerland), own cantons (federal states whatever) and guaranteed democratic participation of Kurdish parties in the Turkish national assembly (the ten percent threshold prevents this until today). This democratic path, which under certain circumstances could theoretically also allow the Kurdish provinces to leave the Turkish national structure, offers a long-term guarantee that there will be no violence. The reality is rather different. To formulate these thoughts publicly would bring me to prison in Turkey for at least five years - convicted as a terrorist. This policy drives young men and women into the mountains to join the PKK. Do you have to do more? Alexander Kauz

It's amazing how you can even ask this question. The US invades Iraq in the name of counter-terrorism, which has nothing to do with al-Qaeda, and leaves a huge mess. Tens of thousands of dead civilians are on their account. In the same breath, the US does not find it legitimate for Turkey to fight the PKK, which has killed 30,000 and whose main bases are in Iraq. The US has failed across the board and is definitely the very last one whose advice is sought on Middle East issues. Remzi Aru

(...) Turkey should sit down at the same table with the Kurds in its own country and solve the problem peacefully - the Kurds have been ready for this for a long time. Instead, it not only tries to push the peaceful Kurds to the margins of society, but also threatens the Kurds in northern Iraq. The clashes are taking place in Turkey and if you look at where that is predominantly, you can easily see that these areas are far from the Turkish-Iraqi border. In truth, Turkey is looking for an excuse to prevent the peaceful and democratic development of northern Iraq because the Kurds are in power there. So instead of solving the problems in one country, it wants to attack the Kurds in another country. To this end, they are of course ready to work hand in hand with Ahmadinejad's mullah regime. (...) Bangin Ciyayi

Israel Lebanon

The attack is contrary to international law and a crime. Anyone who sees this differently is blind or wants to be. Walter Mair

If one tries to keep emotions out of consideration of this conflict, one will probably come to the realization that Israel cannot expect the situation to calm down in the foreseeable future. In this respect, the Israelis' tough approach is understandable. The only thing that could help is a massive military operation by Israel against Hezbollah, with the eventual breakdown of the organization. Then Iran and Syria would have to come out of their cover and either enter the war or sit down at the negotiating table. Bert Greif

The interests behind Hezbollah

Thesis: The Hezbollah attack is used as a pretext to escalate the Middle East conflict. It has been waited for. But the goal is to provoke Iran in order to be able to wage war against this. This is only possible because the US government wanted it too. Hagen Dietrich

Cold-blooded tactics by the USA in the current Middle East conflict

Calmly it is certain how Mr. Bush behaves, and to be honest, this gentleman is not my case either. But let's look at the situation. For many months, Katyusha rockets have been flying regularly from Palestine and southern Lebanon to Israel. A mad Palestinian blows himself up relatively often, killing as many civilians as possible with him. The political parties in the areas from which this is happening are both: terrorist group and political party. Those in charge are in exile in Syria and Iran and have basically pushed the second guard into the front row. There they stand now, the Nasrallas and Hanijahs, getting their orders transmitted, coordinating the terrorist attacks and doing politics on the side. "Stop, you can't me, I'm immune!" How long can a government stand by? It has always been clear to everyone that the Israeli government is not squeamish. But this state has also been in a constant struggle for survival for decades. And then Hamas comes along and rivets down a few soldiers and takes one hostage. Still nothing has happened. Then more Katyushas fly and then this Hanijah goes up to the following formula: "We accept the two-state solution, but please don't believe me that this means recognition of Israel in any way. We would like to keep the soldier, because we believe that support for the two-state solution must suffice. " Tell me, are you still wondering that the Israelis went crazy and marched in the next day? I am not surprised. A few days later, the "Party of God" attacks two Israeli soldiers. The situation is different there. In this case, there is an unequivocal announcement of what will happen if Hezbollah does that again. In addition, Israel has been watching Hezbollah's continued arming for years with growing concern. The Casus Belli is there, so with a roar. And what does a modern war look like? Well, it's really not a "clean cut", especially since the enemy is hiding among the civilians. Hezbollah is taking civilians, uninvolved children, women and men, young and old, hostage. I would almost like to describe it as generous that the Israeli poor trigger the largest possible wave of refugees before they really get down to business. One thing has to be made clear: a dialogue with Palestinians and Arabs is, to put it mildly, difficult. The moderate forces have been in the minority for many years, and as soon as a moderate force is constituted, some extremist ignites and brings a somewhat relaxing situation to the boil again. Now let's be honest: what Busch does is clear, callous, and it's cynical on top of that, but isn't it also understandable or understandable? Toni Schlichting

Can the EU mediate successfully in the conflict?

With the current attitude towards Israel definitely not. The EU must finally show its profile and finally put pressure on Israel, be it politically and / or economically. No country in the world has the right to destroy civilians and civil facilities. According to Lebanese living in Beirut, the destruction is greater than ever. Even in the civil war there was no such massive damage. Everything that has been built in the last 16 years has been destroyed within five days. From day one, Israel did not fight against Hezbollah, but against the civilian population. Europe has a duty to show its profile. Christian Kruger

Bush visits Merkel

Would you like to be hugged by someone who has lost hundreds of thousands of innocent dead? Manfred Salewski

Ladies and gentlemen, one of your commentators said America needs us. I learned this song as a young socialist. This is not just slightly exaggerated, it is exaggerated arrogance and deliberate deception. America can survive without us, but we cannot survive without them - not as a free democratic country. For the last ten years inconceivable hatred against the USA has been carried out in Germany, so that unfortunately many Germans are no longer able to see clearly. That was ten lost years for freedom and democracy in the world. Germany, together with its partners in Europe and the USA, could have helped many, many people to freedom. Josef Bujtor

Arno Breker exhibition

Why shouldn't the exhibition "be allowed"? I really can't think of an argument. Who can declare art admissible or not? For one, it's art, for another, kitsch. Because it was "in" during the Nazi regime, it doesn't necessarily have to be bad, after all, we also drive with Volkswagen on motorways. Roland Kögele

An artist is someone who uses his or her creativity to create things (with or without practical use) that other people look at, inspire, and entertain. Whether he is - knowingly or unknowingly - abused by other people for political purposes does not change anything in his works of art. (...) Are you a Nazi because you depict a beautiful body in a sculpture? (...) Look at Breker's sculptures and take them for what they are: sculptures and art. Rather talk about how you can fight everyday racism in Germany, how you can finally take into account the fact that Germany has long been a country of immigration. The problem is not Breker's art, the problem is latent xenophobia, which is evident, for example, in the CDU's populist rejection of immigration laws. Matthias Hoffrichter

Hasn't it already been prescribed in Germany what is "degenerate"? Do we have to label every fellow traveler and opportunist of the Nazis as artistically worthless? How could art have come about in the so-called Third Reich? What a brave new world we have today! Liepert

We reserve the right to shorten letters to the editor. The editorial team of DW-WORLD.DE.