A new form of support comes to the rescue

In the event that power cannot be maintained—that is, if the government falls—it is necessary to ensure the continuation of state protection against potential threats and dangers that may arise. However, the opposition front, which resists such vital objectives of the ruling camp with great courage, is attempting to block all democratic avenues, and is even doing so quite successfully. This widespread resistance, which could perhaps be seen as the first democratic initiative the Turkish people have tried to achieve through their own efforts and skills, seems destined to fail in its attempt to use the weapon of politicizing the law, even at the cost of eroding the country's institutions.

For it appears that such blatant violation of the legal system is damaging the reputation of the AKP itself. Given this situation, alongside the blatant politicization and exploitation of the law to its limits, there is a need for some new, and perhaps even more effective, tool. 

So, could Israel provide this tool?  Israel, which has subjected the Palestinian people to a full-scale holocaust-like suffering with the support and protection of the US, must not have slowed down while inciting the US against Iran, as it argued during recent budget negotiations that defense spending should be kept high.

Turkey was put forward as a justification for a high budget, especially for high defense spending. As far as we can learn from the press, Israeli officials have claimed that the AKP, which has enjoyed 22 years of power in Turkey, will pursue Neo-Ottomanism and attempt to annex the areas south of Turkey into a new empire.

The Turkish administration, having received this message with satisfaction, has announced that it is taking steps to build shelters for the public to use during air raids in order to be prepared for a possible Israel-Turkey conflict. In short, Turkey is preparing for a war after a long period of peace.

It is not yet clear which of these mutual claims and measures taken are true and which are mere hearsay. However, the only certain information for now is that, just as the Ottoman sultans used to do, the policy of covering up internal problems with external issues must be urgently put into effect.

For one of the primary games politicians play is that when domestic resources are exhausted, it becomes inevitable to bring in external material to remain in power or to keep things running. Indeed, the conflict with Israel is also being pushed into the public's lap as such a necessary issue.

Besides, doesn't Netanyahu's situation resemble our own a bit?  

So, whether it is reality or rumor, could Israel actually attack Turkey?

As you, my dear friends, have also been observing, the opinion of most researchers is that Israel would not intend to show such audacity against Turkey. I suggest we leave this topic to the experts in the field and look at the political and strategic side of the matter. In my opinion, our adoption of anti-NATO stances under all circumstances is a very appropriate view. The fact that nuclear-armed weapons are stored in our country and that our NATO connection prevents the country from pursuing a neutral policy are valid arguments.

If we set these arguments aside and focus solely on the immediate issue, it is clear that as a NATO member country, a potential Israeli attack would create interesting consequences. Specifically, if a possible attack by Israel on Turkey could be perceived as a direct attack on NATO, Israel would be forced to take this into account. However, with the caveat that the provisions of the treaty must be understood before being discussed, I cannot help but say this: since an attack by Turkey in response to an action that Israel might perceive as an attack could be considered legitimate, an Israeli attack on Turkey could also be legitimized.

I hope that the AKP administration does not embark on such political madness to secure itself domestically. 

If we look a little at the policies the AKP implements internally, even the word "dark" would not suffice to describe them. For the legal situation within the country, both in its immediate execution and its future outlook, is in a state of absolute pitch-black darkness.

Is the defection of some mayors and their teams to the AKP the result of a genuine love for the party, or is it the result of the threat of the Sword of Damocles they feel hanging over their heads? Honestly, I believe the latter scenario is more plausible.

Setting aside the commitment of those who change parties to their voters, beyond that, if these party changes are made for the purpose of service, the legal and moral image of the distinction between how the central government views partisan municipalities versus other municipalities must be a serious problem! Furthermore, if the AKP is seen as a salvation to avoid a potential Silivri threat, this means that the AKP is not a party that adheres to the law, but rather a political organization that forces and glorifies lawlessness.

Because, if defecting to the AKP exempts an individual from legal responsibility to society, this situation does not eliminate the crime or the damage suffered by society due to the crime; it is as if an AKP sponge has been wiped over the crime and the damage. In this case, it is not just legal corruption that occurs, but also social harm. Moreover, the person or organization responsible for this harm and who should be held accountable to society becomes the AKP, which shields the perpetrator and covers up the crime and the damage. 

Dear friends, things have gone so far off the rails that the current administration is neither modern nor just.

It is as if society is one large tribe, and a group of people in this tribe, having found a leader suitable for themselves, has pounced on the other group, seeing no harm in further dismantling an already non-existent structure for their own interests and according to their own whims, running over society like a bulldozer.

What is not understood is that when the bulldozer destroys the entire structure in the very near future, everyone, including those on the bulldozer themselves, will be left under the rubble of the destruction. I liken this negative development to the tragedy of activist Charlie Kirk, who was shot and killed in the US last week. The person who advocated for the freedom to carry weapons, and even gave speeches to young people with absurd arguments such as that being armed would empower the individual, has unfortunately gone down in history as a victim of this distorted idea!