Have you noticed - we have gone to war?

At last the cat is out of the bag. Even if it is stuffed back in and a denial is issued, the cat is now out. I quote for the benefit of those who missed the most important paragraph or did not see it:

“We said patience, patience, patience, but finally we could stand it no more and were forced to enter Syria along with the Free Syrian Army. Why did we do this? ... We went there to end the reign of Assad, the tyrant who wields state terror. and for no other reason.”
These words came from the mouth of the one who aspires to realise his ‘Neo-Ottoman’ dreams and to turn talk of the tradition of conquest into action. The cries of “Mosul is ours ... Baghdad is ours ... Damascus is ours ... Jerusalem is ours anyhow” doing the rounds among the dregs of the internet draw their very succour from this mentality and this ideological tangent.
I am speaking of the quagmire into which Turkey is being dragged by those with sick minds who want the 21^st century to be remembered for ‘Sultan somebody or other the Conqueror’.
Remember: The Ottoman economy was based on ‘conquest and plunder’. That is what made the accumulation of capital impossible. The Ottoman order satisfied itself with observing the birth and rise of capitalism and its bestowing political power on the holders of economic power in France in 1789 and the whole of Europe in 1848. With the road to ‘conquest and plunder’ blocked now that Europe possessed advanced military technology, the Ottoman order began to fall apart and in the end collapsed.
Neo-Ottoman conquest has not learnt the lesson of history. This can happen. Maybe it looked out of the window in history lessons or the teachers at the vocational school for religious officials mistaught it history: they indulged in empty heroics about our ‘glorious history’.
But, there is more to it. There stands before us a would-be conqueror who has not managed to work out who the super powers are in the world today.
There is yet more. It is true that we have a Syria dragged into total chaos by a civil war. A place where civil war is driven by both ethnic and religious factors, that has been turned into the operational field of ‘professional jihadists’ who swell the ranks of ISIL and in which war victims number in their hundreds of thousands.
But, Syria is still and at the same time a sovereign country. A valid, important and real meaning is attached to the notion of ‘sovereign country’ in both the political literature and international relations.
By way of example, an example that will make it easier to get my point across: Were a civil war situation to emerge in Bulgaria tomorrow, for instance, if the state began to oppress the Turks living in Bulgaria, can one of Bulgaria’s neighbours say, “We are going there to end the reign of the Bulgarian government, the tyrannical regime which wields state terror?” Were it to spout nonsense or succumb to hunger for conquest and say such a thing, how would this work out for them?



***
The words I quoted at beginning of the article have only one meaning:
Turkey has gone to war.
This is not a decision that can be accounted for with reasons or excuses along the lines of “cross-border operation” or “rules of engagement”. I do not know the date on which it was taken and it was not through a parliamentary resolution. Only Turkish Parliament can resolve to go to war. It would be far better not to do so and not to embroil its country in the cursed calamity known as war and not to append its signature to a disgrace or even a crime. But, if such a decision absolutely has to be passed, only parliament can do so.
Except?
Dear reader!
It is as though nothing has happened and we are living through an ordinary day. When in fact this country has officially declared war on a neighbouring and sovereign country.
If remaining a passive observer is not being a partner in crime, what is it?