Stages and new conceptual tools for legitimizing military intervention

References

1. Abu Mostapha, Hisham
   2011 The Manichean Demonization of the Other in Political Discourse: A Linguistic-Rhetorical Exploration. Düsseldorf: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Altunışık, Meliha B. , and Lenore G. Martin
   2011 “Making Sense of Turkish Foreign Policy in the Middle East under the AKP.” Turkish Studies12 (4): 569–587. doi: 10.1080/14683849.2011.622513
   https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2011.622513 [Google Scholar]
3. Cap, Piotr
   2013 Proximization: The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.232
   https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.232 [Google Scholar]
4. Chastain, Mary
   2014 ISIS Fighter Claims Turkey Funds the Jihadist Group. Retrieved from: www.breitbart.com/national-security/2014/07/30/isis-fighter-claims-turkey-funds-the-jihadist-group/.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Dal, Emel P
   2012 “The Transformation of Turkey’s Relations with the Middle East: Illusion or Awakening?” Turkish Studies13 (2): 245–267. doi: 10.1080/14683849.2012.685257
   https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2012.685257 [Google Scholar]
6. Davenport, Kelsey , and Daniel Horner
   2013 US Says Chemical Weapons Used in Syria. Retrieved from: www.armscontrol.org/act/2013_0708/US-Says-Chemical-Weapons-Used-inSyria.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Davutoğlu, Ahmet
   2001 Stratejik Derinlik: Türkiye’nin Jeopolitik Konumu. İstanbul: Küre Yayınları.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Ego, Dikran
   2014 Turkey Supports Al Qaeda in Syria. Complicit in the Kidnapping of Syrian Orthdodox Bishops. Retrieved from: www.globalresearch.ca/turkey-supports-al-qaeda-in-syria-complicit-in-the-kidnapping-of-syrian-orthdodox-bishopss/5367369.
   [Google Scholar]
9. El-Hussari, Ibrahim A
   2010 “President Bush’s Address to the Nation on U.S. Policy in Iraq: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach.” InPerspectives in Politics and Discourse, ed. by Urszula Okulska and Piotr Cap , 99–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/dapsac.36.10hus
   https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.36.10hus [Google Scholar]
10. Fairclough, Norman
    1995 Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Fairclough, Norman , and Ruth Wodak
    1997 “Critical Discourse Analysis.” InDiscourse as Social Interaction, ed. by Teun van Dijk , 258–284. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Habermas, J
    (1984) Theory of Communicative Action. Boston: Beacon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Küçükali, Can
    2014 “Discursive Strategies of Instrumentalizing History in Mainstream Turkish Political Discourse: The Case of the Negative Other Presentation of the CHP.” Journal of Language and Politics13 (1): 98–119. doi: 10.1075/jlp.13.1.05kuc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.13.1.05kuc [Google Scholar]
14. Phillips, Christopher
    2012 “Turkey’s Syria Problem.” Public Policy Research19 (2): 137–140. doi: 10.1111/j.1744‑540X.2012.00698.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-540X.2012.00698.x [Google Scholar]
15. Polat, Necati
    2013 “Resistance to Regime Change in the Middle East.” Interventions: International Journal of Postcolonial Studies16 (5): 634–654. doi: 10.1080/1369801X.2013.852373
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1369801X.2013.852373 [Google Scholar]
16. Reisigl, Martin , and Ruth Wodak
    2001 Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of Racism and Antisemitism. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Reisigl, Martin , and Ruth Wodak
    2009 “The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).” InMethods for Critical Discourse Analysis, 2nd revised edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer , 87–121. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Reyes, Antonio
    2011 “Strategies of Legitimization in Political Discourse: From Words to Actions.” Discourse and Society22 (6): 781–806. doi: 10.1177/0957926511419927
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926511419927 [Google Scholar]
19. Robins, Philip
    2013 “Turkey’s ‘Double Gravity’ Predicament: The Foreign Policy of a Newly Activist Power.” International Affairs89 (2): 381–397. doi: 10.1111/1468‑2346.12023
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12023 [Google Scholar]
20. Taşpınar, Ömer
    2012 “Turkey’s Strategic Vision and Syria,” The Washington Quarterly, 35 (3): 127–140. doi: 10.1080/0163660X.2012.706519
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2012.706519 [Google Scholar]
21. Van Leeuwen, Teun
    2007 “Legitimation in Discourse and Communication.” Discourse & Communication1 (1): 91–112. doi: 10.1177/1750481307071986
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481307071986 [Google Scholar]
22. Van Leeuwen, Teun
    2008 Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195323306.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195323306.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
23. Van Leeuwen, Teun , and Ruth Wodak
    1999 “Legitimizing Immigration Control: A Discourse Historical Analysis.” Discourse and Society1 (1): 83–118. doi: 10.1177/1461445699001001005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445699001001005 [Google Scholar]
24. Wodak, Ruth
    1995 “Critical Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis.” InHandbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Jef Verschueren , Jan-Ola Östman , and Jan Bloomaert , 204–210. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hoph.8.04wod
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hoph.8.04wod [Google Scholar]
25. Wodak, Ruth
    2009 The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Wodak, Ruth , Rudolf de Cillia , Martin Reisigl , and Karin Liebhart
    2009 The Discursive Construction of National Identity, vol. 2. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Wodak, Ruth , and Michael Meyer
    2001 Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9780857028020
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857028020 [Google Scholar]