Başbuğ's tone of voice and style of speech, which were accompanied by angry gestures and wild finger-pointing, as if he were reprimanding the reporters there, have led everyone to question whether a general speaking this way is compatible with the sprit of a democratic regime. In addition, Başbuğ's failure to respond to the allegations, and instead threatening the media outlets who covered the news, raised suspicions over whether Başbuğ was trying to cover up the military's shortcomings by hitting back. Referring to Başbuğ's remarks, which called on everyone to be "careful" and "to stand in the correct position," Star's Mehmet Altan asks who will determine and show that correct position and whether it will be determined by the stick in Başbuğ's hand or by the rules of democracy. "Increasing calls of fascism instead of responding to allegations about the shortcomings of the military in preventing the deaths of soldiers will fracture Turkey even more and produce results for which nobody can take responsibility. Hiding failure only speeds up collapse," claims Altan.
Hürriyet's Yalçın Doğan finds Başbuğ's memorandum-like statement worrisome because he threatens media members with a style of language which would never be acceptable in a democratic state. "Such a harsh tone urges even those who think like Gen. Başbuğ to have suspicions about the media allegations. What kind of a democracy is this? In which democratic country does a chief of staff have a right to shout at others this way?" asks Yalçın.
Sabah's Emre Aköz discusses what the reaction of a chief of general staff would be if Turkey had a democracy with international standards, and normal political and legal order following allegations about the military's failure to prevent a deadly attack. He talks about three alternatives: He would prove that the documents suggesting the military's failure are fake; he would accept that the documents are genuine but reveal other information that the issue is not as clear cut as it seems; or if the documents are genuine and there is no explanation for the deaths of 17 soldiers other than the military's failure, he would announce his resignation (or the prime minister, if he concluded that the documents in question were genuine, might remove him from office). In light of these, he shows how Başbuğ's reaction is far removed from showing Turkey as a real democratic country at the moment.
Eser Karakaş, another Star columnist, referring to Başbuğ's call inviting everyone to stand in the correct position, says a chief of staff has no say in a democratic state to tell everyone to know where to stand. "If the head of an institution that owns weapons starts to decide which position is correct to stand in a country, this means that country has begun to plunge into deep darkness," suggests Karakaş. He says just like any other army in the world, the Turkish army uses the citizens of this country as its manpower and the money collected from the taxpayers of this country as a financial resource. "A transparent military, which does not release any more pointless memorandums but fulfills its duty in accordance with international principles and within the rule of law, is among our biggest expectations and desires," he adds.
