Is Istanbul Safe?

[Hawaiidan]

According to the U.S. State Department, the number of U.S. citizens killed overseas as a result of incidents of terrorism from 2001 to 2013 was 350.

 

[

Canada has fewer terrorist attacks, we don't carry guns, we have some beautiful scenery and our dollar is dirt cheap for you:D

 

For the entire region of the mid-east, itsan active war zone..you go right ahead..I spent some years in an "active warzone" and dont want to roll the dice anymore.. Canada just took in 10,000 syrians of which who knows aho many were ISIS and more important, how many will become in the next 12 months. Its only partialy true that there are no guns in canada...the law abiding folks yes....however the bad guys and want to be bad guys dont seem to subscribe to that,...suprise suprise That makes Canada an ideal soft target...

[zonkiethegreat]

I called Oceania this morning, and they said they're monitoring the situation.

 

My cruise is on April 25th, Istanbul is the last port, and it's our honeymoon.

 

We planned on staying in Istanbul for 2 nights, before flying out to Paris. Now I'm thinking of canceling that and just going directly to the airport.

 

Yeah, I don't want to live in fear either, but guess what? This was an attack specifically to target TOURISM. They bombed a holy area of the Islam faith, so this is definitely targeted at hurting the tourism industry in Istanbul.

 

And YES this can happen just about anywhere, but Turkey's location sure doesn't help.

 

I'm sad about this, we were very excited about Istanbul. :(

 

Now I just want to know what Oceania is planning to do about it.

[Jay23]

We were in Istanbul just 4 months ago. Security at the airport and cruise port was very tight indeed. What more can they do? I have noted that Oceania has many cruises starting or ending in that City this season, will they have to reschedule all of these?

The area where this bomb was detonated is beautiful, relaxed and the buildings are fascinating. This is another tragedy. Yes, definitely directed at tourism. We have to decide if we can visit or allow the evil terrorists to win. Not an easy choice.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Jay23

[buggins0402]

Looking only at the business side of it, if they did drop Istanbul, is Athens the only viable substitute as an embarkation or debarkation port (without major itinerary changes)? Obviously that would depend on port capacity. After a quick look at the itinerary maps, I didn't see other obvious solutions.

 

It would be a tough call on O's part, particularly since as Paul said, the Turks will probably step up security to a very high level.

[RJB]

Looking only at the business side of it, if they did drop Istanbul, is Athens the only viable substitute as an embarkation or debarkation port (without major itinerary changes)? Obviously that would depend on port capacity. After a quick look at the itinerary maps, I didn't see other obvious solutions.

 

It would be a tough call on O's part, particularly since as Paul said, the Turks will probably step up security to a very high level.

It was at a very high level already. Does not seem to be much room to get any higher and this still happens.

[zonkiethegreat]

Yes, unfortunately it does not matter how many guns or police you have around. If just one zealot decides to commit suicide, than BOOM, innocent people die.

 

I really hope Oceania makes a decision soon.

 

Either way, if they decide to disembark in Istanbul after all, I think I'll be flying out the same day instead of staying 2 nights.

 

This really sucks, because we really wanted to explore Istanbul..... :(

[LHT28]

it is a no win situation either way whatever Oceania decides to do

 

A few people visiting the city is not as big of a target like a cruise ship with hundreds of people disembarking

 

Just like when they cancelled the Black sea cruises some will complain

 

JMO

YMMV

Edited January 13, 2016 by LHT28

[no fuss travel]

The port had a fair amount of security when we were there this past September. They were checking everything before they let anyone into the port area. You had to go through a machine and they used mirrors to check under cars, etc. Lots of police and military. When we disembarked same thing. We noticed a fair amount of presence of military and police in the tourist areas as well. Our attitude now is, if you don't go, they win. If you do go, there is a small chance and we are willing to take that small chance.

For most of the tourist sites, you have to have your bags scanned and you have to go through a metal detector in Istanbul.

[cruisemom42]

Very right, but I will go where the odds are better. A 30 point bet vs. a 3 point one. The underdog will win once in a while, but not often. When traveling I do not want to be the underdog. No sure thing, but some places more sure than others.

 

If you want to talk odds:

 

Istanbul has an average of around 34,400 visitors to the city daily. Yesterday there were 10 killed and 15 wounded.

 

If you were a tourist in Istanbul yesterday, the odds of you being one of the killed or wounded is 25 in 34,400 or about 1 in 1376 (e.g., significantly less than 0.1%). And what is the likelihood that your one day in Istanbul would even coincide with the single (to date) terrorist attack targeting tourists? Too high for me with my limited math skills to even calculate.

 

I am among those who feels the likelihood is much greater that the next terrorist attack will be somewhere else entirely.

Edited January 13, 2016 by cruisemom42

[robbie21]

If you want to talk odds:

 

Istanbul has an average of around 34,400 visitors to the city daily. Yesterday there were 10 killed and 15 wounded.

 

If you were a tourist in Istanbul yesterday, the odds of you being one of the killed or wounded is 25 in 34,400 or about 1 in 1376 (e.g., significantly less than 0.1%). And what is the likelihood that your one day in Istanbul would even coincide with the single (to date) terrorist attack targeting tourists? Too high for me with my limited math skills to even calculate.

 

I am among those who feels the likelihood is much greater that the next terrorist attack will be somewhere else entirely.

 

The problem with this analysis is that it is basically retrospective. Ten days ago the odds of a tourist attack were zero. The more important question is what are the "odds" 5 or 6 months from now when I plan to visit. What are the "odds" if they are carrying off 2 attacks a month (or 5, or 10).

 

This attack appears to be a change in strategy from hitting public demonstrations/government offices/police to hitting tourists. The obvious new strategy goal is to hurt the Turkish economy. And its a damned effective strategy. Tourists are a classical soft target. They gather in predicable places at predictable times and there are lots of targets that are difficult to protect. Imagine a suicide bomber in the ticket line at Topkapi Palace. Or perhaps a tour bus.

 

The next question is are the terrorists capable of repeating this attack on tourists? My answer to that is, very likely. There are 800,000 to a million Syrian refugees in Turkey - not to mention their home grown factions. Some percentage of these are going to be ISIS agents. In my experience the Turkish military and their police are professional and very competent and also tough to the point of brutal but the numbers work against them.

 

And we also have to note that if the pressure gets too heavy for them to operate in Istanbul there is always Kusadasi or some other smaller port. Or perhaps one of the smaller Greek islands where security is thin. They only have to kill 10 or 20 tourist at a time to achieve their objective.

 

I sincerely hope that I am being unduly alarmist in my assessment of the situation. Only time will tell for sure. In the meantime keep a close eye on the news and be realistic in your personal decision process.

Edited January 14, 2016 by robbie21

[ano]

The next question is are the terrorists capable of repeating this attack on tourists? My answer to that is, very likely.

 

Looks like we have a winner..

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/13/asia/jakarta-gunfire-explosions/index.html

Edited January 14, 2016 by ano

[roger b]

Looks like we have a winner..

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/13/asia/jakarta-gunfire-explosions/index.html

 

Sad To see all over the world there are all these troubled souls and nowhere is safe !!! Stay home pull up the drawbridge and don't venture out !!! or go on a great trip and enjoy yourself as we all have go sometime.

I know my choice !!

[spindrift]

AND, did you read about the Syrian refugee who was picked up this week in Houston only to learn that he was training to bomb our exclusive shopping center, the Galleria, as well as another suburban shopping center (one which has little action). He had his parents, young wife and two year old child--all who claimed he was innocent and loved America.

 

Also this morning the suicide bombing in the center of Jakarta!!

 

We can only be cautious when we travel, but as said many times above, don't let the terrorists take over. We only pass this way but once (I think ;)) so enjoy your travel and see the world. Incidents can happen anywhere.

[buggins0402]

Interesting read on the subject:

 

http://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2016-01-12/dont-hide-from-istanbul?mbid=social_facebook

[ano]

There is no reason people still can't travel, but they just need to be a bit more picky about their locations, and most of the trouble spots are pretty well known. Some safer ares that come to mind are Japan, French Polynesia & Tahiti, Alaska, and the US, Canada, Caribbean, South America, Finland, Norway, and Mexico (if you stay away from the drug trafficking areas.) Or staying on the ship should be pretty safe. Unfortunately the world in general is getting more dangerous, and there is no easy solution to that.

[RJB]

There is no reason people still can't travel, but they just need to be a bit more picky about their locations, and most of the trouble spots are pretty well known. Some safer ares that come to mind are Japan, French Polynesia & Tahiti, Alaska, and the US, Canada, Caribbean, South America, Finland, Norway, and Mexico (if you stay away from the drug trafficking areas.) Or staying on the ship should be pretty safe. Unfortunately the world in general is getting more dangerous, and there is no easy solution to that.

Agreed. Just have to use some good judgement and common sense.

[sunnies]

There is no reason people still can't travel, but they just need to be a bit more picky about their locations, and most of the trouble spots are pretty well known. Some safer ares that come to mind are Japan, French Polynesia & Tahiti, Alaska, and the US, Canada, Caribbean, South America, Finland, Norway, and Mexico (if you stay away from the drug trafficking areas.) Or staying on the ship should be pretty safe. Unfortunately the world in general is getting more dangerous, and there is no easy solution to that.

 

I am sure we could add Australia to the "safer" countries.

[bitob]

I am sure we could add Australia to the "safer" countries.

 

 

I believe there was a coffee shop bombed there a while back

 

Trying to categorize places into safe and unsafe (apart from the obvious Libya Syria Iraq Iran) is an exercise in futility.

Edited January 14, 2016 by bitob

[cruisemom42]

There is no reason people still can't travel, but they just need to be a bit more picky about their locations, and most of the trouble spots are pretty well known. Some safer ares that come to mind are Japan, French Polynesia & Tahiti, Alaska, and the US, Canada, Caribbean, South America, Finland, Norway, and Mexico (if you stay away from the drug trafficking areas.) Or staying on the ship should be pretty safe. Unfortunately the world in general is getting more dangerous, and there is no easy solution to that.

 

I have to agree more with bitob that it is difficult to categorize places as "safe" or "unsafe" especially if you look at recent history. You list the Caribbean as "safe", for example, but there have been numerous instances of crimes, including murders, targeted toward tourists there. As to South America, of course it depends on which countries. However, I believe if you look at overall statistics versus Turkey, I'd much prefer my chances in Turkey. Finally, let us not forget the sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway....

[Travelcat2]

What is a bit different with the Istanbul bombings - particularly the one this month, is that it was in the one area where tourists almost always go and is fairly close to the port. This is very specific. While we would go to Turkey, we would probably avoid this area - at least for now. Istanbul already has very high security but it isn't easy to protect people from suicide bombers. JMHO.

[ano]

It really isn't just safe/unsafe that I would look at. Honduras and Belize have the highest murder rates in the world, but I checked, and never found any cruise deaths other than traffic or water related deaths that have occured there. Even the terrible drug trafficking murders that happen in Columbia, Mexico and South America haven't interfered with cruise passengers. All of these places are very dangerous by almost all definitions, but not to cruise passengers.

 

What has changed in the last year is the emergence of terror cells, and their goal is to hit high-profile areas, often the ones that cruise ship passengers frequent. If you stay away from most "tourist" and high-profile areas, you'll be fine, but most cruise passengers don't do that.

 

What bothers me most is that the cruise ship schedules and itinerary is known, so if a terrorist wants to target a whole bunch of international tourists at once, its pretty easy to do. Once those tourists are off the ship, they are very vulnerable.

Edited January 14, 2016 by ano

[ano]

This map may be worth a look....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/11707583/Mapped-Terror-threat-around-the-world.html

[Karennella]

I believe there was a coffee shop bombed there a while back

 

Trying to categorize places into safe and unsafe (apart from the obvious Libya Syria Iraq Iran) is an exercise in futility.

 

The coffee shop was not bombed. Hostages were taken by a person who was mentally unstable and there was a bad outcome.

I seem to recall hostages being taken many times in the US with bad outcomes.

The scariest place I have ever been in my life was the Bronyx in 1977.

The safest place for me has been London but they have had their problems too.

[StanandJim]

Hostages were taken by a person who was mentally unstable and there was a bad outcome.

 

Does everyone read what is NOT being said here?

What gave this "mentally unstable" person the power to take hostages in the first place?

It's all fun and games until your sister/father/son/brother/wife/mother becomes a "bad outcome".

Go ahead, flame away.

[Karennella]

What I am saying is that it was not a bombing, as stated. I am not in any way defending the idiot who took the hostages but there was no bombing. I was actually in the city that day when it happened.