Trump abandons Kurdish allies to Turkish invasion

[Ellipse]

You think leaving that region to its own doing will provide a more stable Middle East and safer planet?

During my lifetime, the only time the Middle East was stable was when iron-fisted dictators were in control. Democracy simply doesn't work in that region and our presence has not provide stability.

So when do you think we should get out?

 

[Zombie]

Whose interests?

Which Kurds should we be supporting? The Iranian Kurds? The Iraq Kurds? The Syrian Kurds? Or maybe the Turkish Kurds?

We had no business getting involved in Syria, which was in the middle of a civil war that we encouraged.

I think we should support the Kurds who's help we've enlisted to fight ISIS. At the very least not blindside them with an announcement that we're leaving them after convincing them to dismantle defensive fortifications with assurances against an invasion from Turkey.

I mean, look whatever your thoughts are about US intervention in the Middle East, and I think we all mostly agree we should be less involved, that's kind of a separate conversation than whether or not bailing on them at the drop of a hat, with no diplomatic groundwork is the way to go.

 

[Ellipse]

Aw. Changing the goalposts already?

You believe American intervention in that region began with the Syrian civil war?

Changing the goalposts? Weren't we discussing our withdrawal from Syria?

As for our responsibility to the Kurds, did we bring them to Syria or were they there before we got involved? Doesn't it bother you that we intervened in a sovereign nation for reasons never explained to the American people? Why are our generals so interested in perpetual war? What threat was/is Assad to US democracy?

Whenever we get involved in these conflicts, I wonder who is making money.

My former employer manufactured munitions for the military. We produced 2 million rounds a day during an 8-hour shift and I can remember the excitement when the Iraqi conflict expanded, we got a new contract for 5 million rounds a day and had to add a swing-shift. That is what foreign intervention gets us: Bigger contracts for the military industrial complex.

 

[Ellipse]

I think we should support the Kurds who's help we've enlisted to fight ISIS.

We didn't "enlist" the Kurds, they were already fighting ISIS. Perhaps we should have left Syria two years ago, when Trump wanted to, after ISIS was defeated. Unfortunately, he let the generals and neocons talk him out of it.

 

[Zombie]

We didn't "enlist" the Kurds

I don't understand what kind of a point you're trying to make here, if not a pedantic one.

They've been our allies in the fight against ISIS. This is a terrible way to treat an ally.

Even if that doesn't bother you, the prospect of thousands of captured ISIS fighters going free as a result of this, should at least give you pause.

Perhaps we should have left Syria two years ago, when Trump wanted to, after ISIS was defeated. Unfortunately, he let the generals and neocons talk him out of it.

I must have missed this rather stunning development.

 

[Eminence]

Man will the Kurds have a tough moral decison to make in the coming days on what to do with all the prisoners they're holding. I don't envy that one bit (and the whole surviving the hell-hole that's coming to the region).

 

[Deleted member 365]

Changing the goalposts? Weren't we discussing our withdrawal from Syria?

Your initial diatribe at 1:25 bounced around from topic to topic. Was that what you were trying to communicate? It's weird because you then went on a rant about how Assad should release ISIS prisoners (which he did in 2011 that led to ISIS gaining power). Then, you proceeded to mention Carter, Rumsfeld, and Obama/Clinton in a completely disjointed way (but I'm sure it made sense to you).

Since then, in your post at 2:37 you pretended as if there's a question as to which group of Kurds we should support. Then, in post #73 you insinuate that democracy doesn't work in that region (not true). In post #75 you insinuate that the military industrial complex is the primary driver behind international interventions. In post #76 you incorrectly state Kurdish history...

So do you see how difficult it is to figure out what you want to argue about? You just seem angry and insinuate 2 things:

1. Democracy can't work in the ME. It can work in all other parts of the world but there's something in the water in the ME which prevents democracy from taking hold.
2. America should retreat to isolationism. Laughable as the past 50 years have been the most peaceful in human history. Thanks America! Thanks big government with your big alliances!

While I don't have the energy to debunk these two misconceptions, I will say this, Syria's neighbors are all functioning democracies. Jordan, Israel, Lebanon (quasi-democracy), and Turkey (devolving like Russia into an illiberal democracy). Even Iraq is functioning as a democracy today. Iraqi civilian deaths have been in decline since 2013 and haven't been this low since before the invasion. So again, don't equate Afghanistan, a fractured "country" and paint with a broad brush that democracy can't work in the ME. It can and does.

As for our responsibility to the Kurds, did we bring them to Syria or were they there before we got involved?

Western powers have been involved off and on with the Kurds since WWI. We've been more directly involved with them since the Persian Gulf War, to protect them against Saddam Hussein, then warring factions in Iraq, and now against ISIS and Turkey.

Doesn't it bother you that we intervened in a sovereign nation for reasons never explained to the American people?

What nation? The Kurds have no sovereign state. Are you referring to Syria? Assad was gassing people and ISIS was on the march. If you're referring to Congress declaring a war, then sure, let's do it. I'd love for Congress to finally make tough votes and clip the power of the executive branch.

Why are our generals so interested in perpetual war?

Which generals specifically are you referring to? If generals are guiding our foreign policy into perpetual war then why did you blame civilian leaders (carter, Rumsfeld, Obama, Clinton) and not the joint chiefs?

What threat was/is Assad to US democracy?

Look at a political map and see who his neighbors are. There are some very important American national interests there.

Whenever we get involved in these conflicts, I wonder who is making money.

My former employer manufactured munitions for the military. We produced 2 million rounds a day during an 8-hour shift and I can remember the excitement when the Iraqi conflict expanded, we got a new contract for 5 million rounds a day and had to add a swing-shift. That is what foreign intervention gets us: Bigger contracts for the military industrial complex.

Cool! I mean it’s good for your employment, right? What's your suggestion then? Legislation to clip lobbying? I'd be all for that. I think fewer lobbyists and dirty money in DC would be better. So why did you bring up Carter, Rumsfeld, Obama, and Clinton? I'm still confused over all of that. Hasn't Bernie and Warren come out with plans to cut lobbying? I can only assume then that you're a huge Bernie or Warren fan and really hate Donald Trump. Trump is literally selling American foreign policy to enrich his own wallet.

 

[Hotdog]

Your initial diatribe at 1:25 bounced around from topic to topic. Was that what you were trying to communicate? It's weird because you then went on a rant about how Assad should release ISIS prisoners (which he did in 2011 that led to ISIS gaining power). Then, you proceeded to mention Carter, Rumsfeld, and Obama/Clinton in a completely disjointed way (but I'm sure it made sense to you).

Since then, in your post at 2:37 you pretended as if there's a question as to which group of Kurds we should support. Then, in post #73 you insinuate that democracy doesn't work in that region (not true). In post #75 you insinuate that the military industrial complex is the primary driver behind international interventions. In post #76 you incorrectly state Kurdish history...

So do you see how difficult it is to figure out what you want to argue about? You just seem angry and insinuate 2 things:

1. Democracy can't work in the ME. It can work in all other parts of the world but there's something in the water in the ME which prevents democracy from taking hold.
2. America should retreat to isolationism. Laughable as the past 50 years have been the most peaceful in human history. Thanks America! Thanks big government with your big alliances!

While I don't have the energy to debunk these two misconceptions, I will say this, Syria's neighbors are all functioning democracies. Jordan, Israel, Lebanon (quasi-democracy), and Turkey (devolving like Russia into an illiberal democracy). Even Iraq is functioning as a democracy today. Iraqi civilian deaths have been in decline since 2013 and haven't been this low since before the invasion. So again, don't equate Afghanistan, a fractured "country" and paint with a broad brush that democracy can't work in the ME. It can and does.



Western powers have been involved off and on with the Kurds since WWI. We've been more directly involved with them since the Persian Gulf War, to protect them against Saddam Hussein.



What nation? The Kurds have no sovereign state. Are you referring to Syria? Assad was gassing people and ISIS was on the march. If you're referring to Congress declaring a war, then sure, let's do it. I'd love for Congress to finally make tough votes and clip the power of the executive branch.



Which generals specifically are you referring to?



Look at a political map and see who his neighbors are.



Cool! What's your suggestion then? Legislation to clip lobbying? I'd be all for that. I think fewer lobbyists and dirty money in DC would be better. So why did you bring up Carter, Rumsfeld, Obama, and Clinton? I'm still confused over all of that.

Thriller, do you work? Where do you find the time to post so many long winded stories?

 

[Hotdog]

I can’t get over “in my great and unmatched wisdom”. Bizarre world.

I gotta admit. That was pretty stupid. Dude is crazy.

 

[Hotdog]

I can't get over people seeing that and thinking, yep- that's still my guy.

It was cringey for sure.

 

[Ellipse]

Your initial diatribe at 1:25 bounced around from topic to topic. Was that what you were trying to communicate? It's weird because you then went on a rant about how Assad should release ISIS prisoners (which he did in 2011 that led to ISIS gaining power). Then, you proceeded to mention Carter, Rumsfeld, and Obama/Clinton in a completely disjointed way (but I'm sure it made sense to you).

The point I was trying to make, which went over your head (my fault, not yours because it is my responsibility to communicate clearly) is that there is a long history of our failed involvement in the Middle East.

Now I was actually in favor of the first Iraqi war. And I reluctantly supported Bush II in the second. I said "reluctantly" because, after Bosnia and Mogadishu, I was beginning to have doubts about our intervention policy and I didn't like the way the Afghan war was progressing with no apparent end in sight. But Bush II said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and I believed that the president had information sources that he couldn't share with us.

Then we found out that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but was hoodwinked into war by an Iraqi dissident who wanted us to kick Saddam out and put him in power. (And thank you, CIA, for doing a such a wonderful job of giving us this intelligence before we went to war.)

So I learned to be very skeptical when our leaders involve us in new wars. What happened in Libya and Egypt showed I was right to be skeptical. Then we got involved in Syria.

You wonder what will happen to the (Syrian) Kurds if we pull out? The same thing that will happen if we pull out next year, or in two years, or in twenty years: they will be left surrounded by hostile regimes. The same regimes that surrounded them before we intervened.

There are no good options, but, perhaps, we should have had the foresight to recognize a fools errand before we invaded a sovereign nation that was never a threat to our national interest.

And, yeah, that's what Nationalist means for those of us who voted for Trump.

 

[Zombie]

Cool, cool cool cool.