Trump abandons Kurdish allies to Turkish invasion
- Thread starter Zombie
- Start date
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
I completely agree. It’s nice to not have to sift through a thread full of ignored posts and people purposely trying to derail the conversation.
On that note, if true it means that Donald got completely schooled by Putin, again.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
I can't get over people seeing that and thinking, yep- that's still my guy.
Almost a perfect thread
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Well yeah trump might not be perfect but what about Hillary and Benghazi? What about uranium one? What about Obama and flexibility? Whatabout...
they are hiding
Ellipse
Well-Known Member
Well, maybe we should turn ISIS prisoners over to the Syrian government, which was doing a decent job of keeping the extremists in check until Obama -- with the blessing of neocons -- undertook a policy of encouraging the overthrow of President Assad. Assad's crime, as near as I can tell, was his willingness to accept Russian aid, which pissed off our generals and neocons hugely.
Is Assad a kind and benevolent ruler? Absolutely not, the guy is a tyrant. I suspect our reasons for going into Syria wasn't to protect the Kurds (who had been instigating terrorist attacks in Turkey!) but to have forces in place to fill the vacuum when Assad and the Russians were kicked out -- a dumbass idea that would have involved us in another endless war we couldn't win.
Does anyone remember the Shah of Iran? He was another tyrant that the USA supported, who ruled Iran with an iron fist. But Carter didn't like the bad press he got for supporting a dictator, so he threw him under the bus, turning Iran over to a Muslim cleric, who hated us. That turned out well.
The Afghan war was handled poorly. We should have gone in, kicked the Taliban's ***, then got out. Leaving them with the message that if they allowed Al Qaida to set up another training base, we'd be back. Rumsfeld's quote, "If you break it, you own it!" has got to be the stupidest guiding principle for spending blood and treasure in US history.
If we had left Saddam Hussein in power, we wouldn't still be fighting an endless war, 18 years later.
Momar Khadafi caused us trouble in the 80's, until we bombed his palace, regrettably killing his 5-year-old son. But he learned a valuable lesson and (excepting an airliner bombing) stopped poking the tiger. But that wasn't good enough for Hillary and Obama, who had to see him overthrown and executed. Same with President Muburak.
But let's feel bad for Kurds, certainly they are the allies we've spent 50 years searching for. (If only they had an actual country, with borders.)
Or we could just quit fertilizing the ground in the Middle East with the blood from our sons and daughters.
Last edited:
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
@Ellipse
This is laughable. Like utterly hilarious. You clearly have no knowledge and understanding of that religion. Assad released many extremist prisoners in the first place when revolts in his country erupted. He used extremists who later turned into ISIS. He helped to feed ISIS in the first place. His government works with radical Sunnis to crush common enemies.
The rest of your ranting has bits and pieces of history but it’s so spotty that it’s hard to make sense of it other than “Hillary/Obama bad.”
What you’re suggesting will only hurt American interests.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26297329
https://www.newsweek.com/how-syrias-assad-helped-forge-isis-255631
https://www.thedailybeast.com/assad-henchman-heres-how-we-built-isis
This is laughable. Like utterly hilarious. You clearly have no knowledge and understanding of that religion. Assad released many extremist prisoners in the first place when revolts in his country erupted. He used extremists who later turned into ISIS. He helped to feed ISIS in the first place. His government works with radical Sunnis to crush common enemies.
The rest of your ranting has bits and pieces of history but it’s so spotty that it’s hard to make sense of it other than “Hillary/Obama bad.”
What you’re suggesting will only hurt American interests.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26297329
https://www.newsweek.com/how-syrias-assad-helped-forge-isis-255631
https://www.thedailybeast.com/assad-henchman-heres-how-we-built-isis
Last edited:
Ellipse
Well-Known Member
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.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Aw. Changing the goalposts already?
You believe American intervention in that region began with the Syrian civil war?
You think leaving that region to its own doing will provide a more stable Middle East and safer planet?
Ellipse
Well-Known Member
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
Well-Known Member
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
Well-Known Member
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
Well-Known Member
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
Well-Known Member
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.
I must have missed this rather stunning development.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
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:
- 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.
- 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!
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.
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? 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?
Look at a political map and see who his neighbors are. There are some very important American national interests there.
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.
Last edited:
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Thriller, do you work? Where do you find the time to post so many long winded stories?