US betrays Kurdish Allies

[Grim Reaper 6]

2 minutes ago, and then said:

The Kurds will be slaughtered wholesale unless Trump has made it clear to that pile of dog crap that crushes Turkey under his Islamic boot that to do so will cause them to suffer economically to the point of insolvency.  If he does no such thing and allows them to be slaughtered then I hope he falls under the judgment of a righteous God when his time comes.

If he brutalizes the civilians in that sector my guess is Turkish civilians will be treated to FAR worse atrocities in time.  There is no safety for tyrants, ever. Time is their enemy.

Still no one has answered the big question, what are the Kurds going to do with the 10,000+ ISIS prisoners. The prison camps lay within the area where Trukey plans to push into. This is a big problem, and no one even the President has spoken about it.

[Farmer77]

Well this is interesting ?

Trump Administration Appears to Reverse Syria Decision Following Backlash

Quote

A senior administration official on an organized call with reporters appeared to contradict President Donald Trump about Syria policy late Monday, refuting interpretations of his statements from earlier in the day that prompted broad outrage from supporters and opponents alike.

The U.S. is not removing its forces from Syria in the face of a Turkish incursion, said the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity. Rather, the president ordered roughly 50 special operations troops in northern Syria to relocate to a different part of the country after he learned that Turkey has planned an offensive against U.S.-backed Kurdish forces in Syria. The official said that offensive had not yet begun.

But somehow worse? So now we're not bringing the troops out of Syria AND we are allowing our allies to be attacked?

Edited October 8, 2019 by Farmer77

[+Hammerclaw]

4 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

 

What do you think is going to happen to all the ISIS prisoners held by the Kurds. You didn't mention that in your post above, I would like to Here Your thoughts.

Sharia justice.

[RAyMO]

2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Well this is interesting ?

Trump Administration Appears to Reverse Syria Decision Following Backlash

But somehow worse? So now we're not bringing the troops out of Syria AND we are allowing our allies to be attacked?

That was always my understanding - he was only moving about 100 troops which would be in the path of a Turkish campaign.

[Farmer77]

4 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

That was always my understanding - he was only moving about 100 troops which would be in the path of a Turkish campaign.

**** man. I could at least partially understand if he was actually bringing troops home like his tweets led us all to believe. This is much much worse. This is betraying an ally for zero benefit to the US.

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

32 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Sharia justice.

I don't beleive that for minute, I suspect if the Kurdsare attacked by Turkey I beleive they will set them free. That would be quit a diversion, and cause some serious problems. The Kurds are not Pro-Government (Syria) the Leadership in Syria Has very little use for them, but like you said maybe Syria will except them, time will tell.

Edited October 8, 2019 by Manwon Lender

[Setton]

58 minutes ago, and then said:

And are we to believe that had his decision been to stay the course and risk open conflict, potentially causing a fracture within NATO, you'd have given him credit for his bravery?  That's the problem with being an obvious shill for years.  No one believes a word you say, regardless which way the wind happens to be blowing that day.  FWIW, I think his decision is dishonorable and will be soon seen as counterproductive but to believe he would ever get support from those who hate him would be like waiting up for the tooth fairy.

Staying would not have been risking conflict, as you well know. Turkey is not going to go in as long as the US has a presence there. 

As for giving him credit, you'll recall I spoke in support of him when he made the decision to call off air strikes on Iran. Unfortunately, that's the only admirable thing he's done in office. 

[+Hammerclaw]

33 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

I don't beleive that for minute, I suspect if the Kurdsare attacked by Turkey I beleive they will set them free. That would be quit a diversion, and cause some serious problems. The Kurds are not Pro-Government (Syria) the Leadership in Syria Has very little use for them, but like you said maybe Syria will except them, time will tell.

No. These people terrorized the Kurds and were supported tacitly, by Erdogan, who saw them as an instrument by which to rid himself of two birds with one stone, the Kurds and Assad. If the Kurds are faced with the choice of giving them freedom or their death, the Daesh foreigners and mercenaries will be slaughtered or rendered combat ineffective by mutilation according to Sharia Law. The rebel groups, on the other hand, might not be so discriminating. They've probably been taking Daesh deserters in, all along.

[The Caspian Hare]

3 hours ago, Setton said:

Staying would not have been risking conflict, as you well know. Turkey is not going to go in as long as the US has a presence there. 

 

Positioning ourselves as a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds is the very definition of risking conflict. Turkey has far more at stake than we do and is consequently willing to risk more. Our presence there is nothing more than a dangerous bluff.

We were never going to fight a NATO member on behalf of the Kurds and we never should have been on the border to begin with, something wchich is beyond the scope of our original mission and far beyond the scope of the AUMF that has already been stretched past the limit to justify our presence in Syria to begin with. If anybody wants to go into Syria to protect the Kurds, then put that before Congress and let them pass a new AUMF.

Should have left the entire country months ago.

[Setton]

1 minute ago, The Caspian Hare said:

Positioning ourselves as a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds is the very definition of risking conflict. Turkey has far more at stake than we do and is consequently willing to risk more. Our presence there is nothing more than a dangerous bluff.

Then you've been risking conflict for 18 months. 

What's changed this week? 

Quote

We were never going to fight a NATO member on behalf of the Kurds

Nobody is expecting you to. US presence is the deterrent in itself. 

Quote

and we never should have been on the border to begin with, something wchich is beyond the scope of our original mission 

Training and supporting your allies is beyond the scope of your mission? 

Good to know how the US sees its friends. 

[The Caspian Hare]

Just now, Setton said:

Then you've been risking conflict for 18 months. 

What's changed this week? 

Nobody is expecting you to. US presence is the deterrent in itself. 

Training and supporting your allies is beyond the scope of your mission? 

Good to know how the US sees its friends. 

 

1. Yes, and that was also a mistake.

2. Deterrence requires a commitment to fight if necessary. Anything else is a bluff.

3. There are no permanent alliances. They change as interests change. That's been the way of the international system since forever. 

[Setton]

7 minutes ago, The Caspian Hare said:

 

1. Yes, and that was also a mistake.

Ooookay... So no reason at all for the US to be supporting those fighting ISIS. Yeah, that seems reasonable. 

Quote

2. Deterrence requires a commitment to fight if necessary. Anything else is a bluff.

Yes, but no one is expecting the US to fight for the Kurds. Quite simply, Turkey knows the US will not stand for attacks that put US troops in danger. So Turkey stays put and there is no danger to the US. 

Quote

3. There are no permanent alliances. They change as interests change. That's been the way of the international system since forever. 

Usually in response to some change in behaviour by one of the allies, or when the terms of the alliance have been fulfilled. 

Not because one of the leaders wants to distract the population at home from inquiries into them. 

If the US wants to quietly die in the shadows, that's fine. Someone else will step up. It won't do the Kurds much good though and you get to become a footnote at the end of a long list of genocidal regimes.

[The Caspian Hare]

58 minutes ago, Setton said:

Ooookay... So no reason at all for the US to be supporting those fighting ISIS. Yeah, that seems reasonable. 

They didn't fight out of the goodness of their hearts, moral outrage over the crime of ISIS, or some commitment to us. They did it because it was in their interests. When our interests no longer align, or the costs of staying are deemed too high, then our alliance is over.

Quote

Yes, but no one is the US to fight for the Kurds. Quite simply, Turkey knows the US will not stand for attacks that put US troops in danger. So Turkey stays put and there is no danger to the US. 

Again, the US has to be committed to fight if necessary, otherwise the presence is a bluff. You are assuming something that cannot be known: that Turkey will wait indefinitely in the face of what it considers a grave territorial threat and not call the US bluff.

Quote

 

Usually in response to some change in behaviour by one of the allies, or when the terms of the alliance have been fulfilled. 

Not because one of the leaders wants to distract the population at home from inquiries into them. 

If the US wants to quietly die in the shadows, that's fine. Someone else will step up. It won't do the Kurds much good though and you get to become a footnote at the end of a long list of genocidal regimes.

 

Let me tell you how the US dies: by overextending itself in the Middle East in endless conflicts, which is what we are doing by being sucked further and further into the wars of the region. Our primary rival, China, has wisely avoided these entanglements, and is able to concentrate on its own region and its own economic development. 

As for why we are a genocidal regime, you will have to explain.

Edited October 8, 2019 by The Caspian Hare
spelling

[Raptor Witness]

6 hours ago, and then said:

....... You have a nice life.  I hope you enjoy 2020 and that it causes you a worse mental break than you are currently struggling with.  Toodles...

 

I’m simply making an argument that you don’t like. If that counts for mental illness, then I sympathize with your lack of ability to counter in kind.

Like Trump, you have nothing to offer, other than empty, frail innuendos for your crippled hero, who is melting like a golden calf.

Don’t weep for me, weep for your fallen angel. 

 

Edited October 8, 2019 by Raptor Witness

[RoofGardener]

Hmm.. I've just noticed something. 

The President has threatened to "..destroy and obliterate the Turkish economy..." if Erdogan oversteps the mark. 

Except... the USA is NOT a major trading partner with the USA. Not even close.  I don't see how the President COULD significantly damage the Turkish economy. At least.. not more than Erdogan is doing already ? 

[The Caspian Hare]

9 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. I've just noticed something. 

The President has threatened to "..destroy and obliterate the Turkish economy..." if Erdogan oversteps the mark. 

Except... the USA is NOT a major trading partner with the USA. Not even close.  I don't see how the President COULD significantly damage the Turkish economy. At least.. not more than Erdogan is doing already ? 

It kind of already happened with steel tariffs last year. Sent the Lira into a tailspin.

Don't know how much more we could do, or if it would be enough to deter Erdogan.

https://bigworldtale.com/world-news/turkey-could-the-us-damage-its-economy/

Quote

 

In fact, only 5% of Turkish exports head to the US and Turkey imports only slightly more from there.

Turkey’s trading relationships with China, Russia and Germany are more important.

But even though overall trade with US is not as large, there are key vulnerable sectors: air transport, iron and steel and machinery – and this is where the US has chosen to target previous sanctions.

Turkey has historically had a deficit in international trade, in that it imports more from the rest of the world than it exports.

However, the trade gap did narrow considerably in 2018 on the back of the weakness of the lira, which made Turkey’s exports more competitive and imports more expensive.

 

 

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

14 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

No you dont have it right.

We had troops there but Trump chose to pull them out, which is cool but, along with pulling our troops out he told Turkey they could invade and we wouldnt stop them. The problem with him explicitly telling them they could invade is they will massacre our allies the Kurds. Essentially Trump just told Turkey to go do genocide.

Very wrong Farmer.   Trump threatens Turkey

Quote

"I have told Turkey that if they do anything outside of what we would think is humane... they could suffer the wrath of an extremely decimated economy," he said.

Ankara brushed aside the threat, with Vice-President Fuat Oktay saying: "Turkey is not a country that will act according to threats."

Farmer, if you have to lie to make your point, then you really don't have a point.

[Farmer77]

23 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Very wrong Farmer.   Trump threatens Turkey

Farmer, if you have to lie to make your point, then you really don't have a point.

Don't accuse me of lying . 

I know what he tweeted but what he tweeted wasn't any form of actual policy or direction. It's just about whatever he deems appropriate while doing some seriously mentally unhinged dictatorial bragging (I guess). That's um called nothing as it relates to actual policy. 

The dear leader's feelings may become policy at some point I suppose but we would have to know exactly what those feelings meant but of course we don't. 

 

Edited October 8, 2019 by Farmer77

[+and-then]

14 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

Sharia justice.

Wholesale execution would be appropriate.  If they are released they will immediately return to combat.  Or worse, be filtered in with "refugees" bound for the lovely climes of Europe.

[+and-then]

8 hours ago, The Caspian Hare said:

It kind of already happened with steel tariffs last year. Sent the Lira into a tailspin.

Don't know how much more we could do, or if it would be enough to deter Erdogan.

https://bigworldtale.com/world-news/turkey-could-the-us-damage-its-economy/

 

Check me if I'm wrong but Iran doesn't have a huge export economy either, beyond oil.  How are THEY doing just now?  

[Black Red Devil]

8 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. I've just noticed something. 

The President has threatened to "..destroy and obliterate the Turkish economy..." if Erdogan oversteps the mark. 

Except... the USA is NOT a major trading partner with the USA. Not even close.  I don't see how the President COULD significantly damage the Turkish economy. At least.. not more than Erdogan is doing already ? 

Yeah, that'll turn Turkey towards the Russians. SMART  The Turk and Syrian Govts don't see eye to eye but some 60% of the Syrian population are Sunni and if allies, they would have the Kurds surrounded. Erdogan would do backflip somersaults for such a deal.  Putin would get rid of Al Assad for a Sunni President in a millisecond if it meant a certain control over the Bosphorus so a deal that would suit all three parties.

Too bad if Iran didn't like it because what's their alternative?  There is no way Iran would look to the US for an ally.

[The Caspian Hare]

23 minutes ago, and then said:

Check me if I'm wrong but Iran doesn't have a huge export economy either, beyond oil.  How are THEY doing just now?  

From what ex-pats tell me, the middle class is getting wrecked.

[The Caspian Hare]

26 minutes ago, Black Red Devil said:

Yeah, that'll turn Turkey towards the Russians. SMART  The Turk and Syrian Govts don't see eye to eye but some 60% of the Syrian population are Sunni and if allies, they would have the Kurds surrounded. Erdogan would do backflip somersaults for such a deal.  Putin would get rid of Al Assad for a Sunni President in a millisecond if it meant a certain control over the Bosphorus so a deal that would suit all three parties.

Too bad if Iran didn't like it because what's their alternative?  There is no way Iran would look to the US for an ally.

 

Turkey's played both sides for a long time. Not much more Russia can do for them, economically at least. Assad's place seems pretty secure for the moment - he's the real winner of the civil war, it seems, against all odds.

[Black Red Devil]

7 minutes ago, The Caspian Hare said:

 

Turkey's played both sides for a long time. Not much more Russia can do for them, economically at least. Assad's place seems pretty secure for the moment - he's the real winner of the civil war, it seems, against all odds.

All true but Trump's threats might spin things differently if Erdogan does attack the Kurds and Trump keeps promise to his words.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

3 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Don't accuse me of lying . 

I know what he tweeted but what he tweeted wasn't any form of actual policy or direction. It's just about whatever he deems appropriate while doing some seriously mentally unhinged dictatorial bragging (I guess). That's um called nothing as it relates to actual policy. 

The dear leader's feelings may become policy at some point I suppose but we would have to know exactly what those feelings meant but of course we don't. 

 

 

What am I supposed to tell you, Farmer, you said - Trump gave Turkey the greenlight to commit genocide on the Kurds.

C'mon, man!

 

PS: I apologize. I'll word it better in the future 

Edited October 8, 2019 by Earl.Of.Trumps
PS