General political chat

Status
Not open for further replies.

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Just checking in to remind everyone how amused I get when no-service civs get mad about troops not being deployed all over the place. I guess armchair soldiering is easier than the real thing...

From Brexit to jury sentences, there are many topics on which we all offer our own non-expert “armchair” opinions. That’s the nature of a discussion forum.
 

Slpy3270

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
The whole Turkey-Syria thing is bad but it's even worse when you consider that, should the next president be a Dem, he/she will not be able to push forward his/her domestic priorities because the foreign crises will consume everything in their agenda.

Given that 2020 Dems' foreign policy (with exceptions to Warren and Sanders) seems to be "undo everything Trump does but leave most of the status quo in place," I'm not optimistic.
 

OneofThree

Well-Known Member
Dems' foreign policy. . .

Dem foreign policy created ISIS -fact. Now where discussing cleaning up yet another problem with proxy combatants we've created and funded? Shocker. But even this doesn't tell the whole story. Unfortunately, some process this as some sort of purely humanitarian engagement. :hilarious: We don't care any more about the Kurds in Syria than we did Albanians in Kosovo.
 

Slpy3270

Well-Known Member
I wrote “international community” for a reason. The responsibility should not fall on the US alone. The entire world owes the Kurds for their inestimable role in fighting ISIS.

By the same token, the whole world—and not just the region—stands to suffer if the Kurds are attacked, because ISIS may well rebound in the ensuing chaos.

Hate to be pessimistic here but ISIS was going to rebound anyhow. Most of their wicked ideology is in fact mainstream in many governments of our Middle Eastern "allies" (i.e. Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc.). They just don't have the barbarism associated with it.

If you really think that Turkey wouldn't have the guts to shoot US troops to get into NE Syria, then you really need to look at Erdoğan's religious views, which are almost indistinguishable from those held by Middle Eastern leaders and ISIS. He would have no qualms using nuclear weapons against us or our troops even if it gets himself and his people killed, because he would've morally "won".

If we had any guts to prevent this calamity, we would've shot Erdogan and his supporters there and then, but because Turkey's a NATO ally (somehow) that was a nonstarter.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
I suggest you look at my statements. The bolded doesn’t reflect anything I’ve posted here. As always, you’re conflating me with others. My own view is that the international community should absolutely be involved in the fight against ISIS, and I’m very glad the US has done so much to support the Kurds in this regard.
Are you upset with Trump, or with european countries?

From your posts last night, you appear to be putting a lot of weight on the shoulders of the US.. and quite willing to let Americans die, because they “owe” the people there.

I have not given my thoughts on what I think should or shouldn’t be done... but, I am chuckling and sickened simultaneously at the way people want to use (or not use) our troops based on how it fits their Anti-Trump narrative.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Hate to be pessimistic here but ISIS was going to rebound anyhow. Most of their wicked ideology is in fact mainstream in many governments of our Middle Eastern "allies" (i.e. Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc.). They just don't have the barbarism associated with it.

If you really think that Turkey wouldn't have the guts to shoot US troops to get into NE Syria, then you really need to look at Erdoğan's religious views, which are almost indistinguishable from those held by Middle Eastern leaders and ISIS. He would have no qualms using nuclear weapons against us or our troops even if it gets himself and his people killed, because he would've morally "won".

If we had any guts to prevent this calamity, we would've shot Erdogan and his supporters there and then, but because Turkey's a NATO ally (somehow) that was a nonstarter.

You're being incredibly reductive and inaccurate. Anyone who's been to Jordan, Qatar, or Turkey can tell you how wildly far-fetched your comparison to IS is. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't merit being equated with the hellish and apocalyptic polity that IS created. That the majority of IS's victims are Muslims underscores the fallacy of conflating the region's various expressions of Islam.
 

willtravel

Well-Known Member
Certainly no other nation besides the US has literally fought a war and maintained so many troops in the region for years, at least in part, to protect the Kurds in Iraq.

Like I said, no matter what, who, or how troops are in that area, there will always be war. Has been, will be. I do not feel we are a police force. I think we have done more than enough and I think it is time for NATO or whoever to step for and take our place. JMO
 

Slpy3270

Well-Known Member
You're being incredibly reductive and inaccurate. Anyone who's been to Jordan, Qatar, or Turkey can tell you how wildly far-fetched your comparison to IS is. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't merit being equated with the hellish and apocalyptic polity that IS created. That the majority of IS's victims are Muslims underscores the fallacy of conflating the region's various expressions of Islam.

Given that those countries are as restrictive towards abortion, LGBT marriage and religious diversity as ISIS is, the comparison isn't "far-fetched" at all.

BTW, guess where ISIS gets its money from? Spoiler alert: Qatar! Our so-called "ally."

Besides, continued panic over ISIS is just gonna give those white supremacist lowlifes more ammunition over the narrative. The inflated panic over ISIS is precisely why Republicans, and by extension Europeans, were willing to embrace racism and xenophobic eliminationism to begin with, and we keep falling for it.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Are you upset with Trump, or with european countries?

From your posts last night, you appear to be putting a lot of weight on the shoulders of the US.. and quite willing to let Americans die, because they “owe” the people there.

I haven't mentioned Trump once.

As usual, you're imagining things rather than responding to anything I've posted. My sole reference to the US last night was to sum up the situation for someone who didn't seem familiar with it:
From the foregoing, it seems you think people are calling on the US to send troops to Rojava to protect it from Turkey. Not at all. American soldiers are already there and have been so for years in alliance with the Kurds. They have only now started to withdraw, much to the dismay of the Kurds who are about to bear the brunt of the Turkish army.


My very first post on this topic made a deliberate point of referring to the international community at large:
The Kurds are going to suffer badly once the Turkish army moves in. After all they did to fight ISIS, they deserve the international community’s support and protection. And they’re not the only ones who are going to pay the price: an ISIS resurgence would have devastating consequences for the region and for the world at large.


And I elaborated on this point earlier today:
I wrote “international community” for a reason. The responsibility should not fall on the US alone. The entire world owes the Kurds for their inestimable role in fighting ISIS.


Now to come to your next accusation:
you appear . . . quite willing to let Americans die, because they “owe” the people there.


Please refer to the first of my responses to you today:
The argument people are making is that Turkey wouldn’t dare to invade Syria to begin with if American troops weren’t withdrawing. And indeed it wouldn’t.


Again, I am not calling on Americans (or anyone else) to fight the Turkish army. On the contrary, I'm saying that Turkey wouldn't be invading the region to begin with if the international community stood by the Kurds.

To conclude this tedious but necessary post with an appeal that I know will fall on deaf ears: please, for goodness' sake, stop claiming I've said things that my own posts disprove.
 

willtravel

Well-Known Member
I mean... wasn't the invasion of Iraq, under the Bush administration, widely considered to be the reason ISIS exists today? The blowback of that decision, to enter Iraq... If that hadn't happened... well.
Not sure all about Desert Storm but Iraqi decided to invade Kuwait and the US plus 40 other countries ( including Canada) went to defend Kuwait but because we decided to defend Kuwait that is why 9/11 happened and no other country?

The war became known by its military name Operation Desert Storm. The Allies consisted of troops and support from almost 40 countries including from the Middle East, Europe, Britain and Asia Pacific.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom