This is bad.
Quote
US to let Turkish forces move into Syria, dumping Kurdish allies
White House reveals policy shift, which follows conversation between Trump and Erdoğan
Julian Borger in Washington and Bethan McKernan in Istanbul
Mon 7 Oct 2019 11.37 BST
First published on Mon 7 Oct 2019 05.42 BST
The White House has given the green light to a Turkish offensive into northern Syria, moving US forces out of the area in an abrupt foreign policy change that will in effect abandon Washington's longtime military partners, the Kurds.
Kurdish forces have spearheaded the campaign against Islamic State in the region, but the policy swerve, after a phone conversation between Donald Trump and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on Sunday, means Turkey would take custody of captured Isis fighters, the White House said.
It has also raised fears of fresh fighting between Turkey and Kurdish forces in Syria's complex war now the US no longer acts as a buffer between the two sides.
The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) said on Monday morning that their US partners had already begun withdrawing troops from areas along Turkey's border. Footage aired on Kurdish news agency Hawar purportedly showed US armoured vehicles evacuating key positions near the towns of Ras al-Ayn and Tal Abyad in the border region. Erdogan himself also confirmed the development in remarks to reporters on Monday morning in Ankara.
The SDF spokesman, Mustafa Bali, accused the US of leaving the area to "turn into a war zone", adding that the SDF would "defend north-east Syria at all costs".
A statement from the Turkish foreign minister, Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, said that Ankara had "supported the territorial integrity of Syria since the beginning of the crisis and will continue to do so ... [We are] determined to ensure survivability and security of Turkey by clearing the region from terrorists. We will contribute to bringing safety, peace and stability to Syria."
The decision represents the latest in a series of erratic moves by Trump, who is fighting impeachment at home, apparently taken without consultation with, or knowledge of, US diplomats dealing with Syria, or the UK and France, the US's main international partners in the country.
Brett McGurk, a former US special envoy for the fight against Isis, said: "The White House statement tonight on Syria after Trump spoke with Erdoğan demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of anything happening on the ground.
McGurk pointed out that the US is not holding any Isis detainees. They are being held by the SDF "which Trump just served up to Turkey".
"Turkey has neither the intent, desire, nor capacity to manage 60,000 detainees, which State and [Pentagon inspectors general] warn is the nucleus for a resurgent Isis. Believing otherwise is a reckless gamble with our national security," McGurk warned on Twitter.
The US and Turkey came to an agreement in August to create a "safe zone" in northern Syria, by which the US-backed Kurdish-led SDF would pull back from the border.
The safe zone deal was due to forestall a Turkish military offensive which has been threatened since Trump announced last December the 2,000 US special forces stationed in Syria would leave. Ankara sees the SDF as indistinguishable from Kurdish insurgents inside Turkey and views it as a serious security threat.
In the White House statement issued just before 11 pm on Sunday, however, that agreement was not mentioned.
"Today, President Donald J Trump spoke with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey by telephone," it said. "Turkey will soon be moving forward with its long-planned operation into northern Syria. The United States Armed Forces will not support or be involved in the operation, and United States forces, having defeated the Isis territorial 'caliphate', will no longer be in the immediate area."
The statement suggested that in return for US acquiescence in a Turkish offensive, Erdoğan had assured Trump that Turkey would take over the detention of Isis militants captured by the SDF, on the battlefield.
The custody of Europeans and other foreign fighters has long been one of Trump's preoccupations, and he has lambasted European governments for not taking responsibility for their own nationals in Isis' ranks.
"The US government has pressed France, Germany, and other European nations, from which many captured Isis fighters came, to take them back, but they did not want them and refused," the White House statement continued.
"The US will not hold them for what could be many years and great cost to the United States taxpayer. Turkey will now be responsible for all Isis fighters in the area captured over the past two years in the wake of the defeat of the territorial caliphate by the United States."
Syria experts have warned that the US abandonment of the SDF would lead to another, new front in the eight-year Syrian conflict, and could push the Kurds into seeking an arrangement with the Assad regime in Damascus. The Kurdish leadership has long been in talks with Damascus to ensure a level of Kurdish autonomy in north eastern Syria in the event of a US pullout.
Two weeks ago, at the UN general assembly, the US special envoy for the global coalition to defeat Isis, James Jeffrey, stressed that the US had an agreement with Turkey on a safe zone, in recognition of Ankara's security concerns, that obviated the need for an Turkish incursion.
"We listen to the Turks' concerns. We try to respond to them when we can," Jeffrey said. "And we have made it clear to Turkey at every level that any unilateral operation is not going to lead to an improvement in anyone's security – not Turkey's, not the people in the north-east, not the people around the world who feel threatened by Daesh [Isis], which is the basic purpose for our US military being in the north-east in the first place."
Ankara says the planned safe zone could allow up to two million Syrian refugees currently living in Turkey to return, although international observers and the SDF say such a move would amount to demographic engineering. Turkish presidency spokesperson Ibrahim Kalin said on Monday that Turkey has "no interest in occupation or changing demographics".
Another outcome of the Trump-Erdoğan call is that the Turkish leader is expected to visit the White House next month.
Let's face it, Erdogan had way more money to offer to Trump and his family.
A self-proclaimed tough guy who likes big splashy construction projects, has contempt for democracy and the rule of law, regularly attacks the central bank over high interest rates, threatens journalists, and abuses his official authority to target political rivals? What's there not to like?
Looks like the US is going isolationist, while ratcheting up our defense spending to ever higher levels. I'm sure it will make sense to everyone once the army is rebranded the Southern Border Protection Force.
Not to defend the undefendable but the Kurds were always going to get abandoned.
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
1h
The United States was supposed to be in Syria for 30 days, that was many years ago. We stayed and got deeper and deeper into battle with no aim in sight. When I arrived in Washington, ISIS was running rampant in the area. We quickly defeated 100% of the ISIS Caliphate, including capturing thousands of ISIS fighters, mostly from Europe. But Europe did not want them back, they said you keep them USA! I said "NO, we did you a great favor and now you want us to hold them in U.S. prisons at tremendous cost. They are yours for trials." They again said "NO," thinking, as usual, that the U.S. is always the "sucker," on NATO, on Trade, on everything. The Kurds fought with us, but were paid massive amounts of money and equipment to do so. They have been fighting Turkey for decades. I held off this fight for almost 3 years, but it is time for us to get out of these ridiculous Endless Wars, many of them tribal, and bring our soldiers home. WE WILL FIGHT WHERE IT IS TO OUR BENEFIT, AND ONLY FIGHT TO WIN. Turkey, Europe, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Russia and the Kurds will now have to figure the situation out, and what they want to do with the captured ISIS fighters in their "neighborhood." They all hate ISIS, have been enemies for years. We are 7000 miles away and will crush ISIS again if they come anywhere near us!
Quote from: Syt on October 07, 2019, 08:00:03 AM
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
1h
The United States was supposed to be in Syria for 30 days, that was many years ago. We stayed and got deeper and deeper into battle with no aim in sight. When I arrived in Washington, ISIS was running rampant in the area. We quickly defeated 100% of the ISIS Caliphate, including capturing thousands of ISIS fighters, mostly from Europe. But Europe did not want them back, they said you keep them USA! I said "NO, we did you a great favor and now you want us to hold them in U.S. prisons at tremendous cost. They are yours for trials." They again said "NO," thinking, as usual, that the U.S. is always the "sucker," on NATO, on Trade, on everything. The Kurds fought with us, but were paid massive amounts of money and equipment to do so. They have been fighting Turkey for decades. I held off this fight for almost 3 years, but it is time for us to get out of these ridiculous Endless Wars, many of them tribal, and bring our soldiers home. WE WILL FIGHT WHERE IT IS TO OUR BENEFIT, AND ONLY FIGHT TO WIN. Turkey, Europe, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Russia and the Kurds will now have to figure the situation out, and what they want to do with the captured ISIS fighters in their "neighborhood." They all hate ISIS, have been enemies for years. We are 7000 miles away and will crush ISIS again if they come anywhere near us!
It is so convenient to entirely ignore what the issue is.
Lindsey Graham is having a little freakout over this, so at least one good thing is coming from it.
Maybe the Lindsay Suckup switch has been turned to off. I'm sure it'll get fixed soon.
Graham does have a few issues that he's dedicated to. Namely, keeping US troops everywhere possible, good or bad.
Quotethat the U.S. is always the "sucker," on NATO, on Trade, on everything.
I don't know about that, but it's certainly always a moran.
Well, at least Trump shared what drove his decision, the State Department's FOX News's assessment
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGSS36FXYAAOr14?format=png&name=900x900)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGSS8EOWoAADa1J?format=png&name=900x900)
I hope the people of Diyarbakir, Ankara, and Istanbul will benefit from democratic confederalism one day.
Also, I know I'm channeling Psellus here, but let them go. Let the Turkish economy stagnate. Support Gulenism and whoever is left among the secular generals. Let Georgia and Armenia into NATO instead. Support Greek claims and Rojava. Time for some rollback. :ph34r:
MEOWTF?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181232249821388801
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
As I have stated strongly before, and just to reiterate, if Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey (I've done before!). They must, with Europe and others, watch over the captured ISIS fighters and families. The U.S. has done far more than anyone could have ever expected, including the capture of 100% of the ISIS Caliphate. It is time now for others in the region, some of great wealth, to protect their own territory. THE USA IS GREAT!
Quote from: Syt on October 07, 2019, 10:46:10 AM
MEOWTF?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181232249821388801
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
As I have stated strongly before, and just to reiterate, if Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey (I've done before!). They must, with Europe and others, watch over the captured ISIS fighters and families. The U.S. has done far more than anyone could have ever expected, including the capture of 100% of the ISIS Caliphate. It is time now for others in the region, some of great wealth, to protect their own territory. THE USA IS GREAT!
Can Trump be: Ottoman Empire?
Hilarious and scary.
It also means that anything Turkey does and Trump doesn't complain about is tacitly approved by him.
This man is President of the United States and has a nonzero chance of being re-elected. :Embarrass:
Quote from: Syt on October 07, 2019, 10:52:37 AM
It also means that anything Turkey does and Trump doesn't complain about is tacitly approved by him.
Until such a time when he's been against it since before Obama started it.
Erm.....wow.
I feel like "great and unmatched wisdom" must be setting off alarm bells about his state of mind, even for the most supine Republican in DC.
It's just a joke. Ha ha. Republican senators were out in force these last few days to tell the American people that the President of the United States is just trolling the press (the real enemy of the people, remember).
Remember the in heady days, before the swearing in ceremony, wise talking heads said the establishment would mould him into being 'presidential' ? :nelson:
This deserves impeachment as much as anything else he's done.
More grounds for invoking Section 4 of the 25th Amendment than grounds for impeachment IMO.
This evening ANHA TV showed video of convoys of US armoured vehicles leaving some bases near the Turkish border.
Sounds like a cartoon villain.
Can we rewind back to 1999 and try again?
Time for a 40m gold statue of Trump on the Mall; that classical look is so passe.
It probably goes down well with voters in Kansas; you would think that they would know better.
Quote from: frunk on October 07, 2019, 07:44:28 AM
Looks like the US is going isolationist, while ratcheting up our defense spending to ever higher levels. I'm sure it will make sense to everyone once the army is rebranded the Southern Border Protection Force.
That's when Canada invades and restores the rule of law and order?
Quote from: Malthus on October 07, 2019, 10:49:44 AM
Quote from: Syt on October 07, 2019, 10:46:10 AM
MEOWTF?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1181232249821388801
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
As I have stated strongly before, and just to reiterate, if Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey (I've done before!). They must, with Europe and others, watch over the captured ISIS fighters and families. The U.S. has done far more than anyone could have ever expected, including the capture of 100% of the ISIS Caliphate. It is time now for others in the region, some of great wealth, to protect their own territory. THE USA IS GREAT!
Can Trump be: Ottoman Empire?
In the words of Stephen Colbert, he's gone full God-Emperor.
Vladimir Putin must be very pleased, but one of the least surprised people by this move.
(https://preview.redd.it/qr6e9715tar31.jpg?width=960&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=5b15aa20400bb6a6cebeefda22213b5634fa72ff)
:lmfao:
Bonus points would have been awarded if it had been "Orange Skull". :P
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 08, 2019, 01:58:50 AM
It probably goes down well with voters in Kansas; you would think that they would know better.
Kansas--epicenter of anti-Kurdism.
Quote
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
2h
We may be in the process of leaving Syria, but in no way have we Abandoned the Kurds, who are special people and wonderful fighters. Likewise our relationship with Turkey, a NATO and Trading partner, has been very good. Turkey already has a large Kurdish population and fully understands that while we only had 50 soldiers remaining in that section of Syria, and they have been removed, any unforced or unnecessary fighting by Turkey will be devastating to their economy and to their very fragile currency. We are helping the Kurds financially/weapons!
"We haven't abandoned the Jews in Poland; Germany already has a large Jewish population ..."
We are helping the Kurds weapons?
Quote from: Habbaku on October 08, 2019, 10:52:59 AM
We are helping the Kurds weapons?
He probably meant weaponally.
weaponeously
Quote from: The Larch on October 08, 2019, 09:30:36 AM
:lmfao:
Bonus points would have been awarded if it had been "Orange Skull". :P
The artist just takes Trump's words directly and transposes them on actual comic book panels. That's the genius of it. If he edited either text or image it would just be the usual. political cartoon.
If you haven't been following President Supervillain, you've been doing yourself a disservice.
Quote from: grumbler on October 08, 2019, 11:09:45 AM
Quote from: The Larch on October 08, 2019, 09:30:36 AM
:lmfao:
Bonus points would have been awarded if it had been "Orange Skull". :P
The artist just takes Trump's words directly and transposes them on actual comic book panels. That's the genius of it. If he edited either text or image it would just be the usual. political cartoon.
If you haven't been following President Supervillain, you've been doing yourself a disservice.
I know they're Trump's original words, it's pretty obvious (although sometimes the lines blur quite a lot). ;)
Orange Skull is the nickname for Trump that Maus' author Art Spiegelman came up with in an essay that Marvel vetoed for publication because he refused to remove that mention.
The other funny part is Trump's confession to having experience ruining national economies.
Really not the best skill to have in a leader.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 08, 2019, 11:34:25 AM
The other funny part is Trump's confession to having experience ruining national economies.
Really not the best skill to have in a leader.
What I find more likely is that when Turkey was having these recent economic troubles in the news, around the time they had a row with the US, Trump asked his court "did I do that?!" and they said "yes!"
Quote from: The Larch on October 08, 2019, 11:31:26 AM
I know they're Trump's original words, it's pretty obvious (although sometimes the lines blur quite a lot). ;)
Orange Skull is the nickname for Trump that Maus' author Art Spiegelman came up with in an essay that Marvel vetoed for publication because he refused to remove that mention.
Yes, I am familiar with what Orange Skull references, but the entire point of President Supervillain is that the artist doesn't need to make up any insulting nicknames or make, like Spiegelman, overt political commentary. He simply lets Trumps own words speak for themselves. Even the most ardent Trumpeter cannot accuse him of putting words in Trump's mouth or making up demeaning nicknames for him. President Supervillain's whole point is that the most deadly enemy of President Trump is Donald J. Trump.
Well it didn't take long for the Turks to attack.
Don't worry, Lindsey is on the case!
https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1181610139092226049
This is monstrous. :mellow:
I am hoping at least Turkey is cancelling the military equipment deal with Russia in exchange, although I don't really expect the Donald to strike any deals apart from family business ones.
I always thought that if it came to a forced choice of Kurds or Turkey, the US would ultimately side with the Turks. What's extraordinary here is there is no forced choice, this is just because Trump chatted to Erdogan :(
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 02:22:24 PM
I always thought that if it came to a forced choice of Kurds or Turkey, the US would ultimately side with the Turks. What's extraordinary here is there is no forced choice, this is just because Trump chatted to Erdogan :(
That is not extraordinary. That is exactly how our foreign policy typically works during this administration.
We have very few friends in the Middle East. Shame to see us betray one of those precious few for no reason at all.
https://theweek.com/articles/870359/kurdish-solution-that-trump-wont-dare-contemplate
Settle the Kurds in the Tennesia Province and turn them into true Americans.
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 02:30:06 PM
We have very few friends in the Middle East. Shame to see us betray one of those precious few for no reason at all.
"
Promise [Kurds] anything," Secretary of State Henry Kissinger infamously said, "
give them what they get, and fuck them if they can't take a joke."
The overwhelming fact is the protecting the Kurds is much more of a liability than strategic value. I wish taht weren't so but it is.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 02:35:59 PM
The overwhelming fact is the protecting the Kurds is much more of a liability than strategic value. I wish taht weren't so but it is.
They weren't such a liability while killing ISIS.
Show your work. What is the overwhelming liability of protecting them?
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 02:22:24 PM
I always thought that if it came to a forced choice of Kurds or Turkey, the US would ultimately side with the Turks. What's extraordinary here is there is no forced choice, this is just because Trump chatted to Erdogan Putin's agenda in the the Middle East needed to be advanced. :(
FYP
America sucks man
Quote from: Habbaku on October 09, 2019, 02:44:25 PM
Show your work. What is the overwhelming liability of protecting them?
They want independence are spread out between their four neighbors each of which don't want them to gain independence.
Strategic value: None, the US shouldn't be there anyway.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 09, 2019, 02:44:20 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 02:35:59 PM
The overwhelming fact is the protecting the Kurds is much more of a liability than strategic value. I wish taht weren't so but it is.
They weren't such a liability while killing ISIS.
Killing ISIS was not that important to the US, not with the immense number of enemies ISIS had anyways.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:01:07 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on October 09, 2019, 02:44:25 PM
Show your work. What is the overwhelming liability of protecting them?
They want independence are spread out between their four neighbors each of which don't want them to gain independence.
Strategic value: None, the US shouldn't be there anyway.
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
If at the end of it, a crisis occurs which forces a dilemma on the Americans, I think that would be one thing. But as I say that hasn't happened, this is a choice by a flighty President for no good strategic reason.
And it probably will cause questions - especially when you add in the stuff with North Korea - about an American alliance that, ultimate, always hangs by the mood of whoever is President at the time.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 02:35:59 PM
The overwhelming fact is the protecting the Kurds is much more of a liability than strategic value. I wish taht weren't so but it is.
The relatively low cost of protecting Kurds is nothing compared to the much higher cost of current (or potential future) US allies looking in other directions for more reliable partnerships.
See also the US tearing up the Iran agreement. We have become significantly less reliable and will pay for that going forward.
Quote from: frunk on October 09, 2019, 03:11:26 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 02:35:59 PM
The overwhelming fact is the protecting the Kurds is much more of a liability than strategic value. I wish taht weren't so but it is.
The relatively low cost of protecting Kurds ?!?
I am truly, truly ashamed to call myself an American.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
There's an argument for the US becoming more isolationist. Negotiating with our allies and gradually pulling back would make sense. Abandoning positions randomly at the request of foreign Autocrats probably isn't the best way to do that.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:11:57 PM
Quote from: frunk on October 09, 2019, 03:11:26 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 02:35:59 PM
The overwhelming fact is the protecting the Kurds is much more of a liability than strategic value. I wish taht weren't so but it is.
The relatively low cost of protecting Kurds ?!?
Our military commitment in Syria is much less than it was in Iraq, or our ongoing commitments in Afghanistan, Europe and Asia. Not to mention military spending isn't set to be reduced so it's not like we are actually saving anything.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
The Kurds have fought courageously in the service of our shared interests though, hardly dead weight. They seem an odd choice if you want to shed unreliable, worthless allies. Turkey seems far more in that category than the Kurds.
But if it was part of a strategic reshuffling that involved just leaving the Middle East to China and Russia...ok whatever. But we are likely going to be sucked back into the Middle East over and over again...just now we will be short one reliable and longterm ally who has shown a willingness to fight.
I don't see the logic behind your points here chipwich.
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 03:18:11 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
The Kurds have fought courageously in the service of our shared interests though, hardly dead weight. They seem an odd choice if you want to shed unreliable, worthless allies. Turkey seems far more in that category than the Kurds.
What shared interests?
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:20:33 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 03:18:11 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
The Kurds have fought courageously in the service of our shared interests though, hardly dead weight. They seem an odd choice if you want to shed unreliable, worthless allies. Turkey seems far more in that category than the Kurds.
What shared interests?
They seem obvious to me. What is your confusion here? How are our interests divergent when it comes to Iraq and Syria?
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
What wars is the US fighting to maintain its allies?
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 03:22:31 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:20:33 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 03:18:11 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
The Kurds have fought courageously in the service of our shared interests though, hardly dead weight. They seem an odd choice if you want to shed unreliable, worthless allies. Turkey seems far more in that category than the Kurds.
What shared interests?
They seem obvious to me. What is your confusion here? How are our interests divergent when it comes to Iraq and Syria?
America doesn't have interests in Iraq and Syria.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:22:56 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
What wars is the US fighting to maintain its allies?
Syria and Korea.
I can't help but think of the Vietnamese boat people. The US took in a whole bunch of people during that which is fair since the US betrayed these folks. Somehow I doubt that will happen with this. I do remember a time when Republicans used the issue of the boat people to argue that the leftists in the US were naive and uncaring, and willing to let other people die rather than stand up against murderers and tyrants. It was, in my opinion, a fairly strong argument in that it was true or at least mostly true.
I disagree vehmently with Chip. We support our allies because we promised to do so. We promised to support them because it's the right thing to do.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:01:46 PM
Killing ISIS was not that important to the US, not with the immense number of enemies ISIS had anyways.
Who are you thinking of? Assad never had any interest in fighting ISIS. The Iraqi army ran away. Obama hired 12 fat Syrians and they all quit.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:39:31 PM
We support our allies because we promised to do so.
What exactly is your best-case scenario? A was of independence against all 4 of Kurdistan's enemies?
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:42:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:39:31 PM
We support our allies because we promised to do so.
What exactly is your best-case scenario? A was of independence against all 4 of Kurdistan's enemies?
Is that a realistic prospect? No. We should make actual policy decisions based on fantasy scenarios now?
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 02:30:06 PM
We have very few friends in the Middle East. Shame to see us betray one of those precious few for no reason at all.
You can always count on Saudi Arabia's devotion :)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 09, 2019, 03:42:07 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:01:46 PM
Killing ISIS was not that important to the US, not with the immense number of enemies ISIS had anyways.
Who are you thinking of? Assad never had any interest in fighting ISIS. The Iraqi army ran away. Obama hired 12 fat Syrians and they all quit.
Assad did a lot of fighting against ISIS. Iraq, Iran and Syria would have eventually worn them down. ISIS became strong after half of the "allies" that we made "promises" to defected and brougbht their American equipment with them.
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 03:44:36 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:42:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:39:31 PM
We support our allies because we promised to do so.
What exactly is your best-case scenario? A was of independence against all 4 of Kurdistan's enemies?
Is that a realistic prospect? No. We should make actual policy decisions based on fantasy scenarios now?
Ask Raz.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:45:34 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 03:44:36 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:42:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:39:31 PM
We support our allies because we promised to do so.
What exactly is your best-case scenario? A was of independence against all 4 of Kurdistan's enemies?
Is that a realistic prospect? No. We should make actual policy decisions based on fantasy scenarios now?
Ask Raz.
Why, you are the one making the case that its ok to suddenly renege on commitments for no reason.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:42:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:39:31 PM
We support our allies because we promised to do so.
What exactly is your best-case scenario? A was of independence against all 4 of Kurdistan's enemies?
US has been pretty clear with the Kurds that you won't go that far. Remember when the Iraqi Kurds tried an independence vote? They were swiftly told they were on their own.
Quote from: Barrister on October 09, 2019, 03:48:32 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:42:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:39:31 PM
We support our allies because we promised to do so.
What exactly is your best-case scenario? A was of independence against all 4 of Kurdistan's enemies?
US has been pretty clear with the Kurds that you won't go that far. Remember when the Iraqi Kurds tried an independence vote? They were swiftly told they were on their own.
Exactly. There is no sovereignty outcome for the Kurds, so there's no reason for the U.S. to fight for them, morally or practically.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:42:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:39:31 PM
We support our allies because we promised to do so.
What exactly is your best-case scenario? A was of independence against all 4 of Kurdistan's enemies?
Well the best case scenario is that Kurds peacefully get independence. I'm not counting on best-case scenarios manifesting, but I think preventing our allies from being butchered is an attainable goal Or at least it was earlier this week.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:52:26 PM
Well the best case scenario is that Kurds peacefully get independence.
Independence from 4 different countries?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:52:26 PM
I'm not counting on best-case scenarios manifesting, but I think preventing our allies from being butchered is an attainable goal Or at least it was earlier this week.
Preventing... Until the end of time?
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:01:07 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on October 09, 2019, 02:44:25 PM
Show your work. What is the overwhelming liability of protecting them?
They want independence are spread out between their four neighbors each of which don't want them to gain independence.
Strategic value: None, the US shouldn't be there anyway.
They are fighting for independance from:
Turkey
Syria
Iran
Irak.
Iran is a declared ennemy of your President. Shouldn't be a problem pissing them off, right?
Syria is a declared ennemy of the US and just about every occidental nations. Shouldn't be a problem to piss 'em off, right?
Irak is holding together by the will of the US. The Kurds there will settle for autonomy. Shouldn'bt a problem to
piss 'em off strike one of these great deals your President is so famous for?
Turkey is much more troublesome as an ally than anyone else in NATO. They don't pull their fair share of the military costs, they don't actively engaged in outside peace keeping operations with NATO, and their only use as an ally was to maintain military bases and nuclear silos during the cold war. Shouldn't be a problem to piss 'em off, right? Unless your President is afraid?
It strikes me as cowardice by the current government of the United States. Republicans can whine all they want, but they will not seriously oppose their president and go against him for more than token words of sorrow and dispointment. They're the ones who enabled this. It's like a SA complaining he got sent to Dachau after an unfair trial.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:54:05 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:52:26 PM
Well the best case scenario is that Kurds peacefully get independence.
Independence from 4 different countries?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 03:52:26 PM
I'm not counting on best-case scenarios manifesting, but I think preventing our allies from being butchered is an attainable goal Or at least it was earlier this week.
Preventing... Until the end of time?
Just getting independance, of a semi-autonomous State with Syria and Irak would be enough. Many Kurds living in Turkey and Iran would likely end up moving there, just like many Jews decided to move to Israel, with a little help from their... friendly neighbours.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:26:13 PM
America doesn't have interests in Iraq and Syria.
We sure end up there a lot for a country that has no interests there.
Again if this is some kind of strategic redeployment than alright...but it isn't and we are most likely going to end up there again soon and potentially in a much weaker position.
I think your point is we shouldn't give a fuck because we shouldn't be in the Middle East anyway, I get that but I do not think that is why we are doing this nor the reality of our current situation.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:50:46 PM
Exactly. There is no sovereignty outcome for the Kurds, so there's no reason for the U.S. to fight for them, morally or practically.
yes, someone helps you fight a common ennemy, and then you leave them to be executed by another ennemy. :)
That is the way foreign policy should be conducted in the 21st century. It is a great way to convince others to join the fight with you, next time the US is in trouble.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:50:46 PM
Exactly. There is no sovereignty outcome for the Kurds, so there's no reason for the U.S. to fight for them, morally or practically.
I don't find this convincing. It is unlikely this one extreme scenario will occur anytime soon and I do not understand why this one scenario is what determines everything in our policy with the Kurds.
Quote from: viper37 on October 09, 2019, 03:54:55 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:01:07 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on October 09, 2019, 02:44:25 PM
Show your work. What is the overwhelming liability of protecting them?
They want independence are spread out between their four neighbors each of which don't want them to gain independence.
Strategic value: None, the US shouldn't be there anyway.
They are fighting for independance from:
Turkey
Syria
Iran
Irak.
Iran is a declared ennemy of your President. Shouldn't be a problem pissing them off, right?
Syria is a declared ennemy of the US and just about every occidental nations. Shouldn't be a problem to piss 'em off, right?
Irak is holding together by the will of the US. The Kurds there will settle for autonomy. Shouldn'bt a problem to piss 'em off strike one of these great deals your President is so famous for?
Turkey is much more troublesome as an ally than anyone else in NATO. They don't pull their fair share of the military costs, they don't actively engaged in outside peace keeping operations with NATO, and their only use as an ally was to maintain military bases and nuclear silos during the cold war. Shouldn't be a problem to piss 'em off, right? Unless your President is afraid?
It strikes me as cowardice by the current government of the United States. Republicans can whine all they want, but they will not seriously oppose their president and go against him for more than token words of sorrow and dispointment. They're the ones who enabled this. It's like a SA complaining he got sent to Dachau after an unfair trial.
How about Canada solves these problems if it's so easy?
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:20:33 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 03:18:11 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 09, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Arguably the strategic value is showing the worth and trustworthiness and reliability of an American ally.
The United States needs to reduce it's number of allies and can't go around fighting wars just to maintain the number of deadweight allies it has.
The Kurds have fought courageously in the service of our shared interests though, hardly dead weight. They seem an odd choice if you want to shed unreliable, worthless allies. Turkey seems far more in that category than the Kurds.
What shared interests?
Destroying ISIS, of course.
In the last five years the SDF has lost around 11,000 men and women in the fight against ISIS. The US has lost 11.
Seems like it was a pretty fucking good deal we made.
Apparently the EU was going to issue a warning to Turkey over their attack on Kurdish positions in Syria but Hungary has vetoed it.
Who cares about chiptroll? Apparently Languish...
Quote from: garbon on October 09, 2019, 04:34:52 PM
Who cares about chiptroll? Apparently Languish...
I care about any unpopular position defended on the basis of facts.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:54:05 PM
Preventing... Until the end of time?
No, just the United States ceases to exist. This isn't really that onerous a task. I mean, we protect Mississippi a place with no value strategic or otherwise. Hell the Kurds are much less likely to attack the US than Mississippi.
We didn't' really have that many troops in Syria, and keeping them there until we can hammer out a treaty that protects the lives of our friends and hopefully grants them some form of autonomy. I think that's worth keeping 50 guys there.
Quote from: The Larch on October 09, 2019, 04:33:11 PM
Apparently the EU was going to issue a warning to Turkey over their attack on Kurdish positions in Syria but Hungary has vetoed it.
<_<
Russia is a much more important American ally than the Kurds.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 04:15:13 PM
How about Canada solves these problems if it's so easy?
Well, for starters who don't stab our allies in the back. Perhaps the next President will have an opportunity to build confidence in the US again. It is completely shot atm.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 09, 2019, 04:47:25 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 04:15:13 PM
How about Canada solves these problems if it's so easy?
Well, for starters who don't stab our allies in the back. Perhaps the next President will have an opportunity to build confidence in the US again. It is completely shot atm.
Canada should go rescue the Kurds then. Since Canada has so much confidence from the rest of the world. Go be the world police this time.
Republicans in open revolt in the Senate, introducing bipartisan legislation placing heavy sanctions on Turkey when they come back from recess.
Donald singlehandedly destroying two alliances in a sensitive geopolitical region. Nice.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 09, 2019, 04:42:00 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 09, 2019, 04:34:52 PM
Who cares about chiptroll? Apparently Languish...
I care about any unpopular position defended on the basis of facts.
That does not seem to describe the current situation.
Quote from: garbon on October 09, 2019, 04:34:52 PM
Who cares about chiptroll? Apparently Languish...
Right? Slow day for people or what? Why feed the troll?
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 09, 2019, 04:54:13 PM
Republicans in open revolt in the Senate, introducing bipartisan legislation placing heavy sanctions on Turkey when they come back from recess.
Donald singlehandedly destroying two alliances in a sensitive geopolitical region. Nice.
They have obviously not heard Chipwich's argument justifying the decisions of the great and unmatched leader.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 09, 2019, 04:59:09 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 09, 2019, 04:54:13 PM
Republicans in open revolt in the Senate, introducing bipartisan legislation placing heavy sanctions on Turkey when they come back from recess.
Donald singlehandedly destroying two alliances in a sensitive geopolitical region. Nice.
They have obviously not heard Chipwich's argument justifying the decisions of the great and unmatched leader.
Your great leader hasn't lifted a finger in Syria so why should mine?
Look on the bright side Chip, the great and unmatched leader is now quoting from social media posts trying to defend his position. Maybe he will choose one of yours. The one he has decided to go with is that the Kurds were not at Normandy.
I'll claim the blame for inciting Chip. I didn't figure all I'd get from him was one-liners and arguments by mere assertion. Mea culpa.
I'm sympathetic to his main point, that the US shouldn't be there. But we are, we shouldn't leave allies in the lurch. We can't just change foreign policy at the President's whim.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 06:54:14 PM
I'm sympathetic to his main point, that the US shouldn't be there. But we are, we shouldn't leave allies in the lurch. We can't just change foreign policy at the President's whim.
If we reverse the policy and help the Kurds, when will it end?
Today Trump doubles down and justified abandoning the Kurds because they didn't help the US in WWII, they didn't help at Normandy.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 07:01:38 PM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 06:54:14 PM
I'm sympathetic to his main point, that the US shouldn't be there. But we are, we shouldn't leave allies in the lurch. We can't just change foreign policy at the President's whim.
If we reverse the policy and help the Kurds, when will it end?
Preferably with some kind of multilateral agreement, not vague assurances from Erdogan.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 07:15:58 PM
Preferably with some kind of multilateral agreement, not vague assurances from Erdogan.
A multilateral agreement? With who? Syria, the country we have invaded?
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:45:17 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 09, 2019, 03:42:07 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:01:46 PM
Killing ISIS was not that important to the US, not with the immense number of enemies ISIS had anyways.
Who are you thinking of? Assad never had any interest in fighting ISIS. The Iraqi army ran away. Obama hired 12 fat Syrians and they all quit.
Assad did a lot of fighting against ISIS. Iraq, Iran and Syria would have eventually worn them down.
Lol, without American intervention ISIS would have rolled over the Arabian peninsula and only been stopped by full blown Iranian intervention.
:lmfao: I'll let someone else respond to that one.
Quote from: PRC on October 09, 2019, 07:06:11 PM
Today Trump doubles down and justified abandoning the Kurds because they didn't help the US in WWII, they didn't help at Normandy.
This episode of the Trump Show is the best one ever. God I hope they can sustain the quality.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 07:19:48 PM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 07:15:58 PM
Preferably with some kind of multilateral agreement, not vague assurances from Erdogan.
A multilateral agreement? With who? Syria, the country we have invaded?
If Assad was ousted, why not? But definitely Kurdish leaders should be in the discussion.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 07:32:31 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 07:19:48 PM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 07:15:58 PM
Preferably with some kind of multilateral agreement, not vague assurances from Erdogan.
A multilateral agreement? With who? Syria, the country we have invaded?
If Assad was ousted, why not? But definitely Kurdish leaders should be in the discussion.
If Assad was ousted the political situation would be entirely different.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 09, 2019, 07:29:20 PM
Quote from: PRC on October 09, 2019, 07:06:11 PM
Today Trump doubles down and justified abandoning the Kurds because they didn't help the US in WWII, they didn't help at Normandy.
This episode of the Trump Show is the best one ever. God I hope they can sustain the quality.
Unfortunately I think it can only get worse, but maybe there is another level to be reached in the "so bad it's good" category.
I suppose it's possible in some weird, low-probability world that the Kurds in Turkey and Iraq come to the aid of those in Syria and rout the Turkish Army. I have my doubts. :hmm:
Quote from: PRC on October 09, 2019, 07:54:08 PM
Unfortunately I think it can only get worse, but maybe there is another level to be reached in the "so bad it's good" category.
That's the joke. :mellow:
Every public comment he's made since the Ukraine whistleblower have been in ascending retardation.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 09, 2019, 04:45:14 PM
Quote from: The Larch on October 09, 2019, 04:33:11 PM
Apparently the EU was going to issue a warning to Turkey over their attack on Kurdish positions in Syria but Hungary has vetoed it.
<_<
Today just keeps getting better and better for Vladimir. :ph34r:
Quote from: Berkut on October 09, 2019, 04:28:57 PM
Destroying ISIS, of course.
In the last five years the SDF has lost around 11,000 men and women in the fight against ISIS. The US has lost 11.
Seems like it was a pretty fucking good deal we made.
Right. I'm not following chip's argument. There were 3 options:
1) Use US ground troops to confront ISIS directly
2) Rely on proxies and allies to fight ISIS for us
3) Let the ISIS caliphate expand.
The Kurds were the most effective proxy we had. By far.
The next argument is that they have outlived their usefulness and thus can be profitably betrayed. The moral and consequential arguments against that are pretty obvious and don't need repeating. There are also the practical counter-arguments: (a) the Kurds may still be quite useful in the future as an effective combatant force in a dangerous and unpredictable region and (b) we gained nothing of value from the betrayal.
It's a truly Trumpian masterstroke of tarnishing the US reputation and getting nothing for it.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 07:01:38 PM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 06:54:14 PM
I'm sympathetic to his main point, that the US shouldn't be there. But we are, we shouldn't leave allies in the lurch. We can't just change foreign policy at the President's whim.
If we reverse the policy and help the Kurds, when will it end?
When the United States either collapses or ceases to be a great power. So most likely some point in the distant future. Or 2-3 years if Trump is re-elected.
Is forever war against a country that hasn't attacked the United States the best you can offer?
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 09:17:44 PM
Is forever war against a country that hasn't attacked the United States the best you can offer?
:huh: ISIS isn't a country.
Syria is. Assad didn't ask us to have soldiers their assisting the Kurds. Did you forget that we invaded his sovereign nation?
Failed states in the midst of civil wars and incapable of policing death cults with the power that ISIS had/has don't get to decide whether or not they can reject good actors from intervening within their borders. I think that's a pretty reasonable rule.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 06:54:14 PM
I'm sympathetic to his main point, that the US shouldn't be there. But we are, we shouldn't leave allies in the lurch. We can't just change foreign policy at the President's whim.
Yeah I mean I get that position. But again we are going to be right back in the Middle East soon. This just weakens our position, and more importantly backstabs our friends who just made sacrifices on our behalf.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 09:25:34 PM
Syria is. Assad didn't ask us to have soldiers their assisting the Kurds. Did you forget that we invaded his sovereign nation?
Well so is Turkey. In any case it was territory he no longer controlled to defeat another force that was opposed to his government occupying his territory.
But that is neither here nor there. Even to the extent you are correct here that doesn't mean abandoning the Kurds is a good thing to do.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 09:17:44 PM
Is forever war against a country that hasn't attacked the United States the best you can offer?
No...I am pretty sure there were other options besides that.
Besides it was not like we have really done much to war with the Assad government.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 04:52:01 PM
Canada should go rescue the Kurds then. Since Canada has so much confidence from the rest of the world. Go be the world police this time.
Ok chipwich I get you are not happy with what has already happened. I was a big voice to not intervene in Syria, but it does not mean we have a magical time machine to go back to 2011 and do it over again. Taking action that encourages Turkey to invade Syria and massacre a people who just allied with us to defeat ISIS is a disgraceful act. Just because you wish things had gone differently back in 2011 does not mean that we can pretend that is what happened.
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 09, 2019, 04:54:13 PM
Republicans in open revolt in the Senate, introducing bipartisan legislation placing heavy sanctions on Turkey when they come back from recess.
Donald singlehandedly destroying two alliances in a sensitive geopolitical region. Nice.
Yeah this will effectively end our alliance with Turkey. It was getting to be difficult with Erdogan anyway. But still...regrettable.
Fuck Turkey. I just hope that this fractures the GOP bootlickers from Trump in a real way.
Are you two referring to some sort of international convention or diplomatic precedent? This isn't a Total War game where you can ninja a province that temporarily got taken over by rebels. The US has more or less normalized relations with Assad's Syria and we don't have anymore right to move troops into there than we did in Iraq.
You could argue that since Assad negligently allowed ISIS to attack America's allies then it is grounds for war, but has never been a policy of Trump or Obama.
There are 195 countries. The United States does not have a burden to protect the Kurds more than any of them.
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 09:41:45 PM
I was a big voice to not intervene in Syria,
I don't think screaming at the computer makes you a "big voice" :hmm:
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 09:55:43 PM
Are you two referring to some sort of international convention or diplomatic precedent? This isn't a Total War game where you can ninja a province that temporarily got taken over by rebels.
Yes this is not some kind of video game where everything operates under strict rules of a game. This is the messy business of actual politics, you seem to be under the impression that everything is this rigid black and white scenario. And anyway the United States has zero interest in "ninjaing" anything.
QuoteThe US has more or less normalized relations with Assad's Syria and we don't have anymore right to move troops into there than we did in Iraq.
I don't necessarily disagree, I don't think we should have been there, but this is not in reference to the current situation. Does Turkey have a right to move troops into Syria? If our actions lead to a foreign army invading Syria and killing its citizens, is that also maybe not the right thing to do? Or maybe it is. I don't know what your strict code is and if it applies to Turkey.
QuoteYou could argue that since Assad negligently allowed ISIS to attack America's allies then it is grounds for war, but has never been a policy of Trump or Obama.
We are not at war with Syria, nor do I think Syria wants there to be a war with the United States. I think they would have vastly preferred what actually happened instead of that.
QuoteThere are 195 countries. The United States does not have a burden to protect the Kurds more than any of them.
Well I disagree that we do not have a burden to not abandon the Kurds. They allied with us and agreed to work with us to defeat ISIS at considerable cost to themselves. Now maybe we shouldn't have done that, maybe we had no right to do that, but we did do that and with that comes certain obligations. However it is just a fact that we considered defeating ISIS of strategic importance, even if you do not think it should have been.
Also this will create a rift between the United States and Turkey. Since you have this personal opinion on American strategic interests that do not seem to correspond to what our government and military think I guess I will leave that up to your interpretation if that is of strategic concern.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 09, 2019, 10:14:27 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 09:41:45 PM
I was a big voice to not intervene in Syria,
I don't think screaming at the computer makes you a "big voice" :hmm:
Well yeah. A big voice on this board which is a completely unimportant and insignificant voice outside of it :P
Eddie Teach: keeping me honest.
Neither Turkey or the United States has the right to invade Syria. This isn't some eclectic philosophy I just made up, invading other countries is largely unacceptable. Did you forget about the whole Iraq war and what it did for America's reputation?
Quote from: Valmy on October 09, 2019, 10:15:36 PM
Well I disagree that we do not have a burden to not abandon the Kurds. They allied with us and agreed to work with us to defeat ISIS at considerable cost to themselves. Now maybe we shouldn't have done that, maybe we had no right to do that, but we did do that and with that comes certain obligations.
This is overwhelming bullshit. We didn't get on our knees and politely beg the Kurds to fight ISIS. They didn't fight ISIS out of the goodness of their hearts. We intervened to prevent ISIS from committing a genocide on the Kurds and the Kurds were fighting for their survival. They owe us, not the other way around.
The thing that drives me nuts is that even if the US decides there's no reason to stay at the very least we should have gotten something from Turkey and/or Syria for leaving. We may have no use for being there but plenty of others would like to see us go. Use it as a bargaining position then screw over the Kurds. This is just random stupid.
Quote from: frunk on October 09, 2019, 11:03:26 PM
The thing that drives me nuts is that even if the US decides there's no reason to stay at the very least we should have gotten something from Turkey and/or Syria for leaving. We may have no use for being there but plenty of others would like to see us go. Use it as a bargaining position then screw over the Kurds. This is just random stupid.
Yeah I agree.
As I said before, I don't think this is based on some calculations of principles or some grand strategic re-alignment but a reckless decision that is just going to make things worse.
We will probably be right back in Syria soon and just in a much worse position.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 07:25:58 PM
:lmfao: I'll let someone else respond to that one.
You really think Asad was going to be able to stop them?
Apparently this is the article from which Trump got the "Kurds didn't help us in Normandy" reference:
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2019/10/08/critics-aghast-as-trump-keeps-word-about-no-more-wars-n2554328 (https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2019/10/08/critics-aghast-as-trump-keeps-word-about-no-more-wars-n2554328)
This is the specific paragraph:
QuoteThe Kurds helped destroy ISIS, true. It's also true that the Kurds would have fought ISIS anyway, since the psycho caliphate was right next door. Let's be honest – the Kurds didn't show up for us at Normandy or Inchon or Khe Sanh or Kandahar. The Syrian Kurds allied with us in their homeland because we shared a common interest in wiping out the head-lopping freak show that was ISIS.
I still can't figure out if this is mind boggling stupidity or malicious word twisting.
Both?
They had bone spurs, it is the only possible reason for failing to turn up for all these campaigns.
Quote from: Saladin on October 10, 2019, 06:21:06 AM
Both?
:yes:
That was my reaction.
Hi Sal, good to see you around the place. :cheers:
Quote from: The Larch on October 10, 2019, 06:15:15 AM
Apparently this is the article from which Trump got the "Kurds didn't help us in Normandy" reference:
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2019/10/08/critics-aghast-as-trump-keeps-word-about-no-more-wars-n2554328 (https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2019/10/08/critics-aghast-as-trump-keeps-word-about-no-more-wars-n2554328)
This is the specific paragraph:
QuoteThe Kurds helped destroy ISIS, true. It's also true that the Kurds would have fought ISIS anyway, since the psycho caliphate was right next door. Let's be honest – the Kurds didn't show up for us at Normandy or Inchon or Khe Sanh or Kandahar. The Syrian Kurds allied with us in their homeland because we shared a common interest in wiping out the head-lopping freak show that was ISIS.
I still can't figure out if this is mind boggling stupidity or malicious word twisting.
If we (as in, the world) analyse for days every stupid fucking brainfart of his, we are hardly different from his followers. We still dance to his tune. Worst is, it's not actually a tune he means to play. He is just this stupid.
But everyone just fucking hangs on it.
Quote from: Tamas on October 10, 2019, 06:43:08 AM
Quote from: The Larch on October 10, 2019, 06:15:15 AM
Apparently this is the article from which Trump got the "Kurds didn't help us in Normandy" reference:
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2019/10/08/critics-aghast-as-trump-keeps-word-about-no-more-wars-n2554328 (https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2019/10/08/critics-aghast-as-trump-keeps-word-about-no-more-wars-n2554328)
This is the specific paragraph:
QuoteThe Kurds helped destroy ISIS, true. It's also true that the Kurds would have fought ISIS anyway, since the psycho caliphate was right next door. Let's be honest – the Kurds didn't show up for us at Normandy or Inchon or Khe Sanh or Kandahar. The Syrian Kurds allied with us in their homeland because we shared a common interest in wiping out the head-lopping freak show that was ISIS.
I still can't figure out if this is mind boggling stupidity or malicious word twisting.
If we (as in, the world) analyse for days every stupid fucking brainfart of his, we are hardly different from his followers. We still dance to his tune. Worst is, it's not actually a tune he means to play. He is just this stupid.
But everyone just fucking hangs on it.
Well, there is a certain value in finding out where he gets his weird ass opinions from, in this case from that particular fucktard. As I doubt that he has even read the article, I just wonder who spoon fed it to him.
Not that it matters, but there were Kurds in the French resistance.
https://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/1023627/Chichkin_-_Neizvestnye_soyuzniki_Stalina._1940-1945_gg..html
Quote from: Habbaku on October 10, 2019, 07:39:04 AM
Not that it matters, but there were Kurds in the French resistance.
https://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/1023627/Chichkin_-_Neizvestnye_soyuzniki_Stalina._1940-1945_gg..html
Stop it.
It's a fun historical exercise, nothing more. It's not like it takes away from anything to show that Trump is wrong, yet again.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:28:15 PM
Syria and Korea.
And in Korea, you think that once the President's new best friend has ran over the South with some Russian and Chinese help, maybe, you will have a huge market of consumers for your products&technology over there?
And when the next ISIS reapears, you think they'll be so happy with American non interventionism that they will spare you from any attacks? :)
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 03:45:17 PM
Assad did a lot of fighting against ISIS.
uh... no. That is simply not true. Assad delibaretly left ISIS alone whenever possible because he chose, with Russian help, to attack the pro-democracy movements and any kind of group even thinking of protesting against Assad. ISIS was just the last group to be attacked, once everyone else had been defeated.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 04:15:13 PM
How about Canada solves these problems if it's so easy?
We had troops there. Our PM decided to pull them out, in an act of cowardice, just like your President is doing. One moron to another, I don't understand why they ain't such better friends.
Great, and now my Facebook is overtaken by the Kurds fighting at XY jokes and rebukes and shit.
This is fucking insane. All of you people should be ashamed. At least Syt's sister is honest about being obsessed with Trump, unlike you lot.
Quote from: Tamas on October 10, 2019, 09:55:47 AM
Great, and now my Facebook is overtaken by the Kurds fighting at XY jokes and rebukes and shit.
This is fucking insane. All of you people should be ashamed. At least Syt's sister is honest about being obsessed with Trump, unlike you lot.
I am ashamed. A massacre is about to happen to people who trusted us.
Quote from: Tamas on October 10, 2019, 09:55:47 AM
Great, and now my Facebook is overtaken by the Kurds fighting at XY jokes and rebukes and shit.
This is fucking insane. All of you people should be ashamed. At least Syt's sister is honest about being obsessed with Trump, unlike you lot.
Relax. Some people process this insanity through humor. Whose mind will be changed by handling it differently?
Quote from: Habbaku on October 10, 2019, 10:02:17 AM
Quote from: Tamas on October 10, 2019, 09:55:47 AM
Great, and now my Facebook is overtaken by the Kurds fighting at XY jokes and rebukes and shit.
This is fucking insane. All of you people should be ashamed. At least Syt's sister is honest about being obsessed with Trump, unlike you lot.
Relax. Some people process this insanity through humor. Whose mind will be changed by handling it differently?
You are participating in the accidental, but still extremely useful effect of Trump's stupidity and recklessness: dominating discourse. One fucking sentence, and the whole grim, tragic topic has been turned into this running joke of listing where the Kurds were or were not, present. One sentence, and the entire discussion is continuing on Trump's terms.
We are fucking sheeps.
I hope Languish is self-aware enough to recognize that we are obsessed with Trump. :hmm:
And that changes what, exactly? Talking about the subject on "his terms" (as if he's doing it deliberately, like it's a considered strategy? Give me a break) doesn't modify the result in the least. He's still wrong, and no one's mind is being changed.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 10, 2019, 10:09:00 AM
I hope Languish is self-aware enough to recognize that we are obsessed with Trump. :hmm:
But not just Trump. We are also obsessed with Brexit.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 10, 2019, 10:09:00 AM
I hope Languish is self-aware enough to recognize that we are obsessed with Trump. :hmm:
No kidding. He's the President. Of course we're going to over-discuss everything about him.
The point is, you should ignore stupid inane shit like this. Let it fly over your head, not make it the bloody conversation of the week.
Which is a fair position, but one that will lead to me doing useful things with my time. :hmm:
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 09:17:44 PM
Is forever war against a country that hasn't attacked the United States the best you can offer?
I don't think I said anything about a forever war. I've never heard of such a thing.
We were talking about alliances. Alliances can be enduring. The UK-Portugal alliance is over 200 years old. The US developed many such relationships, especially since WW2. If you are the sort of person who believes the US should limit its own direct commitment of overseas conflicts, that is a very desirable thing.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 09:25:34 PM
Syria is. Assad didn't ask us to have soldiers their assisting the Kurds. Did you forget that we invaded his sovereign nation?
Assad does not own a sovereign nation; the very idea of a sovereign nation contradicts the concept of personal ownership. Assad does view Syria as his own personal property, which explains a lot of the troubles of that nation over the past decade.
Quote from: Tamas on October 10, 2019, 10:13:47 AM
The point is, you should ignore stupid inane shit like this. Let it fly over your head, not make it the bloody conversation of the week.
Not sure I agree; it is worthwhile to note that a major strategic decision was made without any reasonable basis whatsoever.
That the justification given for it was so self-evidently absurd is something important to note, to avoid any attempt at post facto justification.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 10, 2019, 10:41:06 AM
If you are the sort of person who believes the US should limit its own direct commitment of overseas conflicts, that is a very desirable thing.
Indeed. And what else are we doing except limiting our direct commitment by supporting the Kurds? Our commitment of <1,000 troops/advisers vs. their tens of thousands, nevermind civilians, seems pretty damn limited to me.
Quote from: Habbaku on October 10, 2019, 10:09:52 AM
And that changes what, exactly? Talking about the subject on "his terms" (as if he's doing it deliberately, like it's a considered strategy? Give me a break) doesn't modify the result in the least. He's still wrong, and no one's mind is being changed.
Please don't interrupt virtue-signalling in the midst of signalling virtue.
Quote from: garbon on October 10, 2019, 10:48:51 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 10, 2019, 10:41:06 AM
I've never heard of such a thing.
Wiki has.
Yes, it is a dumb concept designed by some media writers to sell some newspapers.
It's a pretty good sci-fi book.
Haven't read the book, but I have considered doing so.
I discovered it originally through Marvano's excellent comic series based on it, but it has since been one of my favorite classic sci-fi books (Forever Peace is, unfortunately, not as good).
I have difficulty seeing a time when public statements made by the POTUS should be ignored.
Quote from: The Brain on October 10, 2019, 12:40:11 PM
I have difficulty seeing a time when public statements made by the POTUS should be ignored.
Take Trump seriously, not literally, bro!
Quote from: Habbaku on October 10, 2019, 12:42:50 PM
Take Trump seriously, not literally, bro!
I know meant in jest, but it turns out the people taking him literally (i.e. seeking a literal Muslim ban and a literal giant wall with moat etc) were right all along and the people taking him seriously (i.e. there is some coherent policy behind the inane rantings) were wrong. There was no master plan. We just put a cranky old fool in the White House for giggles.
Unfortunately LeCroix is not around to eat crow. Man he was always so eager to read tea leaves and entrails to find the solid logic behind the President's moves.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 10, 2019, 11:50:52 AM
It's a pretty good sci-fi book.
I liked it. Normally I dislike military science fiction, but since it was anti-war there wasn't a lot of the typical "hard men making hard choices" bullshit.
Quote from: chipwich on October 09, 2019, 09:25:34 PM
Assad didn't ask us to have soldiers their assisting the Kurds. Did you forget that we invaded his sovereign nation?
Thank goodness we protected Syrian territorial sovereignty by withdrawing our advisors so that Turkey could infringe on Syrian sovereignty instead of us.
Withdrawal's going great, guys.
https://www.newsweek.com/us-troops-syria-turkey-1464727
EXCLUSIVE: TURKEY BOMBS US SPECIAL FORCES IN SYRIA ATTACK, APPARENTLY BY MISTAKE
Quote from: Habbaku on October 11, 2019, 03:14:39 PM
Withdrawal's going great, guys.
https://www.newsweek.com/us-troops-syria-turkey-1464727
EXCLUSIVE: TURKEY BOMBS US SPECIAL FORCES IN SYRIA ATTACK, APPARENTLY BY MISTAKE
QuoteNo injuries have been reported.
Thank goodness for that.
We're sending more troops to Saudi now too
"BuT foReVEr EndlESs WarS"
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 11, 2019, 03:36:09 PM
We're sending more troops to Saudi now too
"BuT foReVEr EndlESs WarS"
As I said to chipwich, I am not entire unsympathetic to his perspective but he is just wrong. We are not doing this to stop being the world policemen. We are going to continue to do so, we just made our job harder and betrayed a loyal ally.
It is especially infuriating to me since Donald loves to take 100% of the credit for fighting the Kurds did and now he opens them up to a massacre.
Quote from: mongers on October 12, 2019, 03:22:49 PM
Quote from: grumbler on October 12, 2019, 12:40:19 PM
I agree with BA. I thought he'd be a do-nothing president, not an actively anti-American president.
This is an astonishing thing to say and yet the evidence points that way; he's doing a 'fine' job of weakening America's standing in the world and wrecking the international system.
Latest news is the SDF/YPG are considering turning to Assad and Russia for aid/protection. :hmm:
Deal has apparently been done, Syrian forces reported heading north towards the Turkish border and major towns like Kobani.
Nice work Trumpinov. :ph34r:
Weird how often Trump's foreign policy decisions hurt the US and benefit Russia.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 13, 2019, 06:31:52 PM
Weird how often Trump's foreign policy decisions hurt the US and benefit Russia.
Yeah it's totally inexplicable. :hmm:
The one rule of Trump's foreign "policy" is that it all makes sense if you make the assumption he is a Russian plant.
I just make the assumption that he's making money somewhere along the way due to any action he takes. That seems to be holding true.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EG3SarFWsAUW-Ed?format=jpg&name=medium)
The whiplash is real.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1183822488192671745
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
1h
After defeating 100% of the ISIS Caliphate, I largely moved our troops out of Syria. Let Syria and Assad protect the Kurds and fight Turkey for their own land. I said to my Generals, why should we be fighting for Syria and Assad to protect the land of our enemy? Anyone who wants to assist Syria in protecting the Kurds is good with me, whether it is Russia, China, or Napoleon Bonaparte. I hope they all do great, we are 7,000 miles away!
I have crossed oceans of time to assist you.
Donald to Senate Republicans: I'll do anything you say as long as you don't impeach me.
Hookers and blow for everyone at the Kurds' DC lobbying firm tonight.
Phrasing is key with Trump. Saying he betrayed someone isn't likely to get much response beside a grin. However, if you phrase it like "Donald Trump orders retreat in face of Islamist army", you might actually get him to do something.
I hope Erdogan does something stupid like close Trump Towers Instanbul.
So we betrayed the Kurds and still ended up on worse terms with the Turks. We strengthened ISIS, made the US look weak and unreliable, and generally pissed off the entire world.
What a brilliant move by Mr. Four Dimensional Chess Stable Genius.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 14, 2019, 05:47:39 PM
So we betrayed the Kurds and still ended up on worse terms with the Turks. We strengthened ISIS, made the US look weak and unreliable, and generally pissed off the entire world.
What a brilliant move by Mr. Four Dimensional Chess Stable Genius.
It is if the sole object it to remain ever the centre of attention.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 14, 2019, 05:47:39 PM
So we betrayed the Kurds and still ended up on worse terms with the Turks. We strengthened ISIS, made the US look weak and unreliable, and generally pissed off the entire world.
What a brilliant move by Mr. Four Dimensional Chess Stable Genius.
But forever ever ever ever war
He really has excelled himself this time.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 14, 2019, 05:47:39 PM
So we betrayed the Kurds and still ended up on worse terms with the Turks. We strengthened ISIS, made the US look weak and unreliable, and generally pissed off the entire world.
What a brilliant move by Mr. Four Dimensional Chess Stable Genius.
The Art of the Deal.
This is a remarkable fuck-up. I'm genuinely impressed by how Trump caused a catastrophe with so little effort.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 15, 2019, 08:43:54 AM
This is a remarkable fuck-up. I'm genuinely impressed by how Trump caused a catastrophe with so little effort.
I am just glad there wasn't a massacre.
Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2019, 08:46:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 15, 2019, 08:43:54 AM
This is a remarkable fuck-up. I'm genuinely impressed by how Trump caused a catastrophe with so little effort.
I am just glad there wasn't a massacre, yet.
FYP
but we gotta end these endless wars guys
endlesasssssss
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 15, 2019, 09:22:00 AM
but we gotta end these endless wars guys
endlesasssssss
:huh: Yes. Yes, we do.
When we switch to electric cars the Middle East will go back to having very little strategic value...at least I hope.
That might help.
Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2019, 09:45:44 AM
When we switch to electric cars the Middle East will go back to having very little strategic value...at least I hope.
That might help.
Yeah, not until you switch to electric freight ships and warships and planes. And electric sources for plastic
Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2019, 09:45:44 AM
When we switch to electric cars the Middle East will go back to having very little strategic value...at least I hope.
That might help.
And electric passenger jets and electric/solar/sail driven shipping and non-oil plastic and roads not built of asphalt (concrete no substitute) and etc etc etc. :P
Quote from: Tamas on October 15, 2019, 09:57:04 AM
Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2019, 09:45:44 AM
When we switch to electric cars the Middle East will go back to having very little strategic value...at least I hope.
That might help.
Yeah, not until you switch to electric freight ships and warships and planes. And electric sources for plastic
We still produce a shitload of petroleum in the US. A simple significant decline in demand will tank prices and dramatically reduce its value as a strategic resource. We don't need to completely remove petroleum from our economy.
As for plastics they are so destructive for the environment I will be shocked if we do not find substitutes soon.
Besides electric shipping is no big deal design wise, just that massive cargo ships are expensive to build. I don't know much about planes but I think it might even be possible to move beyond the height of 1940s technology someday.
Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2019, 10:08:00 AM
Besides electric shipping is no big deal design wise, just that massive cargo ships are expensive to build. I don't know much about planes but I think it might even be possible to move beyond the height of 1940s technology someday.
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-takes-delivery-of-first-all-electric-experimental-aircraft
Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2019, 10:08:00 AM
Besides electric shipping is no big deal design wise, just that massive cargo ships are expensive to build. I don't know much about planes but I think it might even be possible to move beyond the height of 1940s technology someday.
https://www.timescolonist.com/business/harbour-air-starts-multi-year-conversion-to-electric-powered-flight-1.23847737
:)
QuoteRussia said on Tuesday that its military units were patrolling territory in northern Syria vacated by the Americans following the withdrawal ordered by President Trump, underscoring the sudden loss of United States influence in the eight-year-old Syria war.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/world/middleeast/kurds-syria-turkey.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Reports show video of Russian military police in armoured vehicles patrolling the streets of Manbij . And a Russian news channel has shown video of the city's abandoned US military base, with the voice-over of 'yesterday the Americans were here, but now it's us' :hmm:
I'm guessing Trump's history books only went up to 1919.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 15, 2019, 08:40:26 PM
I'm guessing Trump's history books only went up to 1919.
That's funny. The idea that Trump has books.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 15, 2019, 10:14:34 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 15, 2019, 08:40:26 PM
I'm guessing Trump's history books only went up to 1919.
That's funny. The idea that Trump has books.
Oh, I'm sure he
owns books. That he actually reads them, no.
He owns many leather-bound books and his apartment smells of rich mahogany.
He is kind of a big deal, unfortunately.
Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2019, 08:46:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 15, 2019, 08:43:54 AM
This is a remarkable fuck-up. I'm genuinely impressed by how Trump caused a catastrophe with so little effort.
I am just glad there wasn't a massacre.
The Turks having been killing plenty of people from what I've seen.
Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2019, 09:45:44 AM
When we switch to electric cars the Middle East will go back to having very little strategic value...at least I hope.
That might help.
They're going to cover the country in solar panels and become a green energy powerhouse.
If Putin sends Russian troops into the Baltics, what would Donald do? Abandon the Baltic republics to their fate? Would Europe even be able to respond forcefully without the backing of the United States?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 16, 2019, 06:44:37 AM
They're going to cover the country in solar panels and become a green energy powerhouse.
Maybe...but it's not like they can they put a bunch of giant batteries onto those obsolete oil tankers and export that energy around the globe like oil.
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 16, 2019, 01:08:04 PM
Would Europe even be able to respond forcefully without the backing of the United States?
Lol.
I figure that they could maybe send a sharply worded letter without us. But respond with force? No way.
Well, that was sicking.
So this happened:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHBwvqGXUAAVpKg.jpg:large)
Source?
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/don-t-be-tough-guy-trump-s-extraordinary-letter-erdogan-n1067746
Fox Business reported. White House confirmed.
Jesus. He thinks that makes him look good.
It's fake. It has to be fake.
The US is weird.
Is it really proper to end up an official letter with "I'll call you later"? :hmm:
Quote from: The Larch on October 16, 2019, 05:12:32 PM
Is it really proper to end up an official letter with "I'll call you later"? :hmm:
You prefer "Word to your mother"?
Quote from: Berkut on October 16, 2019, 04:58:05 PM
It's fake. It has to be fake.
That was my initial reaction too. A funny laugh, a clear parody.
It is not.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 16, 2019, 04:52:25 PM
Jesus. He thinks that makes him look good.
Just like the Zelensky transcript :lol:
Quote from: The Larch on October 16, 2019, 05:12:32 PM
Is it really proper to end up an official letter with "I'll call you later"? :hmm:
That's the best bit... "I'll call you later."
Quote from: dps on October 16, 2019, 04:02:21 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 16, 2019, 01:08:04 PM
Would Europe even be able to respond forcefully without the backing of the United States?
Lol.
I figure that they could maybe send a sharply worded letter without us. But respond with force? No way.
We're not the ones with a Russian asset as commander in chief.
And I'd take those odds. Even a straight 1 vs 1 France vs Russia scenario. Their shit is old, poorly supplied and their commanders are stooges.
Quote from: Zoupa on October 16, 2019, 10:52:25 PM
Quote from: dps on October 16, 2019, 04:02:21 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 16, 2019, 01:08:04 PM
Would Europe even be able to respond forcefully without the backing of the United States?
Lol.
I figure that they could maybe send a sharply worded letter without us. But respond with force? No way.
We're not the ones with a Russian asset as commander in chief.
And I'd take those odds. Even a straight 1 vs 1 France vs Russia scenario. Their shit is old, poorly supplied and their commanders are stooges.
You may need to back that up someday.
He should be impeached just for this fiasco.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/turkey-syria-us-nuclear-weapons-bombs-trump-war-isis-kurds-a9158416.html
QuoteTurkey 'effectively holding 50 US nuclear bombs hostage' at air base amid Syria invasion
White House officials scrambling to retrieve weapons of mass destruction, reports say
Vincent Wood
An estimated 50 US nuclear bombs are effectively being held hostage in Turkey as Washington attempts to find a diplomatic way of responding to the country's invasion of Syria, officials are reported to have warned.
The withdrawal of American troops from northern Syria – creating a power vacuum that has allowed Turkey and Russia to move into the region and displace Washington's Kurdish allies – has caused international outcry.
And as even his supporters accuse the White House of betraying its allies, Donald Trump has been forced to escalate his opposition to Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan, threatening to "destroy" his counterpart's economy and contract America's alliance with Ankara.
However, the rapid pace of withdrawal and the tumultuous decline of relations between the two countries has left administration officials scrambling to find a plan for the nuclear weapons stored under American control at the shared Incirlik Air Base in south east Turkey, reports said.
Officials from the State Department and Energy Department, which manages Washington's nuclear arsenal, met at the weekend to consider how they might retrieve an estimated fifty tactical nuclear weapons held at the site, according to The New York Times.
One official told the paper the bombs were now effectively Mr Erdogan's hostages. It is feared that removing the weapons could signal the end of relations between the Nato allies, while leaving them in place could put the weapons of mass destruction at risk.
The conundrum comes just a month after Mr Erdogan said it was "unacceptable" that Turkey was not allowed its own supply of the weapons under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty the country signed in 1980.
A phone call between Mr Trump and Mr Erdogan last week, and the US president's subsequent decision to withdraw from Syria after clearing out Isis-held territory, is said to have been described as an "off script" moment by American diplomats.
After announcing the removal of troops to end America's "endless wars", Mr Trump has been forced to repeatedly ramp up his rhetoric towards Turkey, calling for a ceasefire and slapping sanctions on top officials.
But this does not appear to have stopped the Turkish campaign. Instead Ankara has continued into the north of Syria to claim territory and target Kurdish militias who have been forced to side with America's enemies in the Syrian government to avoid complete destruction.
In the process the Kurds have abandoned prisons holding Isis terrorists, with hundreds escaping in the first few days of the assault.
The UN has said that tens of thousands of people have been displaced so far. Reports suggest dozens have died amid accusations of war crimes.
Meanwhile Russia has been able to assert its dominance in parts of the country previously secured by the US, stepping into the void left by the country to serve as a power broker between Turkey and Syria.
Following the withdrawal, the chair of the US Senate's armed services committee Jack Reed said: "This president keeps blindsiding our military and diplomatic leaders and partners with impulsive moves like this that benefit Russia and authoritarian regimes.
"If this president were serious about ending wars and winning peace, he'd actually articulate a strategy that would protect against a re-emergence of Isis and provide for the safety of our Syrian partners.
"But he has repeatedly failed to do that. Instead, this is another example of Donald Trump creating chaos, undermining US interests, and benefiting Russia and the Assad regime."
He's cracking up.
I presume there are safeguards to prevent an insane president from launching the nukes?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 17, 2019, 12:51:42 AM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 16, 2019, 10:52:25 PM
Quote from: dps on October 16, 2019, 04:02:21 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 16, 2019, 01:08:04 PM
Would Europe even be able to respond forcefully without the backing of the United States?
Lol.
I figure that they could maybe send a sharply worded letter without us. But respond with force? No way.
We're not the ones with a Russian asset as commander in chief.
And I'd take those odds. Even a straight 1 vs 1 France vs Russia scenario. Their shit is old, poorly supplied and their commanders are stooges.
You may need to back that up someday.
Personally?
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/16/house-condemns-trumps-syria-pull-out-000286
House voted 354 to 60 yesterday to condemn withdrawal of US troops from Syria. 2/3 of Republicans supported the motion.
Quote from: Habbaku on October 16, 2019, 04:42:54 PM
So this happened:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHBwvqGXUAAVpKg.jpg:large)
Jesus. Fucking. Christ.
Words escape me.
Holy Christ.
So I guess this is what a 0/0/0 EU4 ruler feels like?
https://twitter.com/marklowen/status/1184745162175635456?s=20
QuoteMark Lowen
@marklowen
#Turkey President's office confirms to @bbcturkce that when President #Erdogan received #Trump's letter, he "thoroughly rejected it, threw it in the bin" and launched the #Syria operation the same day. His mind was already made up to move in; letter was reportedly the final straw
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/1371E/production/_109264697_ehci8z5x4aee67p.jpg)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50079639
QuoteTrump and Pelosi: The 'meltdown' photo showing Washington divides
A photo of US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi confronting the President Donald Trump at a reportedly explosive White House meeting has become a symbol of the deep divisions in Washington.
In the image, leading Democrat Ms Pelosi is standing up at a large table, surrounded by male congressional leaders and top military officials, pointing her finger towards the president, who is seated opposite her and appears stunned.
Afterwards, Mr Trump took to his preferred social media platform, Twitter, to share the photo along with the caption: "Nervous Nancy's unhinged meltdown".
Ms Pelosi - who has said it was Mr Trump that had the "meltdown" - hit back by proudly making the image her cover photo on both Twitter and Facebook.
The original tweet by Mr Trump has now been shared more than 24,000 times on Twitter, with scores of people weighing in on what it says about the two top US politicians.
It has spurred debates on everything from gender inequality in politics, to who would be the better president, but at its core are the disagreements over one of the most divisive political issues of the moment.
The Wednesday meeting was held to discuss the situation in northern Syria, where Turkey launched an offensive last week against Kurdish-led forces after the US suddenly withdrew its troops.
Juts before the meeting, the US House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to condemn the troop withdrawal.
A Democratic source told the Associated Press news agency that the meeting began with Mr Trump bragging about a "nasty" letter he had sent to Turkish President Recep Tayip Erdogan.
Ms Pelosi is then said to have mentioned the House vote and Democratic leader Chuck Schumer began to read the president a quote from former Defence Secretary James Mattis on the need to keep US troops in Syria to prevent a resurgence of the so-called Islamic State group, known as IS or Isis.
According to US media, Mr Trump cut the Mr Schumer off, complaining that Mr Mattis was "the world's most overrated general".
As the meeting went on, the president is said to have told Ms Pelosi: "I hate Isis more than you do."
When asked by Mr Schumer if his plan was to rely on the Syrians and the Turks, the president said the plan was "to keep the American people safe". Ms Pelosi reportedly told him that this was a goal, not a plan.
Mr Schumer has said the president then called Ms Pelosi a "third-rate" politician. (She later said it was "third-grade".)
At that point, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer reportedly interjected, telling the president that such insults were "not useful".
The Democratic leaders then left the meeting early.
What happened afterwards?
Speaking to reporters following the meeting, Ms Pelosi described it as "most unsatisfactory".
"Two-to-one, the Republicans voted to oppose what he was doing in Syria. He just couldn't handle it so he just kind of engaged in a meltdown," she said.
Mr Schumer said the president had been "insulting, particularly to the speaker".
It was later that Mr Trump took to Twitter with a series of photos from the meeting, including the one of Ms Pelosi standing and pointing.
In a final photo, showing three empty seats following the walk-out, he labelled Ms Pelosi and Mr Schumer the "Do Nothing Democrats".
He then said Ms Pelosi "needs help fast".
"She had a total meltdown in the White House today. It was very sad to watch. Pray for her, she is a very sick person," he wrote.
As the photo went viral, some used the hashtag #BeNancy, urging people to take inspiration from the House speaker, while others siding with the president tweeted #PelosiMeltdown.
Quote from: Syt on October 17, 2019, 06:31:52 AM
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/1371E/production/_109264697_ehci8z5x4aee67p.jpg)
That 4star general next to Trump looks like he's praying for the sweet escape of death.
It's a great pic. One of those "could be a painting" pics.
Quote from: Syt on October 17, 2019, 04:50:50 AM
Quote from: Habbaku on October 16, 2019, 04:42:54 PM
So this happened:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHBwvqGXUAAVpKg.jpg:large)
Jesus. Fucking. Christ.
That's an early draft. Here's the real one.
(https://i.redd.it/m307w33x70t31.jpg)
Out of interest when do Presidential letters get released in general?
So this letter's been released and confirmed by the White House (:blink:), but how long do the other ones remain confidential/classified. In the UK I think it was 30 but is now 20 years and then papers get publicly released by the National Archives.
Because he talks a lot about beautiful letters he receives and sends and now I am curious :mellow:
Good point. I mean, if this was something the WH thought good enough to publish, how are the regular ones he sends?
"It was a perfect letter, some say the best letter they've ever seen!"
Quote from: Syt on October 17, 2019, 08:16:26 AM
"It was a perfect letter, some say the best letter they've ever seen!"
He is unravelling faster than I thought.
Will the cabinet/VP have the 'courage' (duty) to step in and replace him?
Disclaimer: I don't know if he said that, I made this up. It just seems likely that he would. :P
Quote from: Syt on October 17, 2019, 08:21:21 AM
Disclaimer: I don't know if he said that, I made this up. It just seems likely that he would. :P
:lol:
But as you say it's as good as, and he'll have definitely thought that and your sentiment and worse will soon appear in his tweets.
:lmfao:
(https://i.imgur.com/XxxVW3Y.jpg)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 17, 2019, 07:28:16 AM
Quote from: Syt on October 17, 2019, 06:31:52 AM
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/1371E/production/_109264697_ehci8z5x4aee67p.jpg)
That 4star general next to Trump looks like he's praying for the sweet escape of death.
Those heads bowed in shame as they tacitly agree with Pelosi while Donald is clearly about to start yelling obscenities :lol:
That the WH also released this expecting people to think it makes Pelosi look bad and Donald look presidential is beyond words.
I may not be her biggest fan, but Pelosi is clearly the only person in the Congress worth a damn as a leader. I never cease to be amazed what she has managed to do, I thought she was done for sure back in 2016.
It's shameful that Pelosi is one of the few in Congress that exhibits anything approaching leadership ability. I wish it were someone other than her, but I'm glad she's there.
Quote from: Valmy on October 17, 2019, 10:32:40 AM
I may not be her biggest fan, but Pelosi is clearly the only person in the Congress worth a damn as a leader. I never cease to be amazed what she has managed to do, I thought she was done for sure back in 2016.
It is so surprising. To think I used to be one of her biggest detractors.
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 17, 2019, 10:28:39 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 17, 2019, 07:28:16 AM
Quote from: Syt on October 17, 2019, 06:31:52 AM
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/1371E/production/_109264697_ehci8z5x4aee67p.jpg)
That 4star general next to Trump looks like he's praying for the sweet escape of death.
Those heads bowed in shame as they tacitly agree with Pelosi while Donald is clearly about to start yelling obscenities :lol:
That the WH also released this expecting people to think it makes Pelosi look bad and Donald look presidential is beyond words.
(https://scontent-frt3-2.cdninstagram.com/vp/36b472b62642dcef401d0efb8c0fc8ed/5E31A063/t51.2885-15/e35/71067104_258010808494285_3848965930651947810_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frt3-2.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=101)
:lol:
When I first saw that original pic in this thread, that meme instantly popped into my head. I was pleased to find the Internets didn't fail me when I quickly found that comparison image. ^_^
That cat looks far more presidential.
What happened?
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
This is a great day for civilization. I am proud of the United States for sticking by me in following a necessary, but somewhat unconventional, path. People have been trying to make this "Deal" for many years. Millions of lives will be saved. Congratulations to ALL!
Quote from: Syt on October 17, 2019, 01:23:53 PM
What happened?
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
This is a great day for civilization. I am proud of the United States for sticking by me in following a necessary, but somewhat unconventional, path. People have been trying to make this "Deal" for many years. Millions of lives will be saved. Congratulations to ALL!
Judging by his other quotes, he has some kind of deal worked out with Erdrogan?
https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/syria-turkey-10-17-2019/index.html
QuoteThe latest: Vice President Mike Pence said Turkey has agreed to a ceasefire in Syria.
The terms: The Syrian Kurds/Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) must dismantle their defensive fortifications and pull troops from the border to appease Turkey.
What this means for the US: Pence said today the US will "continue to engage" in Syria, but "not militarily."
QuoteTurkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said the reached agreement between the US and Turkey to suspend military operations in Syria is not a ceasefire.
"This is not a ceasefire," Cavusoglu said during a televised news conference today.
"We will pause the operation for 120 hours in order for the terrorists to leave," Cavusoglu said. "We will only stop the operation if our conditions are met."
Cavusoglu said a "safe zone" would need to be established at roughly 20 miles east of the Euphrates river to the Iraqi border.
:hmm:
So the US completely gave in during these "negotiations", right? Am I missing something? Also, does the US even have the power to enforce any of their capitulations? The Kurds have no reason to listen to the US any longer with Russia and Syria in their corner.
Why, the Emperor's new clothes aren't clothes at all!
This is basically a 5 day ultimatum to flee the area unless I misunderstand something.
Also, something no one here brought up, Trump needs name plaques to tell who is who. I saw on twitter a comparison shot with Obama, Bush 43, and Clinton giving similar meetings, no names necessary for them.
One thing is sure, if you are in the Middle East and you have no qualms about methods employed, you should be looking to team up with Russia, not the USA. sure, Putin probably extorted a heavy price for it but then stuck with Assad through thick and thin, shelling civilians in unison. Now that's an ally. Big contrast to trusting your safety to your ally who just then packs up and leaves you in deep, ethnic cleansing shit overnight.
Well, you can't put Mediterranean naval bases just anywhere. :P
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 17, 2019, 10:28:39 AMThose heads bowed in shame as they tacitly agree with Pelosi while Donald is clearly about to start yelling obscenities :lol:
That the WH also released this expecting people to think it makes Pelosi look bad and Donald look presidential is beyond words.
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/030/157/womanyellingcat.jpg)
It's official, we live in a meme. :mellow: :thumbsup:
Not really. On the WH photo, it is the sitting guy who is hysterical, and the pointing lady who is calm.
So it looks like Erdogan has played the same trick as Kim Jong-un. Lie to Trump and then go do whatever the fuck they want. Trump won't do anything because that would be proof he failed.
Quote
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
7m
Just spoke to President @RTErdogan of Turkey. He told me there was minor sniper and mortar fire that was quickly eliminated. He very much wants the ceasefire, or pause, to work. Likewise, the Kurds want it, and the ultimate solution, to happen. Too bad there wasn't this thinking years ago. Instead, it was always held together with very weak bandaids, & in an artificial manner. There is good will on both sides & a really good chance for success. The U.S. has secured the Oil, & the ISIS Fighters are double secured by Kurds & Turkey I have just been notified that some European Nations are now willing, for the first time, to take the ISIS Fighters that came from their nations. This is good news, but should have been done after WE captured them. Anyway, big progress being made!!!!
:bleeding:
(https://pics.me.me/unhinged-4927051.png)
What are the conditions to invade another NATO member?
Have an army and navy worth a dann.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/18/erdogan-trump-turkey-syria-050796
QuoteErdogan reportedly threw the letter in the trash upon receiving it.
"For our relationship, there's no point to dwell on this letter," Erdogan told reporters on Friday. "This is not a priority for us, but when the time comes, we would like it to be known that we will take the necessary steps."
Lmao
Quote from: Grey Fox on October 18, 2019, 11:27:15 AM
What are the conditions to invade another NATO member?
Some Greeks in Turkish uniforms attacking a radio station in Rhodes.
You know, the phrase "ultimate solution" is probably not the best thing you can use in this situation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/18/opinion/trump-turkey-kurds-syria.html
An opinion piece from a Captain who was stationed in Syria. He had assured the US Kurdish allies that the US would not abandon them. Now he fears the men he spoke to are dead.
I will believe the military is turning against Trump when Syt's family does.
I get that they probably will never support my party, but if they could at least get him removed and replaced with at least a normal conservative that would be great.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2019, 01:16:28 PM
You know, the phrase "ultimate solution" is probably not the best thing you can use in this situation.
Right? When I read it I was surprised he didn't just go all in and use "final solution".
Quote from: Benedict Arnold on October 19, 2019, 06:23:01 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2019, 01:16:28 PM
You know, the phrase "ultimate solution" is probably not the best thing you can use in this situation.
Right? When I read it I was surprised he didn't just go all in and use "final solution".
He has never heard of it.
Quote from: Benedict Arnold on October 19, 2019, 06:23:01 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2019, 01:16:28 PM
You know, the phrase "ultimate solution" is probably not the best thing you can use in this situation.
Right? When I read it I was surprised he didn't just go all in and use "final solution".
But his solution isn't just final, it's ultimate. Many people say that it's maybe even the most perfect and ultimate solution ever.
I will just keep repeating it: nobody wants a normal conservative anymore.
What is that in today's context anyway? Only mildly supports the reactionary ideas that have overtaken everything right of moderate liberalism?
Quote from: Tamas on October 20, 2019, 02:17:04 PM
I will just keep repeating it: nobody wants a normal conservative anymore.
What is that in today's context anyway? Only mildly supports the reactionary ideas that have overtaken everything right of moderate liberalism?
Pretty much.
So now Putin has negotiated an end to the Turkish offensive. Man, the US is becoming so irrelevant on world stage...
Quote from: Solmyr on October 23, 2019, 07:36:18 AM
So now Putin has negotiated an end to the Turkish offensive. Man, the US is becoming so irrelevant on world stage...
Disagree. Russia could not have accomplished this without the actions of the US. If the US was merely irrelevant Russia would not have as much influence.
Wonder what instinct is gonna win out. Trumps want to appease his Russian handlers or his need to claim all Victories for himself.
Quote from: HVC on October 23, 2019, 11:32:32 AM
Wonder what instinct is gonna win out. Trumps want to appease his Russian handlers or his need to claim all Victories for himself.
Always defer to the guy blackmailing you.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-situation-northern-syria/
QuoteRemarks by President Trump on the Situation in Northern Syria
FOREIGN POLICY
Issued on: October 23, 2019
Diplomatic Reception Room
11:41 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you very much. My fellow Americans, I greet you this morning from the White House to announce a major breakthrough toward achieving a better future for Syria and for the Middle East. It's been a long time.
Over the last five days, you have seen that a ceasefire that we established along Syria's border has held, and it's held very well, beyond most expectations. Early this morning, the government of Turkey informed my administration that they would be stopping combat and their offensive in Syria, and making the ceasefire permanent. And it will indeed be permanent. However you would also define the word "permanent" in that part of the world as somewhat questionable, we all understand that. But I do believe it will be permanent.
I have therefore instructed the Secretary of the Treasury to lift all sanctions imposed on October 14th in response to Turkey's original offensive moves against the Kurds in Syria's northeast border region. So the sanctions will be lifted unless something happens that we're not happy with.
This was an outcome created by us, the United States, and nobody else, no other nation. Very simple. And we're willing to take blame, and we're also willing to take credit. This is something they've been trying to do for many, many decades. Since then, others have come out to help, and we welcome them to do so. Other countries have stepped forward, they want to help, and we think that's great. The nations in the region must ultimately take on the responsibility of helping Turkey and Syria police their border. We want other nations to get involved.
We've secured the oil, and, therefore, a small number of U.S. troops will remain in the area where they have the oil. And we're going to be protecting it, and we'll be deciding what we're going to do with it in the future.
In any event, by the moves that we've made, we are achieving a much more peaceful and stable area between Turkey and Syria, including a 20-mile-wide safe zone. An interesting term, "safe zone." That's the term we're using it. Hopefully, that zone will become safe. Thousands and thousands of people have been killed in that zone over the years. But it's been sought for many, many decades, and I think we have something that's going to be strong and hold up.
Turkey, Syria, and all forms of the Kurds, have been fighting for centuries. We have done them a great service, and we've done a great job for all of them. And now we're getting out. A long time. We were supposed to be there for 30 days; that was almost 10 years ago. So we're there for 30 days, and now we're leaving. It was supposed to be a very quick hit and let's get out. And it was a quick hit, except they stayed for almost 10 years. Let someone else fight over this long-bloodstained sand.
I want to thank Vice President Pence and Secretary of State Pompeo for leading the American delegation so successfully to Turkey several days ago, along with National Security Advisor O'Brien. I want to thank them very much. The American delegation negotiated the original five-day ceasefire that ended [enabled] Kurdish fighters to safely leave. It just got them to a point where, frankly, they were able. It enabled them to get out, to go and move, really, just a few miles in a slightly different direction. So this enabled them to do so.
Countless lives are now being saved as a result of our negotiation with Turkey — an outcome reached without spilling one drop of American blood. No injuries. Nobody shot, nobody killed.
I have just spoken to General Mazloum, a wonderful man, the Commander-in-Chief of the SDF Kurds. And he was extremely thankful for what the United States has done. Could not have been more thankful. General Mazloum has assured me that ISIS is under very, very strict lock and key, and the detention facilities are being strongly maintained. There were a few that got out — a small number, relatively speaking — and they've been largely recaptured.
I'm also sure that he will be issuing his own statement very shortly. We had a great talk. But we've saved the lives of many, many Kurds. He understands that. The war was going to be vicious and probably not very long. And I'm very happy to have been involved in it, as are our Vice President, our Secretary of State, and all of the other people on our team. By getting that ceasefire to stick, we've done something that's very, very special. But by getting the ceasefire after a tremendous amount of really tough war for a very short period of days, that is something very special.
Our troops are safe, and the pain and suffering of the three-day fight that occurred was directly responsible for our ability to make an agreement with Turkey and the Kurds that could never have been made without this short-term outburst.
Should Turkey fail to honor its obligations, including the protection of religious and ethnic minorities — which I truly believe they will do — we reserve the right to re-impose crippling sanctions, including substantially increased tariffs on steel and all other products coming out of Turkey.
We are now an economic powerhouse like never before, and, very importantly, like no other. Our economic might is stronger than it's ever been, and our competitors are not doing very well.
We also expect Turkey to abide by its commitment regarding ISIS. As a backup to the Kurds watching over them, should something happen, Turkey is there to grab them.
Further, we implore European countries to come and take those fighters that the U.S. captured and bring them back to their countries for incarceration and for trial. Until just recently, Europe has been very unresponsive in doing what they should have been doing for a long time. Now is their chance to finally act.
American forces defeated 100 percent of the ISIS caliphate during the last two years. We thank the Syrian Democratic Forces for their sacrifices in this effort. They've been terrific. Now Turkey, Syria, and others in the region must work to ensure that ISIS does not regain any territory. It's their neighborhood; they have to maintain it. They have to take care of it.
There were some political pundits who responded to Turkey's offensive in Syria by calling for yet another American military intervention. I don't think so. But halting the incursion by military force would have required deploying tens of thousands of American troops against Turkey — a NATO Ally and a country the United States has developed a very good relationship with, including President Erdoğan.
The same people that I watched and read — giving me and the United States advice — were the people that I have been watching and reading for many years. They are the ones that got us into the Middle East mess but never had the vision or the courage to get us out. They just talk.
How many Americans must die in the Middle East in the midst of these ancient sectarian and tribal conflicts? After all of the precious blood and treasure America has poured into the deserts of the Middle East, I am committed to pursuing a different course — one that leads to victory for America.
Through much work, we have done things that everybody said couldn't be done. Today's announcement validates our course of action with Turkey that only a couple of weeks ago were scorned, and now people are saying, "Wow. What a great outcome. Congratulations." It's too early to me to be congratulated, but we've done a good job. We've saved a lot of lives.
Most importantly, we have avoided another costly military intervention that could've led to disastrous, far-reaching consequences. Many thousands of people could've been killed.
The last administration said, "Assad must go." They could've easily produced that outcome, but they didn't. In fact, they drew a very powerful red line in the sand — you all remember, the red line in the sand — when children were gassed and killed, but then did not honor their commitment as other children died in the same horrible manner. But I did honor my commitments with 58 Tomahawks.
Eight long years after President Obama's ill-fated push at regime change, U.S. troops are still on the ground in Syria. More than half a million people are dead, hundreds of thousands are terribly injured, and millions more Syrians are displaced. It really is a nightmare of misery.
Across the Middle East, we have seen anguish on a colossal scale. We have spent $8 trillion on wars in the Middle East, never really wanting to win those wars. But after all that money was spent and all of those lives lost, the young men and women gravely wounded — so many — the Middle East is less safe, less stable, and less secure than before these conflicts began.
The same people pushing for these wars are often the ones demanding America open its doors to unlimited migration from war-torn regions, importing the terrorism and the threat of terrorism right to our own shores. But not anymore. My administration understands that immigration security is national security.
As a candidate for President, I made clear that we needed a new approach to American foreign policy, one guided not by ideology, but by experience, history, and a realistic understanding of the world.
We are building up America's military might like never before, investing $2.5 trillion since my election. But we will not be depleted. We will not happen again. It will not be allowed to happen again, where our military is depleted, fighting in areas of the world where we shouldn't be.
When we commit American troops to battle, we must do so only when a vital national interest is at stake, and when we have a clear objective, a plan for victory, and a path out of conflict. That's what we have to have. We need a plan of victory. We will only win. Our whole basis has to be the right plan, and then we will only win. Nobody can beat us. Nobody can beat us.
I want to again thank everyone on the American team who helped achieve the ceasefire in Syria, saved so many lives, along with President Erdoğan of Turkey — a man I've gotten to know very well and a man who loves his country. And, in his mind, he's doing the right thing for his country, and we may be meeting in the very near future.
I also want to thank General Mazloum for his understanding and for his great strength and for his incredible words today to me — but me just as a representative of the United States — because he knows that we saved tens of thousands of Kurds. And we're not talking in the long term, we're talking in the short term. We're talking something that was going on immediately and something, frankly, that was planned for a long time.
The job of our military is not to police the world. Other nations must step up and do their fair share. That hasn't taken place. Today's breakthrough is a critical step in that direction.
Thank you all very much, and God bless America. Thank you. Thank you.
END
11:56 A.M. EDT
A very. Stable. Genius.
When Baghdad Bob wants to do a meme of someone official saying some obviously false and ridiculous thing, he is going to use a picture of Trump giving these remarks.
Well, I'm ashamed.
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/698/489/2f7.png)
Stephen Colbert showed some gems from this speech (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyOSZ1fLWtI). Trump looks high as a kite when he speaks there.
What does this tweet mean?
QuoteDonald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
I really enjoyed my conversation with General @MazloumAbdi. He appreciates what we have done, and I appreciate what the Kurds have done. Perhaps it is time for the Kurds to start heading to the Oil Region!
I have so many questions.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:05:37 PM
What does this tweet mean?
It means Donald is scared of the GOP Senators who are pissed about abandoning the Kurds.
It's the last bit that particularly confuses me. "Pehaps it is time for the Kurds to start heading to the Oil Region!"
Wut? :mellow:
If the Kurds don't want to be abandoned and genocided, they should produce oil for us.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 04:09:15 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:05:37 PM
What does this tweet mean?
It means Donald is scared of the GOP Senators who are pissed about abandoning the Kurds.
Dunno why he would be, though. They've long shown themselves to be little bark and no bite. The GOP Senators fear Trump's base and the base doesn't care about Kurds.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:10:39 PM
It's the last bit that particularly confuses me. "Pehaps it is time for the Kurds to start heading to the Oil Region!"
Wut? :mellow:
Because we're keeping the oil.
https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-us-has-plan-send-tanks-troops-secure-syria-oil-fields-amid-withdrawal-1467350
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 04:16:32 PM
Dunno why he would be, though. They've long shown themselves to be little bark and no bite. The GOP Senators fear Trump's base and the base doesn't care about Kurds.
Tell that to the 2/3 of House Republicans who voted for the resolution condemning Turkey's invasion.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:10:39 PM
It's the last bit that particularly confuses me. "Pehaps it is time for the Kurds to start heading to the Oil Region!"
Wut? :mellow:
He wants them to immigrate to Texas
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 04:18:41 PM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 04:16:32 PM
Dunno why he would be, though. They've long shown themselves to be little bark and no bite. The GOP Senators fear Trump's base and the base doesn't care about Kurds.
Tell that to the 2/3 of House Republicans who voted for the resolution condemning Turkey's invasion.
A good example of little bark and no bite.
I really pity future historians that will research this presidency.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 04:18:41 PM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 04:16:32 PM
Dunno why he would be, though. They've long shown themselves to be little bark and no bite. The GOP Senators fear Trump's base and the base doesn't care about Kurds.
Tell that to the 2/3 of House Republicans who voted for the resolution condemning Turkey's invasion.
And that resolution does what, exactly?
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 05:27:55 PM
And that resolution does what, exactly?
It demonstrates that there are in fact issues on which elected Republicans will be willing to cross Trump.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 05:30:50 PM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 05:27:55 PM
And that resolution does what, exactly?
It demonstrates that there are in fact issues on which elected Republicans will be willing to cross Trump.
Have they crossed him on something which has effects/consequences?
Off the top of my head there's some military funding issue (maybe the national emergency?) where they basically overruled him?
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 05:33:57 PM
Have they crossed him on something which has effects/consequences?
Off the top of my head there's some military funding issue (maybe the national emergency?) where they basically overruled him?
Off the top of my head they didn't fund Teh Wall, and there was something passed about Russia very early on that I can't remember the details of.
But how is that relevant? Unless the claim is that Trump voters will vote them out of office only on funding issues.
No. I just think without consequences, this is just the Access Hollywood tape with a bodycount.
There may be more going on in the Senate.
It's a meaningless vote. It does nothing, and is no different from a tweet or op-ed. They'll continue to vote with him 99% of the time and will not take any substantive action.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 05:45:13 PM
No. I just think without consequences, this is just the Access Hollywood tape with a bodycount.
There may be more going on in the Senate.
God I wish I knew what that meant. :(
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 05:47:02 PM
It's a meaningless vote. It does nothing, and is no different from a tweet or op-ed. They'll continue to vote with him 99% of the time and will not take any substantive action.
If 2/3 of Republicans wrote op-eds or tweets that criticized the conditions in immigration centers, or sucking up to dictators, or badmouthing the CIA and the FBI, would you say the same thing?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 06:04:12 PM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 05:47:02 PM
It's a meaningless vote. It does nothing, and is no different from a tweet or op-ed. They'll continue to vote with him 99% of the time and will not take any substantive action.
If 2/3 of Republicans wrote op-eds or tweets that criticized the conditions in immigration centers, or sucking up to dictators, or badmouthing the CIA and the FBI, would you say the same thing?
What you are describing there is fundamentally different. The vote was form over substance. The fact we don't see any of the things are listed proves his point.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 06:04:12 PM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 05:47:02 PM
It's a meaningless vote. It does nothing, and is no different from a tweet or op-ed. They'll continue to vote with him 99% of the time and will not take any substantive action.
If 2/3 of Republicans wrote op-eds or tweets that criticized the conditions in immigration centers, or sucking up to dictators, or badmouthing the CIA and the FBI, would you say the same thing?
I would say something different if they 2/3rds of Republicans voted for impeachment. Or just one third. As it is, this is a "If you don't don't comply we will be forced to ask again!" level of opposition.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 24, 2019, 06:41:21 PM
As it is, this is a "If you don't don't comply we will be forced to ask again!" level of opposition.
So you subscribe to the theory I mentioned earlier, that Republican primary voters will harshly treat anyone who votes against Trump on a substantive/money issue, but are indifferent to symbolic, gestural votes and/or public statements?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 06:50:44 PM
So you subscribe to the theory I mentioned earlier, that Republican primary voters will harshly treat anyone who votes against Trump on a substantive/money issue, but are indifferent to symbolic, gestural votes and/or public statements?
For what it's worth I'm not sure much Republican politician positioning is to do with fear of Trump's voters per se.
I don't think the dynamic of the Republican party for the last 3 years has been one of an upsurge of Trump voters - like the Tea Party say - replacing incumbents. And, with a few very notable exceptions, Trump has been willing to follow the party line on which candidate to support.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 04:09:15 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:05:37 PM
What does this tweet mean?
It means Donald is scared of the GOP Senators who are pissed about abandoning the Kurds.
I think it means it's time to invoke Section 4 of the 25th Amendment.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 24, 2019, 04:16:32 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2019, 04:09:15 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:05:37 PM
What does this tweet mean?
It means Donald is scared of the GOP Senators who are pissed about abandoning the Kurds.
Dunno why he would be, though. They've long shown themselves to be little bark and no bite. The GOP Senators fear Trump's base and the base doesn't care about Kurds.
He is also concerned as there is news about evangelicals and related conservative voters getting turned off by what Trump did in the Middle East.
Quote from: dps on October 24, 2019, 11:44:43 PM
I think it means it's time to invoke Section 4 of the 25th Amendment.
No game. Trump chooses his own cabinet members. Senate is the only hope.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:10:39 PM
It's the last bit that particularly confuses me. "Pehaps it is time for the Kurds to start heading to the Oil Region!"
Wut? :mellow:
I would guess he is talking about the Kurdish areas of Iraq. Those have oil right?
Quote from: Valmy on October 25, 2019, 07:21:16 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:10:39 PM
It's the last bit that particularly confuses me. "Pehaps it is time for the Kurds to start heading to the Oil Region!"
Wut? :mellow:
I would guess he is talking about the Kurdish areas of Iraq. Those have oil right?
They do, but I also believe those areas constitute less than 20% of Kurdistan.
I must admit, as bad as Trump got, given his family's Jewish connections (via marriage) I never thought he'd become an advocate of ethnic cleansing or population exchange.
[Actually, I think the Kurdish areas of Syria have oil as well in the east and south-east - probably not where the best land in Syrian Kurdistan is though.]
Quote from: Valmy on October 25, 2019, 07:21:16 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 24, 2019, 04:10:39 PM
It's the last bit that particularly confuses me. "Pehaps it is time for the Kurds to start heading to the Oil Region!"
Wut? :mellow:
I would guess he is talking about the Kurdish areas of Iraq. Those have oil right?
They do, but I'm not sure if that's what Trump means. Heck, Trump's probably not even sure what Trump means.
Kurds should leave Turkey and turn Iraq into kurdistan? :s
Guys he is basically grasping at straws. I think these tweets are more to convince himself he didn't just cause the death of thousands due to sheer incompetence. He probably thinks "the oil" is enough of an excuse for him to leave some troops, and probably advisors go along with it to salvage at least something of the US positions there.