Disaster in the Making

[BotanyBoy]

OF course the issue predates Trump. No one is suggesting that it doesn't. But....

But.....then zippy immediately tries to pin 4,000 years of conflict on Trump.

This is a disastrous decision from a military perspective, a geopolitical perspective and a moral perspective and you know it.

Only in the minds of the TDS sufferers.

Everyone else got up, got their lattes and went about life as normal just like they did for the 17 years prior when they didn't give 1 shit about the Kurds or even the US troops that were there.

IT will completely destabilize the entire region.

The entire region has NEVER been stable.....DURRRRRRRRRR HURRRR HURRRR!!!

It is more than obvious that Trump is not listening to any advisors and just doing what he wants, no matter how bad it is for our country.

And you know all this.

Now spending shit tons of money on a pointless neverending war is good for the country?

When did you and all the progressive folks decide that??

Oh, the second Trump pulled out....which is why nobody is taking the TDS crowd seriously.

 

[SpeareChucker]

That's what I love about this issue...

All those people who used to say
"those people hate each other,
just let them kill each other,"
are now appalled that Trump
shares their exact attitude.

He did what Obama did and now
those who supported what Obama did
suddenly don't support what Trump has done.

So will they now finally admit that Obama was wrong
in order to impeach Trump's foreign policy?

Or was it the right move when Obama did it
but now circumstances are different?

Something has changed in the Middle East?

 

[jaF0]

That's what I love about this issue...

All those people who used to say
"those people hate each other,
just let them kill each other,"
are now appalled that Trump
shares their exact attitude.



Something has changed in the Middle East?

I opposed The Shrub putting us in there at all. He made the mess infinitely worse than if we had stayed out of it and let them sort it out on their own, no matter how many bodies. For that matter Daddy Bush should have stayed out too.

Our involvement there in the 40s was for a totally different reason -- driving out an invasion force not from the region.


But ..... now that we messed things up so bad and destabilized the place, what choice do we have to get out that won't leave things even worse?

 

[SpeareChucker]

Give it a rest...



Why weren't you cracking wise during the Obama years when he pulled out and let them sort it out?

 

[BotanyBoy]

I opposed The Shrub putting us in there at all. He made the mess infinitely worse than if we had stayed out of it and let them sort it out on their own, no matter how many bodies.

It was not infinitely worse....as one of the first US ground troops in the region I can attest that it was a shit hole before we showed up on the scene.

For that matter Daddy Bush should have stayed out too.

And let little Kuwait get taken by Iraq?

Nah...Daddy Bush was the only one who operated with a purpose and plan in the area.

But ..... now that we messed things up so bad and destabilized the place, what choice do we have to get out that won't leave things even worse?

We didn't destabilize the place.

Put the Salon/Slate/RAW op-ed down and read an actual book about the long history of war in the middle east.

 

[bellisarius]

It was not infinitely worse....as one of the first US ground troops in the region I can attest that it was a shit hole before we showed up on the scene.



And let little Kuwait get taken by Iraq?

Nah...Daddy Bush was the only one who operated with a purpose and plan in the area.



We didn't destabilize the place.

Put the Salon/Slate/RAW op-ed down and read an actual book about the long history of war in the middle east.

A region of the planet where the inhabitants have been killing each other off for over 2000 years and we destabilized it?

 

[RobDownSouth]

A region of the planet where the inhabitants have been killing each other off for over 2000 years and we destabilized it?

We had a fragile armistice in place, had the Kurds focused on ISIS, and essentially a DMZ between the Kurds and the Turks, with US soldiers protecting supply lines to the Kurds.

Trump chose to keep his income stream from his Turkish Trump hotel intact at the expense of regional stabilization, so he yanked away American protection of the Kurds, which allowed Turkey to begin immediate air strikes on the Kurds.

This is entirely a Trump fuckup, and all the spin that you and your Fox 'n Friends buddy can't change the underlying facts.

 

[BotanyBoy]

A region of the planet where the inhabitants have been killing each other off for over 2000 years and we destabilized it?

Well over 2000 years....like 6,000 years recorded history, the Sumerians were fucking savages and the place was a blood bath back when they first put reed to clay tablets.

The middle east has only had one period of peace, stability and prosperity. It was during the European dark ages at the end of the hundreds. That all ended when the crusades came ah' knocking in 1090 whatever.

OTHERWISE....it's been almost 1000 years since the ME has had any stability.

Clearly this is the work of one man, Donald Trump.

 

[suurfer]

Could it be that THIS ONE TIME, Turkey is motivated more by their national security, than by squashing the kurds?


"President Recep Tayyip Erdogan says the offensive - which began with air raids on Tuesday - is aimed at removing Kurdish-led forces from the border area and creating a "safe zone" so millions of Syrian refugees can be returned."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/10/tur...-refugees-to-europe-over-syria-criticism.html

"President Tayyip Erdogan said on Thursday Ankara will send the 3.6 million Syrian refugees in Turkey to Europe if European countries label the country’s military incursion in Syria as an occupation."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-send-syrian-refugees-to-europe-idUSKBN1WP1ED


Because I now recall that their complaints about being overwhelmed by refugees & lack of help from the West predate this current attack.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Well over 2000 years....like 6,000 years recorded history, the Sumerians were fucking savages and the place was a blood bath back when they first put reed to clay tablets.

The middle east has only had one period of peace and stability, during the European dark ages at the end of the hundreds. That all ended when the crusades came ah' knocking in 1090 whatever.

OTHERWISE....it's been almost 1000 years since the ME has had any stability.

Clearly this is the work of one man, Donald Trump.

The region had been fairly stable (admittedly by Mideast standards) for the past 6-7 years until Trump screwed the pooch.

But hai, as long as you get your welfare check from Uncle Sam each month, you'll back Trump's policies 100%.

 

[suurfer]

Bottom-line: it's a very complicated situation.

But any attempt of laypeople, and even of those who understand history & geopolitics
to make sense of what's going on
Is choked by the Trump-mania noise.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Bottom-line: it's a very complicated situation.

But any attempt of laypeople, and even of those who understand history & geopolitics
to make sense of what's going on
Is choked by the Trump-mania noise.

It IS a "complicated situation"....most realpolitick is.

The simple fact remains, though, that Donald Trump single-handedly made the region considerably less stable by his arbitrary and capricious decision to abandon American allies in the war against ISIS to Turkey.

Tens of thousands will likely perish as a result of his actions.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The region had been fairly stable (admittedly by Mideast standards) for the past 6-7 years until Trump screwed the pooch.

I'm glad we could agree on one observable, objective reality. The various involvements of US military assets in the region did result in the closest thing to stability the region has experienced in nearly a millennia. The Republicans were right, I was wrong, but I'm still anti-war forever for the fun of it.

Poor jaF0 seems to think Iraq was some sort of paradise before we invaded the place in 03.

But hai, as long as you get your welfare check from Uncle Sam each month, you'll back Trump's policies 100%.

I don't get any welfare check Rob.

I'll back any policy that is against unnecessary war. Especially unending, unnecessary war with no objective.

 

[suurfer]

It IS a "complicated situation"....most realpolitick is.

The simple fact remains, though, that Donald Trump single-handedly made the region considerably less stable by his arbitrary and capricious decision to abandon American allies in the war against ISIS to Turkey.

Tens of thousands will likely perish as a result of his actions.

But I don't want to focus on Trump (fyi I'm no fan ever since he decreased billionaire's taxes below those of the working class).

I want you and the others who understand these these, to speculate on what might have motivated Turkey to attack.

Yes, it's clear that they wouldn't mind squashing kurdish separatists from the Syria-Turkey border. But aren't their motivations more complex than that?
They're in a terrible situation too, their economy is overstretched by millions of refugees (3.6 of which Syrian), and more to come.





==============================


https://www.dw.com/en/top-eu-officials-in-turkey-to-save-refugee-pact/a-50687533


"Turkey faced "enormous" migratory pressure, which has increased with new arrivals from Afghanistan and Syria. There are around 3.6 million Syrian refugees in Turkey.
Under a 2016 EU-Turkey agreement, Turkey committed to preventing migrants from reaching Greece. Greece was also permitted to send rejected asylum-seekers back to Turkey.

Erdogan has complained that his country has so far received too little of the €6 billion promised by the EU for the years 2016 to 2019, while shouldering costs of more than €36.5 billion at a time the Turkish economy is struggling.

Erdogan is also playing the refugee card to ramp up pressure on Europe to support a plan to resettle nearly a million Syrians from Turkey into a controversial "safe zone" in northeastern Syria. There, the Turkish military is in fraught cooperation with the US military to clear a section of the border of Kurdish forces that fought the "Islamic State" and are viewed as a threat by Ankara.

Critics of the plan say Turkey intends to ethnically cleanse the predominately Kurdish populated area along the border by replacing them with Syrian Arab refugees.

Separately, Ankara has warned it could face a massive influx of up to 3 million Syrians if Russian-backed Syrian government forces press an offensive in the last rebel enclave in northwest Idlib province."

 

[BotanyBoy]

But I don't want to focus on Trump (fyi I'm no fan ever since he decreased billionaire's taxes below those of the working class).

He didn't do that.

 

[suurfer]

.......

But what do you think prevails in Turkey's balance of priorities:

--- watering down Kurdish population in NE Syria, which borders on Turkey ? (by placement of Syrian refugees ). +/- imperialism?

--- or an economy overstretched by millions of refugees?
Whose resettlement in Syria (according to them) is opposed by kurdish forces at the border


(If I understood correctly)

 

[RobDownSouth]

He didn't do that.

Meanwhile, back in the reality-based world...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/DIki-_O9ljq_nH13XWkQemgLr3c=/1440x0/smart/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/JA2PZ6DJBFC57D5HWYGFCIA57Q.png

 

[LupusDei]

Well over 2000 years....like 6,000 years recorded history, the Sumerians were fucking savages and the place was a blood bath back when they first put reed to clay tablets.

The middle east has only had one period of peace, stability and prosperity. It was during the European dark ages at the end of the hundreds. That all ended when the crusades came ah' knocking in 1090 whatever.

OTHERWISE....it's been almost 1000 years since the ME has had any stability.

Clearly this is the work of one man, Donald Trump.

Trump is accidental, and this is issue far beyond him, or the main issue here is exactly the accidental character of the decision. I see Trump for USA what Nero was for Rome, a disgrace and low point in history, and in many ways a survival test of an empire. But it all is accidental as far the region in question is considered. When Trump pulled Tillerson and Mattis, I thought, well, there's certainly risks, but it still seems good enough. I wasn't trilled about Tillerson's aborted plans in Russia, but I had hoped his separate deals with Kurds (the then current USA administration resented, whichever it was) would have positive influence. Alas, both of those are gone from Trump's team.

I have perhaps rather unorthodox personal opinions about the middle east. Most notably, I believe Iran will revolt if left alone and allowed to grow rich. Middle class prosperity is best antidote to religious extremism. Power hungry religious systems (including christianity and communism) require mass misery for validation.

We (the world) are in dire need for secular Islam. I know, I know, it's very nearly an oxymoron. Even more risky gambling bet is that reformed Iran could provide some such, but that's my hope. But what westerners must know but seems to not understand is that emigration diaspora can't create one, even despite the exposure to different lifestyles. Emigration always have conservative doctrine by default, even if only unconsciously. Global communication and filter bubbling also means there's easily little difference in practical exposure. Neither Egypt nor Turkey can really provide such, reliably. Turkey is a difficult ally, in many ways kept as ally primarily to subdue, and the current regime is just awful.

Meanwhile, it is Kurds who are most level headed and reasonable, and prioritize practical secularism (at least in comparison, as far it's possible to judge across distance; it's always possible they just have better propaganda). Granted, in part it's forced by survival, but such petty difficulties never really concerns true zealots. So I see the chance of independent Kurdistan was the silver lining of the second invasion in Iraq and removal of Saddam Hussein, with I personally think was an error. As was the ultimate removal of Gaddafi (whatever crazy scum he was), if not for other reasons than for it indirectly leading to the collapse of Syria, what was immeasurably tragic misunderstanding with eventually global consequences. Again, the positive fallout of the whole ISIS debacle is strengthened Kurdistan, for better or worse.

In short, I would choose Kurds over Turkey anyday. But of course, that's just a private opinion from northern European forest.

 

[Wrong Element]

The Lit RWCJ vs. the majority of congressional Republicans + Benjamin Netanyahu is the only war I want to watch right now.

 

[BotanyBoy]

But what do you think prevails in Turkey's balance of priorities:

--- watering down Kurdish population in NE Syria, which borders on Turkey ? (by placement of Syrian refugees ). +/- imperialism?

--- or an economy overstretched by millions of refugees?
Whose resettlement in Syria (according to them) is opposed by kurdish forces at the border


(If I understood correctly)

Oh they're going to slaughter tens of thousands.

Better question....why should we care??

What return are we getting for our blood and treasure??

What's in it for the USA?

Personally I think we should pull back on being world police for a bit and unfuck our own backyard before we go back to telling others how to manage theirs. The place is about to come apart and we're out spending billions we don't have playing world police??

To me NOT pulling back on nation building, foreign aid and any other thing we don't NEED is insane.

To me not re-investing that money in getting our most basic domestic issues sorted out is insane.

Basic utilities and sanitation are breaking down in parts of the country. Not to mention other infrastructure items like bridges and damns that are WAY over their service limits and pose potential threats to dozens or even tens of thousands at any given time.

We can't even secure our own borders.....the fuck is our military doing on the other side of the planet to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars a year securing other peoples borders? That's totally fucking broken. If we're going to spend hundreds of billions securing anyone's shit it needs to be our shit.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I have perhaps rather unorthodox personal opinions about the middle east. Most notably, I believe Iran will revolt if left alone and allowed to grow rich. Middle class prosperity is best antidote to religious extremism. Power hungry religious systems (including christianity and communism) require mass misery for validation.

Your "unorthodox personal opinion" is completely validated by history.

Support for Iranian Mullahs plummeted in the period 1996-2001 as the growing Iranian middle class clamored for American jeans, mp3 players and action movies.

Then came 9/11, and Bush's disastrous branding of Iran as part of the "Axis of Evil". Iranians, fearing annihilation, flocked back to their religion, as people do in times of duress.

The mullahs, recognizing a gift handed to them, used their newfound popularity to install more and more components of Botany Boy's favorite legal system, sharia law.

 

[RobDownSouth]

<blather snip>

We can't even secure our own borders.....the fuck is our military doing on the other side of the planet to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars a year securing other peoples borders? That's totally fucking broken. If we're going to spend hundreds of billions securing anyone's shit it needs to be our shit.

Newly minted "Neo-isolationist" glibertarian once again attempts to pivot teh discussion to the Trump Wall.

But hai, remember, according to him "it's not a concentration camp!"

 

[BotanyBoy]

Meanwhile, back in the reality-based world...

All that proves is the 400 richest make most their money off capital gains, not "income".

That's still not the same as lowering taxes for billionaires.

I'm not even close, neither are millions of other investors from those who made a few hundred bucks to those who made a few million who had their taxes lowered.

 

[suurfer]

Yes, he makes sense about Iran.

Also, it's one of the countries in which Islam could only be instituted by military force.
There were also huge mass protests against the "Islamic revolution"in 1979.
Women also took to the street a few years ago, to protest headscarves.

Not to mention their cultural and affective ties to Europe.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Newly minted "Neo-isolationist"

Not wanting to nation build is hardly isolationism.

glibertarian

Nationalism =/= liberalism. Your continued distain for individual liberty is noted though. SUuuuper patriotic.

once again attempts to pivot teh discussion to the Trump Wall.

More attempted ascription.

But hai, remember, according to him "it's not a concentration camp!"

And anyone who understood how absurdly hyperbolic the claim that it is was, rapidly dashing the dreams of open border Dumz nationwide.