Disaster in the Making

[Aglaopheme]

Republican Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois is going further than many of his fellow GOP lawmakers in criticizing President Donald Trump's shift in Syria strategy, declaring he no longer supports Trump altogether because of the move.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/10/...rt-kurds/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

 

[bigsly]

Beat your I'm someone special, dammit! drum LOUDER! Your pathetic insecurity just stands out brighter.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Poor eyesore is having a bad week.

It’s really amusing to watch him try and tell me about what is happening in my backyard and trying to school me on the FEC when I was the Treasurer for a national committee and therefore real with the FEC and campaign finance all the time.

He's obviously a masochist.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Beat your I'm someone special, dammit! drum LOUDER! Your pathetic insecurity just stands out brighter.

Do you feel better, yet? Thoughts and prayers.

 

[RoryN]

Do you feel better, yet? Thoughts and prayers.

*chuckle*

 

[Emerson40]

ISIS is an offshoot of AL QAEDA Iraq, lead by Baghdadi and formed in 2010. Obama famous words the Islamic state as "JV Team" Obama never took them serious and as a result of a military pullout the took over northern Iraq and eastern Syria in the year of our Lord 2014.

You're talking to "Democrats can never do any wrong under any circumstances" Emerson40.

All Bush's fault, clearly.

Yeah, some of these people have no concept of law, history, the constitution or current events. It's just constant oral diarrhea with absolutely no objectivity. It's like their trapped in a left only revolving door.

The US has meddled in the affairs of the Middle East for over 50 years. It’s not a Right or Left thing, it’s an American thing.
Foreign policy in the region has centered around the dick measuring contests with the Soviets, Western access to oil, and securing the Gulf as a strategic foothold in the region. Since 9/11, policies and involvement in the region centre around counter-terrorism, or so the narrative goes.

Almost all the current 'enemies' in the region were once the good guys, and were supplied weapons and / or resources by the US or its allies, provided it kept the Soviets at bay, and served and secured the US's interests in the region.
The US provided $$ and more to help fund a little start-up, called al-Qaeda, when they were fighting the Russkies in Afghanistan during the early 80s.
Even ol' Saddam was the sweetheart of the Arab states during the late 70s and through the 80s, according to the US.

Ironically, the leadership of ISIS was primarily made up of former members of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath government.

I know the above is a very simplified version of a complicated history, but even you two pillocks should be able to understand that the constant intervention in the conflicts of the Middle East, primarily driven by the economic interests of the US, it's foreign policy, and the Cold War, has stirred a hornet's nest and contributed to the formation of ISIS, and their interest to seize power in the region.

The genesis of ISIS was well before 2010. They became prominent during the ‘Dubya’ years. That too is not a Left or Right thing, but simply facts and using a calendar.

 

[suurfer]

I'm no Trump apologist. But re US troups' withdrawal:
this ME analyst gives an explanation that contradicts the Press's narrative of a mindless or corrupt move. (Well, you guys might already know about it, but it's news to me)



The Heat: Turkey launches military offense against Syrian Kurds Pt2
from min. 13.55:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFqlaSYxfO4


"Edmond Ghareeb, Middle East scholar and analyst:

Ghareeb: This should have not come as a surprise. ...
Most significantly, the meeting between president Erdogan and president Trump at the UN general assembly was very significant, although there were different reportings on it, whether Trump or Erdogan or not they wed on the same page.

Interviewer: But he must have been told what Turkey's intentions were.
Ghareeb: Exactly. There was a signal.

Ghareeb: More significantly, about a week ago, there was an article in a couple of American papas, where a US official was qoted: "The storm is brewing in NE Syria. We may be forced to withdraw, we may not have the forces to withstand the Turkish forces, and therefore this may not be work the way some people think.
So there were a numbe of signals there."

 

[suurfer]

If Edmond Ghareeb's take on it is true, that Turkey has been planning the invasion for a long time and the US was informed of it the week before,
- I'm with Trump on this one.

It sucks, but the alternative would have been much worse.
What should have US done? Fight the turks (the second strongest army in NATO) in NE Syria? What a disaster that would have been. Another seed for an endless war.

 

[suurfer]

I feel a bit embarassed, my posts might look ignorant to posters like LupusDei, bellisarius, even ( Rob & al. But half of the posts in this thread are dumber than mine, so what the hell?


A military intervention of such proportion must have been prepared for many months.
And over the last months too, Erdogan has been increasingly whining about the logistic and financial pressure that EU put on Turkey with the millions of refugees. "If you don't do something, we'll realease them in Europe". (to legitimize his planned invasion? or was it the thing that led to the invasion? who knows)

How did the EU strategists not foresee that this might happen?

 

[jaF0]

- I'm with Trump on this one.

Cool of you supporting Genocide

A military intervention of such proportion must have been prepared for many months.

How did the EU strategists not foresee that this might happen?

You mispelled 'war crime'.

'This' happened because we and the EU failed to support the attempt to remove the monster from office a few years back when the moderate Generals acted while he was in a plane in airspace where we could have stopped him from being able to return.

 

[suurfer]

Cool of you supporting Genocide



You mispelled 'war crime'.

'This' happened because we and the EU failed to support the attempt to remove the monster from office a few years back when the moderate Generals acted while he was in a plane in airspace where we could have stopped him from being able to return.

See? Memes like these made me believe that GB Leftists are a bunch of morons, and turn to GB conservatives. Things that I would never do irl.

 

[suurfer]

Cool of you supporting Genocide



You mispelled 'war crime'.

'This' happened because we and the EU failed to support the attempt to remove the monster from office a few years back when the moderate Generals acted while he was in a plane in airspace where we could have stopped him from being able to return.

BTW:
Why did you log in?

I and your protégé ronmcc are the only ones posting currently.

Are you jacking off to the 22 threads that ronmcc just bumped up?

 

[bellisarius]

Sorry if it wasn't clear from context, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia.



Logically and rationally I would tend to agree. There's no natural resources to speak about, and although Ventspils and Liepāja are ice-free ports and Riga quite large one, they're indeed not at all that strategically important as they used to be.

However, Putin himself regards disintegration of Soviet Union as the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of twentieth century." They are quite butthurt about Baltic states, and Putin is trying to channel Peter the Great who did win Riga for Russia from Kingdom of Sweden among other historic heroes. His designated clown and nominally opponent Zhirinovsky once suggested to install gigantic radioactive waste blowers on Latvian border. Hate isn't rational.

Russian invasion in Georgia haven't any much other sense than "protecting Russian speakers" either. Well, there was a bit of civil war situation, so it's probably a bit different. Crimea at least had clear strategic objectives, they couldn't tolerate NATO ships in Sevastopol (and draw a circle around Crimea on the globe, it is a fucking great strategic war base). Many here believed that once they done with Ukraine, we're next, makes it any sense or not.

Also, the latest large scale wargames they played was area denial of Baltic Sea. They repetition the ground invasion quite regularly. Then we pull counter games coordinating several dozens of military organizations from around the world in a single event. They say, hardly anyone else do anything alike. It's all good fun as long its games.

As long as the price is too great, they won't do anything too stupid, one might hope.

Actually, it makes much more sense to try to win political influence in an EU country, and they certainly are trying that too.

The Georgian excursion, protection of "Russian" speakers. Shades of Adolf Hitler.

Putin hasn't "finished off" the Ukraine yet and he's running out of time and Army to do it. Wasn't "protection of Russian speakers" the putative reason given there as well?

Sevastopol made perfect sense, anyone that didn't see that coming was blind. There was no way Russia was going to give up the Crimea and that port.

In my opinion the Russians are a paranoid lot. Not without good reason. They've been invaded by damn near every one at one time or another. But that doesn't excuse them from being irrational in their threat assessment. China is the nation with expansionist designs and the peoples of Eastern Siberia are much closer racially to the Chinese than the Russians (China can play the Hitler gambit as an excuse too). Western Europe is being overrun by the "immigrants" they've allowed in and are in no position, even collectively, to embark on military excursions into Russia. Central Europe hasn't the military or the resources either. Throw in the fact that opposition to Putin is growing in Russia as well. (Nothing like a war to unify a nation, could that be his reason for eyeing the Baltic's?). Regardless, Russia is in a precarious position re. Siberia and without some major repositioning of his military Putin would have no recourse but to go nuclear should China decide they wanted oil and other resources that didn't have to be transported by sea. (Oil being the critical resource as far as China is concerned.)

So all that discussion brings right back to "butt hurt."

 

[LupusDei]

The Georgian excursion, protection of "Russian" speakers. Shades of Adolf Hitler.

Putin hasn't "finished off" the Ukraine yet and he's running out of time and Army to do it. Wasn't "protection of Russian speakers" the putative reason given there as well?

Sevastopol made perfect sense, anyone that didn't see that coming was blind. There was no way Russia was going to give up the Crimea and that port.

It was. To their credit they only resolved to force after the political solution failed and people ousted the president they hoped to be their puppet. But they had that on the ready, obviously.

In my opinion the Russians are a paranoid lot. Not without good reason. They've been invaded by damn near every one at one time or another. But that doesn't excuse them from being irrational in their threat assessment. China is the nation with expansionist designs and the peoples of Eastern Siberia are much closer racially to the Chinese than the Russians (China can play the Hitler gambit as an excuse too). Western Europe is being overrun by the "immigrants" they've allowed in and are in no position, even collectively, to embark on military excursions into Russia. Central Europe hasn't the military or the resources either. Throw in the fact that opposition to Putin is growing in Russia as well. (Nothing like a war to unify a nation, could that be his reason for eyeing the Baltic's?). Regardless, Russia is in a precarious position re. Siberia and without some major repositioning of his military Putin would have no recourse but to go nuclear should China decide they wanted oil and other resources that didn't have to be transported by sea. (Oil being the critical resource as far as China is concerned.)

So all that discussion brings right back to "butt hurt."

It's called "siege mentality" and is extremely powerful crowd control mind drug. Putin needs it domestically. "They are coming for us!" Yeah, we use it to, and it's damaging. The worst is, as any drug, it needs constant dosage increase to stay effective.

There's signs we may have been able to "wake up" Sweden, and if you look up an imaginary block of Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland its already larger economy than Russia and comparable on man force, only lacking in really heavy stuff, and nukes, of course. Alas, there is no such block on the ground although it would make perfect sense economically and militarily and has historical precedent (Poland-Sweden personal union when Sigismund III Vasa, King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania, was crowned King of Sweden in 1592). In that sense, withdrawal of US in its own shell might be a good thing, but it's risky as unprotected fuck.

Long history and symbolism matter a lot in this region. We wage war in historical interpretations and even linguistics, not to mention religion. Legends take precedence over economics. In that context, Ulkrainian orthodox church splitting from Moscow was a big event, for example.

China, oh sure. I think its almost inevitable they will flow into Siberia at some point, it will be done sneakily, linking economy and sending in migrants long before there's military action, if any, to make it official. And since Russia needs to develop those regions too, and they're short of people (even more of people able to actually work, and then even less are willing to go over there from European part), there's no good way to prevent it.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Just when you thought things couldn’t get any crazier:


The US just joined Russia to veto a UN Security Council resolution sponsored by our former European allies — France, Germany, Belgium, the UK and Poland — condemning Turkey's invasion of Syria.


https://www.dailysabah.com/war-on-t...eys-op-in-syria/amp?__twitter_impression=true

GOOD.....our NEVER European "allies" suddenly want us to police their back yard for them? I can't imagine why.

What happened to all that good shit talking about what horrible warmongers we are??? Yet here they are trying to use the UN to force us so they don't have to, fuck them.

 

[LupusDei]

See? Memes like these made me believe that GB Leftists are a bunch of morons, and turn to GB conservatives. Things that I would never do irl.

Look up "Armenian genocide" Turkey has a tradition and trained hand in this.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The US has meddled in the affairs of the Middle East for over 50 years. It’s not a Right or Left thing, it’s an American thing.

Yes, but that's not being discussed, that's a lame deflection.

What is left vs right is should we continue to stay there?

Up until a few days ago the "progressive" left was against it, but because 'orange man bad' suddenly war is the greatest fucking thing ever and we need to stay in the middle east for ALL ETERNITY without any objective or desire to win anything. Just a few hundred billion and a few hundred to a few thousand dead Americans a year black hole for the fun of it!

I know the above is a very simplified version of a complicated history, but even you two pillocks should be able to understand that the constant intervention in the conflicts of the Middle East, primarily driven by the economic interests of the US, it's foreign policy, and the Cold War, has stirred a hornet's nest and contributed to the formation of ISIS, and their interest to seize power in the region.

Yes it contributed to, SO WHAT???

The genesis of ISIS was well before 2010. They became prominent during the ‘Dubya’ years. That too is not a Left or Right thing, but simply facts and using a calendar.

Whatever you gotta tell yourself to justify your hyper-partisan principal free position on war.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Cool of you supporting Genocide

^big fan of China....probably so ignorant he doesn't understand why that makes him a flaming hypocrite.

Also clearly doesn't understand supporting Trump pulling out isn't supporting Genocide.

 

[icanhelp1]

The US has meddled in the affairs of the Middle East for over 50 years. It’s not a Right or Left thing, it’s an American thing.
Foreign policy in the region has centered around the dick measuring contests with the Soviets, Western access to oil, and securing the Gulf as a strategic foothold in the region. Since 9/11, policies and involvement in the region centre around counter-terrorism, or so the narrative goes.

Almost all the current 'enemies' in the region were once the good guys, and were supplied weapons and / or resources by the US or its allies, provided it kept the Soviets at bay, and served and secured the US's interests in the region.
The US provided $$ and more to help fund a little start-up, called al-Qaeda, when they were fighting the Russkies in Afghanistan during the early 80s.
Even ol' Saddam was the sweetheart of the Arab states during the late 70s and through the 80s, according to the US.

Ironically, the leadership of ISIS was primarily made up of former members of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath government.

I know the above is a very simplified version of a complicated history, but even you two pillocks should be able to understand that the constant intervention in the conflicts of the Middle East, primarily driven by the economic interests of the US, it's foreign policy, and the Cold War, has stirred a hornet's nest and contributed to the formation of ISIS, and their interest to seize power in the region.

The genesis of ISIS was well before 2010. They became prominent during the ‘Dubya’ years. That too is not a Left or Right thing, but simply facts and using a calendar.

I totally agree with everything you said and it is oversimplified. We've been involved in the ME since WWII. New borders were created after WWII with the creation of Israel as a state. We tried to keep peace in BEIRUT as a UN function, we were involved with the Iraq Iran was and yes we took sides with Saddame. We did fund the Mujahedin against the Russian invasion which created Osama Ben Laden version of Al Qaeda. Like you I could get really deep, all the way back to Hitler and the Grand Mufti. My point is, which I didn't explain well, is that the vision of the Caliphate with al-Baghdadi started as the world scourge in 2010 and continued till 2014 and basically till it was destroyed.

 

[jaF0]

Trump pulling out

Ahhh, if only Donny's Daddy had .....

 

[BotanyBoy]

Ahhh, if only Donny's Daddy had .....

Couldn't actually respond? I'm shocked

 

[bellisarius]

The long, bloody history of Europe, and in reality the entire Eurasian land mass, based on grievances going back over a thousand years is difficult for Americans to grasp. It's even more difficult when you start talking about the Mid-East where the conflicts and grudges go back even further. Which is another way of saying what the overwhelming majority of Americans know about history could be stuffed up an ants ass without discomforting the ant.

I can understand Putin's paranoia. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the West's rush to bring all of the former bloc members into the NATO fold it most certainly would appear to be an invasion, albeit a political invasion. I can't help but wonder whether encouraging the Central nations to form their own equivalent of the EU might not have been a wiser course of action in the long run. And considering how the policy makers in Brussels are alienating the Central nations that might still be an option in the future. Russia has always wanted a buffer zone between itself and the West, especially Germany. Would that satisfy them?

Back to your observation regarding "Greater Kurdistan" being spread over 4 nations. None of those nations are going to cede their territories to the Kurd's. That is a political reality. Nor are they going to give them autonomous status. (Iraq only did so under US pressure and that could change at anytime in the future.) Granting them autonomous status in the individual nations would eventually lead to a unification of those areas and a declaration of independence. An eventuality that NONE of those nations are going to tolerate.

One last point. The fact that the Kurd's fought against ISIS does not make us "allies" any more than the USSR being a true ally during WWII. Merely part of a coalition with common interests. The Kurd's did not join in with us, they were fighting for their very existence and would have done so had we not been there.

 

[HisArpy]

If Edmond Ghareeb's take on it is true, that Turkey has been planning the invasion for a long time and the US was informed of it the week before,
- I'm with Trump on this one.

It sucks, but the alternative would have been much worse.
What should have US done? Fight the turks (the second strongest army in NATO) in NE Syria? What a disaster that would have been. Another seed for an endless war.

It's a simple equation.

Either we stay and more people on our side die. Or we leave and more people on their side die.

Also note that if we stay, more people on their side die anyway.

No winners for the locals - they're going to die and there's NOTHING the US can do about it except not participate.


Speaking of not participating, do you know what it takes to stop genocide?

Write your answer here --> Just don't do it.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It's a simple equation.

Either we stay and more people on our side die. Or we leave and more people on their side die.

Also note that if we stay, more people on their side die anyway.

No winners for the locals - they're going to die and there's NOTHING the US can do about it except not participate.


Speaking of not participating, do you know what it takes to stop genocide?

Write your answer here --> Just don't do it.

More than any of the suddenly war happy dipshit lefties here would be willing to stand for.

 

[HisArpy]

More than any of the suddenly war happy dipshit lefties here would be willing to stand for.

I think that those politicians and partisan idjits who want us to stay in Syria to fight against our Turkish ally should volunteer to go over there with their 2nd Amendment approved muskets and stand shoulder to shoulder with the Kurds and show their support for more war and death.

Why are they sitting behind the lines and bitching about how bad a job everyone is doing when they can easily get off the fence and go show the world how it's supposed to be done? Why don't they step up and put their money where their alligator mouth is?