Yeah well, that's why this mission was so fraught right from the beginning and that's also why Putin would see this as the perfect opportunity to exploit holes in the NATO.But this isn't something as black and white (to Westeners) as 9/11, Turkey aren't acting within a globally recognized mandate (quite the opposite actually). If Art 5 would be in play it would've been triggered from the start, not after Turkey meet resistance on their offense?!
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Genius move by Trump. Piss off the Kurds, then turn right around and piss off the Turks. Lose-lose.
It’s actually worse.Trump's answer to Turkey's incursion into Syria. "Not our problem".
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Yes, but the people who have been arguing that we shouldn't be keeping animals in barns have just watched them all leave and be rounded up into Russian barns.It's like a farmer opening up the barn door and letting all the cows run loose then yelling at them to get back inside
The NATO treaty is strictly defensive in nature. That means, if Turkey were attacked by Syria, for invading Syria, the treaty does not cover this, since, Turkey technically has attacked someone else, and a defensive treaty does not kick in, when a country defends itself.Its kind of implicit that any attack on one of the signatories is an attack on everyone else.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm
They are not our problem. We have our own problems. The kurds have only thier selves to blame. Syrian kurds problem belongs to Syria.Been reading some reports that Erdogan is coordinating with the Russians on this. If that’s the case (and of course it depends what is meant by ‘coordination’) then the SDF could end up squeezed between Erdogan and Assad with nowhere to run except Iraq. Add in the proposal to re-settle millions of predominantly Arab refugees in Rojava,* and the type of looting and displacement the Turkish-allied militias carried out in Afrin,** and we may see a massive Syrian Kurdish exodus heading in the same direction.
*(personally I doubt this will actually happen)
** (read one report this morning saying the Turkish military have warned the militias not to repeat their Adrian behavior)
I’m interested...I want the oil rich part of texas, just like the kurds want the oil rich part of syria that they have no right to.
What's interesting about that? It's the truth, they've gone too far, I'd be okay with it if they actually taken the part of Syria that is actually predominantly kurds.I’m interested...
I’m interested in what parts of Syria you’re referencing as there are oil fields in the parts of Syria that Kurds have been in since before the Crusades.What's interesting about that? It's the truth, they've gone too far, I'd be okay with it if they actually taken the part of Syria that is actually predominantly kurds.
The northern eastern ones yes, but the one in the Der Ezzour area no, and those are of higher quality and quantity.I’m interested in what parts of Syria you’re referencing as there are oil fields in the parts of Syria that Kurds have been in since before the Crusades.
True, but see, that’s why I asked.The northern eastern ones yes, but the one in the Der Ezzour area no, and those are of higher quality and quantity.
Yes, but they never left and staying in a foreign country, since they claim independence, after achieving your mission is invading, the land belongs to it's rightful owners.True, but see, that’s why I asked.
Didn’t the Kurdish SDF fight for control of Dier Ez-Zor with ISIS?
What does that have to do with their ambitions to take what is not theirs? Saddam was a criminal and his actions does not justify the actions of their leaders to cause unrest and instability in Iraq/Syria. Not even that, but trying to take more land from the central government.Anfal, Halabja, etc.
They’ve never claimed independence from Syria.Yes, but they never left and staying in a foreign country, since they claim independence, after achieving your mission is invading, the land belongs to it's rightful owners.
Why didn't they let the army back in then?They’ve never claimed independence from Syria.
Because they’ve had no reason to do so until it becomes clear which way the spoils of the war are landing (especially while they had US backing), and the more land they control the more leverage they’d ultimately have when it comes to securing what they really want - a federal system with autonomy and recognized cultural rights for Kurds and other minorities. They don’t trust the government (why would they?). I actually agree they’ve gone too far in some areas in terms of imposing their vision on a population whose loyalties lie elsewhere, but at the same time I look at the alternative options they had and can understand.Why didn't they let the army back in then?
Im not going to defend Assad, but what do expect of a country leader seeing his land torn apart being granded to religious extremists backed by the western countries?Because they’ve had no reason to do so until it becomes clear which way the spoils of the war are landing (especially while they had US backing), and the more land they control the more leverage they’d ultimately have when it comes to securing what they really want - a federal system with autonomy and recognized cultural rights for Kurds and other minorities. They don’t trust the government (why would they?). I actually agree they’ve gone too far in some areas in terms of imposing their vision on a population whose loyalties lie elsewhere, but at the same time I look at the alternative options they had and can understand.
And it’s no mystery why they’ve received sympathy from Western audiences in the specific context of the Syrian war. Assad is regarded as a monster, and the mainstream opposition rebel groups have been dominated by jihadis, attempts to arm and train them have been disastrous and they’ve descended into thuggery as the war has progressed. So who does that leave for the vaguely interested Westerner? The SDF built up a somewhat functioning statelet (though its image has been helped by propaganda), they’re explicitly not Islamist, they’ve primarily fought against ISIS, and they generally don’t parade around talking about conquering Rome and stuff like that. Add to that the general sympathy which the Kurds as a people have (primarily due to their predicament in Iraq and Turkey), and it’s easy to understand the romanticism that surrounds them.
Well without getting into the debate over the level of Assad’s responsibility for what has happened, I’d say that even in your generous evaluation he still comes off looking worse than the SDF to the average Westerner.Im not going to defend Assad, but what do expect of a country leader seeing his land torn apart being granded to religious extremists backed by the western countries?
He will fight back to protect his land. He is a war criminal, Yes. But what does this syrian war make western leaders? More criminal than Assad himself. They ruined a perfectly stable country, beautiful and self dependent in a try to replace a stable dictator with religious fanatics. There are always two part of the story and I am sure westerners know very little about ME politics.
About the Kurds, they have the right to live in the country just as every other ethnicity in equality. If they want federal government. Ok but, we all know federal government will lead to their next step, independence calls. Which can be discussed of course but tgey will always want to take part of the land that is not theirs just like in the case of the iraqi kurds and what happened in the past few years.