Turkey Plans to Invade Syria, But to Stop the Kurds, Not ISIS

[JoeB131]

And as always, debate the topic or leave.

This is posted under the military forum. Do you have an opinion on the current military situation and how it changes the situation in Northern Syria?
Will this move be primarily against the Kurds or ISIS?

Do you agree with their move or not?

If they go to kill the Kurds, is that counter to our current strategy of using airstrikes to help the Kurds gain ground?

We are OPENLY supporting the Kurds in the Region. Turkey is OPENLY against the Kurds in the region. Which is my point.

And that is exactly my point. WHy is this OUR problem?

The military situation is easy enough to understand. The Turks have a vested interest in suppressing any kind of Kurdish Nationalism, given they have the largest Kurdish population in the world.

SO again, I ask- WHY IS THIS OUR PROBLEM?

Or to put it another way. The only way to win this war is for the person you care about the most in the world to die. Would it be worth it to you? It wouldn't be worth it to me.

 

[JoeB131]

As always...

Why is any of this OUR problem?

who is "our" I have nothing to do with shit like you

The average American who works his job, pays his taxes and does his part for AMERICA.

Not Turkey.Not Israel. Not Exxon-Mobile.

Why is this AMERICA'S Problem.

I mean, yeah, it's tragic and all that we stuck our nose in that business and the Turks and Saudis are creating a mess over there by supporting ISIL.

But it's not worth one American life to get in the middle of that mess.

 

[irosie91]

As always...

Why is any of this OUR problem?

who is "our" I have nothing to do with shit like you

The average American who works his job, pays his taxes and does his part for AMERICA.

Not Turkey.Not Israel. Not Exxon-Mobile.

Why is this AMERICA'S Problem.

I mean, yeah, it's tragic and all that we stuck our nose in that business and the Turks and Saudis are creating a mess over there by supporting ISIL.

But it's not worth one American life to get in the middle of that mess.

As always...

Why is any of this OUR problem?

who is "our" I have nothing to do with shit like you

The average American who works his job, pays his taxes and does his part for AMERICA.

Not Turkey.Not Israel. Not Exxon-Mobile.

Why is this AMERICA'S Problem.

I mean, yeah, it's tragic and all that we stuck our nose in that business and the Turks and Saudis are creating a mess over there by supporting ISIL.

But it's not worth one American life to get in the middle of that mess.

Saudi Arabia does not support ISIL----there is no question that some Saudis do just as some Saudis supported Osama bin laden -------some Saudis even support the filth of the IRANIAN agenda. Saudi Arabia is full of lots of terrorist types

 

[JoeB131]

Saudi Arabia does not support ISIL----there is no question that some Saudis do just as some Saudis supported Osama bin laden -------some Saudis even support the filth of the IRANIAN agenda. Saudi Arabia is full of lots of terrorist types

YOu know what, if you google "Saudi Arabia helping..." the next word that comes up is "ISIS".

That's how guilty as shit they are.

Iraq crisis How Saudi Arabia helped Isis take over the north of the country - Comment - Voices - The Independent

Saudi Funding of ISIS - The Washington Institute for Near East Policy

America s Allies Are Funding ISIS - The Daily Beast

Guilty as a cat in a canary cage....

 

[Taz]

As always...

Why is any of this OUR problem?

who is "our" I have nothing to do with shit like you

The average American who works his job, pays his taxes and does his part for AMERICA.

Not Turkey.Not Israel. Not Exxon-Mobile.

Why is this AMERICA'S Problem.

I mean, yeah, it's tragic and all that we stuck our nose in that business and the Turks and Saudis are creating a mess over there by supporting ISIL.

But it's not worth one American life to get in the middle of that mess.

It's America's problem because the U.S. ARMY destroyed Iraq for no fucking reason, which started all this mess.

 

[JoeB131]

It's America's problem because the U.S. ARMY destroyed Iraq for no fucking reason, which started all this mess.

True, it's our fault, but it's not our problem.

The Iraqis had 12 years after the Iraq War to pull their heads out of their asses and build a stable regime. Germany and Japan, which suffered far more damage, did it in less time that that after World War II. We poured hundreds of billions of dollars into the place trying to help them, and at the end of the day, they decided it was more important to fight over whether Ali should have been named Caliph back in 632 AD.

 

[irosie91]

As always...

Why is any of this OUR problem?

who is "our" I have nothing to do with shit like you

The average American who works his job, pays his taxes and does his part for AMERICA.

Not Turkey.Not Israel. Not Exxon-Mobile.

Why is this AMERICA'S Problem.

I mean, yeah, it's tragic and all that we stuck our nose in that business and the Turks and Saudis are creating a mess over there by supporting ISIL.

But it's not worth one American life to get in the middle of that mess.

It's America's problem because the U.S. ARMY destroyed Iraq for no fucking reason, which started all this mess.

the MESS was already ongoing in the 1960s when SADDAM got into politics-----kinda like the MESS in Germany began in the mid 1920s when your hero boyfriend ADOLF got into ACTIVISM

 

[irosie91]

It's America's problem because the U.S. ARMY destroyed Iraq for no fucking reason, which started all this mess.

True, it's our fault, but it's not our problem.

The Iraqis had 12 years after the Iraq War to pull their heads out of their asses and build a stable regime. Germany and Japan, which suffered far more damage, did it in less time that that after World War II. We poured hundreds of billions of dollars into the place trying to help them, and at the end of the day, they decided it was more important to fight over whether Ali should have been named Caliph back in 632 AD.

see post # 27

 

[JoeB131]

the MESS was already ongoing in the 1960s when SADDAM got into politics-----kinda like the MESS in Germany began in the mid 1920s when your hero boyfriend ADOLF got into ACTIVISM

No, there wasn't really a mess in the 1960's or the 1970's or the 1980's. Saddam was a bastard, but he was our bastard.

It only became a problem when the Zionists took advantage of a fight between Saddam and the Corrupt Emir of Kuwait to provoke us into a "Gulf War" that really is in it's 25th year now.

 

[irosie91]

Saudi Arabia does not support ISIL----there is no question that some Saudis do just as some Saudis supported Osama bin laden -------some Saudis even support the filth of the IRANIAN agenda. Saudi Arabia is full of lots of terrorist types

YOu know what, if you google "Saudi Arabia helping..." the next word that comes up is "ISIS".

That's how guilty as shit they are.

Iraq crisis How Saudi Arabia helped Isis take over the north of the country - Comment - Voices - The Independent

Saudi Funding of ISIS - The Washington Institute for Near East Policy

America s Allies Are Funding ISIS - The Daily Beast

Guilty as a cat in a canary cage....

Like I said above------Saudi Arabia supports ISIS the same way Saudis supported BIN LADEN------oil rich Saudis-----not the Saudi King

 

[irosie91]

the MESS was already ongoing in the 1960s when SADDAM got into politics-----kinda like the MESS in Germany began in the mid 1920s when your hero boyfriend ADOLF got into ACTIVISM

No, there wasn't really a mess in the 1960's or the 1970's or the 1980's. Saddam was a bastard, but he was our bastard.

It only became a problem when the Zionists took advantage of a fight between Saddam and the Corrupt Emir of Kuwait to provoke us into a "Gulf War" that really is in it's 25th year now.

right------jooooos said to saddam----SLANT DIG OIL ACROSS THE BORDER so that ------the emir can get annoyed so that ------you can cause a war for the benefit of DA JOOOOOOS-------so SADDAM did it------for DA JOOOOOOOS. Of course-----so much trouble-----and da jooooos told TEHERAN youth to demonstrate against the government -----for DA BENEFIT OF DA JOOOOS-------and da joooos told the CHOLERA VIBRIO to hit the shit infected waters of arab lands for the DA BENEFIT OF DA JOOOOS-------da joooos even caused the Pakistani civil war in 1970

 

[eagle1462010]

And as always, debate the topic or leave.

This is posted under the military forum. Do you have an opinion on the current military situation and how it changes the situation in Northern Syria?
Will this move be primarily against the Kurds or ISIS?

Do you agree with their move or not?

If they go to kill the Kurds, is that counter to our current strategy of using airstrikes to help the Kurds gain ground?

We are OPENLY supporting the Kurds in the Region. Turkey is OPENLY against the Kurds in the region. Which is my point.

And that is exactly my point. WHy is this OUR problem?

The military situation is easy enough to understand. The Turks have a vested interest in suppressing any kind of Kurdish Nationalism, given they have the largest Kurdish population in the world.

SO again, I ask- WHY IS THIS OUR PROBLEM?

Or to put it another way. The only way to win this war is for the person you care about the most in the world to die. Would it be worth it to you? It wouldn't be worth it to me.

To Win the War would be what in your opinion, and I'll note that I agree that the Turks have a long hatred with the Kurds. They have been fighting for 40 years off and on. The last cease fire happened in 2013. A new front into Syria would be primarily to kill the Kurds and not necessarily ISIS. They are more concerned with the Kurds than ISIS and many pundits put them in support of ISIS because of their leaderships goal of removing Assad from power.

Both Turkey and Iran want to rule the region. They are divided by Shiite versus Sunni ideologies. However both have stated they want to unite these sides to combine forces to retake Jerusalem and destroy the Jews. Which is the only common ground between them and the only possibility that would unite them in a common front.

Third party involved would be Assad trying to hold on to his power.
4 the major power is Israel worried they will unite and attack.

Again, what would be a WIN in your opinion in this region?

 

[JoeB131]

Like I said above------Saudi Arabia supports ISIS the same way Saudis supported BIN LADEN------oil rich Saudis-----not the Saudi King

The articles say otherwise. the Saudi Government funded ISIS until we got them to stop. Kind of.

Again, this is why we need to keep the hell out of the Middle East. Those cocksuckers- including the Zionists - will stab you in the back in a heartbeat. You can't trust any of them.

Let them slaughter each other over their Imaginary Sky Pixies and keep us out of it.

 

[JoeB131]

right------jooooos said to saddam----SLANT DIG OIL ACROSS THE BORDER so that ------the emir can get annoyed so that ------you can cause a war for the benefit of DA JOOOOOOS-------so SADDAM did it------for DA JOOOOOOOS. Of course-----so much trouble-----and da jooooos told TEHERAN youth to demonstrate against the government -----for DA BENEFIT OF DA JOOOOS-------and da joooos told the CHOLERA VIBRIO to hit the shit infected waters of arab lands for the DA BENEFIT OF DA JOOOOS-------da joooos even caused the Pakistani civil war in 1970

I think you are a little confused. It was the Emir who was slant drilling across the border, that's why Saddam invaded. And Saddam asked April Glaspie if we would take sides, and she replied, "Well, no, we don't have a treaty with Kuwait."

But man, the minute he invaded Kuwait, AIPAC and the Zionists Amen Corner in Congress (as Pat Buchanan calls them) were all keen on us making sure that the Emir got his Kingdom back.

But keep pretending the Zionists aren't pulling the strings on our foreign policy. Or they were until Obama got there, anyway. That's why they are soooo darned angry.

 

[JoeB131]

Again, what would be a WIN in your opinion in this region?

what would be a "win" is America staying the fuck out of the region, stopping all Payments to the zionists and all other parties over there. Taking that money we spend playing hall monitor over there and investing it in energy production here that would make us a net energy exporter instead of a net energy importer.

That would be a win.

 

[Supreme Allied Condista]

TAKE RAQQA BATTLEPLAN

TAKE RAQQA BATTLEPLAN by Supreme Allied Condista on US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is my political and military plan to put the squeeze on the so-called "Islamic State" / ISIS / ISIL / Daesh operational capital at Raqqa, Syria.

1) The Turkish army invades Syria with an armoured column west and south of the Euphrates and attacks Raqqa from the south, also blocking the east and west routes to Raqqa.

2) The Euphrates Volcano - a joint operations room for the Royava Kurds YPG / YPJ and the Free Syrian Army - cut off Raqqa to the north, bottling ISIS fighters up in Raqqa or in other bolt holes to the east and north of the Euphrates.

Euphrates Volcano - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

3) The Turks and / or the Euphrates Volcano YPG / YPJ / FSA take Raqqa, clearing it street to street, mopping up ISIS forces.

I appreciate that the Turks have not yet committed to invading Syria with their army and neither have the Euphrates Volcano, YPG / FSA asked for such Turkish intervention.

So I think it is really going to take NATO to suggest such a collaboration, because neither side would wish to admit needing the other to defeat ISIS, I expect.

Diplomacy is not my strong suit but if these forces can be persuaded diplomatically to work together then liberating Raqqa from ISIS should be straight-forward enough, militarily speaking.

Now a word or two about the politics.

A solution for SYRIA too

We should support the rights of Sunni-majority areas to establish a Sunni-majority state, partitioned from Iraq and / or Syria but modelled not after Saudi Arabia's oppressive religious police Sunni state but rather as a secular, democratic state (approximated imperfectly by Turkey with its majority Sunni population), which could be part of a stable solution, acceptable to world powers.

However, to get there, we must first defeat ISIS and al-Qaeda and put irresistible pressure on Arab states to support a peace solution for Iraq and Syria, perhaps with Arab state regular armies invading Syria and Iraq to enforce a peace settlement along partition lines agreed at the United Nations with NATO acting as a military police force, directing Arab armies here and there.

Such a peace would be workable and stable, rather than as now with the Arab states' proxy terrorists failing to enforce a non-agreed imposed terrorist state.

NATO

The NATO military alliance met recently at NATO Headquarters in Brussels, to consider a plea from Turkey for support.

TURKS

Well if I was leading NATO, Turkey would be getting some very forceful advice behind the scenes to quit treating the PKK the same as ISIS and encouragement to seek a cease-fire with the PKK and I'd be making that distinction clear publicly as I have already done.

Since NATO statements are only agreed unanimously then it is not surprising that Turkey would not agree to the following quoted statement for publication as "the view of NATO" but there is nothing to stop the NATO Secretary General making this statement in a personal leadership capacity, except for the fact that the Secretary General is not me, but someone else.

"Turkey has been quite wrong to try to paint ISIS and the PKK with the same brush, equally as "terrorists", when the PKK have legitimate concerns about protecting Kurds from ISIS, although the PKK's attack on Turkish police officers which broke the cease-fire was ill-advised and it is unsurprising that Turkey would label such attacks as "terrorists" and a unilateral ending of the cease-fire by the PKK. Ending the cease-fire was a bad move by the PKK because cease-fires are much easier to end than they are to resume.

So Turkey had a cease-fire with the PKK and rightly so but Turkey should never have had a cease-fire with ISIS, if indeed that's what it had, it was quite wrong to have such a cease fire with ISIS.

Also, Turkey should be open minded about resuming a cease-fire with the PKK. Admittedly it takes two sides to make a cease-fire stick but at least a cease-fire should be possible with the PKK in the way it should not be possible with ISIS.

Otherwise, the suspicion will be that the Turkish state is being manipulated by those fascists who are not sincere about fighting ISIS but instead are using ISIS attacks as a pretext, conflating ISIS with anyone Kurdish or Turkish leftist, as a smokescreen for a far wider and undemocratic crackdown."​

KURDS

We are not doing the Kurds any favours by turning a blind eye to the PKK blunder providing Erdogan and the Turkish secret security fascists with the pretext for a crackdown they were likely trying to provoke - the July 22 killing by the PKK of 2 Turkish police officers.

Whatever the Kurds' or PKK's suspicions or personal convictions about Erdogan etc secretly sponsoring ISIS, it is not astute for the PKK to lash out at Turkish officers indiscriminately, because the case "Erdogan-backs-ISIS" has not been proven to NATO, to the US and allies or to the people of Turkey.

Least of all is that case made when Turkey provides the US with the use of airbases with which to attack ISIS.

Erdogan has played much too clever a game and has outwitted the PKK. They have fallen into his trap.

In future, Kurds should impress on the PKK the international political need to act with more political wisdom as prosecutors, proving their case of nefarious machinations of the secret security state of Turkey and its sponsorship of ISIS, while treating with respect those Turks, Americans, Europeans and others whom Erdogan's secret plots have deceived.


Supreme Allied Condista by Supreme Allied Condista on US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum