Why isn't NATO working in Syria to protect the Kurds? Why is it always the US?

[Billy_Kinetta]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

Yes it would be wrong to kill the prisoners because 90% of them are just Sunni refugees from the US invasion of Iraq, and are not at all ISIS, especially women and children.

Again, why are they kept with prisoners?

 

[Rigby5]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

A. You would be killing people you could gain human intelligence from on where other ISIS elements or hiding or what their identities are. Information and intelligence are vital in defeating remaining ISIS elements and disrupting their attacks. You lose information and intelligence when you just slaughter people.

You'd prefer they escape and go back to work? Interesting.

[B. There are innocent children in many of these camps.

What are children doing in the prison camps?

C. There are other ISIS elements on the run that are not in the camps.

A separate issue.

Yes it would be vastly preferable to let out all these so called ISIS prisoners.
The reality is that the Kurds want their old country back, and have been using terrorism to do so for the last century.
Those prisoners are not ISIS, but Iraqis, Syrians, or anyone who is not Kurdish.
They are mostly women and children.

If you even think that ISIS is real and not a creation of the Pentagon and the media, then you are really ignorant of what is really going on.
What we are calling ISIS, actually are just the Iraqi Sunni that we made into refugees.

 

[Siete]

if no power can stop them, what difference would our "interference" make?

What difference would wasting US lives make? Spoken like an asshole who doesn't have anyone to serve and die as a "speed bump".
US voters are done wasting US lives and treasure on the ME. The "endless wars" can continue, but the US isn't involved.

Pulling out U.S. troops in Syria puts U.S. lives EVERYWHERE at greater risk. Hunting and destroying ISIS is not a waste of U.S. lives. It saves U.S. lives. More than 90% of America's representatives in congress are AGAINST Trump's pullout from Syria.

You mean in the House. Most of the positive votes were Democrats, who put us there in the first place.

Republicans voted by a margin of 2 to 1 against Trump's actions in Syria.

Republicans always vote for wars, event though every war the US has been in was wrong and illegal, except maybe WWII.
It is against US and international law for any US troops to be in Syria without Assad's consent.
The time to deal with the Kurdish problem was in 1918, when the Allies illegally agreed to divide up Kurdistan.
That is not Trump's problem now.

We were NOT fighting ISIS in Syria, but Assad's forces.
We created ISIS when we invaded Iraq and murdered Saddam.
We armed ISIS when we sent Ambassador Stevens to Benghazi with a warehouse full of arms, to supply the Syrian rebels.
It is wrong to claim we have to fix the problem we deliberately created.
It is clear that our goal was never to fix anything.

its clear Trump jumped in, and the problem became a nightmare-

carnival barkers and diplomacy dont mix.

 

[Rigby5]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

Yes it would be wrong to kill the prisoners because 90% of them are just Sunni refugees from the US invasion of Iraq, and are not at all ISIS, especially women and children.

Again, why are they kept with prisoners?

Obviously the Kurds are going to keep anyone who is not Kurdish, a prisoner.
They want their old Kurdistan back, and want to drive out everyone else.
Any Syrian or Iraqi refugee is going to end up as a prisoner to the Kurds, if we let them.

 

[U2Edge]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

Yes it would be wrong to kill the prisoners because 90% of them are just Sunni refugees from the US invasion of Iraq, and are not at all ISIS, especially women and children.

Some of them are Iraqi's. None of them are refugees from the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.

 

[Rigby5]

What difference would wasting US lives make? Spoken like an asshole who doesn't have anyone to serve and die as a "speed bump".
US voters are done wasting US lives and treasure on the ME. The "endless wars" can continue, but the US isn't involved.

Pulling out U.S. troops in Syria puts U.S. lives EVERYWHERE at greater risk. Hunting and destroying ISIS is not a waste of U.S. lives. It saves U.S. lives. More than 90% of America's representatives in congress are AGAINST Trump's pullout from Syria.

You mean in the House. Most of the positive votes were Democrats, who put us there in the first place.

Republicans voted by a margin of 2 to 1 against Trump's actions in Syria.

Republicans always vote for wars, event though every war the US has been in was wrong and illegal, except maybe WWII.
It is against US and international law for any US troops to be in Syria without Assad's consent.
The time to deal with the Kurdish problem was in 1918, when the Allies illegally agreed to divide up Kurdistan.
That is not Trump's problem now.

We were NOT fighting ISIS in Syria, but Assad's forces.
We created ISIS when we invaded Iraq and murdered Saddam.
We armed ISIS when we sent Ambassador Stevens to Benghazi with a warehouse full of arms, to supply the Syrian rebels.
It is wrong to claim we have to fix the problem we deliberately created.
It is clear that our goal was never to fix anything.

its clear Trump jumped in, and the problem became a nightmare-

carnival barkers and diplomacy dont mix.

No, it is the Pentagon and Hillary as Sec. of State who screwed it all up.
There should never have been any US troops on Syrian soil.
It was ILLEGAL!

Those responsible for any US troops in Syria should be prosecuted.

 

[U2Edge]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

A. You would be killing people you could gain human intelligence from on where other ISIS elements or hiding or what their identities are. Information and intelligence are vital in defeating remaining ISIS elements and disrupting their attacks. You lose information and intelligence when you just slaughter people.

You'd prefer they escape and go back to work? Interesting.

[B. There are innocent children in many of these camps.

What are children doing in the prison camps?

C. There are other ISIS elements on the run that are not in the camps.

A separate issue.

No, I'd prefer the camps be maintained and more U.S. forces be put into Syria to help sort through the prison camps, gain information, and properly transport high risk individuals to more secure sites. But you can't do that with Trump's stupid policy of just pulling everyone out.

The Women and Children are in the camps because the Kurds don't have anywhere else to put them, and they could potentially be a security risk if just released. That's all gone to hell now though with Trump's pullout and the Turkish invasion.

 

[U2Edge]

Pulling out U.S. troops in Syria puts U.S. lives EVERYWHERE at greater risk. Hunting and destroying ISIS is not a waste of U.S. lives. It saves U.S. lives. More than 90% of America's representatives in congress are AGAINST Trump's pullout from Syria.

You mean in the House. Most of the positive votes were Democrats, who put us there in the first place.

Republicans voted by a margin of 2 to 1 against Trump's actions in Syria.

Republicans always vote for wars, event though every war the US has been in was wrong and illegal, except maybe WWII.
It is against US and international law for any US troops to be in Syria without Assad's consent.
The time to deal with the Kurdish problem was in 1918, when the Allies illegally agreed to divide up Kurdistan.
That is not Trump's problem now.

We were NOT fighting ISIS in Syria, but Assad's forces.
We created ISIS when we invaded Iraq and murdered Saddam.
We armed ISIS when we sent Ambassador Stevens to Benghazi with a warehouse full of arms, to supply the Syrian rebels.
It is wrong to claim we have to fix the problem we deliberately created.
It is clear that our goal was never to fix anything.

its clear Trump jumped in, and the problem became a nightmare-

carnival barkers and diplomacy dont mix.

No, it is the Pentagon and Hillary as Sec. of State who screwed it all up.
There should never have been any US troops on Syrian soil.
It was ILLEGAL!

Those responsible for any US troops in Syria should be prosecuted.

U.S. troops were there to kill and capture ISIS forces that threaten the lives all U.S. citizens no matter where they live. It was perfectly legal because the United States has a right to defend itself.

 

[Rigby5]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

Yes it would be wrong to kill the prisoners because 90% of them are just Sunni refugees from the US invasion of Iraq, and are not at all ISIS, especially women and children.

Some of them are Iraqi's. None of them are refugees from the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Wrong!

Obviously ALL of ISIS are refugees from the 2003 US illegal invssion of Iraq.
We had tens of thousands in prisons in Iraq, and as soon as we let them out in 2005, that was the start of ISIS.
The Sunni Iraqi did not all become refugees in 2003.
It took a long time for the new Iraqi Shia forces to start attacking the Sunni cities in western Iraq and slowly turn them into refugees.
First the US had to arm and train the Shia Iraqis.

So it is entirely and completely the fault of the US.
Every single place in the Mideast where things are going wrong, it can all be traced back to US stupidity, weapons, money, and desire for oil.

 

[U2Edge]

if no power can stop them, what difference would our "interference" make?

What difference would wasting US lives make? Spoken like an asshole who doesn't have anyone to serve and die as a "speed bump".
US voters are done wasting US lives and treasure on the ME. The "endless wars" can continue, but the US isn't involved.

Pulling out U.S. troops in Syria puts U.S. lives EVERYWHERE at greater risk. Hunting and destroying ISIS is not a waste of U.S. lives. It saves U.S. lives. More than 90% of America's representatives in congress are AGAINST Trump's pullout from Syria.

You mean in the House. Most of the positive votes were Democrats, who put us there in the first place.

Republicans voted by a margin of 2 to 1 against Trump's actions in Syria.

That does not negate my statement.

The Democrats are the majority in the House, so naturally their votes will always outnumber those of Republicans. DUH.

 

[Rigby5]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

A. You would be killing people you could gain human intelligence from on where other ISIS elements or hiding or what their identities are. Information and intelligence are vital in defeating remaining ISIS elements and disrupting their attacks. You lose information and intelligence when you just slaughter people.

You'd prefer they escape and go back to work? Interesting.

[B. There are innocent children in many of these camps.

What are children doing in the prison camps?

C. There are other ISIS elements on the run that are not in the camps.

A separate issue.

No, I'd prefer the camps be maintained and more U.S. forces be put into Syria to help sort through the prison camps, gain information, and properly transport high risk individuals to more secure sites. But you can't do that with Trump's stupid policy of just pulling everyone out.

The Women and Children are in the camps because the Kurds don't have anywhere else to put them, and they could potentially be a security risk if just released. That's all gone to hell now though with Trump's pullout and the Turkish invasion.

Then you are a criminal.
Again, US and international law is quite clear, and putting troops in a sovereign nation like Syria is an illegal act of war.

The camps should NOT be maintained, because they are illegal attempts by Kurds to ethnically cleanse all the Iraqi and Syrians from their desired homeland.

What you have yet to understand is that ISIS does not really exist at all.
It is entirely a fake entity created by the US and the media.

 

[U2Edge]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

Yes it would be wrong to kill the prisoners because 90% of them are just Sunni refugees from the US invasion of Iraq, and are not at all ISIS, especially women and children.

Some of them are Iraqi's. None of them are refugees from the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Wrong!

Obviously ALL of ISIS are refugees from the 2003 US illegal invssion of Iraq.
We had tens of thousands in prisons in Iraq, and as soon as we let them out in 2005, that was the start of ISIS.
The Sunni Iraqi did not all become refugees in 2003.
It took a long time for the new Iraqi Shia forces to start attacking the Sunni cities in western Iraq and slowly turn them into refugees.
First the US had to arm and train the Shia Iraqis.

So it is entirely and completely the fault of the US.
Every single place in the Mideast where things are going wrong, it can all be traced back to US stupidity, weapons, money, and desire for oil.

ISIS started in Syria after 2011 when the Civil War began there. The old Sunni insurgency in the 00s in Iraq was not ISIS. That Sunni insurgency was also largely defeated by 2009. Had the U.S. not withdrawn from Iraq at the end of 2011, ISIS would not even exist today.

 

[U2Edge]

SIS fighters have escaped the prisons they were contained in and are regrouping with other ISIS forces that were in hiding.

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

A. You would be killing people you could gain human intelligence from on where other ISIS elements or hiding or what their identities are. Information and intelligence are vital in defeating remaining ISIS elements and disrupting their attacks. You lose information and intelligence when you just slaughter people.

You'd prefer they escape and go back to work? Interesting.

[B. There are innocent children in many of these camps.

What are children doing in the prison camps?

C. There are other ISIS elements on the run that are not in the camps.

A separate issue.

No, I'd prefer the camps be maintained and more U.S. forces be put into Syria to help sort through the prison camps, gain information, and properly transport high risk individuals to more secure sites. But you can't do that with Trump's stupid policy of just pulling everyone out.

The Women and Children are in the camps because the Kurds don't have anywhere else to put them, and they could potentially be a security risk if just released. That's all gone to hell now though with Trump's pullout and the Turkish invasion.

Then you are a criminal.
Again, US and international law is quite clear, and putting troops in a sovereign nation like Syria is an illegal act of war.

The camps should NOT be maintained, because they are illegal attempts by Kurds to ethnically cleanse all the Iraqi and Syrians from their desired homeland.

What you have yet to understand is that ISIS does not really exist at all.
It is entirely a fake entity created by the US and the media.

Go spout your crazy conspiracy theory to someone who cares. Maybe a UFO convention, or a TRUTHER event where they talk about how the U.S. government brought down the twin towers.

 

[Siete]

but but but, HILLARY ....

same bullshit different thread-

yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

 

[Rigby5]

You mean in the House. Most of the positive votes were Democrats, who put us there in the first place.

Republicans voted by a margin of 2 to 1 against Trump's actions in Syria.

Republicans always vote for wars, event though every war the US has been in was wrong and illegal, except maybe WWII.
It is against US and international law for any US troops to be in Syria without Assad's consent.
The time to deal with the Kurdish problem was in 1918, when the Allies illegally agreed to divide up Kurdistan.
That is not Trump's problem now.

We were NOT fighting ISIS in Syria, but Assad's forces.
We created ISIS when we invaded Iraq and murdered Saddam.
We armed ISIS when we sent Ambassador Stevens to Benghazi with a warehouse full of arms, to supply the Syrian rebels.
It is wrong to claim we have to fix the problem we deliberately created.
It is clear that our goal was never to fix anything.

its clear Trump jumped in, and the problem became a nightmare-

carnival barkers and diplomacy dont mix.

No, it is the Pentagon and Hillary as Sec. of State who screwed it all up.
There should never have been any US troops on Syrian soil.
It was ILLEGAL!

Those responsible for any US troops in Syria should be prosecuted.

U.S. troops were there to kill and capture ISIS forces that threaten the lives all U.S. citizens no matter where they live. It was perfectly legal because the United States has a right to defend itself.

Wrong.
Assad could easily have dealt with any SISI forces if the US has not been attacking him.
In effect, the reality is that the US was the reason ISIS existed.
The US was in Syria actually to DEFEND ISIS.
Without US forces protecting ISIS from Assad, Assad would have gotten rid of ISIS years ago.
And in fact, it was the US arming rebels against Assad that created ISIS.

And NO, it is NOT perfectly legal for the US to violate sovereign borders, no matter what.
The US only has a right to defend itself from invasion, not some imagined threat in some other country.
Didn't we learn that when we illegally invaded Iraq and Afghanistan?
How did that make the US safer?
Clearly it made the US criminal and much less safe.
The rule of law is supposed to be through courts in the UN and Hague.
When you instead just send in troops, you are a criminal and are promoting crime.

 

[Rigby5]

What difference would wasting US lives make? Spoken like an asshole who doesn't have anyone to serve and die as a "speed bump".
US voters are done wasting US lives and treasure on the ME. The "endless wars" can continue, but the US isn't involved.

Pulling out U.S. troops in Syria puts U.S. lives EVERYWHERE at greater risk. Hunting and destroying ISIS is not a waste of U.S. lives. It saves U.S. lives. More than 90% of America's representatives in congress are AGAINST Trump's pullout from Syria.

You mean in the House. Most of the positive votes were Democrats, who put us there in the first place.

Republicans voted by a margin of 2 to 1 against Trump's actions in Syria.

That does not negate my statement.

The Democrats are the majority in the House, so naturally their votes will always outnumber those of Republicans. DUH.

Congress does not have any legal authority to send or allow US troops in Syria, which clearly is outside US jurisdiction.
That is why the UN was created.

 

[Rigby5]

So blow up the fucking prisons before they do. Is there a problem here?

A. You would be killing people you could gain human intelligence from on where other ISIS elements or hiding or what their identities are. Information and intelligence are vital in defeating remaining ISIS elements and disrupting their attacks. You lose information and intelligence when you just slaughter people.

You'd prefer they escape and go back to work? Interesting.

[B. There are innocent children in many of these camps.

What are children doing in the prison camps?

C. There are other ISIS elements on the run that are not in the camps.

A separate issue.

No, I'd prefer the camps be maintained and more U.S. forces be put into Syria to help sort through the prison camps, gain information, and properly transport high risk individuals to more secure sites. But you can't do that with Trump's stupid policy of just pulling everyone out.

The Women and Children are in the camps because the Kurds don't have anywhere else to put them, and they could potentially be a security risk if just released. That's all gone to hell now though with Trump's pullout and the Turkish invasion.

Then you are a criminal.
Again, US and international law is quite clear, and putting troops in a sovereign nation like Syria is an illegal act of war.

The camps should NOT be maintained, because they are illegal attempts by Kurds to ethnically cleanse all the Iraqi and Syrians from their desired homeland.

What you have yet to understand is that ISIS does not really exist at all.
It is entirely a fake entity created by the US and the media.

Go spout your crazy conspiracy theory to someone who cares. Maybe a UFO convention, or a TRUTHER event where they talk about how the U.S. government brought down the twin towers.

Go look up the UN charter the US Congress ratified in 1945.
Any use of forces in violation of sovereignty is a US crime as well as international crime.

And quite claiming ISIS was not created and armed by the US.
What else do you think ambassador Stevens was doing in Benghazi with a warehouse full of arms?

 

[Rigby5]

Again, the law is very simple.
No country has the right or authority to invade any other country with troops.
Only the UN can create that authority.
So every US soldier in Syria is a criminal.
And so is anyone who supports putting US soldiers there.

 

[U2Edge]

A. You would be killing people you could gain human intelligence from on where other ISIS elements or hiding or what their identities are. Information and intelligence are vital in defeating remaining ISIS elements and disrupting their attacks. You lose information and intelligence when you just slaughter people.

You'd prefer they escape and go back to work? Interesting.

[B. There are innocent children in many of these camps.

What are children doing in the prison camps?

C. There are other ISIS elements on the run that are not in the camps.

A separate issue.

No, I'd prefer the camps be maintained and more U.S. forces be put into Syria to help sort through the prison camps, gain information, and properly transport high risk individuals to more secure sites. But you can't do that with Trump's stupid policy of just pulling everyone out.

The Women and Children are in the camps because the Kurds don't have anywhere else to put them, and they could potentially be a security risk if just released. That's all gone to hell now though with Trump's pullout and the Turkish invasion.

Then you are a criminal.
Again, US and international law is quite clear, and putting troops in a sovereign nation like Syria is an illegal act of war.

The camps should NOT be maintained, because they are illegal attempts by Kurds to ethnically cleanse all the Iraqi and Syrians from their desired homeland.

What you have yet to understand is that ISIS does not really exist at all.
It is entirely a fake entity created by the US and the media.

Go spout your crazy conspiracy theory to someone who cares. Maybe a UFO convention, or a TRUTHER event where they talk about how the U.S. government brought down the twin towers.

Go look up the UN charter the US Congress ratified in 1945.
Any use of forces in violation of sovereignty is a US crime as well as international crime.

And quite claiming ISIS was not created and armed by the US.
What else do you think ambassador Stevens was doing in Benghazi with a warehouse full of arms?

Its not a violation of sovereignty if its necessary for the defense of the United States. The right of defense is paramount. That's why U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were never challenged at the UN with either an attempt at a resolution protesting those invasions or a resolution calling for the troops to immediately withdraw. It was not even challenged in the general assembly. Compare that to the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979 which was challenged in both the Security Council and General assembly of the United Nations, or Iraq's invasion and annexation of Kuwait that was successfully challenged in the Security Council.

 

[U2Edge]

Again, the law is very simple.
No country has the right or authority to invade any other country with troops.
Only the UN can create that authority.
So every US soldier in Syria is a criminal.
And so is anyone who supports putting US soldiers there.

According to you. For most Americans, though, this is about defending ourselves and our interest. The United States has a right to defend itself. Your ideas about international law and who constitutes a criminal won't change that.