Syrian Kurds are close to declaring Independence

Non-interventionism, when you are a superpower, is isolationism. You don't just get to decide one day that you're no longer a superpower and no longer have responsibilities or moral obligations.
Sure countries can they change policies from one leader to another... Neville Chamberlain and Churchill POTUS is called the Commander in Chief for a reason. This was a no win situation...look at what happened today with the US base getting in between fighting...we can't fire on a NATO ally and they were coming no matter what we did
 
Sure countries can they change policies from one leader to another... Neville Chamberlain and Churchill POTUS is called the Commander in Chief for a reason. This was a no win situation...look at what happened today with the US base getting in between fighting...we can't fire on a NATO ally and they were coming no matter what we did

So, if NATO members can't attack other members, why did our troops need to get out of the way? Seems to me that Trump didn't want Turkey to be in the "impossible situation" of not being able to attack our Kurdish allies operating with our troops. It's not as though Northern Syria is Turkish sovereign land.

Maybe I don't understand "4D chess", or maybe it's that I do understand that when someone is compromised, they do all the compromising.

It has all the appearance of Trump bowing to Turkey, because that's what it is.
 
Last edited:
EGq8c-5XYAA2WrI
 
So, if NATO members can't attack other members, why did our troops need to get out of the way? Seems to me that Trump didn't want Turkey to be in the "impossible situation" of not being able to attack our Kurdish allies operating with our troops. It's not as though Northern Syria is Turkish sovereign land.

Maybe I don't understand "4D chess", or maybe it's that I do understand that when someone is compromised, they do all the compromising.

It has all the appearance of Trump bowing to Turkey, because that's what it is.

I don't think it's against the "rules" for a NATO country to attack another. Turkey did invade Cyprus back in the 70s.

The difference is, they can't invoke Article 5 if they start getting their ass kicked if it's shown they are the aggressor.
 
I don't think it's against the "rules" for a NATO country to attack another. Turkey did invade Cyprus back in the 70s.

The difference is, they can't invoke Article 5 if they start getting their ass kicked if it's shown they are the aggressor.
That's interesting. I didn't know that.
 
Didn't know Turkey invaded Cyprus or the Article 5 invocation?
Either, honestly, but was referring to the not being able to rely on NATO to come to the rescue. Makes perfect sense, though.

Some interesting scenarios I can imagine, although Turkey seems to have the angles covered.
 
Either, honestly, but was referring to the not being able to rely on NATO to come to the rescue. Makes perfect sense, though.

Some interesting scenarios I can imagine, although Turkey seems to have the angles covered.

If one of the nations went out and started a fight on their own, the other nations don't have to support them from a Treaty standpoint. It was a defensive pact in nature and why NATO didn't have to support us in Desert Storm or OIF. Now, we did invoke Article 5 after 9-11 which is why there is a NATO mission in Afghanistan, but if a nation voluntarily goes after another, the remainder of the Treaty members can decide to "opt out" since it may or may not concern them.
 


May help if I went back and looked at other posts and I would have seen this was already posted.
 
So removes 50 troops from Kurdish held territories because we don’t need to be in Middle East. Sends 2000 troops to Saudi Arabia because they pay us. When troops die there it will be ok because they pay us boys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
And now it looks like the Kurds are in the process of negotiating a deal with the Russians. Remember what I said about letting the other guy run the table.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
Do you have nothing else to do but post replies to seven year old Tweets?

Not really.

It's an interesting exercise discussing the Middle East, but when the guy in charge puts little to no thought into its future, at some point one wonders, "Why bother?"
 
Not really.

It's an interesting exercise discussing the Middle East, but when the guy in charge puts little to no thought into its future, at some point one wonders, "Why bother?"

Maybe discussing something more recent would be in order...

Of course, you love your Twitter, so that's not going to happen.
 
It can’t be defended.

@Grand Vol @NorthDallas40 please help your brethren here. They need some spin. Do the Kurds not pay as much as the Saudi royalty for our mercenaries even though they didn’t blow up our skyscrapers? I thought the whole reason we took our 50 troops out of the Middle East last week was because it was time to leave the Middle East! What changed since then where we send 2000 troops to the prince? Is renting our troops out cool? Do the Kurds need a trump motel for protection? How do you explain that to the first family that loses their son or daughter for guarding oil? Inquiring minds want to know!
 
Last edited:
@Grand Vol @NorthDallas40 please help your brethren here. They need some spin. Do the Kurds not pay as much as the Saudi royalty for our mercenaries even though they didn’t blow up our skyscrapers? I thought the whole reason we took our 50 troops out of the Middle East last week was because it was time to leave the Middle East! What changed since then where we send 2000 troops to the prince? Is renting our troops out cool? Do the Kurds need a trump motel for protection? How do you explain that to the first family that loses their son or daughter for guarding oil? Inquiring minds want to know!
Who have you got us confused with on this issue kid? Perhaps you should do some sober reading before you drunk post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol

VN Store



Back
Top