And vice versa. It takes two to tango, no?Originally Posted by CrowBat
And? If the narcotics-related conflict in Mexico destroyed the Mexican state and the violence sent millions fleeing into the United States, would Turkey lend a helping hand?Originally Posted by CrowBat
The United States is also being called upon to resolve the Russo-Ukrainian War, the ongoing wars in the D.R. Congo and Burundi, the transnational wars involving Boko Haram, the civil war in Myanmar, the unresolved Korean conflict, etc.
They poured into Lebanon and Jordan as well. Turkey has been the single largest provider of aid (at 47% of total), but Turkey’s allies have pitched in, with the United States being the second-largest donor at 27%.Originally Posted by CrowBat
You inflated the number of Russian citizens fighting for rebel groups in Syria by an order of magnitude, and did they all cross through Iran and Iraq, or take the direct route through Turkey? Yes, Assad sparked the war and yes, neither Daesh nor Nusra would have been possible without the lawless vacuum that the war created. However, Ankara allowed its southern border to be a sieve for foreign volunteers to join the FSA, Daesh and Nusra, because these were clashing with the YPG.Originally Posted by CrowBat
No, the West simply had no appetite for regime change and a major ground war. Prior to the 2013 arrangement with Russia, Assad’s deterrent complicated the situation as it was suggested that some 75,000 ground troops would be required to secure his chemical weapons.Originally Posted by CrowBat
As for Iran’s intervention, Washington couldn’t make war on Iran in Syria on the one hand, and arrive at a deal on Iran’s nuclear weapons program on the other. Obama clearly traded involvement in Ukraine and Syria for the JCPOA.
No, the cooperation began with the PYD. Despite the PKK-PYD ties, the YPG is not fighting in Turkey, and I have seen no evidence of a major flow of Turkish Kurdish volunteers to the YPG or conversely, flows of Syrian Kurdish volunteers to the PKK.Originally Posted by CrowBat
When were the Turks told to tolerate the PKK? I saw Turkish armor roll into southeastern cities weapons free and kill at least as many Kurdish civilians as PKK fighters, with little to no pressure from the West. If the Sultan and his Muslim Brotherhood are so high on the list of Daesh’s and Nusra’s target lists, then why did the Sultan place them below the YPG on his own list? Ankara was accused of collaboration with Daesh by Russia, a claim that was cried shrilly after the Su-24 was barbequed.Originally Posted by CrowBat
Of course, the West could have responded by highlighting Assad’s reliance upon commodities from Daesh-controlled parts of Syria, as the “Syrian Express” cannot keep the lights on in Damascus on its own, but then the Western publics would bay for intervention and how could the West then avoid regime change and conflict with Iran?
Supporting the YPG is dangerous for Moscow and Teheran as well, as Moscow wants to prize Turkey from NATO and has its own ethnic problems, and Iran has a chunk of “Kurdistan” as well. Few seem to be thinking this thing through.
Yeah right. I cannot claim to know many Turks, but I have yet to meet one that believes that there was a genocide.Originally Posted by CrowBat
Should I care? As far as I am concerned, both Russia and Turkey should be walled off.Originally Posted by CrowBat
Well, when you can prove a Jewish genocide of Arabs, perhaps I’ll entertain this more. I went through my pro-Palestinian phase years ago.Originally Posted by CrowBat
I used aboriginal in lieu of “Indian” or “American Indian”, which are inaccurate terms. Would you prefer “native” or “indigenous”? “Aborigine” is something else entirely. Again, no genocide happened. Everyone wants to have their own Holocaust it seems whilst denying the real one that took place.Originally Posted by CrowBat
Alright. So if the United States has one bullet for humanitarian intervention, where does it use it? D.R. Congo and Burundi or Iraq and Syria?Originally Posted by CrowBat
In my experience, the Turks are more indoctrinated by their government than the Russians, and this includes the Turks that are secular nationalists as well. If there is one thing that Turks agree on, it is that there were no genocides and that there is an anti-Turkish conspiracy.Originally Posted by CrowBat
Because the West wants to specifically defeat Daesh and otherwise stay out of the war. I see leaving Assad in place and defeating Sunni Arab supremacism as mutually exclusive objectives. But I’m not on the NSC.Originally Posted by CrowBat
The problem is far too complex to make that assumption. Again, a nuclear-armed Iran was considered a worse threat than Daesh and still is.Originally Posted by CrowBat
I said “rump state”. An Alawi can never rule over the Sunni Arab majority in Syria again. However, neither will the Alawis accept possible tyranny of the majority. Another Alawi leader could enact a realarmistice so that the FSA can concentrate on Daesh and consolidate its control over Sunni Arab Syria. Of course, Russia may be content with that but Iran won’t be.Originally Posted by CrowBat
A weak and federalized state along the lines of Lebanon seems to be the answer for both Iraq and Syria, but are the Alawis and Shias disabused of the notion that they can win it all?
To paraphrase Gen. Sherman, the Iranians need to be made absolutely sick of war.
Bookmarks