Quote (ofthevoid @ 11 Oct 2019 00:41)

Sure, but something tells me this conversation was had and Turkeys red line in the sand was drawn long ago. They simply are not going to let Kurds grow strong right across their border when they've been embroiled in separatist conflicts with the Kurds for decades domestically.

We knew this conflict was coming half a year ago. The Turks told us to fuck off when we tried pressing them to not buy the S-400s, so realistically speaking you don't think they would have told us to fuck off once again?

There's really only two solutions: either we stick with the Kurds and have to defend them (meaning we fight Turkey) or we abandon the Kurds and let them fend for themselves. These are the only two, and i understand the desire to skirt around a direct answer but lets be honest.

Quote (thesnipa @ 10 Oct 2019 22:35)

firstly, i did stop there. then i re-read my own post you were referencing, realized the language wasn't perfectly clear, and expanded what i meant. then after that (you can see ofc there's an edit and you have both halves of the post) i read the last sentence and saw it started with like the worst sentence for content i've read all day. you sounds like a pretentious teenager trying to use SAT words. it comes off as desperate and ignorant, when im sure you hope it sounds intelligent. as ive done for many non-native speakers i try to at least point out when people sound "off". ive done this a lot for you, your inability to listen shows pride, butthurt, or both. take my advice, you'll sound like a smarter person instead of a kid who just learned 10 new words.

secondly, i explained myself i think in that post. Israel is a fairly pure cause and effect and due to externalized (from the middle eastern perspective) issues. aka, war in europe, europeans plant europeans in the Middle east. whereas Iraq is a complicated mess of motivations, many of which are internalized in the middle east. Gulf war 1 played a factor, treatment of the Kurds played a factor, denial of UN inspection teams in certain areas played a factor, the attack on 9-11 played a factor, allegiance with Israel played a factor, etc.

in short, israel is a fairly pure cause and effect chain that leads to a LOT of problems in the middle east. whereas Iraq-afghanistan-syria comparatively have caused more damage across the globe than Israel in the last 2 decades, but are a complicated mess of motivations (aka not ALL the USA's fault). this is operating under the premise of USA vs Europe to answer "who's to blame". which is in itself fairly reductionist. the middle east it a 100 faceted diamond, some large faced some only slivers. the USA surely has it's share of the blame. as i've said many times now i'm staunchly anti-interventionist. were i president on 9-11 i'd have canceled all OPEC orders until they coughed up the cowards and if not made Venezuala the new super power in the field. let the fuckers tear themselves apart.

Quote (Black XistenZ @ Oct 10 2019 07:24pm)

The US could still equip the Kurds with modern weapons, for example anti-tank-missiles.


The larger issue here is that Turkey does no longer belong into the NATO because of their leadership and proven unreliability, and because the geostrategic reason why they were admitted to the NATO in the first place (proximity to the Soviet Union and the oil fields of the Middle East) are much less of a factor nowadays. But at the same time, Turkey still does occupy a spot of tremendous geostrategic value, is still one of the big players in Syria, Iraq and with regards to Iran and Israel. They still are a populous and attractive market, and the European allies could be thrown into turmoil by a Turkey which is spiraling out of control.

Turkey more than deserves to be kicked out of NATO, but there are good, tangible reasons why the US has hesitated to take this step.

Quote (ofthevoid @ 11 Oct 2019 01:41)

They do deserve it but the tangible reasons overrule it. Kicking them out/isolating them/sanctioning them, etc. will only result in more aggressive and erratic behavior. We've see this to be a really shitty foreign policy tactic imo. Doing those things also means we lose whatever little influence we had over them. If you deride and criticize a person the probability that he/she will listen to you or be welcoming to your idea or suggestion drops significantly, it works the same way on a nation-state level.

Quote

This is a strategic move that takes into account weight & strength of an ally. It's cold and cruel but it has to be done because the alternative which is losing Turkey or even making them our enemy is much worse. It's a zero sum game and what we see is the nash equilibrium. Unfortunate for the Kurds.

Quote (Black XistenZ @ 11 Oct 2019 03:07)

Why did I immediately have to think of the Democrats?

Quote (fender @ 11 Oct 2019 03:20)

because you're conditioned that way. forget all the attacks on the left, "demonrats", "snowflakes", "cucks", "npcs"... no - it's them who made the whole thing toxic, because being called 'deplorable' is what wants you make to vote for trump, even though you don't share any of his bigoted worldviews. isn't that what you guys tell each other and yourselves?

Quote (Black XistenZ @ 11 Oct 2019 03:24)

lol. maybe you have forgotten, or suppressed the memory, or still refuse to acknowledge it, but it was the Democrats who lost in 2016. they are the ones who need to win over some of the other side's voters. they are the ones with the big plans and ideas for sweeping changes to our economy and society for which they need to find majorities if they ever want a chance at actually enacting them. yet they constantly put their contempt and disregard for the trump voters and their interests on public display and engage in perpetual self-radicalization.

Quote (fender @ 10 Oct 2019 00:08)

don't get me wrong, all those shitty republicans like lindsey graham and ted cruz, who suddenly appear to have grown something that remotely resembles balls, who managed to finally speak out against something trump does, do so for the wrong reasons. they don't give a shit about the kurds or even americas reliability as an ally, their only thoughts are with their donors and owners in the military industrial complex - but in the short term (it would have been great if a kurdish state, or at least an internationally recognised and protected, self-governing region would have been established BEFORE america withdrew) they happen to be 'right', but no one who knows the first thing about the conflict, or them for that matter, is fooled by their statements...
and just to be crystal clear (and to inb4 the inevitable and simplistic 'if you disagree with this decision you are pro war' narrative): as a long term goal i absolutely agree with america withdrawing from ALL middle eastern conflicts, but only doing it where there's vested interest by turkey, russia, and ISIS, and where no mining and digging rights are to be won for american companies, is as transparent as it gets...

Quote

Quote (fender @ Oct 10 2019 06:50pm)

not only didn't i comment on islam at all, my whole point was that his 'uncultured (not 'poor and underdeveloped', there is a distinction) masses' comment lacks any insight (not just regarding the history and politics of the region, but also the definition of cultures) and nuance, and oozes with american arrogance and an entirely undeserved superiority complex.



doubling down on your offensive anti-intellectualism doesn't make your boring, breitbart quality takes any edgier - or true for that matter.
also, someone who gets their panties in a twist over me calling an individual's stupid statements 'retarded', now acting like it's totally unreasonable to point out that calling hundreds of millions 'uncultured' is simplistic and dumb, is pretty fucking rich... here's a clue: it's not your language that is the problem, it's the idiotic and simplistic world view that's behind it. yes, you are offensively ignorant and hilariously even proud of it.

but hey, what else should i have expected from someone who introduced themselves by claiming "kurds worship crosses"...

Quote (Leevee @ 11 Oct 2019 08:22)

See, here's the thing:

Person A: says something and uses poor phrasing.
Person B: understands what Person A is trying to say, but chooses to respond to the literal phrasing instead.

Person B is you.

You are right that, according to the definitions of "cultured" and "uncultured", the Middle-East was not (and is not) uncultured. On the other hand, you know perfectly well that this is the Internet, where people often make their points via hyperbole and mockery.
If that's something you are sensitive to, I don't think you'll fare well in any politically themes Internet forum.
If this is just a matter of you arguing semantics, then I think you should join a linguistics forum instead.