KURDS LEFT HIGH AND DRY TO DIE?

[Marcin + 519]

22 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Are you saying that the Kurds should not be seeking an independent homeland?

They should but also need to take under consideration the small fact that it is against vital interests of Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Syria.

They are under US umbrella because are strategically useful, but they will still live on the territory of these 4 countries. US actually strategically united these 4 countries, not good situation long-term.

The best they could  get was Kurdish language taught at schools and being first not second class citizens in respective countries.

This opportunities were unfortunately lost.

Please tell me why downvoted my previous post about Kurdish conundrum, you did not like it because it was too real for your optimistic world view or had any actual arguments against it?

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Nope, you are absolutely correct! I failed to realize that your post was the epitome  of logic, knowledge and common sense. Furthermore, my incredibly optimistic world view was no match for your wit and wisdom. Please allow me to grovel at your feet and publicly apologize...

DEAR ALL. APPARENTLY I AM AN IDIOT AND HAVE NO BUSINESS DEBATING WITH THE SMARTEST MAN ON THE PLANET (aka MARCIN). DO SO AT YOUR OWN PERIL!

Happy now?

[Marcin + 519]

21 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

 

Happy now?

Not happy, did not mean to offend you

I frequently meet 2 Kurdish families at family gatherings like weddings and funerals. So I am sometimes a little bit rude when I join discussions regarding Kurdish topics because it is simply not nice to see how this poor nation is used as a tool by various powers.

[Zhong Lu + 845]

On 10/9/2019 at 3:24 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

I think people are confusing the ethnic Kurds spread around the region with those Kurds within the Kurdish Autonomous Region.

The Kurds FINALLY got an autonomous area to call a homeland after Saddam was gone. This was a HUGE step for the Kurds and they are not going to let it go.

There are not enough Kurds to defend and protect their region (which is why the US was allowed in to assist and supply heavy weapons to defeat ISIS). There are definitely not enough Kurds to get involved in conflicts OUTSIDE their region.

The best thing which could happen is if displaced Kurds move into the internationally recognized autonomous region, settle there and participate in the building up and defense of the region. If not, they will be taken on piecemeal.

Internationally recognized autonomous regions tend to be prison camps or genocidal death traps.  See Bosnia.  Or perhaps Uighur.  Or perhaps the Indian reservations in the US.  

The term "autonomous region" mostly means "no one cares if someone bigger and stronger goes into your region and fucks you up."  The evidence of the fate of multiple "autonomous regions" around the world supports this claim.  

Edited October 11, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[Marcin + 519]

With Iraqi Kurdistan it is different but because of that even more difficult for Iraqi Kurds longterm.

After 2003 invasion and occupation Iraq was made to change constitution under US barrel and give Kurds Broad autonomy.

[Marcin + 519]

When Iraq wilk be independent again ( not sooner than 15 years) i Think Iraqi people will change constitution to become unitary state not because they hate Kurds but because they do not want to loose 20% of territory.

Countries like their territories and do not want to loose it because of minorities.

[Zhong Lu + 845]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-abandons-kurds-israel-worries-172051885.html

Concerns have only deepened following a series of moves in which Trump backed away from possible military confrontations. In June, he called off a planned attack against Iran in response to the shooting down of an American drone. Trump also decided against military action in response to an alleged Iranian attack on Saudi oil facilities last month, saying he did not want war.

Then, this week, he abruptly withdrew U.S. troops from Kurdish areas in northeastern Syria, clearing the way for a Turkish invasion aimed at crushing the Kurds, America's allies in the fight against the Islamic State group. Trump has defended the move by saying the United States should not be "fighting and policing" in the Middle East. But it reportedly caught Israeli officials off guard.

The fear is that Trump's actions, or lack thereof, could encourage Iran to step up what Israel sees as aggressive and hostile activity in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

"The main image is a very weak U.S. that does not help its allies. It deserts its allies," said Eytan Gilboa, an expert on U.S.-Israel relations at Israel's Bar-Ilan University.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[Marcin + 519]

US will not carve out sovereign Navajo country , China Uighur country , Turkey Iraq Iran Syria sovereign Kurdistan, Japan Ains country in Hokkaido, Spain Bask country the list goes on.

India is special case would need to partition into at least 20 medium sized countries.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

6 hours ago, Zhong Lu said:

Internationally recognized autonomous regions tend to be prison camps or genocidal death traps.  See Bosnia.  Or perhaps Uighur.  Or perhaps the Indian reservations in the US.  

The term "autonomous region" mostly means "no one cares if someone bigger and stronger goes into your region and fucks you up."  The evidence of the fate of multiple "autonomous regions" around the world supports this claim.  

Lu,

I spent two years in Kurdistan and I can guarantee you that it does not remotely resemble a prison camp or genocidal death camp!

[Zhong Lu + 845]

Douglas,

I believe you, but it doesn't change the fact that "autonomous regions" just means "we don't care if you get fucked by your larger neighbors."  

 

Edited October 12, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Lu,

I respectfully disagree in regards to Kurdistan. Funny enough, they are proud to be Iraqi AND Kurdish. Under Saddam they were treated poorly (getting gassed rates as ‘poorly’ I think). They essentially wanted a region WITHIN IRAQ, where they could be safe and self-administered.

You really need to experience it for yourself, it is hard to explain or quantify.

If you try to compare Southern Iraq to Kurdistan, you are comparing apples to oranges. Basra is STILL a war torn, dangerous s**thole. Erbil has a new, modern airport, new roads, nice hotels and a Jewish community.

I would love another gig in Kurdistan!

[Marcin + 519]

1. Iraq is a country occupied by US military since 2003.

2. Iraq was made to change its constitution just after the occupation and grant Kurds its current autonomy.

3. Kurds in Kurdistan enjoy their liberties/autonomy because they are defended by US military forces in the region. Iraq cannot enjoy full sovereignty over its territory.

So this is not a typical autonomy region situation.

The most similar case is Crimea occuppied by Russia. Citizens there have their "Russian liberties" and have autonomy just because Ukraine has no control over this part of its territory.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

The US has never ‘occupied’ Iraq. Name one American settlement or base in Iraq. The Green Zone is/was a coalition area.

Name one American military installation in Kurdistan. There isn’t one.

The Kurds were the ONLY Force to halt the ISIS advance. This was BEFORE US support and air power arrived.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

‘2. Iraq was made to change its constitution just afterthe occupation and grant Kurds its current autonomy.’

Well, after the Iraqi’s gassed the Kurds back in Saddams era, the fact that Iraq is still, to this day, a dangerous, unimproved s*thole, it’s a damn good thing the Kurds got autonomy and don’t have to get involved with that mess in the south!

[Marcin + 519]

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The US has never ‘occupied’ Iraq. Name one American settlement or base in Iraq. The Green Zone is/was a coalition area.

Name one American military installation in Kurdistan. There isn’t one.

The Kurds were the ONLY Force to halt the ISIS advance. This was BEFORE US support and air power arrived.

Definition of occupation per Merriam-Webster

3a : the act or process of taking possession of a place or area : seizure Spain's occupation of the island

b : the holding and control of an area by a foreign military force: the Roman occupation of Britain

c : the military force occupying a country or the policies carried out by it The occupation addressed the concerns of the local population.

Definition 3b.

Enough American military forces in the region to cripple Iraqi government in 2 days: 1 day needed to invent and promote in global mass media the cause of ovethrowing the government, 1 day needed for actual coup d'etat.

 

The only force to halt ISIS advance was United States: it just banned Saudi Arabia and UAE sales of US weaponry to ISIS. Have never come to your mind why ISIS uses exclusively US military gear, no other country sales weapons to ISIS ?

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Are you saying that the US sold weapons to ISIS? If so, do you have any supporting documentation? Or, is it possible they captured weapons supplied to the Iraqi military when the Iraqi’s ran from the fight. I seem to have seen alot of AK variants in the hands of ISIS ‘soldiers...the US military does not generally utilize AK variants.

Thank you for your definition, but I am capable of using a dictionary by myself. You should read it as it does not apply to US actions in Iraq.

 

[Zhong Lu + 845]

On 10/11/2019 at 11:15 PM, Douglas Buckland said:

Lu,

I respectfully disagree in regards to Kurdistan. Funny enough, they are proud to be Iraqi AND Kurdish. Under Saddam they were treated poorly (getting gassed rates as ‘poorly’ I think). They essentially wanted a region WITHIN IRAQ, where they could be safe and self-administered.

You really need to experience it for yourself, it is hard to explain or quantify.

If you try to compare Southern Iraq to Kurdistan, you are comparing apples to oranges. Basra is STILL a war torn, dangerous s**thole. Erbil has a new, modern airport, new roads, nice hotels and a Jewish community.

I would love another gig in Kurdistan!

With a weak central government in Baghdad, the Iraq part of Kurdistan is doing fine- until the next Saddam takes power (but that's for the future).  The problem right now is the Syrian end.  

I see no reason why we can't support the Kurds like the way we supported Israel.  A few hundred special forces soldiers doesn't cost much in the grand scheme of things.  And the goodwill and protection it buys for one of the "friendlies" is more than worth it.

Also, ISIS is going to come back now that their main enemy is preoccupied with Turkey.  

Edited October 13, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[Hotone + 412]

On 10/8/2019 at 9:21 PM, James Regan said:

https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/bitterness-fear-syria-us-withdraws-troops

It would be interesting to know the forums view on the USA leaving the Kurds to the will and the strength of the Russian Backed Turkish military who are supposedly moving into Kurdistan to fight "terrorists"- One mans Terrorist another mans friend"

Is POTUS showing himself as a person who can not be trusted and worse still is this showing that the USA cannot be trusted once the mandate has supposedly been filled, they back out. Kurdistan was protected for one thing and one thing only the rich oilfields, however now for some reason the oilfields are not so important.

IMO- if the US leaves the Kurds high and dry after managing to split the ISIS power cell it will only come back to bight them, if the ISIS power cell was the target or reason to assist the Kurds. It seems the Kurds will be decimated again and the once great nation people of Kurdistan left to be pillaged again. ( Remember the horrors of the gassed Kurds that shocked America enough to be part of the reason to start a war with Sadam)

Sounds like a good plan to release all the ISIS fighters and families out of the prison camps and also "possibly" take over  the weakened Kurds, perfect location for a vacuum to be filled by any group with an axe to grind. I dont see the Kurds giving in but they are nothing without support. Who's hands will the Kurdish oilfields fall into???

In the Guardian's opinion, Trump has betrayed America to foreign powers.

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/13/donald-trump-ukraine-turkey-impeachment

Edited October 13, 2019 by Hotone
Font

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

They are NOT moving into Kurdistan! They are moving into SYRIA!

[James Regan + 1,776]

Looks like  Erdogan has already decided to bite off a little more than he had first detailed, the offensive has been extended a further 40KMs ahead of the so called safe area or buffer zone.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-troops-withdraw-from-another-syrian-town-as-turkish-forces-block-supply-lines/2019/10/13/aab5fab8-ec5a-11e9-a329-7378fbfa1b63_story.html

Technically Kurdistan doesn't exist, they would need to invade, Iran and Iraq also.

Over 800 Prisoners escaped from an ISIS detention camp into Turkey, this has the hallmarks of a typically well planned Turkish assault, however in the long game if your going to need an ally in the region probably better picking the Turks, if Kurdistan actually existed with defined borders then you can put your house on it that it would be very well supported by the USA. Turkey is a pretty good geographical wall not only for the USA but for Europe. Perfectly placed to keep Iran on their toes and and Chinese at bay. However the fact the US has pulled troops out of the region of the Kurds has nothing to do with getting out of the region, it's just smart planning.

[James Regan + 1,776]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/14/syrian-troops-enter-kurdish-fight-against-turkish-forces

Syrian troops enter Kurdish fight against Turkish forces

Syrian troops have begun sweeping into Kurdish-held territory on a collision course with Turkish forces and their allies, a day after the beleaguered Kurds agreed to hand over key cities to Damascus in exchange for protection.

The deal, which Kurdish leaders emphasised they had made reluctantly after four days of bombardment by Turkish artillery and jets, threatens to open a new front in Syria’s nearly nine-year civil war, and signals the likely end of US and European military deployments in the country’s north-east.

Maybe one thing this may do is bring a coalition to to factions and we may see a conventional one on one backed by its proxies.

Are we going to see the Syrians seriously take on Turkey? 

Turkey has shown its alliance to both the USA/NATO and Russia, however Assad has the backing of the Russians, this is playing right into Putins hands again, he does very little (it seems) but for some strange reason he always seems to come out on top, its almost as if it was "Planned"???

Edited October 14, 2019 by James Regan

[James Regan + 1,776]

On 10/14/2019 at 11:13 AM, James Regan said:

Turkey has shown its alliance to both the USA/NATO and Russia, however Assad has the backing of the Russians, this is playing right into Putins hands again, he does very little (it seems) but for some strange reason he always seems to come out on top, its almost as if it was "Planned"???

Looks like this panned out as planned for the Turks and most certainly Mr Putin will be smiling. The ceasefire or pause is already in tatters as no guidelines have been defined lots of vague info being touted. I doubt very much the Kurds will leave their positions while having to leave any artillery behind. Great way to disarm your enemy for 120 hours of "peace" and then what?

Putin will conveniently sort this out in Sochi and once again look like the main player in the region with doing very little this time around. The Russians were smart after having their asses kicked in Afghanistan looks like good foreign policy at play by sitting back and now cherry picking for the best end game.