October 10, 2019

"Turkey has been planning to attack the Kurds for a long time. They have been fighting forever. We have no soldiers or Military anywhere near the attack area."

"I am trying to end the ENDLESS WARS. Talking to both sides. Some want us to send tens of thousands of soldiers to the area and start a new war all over again. Turkey is a member of NATO. Others say STAY OUT, let the Kurds fight their own battles (even with our financial help). I say hit Turkey very hard financially & with sanctions if they don’t play by the rules! I am watching closely."

Trump tweets.

Did he mean we had no soldiers or military anywhere near the attack area even before his recent decision to withdraw the military? Am I understanding this correctly: Turkey was already planning to move into this area, and the military we had there could not have stopped the planned action, and only a big new infusion of military could have confronted Turkey, so it was better, in Trump's view, to remove all the military and issue an ultimatum based entirely on economic sanctions and no pretense of military defense of the Kurds. Those who want a military defense of the Kurds had to mean the U.S. would send "tens of thousands of soldiers to the area and start a new war all over again." He's saying his method — threat of economic ruination — is the most effective way to protect the Kurds.

But the other view is that Trump is standing back and giving the go-ahead for genocide. I'm seeing #TrumpGenocide.

What is Trump doing? Pick the answer closest to your thinking:
 
pollcode.com free polls

148 comments:

sunsong said...

come on, donald cares ONLY about donald. whatever he perceives to be to his personal advantage is what he will choose

cubanbob said...

Erdogan isn't all that popular in Turkey among the better educated and the middle class. His Islamist policies are grating to these people. The Turkish economy isn't doing so well. This action will drain the Turkish economy even further and cause further friction with the EU and NATO. He becomes even more unpopular in Turkey. Eventually the Turks pull back and the Kurds if they don't overplay their hand get semi-autonomous regions in Syria and Iraq which is the best they can get.

J. Farmer said...

I followed Ann's "Syria" tag and found the posts from late last year where Trump announced he was withdrawing troops from Syria, and Mattis quit in protest, and then Trump walked back the withdrawal partially on the basis that we needed to protect the Kurds. I wrote this on 12/22/18: "The creation of a de facto Kurdish state in northeastern Syria simply cannot be tolerated from Turkey's point of view, since any such territory could be used as a launching ground for terrorist attacks against Turkey, which has suffered attacks from Kurdish terror groups for 40 years. Turkey has already made frequent ground and air incursions into Iraqi Kurdistan."

Trump has been talking about his desire to stop "endless wars," but he hasn't actually ended any of them. Since his inauguration, he has escalated US involvement in all of the wars he inherited, and he has sent more troops abroad than he has brought home.

rehajm said...

Trump's words sound exactly like what Cookie is always demanding of the US. Not to call out Cookie specifically but will any of the Cookie's out there praise Trump for his action? I doubt it...

johns said...

The BBC in-depth story linked on Whatfinger (best new aggregator) agrees that the Turks told Trump they were going to move in to set up their buffer zone. The U.S. had only a few hundred troops in the area, and Trump decided not to start a war, but to pressure Turkey in other ways.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49973218

Yancey Ward said...

He is recognizing the limits of American military might. What are we to do- put American troops between all hostile forces in the world? I don't think any of these "answers" are quite correct. The peoples of the world have to start solving their own fucking problems with each other- the United States is being bled dry policing the world- it isn't our job nor is it our responsibility. If the Kurds can't protect themselves by this point, then they never can and we will be there forever. The same applies in Afghanistan- time to leave. Sunk-Cost-Fallacy military operations are sure to fail eventually anyway.

Michael K said...

Much hysteria and little facts.

Try to learn something.

In other words Syria risks becoming Erdogan's Vietnam. The Independent writes:

Turkey is already fighting a guerilla war against the separatist Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in its own southeast provinces. Expanding the ground war into Syria against the PKK’s allies risks sparking a separate insurgency. The Syrian Democratic Forces, the collection of Kurdish-led armed groups partnered with the US in its fight against Isis, said it was “determined to defend our land at all costs” against Turkey.
“What makes Turkey think they’re not going to get caught in northern Syria fighting a protracted campaign?” said Steven Cook, a Turkey and Middle East specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations. ... “They’re really exposed going deeper into Syrian territory,” said Mr Cook. “And they’re not going to get any help. If Erdogan gets into trouble, the cavalry is not coming to the rescue.”

Far from being primarily a Kurdish problem Turkey's offensive underscores the unresolved threat of Syria to the region's security. Europe may be hesitant to take a forceful position because it is terrified of a new flood of migrants into the continent. "Greece’s prime minister accused Turkey on Friday of appearing to “exploit” Europe’s migrant crisis for its own ends and said Ankara could and should control migrant flows to the continent."

Ray - SoCal said...

What a mess.

So the withdrawal of 50 us troops causes genocide?

The us is not the worlds policeman.

Trump is forcing Russia, Syria, Europe, and Iran to clean this up.

So which Alinsky meme is greater?

Genocide or endless wars?

With the us public after 18 years of fighting - endless wars.

Especially if there is no giant massacres by the Turks.

Why is the US responsible for what happens in a foreign country, Syria - we are not even officially invited too?

Trump should ask congress to declare war, under the war powers act. Congress should either Put up, or shut up.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Considering the formerly anti-war left are going ape-shit - and the media are known liars.. certainly we cannot derive the truth from the media(D).

Big Mike said...

I’m all for giving Trump a chance to show whether economic sanctions can work. The sort of people pushing for military action would feel differently if their kids were still subject to the draft.

MikeDC said...

If I understand correctly, we did have troops in the area. Trump withdrew them.

The number of troops was not enough to militarily stop the Turks in battle, but as a practical matter, if Turkey launched this offensive and a bunch of American soldiers in the process, that would be an act of war against the United States that would require a response.

So the real decision point is whether Turkey would actually launch their offensive while US soldier were in the targeted areas. If they would, Trump pulling out the soldiers averted the deaths of those soldiers.

If the Turks ultimately would have backed down and not have taken the chance of killing US service members, then Trump pulling them out gave Turkey the green light that they otherwise wouldn't have had.

I tend to think that Turkey wouldn't have been dumb enough to do this, but in the grand scheme of things, I don't know that we (the US) is well served by setting our soldiers up to be sacrificial lambs either.

narciso said...

https://pjmedia.com/spengler/we-dont-have-good-options-with-turkey-and-iran-well-have-to-work-hard-to-get-them/

LYNNDH said...

It is my understanding that we have/had advisor with the Kurds. Not very many. And yes it would take a full scale intro of troops to be effective. No easy answers, just easy comments to be made.

stevew said...

In my brief experience following Trump it is best to take what he says at face value and assess it in the context of the Art of the Deal.

mccullough said...

I do like Trump’s tweet that it’s not like the Kurds fought with us at Normandy.

Turkey is technically an ally as they are in NATO. We going to war with an ally over the Kurds?

Economic sanctions are sufficient. Those who are bothered by the Turks can take up arms against them like Lord Byron did.

Hagar said...

I suspect this was thought up by Putin. He has this kind of a mind. Very little cost to Russia and its allies, Iran and Turkey, and potentially quite profitable for all.
I noted that Russia and Iran stood ready with statements backing Turkey that sounded like written by the same composer.
The Kurds are SOL caught between the millstones of Turkey and Iran, but Syria is the prize.

And after Syria?

Bill Harshaw said...

Does Trump really believe that Turkey would have attacked our troops, even a handful, but will withdraw when faced with economic sanctions? Who knows what he believes. He's not a thinker, nor a reader, just reacts to what he hears.

flophouse philosopher said...

1. Turkey is a member of NATO. We have treaty obligations to them. Going to war with them over the Kurds would violate those obligations.

2. Any threat to go to war with Turkey over the Kurds would be a bluff anyway, because they have a powerful army that would easily overrun any forces that we have in the area.

3. There's not going to be a genocidal massacre. The Turks and Kurds have been fighting for decades. The Turks have always had the upper hand and haven't genocidally massacred the Kurds yet. There's no reason to think they will start now.

daskol said...

Erdogan is full of bluster. He might be the only world leader with a more active social media presence than Trump. Turkey is also still an ally, a close one in that they're NATO. This alliance is courtesy of Turkey's previous regimes. Erdogan has pissed all over it for years, straining relations with western nations and Israel. But mostly, it's been in words and symbolic acts and via proxy, and the threat of allowing even more refugees into Europe. The notion that we should use our military, bound to protect Turkey in a mutual defense alliance, to attack Turkey strikes me as insane. This is brinksmanship, or calling Erdogan's bluff. You want to act like a destabilizing, genocidal Ottoman supremacist? Go ahead: you get the Iran treatment. With the threat of US military retaliation out of the way, Erdogan no longer has that excuse for his inability to deal effectively with the Kurdish threat. With the threat of economic sanctions, he has that as a constraint to the brutality he can allow his forces to resort to. I think Trump has just passed a hot potato to Erdogan and our European allies.

Earnest Prole said...

Obama proved himself Nobel-worthy by sacrificing the Kurds to get us out of Iraq. Why shouldn't the same logic work for Trump in Syria?

Carol said...

He's heartless all right, but that's what it takes to end our forever wars. You can't keep the public's support forever.

And the sanctions will just hurt the Turkish people, Erdogan will make sure of that.

We have no real options other than the punitive sanctions and clumsy interventions that we've been doing. I yell at the TV whenever the media starts its "somebody DOOOO something" propaganda.

Mike said...

Trump is saying America is not the world's policeman.

MBunge said...

Why is it our business to protect the Kurds from Turkey and not Germany, Britain, or any other NATO country? This is more there backyard than ours.

Mike

Automatic_Wing said...

Remember when all these same people said Obama couldn't pull out of Iraq BECAUSE THE KURDS? Oh yeah, me neither.

Darcy said...

I think it is impossible to know what is happening, due, in large part, to our thoroughly corrupt media. I have no idea who is telling the truth, but history shows that Trump is much more often correct with regard to what is really going on, and I don't see him as heartlessly throwing the Kurds under the bus. I wish we had a reliable media source. We don't.

As an aside, I wonder how any reasonable person would want the American voter to give in to the corrupt media's intent to bring this President down. Imagine the consequences of that. I have faith that the majority sees those consequences.

Sebastian said...

Option #4: at this point, who cares?

Wince said...

Expect a maudlin, scolding Christiane Amanpour decrying Trump from some isolated refugee camp in 3...2...1

mandrewa said...

Well some of the trade-offs seem obvious, even given that I have not been paying that much attention.

Our military engagement with Syria started under Obama, and there are probably a lot of things that could be said about that. But Obama was primarily about aerial bombardment. And there were very few US soldiers or special operatives on the ground in Syria under Obama.

Under Trump I believe that our engagement on the ground in Syria was dramatically increased, in terms of the number of people involved, and the rules of engagement where much less restrictive than under Obama, but it was still nothing like Iraq. And Trump won that war, as that in less than a year ISIS was almost eliminated. But of course there were a lot more people involved than just us.

(a) The Russians forces were and are in Syria big time. It's a significant part of the current effective Russian military power that has been deployed to Syria.

(b) The Kurds. We worked through the Kurds. The Kurds were effectively our ground troops. One way to look at it is that our elite forces in Syria were primarily there to help the Kurds fight.

(c) The Syrian government and their military are major part of all of this. And although we were opposed to them not that long ago, since relatively speaking they are better than ISIS, that's kind of changed.

(d) Iran has a much larger presence in Syria, through the political and military groups that they sponsor, than most people realize.

(e) And then there is Turkey which in some ways has stayed out, but they have played a role, and in particular they have been fighting the Kurds practically the whole time. It's not like it just started a week ago. The difference is the size of the effort.

Over 40% of the population of Turkey is Kurdish. And that Kurdish minority has been in conflict with the cultural Turks for decades now, and there have been lots of people killed, although it has not yet escalated to the level of being a civil war.

Now clearly we don't want a war with Turkey. That's obvious.

Now clearly we don't want to abandon our allies, the Kurds. That's also obvious.

Now I want to qualify that. Most people in the United States don't even know about the Kurds. But the military does and they don't want to abandon the Kurds.

Now the question is how do you reconcile these two goals? It seems obvious that Trump thought he could restrain Turkey by threatening Turkey with severe economic sanctions if they want overboard.

Remember that the Turks have been attacking the Kurds in Syria, including finding excuses for bombing them and firing artillery shells at them, all along, and even when Obama was in power.

But it's the scale of the current assault that is different.

And also we've been pulling our forces out of Syria. One thing that has restrained the Turks in the past is that we have had our forces in and among the Kurds. So if they attacked the Kurds they risked attacking us.

But Trump, and probably the most of the American population, wants us out of Syria. He doesn't us to be stuck in or to be responsible for what happens next.

Tomcc said...

It's hard to know whether economic sanctions alone are enough to dissuade a state from conducting a "genocide". I'd like to know why this is seen as a responsibility unique to the U.S.? If the threat of genocide is genuine, shouldn't we, along with other member nations, be working through the UN to prevent it? (Up to and including military action?)

Kevin said...

Am I understanding this correctly: Turkey was already planning to move into this area, and the military we had there could not have stopped the planned action, and only a big new infusion of military could have confronted Turkey, so it was better, in Trump's view, to remove all the military and issue an ultimatum based entirely on economic sanctions and no pretense of military defense of the Kurds.

It has been reported we had 50 US Troops in the area.

50.

NPR: 'Shocking': Trump Is Criticized For Pulling Troops From Syrian Border

Michael The Magnificent said...

I'd bet the same people who wanted US troops out of Vietnam (leaving them to the tender mercies of the Vietcong) (google vietnam boat people to understand how desparate they became) are against Trump withdrawing troops from Seria.

Andrew said...

If LBJ had cut his losses early and removed American soldiers from Vietnam, it would have been a short term disaster. He would have been accused of betraying our allies in the South. But in retrospect, it would have been the right thing to do. Thousands of lives would have been saved. Our country's history (without the ongoing war) would have been entirely different.

And in Vietnam, at least Congess actually declared a war (based on a false media narrative). Why are we in Syria? When was a war declared? Which side has clean hands? If you answer "the Kurds," you haven't been paying attention.

If you were to survey every American family who has lost a son or daughter in the Middle East, my guess is that the vast majority approve of Trump's decision.

And wow, is it amazing to watch the war machine spring into action to denounce Trump. After Iraq, after Libya, after Syria, nothing has been learned. The contempt I have for the vast majority of politicians (of both parties) grows ever greater. The same people who called McCain a hero at his funeral while mocking Trump. How much American blood needs to be shed to make these vultures happy? (Maybe that's one of the "norms" Trump is violating.)

You know who Trump is NOT betraying? The American people who voted for him.

Limited blogger said...

No one knows what the fuck is going on.

Jerry said...

The funny thing about NATO alliance?

As I understand it - We'll come to your help if you're attacked.

If you're the aggressor - well, you're pretty much on your own.

So Trump's saying "We'll just watch you and him fight, 'k? We don't want no part of this."

wildswan said...

I feel that I don't know what is going on. Some say that the particular group which Turkey is attacking is a group which the State department declared was a terrorist group. In other words, "the Kurds" includes various groups and we need to know which one we are speaking of. For instance, in the French Resistance there were many Communist groups which fought bravely. But as the end of the war approached they began assassinating the French nationalists with whom they had been co-operating. And the Greek Communists did the same to Greek nationalists. So I feel that I don't know whether the actual group the Turks are attacking is nationalist or Communist and I feel that this might make a difference.
Also I've noticed that as a particular war ends our "allies" like to start sneaking out - going home and telling us to stay and clean up and maintain order. Maybe we are just going home to America first.
And people who oppose Trump's wall and ICE and the Border Patrol are supporting the idea of the Kurds having a nation with borders. Huh.
And then Turkey says "the Kurds" are firing into their territory. Are they? I wish there was a newspaper or TV station that was busy with the news, not the clicks.
So it's hard to understand the issue. Based on the past I'd say Trump has made a smart, unconventional move and got us out. I'm quite sure that the only place worse than the DC swamp is the Mid-East. They are as corrupt as the DC families in the political class and, as well, like hating and killing and torturing and beheading and stoning.

Birkel said...

Which Kurds do we mean? The Iraqi Kurds? The Syrian Kurds?

Should NATO member Turkey fight us? We, them?

Birkel said...

Which Kurds do we mean? The Iraqi Kurds? The Syrian Kurds?

Should NATO member Turkey fight us? We, them?

Lawrence Person said...

You might take a look at the Kurdish Conundrum. There are other constraints on Turkish action, namely the fact that their existing incursion in Syria (since 2016) is tremendously unpopular, and they're already suffering a fair amount of equipment attrition there as it is.

Go beyond that 20 mile buffer zone, and both problems rise significantly, possibly exponentially.

TreeJoe said...

In my lifetime - including childhood - Trump is the most anti-war and anti-unclear-military-involvement President. Syria and Libya are two of the worst foreign policy military interventions of the Obama era with the least clear end and outcomes in sight. And the most unconstitutional of those eras.

I hate leaving an ally defenseless and I really dislike what I'm hearing about how abrupt this is. There is a basis to say the pull out in coordination with Turkeys readiness is really freaking bad.

But at the same time where the heck are the anti-war doves - they should be praising trump for these types of actions. Intellectual cowards if they don't

Owen said...

He is leaving the Turks to their fate. Something tells me this adventure will not go well for them at all.

Barry Dauphin said...

Erdogan watches American news. He knows what's going on with the Trump impeachment inquiry and saw an opportunity to push the envelope. Various foreign leaders will hope to turns this to their advantage.

narayanan said...

we should give both sides - Turks and Kurds - virtue points if they will "eat the babies of their enemies".

MeatPopscicle1234 said...

How about option 3... Trump recognizes that this is a trap meant to ensnare him in a no-win situation, in that no matter what he does, the anti-Trumpers will scream bloody hell, and he would rather save American soldiers lives than get us embroiled in yet another middle-eastern quagmire, this time against a supposed NATO "ally"...

Like another poster said, if CONGRESS wants to declare war against Turkey, then they need to step up, grow a pair, and take ownership of that decision... but they won't, because they are a bunch of chicken-shit, snake-in-the-grass, rat-eating bastards who only care about enriching themselves on the backs of taxpayers and selling out their country to the highest foreign bidder...

Murph said...

The only [diplomatically] easy day was yesterday.

As Andy McCarthy relates, here:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/turkey-and-the-kurds-its-more-complicated-than-you-think/

Iman said...

No doubt, it does appear to be a questionable move by POTUS, and most of what I’ve read states as much, although in more descriptive terms. Turkey's military may not have the strength required to move that far into Syria. And it's near certain that Russia and Iran would oppose such a move. The Kurds will have to stand alone at some point and the US isn’t the only nation with an interest in keeping ISIS constrained.

The cost effective way to do keep ISIS constrained, of course, would be to show these ISIS prisoners – every single one of them – the same mercy they showed the prisoners they began taking from the getgo. Which is no mercy.

Jeff Brokaw said...

I voted impossible but I would say “nearly impossible” is slightly more accurate.

The quality of information and reporting on conflicts with big geopolitical impact is very poor, always, and we should expect it to be exponentially worse with a media that actively and viscerally hates the CinC. There’s just no way to have any confidence at all, in any of it.

Jason said...

People who don't know the difference between PKK and Peshmerga weighing in all over Twitter and Facebook this week = lulz.

Earnest Prole said...

Q: Should an American President be held responsible for the mass murder of allies resulting from a precipitous policy decision?
A: It depends entirely on whether he has a D or an R following his name.

Jason said...

Even worse, people so stupid or ignorant they can't grasp that Turkey is a NATO ally and the PKK is not an ally at all = lulz.

Jason said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Mouse that Roared said...

As I understand it, there were fewer than 100 American soldiers in that area, and they were all support personel. Even if they had stayed, they would not have been able to protect the Kurds.

I don't understand why anyone is anxious to go to war with Turkey over this. There is no American interest at stake.

rhhardin said...

The kurds aren't a military pushover, beyond having their own independent grudge war that is not something to take sides on. A repartition would be the logical solution. Boundaries in the wrong place, like in Czechoslovakia. Solved that nicely.

stlcdr said...

None of the above.

Military force is an effective tool. Economic hardship is an effective tool. One hasn't worked. Try the other.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Trump has the balls to admit we have failed in the Middle East.

And for that we can blame all the so-called experts going back at least to Dick Cheney and up through failed novelist turned foreign policy expert Ben Rhodes.

Trump has the sense to acknowledge no one has convinced him it is worth it to put American lives on the line.

Trump should be applauded for this decision.

BarrySanders20 said...

The Kurds are an ethnic group but are hardly monolithic in thought or what they want. Some are extremists vis-a-vis Turkey. Some want their own homeland. Turkey isnt attacking them all.

M said...

The Kurds have been fighting their neighbors for CENTURIES. Nothing we do is going to stop that. I hate to leave them with less defense but they didn’t enter into the fighting with us out of the goodness of their hearts. We were a convenient ally in a war they had been fighting since before America was discovered by Europeans. Nothing less than genocide of a majority of Muslims in Syria and Turkey would keep the Kurds safe and most of Kurds are Muslim. So.....not our fight really.

Mr Wibble said...

He knows that military action to protect the Kurds would be difficult due to Turkey's position in NATO, as well as general exhaustion by the US population towards military intervention, and so is choosing another path: economic action.

Ken B said...

It is fantasy to think Erdogan would attack American troops, even a token force. A platoon would suffice to forestall An attack because Erdogan knows that the punishment for willfully attacking American troops is not a boycott. But it is not fantasy to think Erdogan would risk a boycott to attack his enemies. Thus Trump has destabilized the situation, and increased risks. This is not good stewardship.

TJM said...

People forget that Trump was vocally against the Iraq War - whereas Hildabeast and Biden were all for it. But for a corrupt, left-wing media, these two clowns would have been off the national stage years ago.

cf said...

The Italian artist who created the incredible "Il Patron" Trump float last year pointed out why he was so excited for the world that Donald Trump was in charge.
He said Trump was exchanging nuclear and other methods of war for Economic battle, and over and over you can see how right that is.

my favorite 2019 youtube, with translation. the comments are around the 19 minute mark.
https://youtu.be/EWjC_mrucY4

Godspeed, America and the World.

Unknown said...

Promises made, promises kept.

bagoh20 said...

If the Kurds get defended, I don't think it would be Trump strapping on the gear, getting in the dirt, and risking his life, so characterizing it like it just him alone in this thing is silly.

Oso Negro said...

I suggest we arm all the Federal employees in the Greater D.C. Metropolitan area, and station them in Kurdish areas. For a few years.

n.n said...

Partition Turkey and establish a Kurdovo.

minnesota farm guy said...

Here are two very good pieces that lay out the issues around Turkey. In essence the question comes down to which ally - Turkey or the YPG ( a terrorist organization) - is more important to us in the long run. Andrew McCarthy link .
Older but good analysis from American Conservative.

PresbyPoet said...

Remember when China attacked Vietnam? The Vietnamese handed them their hats. Vietnam had been fighting us for years. China did not know what hit them. Turkey thinks the Kurds will fold. I suspect Turkey will not find their "war" so easy. The Kurds will have our weapons. They are tough fighters. Turkey will find the war is not just in Syria, but in Turkey where the Kurds (mountain turks),will take the war to them.

If we still had troops in the area Turkey tries to occupy, we would have had to either declare war on a member of NATO, when Turkey killed Americans, or ignore it and look like wimps.Considering neither we or the Turks have been invited to Syria by the "legitimate" government in Damascus, and ISIS is defeated, why are we still there?

My suggestion is for Ms Graham to author a bill declaring war on Turkey. See if anyone agrees. I want the evil egonone gone, but regime change in Turkey has dangers no one can predict. The guns of August come to mind. Unless at least 67 Senators are willing to declare war on Turkey, it should not happen,(The house is crazy, it does not count.)

I know the Kurds are being shafted. It is nothing new. Life isn't fair. Get over it. I love the Kurds, they deserve their own country. The boundry lines of the middle east make no sense. The boundry lines of Afghanistan,Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Cypress,and most of Africa make no sense. How many Americans should die to make the lines make sense?

Iman said...

^^What Oso Negro said at 2:34pm^^

derek said...

The contradictions here are almost impossible to ponder.

Turkey is in Nato.

Turkey is bearing the brunt of the Syrian mess, with refugees, and a very unstable situation on their border.

The Kurds are in Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran.

The Europeans wish this would all go away.

The US has what interest now in the middle east? Israel, who with some backing can defend themselves. Not oil anymore.

The Turkish/US relations have been worsening for a decade or more. They have been a destination for investment in spite of that. The US foreign policy establishment seems to have been very good at creating blood enemies out of former allies.

So the screaming is for Trump to commit troops to defend against a NATO member in a region with no US interests, and essentially bail out the Europeans.

This is another example of Trump exposing an impossible situation. Previous presidents would write a very large check to someone, and hope it got quiet again for a bit, maybe send some US troops into some impossible and unsolvable situation.

I think Trump is going to win this one as well. Turkey is limited in what they can do, the Europeans will flail about making fools of themselves. The russians will poke and prod to make it more of a mess. This is the anti trump neocons making a noise, and the Democrats making fools of themselves again.

minnesota farm guy said...

Following on my post at about 1445 - if it ever gets posted. The situation with Turkey is a lot more subtle and complex than Congress (surprise!) or the Hawks want us to believe. Essentially two allies: one of convenience (YPG - a terrorist group) and one formal for an extended period of time (Turkey/NATO). The real foreign policy question comes down to: with which, in the long run, can we have the most profitable relationship in the turbulent ME? The answer "Turkey" is quite obvious. I think Trump made the right decision and that is why he has the responsibility. Do we really want to be in a position where we have to commit troops against a NATO ally, no matter how difficult?

Hunter said...

Kinda surprised no one has yet mentioned how AOC and Omar are blasting Trump for pulling troops out of Syria... six months after signing a letter in support of pulling troops out of Syria within six months.

I haven't seen if any of the other (D) signatories have suddenly reversed their position now that Trump is doing what they wanted.

This situation does illustrate the problem of seen and unseen costs. While we have soldiers deployed somewhere, you see the costs of American blood and treasure, and locals irritated at our presence, and can easily think "We shouldn't be in these places, we have no business there, what's the point of all this?" Until we actually pull out and you see the previously-unseen costs of innocent people getting rolled over without our protection, and easily forget all the complaints you had before.

minnesota farm guy said...

Where I used YPG others use PKK. I think they are essentially the same animal.

JPS said...

At first I was upset on behalf of the Kurds, wondering just how many times we're going to hang them out to dry. I was bitterly thinking of Otter's cheerful line, "You fucked up! You trusted us."

But I'm tempted to think this is an opportunity for them - a scary one, but an opportunity nonetheless. If Turkey goes after them hard, the Kurds might just drive them off. And what they do afterward, we're not responsible for, no one can expect us to rein them in, and no one can expect them to listen to us if we tried.

The Israelis, including some fairly sketchy factions I might not have wanted to support at the time, had to fight against steep odds, and drive off hordes of neighbors who wanted to kill them all, to establish their state. They did it without our help, and with a lot of the U.S. foreign policy establishment against our helping them. I'll be cheering for the Kurds to do the same.

wild chicken said...

"And in Vietnam, at least Congess actually declared a war"

What?? Nooo never happened, and that was one of the issues. Totally undeclared war. All they had was a resolution based on bogus info, rather like the wmd thing in Iraq

narciso said...

they can't come up with one editorial statement a day:

https://thedispatch.com/p/the-morning-dispatch-october-9-2019

for 6 million dollars I could a brief history of Kurdistan, from the time of saladin,

narciso said...

more perspectives


https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/10/10/trump-allies-are-missing-the-bigger-picture-in-re-troop-withdrawals-from-kurdish-syria/

Lydia said...

Some helpful background info: "Turkey v Syria's Kurds: The short, medium and long story" (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49963649)

J. Farmer said...

Promises made, promises kept.

Which promises are you referring to?

Francisco D said...

Trump has been talking about his desire to stop "endless wars," but he hasn't actually ended any of them. Since his inauguration, he has escalated US involvement in all of the wars he inherited, and he has sent more troops abroad than he has brought home.

Is there a POTUS who has not behaved that way despite campaign promises?

IMHO, Trump is late on this issue because he finally realized that he was listening to the wrong generals. He does not seem to be temperamentally a foreign military adventurer. Intellectually, he likely sees it as a very poor risk with little reward.

Reading the above posts, it is clear that we are still trying to understand the overly complicated nature of the MidEast. Maybe if we pull our folks out and watch what happens, we will get a better handle on it.

I was a Neo-Con 20 years ago. We grow in our understanding and appreciation for what we are unable to understand.. At least some of us do.

RMc said...

So the withdrawal of 50 US troops causes genocide?

If Trump does it, sure. Trump commits genocide just by waking up in the morning.

Paul Ciotti said...

Trump tweets: "I am trying to end the ENDLESS WARS."

The smartest thing any president has said in my lifetime.

langford peel said...

President Trump is merely following through on his promise to bring our boys home from the endless wars. Yes it is hard and not going as fast as we might like. But he brought back 1,000 of the two thousand that were formerly in Syria. All of this bullshit is about fifty troops. Fifty. 5-0. What a bunch of bullshit.

President Trump is going against the military industrial complex and the Deep State and they are savage in their attempts to protect their rice bowl. Listen to President Trump speak so emotionally about dealing with the families of dead servicemen at the end of this clip. He talks about seeing them run and jump on top of the coffins. About going to hospital and seeing the broken and wounded soldiers sacrificed so Lindsey Graham and Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell can feel like tough guys.

As always President Trump is putting the Soldiers first. Putting regular people first. Putting America First.

God bless and protect against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Howard said...

Fuck the Kurds, Trump is genius

Clyde said...

flophouse philosopher said...

3. There's not going to be a genocidal massacre. The Turks and Kurds have been fighting for decades. The Turks have always had the upper hand and haven't genocidally massacred the Kurds yet. There's no reason to think they will start now.


I hope you're right. The Armenians were not available for comment.

viator said...

There is not going to be any "genocide" that's the a TDS propaganda burp. Abdullah Öcalan has been in Turkish prison for 20 years, if there is any Kurd that the Turks were going to "gonocide" it's him. The people fighting the Turks right now are PKK. PKK is officially considered a terrorist group by the United States.

Hagar said...

It was a move, people. It will be followed by countermoves. And so on.
We are not any more "out of" or "into" Syria than we were before.

Sigivald said...

I assume anyone picking #1 is in favor of a shooting war with Turkey or at very least a semi-permanent deployment of a lot of troops there AND unavoidable intervention and side-picking in the Syrian Civil War.

(I mean, hey. I'd be down with establishing Kurdistan and also kicking Assad to the curb.

But I don't pretend that's politically possible, and the same people bemoaning Trump's actions here are almost all going to call that "illegal aggressive war" or "wasting the lives of the troops" or whatever they can find.

Because, to be most charitable, they have NO IDEA how to "protect the Kurds" in practice.)

Sigivald said...

It is fantasy to think Erdogan would attack American troops, even a token force. A platoon would suffice to forestall An attack because Erdogan knows that the punishment for willfully attacking American troops is not a boycott

Oh, really? How about attacking them and saying it was unintentional and they were really targeting the "Kurdish terrorist elements" [which even DO really exist!] that attack Turkey?

D'ya think we'd get unanimous Congressional support [or even 2/3 for a veto overturn?] for declaring war on Turkey, breaking NATO, and all that?

What's Putin do around that, also? Nice new alliance with Turkey, perhaps?

I would not assume a platoon (or 50 spec ops advisors recently moved?) is some magical deterrent.

chuck said...

I think the whole thing is overblown. Turkey will take the buffer zone and were intending to for years. If they go further they will likely get into trouble. Trump knows when to fold his hand, but it is funny when the anti-war left, the same left that stood by for Libya and ISIS and were happy with the withdrawal from Iraq, squawk.There is no honor in politics.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

There's no challenge left to making fun of Trump's presidency. I'm seriously thinking of switching sides just to stay awake through the rest of this train wreck.

Where is Hillary's server?
You say Ukraine.
I say your brain.
Let's call the whole thing off.

Rudy Giuliani's Ukraine fixers are arrested trying to flee the U.S. hours after lunching with him and are charged with funneling $350k from mystery Russian businessman to Trump PAC - then pushing to have ambassador to Kiev fired

Required field must not be blank said...

Turks and Kurds have been at each others' throat for forever (and a day), and the only way to settle this is by letting them figure things out themselves, which they will do at some point, regardless of how long they'll have to wait for the big moment whilst someone else attempts to peace keep (in the meanwhile, they will peave keep...)

They will still be enemies in 1000 years, unless one side is completely vanquished.

n.n said...

The very model of an Islamic State, too many capable interests. Mass abortion, no. Immigration reform, perhaps. Reconciliation, yes. A Kurdovo, probably not. I suppose the Kurds could attempt another "Black September" to force a united solution, and secure a legacy of equal and progressive risk for their diversity class.

FullMoon said...

Float the idea of reinstating the draft so we can protect the Kurds. No college deferments

See what happens.

chuck said...

> The Armenians were not available for comment.

The Kurds were deeply involved in that too. Hey, it's the Middle East.

J. Farmer said...

Trump tweets: "I am trying to end the ENDLESS WARS."

The smartest thing any president has said in my lifetime.


Agree. Now if he would just do it, as opposed to saying he wants to do it, then we would be moving in the right direction. So far no troops are being withdrawn from Syria, simply redeployed inside the country. And recall that Trump reneged on his Syrian troop withdraw a year ago partially on the premise that they would need to stay to protect the Kurds.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

"The Congress shall have Power...to declare War...."

I have watched as criticism and abuse is heaped upon the President for following immigration laws passed by Congress. Now he is abused for not declaring war on NATO ally. I vomit on those people. They are disgusting shit.

There is a lot not to like about the Turks (as a nation), going back at least to the First Gulf War. But the people bitching at Trump have the wrong target. They should complain to their Cowardly Congress Critters, or STFU.

Too much coffee this morning. Or maybe too much "news."

Drago said...

Howard: "Fuck the Kurds, Trump is genius"

Obama Betrays the Kurds by ROBERT ZUBRIN
September 30, 2014 8:00 AM
https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/09/obama-betrays-kurds-robert-zubrin/


Bush betrays the Kurds By Ilana Mercer
Published October 19, 2007 at 1:00am
https://www.wnd.com/2007/10/44100/?fbclid=IwAR10QxgvSLyUgnZKm_m6rY05Uoa0J37hSU5I8KAta9o9OGVuN3XtrTZQH4Q

US abandoned us, say Kurds
Pro-Saddam leader expresses bitterness after bombing
Hugh Pope Wednesday 4 September 1996 00:02
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/us-abandoned-us-say-kurds-1361688.html


A People Betrayed : Twice before, Washington let Kurds die to promote foreign-policy designs. Now it’s the Bush Administration doing the deed.
By DAVID WISE APRIL 14, 1991 12 AM
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-04-14-op-141-story.html?f

History began 15 minutes ago. Literally.

Drago said...

And now we find out the democrat former Ambassador to the Ukraine was working with others in our govt to spy on journalists who were attempting to get to the bottom of democrat corruption.

This is my shocked face.

Drago said...

And now we find out that the Most Honorable and Righteous James Comey was spying on Loretta Lynch too!! AND he was in possession of clear evidence that Lynch was not going to allow the investigation into Hillary to go very far.

I'm quite sure that never came up as a topic of private conversation on the tarmac where Billy boy (out of cigars at the time, no doubt) was meeting with the head of the DOJ while his wife was under investigation.

Nope. Nothing strange about that at all.

Browndog said...

Blogger chuck said...

> The Armenians were not available for comment.

The Kurds were deeply involved in that too. Hey, it's the Middle East.


Kurds helped and saved many Armenians on their death march. They are not monolithic,

Oh, and it had nothing to do with Arabia, now commonly refereed to as the "middle east", sometimes "Asia" to mask the identity of muslim jihadis.

narciso said...

wars don't end when one party withdraws, that's just a fact, yes the itijihad used the kurds against the Armenians, and there are some distressing elements about what the Turkish foreign minister has promised to do, with the Kurdish territories like al hamman,

bagoh20 said...

After defending our military excursions in the middle east for decades, I'm changing, becuase all those lives and dollars lost over all those years have not accomplished anything lasting, nor will they. We killed a lot of people and most of them were very bad men, but the place has an endless supply of those men who have no intention of becoming a peaceful prodcutive society, and we don't need their oil anymore. There is no end game for us, no realistic objective, only death and expense. Time to let the middle east be the middle east; all of them, good and bad. We can't fix everything.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

but but but.. Meghan McCain is unhappy about it. Hatzes! Trump!

Drago said...

The same lefties who praised praised PRAISED Hillary and obama and Biden for throwing Gaddafi to the Islamic Supremacist wolves AFTER Gaddafi had already complied with all US requirements re: weapons programs are very very very upset with Donald Trump for following thru on this campaign promise that the nation knew in advance and voted upon.

Discuss.

Narr said...

Whatever happened to "Human Shields"?

Narr
Openings available!

narciso said...

meghan who mixed up the northern alliance with the kurds, Columbia education is really what it's cracked up to be,

as I observed elsewhere, this is the third era of long term military expeditions, beginning in 1990, the previous ones was east asia, which ran from roughly 1942-1975, and the first was in latin America, from 1898-1933, punctuated by the removal of the marines, and the replacement by the Haitian guard, also similar events in Dominican republic and Nicaragua,

Lydia said...

Turkish president threatens to send 3.6m refugees to Europe: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan warns he will ‘open the gates’ if Syria assault is called an ‘occupation’

Just the kind of guy one can strike deals with. Ha.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

This is what leadership looks like:
"without consulting the Pentagon, the State Department, or leaders of his own party, the president gave his Turkish counterpart permission to wage war on America’s Kurdish allies in northeastern Syria." He's so hard-ass he didn't even give the Kurds a heads up.

narciso said...

well fracking and other exploration has ameliorated the impact of a major shock, like what palin warned almost a dozen years re abquaiq, a series of factors led to the perfect storm of the oil embargo in the 70s, first perez alfonso, organizing opec, then the quaddafi coup, but there was also the esso spill and how it foreclosed most offshore oil exploration, the Alaskan pipeline was the last gasp, add the backlash from the airlift to aid Israel, and the increasing power control of the ulema, (the ilkwan clergy) over king faisal,

Browndog said...

The YPG and PKK do not define the Kurds. They are factions. Just like every race has political factions. Some, as stated above, are communist/terrorists, others pro-democracy/peaceful.

Anthony Bourdain did a show in Northern Iraq with the Kurds. Find it. Watch it.

Limited Perspective said...

I used to enjoy the "man on the street interview." Some well informed smart ass asks a guy minding his own business, "what should we do about the Kurds?" The guy, minding his own business says, "who are the Kurds?" The smart ass audience whoops with laughter. You have to live under a rock not to know who the Kurds are!

Why should some guy who works as a carpet installer even care about the Kurds in Syria, the Gurks in Canastan, the Whipps in Riperdan, the Zeps in Chaplanburg?

I'm getting to like having a beer with guys living under a rock.

Drago said...

And now it has been confirmed that Brennan's CIA butt boy (who specialized in digging up dirt on Trump and his campaign while working with Ukrainians) also worked directly with Joe Biden when Biden was VP and is a registered democrat and coordinated directly with Adam Schiff's staff in developing his hoax "whistleblower report" AND the approval to use second hand info in a "whistleblower" report was given by democrat Atkinson by altering the change date for second hand information and Atkinson REFUSES, even in closed hearings, to answer questions as to why he performed this miracle of time travel!!

And to top it all off, we now know Pelosi's son has business interests with Ukrainian energy entities (tied to Putin) along with John Kerry's son in law, li'l cokehead sister-in-law-doinker Hunter Biden AND Romney's son!!

And guess who was directly paid $900,000 in sweet sweet lobbyist money by Burisma, the firm that Slow Joe Biden stopped the Ukrainian investigation against by threatening to withhold US aid?

LOL

If you guessed Burisma, you would be correct.

Very, very correct.

But again, nothing to see here. Move On!!

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

hope Greece doesnt get involved.
With all this talk of Turkey & Kurds, we're getting Hungary.

Gordian Knots? we just cant cut it. You guys have at it.

iowan2 said...

The talking point is, President Trump is impulsive and no one can predict his next action.
Except President Trump has been clear from his speech on the escalator, bring troops home and completely get out of the US military as the world wide town constable. He was sworn in, and ordered the troops out. All the military, intelligence, and State Dept experts explained it had to be done the right way. So President Trump said. "Do your thing, make it happen, you have a year.
Nothing.
An extra 1.5 years and President Trump tells the experts, times expired.
Unless we are going to kill the bad guys by killing the women, children and innocents, what to do?
(Obama got a pass by walking away from a victory in Iraq. 30,000 Christians exterminated)

Diogenes of Sinope said...

testing

Browndog said...

Blogger Drago said...

The same lefties who praised praised PRAISED Hillary and obama and Biden for throwing Gaddafi to the Islamic Supremacist wolves AFTER Gaddafi had already complied with all US requirements re: weapons programs are very very very upset with Donald Trump for following thru on this campaign promise that the nation knew in advance and voted upon.

Discuss.


What I like about you most Drago, is you don't forget what happened..two days ago, last year--Hell, ten years ago.

A modern miracle these days.

Discuss? On Althouse?

These days it's like holding up a "Free Hong-Kong" sign at an NBA game.

No discussion permitted.

Josephbleau said...

After 2 years of screeching that Trump would start a war and kill us all, the political opposition has set a false dilemma. Either Trump kills all the Kurds by not going to war, or he saves them and his deadly war mongering is exposed for the pure evil he embodies. If I were Trump I would tell them to piss up a rope. If the house wants a war, to save the Kurds they can vote for one, otherwise Stfu. These stupid infantile black hearted cretins have to go!

rcocean said...

I hope people are smart enough to see what is going. The BS about "the Kurds. Our noble allies that trump has betrayed" -This is just more "Orange man Bad" As shown by their past behavior, the ONLY consistent principle the NYT/WaPo/DNC/Never-trumpers have is what ever Trump does - its wrong.

If tomorrow, Trump was to increase Troops in Syria and say we should stay there forever to protect our "noble Kurd allies". The SAME PEOPLE in the press and the D party would criticize him for breaking a promise, getting us into an endless no-win war, etc. etc.

Isn't if funny how we're at peace (mostly) and prosperous and haven't had another 911 or an embassy attack like Benghazi, and we've achieved it DESPITE Trump. Y'see he's been WRONG about EVERYTHING - at least that's what the MSM has been saying for almost 3 years. Trump's the luckiest idiot in the history of the world. Things come out OK - despite his being wrong.

rcocean said...

BTW, how many of you have thought about the Kurds in the last 12 months before this happened? How many can give me a informed 1 minute synopsis of the situation in Syria and what is the USA's endgame?

mockturtle said...

It's not that I'm anti-war. It's just that I lived through Vietnam. Nearly 60K killed and 150K wounded and South Vietnam was taken over by communists the minute we left. Just as these ME countries will be taken over by whatever militant faction is in charge at the time. All those lives and resources for nothing because those whom we arm and train haven't the heart to fight for their own freedom nor do they really want democracy.

Michael K said...


Where is Hillary's server?
You say Ukraine.
I say your brain.
Let's call the whole thing off.


This is what turning of your brain looks like.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Watching Trumps speech. It's brilliant. It's like a pantomime, only with simpler language.

Michael McNeil said...

“And in Vietnam, at least Cong[r]ess actually declared a war”

What?? Nooo never happened, and that was one of the issues. Totally undeclared war. All they had was a resolution based on bogus info, rather like the wmd thing in Iraq


Au contraire. Regardless of whether it was “based on bogus info” or not, that Congress-passed “resolution” was and is, constitutionally, a full-blown declaration of war.

As then-Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Joseph Biden put it in response to a question from the floor during a speech by him on October 22, 2001: [quoting…]

Question: Senator, thank you for this broad gauged approach to the problems we face. My question is this, do you foresee the need or the expectation of a Congressional declaration of war, which the Constitution calls for, and if so, against whom? (Scattered Laughter)

Biden: The answer is yes, and we did it. I happen to be a professor of Constitutional law. I'm the guy that drafted the Use of Force proposal that we passed. It was in conflict between the President and the House. I was the guy who finally drafted what we did pass. Under the Constitution, there is simply no distinction … Louis Fisher(?) and others can tell you, there is no distinction between a formal declaration of war, and an authorization of use of force. There is none for Constitutional purposes. None whatsoever. And we defined in that Use of Force Act that we passed, what … against whom we were moving, and what authority was granted to the President.

[/unQuote]
____
Quoted from Joe Biden's own — now defunct — senatorial website. Here's a link to Biden's foregoing speech-excerpt, preserved at the Internet Archive.

walter said...

"Isn't if funny how we're at peace (mostly) and prosperous and haven't had another 911 or an embassy attack like Benghazi, and we've achieved it DESPITE Trump."
--
What happened to the videos of Isis burning alive folks in cages or sawing off heads?

walter said...

I know the UN is strapped for cash after the bank of Fonda went belly up. But the peace/peave-keeping coalition seems kinda quiet.

rcocean said...

Were we "standing by our noble Kurd allies' BEFORE Obama sent troops? I don't remember anyone saying a word about it. Aren't there Kurds in Turkey? How are they doing? No one seems to say anything.

Isn't Turkey our ally? Aren't they in NATO? Don't we give them large sums of money in military aid? So why are they suddenly the evil enemy? And then you got this weird Pro-war, Pro-Kurd alliance between Pat Robertson, Christian Evangelicals, Southern Warmongers (Like Lindsey G.), and the NYT and the WaPO. What's that all about?

I think a lot of Americans just LOVE being the world's policeman/nanny and running around worrying about "Whither the Kurds?" "Who's controlling the Crimea?" "Is Venezuela OK?" "Can we send $10 billion to Guatemala?"

Laslo Spatula said...

If it is important that there be human shields in the Middle East, then let them be the Europeans.

They might not have the best equipment, but they will only be needed as warm bodies. Perhaps they can get some of their Muslim communities to volunteer.

There has not been a successful action by the West in the Middle East for 50 years or longer. The Best and the Brightest have had their opportunities, with no worthwhile successes; it is well past time for no more blank checks to be drawn from the US account of soldiers' lives.

The Middle East is nothing but tar babies. There is little on the horizon to suggest that Lucy isn't going to pull away the football yet again.

Meanwhile, the Left is gangbusters on BDS for Israel.

Perhaps our involvement has only prolonged the conflicts, by stopping the fight before a clear winner is determined.

Perhaps the Middle East needs to beat the shit out of each other in a way that they will always remember -- a self-inflicted Hiroshima Event to make sure the losers know they lost. Their Hitlers need to fucking die in their bunkers.

Maybe we can help out with aid after the wreckage is complete. If we are feeling generous.

But all good deeds are eventually forgotten. Or the source of new resentments. I am looking at you, France. I am looking at you, Germany.

My final advice: airlift the Kurds and give them a homeland on the Gaza Strip. They can work it out from there.

I am Laslo.

Michael K said...

ARM
It's like a pantomime, only with simpler language.

Just for you, You have proven you are not up to understanding what is happening.

Narr said...

The use of the term Genocide for anything remotely possible on the ground just proves the user to be a nincompoop. Nobody in the region can genocide even a small fraction of the Kurds (short of actual WMDs which seem to be of little concern anymore . . . hmmm).

As Roughcoat told us days ago, the more likely victims of genocidal intent will be much smaller and even more obscure groups.

Here's a nice bit of ironconography: the sigel of the Turkish AK Party is a light bulb! A fucking LIGHT BULB! Dopey dipshits steal a Western meme to use a Western invention as their device!

Narr
While denying every Western cultural value . . .

Steven said...

Everyone calling this a betrayal, how many decades should we have remained deployed? The modern phase of the conflict between Turks and Kurds goes back to 1920. It isn't going to resolve soon.

We didn't marry the Syrian Kurds, we offered them support against the Islamic State (whom they were fighting anyway). The last pocket of the Islamic State has been mopped up. Common objective achieved, time for us to go home.

alanc709 said...

Why is everyone ignoring that there are Kurds in Iran. Should we put troops there, too?

Birkel said...

Question for the Leftist Collectivists:
Are we supposed to be FOR war without end, or not?
Can I get a score sheet, please?

Drago said...

Repeated again for ARM and the other marxists:

Obama Betrays the Kurds by ROBERT ZUBRIN
September 30, 2014 8:00 AM
https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/09/obama-betrays-kurds-robert-zubrin/

In ARM's defense, those Kurds didn't count. Probably "white Kurds".

Drago said...

ARM is so fired up to fight with the Kurds I wouldn't be surprised to see him buy his own ticket over there and volunteer to fight.

God speed ARM and good luck!

Please drop a line now and then to let us know how its going. I'm sure you'll be one of many many many democratics heading over there!!

Drago said...

Oh my goodness.

Now we find out that "righteous" and "noble" whistleblower was a Biden helper boy and literally traveled with Biden to Ukraine to harass and threaten the Ukrainians to stop the investigation into the corrupt Biden Coke-head boy!!

Yes, that's right. The dems beloved lying hack "whistleblower" who is working with dems to frame Trump for abuse of office is LITERALLY a dem hack who worked with Joe Biden directly to abuse his office for Biden family financial gain!!!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Quick ARM, bring up Trump's lemonade stand when he was 5 years old!!!

Drago said...

And now, 1 day after Clapper-ty Clapper went full Nuremburg by saying he was only following obama's orders (he literally said that) in spying on a domestic political opponent, Creepy Sleepy Joey "Plugs" Biden stated the obama admin itself APPROVED of Hunter Biden's little corrupt deal with Burisma!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Oh my, I would love to hear the "Lightbringer" explain that one.....

Drago said...

So whaddya think dems?

Did Burisma directly pay Joe Biden enough with that sweet sweet $900,000?

Should it have been more?

After all, the ChiComs gave Hunter Biden, John Kerry's stepson AND mobster Whitey Bulgers nephew $1.5 Billion and the Russians kicked a sweet sweet $145 MILLION over to the Clintons.

Considering all that, $900,000 seems a bit cheap, no?

But thats our Joey Biden. Easily bought and sold.

Lyle said...

There is always a genocide when a Republican is in office and they're always doing nothing about it. Remember Dafur? Yeah, fake news too. Just white people complaining about the real world they're aren't prepared to do anything about.

Trump will piss on Turkey's economy if they go beyond the area they're planning on taking over. He's done it once and he can do it again.

Yancey Ward said...

Michael, the idea that ARM was watching Trump's speech is laughable at best.

Kirk Parker said...

Lydia,

"Just the kind of guy one can strike deals with. Ha."

Reality check: deal with him or not, he is the current leader of our NATO ally Turkey.

(And it turns out you're Deep State, too? What a disappointment!)

n.n said...

Planned Kurd, join the revolution already in progress.

exhelodrvr1 said...

I was in favor of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars - give those peoples an opportunity for a fresh start. But it's obvious that, on the whole, those cultures don't want a fresh start. Time to let them be, and punish with air power if they act up against us.

Narayanan said...

When we discuss tribal culture, at what stage of their development merit transition from #tools# of "anthropology" to *sociology*?

tim in vermont said...

Trump is a businessman who looks for win win, the opposite of war.

I can’t believe that the “Anti War Committee” was among the groups trying to deplatform Trump last night in Minneapolis.

Anonymous said...

Now that Bolton has been fired it's great to come to Althouse and see longtime neocons Howard and ARM give the good old Bushitler perspective. I'm going to miss them when they ship out to the Syrian front.

Hagar said...

"You may not be interested in war, but war may be interested in you!"

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Yancey Ward said...
Michael, the idea that ARM was watching Trump's speech is laughable at best.


I definitely watched it. He brought the local cops up on stage in red Ts. It was funny in the same way an English pantomime is funny. Exaggerated villains and lots of crowd participation.

Michael K said...

Exaggerated villains and lots of crowd participation.

Yeah, those damned deplorables. There did seem to be a lot of them, though.

Nichevo said...


Howard said...
Fuck the Kurds, Trump is genius

Improper grammar, hence, your clown nose is on. So what don't you like about it, Howie? What's your plan?