US Betrays Democracy in Middle East, Again

[Geilinor]

Erdogan is on the side of Turkey. Having lunatic Islamists at your borders isn't something even he wants. And Turkey has faced a major destabilisatio now that the Kurds in Turkey are once again launching attacks.

ISIS came to the fore right about the same time the Turkish government and the Kurds in Turkey were in serious negotiations. Said negotiations failed largely because the Kurds had sent all their fighters into Iraq. Now that Iraq is actually doing reasonably well, all the fighters are coming back into Turkey and launching attacks against police checkpoints.

Turkey's support for Islamist rebels leaves me skeptical. The "Free" Syrian Army isn't a bunch of Jeffersonian democrats.

He doesn't care about lunatic Islamists, just lunatic Islamists he doesn't fund and possibly threaten Turkey (ISIS). On top of that, Kurdish independence scares the shit out of him, and Turkish-backed rebels' attack on the YPG and SDF effectively benefits the Islamic State.

Of course they aren't a bunch of Jeffersonian Democrats, but they aren't lunatic Islamists.

[Novus America]

Turkey's support for Islamist rebels leaves me skeptical. The "Free" Syrian Army isn't a bunch of Jeffersonian democrats.

He doesn't care about lunatic Islamists, just lunatic Islamists he doesn't fund and possibly threaten Turkey (ISIS). On top of that, Kurdish independence scares the shit out of him, and Turkish-backed rebels' attack on the YPG and SDF effectively benefits the Islamic State.

Of course they aren't a bunch of Jeffersonian Democrats, but they aren't lunatic Islamists.

Well some in the FSA are lunatic Islamists. Most are not. Some actually are Jeffersonian Democrats of sorts. It is quite a loose and varied group.

But there are no good guys in Middle East politics. Only less bad guys.

[The New Sea Territory]

Turkey's support for Islamist rebels leaves me skeptical. The "Free" Syrian Army isn't a bunch of Jeffersonian democrats.

He doesn't care about lunatic Islamists, just lunatic Islamists he doesn't fund and possibly threaten Turkey (ISIS). On top of that, Kurdish independence scares the shit out of him, and Turkish-backed rebels' attack on the YPG and SDF effectively benefits the Islamic State.

Of course they aren't a bunch of Jeffersonian Democrats, but they aren't lunatic Islamists.

Yeah, the people Turkey supports are Islamists. EDIT.

These guys are Islamists. Salafists. They just, conveniently, aren't labeled terrorists by the United States. This group is supported by Turkey and allied with the "Free" Syrian Army. As for the FSA themselves, it's organization structure has imploded and it's basically just a loose label used by anyone who wants to use it. There was a story of an FSA leader praising Osama Bin Laden a few months back. Searching for that link now. (EDIT: This scumbag was a leader of Jaysh al-Islam, not the FSA; however, they have worked with the FSA and are America's and Turkey's allies....)

Don't forget the recent story about American allies beheading a child. Stay classy.

[Bakery Hill]

Funnily enough this isn't really a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Or the US and Russia, though it is sort of both of those things. It's been increasingly a proxy way between the CIA and the US Department of Defence. The CIA has always backed the Free Syrian Army, the Department of Defence has chosen to back the YPG/SDF, American armed/advised/supported units have clashed in the past. The only difference now is that the Department of Defence is also backing the Turkish Army, as obligated under NATO, and the CIA-backed FSA, while continuing to back the SDF at the same time. Oh the wonderful world of US foreign policy.

[Communal Ecotopia]

Yo, we're talking about the Syrian Democratic Forces, not the Social Democratic Federation.

Yes I know. Rojava's leading political force is this group.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrati ... rty_(Syria)

The YPG is their military arm. Ideological lessons about democratic confederalism are central to their training.

I was also talking about groups outside a palatable (to the West) Kurdish-led north.

[Communal Ecotopia]

Iran and Syria both refuse to tolerate, accept, or even recognize Kurdish independence. The US was, and still is, the Kurds' best bet for independence.

Iran helped the Kurds fight for independence in Iraq and in turkey.

Only to piss Iraq and Turkey off. They have their own Kurdistan "problem".

[Communal Ecotopia]

Erdogan is on the side of Turkey. Having lunatic Islamists at your borders isn't something even he wants. And Turkey has faced a major destabilisatio now that the Kurds in Turkey are once again launching attacks.

ISIS came to the fore right about the same time the Turkish government and the Kurds in Turkey were in serious negotiations. Said negotiations failed largely because the Kurds had sent all their fighters into Iraq. Now that Iraq is actually doing reasonably well, all the fighters are coming back into Turkey and launching attacks against police checkpoints.

Turkey's support for Islamist rebels leaves me skeptical. The "Free" Syrian Army isn't a bunch of Jeffersonian democrats.

He doesn't care about lunatic Islamists, just lunatic Islamists he doesn't fund and possibly threaten Turkey (ISIS). On top of that, Kurdish independence scares the shit out of him, and Turkish-backed rebels' attack on the YPG and SDF effectively benefits the Islamic State.

Additionally, and this pains me, this is far beyond an Erdogan problem. Turkish nationalism since its founding has been predicated on anti-Kurd, anti-Armenian, anti-Syriac beliefs and actions.

[Baltenstein]

So it turns out that Turkish ground troops are actually not that interested in moving against local ISIS targets but rather in engaging in hostilities against US-backed Kurdish forces in the region.

"What a shocking and unexpected turn of events!!!"...said no one ever.

Also, in order to remind everyone of its friendly disposition towards the Western countries again the Turkish gov is now demanding from the German gov to officially accept Turkey's "fair portrayal of history" (read = denial of the Armenian genocide) if German MPs are to be allowed to visit German military personnel stationed at Incirlik, despite the fact that it was originally agreed they would have that right uncoditionally.

However, in response to a question about Roth’s statement, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said the much-anticipated visit of German MPs could only be possible if Berlin took “the necessary steps.”

“It depends on the steps taken by Germany. If they take the necessary steps we will enable this visit,” Çavuşoğlu said at a joint press conference with visiting Dutch Foreign Minister Bert Koenders on Aug. 29.

“But unfortunately I have to say that those that mingle and manipulate our history in an unfair manner cannot be allowed on this visit,” he said, in reference to the Armenian resolution.

The steps Çavuşoğlu mentioned have two important aspects, according to the diplomatic sources. First, Turkey expects the German government to announce that it does not embrace the Bundestag’s decision and therefore will not undertake governmental actions in that regard. Second, Turkey believes the support and solidarity shown by German officials in the aftermath of the July 15 failed coup attempt have not been sufficient so far and thus expects a clear display of support to Ankara.

Merkel’s recent statements signaling her empathy with what happened in Turkey on July 15 were a first sign to this end, sources said, though they added more needed to be done through more talks between the two capitals.

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey ... sCatID=510

The Turkish gov also expects "more empathy and solidarity" from Germany and other Western govs for its post-coup actions, despite the fact that virtually all of its own statements concerning Turkish-Western relations in the past few months have consisted on a non stop stream of demonizing, over-exaggerated and in some cases quasi racist rants against Western countries, and various demands to intervene directly into said countries internal affairs.

Isn't it great to have friends like these in the Mid East, I think we can all sleep more peacefully now.

[Costa Fierro]

Utter contempt? The fuck did I do to get you so emotional haha?

It was in reference to another user.

But you don't think there wasn't a garrison or arms caches in ISIS's only link to the outside world? Probably their most crucial city since Tell Abyad fell last year?

It's ISIS. They're not exactly fantastic military strategists. The only reason they managed to take the amount of territory they did was exploiting an already chaotic situation.

[Taviana SSR]

The Kurdish people have a long and bitter history of betrayal at the hands of U.S. imperialism.

The Western imperialists were dividing up the Ottoman Empire after WW I, the U.S. and Britain had promised to create a separate country, Kurdistan a promise recorded in the Treaty in 1920. Three years later this was reversed in another treaty, and the area promised the Kurds now became part of Iraq, an oil-rich area then occupied by the British. The Kurdish nation as a whole was scattered among Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria, ensuring that the Kurds would remain an oppressed, marginalized people in those countries ever since.

From 1973 to 1975 the US regime supported Kurd rebels in Iraq in order to strenghen the pro-U.S. regime in Iran and weaken the then-pro-Soviet Iraqi regime. But as soon as Iran and Iraq cut a deal, the U.S. withdrew support, denied the Kurds refuge in Iran, and stood by while the Iraqi government murdered them. Henry Kissinger, the U.S. national security adviser at the time, justified this cold-blooded move by saying that "covert action should not be confused with missionary work. In 1979, Irans Kurdish population rose up with millions of other Iranians to overthrow the hated Shah, but when they demanded their national rights, the U.S. government publicly supported the Khomeini regime's efforts to crush them and maintain Iranian domination of Kurds.

In 1988, the Iraqi regime launched poison-gas attacks on Halabja, a small Kurdish town under the control of Kurdish rebels, killing over 5,000 people. This crime was met with silence from the U.S. government. U.S. officials even claimed that they had reviewed the evidence of the gas attack and found it "inconclusive." Meanwhile, the U.S. was increasing support for Saddam Hussein--part of the sinister moves to prolong the bloody war between Iraq and Iran in order to benefit U.S. imperialist interests in the region. During the 1991 Gulf War, U.S. President and war criminal Bush Sr. called on Kurds in northern Iraq (and the Shia population in the south) to rise up against Saddam Hussein. When the Kurds and the Shia did rise up, the U.S. government ,fearing that a break-up of Iraq would not be in its interests stood by as the Iraqi regime brutally put down the rebellions. Kurds fleeing westward were attacked by the U.S.-armed Turkish troops. The Kurds once again became the victims of cynical imperialist calculations.

While the Obama regime and Co. loudly denounce ISIS brutal treatment of the Kurds, the U.S. has for decades given massive support to the fascist rulers of Turkey, who have waged genocidal war on the Kurdish people and imprisoned and tortured countless Kurds.

The current situation in the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq is very complex. It is an explosive mixture of Kurdish national aspirations, scramble for the oil resources, expansionist moves by Turkey, and schemes of the U.S. imperialists. The U.S. imperialists were never on the side of genuine liberation of the Kurdish people. If the Americans help someone, it is after their own interests.

[Baltenstein]

The Kurdish people have a long and bitter history of betrayal at the hands of U.S. imperialism.

The Western imperialists were dividing up the Ottoman Empire after WW I, the U.S. and Britain had promised to create a separate country, Kurdistan a promise recorded in the Treaty in 1920. Three years later this was reversed in another treaty, and the area promised the Kurds now became part of Iraq, an oil-rich area then occupied by the British. The Kurdish nation as a whole was scattered among Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria, ensuring that the Kurds would remain an oppressed, marginalized people in those countries ever since.

The Kurdish people have a long and bitter history of betrayal at the hands of everybody.

Even if you may tell yourself otherwise, they were sold out multiple times by the Soviet Union/Russia as well. And Iran of course, which - as has been pointed out - always seems to only care about the cause of Kurdish independence outside its own borders.

[Supreme Allied Commander]

More than a year ago I published a TAKE RAQQA BATTLEPLAN
http://supremealliedcondista.newsvine.c ... battleplan
attempting to co-ordinate Turkish & Free Syrian forces with Kurdish and Syrian Democratic forces.



A key feature of my plan was a Turkish army ground attack west of the Euphrates deep into Syria, attacking Raqqa from the south, co-ordinating with SDF/YPG forces (then known as the "Euphrates Volcano") attacking Raqqa from the north.

I posted about it here in Nation States too.

TAKE RAQQA BATTLEPLAN

* My username elsewhere is Supreme Allied Condista - I've not yet made promotion to Supreme Allied Commander in the real world

This is my political and military plan to put the squeeze on the so-called "Islamic State" / ISIS / ISIL / Daesh operational capital at Raqqa, Syria.

1) The Turkish army invades Syria with an armoured column west and south of the Euphrates and attacks Raqqa from the south, also blocking the east and west routes to Raqqa.

2) ...

However my plan didn't seem to be taken up by either the White House, Pentagon or NATO HQ.

The Russians / Al-Assad / Syrian Arab Army then claimed they were in a position to attack Raqqa themselves, so I said "Fine, on you go" but it seems it was all a bluff and they had more pressing priorities than to push an armoured column to attack Raqqa.

Anyway, I am still offering to take out ISIS from Raqqa, one way or another, but it looks like I will actually need to be appointed to something to get sufficient attention paid to my battle-plans.

I might suggest appointing me to serve as a military commander under / security adviser to Condoleezza Rice - appointing her as NATO Secretary General or United Nations Secretary General.

I don't really think it is appropriate for me to take my orders from anyone else but Condi.

[Novus America]

The Kurdish people have a long and bitter history of betrayal at the hands of U.S. imperialism.

The Western imperialists were dividing up the Ottoman Empire after WW I, the U.S. and Britain had promised to create a separate country, Kurdistan a promise recorded in the Treaty in 1920. Three years later this was reversed in another treaty, and the area promised the Kurds now became part of Iraq, an oil-rich area then occupied by the British. The Kurdish nation as a whole was scattered among Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria, ensuring that the Kurds would remain an oppressed, marginalized people in those countries ever since.

From 1973 to 1975 the US regime supported Kurd rebels in Iraq in order to strenghen the pro-U.S. regime in Iran and weaken the then-pro-Soviet Iraqi regime. But as soon as Iran and Iraq cut a deal, the U.S. withdrew support, denied the Kurds refuge in Iran, and stood by while the Iraqi government murdered them. Henry Kissinger, the U.S. national security adviser at the time, justified this cold-blooded move by saying that "covert action should not be confused with missionary work. In 1979, Irans Kurdish population rose up with millions of other Iranians to overthrow the hated Shah, but when they demanded their national rights, the U.S. government publicly supported the Khomeini regime's efforts to crush them and maintain Iranian domination of Kurds.

In 1988, the Iraqi regime launched poison-gas attacks on Halabja, a small Kurdish town under the control of Kurdish rebels, killing over 5,000 people. This crime was met with silence from the U.S. government. U.S. officials even claimed that they had reviewed the evidence of the gas attack and found it "inconclusive." Meanwhile, the U.S. was increasing support for Saddam Hussein--part of the sinister moves to prolong the bloody war between Iraq and Iran in order to benefit U.S. imperialist interests in the region. During the 1991 Gulf War, U.S. President and war criminal Bush Sr. called on Kurds in northern Iraq (and the Shia population in the south) to rise up against Saddam Hussein. When the Kurds and the Shia did rise up, the U.S. government ,fearing that a break-up of Iraq would not be in its interests stood by as the Iraqi regime brutally put down the rebellions. Kurds fleeing westward were attacked by the U.S.-armed Turkish troops. The Kurds once again became the victims of cynical imperialist calculations.

While the Obama regime and Co. loudly denounce ISIS brutal treatment of the Kurds, the U.S. has for decades given massive support to the fascist rulers of Turkey, who have waged genocidal war on the Kurdish people and imprisoned and tortured countless Kurds.

The current situation in the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq is very complex. It is an explosive mixture of Kurdish national aspirations, scramble for the oil resources, expansionist moves by Turkey, and schemes of the U.S. imperialists. The U.S. imperialists were never on the side of genuine liberation of the Kurdish people. If the Americans help someone, it is after their own interests.

Umm, your history is quite a bit off. Saddam did not defeat the Kurds in 1991. The Kurds won, thanks in part to US support and the US no fly zone, driving out the Iraqi Army and gaining defacto independence.

[Taviana SSR]

Umm, your history is quite a bit off. Saddam did not defeat the Kurds in 1991. The Kurds won, thanks in part to US support and the US no fly zone, driving out the Iraqi Army and gaining defacto independence.

2 million Kurds fleeing their homes does not sound like "winning" to me. The only people winning from the Gulf war were the CEOs of military industry and Saudi oil barons. Saddam wanted to change the oil currency away from the dollar that was the true casus belli.

[New Rogernomics]

More than a year ago I published a TAKE RAQQA BATTLEPLAN
[...]attempting to co-ordinate Turkish & Free Syrian forces with Kurdish and Syrian Democratic forces[...]
However my plan didn't seem to be taken up by either the White House, Pentagon or NATO HQ.[...]

The bit in bold would be why.

The Turkish government absolutely hate Kurds, and only barely tolerated Iraqi Kurds pre-ISIS.

They don't want to really work with Free Syria anything, in fact their goal is more to establish a pro-Turkish puppet state in Syria.

They barely tolerated Assad as he kept the Kurds in check, and when they saw an opportunity to overthrow Assad they took it.

I have a hunch that Turkey will attempt a buffer zone, as it is currently in towns near it's border.

Whatever government wins the war in a decade or so, will have to negotiate the territory that Turkey seizes back, and that is only if Turkey decides it doesn't want to just annex those areas.

Erdogan wants his own empire. So that is going to mean even more bloodshed as Turkey moves its forces in Syria.

[Uxupox]

More than a year ago I published a TAKE RAQQA BATTLEPLAN
[...]attempting to co-ordinate Turkish & Free Syrian forces with Kurdish and Syrian Democratic forces[...]
However my plan didn't seem to be taken up by either the White House, Pentagon or NATO HQ.[...]

The bit in bold would be why.

The Turkish government absolutely hate Kurds, and only barely tolerated Iraqi Kurds pre-ISIS.

They don't want to really work with Free Syria anything, in fact their goal is more to establish a pro-Turkish puppet state in Syria.

They barely tolerated Assad as he kept the Kurds in check, and when they saw an opportunity to overthrow Assad they took it.

I have a hunch that Turkey will attempt a buffer zone, as it is currently in towns near it's border.

Whatever government wins the war in a decade or so, will have to negotiate the territory that Turkey seizes back, and that is only if Turkey decides it doesn't want to just annex those areas.

Erdogan wants his own empire. So that is going to mean even more bloodshed as Turkey moves its forces in Syria.

The guy is trolling...

[Novus America]

Umm, your history is quite a bit off. Saddam did not defeat the Kurds in 1991. The Kurds won, thanks in part to US support and the US no fly zone, driving out the Iraqi Army and gaining defacto independence.

2 million Kurds fleeing their homes does not sound like "winning" to me. The only people winning from the Gulf war were the CEOs of military industry and Saudi oil barons. Saddam wanted to change the oil currency away from the dollar that was the true casus belli.

Do you have a source for that? And yes, winning is winning. You are aware of
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Kurdistan
Right? Kurds with US help drove the Iraqi Army out of their zone. Now they did not get every piece of land they wanted, and I have no doubt many Kurds moved into the new auto like area from areas it did not control.

But gaining de facto independence and expelling Iraqi troops was a victory.
And no, despite the conspiracy theory BS by people who give some magical woo powers to fiat currency the real causus belli was Saddam's idiotic imperial campaign.

Plus you mixed up your wars. The "changing currency conspiracy" is used for the 2003 invasion, not the Gulf War.

[Taviana SSR]

[...}

Plus you mixed up your wars. The "changing currency conspiracy" is used for the 2003 invasion, not the Gulf War.

Ahh, I remember, in 1990 he was tricked into attacking by the US ambassador woman. The real motive was the defence of power and profit. The leaders have concealed imperialism's real war aims behind the smokescreen of the United Nations. The US and other Western powers built up Iraq's massive military machine and did nothing to stop Saddam from using poison gas on dozens of Kurdish villages.

[Novus America]

[...}

Plus you mixed up your wars. The "changing currency conspiracy" is used for the 2003 invasion, not the Gulf War.

Ahh, I remember, in 1990 he was tricked into attacking by the US ambassador woman. The real motive was the defence of power and profit. The leaders have concealed imperialism's real war aims behind the smokescreen of the United Nations. The US and other Western powers built up Iraq's massive military machine and did nothing to stop Saddam from using poison gas on dozens of Kurdish villages.

He was not "tricked into attacking". The US said it did not want to get involved in the oil dispute between Iraq and Kuwait.

That does not justify Saddam launching an imperial campaigns of annex and conquest. Saddam was the imperialist annexing land.

And it was the Soviets that built up Iraq's war machine. He was using Soviet planes and Soviet tanks. T-72s and Scud missiles are not western.

Yes the west did not stop every bad thing is this world. It is not is job to do so. And the planes that bombed the Kurds? Maybe by the and supplied to Iraq by the Soviets.

[G-Tech Corporation]

Ahh, I remember, in 1990 he was tricked into attacking by the US ambassador woman. The real motive was the defence of power and profit. The leaders have concealed imperialism's real war aims behind the smokescreen of the United Nations. The US and other Western powers built up Iraq's massive military machine and did nothing to stop Saddam from using poison gas on dozens of Kurdish villages.

He was not "tricked into attacking". The US said it did not want to get involved in the oils dispute between Iraq and Kuwait.

That does not justify Saddam launching an imperial campaigns of annex and conquest. Saddam was the imperialist annexing land.

And it was the Sovuets that built up Iraq's war machine. He was using Soviet planers and Soviet tanks. T-72s and Scud missiles are not western.

Yes the west did not stop every bad thing is this world. It is not is job to do so. And the planes that bombed the Kurds? Maybe by the and supplied to Iraq by the Soviets.

Novus, you're debating the conspiracy theorist. You'll have more luck emptying a lake with a strainer.

[Novus America]

He was not "tricked into attacking". The US said it did not want to get involved in the oils dispute between Iraq and Kuwait.

That does not justify Saddam launching an imperial campaigns of annex and conquest. Saddam was the imperialist annexing land.

And it was the Sovuets that built up Iraq's war machine. He was using Soviet planers and Soviet tanks. T-72s and Scud missiles are not western.

Yes the west did not stop every bad thing is this world. It is not is job to do so. And the planes that bombed the Kurds? Maybe by the and supplied to Iraq by the Soviets.

Novus, you're debating the conspiracy theorist. You'll have more luck emptying a lake with a strainer.

Yeah, good point.

[Taviana SSR]

Ahh, I remember, in 1990 he was tricked into attacking by the US ambassador woman. The real motive was the defence of power and profit. The leaders have concealed imperialism's real war aims behind the smokescreen of the United Nations. The US and other Western powers built up Iraq's massive military machine and did nothing to stop Saddam from using poison gas on dozens of Kurdish villages.

He was not "tricked into attacking". The US said it did not want to get involved in the oils dispute between Iraq and Kuwait.

That does not justify Saddam launching an imperial campaigns of annex and conquest. Saddam was the imperialist annexing land.

And it was the Sovuets that built up Iraq's war machine. He was using Soviet planers and Soviet tanks. T-72s and Scud missiles are not western.

Yes the west did not stop every bad thing is this world. It is not is job to do so. And the planes that bombed the Kurds? Maybe by the and supplied to Iraq by the Soviets.

Like this time when Soviet foreign minister Gryomko met with him and gave him Soviet high-tech missiles, jets and poison gas?

[Novus America]

He was not "tricked into attacking". The US said it did not want to get involved in the oils dispute between Iraq and Kuwait.

That does not justify Saddam launching an imperial campaigns of annex and conquest. Saddam was the imperialist annexing land.

And it was the Sovuets that built up Iraq's war machine. He was using Soviet planers and Soviet tanks. T-72s and Scud missiles are not western.

Yes the west did not stop every bad thing is this world. It is not is job to do so. And the planes that bombed the Kurds? Maybe by the and supplied to Iraq by the Soviets.

Like this time when Soviet foreign minister Gryomko met with him and gave him Soviet high-tech missiles, jets and poison gas?

From your own source
"the greatest amount of military equipment came to Iraq from the Soviet Union"

[Lonograd]

It's either the secular socialist government of Bashar al Assad, the Islamist rebels, ISIS, or the far right Kurdish nationalists.

[Novus America]

It's either the secular socialist government of Bashar al Assad, the Islamist rebels, ISIS, or the far right Kurdish nationalists.

Umm not all of the rebels are Islamists. And the Kurdish forces are mostly secular democratic socialists. Not far right. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democra ... rty_(Syria)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_ ... tic_Forces

And Assad is socialist in name only. Syria is in reality not socialist at all.