Let me guess, conservatives. You agree with Trump's new sanctions on Turkey

[Slade3200]

thats great... so let’s debate it out. You should be able to kick my ass in no time using facts, reason and logic. Right? Make your counterpoint to my last post... let’s do this

Just a few points -

Obama painted a red line and balked when it was crossed. No comparison to the current event.

The tensions in the ME are as much if not more due to tribal conflicts that have existed in some cases a thousand years, rather than recent political developments. Frankly, from that viewpoint we need not engage in most of them. Let them fight it out. Israel and "Palestine" as well.

In terms of fighting ISIS, the Kurds would have been fighting ISIS in any case, whether we were present or not. As much as we wanted ISIS stopped, so did the Kurds. This was not a symbiotic relationship.

A thousand troops between the Kurds and the Turks offered nothing to no one.

Why is Turkey even in NATO? That said, they went over the line Trump drew. Now they get the hosing. Papers are already signed.

My attitude toward the ME is one of persuasion and hands off. Let the bastards fight it out once and for all. We will deal with whoever remains by whatever means are necessary.

If they threaten us, and I mean so much as threaten, hit 'em. Make examples.

If we are forced by events to go in militarily, go with the intent to finish things. No boots on the ground. Destroy all infrastructure, governments centers, military sites. Then go home. No staying to build schools, hospitals, soccer parks, whatever. No staying to "bring freedom and liberty" and attempting to democratize the enemy. They don't want it. "Winning hearts and minds" is a concept of war long since proven to be complete crap.

obama drew a red line and balked when it was crossed. Trump committed to defending the Kurds at the border if they demilitarized and then balked when Turkey said they were coming in. I do agree that they are not equal events. Trumps is far worse as it resulted in immediate loss of lives, trust, power and strategic positioning. Now we are in a world of shit and even closer to war. This was a sloppy, thoughtless, and cowardly retreat which we will be dealing with for years to come.

I don't recall such a commitment. Link?

As you've guessed, my POV is different.

Im happy to dig up a link for you if you’re really not familiar with our relationship with the Kurds. But before I do so let me ask... if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border, would that change your position in this debate? Would you admit that the way trump withdrew was wrong and messed up?

Possibly.

Depends.

Ok well I’ll give it a shot. Read up on the DMZ on the Turkey Syria border. Learn about the agreements that were made between our country, Turkey and the Kurds. We were there to enforce the peace corridor and be a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds. Here are some links but feel free to do your own research.

Turkey, US work to create buffer zone in northern Syria | DW | 13.08.2019

Coalition Says 'Good Progress' in North Syria Buffer Zone | Small Wars Journal

Northern Syria Buffer Zone - Wikipedia

 

[Slade3200]

thats great... so let’s debate it out. You should be able to kick my ass in no time using facts, reason and logic. Right? Make your counterpoint to my last post... let’s do this

Just a few points -

Obama painted a red line and balked when it was crossed. No comparison to the current event.

The tensions in the ME are as much if not more due to tribal conflicts that have existed in some cases a thousand years, rather than recent political developments. Frankly, from that viewpoint we need not engage in most of them. Let them fight it out. Israel and "Palestine" as well.

In terms of fighting ISIS, the Kurds would have been fighting ISIS in any case, whether we were present or not. As much as we wanted ISIS stopped, so did the Kurds. This was not a symbiotic relationship.

A thousand troops between the Kurds and the Turks offered nothing to no one.

Why is Turkey even in NATO? That said, they went over the line Trump drew. Now they get the hosing. Papers are already signed.

My attitude toward the ME is one of persuasion and hands off. Let the bastards fight it out once and for all. We will deal with whoever remains by whatever means are necessary.

If they threaten us, and I mean so much as threaten, hit 'em. Make examples.

If we are forced by events to go in militarily, go with the intent to finish things. No boots on the ground. Destroy all infrastructure, governments centers, military sites. Then go home. No staying to build schools, hospitals, soccer parks, whatever. No staying to "bring freedom and liberty" and attempting to democratize the enemy. They don't want it. "Winning hearts and minds" is a concept of war long since proven to be complete crap.

obama drew a red line and balked when it was crossed. Trump committed to defending the Kurds at the border if they demilitarized and then balked when Turkey said they were coming in. I do agree that they are not equal events. Trumps is far worse as it resulted in immediate loss of lives, trust, power and strategic positioning. Now we are in a world of shit and even closer to war. This was a sloppy, thoughtless, and cowardly retreat which we will be dealing with for years to come.

I don't recall such a commitment. Link?

As you've guessed, my POV is different.

Im happy to dig up a link for you if you’re really not familiar with our relationship with the Kurds. But before I do so let me ask... if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border, would that change your position in this debate? Would you admit that the way trump withdrew was wrong and messed up?

/——/ I’m so old, I remember when Libtards demanded sanctions over warfare all the time.

good for you. What does that have to do with this conversation

 

[jc456]

Just a few points -

Obama painted a red line and balked when it was crossed. No comparison to the current event.

The tensions in the ME are as much if not more due to tribal conflicts that have existed in some cases a thousand years, rather than recent political developments. Frankly, from that viewpoint we need not engage in most of them. Let them fight it out. Israel and "Palestine" as well.

In terms of fighting ISIS, the Kurds would have been fighting ISIS in any case, whether we were present or not. As much as we wanted ISIS stopped, so did the Kurds. This was not a symbiotic relationship.

A thousand troops between the Kurds and the Turks offered nothing to no one.

Why is Turkey even in NATO? That said, they went over the line Trump drew. Now they get the hosing. Papers are already signed.

My attitude toward the ME is one of persuasion and hands off. Let the bastards fight it out once and for all. We will deal with whoever remains by whatever means are necessary.

If they threaten us, and I mean so much as threaten, hit 'em. Make examples.

If we are forced by events to go in militarily, go with the intent to finish things. No boots on the ground. Destroy all infrastructure, governments centers, military sites. Then go home. No staying to build schools, hospitals, soccer parks, whatever. No staying to "bring freedom and liberty" and attempting to democratize the enemy. They don't want it. "Winning hearts and minds" is a concept of war long since proven to be complete crap.

obama drew a red line and balked when it was crossed. Trump committed to defending the Kurds at the border if they demilitarized and then balked when Turkey said they were coming in. I do agree that they are not equal events. Trumps is far worse as it resulted in immediate loss of lives, trust, power and strategic positioning. Now we are in a world of shit and even closer to war. This was a sloppy, thoughtless, and cowardly retreat which we will be dealing with for years to come.

I don't recall such a commitment. Link?

As you've guessed, my POV is different.

Im happy to dig up a link for you if you’re really not familiar with our relationship with the Kurds. But before I do so let me ask... if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border, would that change your position in this debate? Would you admit that the way trump withdrew was wrong and messed up?

Possibly.

Depends.

Ok well I’ll give it a shot. Read up on the DMZ on the Turkey Syria border. Learn about the agreements that were made between our country, Turkey and the Kurds. We were there to enforce the peace corridor and be a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds. Here are some links but feel free to do your own research.

Turkey, US work to create buffer zone in northern Syria | DW | 13.08.2019

Coalition Says 'Good Progress' in North Syria Buffer Zone | Small Wars Journal

Northern Syria Buffer Zone - Wikipedia

so pull out the quotes that back this statement:

if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border,

BTW, we or trump?

 

[MAGAman]

Today President Donald Trump imposed sanctions on Turkey, something that no conservative I've seen in this board has suggested.
Correct me if I'm wrong: You think the sanctions are an awesome idea, and you thought it was a good idea all along but you were just too busy to include it in your postings here. Oh, and you are not just saying that because you say yes to everything Donald Trump does. Oh, and you would have totally supported sanctions if Obama had imposed them, not Trump.
U.S. imposes new sanctions on Turkey over Syria offensive

So, you just started hating sanctions on Turkey as soon as Trump announced them, right?

 

[jc456]

Just a few points -

Obama painted a red line and balked when it was crossed. No comparison to the current event.

The tensions in the ME are as much if not more due to tribal conflicts that have existed in some cases a thousand years, rather than recent political developments. Frankly, from that viewpoint we need not engage in most of them. Let them fight it out. Israel and "Palestine" as well.

In terms of fighting ISIS, the Kurds would have been fighting ISIS in any case, whether we were present or not. As much as we wanted ISIS stopped, so did the Kurds. This was not a symbiotic relationship.

A thousand troops between the Kurds and the Turks offered nothing to no one.

Why is Turkey even in NATO? That said, they went over the line Trump drew. Now they get the hosing. Papers are already signed.

My attitude toward the ME is one of persuasion and hands off. Let the bastards fight it out once and for all. We will deal with whoever remains by whatever means are necessary.

If they threaten us, and I mean so much as threaten, hit 'em. Make examples.

If we are forced by events to go in militarily, go with the intent to finish things. No boots on the ground. Destroy all infrastructure, governments centers, military sites. Then go home. No staying to build schools, hospitals, soccer parks, whatever. No staying to "bring freedom and liberty" and attempting to democratize the enemy. They don't want it. "Winning hearts and minds" is a concept of war long since proven to be complete crap.

obama drew a red line and balked when it was crossed. Trump committed to defending the Kurds at the border if they demilitarized and then balked when Turkey said they were coming in. I do agree that they are not equal events. Trumps is far worse as it resulted in immediate loss of lives, trust, power and strategic positioning. Now we are in a world of shit and even closer to war. This was a sloppy, thoughtless, and cowardly retreat which we will be dealing with for years to come.

I don't recall such a commitment. Link?

As you've guessed, my POV is different.

Im happy to dig up a link for you if you’re really not familiar with our relationship with the Kurds. But before I do so let me ask... if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border, would that change your position in this debate? Would you admit that the way trump withdrew was wrong and messed up?

/——/ I’m so old, I remember when Libtards demanded sanctions over warfare all the time.

good for you. What does that have to do with this conversation

everything?

 

[MAGAman]

People who are backing trump over this idiotic move are never allowed to criticize Obama for the red line or for pulling out of Iraq again without being complete and total hypocrites.

Derp,
Trump campaigned on getting our troops out of endless wars.

 

[jc456]

People who are backing trump over this idiotic move are never allowed to criticize Obama for the red line or for pulling out of Iraq again without being complete and total hypocrites.

Derp,
Trump campaigned on getting our troops out of endless wars.

now damn-it stop educating these losers.

 

[RealDave]

Today President Donald Trump imposed sanctions on Turkey, something that no conservative I've seen in this board has suggested.
Correct me if I'm wrong: You think the sanctions are an awesome idea, and you thought it was a good idea all along but you were just too busy to include it in your postings here. Oh, and you are not just saying that because you say yes to everything Donald Trump does. Oh, and you would have totally supported sanctions if Obama had imposed them, not Trump.
U.S. imposes new sanctions on Turkey over Syria offensive

You're kinda slow, Trump campaigned on getting us out of these shitholes. Now the libtardos can campaign on putting our kids and grand kids in those shitholes to die in an Islamic war. Good luck.

Funny chit coming from a George W Bush cheerleader in Iraq.

 

[RealDave]

People who are backing trump over this idiotic move are never allowed to criticize Obama for the red line or for pulling out of Iraq again without being complete and total hypocrites.

Derp,
Trump campaigned on getting our troops out of endless wars.

How do you know Syria is an endless war?

 

[RealDave]

This has zero to do with pulling our of wars.

This has to do with Trump knowing that the Turkish Army was going to advance on the Kurds & him moving our troops out of the way.

This is about abandoning those who fought along side us.

 

[impuretrash]

This has zero to do with pulling our of wars.

This has to do with Trump knowing that the Turkish Army was going to advance on the Kurds & him moving our troops out of the way.

This is about abandoning those who fought along side us.

So you would have preferred that US soldiers be caught up in a battle between two of our supposed "allies"?

 

[Aldo Raine]

Today President Donald Trump imposed sanctions on Turkey, something that no conservative I've seen in this board has suggested.
Correct me if I'm wrong: You think the sanctions are an awesome idea, and you thought it was a good idea all along but you were just too busy to include it in your postings here. Oh, and you are not just saying that because you say yes to everything Donald Trump does. Oh, and you would have totally supported sanctions if Obama had imposed them, not Trump.
U.S. imposes new sanctions on Turkey over Syria offensive

Dude you are a Democrat you fucking have 2200 people shot in Chicago alone this year stop talking about Republicans go fix your stupid fucking shit holes leave us alone

Rethugs, like dims couldn't fix a sandwich!

 

[Slade3200]

People who are backing trump over this idiotic move are never allowed to criticize Obama for the red line or for pulling out of Iraq again without being complete and total hypocrites.

Derp,
Trump campaigned on getting our troops out of endless wars.

so did Obama yet I’m sure you took joy I’m blaming him for ISIS because he pulled troops from Iraq. Am I right?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Just a few points -

Obama painted a red line and balked when it was crossed. No comparison to the current event.

The tensions in the ME are as much if not more due to tribal conflicts that have existed in some cases a thousand years, rather than recent political developments. Frankly, from that viewpoint we need not engage in most of them. Let them fight it out. Israel and "Palestine" as well.

In terms of fighting ISIS, the Kurds would have been fighting ISIS in any case, whether we were present or not. As much as we wanted ISIS stopped, so did the Kurds. This was not a symbiotic relationship.

A thousand troops between the Kurds and the Turks offered nothing to no one.

Why is Turkey even in NATO? That said, they went over the line Trump drew. Now they get the hosing. Papers are already signed.

My attitude toward the ME is one of persuasion and hands off. Let the bastards fight it out once and for all. We will deal with whoever remains by whatever means are necessary.

If they threaten us, and I mean so much as threaten, hit 'em. Make examples.

If we are forced by events to go in militarily, go with the intent to finish things. No boots on the ground. Destroy all infrastructure, governments centers, military sites. Then go home. No staying to build schools, hospitals, soccer parks, whatever. No staying to "bring freedom and liberty" and attempting to democratize the enemy. They don't want it. "Winning hearts and minds" is a concept of war long since proven to be complete crap.

obama drew a red line and balked when it was crossed. Trump committed to defending the Kurds at the border if they demilitarized and then balked when Turkey said they were coming in. I do agree that they are not equal events. Trumps is far worse as it resulted in immediate loss of lives, trust, power and strategic positioning. Now we are in a world of shit and even closer to war. This was a sloppy, thoughtless, and cowardly retreat which we will be dealing with for years to come.

I don't recall such a commitment. Link?

As you've guessed, my POV is different.

Im happy to dig up a link for you if you’re really not familiar with our relationship with the Kurds. But before I do so let me ask... if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border, would that change your position in this debate? Would you admit that the way trump withdrew was wrong and messed up?

Possibly.

Depends.

Ok well I’ll give it a shot. Read up on the DMZ on the Turkey Syria border. Learn about the agreements that were made between our country, Turkey and the Kurds. We were there to enforce the peace corridor and be a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds. Here are some links but feel free to do your own research.

Turkey, US work to create buffer zone in northern Syria | DW | 13.08.2019

Coalition Says 'Good Progress' in North Syria Buffer Zone | Small Wars Journal

Northern Syria Buffer Zone - Wikipedia

The Juicy Parts -

National [REACTIONS]

• 
  Syria — The Syrian Government strongly condemned and categorically rejected the deal, dubbing it a "blatant attack" on the nation's national sovereignty, as well as a violation of international law.[131][132][e]
• 
  Turkey — Turkish foreign minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu warned that Turkey would not allow the plans for the implementation of the buffer zone to "stall" and cautioned that Turkey would not tolerate a repetition of the unenforced Manbij roadmap. Cavusoglu further pleged to clear the buffer zone of "YPG terrorists".[133][134] Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed dissatisfaction with the size, scope and implementation timeline of the deal numerous times and has threatened to void the agreement, as well as allow free refugee migration to Europe, if the deal's terms are not altered and interpreted more in line with Turkey's vision for the zone.[135][136][137][138]
• 
  United States — The US embassy in Turkey released a statement, in which it noted that US and Turkish military delegations had met and agreed to work together to address Turkey's 'security concerns'.[139]
• 
  Russia - Russia warned of what it deemed were efforts to divide northeastern Syria and added that any legitimate agreement would require the approval of the Syrian Government. Russia urged dialogue between the Syrian Government and Rojava as a means to prevent the partition of Syria.[140][e] However, several weeks later, during a visit by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his support for a buffer zone in principle, stating that Turkey had been shouldering a "huge refugee load" and had "legitimate concerns" over the security of its southern borders.[141] Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented that Russia "always supports" de-escalation agreements, but insisted that all such agreements "respect Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as the rights of the Arab tribes, traditionally living around the Euphrates." [142]
• 
  Iran - Iran condemned the agreement, considering it a "provocative and worrying step", which it deemed to violate the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.[143][144][e]
• 
  Denmark - Shortly before joint US-Turkish ground patrols within the zone were due to begin, Denmark announced that it would be sending Danish army troops and medical personnel to SDF-held areas in Northern Syria, in what the Danish Government dubbed a move assist SDF and 'residual' U.S. forces in their fight against ISIL.[145][146] The United States Department of Defense welcomed this announcement.[147]

Nothing to change my mind there.

 

[Slade3200]

obama drew a red line and balked when it was crossed. Trump committed to defending the Kurds at the border if they demilitarized and then balked when Turkey said they were coming in. I do agree that they are not equal events. Trumps is far worse as it resulted in immediate loss of lives, trust, power and strategic positioning. Now we are in a world of shit and even closer to war. This was a sloppy, thoughtless, and cowardly retreat which we will be dealing with for years to come.

I don't recall such a commitment. Link?

As you've guessed, my POV is different.

Im happy to dig up a link for you if you’re really not familiar with our relationship with the Kurds. But before I do so let me ask... if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border, would that change your position in this debate? Would you admit that the way trump withdrew was wrong and messed up?

Possibly.

Depends.

Ok well I’ll give it a shot. Read up on the DMZ on the Turkey Syria border. Learn about the agreements that were made between our country, Turkey and the Kurds. We were there to enforce the peace corridor and be a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds. Here are some links but feel free to do your own research.

Turkey, US work to create buffer zone in northern Syria | DW | 13.08.2019

Coalition Says 'Good Progress' in North Syria Buffer Zone | Small Wars Journal

Northern Syria Buffer Zone - Wikipedia

The Juicy Parts -

National [REACTIONS]

• 
  Syria — The Syrian Government strongly condemned and categorically rejected the deal, dubbing it a "blatant attack" on the nation's national sovereignty, as well as a violation of international law.[131][132][e]
• 
  Turkey — Turkish foreign minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu warned that Turkey would not allow the plans for the implementation of the buffer zone to "stall" and cautioned that Turkey would not tolerate a repetition of the unenforced Manbij roadmap. Cavusoglu further pleged to clear the buffer zone of "YPG terrorists".[133][134] Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed dissatisfaction with the size, scope and implementation timeline of the deal numerous times and has threatened to void the agreement, as well as allow free refugee migration to Europe, if the deal's terms are not altered and interpreted more in line with Turkey's vision for the zone.[135][136][137][138]
• 
  United States — The US embassy in Turkey released a statement, in which it noted that US and Turkish military delegations had met and agreed to work together to address Turkey's 'security concerns'.[139]
• 
  Russia - Russia warned of what it deemed were efforts to divide northeastern Syria and added that any legitimate agreement would require the approval of the Syrian Government. Russia urged dialogue between the Syrian Government and Rojava as a means to prevent the partition of Syria.[140][e] However, several weeks later, during a visit by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his support for a buffer zone in principle, stating that Turkey had been shouldering a "huge refugee load" and had "legitimate concerns" over the security of its southern borders.[141] Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented that Russia "always supports" de-escalation agreements, but insisted that all such agreements "respect Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as the rights of the Arab tribes, traditionally living around the Euphrates." [142]
• 
  Iran - Iran condemned the agreement, considering it a "provocative and worrying step", which it deemed to violate the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.[143][144][e]
• 
  Denmark - Shortly before joint US-Turkish ground patrols within the zone were due to begin, Denmark announced that it would be sending Danish army troops and medical personnel to SDF-held areas in Northern Syria, in what the Danish Government dubbed a move assist SDF and 'residual' U.S. forces in their fight against ISIL.[145][146] The United States Department of Defense welcomed this announcement.[147]

Nothing to change my mind there.

Haha, yeah I didn’t think so. Would you say this statement is accurate?

The USA aligned with the Kurds in the fight against ISIS, the Kurds took the front lines and sacrificed thousands of lives. In the aftermath the US served as the go between with Turkey and the Kurds to set up a DMZ along the border. We got the Kurds to demilitarize and turkey to agree to a safe zone for refuge resettlement. Turkey decided to break the deal and attack. Instead of standing with the Kurds and preventing Turkey from attacking, Trump pulled our forces which has lead to death destruction and loss of trust, power, peace and strategic positioning in the Middle East. Russia and Syria will take the power we gave up and we no longer have a hold on rogue ISIS terrorists, many of which have already escaped captivity.

is that a fair statement? If no then why?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I don't recall such a commitment. Link?

As you've guessed, my POV is different.

Im happy to dig up a link for you if you’re really not familiar with our relationship with the Kurds. But before I do so let me ask... if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border, would that change your position in this debate? Would you admit that the way trump withdrew was wrong and messed up?

Possibly.

Depends.

Ok well I’ll give it a shot. Read up on the DMZ on the Turkey Syria border. Learn about the agreements that were made between our country, Turkey and the Kurds. We were there to enforce the peace corridor and be a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds. Here are some links but feel free to do your own research.

Turkey, US work to create buffer zone in northern Syria | DW | 13.08.2019

Coalition Says 'Good Progress' in North Syria Buffer Zone | Small Wars Journal

Northern Syria Buffer Zone - Wikipedia

The Juicy Parts -

National [REACTIONS]

• 
  Syria — The Syrian Government strongly condemned and categorically rejected the deal, dubbing it a "blatant attack" on the nation's national sovereignty, as well as a violation of international law.[131][132][e]
• 
  Turkey — Turkish foreign minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu warned that Turkey would not allow the plans for the implementation of the buffer zone to "stall" and cautioned that Turkey would not tolerate a repetition of the unenforced Manbij roadmap. Cavusoglu further pleged to clear the buffer zone of "YPG terrorists".[133][134] Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed dissatisfaction with the size, scope and implementation timeline of the deal numerous times and has threatened to void the agreement, as well as allow free refugee migration to Europe, if the deal's terms are not altered and interpreted more in line with Turkey's vision for the zone.[135][136][137][138]
• 
  United States — The US embassy in Turkey released a statement, in which it noted that US and Turkish military delegations had met and agreed to work together to address Turkey's 'security concerns'.[139]
• 
  Russia - Russia warned of what it deemed were efforts to divide northeastern Syria and added that any legitimate agreement would require the approval of the Syrian Government. Russia urged dialogue between the Syrian Government and Rojava as a means to prevent the partition of Syria.[140][e] However, several weeks later, during a visit by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his support for a buffer zone in principle, stating that Turkey had been shouldering a "huge refugee load" and had "legitimate concerns" over the security of its southern borders.[141] Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented that Russia "always supports" de-escalation agreements, but insisted that all such agreements "respect Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as the rights of the Arab tribes, traditionally living around the Euphrates." [142]
• 
  Iran - Iran condemned the agreement, considering it a "provocative and worrying step", which it deemed to violate the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.[143][144][e]
• 
  Denmark - Shortly before joint US-Turkish ground patrols within the zone were due to begin, Denmark announced that it would be sending Danish army troops and medical personnel to SDF-held areas in Northern Syria, in what the Danish Government dubbed a move assist SDF and 'residual' U.S. forces in their fight against ISIL.[145][146] The United States Department of Defense welcomed this announcement.[147]

Nothing to change my mind there.

Haha, yeah I didn’t think so. Would you say this statement is accurate?

The USA aligned with the Kurds in the fight against ISIS, the Kurds took the front lines and sacrificed thousands of lives. In the aftermath the US served as the go between with Turkey and the Kurds to set up a DMZ along the border. We got the Kurds to demilitarize and turkey to agree to a safe zone for refuge resettlement. Turkey decided to break the deal and attack. Instead of standing with the Kurds and preventing Turkey from attacking, Trump pulled our forces which has lead to death destruction and loss of trust, power, peace and strategic positioning in the Middle East. Russia and Syria will take the power we gave up and we no longer have a hold on rogue ISIS terrorists, many of which have already escaped captivity.

is that a fair statement? If no then why?

Because the story has not yet played out. There is more here than meets the eye.

 

[Slade3200]

Im happy to dig up a link for you if you’re really not familiar with our relationship with the Kurds. But before I do so let me ask... if I show you credible evidence that we had told the Kurds that we would stand by them if they demilitarized the Turkish border, would that change your position in this debate? Would you admit that the way trump withdrew was wrong and messed up?

Possibly.

Depends.

Ok well I’ll give it a shot. Read up on the DMZ on the Turkey Syria border. Learn about the agreements that were made between our country, Turkey and the Kurds. We were there to enforce the peace corridor and be a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds. Here are some links but feel free to do your own research.

Turkey, US work to create buffer zone in northern Syria | DW | 13.08.2019

Coalition Says 'Good Progress' in North Syria Buffer Zone | Small Wars Journal

Northern Syria Buffer Zone - Wikipedia

The Juicy Parts -

National [REACTIONS]

• 
  Syria — The Syrian Government strongly condemned and categorically rejected the deal, dubbing it a "blatant attack" on the nation's national sovereignty, as well as a violation of international law.[131][132][e]
• 
  Turkey — Turkish foreign minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu warned that Turkey would not allow the plans for the implementation of the buffer zone to "stall" and cautioned that Turkey would not tolerate a repetition of the unenforced Manbij roadmap. Cavusoglu further pleged to clear the buffer zone of "YPG terrorists".[133][134] Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed dissatisfaction with the size, scope and implementation timeline of the deal numerous times and has threatened to void the agreement, as well as allow free refugee migration to Europe, if the deal's terms are not altered and interpreted more in line with Turkey's vision for the zone.[135][136][137][138]
• 
  United States — The US embassy in Turkey released a statement, in which it noted that US and Turkish military delegations had met and agreed to work together to address Turkey's 'security concerns'.[139]
• 
  Russia - Russia warned of what it deemed were efforts to divide northeastern Syria and added that any legitimate agreement would require the approval of the Syrian Government. Russia urged dialogue between the Syrian Government and Rojava as a means to prevent the partition of Syria.[140][e] However, several weeks later, during a visit by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his support for a buffer zone in principle, stating that Turkey had been shouldering a "huge refugee load" and had "legitimate concerns" over the security of its southern borders.[141] Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented that Russia "always supports" de-escalation agreements, but insisted that all such agreements "respect Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as the rights of the Arab tribes, traditionally living around the Euphrates." [142]
• 
  Iran - Iran condemned the agreement, considering it a "provocative and worrying step", which it deemed to violate the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.[143][144][e]
• 
  Denmark - Shortly before joint US-Turkish ground patrols within the zone were due to begin, Denmark announced that it would be sending Danish army troops and medical personnel to SDF-held areas in Northern Syria, in what the Danish Government dubbed a move assist SDF and 'residual' U.S. forces in their fight against ISIL.[145][146] The United States Department of Defense welcomed this announcement.[147]

Nothing to change my mind there.

Haha, yeah I didn’t think so. Would you say this statement is accurate?

The USA aligned with the Kurds in the fight against ISIS, the Kurds took the front lines and sacrificed thousands of lives. In the aftermath the US served as the go between with Turkey and the Kurds to set up a DMZ along the border. We got the Kurds to demilitarize and turkey to agree to a safe zone for refuge resettlement. Turkey decided to break the deal and attack. Instead of standing with the Kurds and preventing Turkey from attacking, Trump pulled our forces which has lead to death destruction and loss of trust, power, peace and strategic positioning in the Middle East. Russia and Syria will take the power we gave up and we no longer have a hold on rogue ISIS terrorists, many of which have already escaped captivity.

is that a fair statement? If no then why?

Because the story has not yet played out. There is more here than meets the eye.

well then lay out your argument. I made mine and you pasted a list from an article with no analysis of your own. Then I made another argument and you say that you don’t agree because we shall see? How about you just give direct responses to my points and engage in a real debate? Might be refreshing for a change.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Possibly.

Depends.

Ok well I’ll give it a shot. Read up on the DMZ on the Turkey Syria border. Learn about the agreements that were made between our country, Turkey and the Kurds. We were there to enforce the peace corridor and be a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds. Here are some links but feel free to do your own research.

Turkey, US work to create buffer zone in northern Syria | DW | 13.08.2019

Coalition Says 'Good Progress' in North Syria Buffer Zone | Small Wars Journal

Northern Syria Buffer Zone - Wikipedia

The Juicy Parts -

National [REACTIONS]

• 
  Syria — The Syrian Government strongly condemned and categorically rejected the deal, dubbing it a "blatant attack" on the nation's national sovereignty, as well as a violation of international law.[131][132][e]
• 
  Turkey — Turkish foreign minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu warned that Turkey would not allow the plans for the implementation of the buffer zone to "stall" and cautioned that Turkey would not tolerate a repetition of the unenforced Manbij roadmap. Cavusoglu further pleged to clear the buffer zone of "YPG terrorists".[133][134] Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed dissatisfaction with the size, scope and implementation timeline of the deal numerous times and has threatened to void the agreement, as well as allow free refugee migration to Europe, if the deal's terms are not altered and interpreted more in line with Turkey's vision for the zone.[135][136][137][138]
• 
  United States — The US embassy in Turkey released a statement, in which it noted that US and Turkish military delegations had met and agreed to work together to address Turkey's 'security concerns'.[139]
• 
  Russia - Russia warned of what it deemed were efforts to divide northeastern Syria and added that any legitimate agreement would require the approval of the Syrian Government. Russia urged dialogue between the Syrian Government and Rojava as a means to prevent the partition of Syria.[140][e] However, several weeks later, during a visit by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his support for a buffer zone in principle, stating that Turkey had been shouldering a "huge refugee load" and had "legitimate concerns" over the security of its southern borders.[141] Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented that Russia "always supports" de-escalation agreements, but insisted that all such agreements "respect Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as the rights of the Arab tribes, traditionally living around the Euphrates." [142]
• 
  Iran - Iran condemned the agreement, considering it a "provocative and worrying step", which it deemed to violate the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.[143][144][e]
• 
  Denmark - Shortly before joint US-Turkish ground patrols within the zone were due to begin, Denmark announced that it would be sending Danish army troops and medical personnel to SDF-held areas in Northern Syria, in what the Danish Government dubbed a move assist SDF and 'residual' U.S. forces in their fight against ISIL.[145][146] The United States Department of Defense welcomed this announcement.[147]

Nothing to change my mind there.

Haha, yeah I didn’t think so. Would you say this statement is accurate?

The USA aligned with the Kurds in the fight against ISIS, the Kurds took the front lines and sacrificed thousands of lives. In the aftermath the US served as the go between with Turkey and the Kurds to set up a DMZ along the border. We got the Kurds to demilitarize and turkey to agree to a safe zone for refuge resettlement. Turkey decided to break the deal and attack. Instead of standing with the Kurds and preventing Turkey from attacking, Trump pulled our forces which has lead to death destruction and loss of trust, power, peace and strategic positioning in the Middle East. Russia and Syria will take the power we gave up and we no longer have a hold on rogue ISIS terrorists, many of which have already escaped captivity.

is that a fair statement? If no then why?

Because the story has not yet played out. There is more here than meets the eye.

well then lay out your argument. I made mine and you pasted a list from an article with no analysis of your own. Then I made another argument and you say that you don’t agree because we shall see? How about you just give direct responses to my points and engage in a real debate? Might be refreshing for a change.

I've not engaged in an argument in this matter at all, but merely posted a few opinions. I'll wait for the punchline before venturing a final.

At this time I have no problem with Trump's action.

 

[Slade3200]

Ok well I’ll give it a shot. Read up on the DMZ on the Turkey Syria border. Learn about the agreements that were made between our country, Turkey and the Kurds. We were there to enforce the peace corridor and be a buffer between Turkey and the Kurds. Here are some links but feel free to do your own research.

Turkey, US work to create buffer zone in northern Syria | DW | 13.08.2019

Coalition Says 'Good Progress' in North Syria Buffer Zone | Small Wars Journal

Northern Syria Buffer Zone - Wikipedia

The Juicy Parts -

National [REACTIONS]

• 
  Syria — The Syrian Government strongly condemned and categorically rejected the deal, dubbing it a "blatant attack" on the nation's national sovereignty, as well as a violation of international law.[131][132][e]
• 
  Turkey — Turkish foreign minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu warned that Turkey would not allow the plans for the implementation of the buffer zone to "stall" and cautioned that Turkey would not tolerate a repetition of the unenforced Manbij roadmap. Cavusoglu further pleged to clear the buffer zone of "YPG terrorists".[133][134] Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed dissatisfaction with the size, scope and implementation timeline of the deal numerous times and has threatened to void the agreement, as well as allow free refugee migration to Europe, if the deal's terms are not altered and interpreted more in line with Turkey's vision for the zone.[135][136][137][138]
• 
  United States — The US embassy in Turkey released a statement, in which it noted that US and Turkish military delegations had met and agreed to work together to address Turkey's 'security concerns'.[139]
• 
  Russia - Russia warned of what it deemed were efforts to divide northeastern Syria and added that any legitimate agreement would require the approval of the Syrian Government. Russia urged dialogue between the Syrian Government and Rojava as a means to prevent the partition of Syria.[140][e] However, several weeks later, during a visit by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his support for a buffer zone in principle, stating that Turkey had been shouldering a "huge refugee load" and had "legitimate concerns" over the security of its southern borders.[141] Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented that Russia "always supports" de-escalation agreements, but insisted that all such agreements "respect Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as the rights of the Arab tribes, traditionally living around the Euphrates." [142]
• 
  Iran - Iran condemned the agreement, considering it a "provocative and worrying step", which it deemed to violate the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.[143][144][e]
• 
  Denmark - Shortly before joint US-Turkish ground patrols within the zone were due to begin, Denmark announced that it would be sending Danish army troops and medical personnel to SDF-held areas in Northern Syria, in what the Danish Government dubbed a move assist SDF and 'residual' U.S. forces in their fight against ISIL.[145][146] The United States Department of Defense welcomed this announcement.[147]

Nothing to change my mind there.

Haha, yeah I didn’t think so. Would you say this statement is accurate?

The USA aligned with the Kurds in the fight against ISIS, the Kurds took the front lines and sacrificed thousands of lives. In the aftermath the US served as the go between with Turkey and the Kurds to set up a DMZ along the border. We got the Kurds to demilitarize and turkey to agree to a safe zone for refuge resettlement. Turkey decided to break the deal and attack. Instead of standing with the Kurds and preventing Turkey from attacking, Trump pulled our forces which has lead to death destruction and loss of trust, power, peace and strategic positioning in the Middle East. Russia and Syria will take the power we gave up and we no longer have a hold on rogue ISIS terrorists, many of which have already escaped captivity.

is that a fair statement? If no then why?

Because the story has not yet played out. There is more here than meets the eye.

well then lay out your argument. I made mine and you pasted a list from an article with no analysis of your own. Then I made another argument and you say that you don’t agree because we shall see? How about you just give direct responses to my points and engage in a real debate? Might be refreshing for a change.

I've not engaged in an argument in this matter at all, but merely posted a few opinions. I'll wait for the punchline before venturing a final.

At this time I have no problem with Trump's action.

innocent people are dead. We abandoned an ally who was depending on us for a safe zone. That’s all done, it’s history, nothing to wait for in regards to that. How do you justify it?

 

[JWBooth]

Opposed to sanctions and impediments to trade for any reason.