Started By
Message

re: The Kurds just made a combat jump.

Posted on 3/24/17 at 11:06 am to
Posted by Errerrerrwere
Member since Aug 2015
38260 posts
Posted on 3/24/17 at 11:06 am to
What's wrong with a mustard stain?
Posted by HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Member since Feb 2017
12458 posts
Posted on 3/24/17 at 11:09 am to
quote:

You might want to grab a map before posting



LOLWUT?

Seriously, the Kurds wanted arms to fight ISIS before they got a foothold in Iraq, Pakistan objected (because they hate the Kurds) and Obama obliged them.

Meaning that when the Kurds DID attempt to fight ISIS they got their asses handed to them.

Would they have defeated ISIS when ISIS was still "the JV?" if we had armed them? Hard to tell, but dude's point was spot on.


Posted by 14&Counting
Eugene, OR
Member since Jul 2012
37612 posts
Posted on 3/24/17 at 11:10 am to
Badass
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89506 posts
Posted on 3/25/17 at 9:34 am to
quote:

Seriously, the Kurds wanted arms to fight ISIS before they got a foothold in Iraq, Pakistan objected (because they hate the Kurds) and Obama obliged them.



I think the issue is that you keep saying "Pakistan" when you mean "Turkey." - I think that's the error that folks are seizing upon. Because Pakistan doesn't give a single shite about the Kurds.
Posted by ItTakesAThief
Scottsdale, Arizona
Member since Dec 2009
9191 posts
Posted on 3/25/17 at 9:36 am to
Turkey you mean?
Posted by Navytiger74
Member since Oct 2009
50458 posts
Posted on 3/25/17 at 9:58 am to
quote:

The real question is what happens after Raqqa and Mosul fall. We already have Rangers playing referee between opposing factions in Syria. I don't want to see anymore mission creep but I'm not hopeful.
That is the question. ISIS won't maintain any of its territorial holdings, but they aren't going to disappear and will find safe-haven in poorly governed areas and among populations. They're still going to be a pain in the arse as a more traditional terrorist threat. But the more immediate concern will be managing the remaining "victorious" factions in Iraq and Syria. You'll have the Assad Regime, Moderate Syrian Opposition, Turkey, and the Kurds all wanting their piece (well Assad will eventually demand the whole of Syria back, though he may play it cool at the outset). And you have Iran, Russia, and US-aligned powers all vying for a say in how it plays out. Legitimately may be the most complicated foreign policy mess in decades with Russia, Iran, and NATO allies all standing on each other's pricks.
Posted by RCDfan1950
United States
Member since Feb 2007
34891 posts
Posted on 3/25/17 at 10:02 am to
quote:

The key will be finding diplomatic solutions to factional divisions in Iraq. The Sunnis and Shia have to find a way to play nice, and that means they both need representation in government. That wasn't happening in the years leading up to ISIS's rise.


Did you watch the Frontline piece on Iraq last Tuesday, HH? The 'Government' is existentially non-existent in Iraq; and to the degree it does exist, is seen to be complicit with Shia-dominated Iranian Militia atrocities in the area. They'll have to divide that place up; no way the Sunni/Shia come together. It's like Israel and the Palestinians...too much blood on the ground and Ideological/Religious polar division for this generation to overcome.
Posted by 14&Counting
Eugene, OR
Member since Jul 2012
37612 posts
Posted on 3/25/17 at 10:18 am to
quote:

They'll have to divide that place up;


This^....these countries are all synthetic states drawn up by colonial powers after WWI.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram