Will Trump be impeached?

[Caballus]

Getting involved with the Kurds was about as smart as getting involved in Bosnia. That shit goes back CENTURIES - but sure you're now an expert on the Middle East. Were you this worried for the Montagnards when we left Vietnam?

Interesting thread to watch, and this part of it is a bit off topic, but it strikes close to home, so...

Debatable.
How we (U.S., NATO, UN) handled the war in Bosnia can and probably should be criticized. Whether or not we (U.S.) should have taken a leading role can be debated—though after Srebrenica it would be tough to argue against involvement. Whether we were smart to get involved with the Kurds (decades ago) and are right to step aside now and leave them exposed is also debatable--the answer boils down to opinion, which means there is no answer.

Undebatable.
We (the U.S.) did get involved with and make a commitment to the Kurds. What's more, there is little to no comparison between our relationship with the Peshmerga (and Syrian Kurds) and our relationship with the Bosniacs. We didn’t have a long-standing relationship with the Bosniacs before the war. Our sole purpose in that relationship was to protect them, which did not involve them fighting alongside us.

Conversely, not even counting what we did with them in the 70s thru 90s, the Kurds directly assisted us during OIF, and afterwards they were key to us finding and killing Bin Laden. Related to Syria, they have bled next to us and instead of us—their women included. It’s not a mistake that they wear our uniforms. Peshmerga are (were?) risky allies because of the centuries old baggage you mentioned and then some. But, we made a deal and they have lived up to their end several times over. There is absolutely no way we would have crippled ISIS the way we did without fighting "by, with and through" the Kurds.

The Montagnards were equally loyal partners when we needed them…

All the rest remains open for debate by those who are into that.

Sponsored

 

[Weather Man]

Biden been playing the "Quid Pro Quo" influence peddling game a long time. Oh look, another 1.5 Billion.

HillStone International won a coveted government contract in part because the company has “the little brother of the vice president as a partner,” as David Richter, president of HillStone’s parent company explained to investors in a recent meeting reported on by Fox Business today.

“Since November 2010, James Biden has been the executive vice president of Hill International’s housing subsidiary despite little if any documented work history in residential construction,” Fox explains. “And if the company’s projections are accurate, both Hill and Biden are on the verge of a huge payday, beneficiaries, some analysts believe, of James Biden’s connections to the Obama Administration through his older brother.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/1...head-of-debate

 

[ctandc72]

Interesting thread to watch, and this part of it is a bit off topic, but it strikes close to home, so...

Debatable.
How we (U.S., NATO, UN) handled the war in Bosnia can and probably should be criticized. Whether or not we (U.S.) should have taken a leading role can be debated—though after Srebrenica it would be tough to argue against involvement. Whether we were smart to get involved with the Kurds (decades ago) and are right to step aside now and leave them exposed is also debatable--the answer boils down to opinion, which means there is no answer.

Undebatable.
We (the U.S.) did get involved with and make a commitment to the Kurds. What's more, there is little to no comparison between our relationship with the Peshmerga (and Syrian Kurds) and our relationship with the Bosniacs. We didn’t have a long-standing relationship with the Bosniacs before the war. Our sole purpose in that relationship was to protect them, which did not involve them fighting alongside us.

Conversely, not even counting what we did with them in the 70s thru 90s, the Kurds directly assisted us during OIF, and afterwards they were key to us finding and killing Bin Laden. Related to Syria, they have bled next to us and instead of us—their women included. It’s not a mistake that they wear our uniforms. Peshmerga are (were?) risky allies because of the centuries old baggage you mentioned and then some. But, we made a deal and they have lived up to their end several times over. There is absolutely no way we would have crippled ISIS the way we did without fighting "by, with and through" the Kurds.

The Montagnards were equally loyal partners when we needed them…

All the rest remains open for debate by those who are into that.

Agree on most points - but I wasn't comparing our relationships between the two. I'm referring to the fact that both groups of people have been essentially at odds with the other groups (mostly the majority depending) for centuries. There's no easy fix to that. Once more - the Kurds assisted us for sure, but they don't want us staying there. That's been our problem since the 50's. Political and civilian forces try to use the military in regime changes and "police actions" and that's not what the conventional military is designed / built for.

Mostly it's bureaucratic ignorance at the top and good old CRS Syndrome (Can't Remember Shit). Bremer essentially putting every Iraqi soldier and government official out of work comes to mind. He pretty much guaranteed much of what went on after the initial invasion success in '03. When a man trained to be a solider is suddenly unemployed, someone will find the money to hire him - and since they blamed the U.S. government for putting them out of work - there you go.

But back to the Syrian Kurds....we've had plenty of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" situations over the years. That's normal. But the shit that's been going on in Kurdish controlled Syria is nothing new. Just because certain groups there happened to hate Isis more than us or other groups doesn't make it all better.

My main point is it's complicated as all get out - and all these op-eds and people suddenly crowing about the Kurds couldn't have given two shits about 'em a month ago. The thing is most people hear "Kurds" and thing it's all the same. It's not. Apparently you know that as well. Hell, the Kurds in Turkey are a LARGE chunk of the population. For many in that region, the Kurds in Northern Syria have more in common with Iran than anyone else.....from a cultural standpoint.

It's the wild west out there - same as the "Autonomous" regions in Pakistan. It's just hard for most Americans to realize how tribal many of these groups are. It's also hard for people to realize that many of these groups have been fighting SOMEONE for decades if not longer. And many times who they fight is based on who their tribal leaders are paid to fight.

 

[Shane361]

Here is the Democratic Strategy
If you can't beat them, destroy them.

As mentioned....Trump didn't win so much as Hilary lost...big difference. In other terms a lot of people voted against Hillary without thought of WHO that was for. I don't really like Trump as a person but I also don't have to like him. I do like him as a President...maybe even love him as one. He is pissing off pretty much everybody I don't like in the first place. Must be doing something right. ;)

 

[Hack]

Here is the Democratic Strategy
If you can't beat them, destroy them.

As mentioned....Trump didn't win so much as Hilary lost...big difference. In other terms a lot of people voted against Hillary without thought of WHO that was for. I don't really like Trump as a person but I also don't have to like him. I do like him as a President...maybe even love him as one. He is pissing off pretty much everybody I don't like in the first place. Must be doing something right. ;)

I think you are right plus a lot of the left base was not excited about their candidate and not as many of them showed up to vote. Who can blame them?

If we would have had Jeb Bush to vote for I wouldn't have been excited either.

 

[Caballus]

Agree on most points - but I wasn't comparing our relationships between the two. I'm referring to the fact that both groups of people have been essentially at odds with the other groups (mostly the majority depending) for centuries. There's no easy fix to that. Once more - the Kurds assisted us for sure, but they don't want us staying there. That's been our problem since the 50's. Political and civilian forces try to use the military in regime changes and "police actions" and that's not what the conventional military is designed / built for.

Mostly it's bureaucratic ignorance at the top and good old CRS Syndrome (Can't Remember Shit). Bremer essentially putting every Iraqi soldier and government official out of work comes to mind. He pretty much guaranteed much of what went on after the initial invasion success in '03. When a man trained to be a solider is suddenly unemployed, someone will find the money to hire him - and since they blamed the U.S. government for putting them out of work - there you go.

But back to the Syrian Kurds....we've had plenty of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" situations over the years. That's normal. But the shit that's been going on in Kurdish controlled Syria is nothing new. Just because certain groups there happened to hate Isis more than us or other groups doesn't make it all better.

My main point is it's complicated as all get out - and all these op-eds and people suddenly crowing about the Kurds couldn't have given two shits about 'em a month ago. The thing is most people hear "Kurds" and thing it's all the same. It's not. Apparently you know that as well. Hell, the Kurds in Turkey are a LARGE chunk of the population. For many in that region, the Kurds in Northern Syria have more in common with Iran than anyone else.....from a cultural standpoint.

It's the wild west out there - same as the "Autonomous" regions in Pakistan. It's just hard for most Americans to realize how tribal many of these groups are. It's also hard for people to realize that many of these groups have been fighting SOMEONE for decades if not longer. And many times who they fight is based on who their tribal leaders are paid to fight.

Agree with much of the above (though not all), and fully get the regional, cultural, tribal, security...dynamics (from a totally non-bureaucratic perspective)--fully. So, what Kurds have in common with each other is less important than what they have in common with us, since no nation (state or non-state) enters into a deal unless there is something in it for them. But, when partners enter into a deal, vice adversaries, there's an expectation of reciprocity. So what's relevant here is that in exchange for blood treasure, we (Americans) made a deal. Unlike Russians and others, that means something, or at least should. That part is not the least bit complicated.

Can't speak for OpEds and those who didn't know, care about, or fight alongside Kurds in the past.

 

[ctandc72]

Agree with much of the above (though not all), and fully get the regional, cultural, tribal, security...dynamics (from a totally non-bureaucratic perspective)--fully. So, what Kurds have in common with each other is less important than what they have in common with us, since no nation (state or non-state) enters into a deal unless there is something in it for them. But, when partners enter into a deal, vice adversaries, there's an expectation of reciprocity. So what's relevant here is that in exchange for blood treasure, we (Americans) made a deal. Unlike Russians and others, that means something, or at least should. That part is not the least bit complicated.

Can't speak for OpEds and those who didn't know, care about, or fight alongside Kurds in the past.

Agreed. Problem is that politicians and politics usual end up putting our military in a position they shouldn't have been subjected to in the first place, but once we're there - that's the rub. Always has been.

The biggest problem is perception - and that's counting high level politicians who compare their life / experiences in the U.S. and reflect it onto other countries and cultures and it just doesn't work like that. My issue is more that IF we take military action, we take it with a CLEAR goal in mind and we don't dip our toes in the water, we jump in, get the job done. I think most military would agree with that. Other than those looking for a stamp on their jacket on the way up the chain of course.

 

[Caballus]

Agreed. Problem is that politicians and politics usual end up putting our military in a position they shouldn't have been subjected to in the first place, but once we're there - that's the rub. Always has been.

The biggest problem is perception - and that's counting high level politicians who compare their life / experiences in the U.S. and reflect it onto other countries and cultures and it just doesn't work like that. My issue is more that IF we take military action, we take it with a CLEAR goal in mind and we don't dip our toes in the water, we jump in, get the job done. I think most military would agree with that. Other than those looking for a stamp on their jacket on the way up the chain of course.

Agree in general, although jumping in and getting the job done in the classic sense requires a degree of symmetry that seldom exists. Either way, I don't see how that applies to stepping aside from our Kurdish partners in this instance...

 

[shogun32]

Bremer essentially putting every Iraqi soldier and government official out of work comes to mind. He pretty much guaranteed much of what went on after the initial invasion success in '03.

which is why Patton hired the Nazis to run Germany in the aftermath and similarly in Japan after their respective falls.

I can agree with getting our troops out of the immediate vicinity but my solution to Endrogan would be to inform him in no uncertain terms that we will annihilate any armor or forces in strength the instant they cross the recognized border. And I would supply the Kurds with plenty of ammo and vehicles with the proviso that they likewise stay put in their zones. And open up direct dialog with Assad to get him and Kurds figuring how to live peaceably with each other. F*k Turkey. Disable all their US planes and armaments and cancel all contracts.

The military is for killing the other side. As ruthlessly, quickly and efficiently as possible. It's an abomination what "war" has become.

 

[Tony T]

I’m sure our NATO allies are reassessing their relationship with the U.S. As is Japan, South Korea and especially Taiwan.

What would Trump do right now if Russia invaded the Ukraine? Or Poland?

What would he do if China decided to repatriate Taiwan?

What would he do if North Korea launched an attack on the south?

I know what he would do. Based on his past Presidential behavior, he would fire off a few Tweets about it. Talk big about how it would be a big mistake. And then do nothing.

What country would want to be an ally to one that will bug out when the crap hits the fan?

This country needs a real leader. A person with intelligence, temperament, but unwavering will.

Donald Trump is not that person.

 

[gixxersixxerman]

I’m sure our NATO allies are reassessing their relationship with the U.S. As is Japan, South Korea and especially Taiwan.

What would Trump do right now if Russia invaded the Ukraine? Or Poland?

What would he do if China decided to repatriate Taiwan?

What would he do if North Korea launched an attack on the south?

I know what he would do. Based on his past Presidential behavior, he would fire off a few Tweets about it. Talk big about how it would be a big mistake. And then do nothing.

What country would want to be an ally to one that will bug out when the crap hits the fan?

This country needs a real leader. A person with intelligence, temperament, but unwavering will.

Donald Trump is not that person.

i do know you would bitch if he did nothing, you would bitch if he put us in another war..

 

[Tony T]

I believe the reason Trump gave Turkey the green light to invade northern Syria is because Putin told him to. I believe Putin has dirt on our President. I believe our President has been comprised!

 

[Tony T]

i do know you would bitch if he did nothing, you would bitch if he put us in another war..

The correct definition of the word, “bitch” is a female dog in heat.

So your post is nonsensical.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

What would Trump do right now if Russia invaded the Ukraine? Or Poland?

What would he do if China decided to repatriate Taiwan?

What would he do if North Korea launched an attack on the south?

That's for him to know and them to find out, at least until someone figures a way to tell US citizens without any adversaries finding out so they don't have to prepare for the alternatives.

I think Schiff proposed using pig-latin but that incurred the wrath of Americans identifying as porcine.

 

[gixxersixxerman]

The correct definition of the word, “bitch” is a female dog in heat.

So your post is nonsensical.

Best you could come back with huh? Because you know it would be the truth. Let me make it easier for your baby brain. You would complain if he did nothing, you would complain if he started another war. Is that "sensical" enough for you? Or need it broken down even more?

Sponsored