Donald Trump's Facebook post made 20 minutes ago regarding the Middle East

Just to point out the obvious...


It's the run-up to the Election...

And the troops have merely moved South they haven't actually left the ME...

Never trust a Snake Oil Salesman and let's face Trump seems to have a whole warehouse full of the useless stuff.

Always Deny Ignorance

Also, the "REAL" left wouldn't have even entered the ME, that is if America actually had a left-wing of which they do not, they just have two forms of right-wing and both seem very wrong. As for blaming the Democrats for ME wars, I believe you may need to look back at your recent history. As for US ME interference origins, you'd have to look back even further than that 1953 Iran. Common Theme, as usual, being OIL.

So please, all this Left Wing rhetoric, it's very misplaced... What you mean is, You the Right Wing(Republicans) and then those on the Right(Democrats)who is a different type of Right Wing.

An analogy, The Romulans calling the Klingons Left Wing

DENY IGNORANCE

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan
If our justice dept did its job all of them would be in jail this administration included.

Ewww, now we supposed to login into farcebook to get governmental information, dam thats sad in general. Calling 1984 come in 1984 "we can see if you support the state and will adjust your social score to reflect so".

I did not see the post, but saw a tweet about beetles, but surely he meant beatles as that is what they were dubbed

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump In case the Kurds or Turkey lose control, the United States has already taken the 2 ISIS militants tied to beheadings in Syria, known as the Beetles, out of that country and into a secure location controlled by the U.S. They are the worst of the worst!

Other members of the IS cell - dubbed "The Beatles" because of their British accents

British IS fighters taken into US custody, says Trump

Again its only a minor mistake, but he sure has a habbit of it, I suppose it shows at least his tweets are not vetted and that is a least some transparency, but then we have to admit he cant spell very well, yet he believes he has unmatched wisdom, sometimes even geniuses have their flaws.


Beetles


Beatles

We can’t win in the Middle East. It’s full of crazy people following a crazy religion. We’d either have to kill them all or occupy and fundamentally transform the entire region as we did Germany and Japan after WWII. It’s not worth it.

We don’t need its oil anymore.

Israel can easily take care of itself and doesn’t need our money.

We can save additional billions by cutting off Egypt and every other aid recipient in the ME.

I don’t mind selling weapons to them I suppose, but I don’t want our people dying over there anymore.

If Iran gets the bomb and Israel feels threatened enough, it can eliminate those nut jobs for good in one day. The Arabs would secretly applaud it.

I’m not opposed to killing terrorists there when it can be done without undo risk to our personnel. And any nation abetting terrorists who harm America or Americans should be punished severely.

As for policing the region; let someone else shoulder the burden. The EU’s always second guessing us and complaining. They’re rich. Let them do it. Or let China. I don’t care anymore.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: EartOccupant

The whole middle east and parts of Africa are not and have not been real borders, with real countries, with real rulers.

Rulers are only as real as the weapons and foreign interests that back them - keeping their people under dictatorships.

The borders are real - set up by Britain and protected by US soldiers so the US/Petrodollar remains supreme, and the MIC makes money and Big Oil like Shell and BP.



wiki Iraq -

In April 1920 the British Mandate of Mesopotamia was created under the authority of the League of Nations. A British-backed monarchy joining these vilayets into one Kingdom was established in 1921 under Faisal I of Iraq. The Hashemite Kingdom of Iraq gained independence from the UK in 1932.

The Shah of Persia

en.wikipedia.org...état

The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup d'état (Persian: کودتای ۲۸ مرداد‎), was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favour of strengthening the monarchical rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953, orchestrated by the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project[5] or "Operation Ajax") and the United Kingdom (under the name "Operation Boot").[6][7][8][9] It was the first covert action of the United States to overthrow a foreign government during peacetime

Are you saying the inhabitants and rulers in the Middle East have had nothing to do with the royal mess they find themselves in? I had no idea the USA was that powerful. Seems to me Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq and Iran have made plenty of mistakes and committed a few crimes all on their own. But don’t let that keep you from blaming America for everything wrong in the Middle East. You should be happy we’re leaving it in the wise hands of the EU, Russia and China. They never make mistakes or do anything immoral.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

The next time, if ever, we return to the ME it should be with the goal of conquering. No more wars we aren't allowed to win.

Amen.

On so many levels...

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Riffrafter

the us administrations since carter? www.nytimes.com...

Whoever was to blame, an American guarantee was dishonored. An ethnic group that wanted only to speak its language and pursue its cultural traditions, as an autonomous region under the Iraqi flag, has since been systematically uprooted and dispersed. The totalitarian state of Iraq has driven hundreds of thousands of Kurds out of their homes. Thirty thousand Kurdish pesh rnerga (“those who face death”)—Mulla Mustafa's followers—were reported to he In concentration camps. Amnesty International has the names of 389 hostages—innocent wives and children of rebel soldiers now fighting once again in the hills—who have been jailed by Iraq, without medical care, in defiance of anybody's idea of human rights. Mulla Mustafa, now 75 and ill, is in America trying to call Mr. Carter's attention to the plight of his people,

so this from waaaay back in the day

Good points. I'll try and think about this as I continually evaluate wtf is going on.

Thanks.

originally posted by: kobalt7
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan
If our justice dept did its job all of them would be in jail this administration included.

True - but who does the justice dept ultimately report to?

The Attorney General.

And who appoints the Attorney General?

See the flaw in your logic yet?

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Are you implying that the other 48 countries are exempt from any responsibility

no i'm saying that the U.S. is better than that, or should be. here are a people that the whole world has took a dump on when the greed of land and and territory after WW I took what they gave them away. the U.S. fought a war for independence and should above all know what the Kurds are going through. sh@@hole or not.

In the early 20th Century, many Kurds began to consider the creation of a homeland - generally referred to as "Kurdistan". After World War One and the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, the victorious Western allies made provision for a Kurdish state in the 1920 Treaty of Sevres. Such hopes were dashed three years later, however, when the Treaty of Lausanne, which set the boundaries of modern Turkey, made no provision for a Kurdish state and left Kurds with minority status in their respective countries. Over the next 80 years, any move by Kurds to set up an independent state was brutally quashed.

Who are the Kurds?

does that sound like any or maybe two or three other peoples in the middle east. i say yes.

The Kurds’ fellow Muslims certainly don’t give a damn about them, although they’re united in denying them a nation of their own. Trump and the USA get criticized for everything that’s happened to the Kurds, but who exactly is it that’s abusing them? Why it’s Turkey, Iran, Syria and Iraq. And while I think the second Iraq war was a terrible mistake, the Kurds got an autonomous homeland in northern Iraq out of it, and the Shiite Arab-majority population gained political control. Let Merkel, Macron and Juncker straighten it all out. They always make wise decisions and love to criticize Trump.

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Riffrafter

the us administrations since carter? www.nytimes.com...

Whoever was to blame, an American guarantee was dishonored. An ethnic group that wanted only to speak its language and pursue its cultural traditions, as an autonomous region under the Iraqi flag, has since been systematically uprooted and dispersed. The totalitarian state of Iraq has driven hundreds of thousands of Kurds out of their homes. Thirty thousand Kurdish pesh rnerga (“those who face death”)—Mulla Mustafa's followers—were reported to he In concentration camps. Amnesty International has the names of 389 hostages—innocent wives and children of rebel soldiers now fighting once again in the hills—who have been jailed by Iraq, without medical care, in defiance of anybody's idea of human rights. Mulla Mustafa, now 75 and ill, is in America trying to call Mr. Carter's attention to the plight of his people,

so this from waaaay back in the day

and newrepublic.com...

U.S. geopolitical engagement with the Kurds began in earnest in the mid-1970s. The Americans and Israelis had brokered a deal with the Shah of Iran to permit the establishment of a large autonomous Kurdish enclave in Northern Iraq, which could help antagonize Saddam Hussein’s regime in Baghdad. (The Kurds had already rebelled against Iraq several times in the 1960s, conflicts that left tens of thousands dead and made refugees of hundreds of thousands more.) But, as The New Yorker’s Dexter Filkins has noted, the Shah and Hussein struck a peace deal in 1975, and the new Kurdish stronghold was ultimately left unprotected. The Iraqi army immediately sent the Kurds to ground. This tragedy, Filkins wrote, left an indelible mark: The name of Henry Kissinger—who as Gerald Ford’s secretary of state and national security advisor oversaw the U.S.’s disengagement—“is known, and reviled, by nearly every Kurd.” The Kurds’ de facto leader later wrote an unnerving lament to Ford’s successor, President Jimmy Carter: “I could have prevented this calamity which befell my people,” he said, “had I not fully believed in the promise of America.” By 1988, near the end of the Iran-Iraq war, Hussein initiated the “Anfal campaign,” a genocidal offensive against the Kurds that killed perhaps 100,000; Iraqi units were ordered to bomb indiscriminately “in order to kill the largest number of persons present” and execute any prisoners between the ages of 15 and 70. Arguably the worst of these attacks occurred in Halabja that year, a town bombarded with mustard gas and nerve agents, making Iraq the first known state to use chemical weapons against its own people. An estimated 5,000 people, many women and children, died in that strike. Throughout the Iran-Iraq war, the U.S. had long known about Hussein’s chemical attacks, tolerated them, and even provided targeting information used by chemical units (against the Iranians, not the Kurds), all because he was their bulwark against Tehran. As Bush’s predecessor, Ronald Reagan, once wrote into the margins of a Pentagon intelligence report: “An Iranian victory is unacceptable.” But three years later, as U.S. armor repelled Hussein’s soldiers from neighboring oil-rich Kuwait, President George H.W. Bush suddenly rediscovered the Kurds as a possible check to Baghdad’s power. “The Iraqi people should put Saddam aside, and that would facilitate the resolution of all these problems,” Bush said in early March of 1991, as U.S. victory seemed imminent. Believing that Bush had their backs, Kurds in the north and Shi’a Iraqis in the south launched uprisings against the Saddam regime. But the U.S. did not have the Kurds’ backs. Despite their territorial gains and open call for Hussein’s arrest, the American commander, General Norman Schwarzkopf, did not advance to Baghdad; instead, he negotiated a settlement that permitted Iraq to use helicopters for logistical purposes. The Iraqis instead used helicopters as gunships, raining steel and chemicals down on Kurdish positions, killing thousands and displacing many more. The U.S. more or less looked the other way as Kurds fled for safety under a no-fly zone in the north. “We don’t think that outside powers should be interfering in the internal affairs of Iraq,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said at the time.

so sadly far from the first ,does not make it any better but sadly par for the course for how the usa has treated the valiant kurds

They have an autonomous homeland in northern Iraq that’s almost entirely due to the USA, and that did not come cheaply nor without a lot of dead and wounded Americans. What country are you from? What has it done for the Kurds?

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Sublimecraft

UN should be protecting them but they are broke and cant even pay their staffers apparently www.reuters.com...

He told the 193-member U.N. General Assembly’s budget committee that if he had not worked since January to cut spending then “we would not have had the liquidity to support” the annual gathering of world leaders last month. “This month, we will reach the deepest deficit of the decade. We risk ... entering November without enough cash to cover payrolls,” said Guterres. “Our work and our reforms are at risk.” The United States is the largest contributor - responsible for 22 percent of the more than $3.3 billion regular budget for 2019, which pays for work including political, humanitarian, disarmament, economic and social affairs and communications.

in the past decade or so the UN has turned toothless to stop the exact thing it was invented to stop

Just so you know, the USA pays more BY FAR for the U.N. budget and peacekeeping than any other nation. Here are a couple of excerpts from a recent Newsweek article:

“For the 2018-2019 fiscal year, the U.S. will contribute 28.47 percent ($1.9 billion) of the body's budget. China trails far behind, contributing just 10.25 percent ($687.7 million). Japan follows China at just under 10 percent, then Germany, France and the United Kingdom all at around 6 percent. Russia, Italy, Canada and Spain round out the top ten contributors, respectively.“

Re: the U.S. share for U.N. peacekeeping:

“Running from June 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019, the budget is currently set at $6.7 billion. The United States, which is the world's largest economy, is by far the biggest contributor, giving more than double that of the next biggest donor, China.”

That’s $8.6 billion a year for activities that provide very little benefit to the USA.

a reply to: Riffrafter

When Dubya first kicked off the gulf war sequel, I think it was about 1.3 trillion a year.

As for the soldiers, I used to watch PBS and everyday dozens of soldiers KIA were named for months. How do we fix this mess we helped create? simple, we can't.

a reply to: Scapegrace

America(montana) and well i guess that autonomous region you talked about good deal of weapons and support over the years but sadly when ever it comes down to helping them in situations like this we tend to bail , like i said big fan of the kurds and trump doing this irked me but acting like its all his fault for this or that its the first time this has happened to the Kurd's is disingenuous.

a reply to: Riffrafter

It would be easier to take him seriously if he didn't just send weapons and troops to Saudi Arabia to protect the Mudering Prince's oil for him.

Trump doesn't want out of the middle east, he just wants to hand Putin things Putin wants.

a reply to: Scapegrace

yep think trumps even brought it up in the past the other members of the un need to step up and pay more of the dues they owe least if they want it functioning as it should as we the usa cant and should not have to fund the majority of it alone

a reply to: Extorris

www.cnn.com... every one sells weapons to saudi and they have the money to buy what ever they want pretty much from good deal of EU members to usa canada and china although russia has not really popped into the market too well (they do buy rifles though but china sells them the bulk of the eastern weapons systems
www.aljazeera.com...

According to data for 2018, the United States continued to supply the bulk of arms to Saudi Arabia, accounting for 88 percent of all arms sold to the country. Between 2014 and 2018, Saudi Arabia received 22 percent of the US's arms exports, a sharp increase from 4.9 percent from 2009 to 2013. The data includes major arms, such as armoured vehicles, guided missiles, aircraft, artillery and ships. Arms deliveries to Saudi Arabia in 2014-2018 included 56 combat aircraft from the US and 38 from the United Kingdom, according to the report. In both cases, the aircraft were equipped with cruise missiles and other guided weapons. Planned deliveries for 2019-2023 include 98 combat aircraft, seven missile defence systems and 83 tanks from the US, 737 armoured vehicles from Canada, five frigates from Spain and short-range ballistic missiles from Ukraine, according to SIPRI. The report noted that arms flows to the Middle East have surged, almost doubling in the past five years. Four of the world's top 10 arms-importing countries in 2014-2018 were in the Middle East: Saudi Arabia, which received 33 percent of arms transfers to the region, Egypt at 15 percent, the United Arab Emirates 11 percent and Iraq 11 percent. Shown below are the countries that export the most major weapons to Saudi Arabia.

we do sell them the bulk of the weapons though so ill give you that but it should be some solace to you that we can sell them all the advanced weapons in the world but they arent worth a hoot with out good combat doctrine as the saudis have found out getting a good deal of the abrams tanks they have lit up by yemeni insurgents

a reply to: Riffrafter

I don't believe the reasoning given for pulling back.

Lindsey Grahm was recently punked with a prank call where they pretended to be Turkey's leadership.

Lindsey Grahm who has publicly denounced abandoning the Kurds spouting on about allies this and that showed his true colors when he thought he was on the phone with Turkey's defense minister.

In the call, Graham was primarily concerned with getting Turkey back into the F-35 program and urging the “defense minister” to refrain from using Russia’s S-400 anti-aircraft weapon system

link

Just so happens that there is F-35 manufacturing in his state. When Grahm talked about the Kurds he described them as a problem and said he was sympathetic to the threat.

This pullout is more about appeasing the MIC so they can sell weapons systems to keep them rolling in dough. Lives, Honor, Oaths mean nothing in the face of business and business is war.

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Scapegrace

yep think trumps even brought it up in the past the other members of the un need to step up and pay more of the dues they owe least if they want it functioning as it should as we the usa cant and should not have to fund the majority of it alone

That is all great, but the majority of that funding goes to those nations to buy weapons from US MIC.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Riffrafter

Thoughts?

The left, which were formerly peaceniks, will be shouting battle cries as the new warmongers.

Lets not forget that it was the Obama admin along with Biden and Hilary Clinton are responsible for the chaos and mess in Libya.

Its no secret MSM Outlets are protecting them of any criticism on the middle east mess.

a reply to: Extorris

Trump doesn't want out of the middle east, he just wants to hand Putin things Putin wants.

Ah this nonsense again. Also America has being in the middle east and creating chaos for 20 = years with regime changes and interventions anything to please Saudi house