Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Mohamed1993

Russia bombed SDF

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Russia bombed SDF targets today, after the SDF made a statement that they would not LET the SAA cross the euphrates river. I know Kurds haven't been well treated under Baathist regimes before, but they are pretty much allowing themselves to be exploited for imperialist and Zionist ambitions to weaken Syria, if that's the case, they should get ready to be bombed, you cannot impede the progress of the SAA. No wonder Turkey doesn't trust them. 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-sdf/jets-strike-u-s-backed-forces-in-eastern-syria-idUSKCN1BR09K?il=0.

[Mod Note: Topic title changed.]

Edited by ShiaChat Mod
To add the Mod Note.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iran, Iraq, Turkey, the three major Kurd population holders won't allow it to happen. Iran and Iraq because they won't let another Israel be planted next to their borders (recent statement of IRI FM), Turks won't allow it because if it happens, 1/3rd of Turkish territory could be claimed to be the future part of Kurdistan. Russians don't like it because of instability closer to its borders and also because they have already wasted enough resources on countering other stooges of the West in their immediate neighborhood.

Google Pepe Escobar or M.P. Bahadurkumar for excellent analysis of why Kurds are being used only to foment more chaos in the ME and would be abandoned as soon as it won't remain convenient for he West to play spoiler. Central theme, ISIS is out, AQ is sort of dead, on who else to milk Wahabi oil money and feed the war machine of the West, Kurds fit right in. 

Political sands are shifting fast in general in favor of the Shia / Resistance in ME which obviously didn't come cheap to Shia. Earlier this month, BNY came empty handed from Russian visit where he demanded Putin to keep Shia legions 60 miles off of the border of Israel. The chosen ones are not used to hear no until recently. Those who used to consider themselves unapproachable five years ago are being equalized in the world of politics as the influence of the West is waning rapidly. Syrian war has fundamentally shaken the world order that was established after the end of Cold War (see Asia Times op ed 9/15/2017). 

Bottom line - Kurdistan won't happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

How can one justify promoting a Palestinian State while advocating against a Kurdish State?

The British and the French have been blamed for almost 100 years for dividing up the Middle East along somewhat arbitrary lines after World War I and the fall of the Ottoman Empire.  But now, when an ethnic group whats to reverse this and regain control of their native land they are met with resistance by State's that have pointed their finger at Britain and France for years.  :confused:

All the Best,

David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, David66 said:

How can one justify promoting a Palestinian State while advocating against a Kurdish State?

 

Oh the irony, how can one justify denying a Palestinian state while promoting a Kurdish one, you should really ask the Israelis this. I don't agree with the two-state solution, I support a single-state with appropriate rights for everyone living in that land, that's what I advocate in Syria, Iraq, Iran or anywhere else in the world, division sows hatred and enmity, the two-state experiment (or the lack of one) in Israel/Palestine has shown that segregation only fosters antagonistic attitudes, which governments then exploit to keep people fearful and promote their own agendas.

2 hours ago, David66 said:

But now, when an ethnic group whats to reverse this and regain control of their native land they are met with resistance by State's that have pointed their finger at Britain and France for years

Breaking up states is an extension of Sykes-Picot btw, and only serves an imperialist agenda of weakening countries the imperial powers don't like. It is better to have united countries where all people can have their rights protected, breaking them up will create more instability and more war, not what the region needs right now.  

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

50 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

Breaking up states is an extension of Sykes-Picot btw, and only serves an imperialist agenda of weakening countries the imperial powers don't like. It is better to have united countries where all people can have their rights protected, breaking them up will create more instability and more war, not what the region needs right now.  

Do you think this is possible in the Middle East?

All the Best,

David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, David66 said:

Do you think this is possible in the Middle East?

 

Eventually. The alternative would be to split things up but then have disputes about territory, oil, resources, and be in perpetual conflict forever. With the right leadership and the right education systems implemented, its possible. These nations haven't been independent for very long, and they've constantly had foreign interference from different parties, if left alone and given time, I think it will happen eventually. Let's not forget that the European nations for a long time were not peaceful countries, they had brutal wars with one another, as did the US with its civil rights movement. People evolve, cultures evolve. The crazy Wahhabi interpretations though need to be done away with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2017 at 4:33 PM, Irfani313 said:

Iran, Iraq, Turkey, the three major Kurd population holders won't allow it to happen. Iran and Iraq because they won't let another Israel be planted next to their borders (recent statement of IRI FM), Turks won't allow it because if it happens, 1/3rd of Turkish territory could be claimed to be the future part of Kurdistan. Russians don't like it because of instability closer to its borders and also because they have already wasted enough resources on countering other stooges of the West in their immediate neighborhood.

Google Pepe Escobar or M.P. Bahadurkumar for excellent analysis of why Kurds are being used only to foment more chaos in the ME and would be abandoned as soon as it won't remain convenient for he West to play spoiler. Central theme, ISIS is out, AQ is sort of dead, on who else to milk Wahabi oil money and feed the war machine of the West, Kurds fit right in. 

Political sands are shifting fast in general in favor of the Shia / Resistance in ME which obviously didn't come cheap to Shia. Earlier this month, BNY came empty handed from Russian visit where he demanded Putin to keep Shia legions 60 miles off of the border of Israel. The chosen ones are not used to hear no until recently. Those who used to consider themselves unapproachable five years ago are being equalized in the world of politics as the influence of the West is waning rapidly. Syrian war has fundamentally shaken the world order that was established after the end of Cold War (see Asia Times op ed 9/15/2017). 

Bottom line - Kurdistan won't happen. 

What does "another Israel won't happen" mean? 

You should also see the news, the referendum is happening tommorrow. Iraq has threatened invasion, Turkey and Iran have. Yet none seem to be preparing for it, empty rhetoric I'd imagine. 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/22/2017 at 11:35 PM, Mohamed1993 said:

 

Breaking up states is an extension of Sykes-Picot btw, and only serves an imperialist agenda of weakening countries the imperial powers don't like. It is better to have united countries where all people can have their rights protected, breaking them up will create more instability and more war, not what the region needs right now.  

That makes no logical sense whatsoever. The Sykes-Picot agreement essentially drew the borders of the Middle-east that exist today. How can it serve the "imperialist agenda" when it is inherently anti-imperialist?

Quote

Oh the irony, how can one justify denying a Palestinian state while promoting a Kurdish one, you should really ask the Israelis this. I don't agree with the two-state solution, I support a single-state with appropriate rights for everyone living in that land, that's what I advocate in Syria, Iraq, Iran or anywhere else in the world, division sows hatred and enmity, the two-state experiment (or the lack of one) in Israel/Palestine has shown that segregation only fosters antagonistic attitudes, which governments then exploit to keep people fearful and promote their own agendas.

It's actually typical double-standards that comes from Palestine independence supporters. They support Palestinian self-determination but not Kurdish self-determination. 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

That makes no logical sense whatsoever.

It does, breaking up states is part of imperialist agendas to weaken countries, they don't care about Kurds whatsoever, the fact that Kurds don't see this makes them incredibly naive. A region rife with more instability than it already has isn't what anyone need, and who do you think such instability benefits? If people thought more logically and less along the lines of mine and your homeland, we wouldn't allow neo-colonialists to divide us, unfortunately many don't seem to recognise this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

It's actually typical double-standards that comes from Palestine independence supporters. They support Palestinian self-determination but not Kurdish self-determination. 

Yeah and the Kurds keep waving the Israeli flag, where is their respect for Palestinian self-determination then? And, I don't support a two-state solution, so the argument is in vain. We call for democratic states everywhere, why must the Middle East be different? When the borders were drawn, an injustice was done, but now that it's done, you only sow more hatred, division and instability by further splitting up land. 

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...