Has Trump given Syria to Erdogan or Putin or both?
Erdogan meets with Putin Tuesday.
The "allied" troops including Delta Force and the SAS had to be flown out as an emergency measure as they were without support. The Kurds are now being hit with Air Strikes by Accident despite having been allies or the allies... wtf!
Originally posted by Nibedicusof course you can give what isn't yours. Colonial History alone is full of examples of nations taking ang giving what doesn't belong to them. Possession has never been 9/10ths of the law, the law has always been the one with the biggest stick decides who gets what.
You can’t really “give” what isn’t yours.More like “no longer prevented from taking”, maybe?
Originally posted by Putinbot1
of course you can give what isn't yours. Colonial History alone is full of examples of nations taking ang giving what doesn't belong to them. Possession has never been 9/10ths of the law, the law has always been the one with the biggest stick decides who gets what.
My god! How high is that horse you’re riding on?
You do know the world was build and created through the destruction of the weak right? Back then, it was might that strives, if you were to weak to protect yours, it was taken from you.
From the strongest empire, to the weakest town, might control all.
So get off your high horse.
Re: Has Trump given Syria to Erdogan or Putin or both?
Originally posted by Putinbot1
Erdogan meets with Putin Tuesday.The "allied" troops including Delta Force and the SAS had to be flown out as an emergency measure as they were without support. The Kurds are now being hit with Air Strikes by Accident despite having been allies or the allies... wtf!
*YAWN*
Troll harder, pooty/bashy.
Trump/Pence 2020. 👆
If you truly care about Syria so damn much and aren't just using it as a tool to bash Trump then why don't you get off your high horse and spend your time petitioning your own damn government to send its own troops to defend it. Let the UK put its own soldiers in danger instead of always depending on the US to do it. We're (us americans) are sick and tired of it.
I find that topics like these are much harder to comprehend (for me) due to not knowing the cultures/people in those regions.
Do you back your NATO allies wishes, I dont know the rules in NATO and it seems like this is an issue that NATO should handle and not 1 or 2 countries in NATO but the entire group.
Do you back your allies in the region that you have no formal agreement with while threatening the agreement you have with NATO partners?
Tough call, to many nations/leaders involved to ever have a very good understanding of it other then the obvious land grab for syrian "refugees."
Originally posted by Putinbot1
of course you can give what isn't yours. Colonial History alone is full of examples of nations taking ang giving what doesn't belong to them. Possession has never been 9/10ths of the law, the law has always been the one with the biggest stick decides who gets what.
Well, that’s the thing.
You have to TAKE something to make it yours THEN you can give it. Technically.
Are you saying America TOOK Syria THEN gave it to Putin/Edrogan?
Originally posted by NibedicusYou can give someone something by not doing something, for instance, the goalkeeper who decides not to save a shot he could save gives a goal away.
Well, that’s the thing.You have to TAKE something to make it yours THEN you can give it. Technically.
Are you saying America TOOK Syria THEN gave it to Putin/Edrogan?
Originally posted by Putinbot1
You can give someone something by not doing something, for instance, the goalkeeper who decides not to save a shot he could save gives a goal away.
Hm. That is a good point, I can actually get behind that meaning of the word if it’s what you meant by “give” here.
But then, it’ll make the rhetoric of your title a lot less impactful though. After all, not doing something to prevent something is only really meaningfully bad if it is your job to prevent it in the first place.
Do you believe it was the US’s job to prevent Russia/Turkey from capturing Syria?
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Hm. That is a good point, I can actually get behind that meaning of the word if it’s what you meant by “give” here.But then, it’ll make the rhetoric of your title a lot less impactful though. After all, not doing something to prevent something is only really meaningfully bad if it is your job to prevent it in the first place.
Do you believe it was the US’s job to prevent Russia/Turkey from capturing Syria?
Originally posted by Putinbot1
I believe if you create a situation, you shouldn't abdicate responsibility. Led alone leave your own soldiers and allies at risk.
That certainly is the more responsible thing to do, yes. But I thought the whole thing was caused by Assad trying to stay in power and oppressing his people. Didn’t know the US created the whole situation, but my Middle East knowledge is surface-only at best. Did the US create the situation? W/c administration did that? Was it Trump’s?
Originally posted by Putinbot1
I believe if you create a situation, you shouldn't abdicate responsibility.
One has to ask how long we should stay there though and how many of us should die before we stop. The ones who created the situation won't be the ones dying.
Also side note: does this mean you're pro life and against abortion?
Originally posted by NibedicusAssad has been propped up by us and the yanks for years as well as the Russians who he is still close to. The Arab spring was probably caused by the US and UK amongst others. ISIS is a result of the US and UK actions. The Kurds were being exterminated by Sunni Muslims as long ago as the Gulf War. The Turks are merely continuing what Iraq and ISIS started with them. I could get a lot more complicated but, the second Gulf war was as much about stopping Shia and Kurd genocide by the Sunni as it was weapons of mass destruction. Russia as in Africa just wants a piece of the tasty weapons selling pie and exploitation that the UK, US and France have going on.
That certainly is the more responsible thing to do, yes. But I thought the whole thing was caused by Assad trying to stay in power and oppressing his people. Didn’t know the US created the whole situation, but my Middle East knowledge is surface-only at best. Did the US create the situation? W/c administration did that? Was it Trump’s?
Originally posted by SurturWeekend at Bernies was great... tbh I never agreed with the policies the US and allies had or the Russians however the prevention of Kurdish and Shia genocides was a good thing worth doing. A lot of Brits, yanks etc have died in them and stopping g ISIS, pulling out now seems a big slap in all their faces.
If we assassinated him we could still prop him up, a Weekend At Assad's type thing?