"Kurdistan" becoming a reality?!

[whitecoast]

Things have changed a lot over the past 5 months, and a lot has been revealed. It seems that the US' "plan b" (or whatever letter they are on now) is to use the kurdish aspiration for a homeland to achieve what they could not achieve through the overthrow of Assad. In short, the idea of a "kurdistan" across northern Syria is a very bad idea, a hopeless one really, although you never know how far the US will push their agenda. The plan seems to be to push for the creation of a "kurdistan" across all of northern Syria in the hope of 'hooking up' with Kurds both in south central Turkey and northern Iraq (where a lot of Iraq's oil is).

The idea seems to be to create a US-compliant state through which Iraqi oil in the north can be shipped to the Med. Obviously Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran would all be against this idea (not to mention Russia). The US' immediate way to enforce this seems to be by "embedding" US troops with YPG forces in Northern Syria, warning the Syrian airforce (and by implications the Russians) that, should they attack these forces they would risk US retaliation. Basically, it's the US' attempt at a 'no fly' zone.

I don't get US logic. It's basically a return to outright invasion and belligerence like Iraq in 2003. Even if the UN or security council has little power to stop the US, there should be at least some condemnation coming from somewhere. I haven't heard much from Russia on this count, but they're not ones to react mindlessly.

 

[Joe]

I don't get US logic. It's basically a return to outright invasion and belligerence like Iraq in 2003. Even if the UN or security council has little power to stop the US, there should be at least come condemnation coming from somewhere. I haven't heard much from Russia on this count, but they're not ones to react mindlessly.

One thing of which I have to continually remind myself, is that war is an end in itself for those who profit from it. For every missile or bullet fired or bomb dropped, the (inflated) $$ value of that ordnance is channeled directly from the taxpayer to major "defense" contractors and, indirectly, to their politician friends who sign off on the war/invasions that facilitate the dropping of bombs etc. It's nice little racket they've had going for centuries.

So there is really is NO incentive for countries like the USA to stop 'having a war', and lots to keep them going, at almost any cost (or any cost they can keep hidden). Even clearly losing (and losing face repeatedly) as the USA has done spectacularly in Syria, and having no rational political or strategic reason to have a presence there, they keep on keeping on anyway. Because it's all about personal greed in the end, and not ideology, ideology is just for bamboozling the peoples so they don't see the truth.

 

[know_yourself_1234]

What strikes me is the opinion of the western people about what is really happening.

I mean, the picture of McCain with the rebels should had been enough for the people to say "hey, stop! something is wrong; let's stop the process and have a look at the situation".

But then, nothing really happened. Worse, we even saw "french soldiers in Lybia", "british troops in Syria", just name it, and these were really kind of "glitches".

But, even with these glitches of non-welcomed intrusions, it kept going on, without excuse or explanation (and even..maybe ... stopping it and backing up). I really dislike this spotted psychopath attitude, because they would not show any sign of dignity. It's like they'd rather tend to convey us to "No, it didn't happen! Nothing happened! Forget it."

Hopefully, when the hypocrisy reaches an outrageous point, I am rather happy to see mainstream economist and political analyzers taking position and saying that "we have a problem there".

I thank you for your objectivity.

The idea of "freedom fighters" takes a different perspective for me now; this is maybe way too romantic.

 

[whitecoast]

I don't get US logic. It's basically a return to outright invasion and belligerence like Iraq in 2003. Even if the UN or security council has little power to stop the US, there should be at least come condemnation coming from somewhere. I haven't heard much from Russia on this count, but they're not ones to react mindlessly.

One thing of which I have to continually remind myself, is that war is an end in itself for those who profit from it. For every missile or bullet fired or bomb dropped, the (inflated) $$ value of that ordnance is channeled directly from the taxpayer to major "defense" contractors and, indirectly, to their politician friends who sign off on the war/invasions that facilitate the dropping of bombs etc. It's nice little racket they've had going for centuries.

So there is really is NO incentive for countries like the USA to stop 'having a war', and lots to keep them going, at almost any cost (or any cost they can keep hidden). Even clearly losing (and losing face repeatedly) as the USA has done spectacularly in Syria, and having no rational political or strategic reason to have a presence there, they keep on keeping on anyway. Because it's all about personal greed in the end, and not ideology, ideology is just for bamboozling the peoples so they don't see the truth.

This makes me wish they went forward with project bluebeam instead of cold war 2.0. If military-industrial complex fat cats could get rich off firing high-tech fireworks against UFO holograms in the upper atmosphere and lower orbit, maybe the Syrians and Libyans could get on with their lives?

 

[know_yourself_1234]

There is a very recent article on SOTT on the topic :
_https://www.sott.net/article/326203-Turkish-tanks-cross-Syrian-border-in-military-op-to-retake-city-of-Jarablus-from-ISIS-with-US-air-support-UPDATES

The following tweet shows what appears to be the turkish flag and the terrorist flag together :
_https://twitter.com/barzaniso/status/769960745282994176

The following one is suggesting as well :
_https://twitter.com/barzaniso/status/769953382975016961