Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 117

Thread: Slaughtering our Kurdish allies

  1. #51
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,240
    Amen (Given)
    1109
    Amen (Received)
    19012
    The Kurds may use human shields

    Well at least according to The Sun. And the human shields would be captured ISIS combatants. I seriously doubt that killing them would in any way hinder the Turkey military.

    Source: 'IN THE CROSSFIRE' Jihadi Jack’s mum moans her ISIS son will be slaughtered in Turkey invasion as Kurds vow to use human shields against troops


    THE mother of Brit ISIS fighter 'Jihadi Jack' fears he will be killed if Turkey goes ahead with its threat to invade Syria.


    Sally Lane is worried his captors will set him free to be gunned down when the mighty Turkish military storm over the border.

    he spoke out as it was reported Turkish troops crossed into Syria this morning in preparation for an imminent attack on Kurdish territory.

    The news comes after tanks, trucks, troops and supplies were spotted massing on the Turkish side of the border overnight.

    Lane's 23-year-old son is currently languishing in a hellhole jail being run by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in the north of the country.

    Footage released at the weekend was said to show Jack Letts - who once declared himself an "enemy of Britain" - looking gaunt in an overcrowded cell.

    Turkey today warned the invasion was "imminent" sparking fears of bloody clashes with the SDF - seen as a terror group by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

    According to The Guardian , Letts' mum said: "I’m worried that he could get killed in the crossfire.

    "I know what people think, who cares about hundreds of ISIS fighters, but one of them is my son."

    She added she fears SDF commanders may even order ISIS prisoners to fight for them against the invading enemy.

    Her moans come amid worrying reports of "human shields" being mobilised along the border ahead of the looming war.

    The local authority, known as the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, said: “We call upon our people, of all ethnic groups, to move toward areas close to the border with Turkey to carry out acts of resistance during this sensitive historical time.”

    SDF spokesman Kino Gabriel said Turkey's invasion plan risked a major war, a humanitarian crisis and the security of Islamic State prisoners.

    He told Sky News: "The people are already working and moving towards the border area in order to create a human shield against any Turkish invasion and I think everyone is also working to prepare itself for any future operation."

    The Kurdish-led military group earlier vowed it would attack Turkish troops if they crossed into Syria.

    “We will resist,” Mazlum Kobani, commander of the Kurdish-led militia, said in an interview with The New York Times.

    “We have been at war for seven years, so we can continue the war for seven more years.”

    Turkish troops are now being bussed to the Syrian border in preparation for an incursion, Turkish media reported.

    And the Turkish Defense Ministry said on Twitter that preparations to enter Syria “had been completed.”

    The threat came after President Trump agreed to let the Turkish operation go forward and to move American troops out of the way.

    On Monday, US soldiers withdrew from posts near two Syrian towns near the border.

    After the American troops began pulling out the SDF - a key US ally in the war on ISIS - began shutting down the units that secure its prison camps.

    The group's no-nonsense jails hold 100,000 jihadis and their wives - including dozens of westerners.

    Among those being held are two of the so-called Beatles, accused of participating in the beheadings of ISIS hostages, runaway schoolgirl Shamima Begum and Letts.

    Now the fighters which normally guard them are being sent to the border to prepare for a Turkish assault.

    The move raises the threat of a big breakout from prisons that are already overcrowded, understaffed and blighted by violence.

    Reports on the ground reveal the situation in the notorious Al-Hawl camp - where ISIS bride Begum was once housed - is becoming increasingly dangerous.

    ISIS 'sleeper' cells are using the threat of war to step up their regrouping efforts though women in the camp, it's been claimed.

    However, General Mazloum Kobani Abdi, commander of the SDF said guarding prisons had now become a “second priority” for his fighters.

    It was pointed out that many of the fighters have families in the border towns that will fall on the front line should Turkey attack.



    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    The story itself has numerous hyperlinks and various photos and graphics.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" -- starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)

  2. #52
    tWebber firstfloor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    invalid value
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,143
    Amen (Given)
    21
    Amen (Received)
    373
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    There is a cunning plan in office to permanently remove him from office on January 20, 2024. I think it just might work.
    I am sure that there is someone out there already penning Trump’s political obituary. It’s pretty awful. When he goes, he will hand back a banana republic. It is always the case that Democrats repair damage done by Republicans. You would think the voters would have realized this much by now.
    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
    “You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott
    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell

  3. #53
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,236
    Amen (Given)
    1535
    Amen (Received)
    965
    Quote Originally Posted by NorrinRadd View Post
    This is difficult.

    Trump campaigned on getting out such entanglements. But ISTM we have never really lived up to commitments we made to the Kurds decades ago.
    No we have not.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  4. #54
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Humanist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,338
    Amen (Given)
    449
    Amen (Received)
    989
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    The Kurds may use human shields

    Well at least according to The Sun. And the human shields would be captured ISIS combatants. I seriously doubt that killing them would in any way hinder the Turkey military.
    You missed the last three paragraphs, but that's a full blowout on copyright restrictions, rouge. Doesn't look like you read the story before you copied it, either:

    Now the fighters which normally guard them are being sent to the border to prepare for a Turkish assault.

  5. #55
    tWebber MaxVel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    It's hot!
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,436
    Amen (Given)
    1063
    Amen (Received)
    1601
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Naturally. You've defended worse from Trump rougue. I've even started threads saying - effectively - surely people can't support THIS - and sure enough, a good many of you do.
    No, that's a misrepresentation. People disagree with you over the substance of what you think Trump actually did, so they don't have a problem with it. Since they don't think he did what you think he did, they don't draw the conclusion you draw. You have to get them to agree on the premises (what he did) BEFORE you can get them to agree on the conclusion you draw from those premises.

    This has been pointed out to you more than once.



    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd
    Many time you and others have chastised me severely for pointing our what he is doing is immoral, after all, you didn't elect a saint.
    1. See above. Until there is agreement on what he actually did, there won't be agreement on whether it is immoral or not.

    2. Some people realise that all politicians are to a greater or lesser degree, flawed and immoral. They take a pragmatic view of politics. You seem to be more idealistic.

    3. I harbour doubts about how even-handed your moral sensibility is in the area of politics. I suspect you focus on the morality of politicians you dislike, and overlook the morality of politicians you support. As do we all.

    Take a good look at the current 'Elizabeth Warren lying' thread. You have a group of posters interpreting her statements in the most charitable way they can (and reasonably, I think), because they broadly oppose Trump and support her. And you have a group of posters who find her statements to be contradictory, and indicative of her lying (reasonably, I think). They don't like her politics, her personality, and find things in her past (claims to be Native American) as evidence that she's likely lying now.

    Now imagine that we changed 'Warren' to 'Trump' but left the statements, backstory, etc the same. I think that they posters who have been supporting 'Warren' would condemn 'Trump' and vice versa. The people who interpret 'Warren's' statements charitably would interpret 'Trump's' statements unfavourably.

    tl; dr : I don't think anyone is completely unbiased, certainly not you. Hence 'Trump bad' from you carries little weight.





    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd
    So I can't even count on the immorality of his actions as any indication you would be likely to reject them. So yes, if you don't explicitly say you are against what he is doing, I assume you are with what he is doing.

    Jim

    For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

    That's waaay better than asking what someone really thinks. It's far easier to deal with people if we put them into categories and stereotypes, and assume their motivations.

    ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

  6. Amen Littlejoe, Celebrian, NorrinRadd, One Bad Pig amen'd this post.
  7. #56
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,602
    Amen (Given)
    300
    Amen (Received)
    1594
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxVel View Post
    No, that's a misrepresentation. People disagree with you over the substance of what you think Trump actually did, so they don't have a problem with it. Since they don't think he did what you think he did, they don't draw the conclusion you draw. You have to get them to agree on the premises (what he did) BEFORE you can get them to agree on the conclusion you draw from those premises.

    This has been pointed out to you more than once.





    1. See above. Until there is agreement on what he actually did, there won't be agreement on whether it is immoral or not.

    2. Some people realise that all politicians are to a greater or lesser degree, flawed and immoral. They take a pragmatic view of politics. You seem to be more idealistic.

    3. I harbour doubts about how even-handed your moral sensibility is in the area of politics. I suspect you focus on the morality of politicians you dislike, and overlook the morality of politicians you support. As do we all.

    Take a good look at the current 'Elizabeth Warren lying' thread. You have a group of posters interpreting her statements in the most charitable way they can (and reasonably, I think), because they broadly oppose Trump and support her. And you have a group of posters who find her statements to be contradictory, and indicative of her lying (reasonably, I think). They don't like her politics, her personality, and find things in her past (claims to be Native American) as evidence that she's likely lying now.

    Now imagine that we changed 'Warren' to 'Trump' but left the statements, backstory, etc the same. I think that they posters who have been supporting 'Warren' would condemn 'Trump' and vice versa. The people who interpret 'Warren's' statements charitably would interpret 'Trump's' statements unfavourably.

    tl; dr : I don't think anyone is completely unbiased, certainly not you. Hence 'Trump bad' from you carries little weight.








    For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

    That's waaay better than asking what someone really thinks. It's far easier to deal with people if we put them into categories and stereotypes, and assume their motivations.

    I stand by my reasons fo believing rogue will be supporting Trump on an issue, and especially in light of posts that do not directly criticize him. And I dont believe there is any post by rogue in this thread that would provide justification for changing that as my default expectation.

    Jim

  8. #57
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Humanist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,338
    Amen (Given)
    449
    Amen (Received)
    989
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxVel View Post
    Take a good look at the current 'Elizabeth Warren lying' thread. You have a group of posters interpreting her statements in the most charitable way they can (and reasonably, I think), because they broadly oppose Trump and support her. And you have a group of posters who find her statements to be contradictory, and indicative of her lying (reasonably, I think). They don't like her politics, her personality, and find things in her past (claims to be Native American) as evidence that she's likely lying now.
    Alternatively, there are those who judge based on the full set of facts currently available, which support an "automatic resignation," and that her lineage includes an admixture of native American consistent with the history shared in her family, and those who reject these additional facts, and consequently, come to a differing conclusion.

    While both positions are understandable, I do not find the latter position as reasonable as the former.

    Neither do I find the Washington Beacon's failure to update their piece with additional facts that have come to light consistent with standard editorial review.

  9. #58
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Humanist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,338
    Amen (Given)
    449
    Amen (Received)
    989
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I stand by my reasons fo believing rogue will be supporting Trump on an issue, and especially in light of posts that do not directly criticize him. And I dont believe there is any post by rogue in this thread that would provide justification for changing that as my default expectation.

    Jim
    I would point out that there are two posters in this thread, NorrinRadd and seer, whom I have seen posting consistently in support of Trump, who nonetheless do not agree with this development. I would add Terraceth due to his "amen" on the former, but this is only a suggestion, and I do not know his posting history of support or opposition to Trump's actions in general.

    More substantively, the same should be acknowledged for Lindsey Graham.

    But more directly, it is not reasonable in my view to continue to defend an initial judgment at odds with Rogue's direct denial of support in this instance. The proper course, in my view, is to gracefully admit to being wrong, learn from the experience, and move on.

  10. #59
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,959
    Amen (Given)
    121
    Amen (Received)
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by Christianbookworm View Post
    When is the last time the USA actually bothered declaring war?
    Declaring is passe and unnecessary. The essential thing is that there must be war, world without end.

    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    The Kurds may use human shields
    Marxist terrorists might use human shields, what a shocking possibility.

    Actually, if the human shields are ISIS, I don't think I object.
    Trump is basically "Bruce Wayne pretending to be a foppish retarded billionaire" tier genius, in case nerds need a simpler metaphor.

  11. #60
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Humanist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,338
    Amen (Given)
    449
    Amen (Received)
    989
    Lindsey Graham's twitter account, pinned tweet

    4:45 PM · Oct 9, 2019

    I am pleased to have reached a bipartisan agreement with Senator @ChrisVanHollen on severe sanctions against Turkey for their invasion of Syria.

    While the Administration refuses to act against Turkey, I expect strong bipartisan support.

    EGduEjaX0AYzT1d.jpeg

    EGduEjZWoAAfVHh.jpeg

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •