Though this is a chance for the US/the West to improve our relations with the Kurds at least. If Turkey makes a decent peace with the PKK than there are few practical barriers between greater cooperation.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Turkey is a NATO member and thus the West tends to support them when it comes to their fight with the Kurdish fighters within Turkey.
edited 28th Aug '14 6:15:23 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Because we left them twisting in the wind back in the first Gulf War. We really haven't done jack for them since, except look the other way while the Israelis kept them supplied. Same with the Sunnis, who we abandoned when the Shiites decided to begin ethnic cleansing. Of course we just abandoned the Shiites in Baghdad, which is why ISIS is attacking now in the first place. And everyone has seen how we treated the Free Syrian Army (ISIS other enemy besides the Assad regime). Really, no one has any reason to consider us a reliable ally over there.
We have no credibility with Sunni Arabs, but we're somewhat better with Kurds. We left them hanging, true, but we also provided the nofly. It's always one step forward one step back with them vis a vis the US.
Well, I guess that's better than nothing... O_o
Shameful Display
Yeah I always got the impression the Kurds liked us. I guess it's just my American hubris showing
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Nah... that's the piss-poor state of our popular news media showing...
Shameful Display
So who down't hate us in the region? Even Israel is pissed at us.
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
@De Marquis - They don't want us to be their Valentine or anything, but we don't have "no credibility" either. Relatively speaking, they're our strongest partners in the Iraq region. Moreso than the Shia even, since they were ALSO let out to dry and didn't have the benefit of fighter support....
Jordan.
edited 28th Aug '14 6:37:32 PM by FFShinra
@Jack: That's just it, dude. We suck. It's like "If we like you we will obliterate your enemies with overwhelming firepower, and then leave when the political aftermath gets too complicated for us to follow, or the opposition party decides that helping you is too expensive, or we lose a few people, or something else comes up, or we just decide it isnt fun anymore... and then we leave you to deal with the aftermath."
It's no wonder that American interests are a shambles in the Middle East.
@Shinra: We also seem to be on pretty good terms with Morocco.
edited 28th Aug '14 6:39:25 PM by demarquis
No argument here. All I was doing was pointing out a subtle difference. I am otherwise in agreement with you 100%.
EDIT- Oh that wasn't directed at me...
Move along...
edited 28th Aug '14 6:39:03 PM by FFShinra
Yeah. Of course, the Kurds may not like us, but they're aware that we and they are "on the same side" and they'll happily take our guns and air support.
That's the Middle East for you. Except for Israel, whose lobby has had Congress by the balls for a while now, everyone knows that America is a generous but unreliable ally at best. (Though don't we still have a better rep than the British?)
A procrastination in of itself
The British rep depends, a large amount of the recent damage to the British rep is because we're seen as America's laptop, for following you guys into Iraq.
Now if you go back further there are remnants of the colonial rep, but I don't think it's that big a deal anymore, the crazy borders are our fault but I'm not sure how much that is held against either us of the French.
But largely our rep is tied to that of the US, as we're "little satan" to your "big satan".
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
That, and the British still have a reputation for being able to play a deeper game- one that might conceivably include deception and betrayal. The French even more so. Say what you want about the US, but no one thinks that we are deliberately planning to double cross anyone (well, other than the conspiracy crazies). We just have a short attention span.
Ah the difference between malice and incompetence....
わからない
Trapped Filipino peacekeepers ready to defend themselves
Philippine officials remain optimistic that the hostage crisis will be resolved peacefully but are nevertheless prepared for any eventuality.
"Our soldiers are prepared, trained and capable of dealing with these situations and will take risks to fulfill our commitment to international security and peace," Armed Forces spokesman Maj. Gen. Domingo Tutaan Jr. said in a press briefing.
"The peacekeeping contingent has the right to defend its position and the units in line with the UN (United Nations) protocols and rules of engagement," he added.
Colonel Roberto Ancan, chief of the Armed Forces Peacekeeping Operations Center, said the Filipino troops are equipped with M4 assault rifles, M60 light machineguns, K3 squad automatic weapons and cal. 45 pistols and "sufficient ammunition to defend themselves."
More than a hundred UN peacekeepers in Golan Heights are either being held hostage or surrounded by Syrian anti-government forces since Thursday.
Syrian militants occupied the camp of 43 Fijian peacekeepers at the UN Disengagement Force (UNDOF) at around 10 a.m. Syrian time (3 p.m. in the Philippines). They demanded that the Fijian peacekeepers surrender their firearms. Upon surrendering their firearms, the 43 Fijian soldiers were taken hostage.
The Syrian anti-government forces then surrounded the Philippine peacekeepers' camps and also demanded the surrender of firearms.
"The Philippine peacekeepers held their ground and demonstrated their resolve to defend their positions. They did not surrender their firearms as they may in turn be held hostage themselves," Armed Forces public affairs chief Lt. Col. Ramon Zagala said.
The refusal of Filipino soldiers to yield to the rebels' demand resulted in a standoff.
edited 29th Aug '14 2:35:56 AM by entropy13
I'm reading this because it's interesting. I think. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, over.
Party Crasher
Surprised the Israel would even let Syrian rebels operate in the Golan Heights.
It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane.
Not a question of let. It's a question of "staying very still and maybe they kill the other guy instead".
V
Israel has enough problems as it is — they don't want (as ISIS no doubt wants eventually) to be drawn into the Civil War in Syria.
Shameful Display
Yeah I'm surprised IS hasn't tried to attack Israel yet. I mean if their trying to draw on Pan Arabic support there is no better way, especially in light of the Gaza conflict. Instead they have been spending their time killing almost exclusively other Muslims.
You are assuming rational actors, there. Not all humans are rational actors, let alone in all circumstances.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Israel will be forced to encounter them in some way.
If they think having Arab neighbors made life difficult before, imagine what shit will storm if a group who will actually make good on their belief that Israel doesn't have the right to exist is by their boarders.
It would be in their best interest to offer support with a coalition against ISIS, even if just allowing supplies and transport through their country or letting British and American troops base there if needed. Certainly not send troops or anything.
ISIS is just the human Ebola it seems. We can't afford to let that shit spread.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
Thing is, while ISIS might be nutballs who actually hate Israel's guts, right now their big targets are the other Muslims. And as long as that's the case, Israel will continue acting like they did in that Polandball comic that's somewhere upthread; "We support both sides."
They might provide a loose bit of support if ISIS attacks Jordan in force, but that's unlikely right now (ISIS has softer targets).
Eventually. ISIS may only have their attention on Muslims for now, but don't tell me that Israel can just sit this out and hope they're ignored. Even if Israel isn't touched directly, they can't afford to have all their neighbors in turmoil. It will bleed on them eventually.
I personally think it would be better for Israel in general to at least offer support, either in providing a base area or supplies, not as an actor or with troops. I compared ISIS to Ebola for a reason. Even if more people aren't killed (which isn't going to stop) the fear, the cultural and economic impact, the social strain, and all this in an already weak and volatile situation?
Easy for this to turn into a very lengthy and incalculable disaster if we (the world collectively) doesn't jump on this.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
V
Israel are already active in Iraq:
The TV station quotes unnamed Iraqi sources that claim that the US embassy in Iraq sent a team to collect the debris, although the reports did not identify the UAV type.
Why do we have no credibility with the Kurds?
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.