MIDDLE ISRAEL: WHAT ARE THE KURDS DOING WRONG?

  
Via:  krishna  •  4 weeks ago  •  26 comments

 MIDDLE ISRAEL: WHAT ARE THE KURDS DOING WRONG?
Faced with their most recent abandonment, Kurdish nationalists must first ask themselves why they are repeatedly betrayed, and then draw several lessons from Zionist history.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


512

Kurdistan Flag ( Source )

Let every nation know,” vowed John Kennedy in his inaugural address, “that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”

Donald Trump’s amendment of this brave statement – “every nation except the Kurds” – is obviously a disgrace, but lamenting his betrayal can be no substitute for the introspection in which the Kurds must engage, and which Zionist experience can inform. 

Faced with their most recent abandonment, Kurdish nationalists must first ask themselves why they are repeatedly betrayed, and then draw several lessons from Zionist history.

BETRAYAL HAS been a fixture of Kurdish life for a century. Their first betrayers were the European powers that promised Kurdish statehood in the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres, only to abandon this commitment in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.

Then came the Soviets, who backed the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad which existed in northwestern Iran in 1946, until the Red Army withdrew from Iran and abandoned its Kurds to their devices.

Then came Iran, whose shah first encouraged the Kurds’ revolt in Iraq in the 1970s, but abandoned them in 1975 to Saddam Hussein’s fury, in return for territorial concessions over the Shatt al-Arab waterway.

Then came the US, whose betrayal of the Kurds began not with Trump but with George H.W. Bush, in 1991, when he encouraged Iraq’s Kurds to confront Saddam, only to stand by when Saddam quelled their revolt.

That such geopolitical misfortune keeps befalling the Kurds is puzzling enough, but it is altogether mind-boggling considering the assets they possess.

The Kurds are big, numbering some 40 million people scattered contiguously along a landmass the size of Japan, which connects Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Ethnically non-Arab, the Kurds speak their own language and take pride in literature that harks back centuries.

In others words, the Kurds deserve national determination no less than the French, the Saudis and the Vietnamese, especially at a time when Lilliputian nationalities like Estonia, Kosovo and East Timor have their own states.

Yes, the Kurds did obtain one autonomous region, in northern Iraq, in the wake of last decade’s removal of Hussein. However, the autonomy, which is roughly the size of Maryland and is home to less than one-fifth of all Kurds, has failed to capitalize on this decade’s upheaval across the Arab world. In fact, it did the opposite of that – and that is where Zionist history’s first lesson to Kurdistan’s freedom fighters comes in.

Important Related Articles Here on The Newstalkers

1. Why I Support The Kurds, The Indians Of The Middle East.

2. The Kurdish-Israel Relationship: Former Covert Israeli Forces 'Training Kurds In Iraq' 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Krishna
1  seeder  Krishna    4 weeks ago

Faced with their most recent abandonment, Kurdish nationalists must first ask themselves why they are repeatedly betrayed, and then draw several lessons from Zionist history.

(Note: This article is from The Jerusalem Post)

 
 
 
Krishna
2  seeder  Krishna    4 weeks ago

Yes, the Kurds did obtain one autonomous region, in northern Iraq, in the wake of last decade’s removal of Hussein. However, the autonomy, which is roughly the size of Maryland and is home to less than one-fifth of all Kurds, has failed to capitalize on this decade’s upheaval across the Arab world. In fact, it did the opposite of that – and that is where Zionist history’s first lesson to Kurdistan’s freedom fighters comes in.

 
 
 
bbl-1
3  bbl-1    4 weeks ago

Kurds did nothing wrong.

The wrong which is apparent is the hate and ignorance that dwells within the Trump and those who support him.

 
 
 
Krishna
3.1  seeder  Krishna  replied to  bbl-1 @3    4 weeks ago
The wrong which is apparent is the hate and ignorance that dwells within the Trump and those who support him.

Yes, that's what currently stands in the way. (Well, also the leaders of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria-- the 4 countries currently occupying theKurdih homeland).

But before Trump?

 
 
 
bbl-1
3.1.1  bbl-1  replied to  Krishna @3.1    4 weeks ago

Before Trump the influence of Russia was weaker.  That has changed.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4  Perrie Halpern R.A.    4 weeks ago

THE FIRST thing Zionism struggled to do was to unite the Jews.

The congress that launched the Zionist project was but the beginning of a Sisyphean effort that was fiercely opposed by most of the day’s rabbis, both ultra-Orthodox and Reform, who were joined in this by communists, socialists, Bundists and Yiddishists.

It took decades, but by the time Zionist leaders decided to declare statehood, they were supported by almost every Jew in the world. Without that massive support, the Jewish state might have never been born.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4    4 weeks ago

The Kurds today are even more disjointed than the Jews were in the days of Theodor Herzl. Their rifts surfaced most tragically two years ago, when the Kurdish autonomy held an independence referendum while split between then-president Masoud Barzani and his rival, Bafel Talabani.

Barzani claimed 93% voted “yes,” but his failure to harness a major Kurdish leader’s support before making such a major gamble proved fatal. Detecting and also exploiting Kurdish disunity, Iranian-backed Iraqi forces stormed oil-rich Kirkuk, snatched more than a third of the Kurdish autonomy’s territory, and seized much of the oil that was its main source of income.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5  Buzz of the Orient    4 weeks ago

I think that's an excellent analysis, but I thought Barzani was a character in the movie The Godfather.

 
 
 
Kavika
6  Kavika     4 weeks ago

IMO, one of the problems with uniting the Kurds is that various groups of Kurds live in four different countries each group faces it's own problems. 

As Perrie pointed out a few years back Barzani and Talabani held an independence referendum and results is Barzani really blew it when he was not able to gain the support of major Kurdish leaders..Very poor planning on his part but the Kurdish people are the ones that suffered. 

On another note, I'm going to post a letter written by a U.S. Army Special Operations soldier to Kurdish Soldiers.

This is how many of our real warriors feel about deserting the Kurds. 

If you feel this isn't appropriate for this article please feel free do delete it Krish. 

A letter to Kurdish soldiers from a US military wife

Updated 2:12 PM ET, Thu October 17, 2019

This article was written by the wife of a Special Operations soldier, who has served throughout the Middle East. CNN is not revealing her identity at her request. The views expressed in this commentary are her own. View more   opinion   at CNN.

Dear Kurdish soldiers,

You don't know me, but I have known of you for most of my adult life. When my military husband and I quickly married, knowing he was deploying to the Middle East to be part of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, I feared what he and his Special Operations unit would face when they arrived.
How bad would the fighting be? How long would they be gone? Would he survive?
Months later, he returned and recounted to me what he could about his experience. I asked how he had made it through. He replied, "We had help. We had the Kurds."
He told me stories of how the Kurdish people in Northern Iraq supported the troops, advised them, stood by them, fought shoulder to shoulder with them in combat, and became allies and friends. And I became grateful -- immensely, unwaveringly, and forever grateful for you.
Since then, the word "Kurds" in my home has meant something. It has meant "ally" and "friendship."
There are pictures of Iraqi Kurds alongside my husband and fellow soldiers in our home. I have a coffee mug with depictions of female Syrian Kurdish soldiers on it that I proudly use to remind me of you. My children play soccer in their Kurdistan jerseys.
The Kurdish people are not nameless, faceless people across the world. You hold a place of honor and respect in our home. It's important to me that all of you know that. I owe you so much. My husband is home safe today after years of fighting and I know you helped make that happen.
But now, I watch the news in horror. I see promises broken, progress destroyed, years of hard work and unimaginable sacrifice gone in a tweet. I see allies betrayed, their faces in my picture frame. While watching the news, my children turn to me and ask if those are our friends and I say yes. They have looks of confusion on their faces.
I can't imagine what your families are going through. I can't imagine their fear. I can't imagine these things because for the last 17 years you have fought to help us keep an attack off our soil, and I know that has now compromised your safety. It breaks my heart.
Where I come from, a person's word means something. Our honor and integrity are everything, as I know yours are to you. To read in international newspapers that the United States, my country, has abandoned the Kurds is absolutely heartbreaking.
Hasty decisions like this have not only put your people in terrible danger, they make the situation for our soldiers there on the Syrian-Turkish border much more difficult. My husband was with you on that border not long ago and I can't imagine what our soldiers' families are feeling right now.
And it's not just safety. It's hard to imagine how difficult it is for American soldiers to hear a partner and ally's calls for help and not be allowed to answer them. It's also hard to imagine you having to turn to Putin or the Assad regime for support because you could no longer count on Americans to keep their promise.
Get our weekly newsletter.
I worry for the safety of you and your families. I worry about the instability of the region and what that could mean for the future. I worry about the thousands of ISIS fighters we worked so hard to put in prisons, and who you must walk away from as you defend yourselves. I can't imagine the threat that now poses for us all. I see the look on my husband's face when he watches the news at the end of the day. The only phrase that comes to mind is "I'm sorry."
I write you today, on behalf of my family, to say thank you for everything you have done for us. Thank you for your friendship, for keeping your word and fighting alongside us, for staying the course year after year. Thank you for keeping my husband safe so he could come back home to me and my children. You have my sincerest prayers today that you too may safely return to yours. Thank you to your families that sacrificed without you, so you could make this partnership happen.
I pray we return to your side, that we stand by you, and that this has not all been in vain.
Forever yours,
A Grateful Wife

 
 
 
Tacos!
7  Tacos!    4 weeks ago
Let every nation know,” vowed John Kennedy in his inaugural address, “that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”

That sounds nice, but we don't do that. We do pretty well, but we don't do all of that. Not even close, really. Think about it: any price? Any burden? Any hardship? etc.? I don't think so. That would never be supportable politically, financially, or under international law.

If that were all true, many tens of millions of Americans would be conscripted into the armed forces. We would have marched into Russia, China, or North Korea decades ago. We would have cleaned out Central and South America of all the dictators and warlords they have endured. Every country in Africa would regularly enjoy free and fair elections.

None of that has happened, so let's not pretend that America has been solving everyone's problems for 60 years and the Kurds are the sole exception.

In the early years of Barack Obama's administration, we saw the Green Revolution in Iran . What a great opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to assuring the survival and success of liberty. But Obama went out of his way to order our people not to help them and then turned his back on both the revolution and the regime's human rights abuses, all in the name of signing a really dreadful nuclear treaty.

Heck, even in Syria, there was Obama's infamous red line of using chemical weapons that he warned Syria not to cross. And then the line was crossed, the weapons were used, and Obama ignored it.

So Trump is now somehow the one president who is not willing to pay any price, bear any burden, and so on? I don't think so.

In others words, the Kurds deserve national determination no less than the French, the Saudis and the Vietnamese, especially at a time when Lilliputian nationalities like Estonia, Kosovo and East Timor have their own states.

Are we - the United States - supposed to unilaterally create nations for every ethnicity that wants one? Will that include carving out sections of Spain for Catalons and Basque? How about Flanders from the Netherlands? Moravia from Czech Republic? Khmer in Vietnam? Just Google "separatist movements in [pick your region of the world, e.g. Asia, Europe, etc]." You'll be amazed at how many there are.

There has been so much outrage about the Kurd situation, but that outrage is based on the idea that Trump violated a standard of behavior - i.e. intervention with zero accountability - invented last week and applied only to him.

 
 
 
Krishna
7.1  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Tacos! @7    4 weeks ago
That sounds nice, but we don't do that. We do pretty well, but we don't do all of that. Not even close, really. Think about it: any price? Any burden? Any hardship? etc.? I don't think so

You're comment reminds me of a poem by Ogden Nash:

The Purist  - by Ogden Nash

I give you now Professor Twist, A conscientious scientist,

Trustees exclaimed, "He never bungles!"

And sent him off to distant jungles.

Camped on a tropic riverside,

One day he missed his loving bride.

She had, the guide informed him later,

Been eaten by an alligator.

Professor Twist could not but smile.

"You mean," he said, "a crocodile

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
7.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Tacos! @7    4 weeks ago
Are we - the United States - supposed to unilaterally create nations for every ethnicity that wants one? Will that include carving out sections of Spain for Catalons and Basque? How about Flanders from the Netherlands? Moravia from Czech Republic? Khmer in Vietnam? Just Google "separatist movements in [pick your region of the world, e.g. Asia, Europe, etc]."

Did any of those fight alongside the American troops, protecting them, helping them?  Were promises ever made to them?

 
 
 
Tacos!
7.2.1  Tacos!  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.2    4 weeks ago

If you think about it, there are plenty of situations where we cooperate with someone - maybe it's a whole country, or insurgents, or rebels, or some marginalized ethnic group - in a certain situation. That doesn't mean we help them with every situation for all time.

We cooperated with Kurds to defeat ISIS. That doesn't mean we owe them military assistance in establishing their own country.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
7.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @7    4 weeks ago

Latest thing I read this morning is that Mitt Romney thinks there needs to be an investigation of the pullout. 

Romney then returned to the idea that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan might have given Trump an ultimatum that was met with acquiescence.

“Are we so weak and inept diplomatically that Turkey forced the hand of the United States of America? Turkey!?” Romney said. “I believe that it’s imperative that public hearings are held to answer these questions, and I hope the Senate is able to conduct those hearings next week.”

 Also keep in mind that 129 House republicans joined democrats condemning Trumps abandonment of the Kurds on Wednesday.

Face it Tacos..... you and a bunch of other Trump lovers here on this site are on the wrong side of the argument, and very much in the minority of this issue.  You can deflect all you want, but on this specific matter, with this specific ally, at this point in time, you are defending the indefensible. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
7.3.1  Tacos!  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @7.3    4 weeks ago
Mitt Romney thinks there needs to be an investigation of the pullout. 

OK. So? Investigate it. 

Also keep in mind that 129 House republicans joined democrats condemning Trumps abandonment of the Kurds on Wednesday.

So the argument here is that because a bunch of Republicans chimed in with a certain point of view, that should convince me? Do you normally think of these people as wise, thoughtful people whose guidance we should follow? Somehow I doubt that. But today, they're paragons of wisdom, right?

Face it Tacos..... you and a bunch of other Trump lovers here on this site are on the wrong side of the argument

I don't love Trump. I happen to in favor of injecting American human beings into harm's way as little as possible.

I'm in favor of rolling back regulations where possible, repealing draconian laws that have needlessly been on the books for years, and I'm in favor of pulling out troops whenever we can. It saves lives and money. Those lives can go back to their families and that money can be spent on other things like health care, infrastructure, or tax refunds (a boy can dream).

It seems to me like some people have no upper limit to the lives and money (always other people's lives and money) they are willing to spend because of politics.

very much in the minority of this issue

The majority and their opinion can kiss my whole entire ass. I think for myself, thank you very much. I don't need the majority to tell me what's right.

However, if you do need a majority to tell you what's right, check out this poll that shows 57% of Republicans support Trump's decision to pull out of Syria . Does that change your mind? Should it?

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
7.3.2  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Tacos! @7.3.1    4 weeks ago
The majority and their opinion can kiss my whole entire ass. I think for myself, thank you very much. I don't need the majority to tell me what's right.

is that why you choose to believe the minority ?

 
 
 
Tacos!
7.3.3  Tacos!  replied to  igknorantzrulz @7.3.2    4 weeks ago
is that why you choose to believe the minority ?

Did you read the comment you are replying to? I made it clear, I thought, that I work out my own opinions. It doesn't depend on what a majority or a minority think. Also, if majorities are important to you, I linked to a poll showing that a majority of Republicans support the move to withdraw from Syria. So, whatever majority you like, you have a choice.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
7.3.4  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Tacos! @7.3.3    4 weeks ago

what are you talkin about...

read the comment i'm commenting to...

WTF !

Look, back when i didn't go to college, i majored in Mining, dug deep into cavernous labyrinths with cards cataloged like catalogs with cards, in them, and found what i claimed, now

Mine.

So Y oui' give the Kurds the Shaft(not Mine) because the Minority 

Hating Trump, isn't in the minority the majority of the time the Trump hating majority, hates.

.

if u haven't noticed, the majority of the people who believe i'm here to please the majority of the people, are not polling my direction to sway a way i might lean when meeting a vegan to dissuade what i red the meeting should be about, as deemed essential by the minority i figure should be the authority figure on which i watch, as disfigure is figured into how i make my indecision, as to waht major minority faction is a fraction of my minor concerns a majority of the time while in general, it is admirable, to be an independent thinker, as i am, on occasion, 

and not just of thought and reason if you were thinking my thought and reason was decided by those who choose not to make a choice , as i prefer to decide upon my indecisions that slice incisions into my mind, while i don't, cutting deep while i slice pizza into square pies for those not outgoing into that deform for those in lock step uniform for what is popular, as popularity is for those who can't recognize true self worth, as i'm worthless than many, while worth  no more than the majority that know more than i don't know more than, as the minority report

is reporting it is all fake news the majority is stuck shafted with in my Mine, i lease, so as to never own what the vast majority of the minority is reported to not 

own.   Their opinions.

I'll never beat an opinion like a rented mule, and make an ass out of what i rhode scholarly in on,

a minority of the majority thinks i'm an ass, i'm just to stubborn to give a horses ass, 

unless i take a poll and determine what the Majority of the Minority reports, in on,

then i call Bovine excellent excremeant for all my detractor beaming without star light trekking my trek,

which follows all others in every direction whence it comes to thinking like them

don't ya think ...?

 
 
 
Krishna
7.3.5  seeder  Krishna  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @7.3    4 weeks ago

Latest thing I read this morning is that Mitt Romney thinks there needs to be an investigation of the pullout. 

Romney then returned to the idea that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan might have given Trump an ultimatum that was met with acquiescence.

“Are we so weak and inept diplomatically that Turkey forced the hand of the United States of America? Turkey!?” Romney said. “I believe that it’s imperative that public hearings are held to answer these questions, and I hope the Senate is able to conduct those hearings next week.”

Face it Tacos..... you and a bunch of other Trump lovers here on this site are on the wrong side of the argument, and very much in the minority of this issue.  You can deflect all you want, but on this specific matter, with this specific ally, at this point in time, you are defending the indefensible. 

There are a few Republicans who still seem to be in a cult-like cabal of trump-worshippers-- who believe the Bone-Spur-Challenged one can do no wrong!

However there are many Republicans who are waking up to the very real danger trump's hasty action poses to America:

Fox news is reporting that the Senate Majority Leader, Republican Mitch McConnell has this to say:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell rebuked President Trump’s withdrawal of troops from Syria on Friday, calling it a “grave strategic mistake” in an op-ed that claimed the move had set back the U.S. fight against Islamic terrorism in the region.

“Withdrawing U.S. forces from Syria is a grave strategic mistake.

It will leave the American people and homeland less safe, embolden our enemies, and weaken important alliances,” McConnell, R-Ky., writes.

 “Sadly, the recently announced pullout risks repeating the Obama administration’s reckless withdrawal from Iraq, which facilitated the rise of the Islamic State in the first place.”

 
 
 
Krishna
7.4  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Tacos! @7    4 weeks ago
There has been so much outrage about the Kurd situation, but that outrage is based on the idea that Trump violated a standard of behavior - i.e. intervention with zero accountability - invented last week and applied only to him.

Nope-- wrong again!

Don't you ever actually read the news?

[Deleted]

It has nothing whatsoever to do with "intervention with zero accountability". 

Rather, the outrage is due to the fact that the Kurds have been one of out best (if not the best) allies in the fight against ISIS. They've taken thousands of casualties. 

We promised have their back innorthern Syria-- thn we stabbed them in the back by deserting them

Its about betraying an ally.

Amd about American honor.

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Tacos!
7.4.1  Tacos!  replied to  Krishna @7.4    4 weeks ago
It has nothing whatsoever to do with "intervention with zero accountability".

Intervention should always be connected to accountability. Or do you want a president just injecting our military into sovereign countries anywhere and anytime based on his own whims?

Rather, the outrage is due to the fact that the Kurds have been one of out best (if not the best) allies in the fight against ISIS.

Yes, and for that good work, they were armed and trained by the best in the world. They used those arms and that training to take and control land they didn't control before. It looks like they'll have to give some of it up, but they are definitely in a stronger position now than they were 5 years ago.

We promised have their back innorthern Syria

Yes. In the fight against ISIS. We never promised to defend them indefinitely against Syria, Turkey, or Iraq, and we never promised to help them become an independent country.

That alliance does not extend to some kind of blank check for American military support. It doesn't mean we have troops in Syria forever or that we take up arms against a NATO ally so that we can carve a brand new country out of three or four other existing sovereign countries. That's the kind of thing you're asking for and there is no international legal justification for it. Nor is there a moral justification in demanding that American lives and capital be spent on this kind of nation-building.

 
 
 
Tessylo
8  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

'you are defending the indefensible'

That's what he does mostly

 
 
 
Ronin2
9  Ronin2    4 weeks ago
Let every nation know,” vowed John Kennedy in his inaugural address, “that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”

Bay of Pigs proved him very, very, wrong.

https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/jfk-in-history/the-bay-of-pigs?gclid=CjwKCAjwxaXtBRBbEiwAPqPxcP978ydIZ7Kql2mpsFpKbATu3KB7w3RbLSRvGWjTDtJRQpZqbEVBSxoCwLkQAvD_BwE

Shortly after his inauguration, in February 1961, President Kennedy authorized the invasion plan. But he was determined to disguise U.S. support. The landing point at the Bay of Pigs was part of the deception. The site was a remote swampy area on the southern coast of Cuba, where a night landing might bring a force ashore against little resistance and help to hide any U.S. involvement. Unfortunately, the landing site also left the invading force more than 80 miles from refuge in Cuba's Escambray Mountains, if anything went wrong.

The Plan

The original invasion plan called for two air strikes against Cuban air bases. A 1,400-man invasion force would disembark under cover of darkness and launch a surprise attack. Paratroopers dropped in advance of the invasion would disrupt transportation and repel Cuban forces. Simultaneously, a smaller force would land on the east coast of Cuba to create confusion.

The main force would advance across the island to Matanzas and set up a defensive position. The United Revolutionary Front would send leaders from South Florida and establish a provisional government. The success of the plan depended on the Cuban population joining the invaders.

The Invasion

The first mishap occurred on April 15, 1961, when eight bombers left Nicaragua to bomb Cuban airfields. 

The CIA had used obsolete World War II B-26 bombers, and painted them to look like Cuban air force planes. The bombers missed many of their targets and left most of Castro's air force intact. As news broke of the attack, photos of the repainted U.S. planes became public and revealed American support for the invasion. President Kennedy cancelled a second air strike.

On April 17, the Cuban-exile invasion force, known as Brigade 2506, landed at beaches along the Bay of Pigs and immediately came under heavy fire. Cuban planes strafed the invaders, sank two escort ships, and destroyed half of the exile's air support. Bad weather hampered the ground force, which had to work with soggy equipment and insufficient ammunition.

The Counterattack

Over the next 24 hours, Castro ordered roughly 20,000 troops to advance toward the beach, and the Cuban air force continued to control the skies. As the situation grew increasingly grim, President Kennedy authorized an "air-umbrella" at dawn on April 19—six unmarked American fighter planes took off to help defend the brigade's B-26 aircraft flying. But the B-26s arrived an hour late, most likely confused by the change in time zones between Nicaragua and Cuba. They were shot down by the Cubans, and the invasion was crushed later that day.

Some exiles escaped to the sea, while the rest were killed or rounded up and imprisoned by Castro's forces. Almost 1,200 members of Brigade 2506 surrendered, and more than 100 were killed.

The Aftermath

The brigade prisoners remained in captivity for 20 months, as the United States negotiated a deal with Fidel Castro. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy made personal pleas for contributions from pharmaceutical companies and baby food manufacturers, and Castro eventually settled on $53 million worth of baby food and medicine in exchange for the prisoners.

On December 23, 1962, just two months after the end of the Cuban Missile Crisis, a plane containing the first group of freed prisoners landed in the United States. A week later, on Saturday, December 29, surviving brigade members gathered for a ceremony in Miami's Orange Bowl, where the brigade's flag was handed over to President Kennedy. "I can assure you," the president promised, "that this flag will be returned to this brigade in a free Havana."

The disaster at the Bay of Pigs had a lasting impact on the Kennedy administration. Determined to make up for the failed invasion, the administration initiated Operation Mongoose—a plan to sabotage and destabilize the Cuban government and economy, which included the possibility of assassinating Castro.

Kennedy was great to the Cuban brigade, they screamed for our help; but no US military force came in to back them up.

Then there is Vietnam.

Maybe use a better example than Kennedy.

 
 
 
Ronin2
9.1  Ronin2  replied to  Ronin2 @9    4 weeks ago

Further errors in the article. 

“every nation except the Kurds”

There is no Kurdish nation. There is no Kurdistan, and there never will be unless you want the US to engage in a genocide that would make our enemies proud.

but lamenting his betrayal can be no substitute for the introspection in which the Kurds must engage,

So Bush Sr, Bush Jr, and Obama didn't betray the Kurds in Iraq? Do tell. But Trruuummmmppppp!!!!!!

BETRAYAL HAS been a fixture of Kurdish life for a century. Their first betrayers were the European powers that promised Kurdish statehood in the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres, only to abandon this commitment in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.

Jump on board the European train betrayal train special. The Kurds were not the only ones promised their own countries. How many Arab groups were promised countries for their support; only to be betrayed?

Then came the Soviets, who backed the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad which existed in northwestern Iran in 1946, until the Red Army withdrew from Iran and abandoned its Kurds to their devices.

http://i-cias.com/e.o/kurdistan_republic.htm

In conclusion to an extremely tense situation of the early Cold War , the Soviet Union announces that its troops in Iran will be withdrawn within six weeks. The Iranian crisis was one of the first tests of power between the United States and the Soviet Union in the postwar world.

The Iranian crisis began during World War II . In 1942, Iran signed an agreement by which British and Soviet troops were allowed into the country in order to defend the oil-rich nation from possible German attack. American troops were also soon in Iran. The 1942 treaty stated that all foreign troops would withdraw within six months after the end of the war. In 1944, however, both Great Britain and the United States began to press the Iranian government for oil concessions and the Soviets thereupon demanded concessions of their own. By 1945, the oil situation was still unsettled, but the war was coming to an end and the American attitude toward the Soviet Union had changed dramatically.

The new administration of Harry S. Truman, which came to power when Franklin D. Roosevelt died in April 1945, decided that the Soviets were not to be trusted and were bent on expansion. Therefore, a policy of “toughness” was adopted toward the former wartime ally. Iran came to be a test case for this new policy. The Soviets had decided to take action in Iran. Fearing that the British and Americans were conspiring to deny Russia its proper sphere of influence in Iran, the Soviets came to the assistance of an Iranian rebel group in the northern regions of the country. In early 1946, the United States complained to the United Nations about the situation in Iran and accused the Soviets of interfering with a sovereign nation. When the March 2, 1946 deadline for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Iran passed and the Soviets were still in place, a crisis began to develop.

A major diplomatic confrontation was avoided when the Soviets announced on March 25, 1946, that they would be withdrawing their forces within six weeks. President Truman bragged that his threats of a possible military confrontation had been the deciding factor, but that seems unlikely. The Soviet Union and Iran had reached an agreement that gave the Soviets an oil concession in Iran. With this promise in hand, the Soviets kept their part of the bargain and moved their troops out of Iran in April 1946. Almost immediately, the Iranian government reneged on the oil deal and, with U.S. aid and advice, crushed the revolt in northern Iran. The Soviets were furious, but refrained from reintroducing their armed forces into Iran for fear of creating an escalating conflict with the United States and Great Britain. The Iranian crisis, and the suspicion and anger it created between the United States and the Soviet Union, helped set the tone for the developing Cold War.

Just a little history that the article leaves out. So throw Truman into the mix of betrayers as well. Of course we were the Iranian's allies, not the Kurds; but it was still a betrayal by the US to keep Iranian oil.

Then came Iran, whose shah first encouraged the Kurds’ revolt in Iraq in the 1970s, but abandoned them in 1975 to Saddam Hussein’s fury, in return for territorial concessions over the Shatt al-Arab waterway.

Anyone else see a reoccurring them here? The Kurds are always in someone else's country. Usually doing a foreign occupiers dirty work; in the vain hopes of carving their Kurdistan out of Syria, Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. Sounds like they are repeat suckers, and will side with anyone to get what they want.

Then came the US, whose betrayal of the Kurds began not with Trump but with George H.W. Bush, in 1991, when he encouraged Iraq’s Kurds to confront Saddam, only to stand by when Saddam quelled their revolt.

Because Bush Sr was a hell of a lot smarter than his son. Invading Iraq would have handed the country over to Iran much sooner; and there still would not be a Kurdistan. Invading Iraq was a massive mistake that Bush Jr deserves blame for. Now it seems the left want it both ways- invading Iraq was bad; but betraying the Kurds was worse. WTF!!! Anyone trying to follow this logic would suffer whiplash!

The Kurds are big, numbering some 40 million people scattered contiguously along a landmass the size of Japan, which connects Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Ethnically non-Arab, the Kurds speak their own language and take pride in literature that harks back centuries.

In others words, the Kurds deserve national determination no less than the French, the Saudis and the Vietnamese, especially at a time when Lilliputian nationalities like Estonia, Kosovo and East Timor have their own states.

Kosovo? Who the fucks fault was that? Oh, that is right Clinton and NATO. We still have troops there. Serbia is still just as big of a threat. Great job handing Kosovo over to terrorists Bill.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/deal-or-no-deal-international-influence-and-serbia-kosovo-conflict

Over the next decade, the U.N. tried to broker a plan for Kosovo to gain self-rule but failed to come up with a concrete plan. In 2008, Kosovo unilaterally declared independence. Serbia immediately responded that Kosovo’s declaration was illegal and challenged its independence in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Two years later, the ICJ ruled that Kosovo’s declaration of independence was legal. Since the 2008 declaration, 108 countries, including the United States, have recognized Kosovo as an independent nation, but Kosovo still falls short of the two-thirds majority required for U.N. recognition. Serbia’s refusal to recognize Kosovo remains a sticking point. Russia and China, among others, have backed Serbia’s claim that Kosovo is not an independent nation. Many of these countries claim they will support whatever stance Serbia takes regarding Kosovo.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/02/the-small-war-that-wasnt/

In 1996, however, the marginal secessionist group, the Kosovo Liberation Army, stepped up its violent campaign for Kosovan independence and launched a series of assassinations of policemen and civilians in Kosovo, targeting not only Serbs, but also Albanians who did not support the KLA. The Yugoslav government branded the KLA a terrorist organisation - a description also used by US officials. As late as the beginning of 1998, Robert Gelbard, US special envoy to Bosnia, declared: "The UCK (KLA) is without any question a terrorist group."

KLA attacks drew an increasingly heavy military response from Yugoslav government forces and in the summer of 1998 a concerted offensive against KLA strongholds began. In contrast to its earlier position, the US administration now threatened to bomb Yugoslavia unless the government withdrew its forces from the province, verified by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The US was now clearly determined to remove Milosevic, who was obstructing Yugoslavia's integration into the western institutional and economic framework.

Agreement was reached in October 1998 and 1,000 OSCE observers went to Kosovo to oversee the withdrawal of government troops. But the KLA used the pullback to renew armed attacks. In January 1999 an alleged massacre of 45 Kosovan Albanians by Yugoslav government forces took place at Racak. Both at the time and subsequently, evidence has been contradictory and fiercely contested as to whether the Racak victims were civilians or KLA fighters and whether they died in a firefight or close-range shootings.

Nevertheless, Racak was seized on by the US to justify acceleration towards war. In early 1999, the OSCE reported that "the current security environment in Kosovo is characterised by the disproportionate use of force by the Yugoslav authorities in response to persistent attacks and provocations by the Kosovan Albanian paramilitaries." But when the Rambouillet talks convened in February 1999, the KLA was accorded the status of national leader. The Rambouillet text, proposed by the then US secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, included a wide range of freedoms and immunities for Nato forces within Yugoslavia that amounted to an effective occupation. Even the former US secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, described it as "a provocation, an excuse to start bombing". The Yugoslavs refused to sign, so bombing began on March 24 1999.

Gotta love them terrorists when it comes to removing foreign pro Russian governments.

Yes, the Kurds did obtain one autonomous region, in northern Iraq, in the wake of last decade’s removal of Hussein. However, the autonomy, which is roughly the size of Maryland and is home to less than one-fifth of all Kurds, has failed to capitalize on this decade’s upheaval across the Arab world. In fact, it did the opposite of that – and that is where Zionist history’s first lesson to Kurdistan’s freedom fighters comes in.

Yes, let's support the formation of a Kurdistan. We haven't created enough terrorists yet. We have done a great job at nation building all over the planet. We need another yearly mutli billion dollar country to support economically, militarily, and protect politically in the UN. That would be a great use of US resources and our troops lives./S

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.1.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Ronin2 @9.1    4 weeks ago
So Bush Sr, Bush Jr, and Obama didn't betray the Kurds in Iraq?

What many like to entirely gloss over is the fact that Syria was using the PKK (Syrian Kurds) in a minor proxy war with Turkey and the PKK is listed as a terrorist organization by many countries around the world, including America.

Further, the Kurds in Iraq, the KDP while fighting off Turkey themselves, permitted Turkish troops to transit their controlled area of Iraq after we toppled Hussein so they could attack the PKK in Syria.

And people want us to continue involvement in that FUBAR why exactly?  Can you say abject insanity?

 
 
 
Krishna
9.1.2  seeder  Krishna  replied to  XDm9mm @9.1.1    4 weeks ago
And people want us to continue involvement in that FUBAR why exactly? 

Good question.

And Fox news is reporting than none other than Republican Senate majority Leader Mitch McConnell weighs in on that very question:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell rebuked President Trump’s withdrawal of troops from Syria on Friday, calling it a “grave strategic mistake” in an op-ed that claimed the move had set back the U.S. fight against Islamic terrorism in the region.

“Withdrawing U.S. forces from Syria is a grave strategic mistake. It will leave the American people and homeland less safe, embolden our enemies, and weaken important alliances,” McConnell, R-Ky., writes.

“Sadly, the recently announced pullout risks repeating the Obama administration’s reckless withdrawal from Iraq, which facilitated the rise of the Islamic State in the first place.”

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

al Jizzerror
Dismayed Patriot
GregTx
CB
Freedom Warrior
Dulay
Sean Treacy
arkpdx


40 visitors