• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is opposition to staying in a war being a traitor abandoning allies?

Is opposition to staying in a war being a traitor abandoning allies?

  • Yes, opposing staying in the Vietnam and Syria wars was traitorously abandoning allies

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No, opposing staying in the Vietnam and Syria wars was NOT traitorously abandoning allies

    Votes: 12 100.0%
  • Total voters
    12
J

joko104

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
65,981
Reaction score
23,408
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Currently, the Democratic Party, Republican warhawks and the warhawks in the military, military industries, military contractors and of course the MSM propaganda outlets of the super rich claim that we can we should have gone to war against Turkey on behalf of the Kurd's war for independence from Syria, Turkey and Iraq - taking territory from each of those countries.

Setting aside that Turkey is a NATO ally who has fought with the USA since the Korea War including in Syria and the ME, they claim anyone who opposed USA troops being at war with Turkish troops is a traitor and is betraying our ally. That reasoning it the reason to be at war forever when it is a civil war. It is the reasoning used to claim we could never leave the Vietnam War.
 
Anyone remember when liberals used to protest wars? There are no liberals left in the Democratic Party because it isn't liberal. The Democratic Party is corporate fascist concerning government and socialist concerning the economy - ala 1930s Germany style. Thus, predictably, the new corporate-fascist Democratic Party now is universally for all wars - perpetual wars - everywhere - forever.
 
joko104 said:
Currently, the Democratic Party, Republican warhawks and the warhawks in the military, military industries, military contractors and of course the MSM propaganda outlets of the super rich claim that we can we should have gone to war against Turkey on behalf of the Kurd's war for independence from Syria, Turkey and Iraq - taking territory from each of those countries.

Setting aside that Turkey is a NATO ally who has fought with the USA since the Korea War including in Syria and the ME, they claim anyone who opposed USA troops being at war with Turkish troops is a traitor and is betraying our ally. That reasoning it the reason to be at war forever when it is a civil war. It is the reasoning used to claim we could never leave the Vietnam War.
Click to expand...

LOL!!

Nice trap. I eagerly await the mental contortions from those who suffer from TDS.
 
joko104 said:
Currently, the Democratic Party, Republican warhawks and the warhawks in the military, military industries, military contractors and of course the MSM propaganda outlets of the super rich claim that we can we should have gone to war against Turkey on behalf of the Kurd's war for independence from Syria, Turkey and Iraq - taking territory from each of those countries.

Setting aside that Turkey is a NATO ally who has fought with the USA since the Korea War including in Syria and the ME, they claim anyone who opposed USA troops being at war with Turkish troops is a traitor and is betraying our ally. That reasoning it the reason to be at war forever when it is a civil war. It is the reasoning used to claim we could never leave the Vietnam War.
Click to expand...

Your statement is confusing. Turkey is a NATO ally. It would be treason if we DID fight them. We also have US laws which prevent the military from being put in harms way without congressional approval. We can make an argument for fighting islamic terrorists organizations, not civil wars.
 
joko104 said:
Currently, the Democratic Party, Republican warhawks and the warhawks in the military, military industries, military contractors and of course the MSM propaganda outlets of the super rich claim that we can we should have gone to war against Turkey on behalf of the Kurd's war for independence from Syria, Turkey and Iraq - taking territory from each of those countries.

Setting aside that Turkey is a NATO ally who has fought with the USA since the Korea War including in Syria and the ME, they claim anyone who opposed USA troops being at war with Turkish troops is a traitor and is betraying our ally. That reasoning it the reason to be at war forever when it is a civil war. It is the reasoning used to claim we could never leave the Vietnam War.
Click to expand...

I don't know who you're trying to fool, but you act like going to war with turkey was the only alternative to evacuating the area when that is obviously not true. Do you think Turkey would still have invaded if US troops were in the way? And if they did fire on US soldiers, wouldn't that be Turkey starting the war, thereby vacating any alliance we might have had? I eagerly await your response.
 
A joko104 circle-jerk with the usual suspects.
 
Just give them time and a heads up so their 3yo daughters aren't slaughtered.

Damn.
 
joko104 said:
Currently, the Democratic Party, Republican warhawks and the warhawks in the military, military industries, military contractors and of course the MSM propaganda outlets of the super rich claim that we can we should have gone to war against Turkey on behalf of the Kurd's war for independence from Syria, Turkey and Iraq - taking territory from each of those countries.

Setting aside that Turkey is a NATO ally who has fought with the USA since the Korea War including in Syria and the ME, they claim anyone who opposed USA troops being at war with Turkish troops is a traitor and is betraying our ally. That reasoning it the reason to be at war forever when it is a civil war. It is the reasoning used to claim we could never leave the Vietnam War.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard anyone of either party say we should go to war against Turkey. I'm also unfamiliar with the common theme I hear that we could never leave Vietnam. I was alive in 1973 and no one was talking about how we could never leave. Huge difference between S Vietnamese and the Kurds. The Kurds fought in front of our troops and died so that our soldiers didn't. They have also been guarding ISIS, this is ending, and ISIS will regroup.
 
jonny5 said:
Your statement is confusing. Turkey is a NATO ally. It would be treason if we DID fight them. We also have US laws which prevent the military from being put in harms way without congressional approval. We can make an argument for fighting islamic terrorists organizations, not civil wars.
Click to expand...

It would not be treason, it would be breaking ties with an ally, something that seems to be gaining steam under the current administration.
 
joko104 said:
Currently, the Democratic Party, Republican warhawks and the warhawks in the military, military industries, military contractors and of course the MSM propaganda outlets of the super rich claim that we can we should have gone to war against Turkey on behalf of the Kurd's war for independence from Syria, Turkey and Iraq - taking territory from each of those countries.

Setting aside that Turkey is a NATO ally who has fought with the USA since the Korea War including in Syria and the ME, they claim anyone who opposed USA troops being at war with Turkish troops is a traitor and is betraying our ally. That reasoning it the reason to be at war forever when it is a civil war. It is the reasoning used to claim we could never leave the Vietnam War.
Click to expand...

You sure are desperate to defend your support of genocide, aren't you Joko? :)
 
joko104 said:
Currently, the Democratic Party, Republican warhawks and the warhawks in the military, military industries, military contractors and of course the MSM propaganda outlets of the super rich claim that we can we should have gone to war against Turkey on behalf of the Kurd's war for independence from Syria, Turkey and Iraq - taking territory from each of those countries.

Setting aside that Turkey is a NATO ally who has fought with the USA since the Korea War including in Syria and the ME, they claim anyone who opposed USA troops being at war with Turkish troops is a traitor and is betraying our ally. That reasoning it the reason to be at war forever when it is a civil war. It is the reasoning used to claim we could never leave the Vietnam War.
Click to expand...
Generally I'm opposed to interfering like we have been in various nations of the middle east.

But I also think it's a really bad idea to actually or even appear to betray allies like the Kurds.

I think Trump's decision was wrong, but possibly motivated by one of the few impulses he has that I tend towards agreement with - avoiding getting involved in conflicts such as that, and trying to leave if we're already involved.

It's just that he went about it in a foolish and ham-handed way.
 
Opposing wars where we either have no intrinsic interest or no way of winning is just common sense. They are called quagmires. We don't need any more of them.
 
Irredentist said:
I don't know who you're trying to fool, but you act like going to war with turkey was the only alternative to evacuating the area when that is obviously not true. Do you think Turkey would still have invaded if US troops were in the way? And if they did fire on US soldiers, wouldn't that be Turkey starting the war, thereby vacating any alliance we might have had? I eagerly await your response.
Click to expand...

If our troops were going to do nothing as Turkish forces simply bypassed them what do you think would be accomplished by keeping them there?

Do I think Turkey would have invaded in our troops were there? Turkish troops already were fighting there - and along side American troops.
 
mrjurrs said:
It would not be treason, it would be breaking ties with an ally, something that seems to be gaining steam under the current administration.
Click to expand...

Treason, betrayal against something. Like a treaty.
Article 1
The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.
Click to expand...

So much for that.
 
The conservative ideology:

1) The first to start wars using cooked intel.
2) The first to accuse opponents of their wars of being traitors.
3) The first to support war criminals.
4) The first to abandon allies who fought in America's interest.
5) The first to accuse others of being too eager to start wars.

The sheer audacity is something to behold.
 
joko104 said:
Currently, the Democratic Party, Republican warhawks and the warhawks in the military, military industries, military contractors and of course the MSM propaganda outlets of the super rich claim that we can we should have gone to war against Turkey on behalf of the Kurd's war
Click to expand...
False. No need for war against Turkey. All we needed to do was help the kurds hold the position.

Newsflash genius. When you've got the entire Democratic Party agreeing with Republican Warhawks it's a safe bet we're right and you're wrong.
 
joko104 said:
Anyone remember when liberals used to protest wars? There are no liberals left in the Democratic Party because it isn't liberal. The Democratic Party is corporate fascist
Click to expand...

Okay seriously, is there a way to check this guys IP address? This **** is very clearly not coming from any kind of U.S. Citizen.
 
Irredentist said:
I don't know who you're trying to fool, but you act like going to war with turkey was the only alternative to evacuating the area when that is obviously not true. Do you think Turkey would still have invaded if US troops were in the way? And if they did fire on US soldiers, wouldn't that be Turkey starting the war, thereby vacating any alliance we might have had? I eagerly await your response.
Click to expand...

Why were US troops there in the first place?

Why is it the problem of the US if a country suffers a civil war?

Which ally do you propose be supported when two allies fight each other?
 
CaughtInThe said:
Just give them time and a heads up so their 3yo daughters aren't slaughtered.

Damn.
Click to expand...

Tragedies occur when old men send young men to war.

The war(s) in this area of the world has been ongoing for 7000 years.

The US is now energy independent. The US need for a stable Middle East no longer exists.

If we just get out of the way and let things settle in, they will settle in. Maybe a new Ottoman Empire.

Rome wasn't built in a day. Neither was the Ottoman Empire. Both helped provide relative peace for centuries. Both did so without help from the US.
 
MrWonka said:
False. No need for war against Turkey. All we needed to do was help the kurds hold the position.

Newsflash genius. When you've got the entire Democratic Party agreeing with Republican Warhawks it's a safe bet we're right and you're wrong.
Click to expand...

Disagreeing with Trump does not mean agreeing with anyone.

Hate is only hate.

Why do you align with one American ally in favor of the other?
 
MrWonka said:
Okay seriously, is there a way to check this guys IP address? This **** is very clearly not coming from any kind of U.S. Citizen.
Click to expand...

Apparently, wherever he's from, he's able to see things clearly.
 
code1211 said:
Why do you align with one American ally in favor of the other?
Click to expand...
False choice. We can align with both. We did not need to attack Turkey to save the Kurds we simply needed to stay put and prevent Turkey's attack.
 
code1211 said:
Tragedies occur when old men send young men to war.

The war(s) in this area of the world has been ongoing for 7000 years.

The US is now energy independent. The US need for a stable Middle East no longer exists.

If we just get out of the way and let things settle in, they will settle in. Maybe a new Ottoman Empire.

Rome wasn't built in a day. Neither was the Ottoman Empire. Both helped provide relative peace for centuries. Both did so without help from the US.
Click to expand...

That's fine but still give our allies a heads up so their three-year-old daughters aren't slaughtered in the streets.
 
MrWonka said:
False choice. We can align with both. We did not need to attack Turkey to save the Kurds we simply needed to stay put and prevent Turkey's attack.
Click to expand...

That makes absolutely no sense. Turks could increase their military force in Syria (that was fighting along side us) and ignore us. Having a few troops at a base somewhere wouldn't stop any invasion whatsoever. All it would do is what warhawks always want - some Americans would get killed somehow as warhawks want to justify the next war they want us to be in.
 
joko104 said:
That makes absolutely no sense. Turks could increase their military force in Syria (that was fighting along side us) and ignore us. Having a few troops at a base somewhere wouldn't stop any invasion whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Yes, it does. Because if Turkey would have attacked a base and murdered American Soldiers they'd be starting WWIII and committing suicide. There's enough stupid Americans that don't care about the kurds that will make it hard for the U.S. to make Turkey pay for what they've done, but if they had murdered American Soldiers 100% of Americans would support kicking Turkey's ass and they know it.

That would have been plenty to insure Turkey stayed out of that region.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom