Erdogan - we will 'strangle' U.S.-backed force in Syria 'before it's even born'

[sirineou]

  US to the Kurds: Here are some weapons to protect your selfs.

US to Turks : Hey The Kurds have heapons , you should buy bigger weapons

US to Kurds: Hey, the Turks know you have weapons and are buying bigger ones.

Israel: LOL

US to Americans: We need to cut down social services to give a tax break to the rich so they can trickle on you.

Americans: We're Number One We're Number One

Me: but I thought sh#* was number two

Edited January 22, 2018 by sirineou

[Jack Mountain]

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

  US to the Kurds: Here are some weapons to protect your selfs.

US to Turks : Hey The Kurds have heapons , you should buy bigger weapons

US to Kurds: Hey, the Turks know you have weapons and are buying bigger ones.

Israel: LOL

US to Americans: We need to cut down social services to give a tax break to the rich so they can trickle on you.

Americans: We're Number One We're Number One

Me: but I thought sh#* was number two

They think that Trump is refering to the US phone landcode, which is 1.

[boomerangutang]

This is how small wars escalate to big wars.  

[Morch]

 

@ilostmypassword

 

Knew it was futile expecting anything but more of the same.

 

Once again, if you want to argue a point, go ahead. Spinning other posters words as to imply a faux counter argument for you to play with, not so welcome. I'm not the one obsessed with Mattis and McMaster, you are. I'm not the one who brought either into this topic, you did. I'm not the one pretending to place much weight on Tillerson's denials - you are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Morch]

3 hours ago, sirineou said:

  US to the Kurds: Here are some weapons to protect your selfs.

US to Turks : Hey The Kurds have heapons , you should buy bigger weapons

US to Kurds: Hey, the Turks know you have weapons and are buying bigger ones.

Israel: LOL

US to Americans: We need to cut down social services to give a tax break to the rich so they can trickle on you.

Americans: We're Number One We're Number One

Me: but I thought sh#* was number two

 

Either clueless or trolling. Probably both.

[sirineou]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Either clueless or trolling. Probably both.

I would not be so hard on your self

 

[MajarTheLion]

On 1/19/2018 at 10:55 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

The US should never have got involved with that morass in the first place. Far as I know was one of the few places the US didn't cause the problem, and have, IMO, zero chances of a good outcome, whatever that may be in that quagmire. Like Afghanistan after the US abandoned the place once the Russians were gone, it's probably just going to come back and bite the US on the bum.

Amen to that. We need to scale our overseas meddling WAY back. I believe both Obama and Trump had good intentions to at least some degree in that direction. It didn't take long for the war machine to grab a hold of either of them.

 

Sad.

[Morch]

10 hours ago, sirineou said:

I would not be so hard on your self

 

 

I'm not the one posting inane drivel, which pretty much sums your contribution to this topic.

[ilostmypassword]

12 hours ago, Morch said:

 

@ilostmypassword

 

Knew it was futile expecting anything but more of the same.

 

Once again, if you want to argue a point, go ahead. Spinning other posters words as to imply a faux counter argument for you to play with, not so welcome. I'm not the one obsessed with Mattis and McMaster, you are. I'm not the one who brought either into this topic, you did. I'm not the one pretending to place much weight on Tillerson's denials - you are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You really don't understand why I introduced Mattis and McMaster into this thread? Let me first quote you on the subject:

"It does not matter much whether Tillerson's denial is mere damage control or if it does have factual merit. The announcement did sound somewhat bogus (or rather unnecessarily provocative) to begin with, and guess that with proper vetting by the State Department things wouldn't have escalated. The Trump administration's ability to create misunderstandings based on this or that statement is a common occurrence by now"

You have clearly assigned any potential blame for this to the State Department. Since when is the State Department responsible for the gaffes of the Defense Department? So I mentioned Mattis and McMaster, because they are the people supervising Syrian policy. And Mattis is the Secretary of Defense. So the responsibility is clearly his, and not the State Department's. Tillerson may have been called in to clear up the Defense Department's mess, but it is not State's responsibility to vet Defense Department press releases and communications. So. when you make a faulty claim be prepared for relevant evidence to be introduced against it. And if the name of that evidence is Mattis and McMaster, either accept it or try impeaching it on other grounds than the fact that you didn't say their names first.

 

 

[Morch]

 

@ilostmypassword

 

I completely get you not missing a chance to present either Mattis or McMaster in a negative light. Pretty much a theme by now. Goes hand in hand with what passes for "debate" out of you - constructing a faux argument based on some contrived "interpretation" foisted on other posters' words.

 

I have not "clearly assigned any potential blame for this on the State Department". That's your bogus "interpretation" bit. As said several times already, and as even you acknowledged earlier, there was a general comment rather than a specific one - unless, that is, if  one (such as yourself) insists on ignoring the posts' context and twist words to suit the faux counterargument.

 

 

Kindly stop trolling with your pointless arguments and imposed "interpretations".

 

 

 

[sirineou]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I'm not the one posting inane drivel, which pretty much sums your contribution to this topic.

If you say so.