Kurdish Allies in the Crosshairs


Could see this coming 8,000 miles away. We will regret not standing by those that ally themselves with us if do not stand firm.

9 thoughts on “Kurdish Allies in the Crosshairs

  1. I understand the downside to being an unreliable ally, but was the mistake in leaving them(after getting a dubious promise for their safety) or enticing them to get involved in the first place?

    The Kurds goal is not just the defeat of ISIS, it is to carve out a homeland for their people from oil rich portions of Iraq, Syria and Turkey. To what extent do we back that play? Russia was not going to let them take part of Syria, and Turkey is a NATO member. Do we go to war with them on the Kurd’s behalf?

    Remember that ISIS only became a problem when we armed them in a misguided attempt to overthrow Assad. Russia’s only warm water port on the Mediterranean is in Syria and they weren’t going to let him fall to the insurgents.

    Our meddling in these religious and tribal wars in the mideast has been clumsy and dangerous. Frankly, the Russians are better at it and had this under control before we stuck our noses in it. Let them manage their back yard.


    1. Both were mistakes. However, what’s done is done. I agree with every point you made, however it doesn’t change the ultimate question you asked. “What do we do, NOW”? My point, based on the current reality is simple; do we walk away? Potential future allies (and we’ll be needing them) are watching.

      I get that it would be nice to leave it to Putin and company, but the Hegemony implications are grave.

      BTW Our “noses” are already stuck.


    2. RE: “The Kurds goal is not just the defeat of ISIS, it is to carve out a homeland for their people from oil rich portions of Iraq, Syria and Turkey. To what extent do we back that play?”

      We don’t have any obligation to help the Kurds carve out a homeland.

      It may sound harsh, but let them sink or swim. In the long run that’s the only viable option, anyway.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. As a businessman I’m not apt to forget or discount the issue of suck cost and if this was solely a financial transaction I would probably agree. However, it is both financial AND moral. “It’s just business” is anathema to what we SHOULD stand for as a Country. IMO.


    1. The Sunk Cost Fallacy cost us at least 30,000 lives in Vietnam.

      We stayed there a long time after it was clear we did not have the will to win because we “didn’t want those boys to have died in vain.” Continuing a war one day after it is won or lost is a moral issue to me.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. At the risk of being contentious, there is no way sunk cost was the issue in Vietnam. It was a political and defense industry decision making process that completely discounted the lives lost. So yes, a moral (or immoral) issue to be sure but on the other side of the debate. It was immoral NOT to leave. This situation is different on multiple levels.

        We exposed the Kurds with promises to have their backs. We don’t have to lose US lives to draw a line that can have serious consequences if crossed.


      2. the decision is different but Sunk Cost applies in both cases.

        I remember LBJ telling the nation that if we left Vietnam all those boys would have died in vain. That isn’t a monetary cost but its the same reasoning as throwing good money after bad. The idea of Sunk Cost is that you only look forward when making a decision.

        In this case, considering that the Kurds are determined to have their homeland, what is our national and moral interest going forward? It is bad for the Kurds already but I don’t see a way that us remaining there fixes that.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. Sunk costs should be a part of every decision, personal and otherwise. Yes, it is looking forward (that’s the point after all). I don’t pretend to know what actions we should take, but what do we become if all our decisions are self serving, particularly after making promises that exposed others to harm? Uber Alles?

    I think it’s a fine line, probably unable to be walked by the current Administration. Heck, we got tweedle dee and dumb out in the field “negotiating” ….


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s